The Sun.
London, England, 1857-07-08 00:00:00

THE SUN,
_LONBON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, JULY 8, 1857.

authority? (Loud :rries of "hear, hear.") There may or
may not have been a management of men ; that, however,
is a political result; but who can dispute—who is there that
ought to object to such conduct? But I want to know,
has there been no intriguing--has there been no exercise
of patronage in England during those 20 years, as well as
in Ireland? (Loua cheers.) Let us meet the question
fairly. Why, sir, as Belgium has been said to be the
battle-field of Europa, so Ireland has been the battle-field
of parties ; and we have had accusations and counter-ac-
cusations respecting the exercise of patronage there. There
is no doubt about that. Sometimes we are told that a
particular Lord Lieutenant gives all the patronage at his
disposal to Proteetauts ; and in another year we are told
that the Lord Lieutenant dispenses all the patronage at
his command to Roman Catholics. But remember, this
country is a country of parties ; and so it has occurred that
during the last 20 years gentlemen from Ireland, of the
Roman Catholic religion, have been followers of one party
in the state ; while gentlemen from Ireland, professing the
Protestant religion, have generally been followers of the
other party in the state—the distribution of patronage fol-
lowing the arrangements of party. But now that we live
in calmer times, and consider subjects in a more tranquil
spirit than formerly, no one can attribute this natural
party exercise of petrel-rage to corrupting and improper in-
fluences. Now, sir, tate thelast lOyears—take the time that
has intervened since ors last discussion upon this subject
—take the periods of oEce of three Lords Lieutenant who
were noblemen of differantopinions, to illustrate my mean-
ing upon this subject. But first let me say, we are asked
to put an end to this o fficeupon the ground that it a mockery.
Now, an argument of that kind would tell equally well
against the governors of every one of our colonies. I might
be told that the Governor General of India was a " sham"
just as well as the Lorl Lieutenant of Ireland is. Again,
you are asked to put an end to this office because it is
corrupting in its influence, not one single case having
been alleged in which corruption has been exercised. ( Rear,
hear.) Well, then, to revert to the periods of office of
three noblemen who have filled the appointment of Lord
Lieutenant of Ireland. You had the Earl of Clarendon,
the present Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. He exer-
cised the office in timer of considerable trouble and excite-
ment. I don't suppose that any one will pretend that the
exercise of his office was a mockery or a sham ; but what-
ever may be the difference of opinion as to the administra-
tion of Lord Clarendon, there is no doubt her Majesty con-
sidered his services so signal that she bestowed upon him
the highest honours within the power of the crown. I need
hardly say a word as ton noble friend of mine, the Earl of
Eglinton. His viceroyalty was not of any great duration,
but it was of a character so remarkable, that it remains in
the hearts and recollections of those whose interests were
the concern of his administration. (Cheers.) But we are
told to-night that Lord Carlisle is a dancer, and that he
knows the difference between a bull and a pig. Sir, I had
the honour of a seat in this house during ten years when
Lord Carlisle sat here, not only as a minister of state, but
as a secretary of a Lord Lieutenant, who held office in the
cabinet ; and let me remind the house those were not or-
dinary times. The House of Commons then reckoned
amongst its members a greater number of considerable
men than perhaps it ever before held. Thera may have
been individual members more remarkable than any who
flourished within these walls at that time, but, undoubtedly
there never was a period when so great a number of dis-
tinguished men were to be counted in the House of Com-
mons than during those 10 years Lord Morpeth took a great
part in our discussions. He was one of our very greatest
debaters. He was remarkable for his knowledge, for his
accomplishments, and for his command of eloquence.
(Hear, hear.) He was the man who, as Secretary to the
Lord Lieutenant, WA that responsible minister for Ire-
land of whoa we have heard so much. But the hon.
gentleman (Mr. Maguire) will allow me to say that it was
not complimentary to a House of Commons, where Lord
Morpeth fillet so considerable a space, and held so consi-
derable a swat, to say that, having come to Ireland, that
noble lord was only a dancer, and only able to decide
and about
the greatly
lifeli legends
pi on
isd f
between the merits of bulls and pigs. That leads me
to the real point before us. We are always here contend-
ing government,suwpbe
when
n the
y oe
uh ;ear
rebeeut
talking
aekffitne
gr
the
aall,bgovern-
ment
sham
ham individual;
mtleonofarDehuibe ;int dththe
question intrigues
is andwh e
th e r corruptionsyetl have of
nottbe
bCeaesn-
energy, experimace,
note tlah eard
enabled throule the machinery of the Lord Lieutenancy,
to place in Ireland as your chief administrators men of
brit
Imhaayv
enand position ? Ido not say that pea-
sous
allegedthe
mw.
aamc change ge
quiteshe
preparedul d not
toccur,say
that you may lot devise a more rational and precise form
of administraton ; but I recollect one of the most expe-
rienced members of this house, then Prime Minister of
England, aided by the knowledge and wisdom of a power-
ful cabinet, dic bring forward this scheme, and that it did
not stand against the discussions of a House of Commons
favourable to tie measure. I must, therefore, proceed with
caution before sanction
a general resolution like the pre-
sent. I think tie alternative offered to us is one which we
ought to adopt. Ido not think that under any circum-
stances we are justified is voting for the motion of the boo.
and learned member for Sheffield, unless what might be
called " the enormities cf the office" were so obvious, un-
less the public discontent was so overwhelming, or the
Ministry of the (ay so involved, that the House of Com-
mons ought to ccme foreard and call upon the Government
to vindicate this wrong, end offer a remedy for such a pro-
scribed and ackncwledgecl evil. But that not being our
position, I don't see whet other course we ought to take
under present cheumstaeces than to avoid giving any de-
cision on the question beyond saying that we do not think
the present a convenient moment to discuss it—for that, I
understand, to be the reel interpretation of our voting for
the previous question. All I wish to protest against now is
the interpretation whiih has been put upon that vote by the
hon. and learned gantlemtn—namely, that it is an acknow-
ledgment of the principle which he lays down. That I
think to be quite a gratuitous interpretation of our vote.
tinder general circumstances, it would be more conve-
nient that a questior should be fairly met and discussed,
and that we should say aye or no as to the merits of a reso-
lution like this ; but I do not see how we could do that
unless the Government are prepared, if they accept the
principle laid down, to king forward some practical sub-
stitute for the administration of Ireland. But they are not
prepared to do that, and, therefore, I think we take a pru-
dent course in voting for the amendment, and thus express
an opinion that it is not convenient at the present time to
discuss the motion of thehon. and learned gentleman. Lot
me observe, in conclusion, that in voting for the previous
question, I beg to state that. I do not in any way admit the
principle which the hon. gentleman wishes us to accept,
and I reserve to myself tie right, at the proper momens, to
offer upon this subject a matured and unshackled opinion.
(Cheers.)
Mr. CONOLLY havirg borne a part in the discussion
which took place with reference to this question some
years ago, and when it was brought before the house in a
regular form by the Government of the day, might be al-
lowed to state very shortly the reasons which had induced
him to alter the vote which he then gave in favour of the
abolition of the office of Lord Lieutenant. He would ac-
knowledge that it was mainly owing to the opinions ex-
pressed by the late Dries of Wellington that he had been
led so completely to change his views upon the subject.
l (Cries of " Divide.") The position of Ireland was peculiar,
and it required on that account a more direct interference
of the Executive. That was the opinion of the Duke of
Wellington, and it was one which he at least would not
be disposed to treat with levity or ridicule. He (Mr.
Conolly) lived in the vicinity of Dublin, and he se ruld very
value of a more independent society• well appreciate the in
believed the benefits of the proposed
I that city; still he
and
abolition would be partial insignificant when placed
side by side with the advantages and safeguards derived
from the presence of the Lord Lieutenant.
Mr. ROEBUCK rose to reply. It had been said he had
brought forward this mction in an imprudent manner; now
let him at once say no other course was then open to him
than that which he had pursued. . He recollected hearing
Peel once say,. upon being asked what he would
Sir Robert
onj uacture— -he would
do in a particular clet them know
when he was called
in. ( A laugh). Well, just so ; it was
enough for him, a
private member, to point out a par-
ticular defect, and until he was called in
,he need not feel
bound to offer a remedy. The right hon. gentleman the
member for
Stroud bee said that when the functions of
the house on this subject ceased those of the Government
Now that was quite natural. (Hear, hear.)
would b >gin.
hl Lead the G2that
if oea of Government said
The noble lord at
if there was a Parliamentary division aeainst the office
now, the session
would close with a Parliamentary stigma
on the Lord-Lieutenancy of Ireland : but was not there
already a stigma
of that kind affixed to it by the vote of
1810? It was stated that the Lord-Lieutenancy was so
important an office that any one seeking for its removal
should state grounds for that movement. (Hear, hear.)
He had done so.
lie Lad objected to the office on the
and also on theground of the irre-
sponsibled
ground of expense,
nature of the present Irish Government (Hear,
hear.) He thought these were very cogent objections. In
taking the course
he had he (Mr. Roeuck) had followed
the example set him
in 1850 by the noble lord the mem-
ber for the City of London _ a
sofar as a private member
could follow the example ofPrime Minister. It was
not his (Hr. Reetnic
k's) province to suggest a scheme of
Queen Anne, when it took
three In the reign of
three weeks or a month to travel to Edinburgh, a Lord-
Lieutenant was not asked for Scotland, though it was
then being united to England. He asked, then, why, now
that Ireland was within eleven hours of England, a Vice-
roy should be continued in that country ? (Hear, hear.)
As to the panic got up about the alleged intended re-
moval of the law courts that was simply foolish. (Hear,
heaa.) No statesman could think of such a scheme. It aas
no part of Lord J. Russell's scheme in 1850 ; and after all
Parliament had done to bring cheap law home to every man's
door (Hear, hear).— it was a " sham" to say there was any
fear of the law courts of Ireland being abolished or
' removed to this country. What did the Lord-Lieutenant do?
Could he do anything? Nothing. When asked to do any-
thing his Excellency said, " I must consult my superiors."
Ile had not the power possessed by the Governor-General
of India. He no more governed the people of Ireland than
did the groom that waited on him. He (Mr. Roebuck)
knew he should be in a small—a miserable minority; but
he hart been too long a member of that house to be asto-
nished at any change of opinion amongst hon. gentlemen.
Certainly the change on this subject was a great one; for,
when in 1850, there was a vote of the house in favour of
the abolition of the Lord Lieutenency, there was danger
iu Ireland ; but now there was nothing there but peace ;
still he was quite prepared for having
his proposition re-
jected by a large majority, however 'consonant it might be
with reason and good policy, (Hear, hear.)
The house then divided—,
115
For the previous question
Against

M
it
The prtevrottajsoqrl . 1
ys.tiOn..s.v;s—t..h..e.r;;;l;;;;lo;i: * ;/n(lstlhe mo-
tion was not pat.
The
from ELECTION PETITIONS.
SPEAKERmr.eannouncedh
et ha agte
nhte
forhad thethat day
petitionerreceived
a letter who
complained of an undue election for the borough of Taun-
ton, tting that it was not his intention to proceed with
the petition. The right hon. gentleman further announced
that the agents for the petitioners against the return for
the boroughs of Newport and Portsmouth had also written
to hie, to say that it was not their intention to proceed
with their respective petitions.
lt was then ordered that no further proceedins should
be taken by the house upon the three petitions above
named.
THE NAVY.
Sir 0. NAPIER rose to move for returns relating to the
reserved steamers and the steamers in commission at the
various ports. The hon. and gallant gentleman said he
understood that the First Lord of the Admiralty intended
to oppose his motion on the ground that it would furnish
to foreign Powers information which it would be wiser to
keep from them. There was nothing, however, in the
returns for which he asked that anybody who went down
to Portsmouth, Plymouth, and other stations might not
easily pick up ; and therefore such a plea for withholding
these particulars was wholly idle and fallacious. The only
nformation given to the house respecting the navy was
oruprised in the estimates ; and whether the money they