The Sun.
London, England, 1850-05-11 00:00:00

THE SUN,

statement of the relations between landlord and tenant,
but by the great moral and material causes that have
seldom occurred in the history of nation=, and probably
never con be repeated in the history of Ireland—namely,
unparalleled political agitation, and a famine, Which, as
the Noble and Learned once rightly said, was
a famine of the middle ages accounting for
the state of Ireland by these causes, I want
to know, is there in Ireland, at this moment
such a feverish disease for the settlement of the question
that it will justify the Government in bringing forward a
measure which they themselves acknowledge they have
not well considered?—(Cheers.) Now, Sir, my opinion
is, that while we should frankly acknowledge
our wish that Ireland should be placed in
the enjoyment of political privileges inferior
to none of the kingdoms of her Majesty, we should
also have the moral courage at the same time to an-
nounce that we are resolved that these political privi-
leges shall be real on. s.—(Cheers.) And inasmuch ac,
according to the genius of our constitution—for as we
have been reminded of the genius of Ireland, I may pre-
sume to appeal t o the genius of our constitution—in-
asmuch as the enjoyment and the exercise of the suf-
frage has been, on the whole, in this country, connected
with the possession of property, we should—although,
of course, in the adjustment of such an important set-
Cement, we must, in many instances, where it is wise
and circumspect, modify the application of that prin-
ciple—of that principle we are determined never to lose
sight.—(Hear, hear.) Bet in the present instance we
depart from it; we lose sight of it; we substantially
reject it, we announce that tho enjoyment and exercise
of the suffrage in Ireland shall not be consistent with
property; and in doing that we destroy the principle
which has made the enjoyment and exercise of the suff-
rage in England most valuable.— (Cheers.) Let the privi-
lege be as wide as the merits of the community deserve,
but let the community obtain it by industry, by intelli-
gence, by the exercise of all those great qualities which
make use fel and honest citizens. These have, through
the good sense of the people of England, hitherto
been our guiding principles in the adjustment of the
question of suffrage. For my part, I believe that the
people of Ireland are equally capable to mark the same
results and to exercise the same rights as the people of
England. But I oppose a law the essence of which is
not to give credit to the people of Ireland for these qua-
lities, the object of which is to announce that they are
different from the people of England, and to tell them
that the genius of Ireland is incapable of making the
exertions and enjoying the honours of Englishmen.—
(Loud cheering.)
Lord J. RUSSELL—Sir, I will not detain the House
long, because I really do not think, if I were capable of
addressing it at length, that this Bill on its third read-
ing requires much advocacy on our part. Hero is a
grievance, and we propose a remedy. Does the griev-
ance exist? I shall not go into a detail of the small
number of electors in the different boroughs in Ireland;
but when I look at the number of electors in England,
Scotland, and Wales, I find that they vary from 1 in
25, which is the lowest, to 1 in 32 per cent., which is
the highest, giving an average of somewhere about
29 per cent. in Great Britain; and when I come to Ire-
land I find that it is not 25 per cent., that it is not 20
per cent., or 10 per cent., but merely 2 t.
per cen of the
adult male population.—(Loud cheers.) I ask the
House, is not that a grievance which, when it is brought
before it, and when a Bill is proposed to remedy it—is
it not fitting that the House should agree to it?—
(Cheers.) We are told that we have departed altogether
from the franchise by tenure, which is the basis of the
franchise in England. If I could understand that Hon.
Gentlemen opposite meant to maintain that we ought to
propose some such franchise as we have in England—
that, for instance, the 40s. freeholders should be restored
in Ireland, and that that franchise they were prepared
to defend—l could well understand their saying, "We
propose putting Ireland on an equality with England—
we believe that yours is founded on a wrong principle,
and we propose, instead, one similar in its detail and
objects to the franchise existing in England." But
they propose no such remedy. Do they propose to
make the existing 10/.franchise more simple, and to make
that the franchise for Ireland? By no means.—
(Hear, hear.) They do not propose even that extreme.
Therefore thus laying down the proposition that
the grievance being clear and incontestable—that the
grievance being undeniable—no remedy is to be
proposed. What is the language of the Hon. and
Learned Member for the University of Dublin, and of
the Hon. Gentleman who has last spoken? Forgetting
what the Hon. Gentleman who spoke last has stated,
they tell you that there are other kinds of legislation;
for instance, the law of landlord and tenant, which the
Legislature should attend to, and not to the extension of
the franchise, Sir, such is the language that has always
been held in despotic countries.—(Cheers.) They tell
you in despotic countries that nothing is so mischievous
us the concession of political rights, the freedom of the
press, the exercise of the right of voting, and the discus-
sioa of political questions. That it is the business of the
Government to take care in a peculiar manner of the
material interests of the people—(Hear, hear)—to look
after the fisheries—(Hear, and cheers)—to provide for
their material interests; but that political franchises were
the source of disorder and revolution, and from that we
must carefully abstain.—(Hear.) But in England
we have learned a totally different lesson.—(Hear.)
We have learned that if men have the right of
voting and of sending Members to this House,
if men know the responsibility of the great in-
terests of the country, and know that these they
have sent as representatives have the power of control-
ling the expenditure of the country, of giving advice to
the Crown, and of taking part in all the legislative func-
tions with regard to persons and property in the coun-
try; they know that by these they may be raised to
rank and dignity, and so far from being less able to at•
tend to their material interests, the very freedom they
enjoy and the very exercise of their rights will make
them more able to pursue the paths of industry and of
wealth.—(Hear, hear.) Why, when there were discus-
sions in this House some sixty years ago, and when Mr.
Pitt, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, came down to
show the then fl amishing state of the trade and revenues
and the material interests of the country, he said, when
he had finished the detail which was given in his own
magical manner, they owed all that to the free constitu-
tion of England.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. Fox, who concurred
in the statement, made the same admission. Both agreed
that it was a matter nobody could dispute—that the free
constitution of England and the possession of the fran-
chise led to wealth. Now, in Ireland, we are told that
is to be reversed Give the people of that country, not
the enjoyment of their rights—no—it is the business
of Parliament to look after the fisheries, to look after
her material interests, but as to political franchise, we
must altogether abandon the care of that concern. I
am surprised that those who hold these doctrines have
found only two or three things in the Bill to find fault
with. The Bill proposes that, instead of the 403. free-
hold system, which led to great abuses, when they were
driven like crowds of vassals to the poll to vote for their
landlords, and then by some political or religious agita-
tion induced to vote against them—by the franchise that
was proposed instead of that system is 1829, and after-
wards enlarged in 1831, as being too complicated and
difficult to define—instead of that system, we propose a
franchise, simple in its nature, by which persons having
a vote are not obliged to go in and make good their claim
to that vote, but are entitled out of the rate-books of
the guardians of the poor to exercise that vote.—(Hear.)
I say it is of immense advantage to the country to ex-
change that which led to abuses, and wascomplicated and
difficult to carry into effect, for one simple and easy in its
character and definition. Then it is said by the Noble
Lord the Member for King's Lynn, if you extend it to
121. it will include an intelligent class of men, but as you
have put it at 81. you swamp all the franchise. Ido not
think that the Noble Lord gave any proof that all
those possessing a holding; of 121. are intelligent, and
all those possessing one of Si. are not intelligent. We
have taken a solvent class of men, and we have likewise
taken a class of persons who in number do not come up
in proportion t the county electors either of England
or of Scotland. I say that we have not taken the fran-
chise exceedingly low, and that we have struck out the
just medium. Then the Hon. Gentleman says, and
many other Hon. Gentlemen have gone along with him,
respecting the joint tenancy clause, that it is mischievous
in its operation. I hold that clause to be of imma-
terial importance. Ido not believe that there aro many
joint tenants, and I cannot compare this to the splitting
up of land under the 40e. system, because it must be
a holding tantamount to the value of 16/. at least, out
of which two votes are to be given. Taking the analogy
of the Reform Bill we have put in this clause, but if
the Hon. Gentlemen who are connected with the rural
economy of Ireland tell me that this clause is injurious
I am ready to omit it. I do not attach any importance
to it. The Hon. Member fur Bucks said that they
were legislating upon the consequences of the late fa-
mine, and suggests to us that we should wait until
we see its permanent effects. The Hon. Gentleman does
not seem to be aware that the diminution in the number
cf voters had been going on since IS4I, and therefore it
could not be said th it this is a diminution owing to the
farnine, but that it has been going on from year to year
owing to the nature of the franchise. Then the Hon.
Gentleman the Member for Bucks has one large reason
for not adopting the Bill, which is a strong reason for
th e course we pursue. The Hon. Gentleman also says
iat there is no feverish anxiety about it. Why, if
tteere was, what should we be told? That we were lis-
t ening to clamour and agitation. On the contrary, the
Right Hon. the Master of the Mint has told us that the
time is favourable to the extension of the franchise, be-
cause it is a time of calm and quiet, and uninfluenced by
any agitation or excitement. The measure itself pro-
pose, , in point of fact, to place the people of Ireland in
a situation as good, or nearly so, as the people of Eng-
land. It is founded on the principle that they shall not
be treated as inferior to England or Scotland, but that it
has a right, when England and Scotland have a certain
franchise, that she shall have an equivalent, That right
has not been urged with clamour and agitation ; and so
much the more does it become your justice and
wisdom to make the people of Ireland equal with the
people of Great Britain, and show them that, by equal
freedom and an Equal franchise, you have full confidence
in the manner they will use this franchise, and that you
wish them to have all the freedom of the other parts of
the empire.—(Cheers.)
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the third reading ... 254
Against it
Majority in favour of the third reading —6B
The Bill was then passed.
The amendments to the elections (Ireland) Bill were
considered and agreed to.
Mr. NAPIER obtained leave to bring in a Bill to
amend the laws relating to ecclesiastical residences in
Ireland; Bill te amend the laws relating to the erection
and endowmet it of churches and chapels in Ireland;
and a BM to repeal certain statutes relating to the
clergy of th© Irish branch of the United Church of Eng-
land anti ireiaod.

The Bii.s were subsequently brought in and read a
first time.
Adjourned at One o'clock.

5:-.olF"rtott iftfl

QUEEN'S BENCH.--(THIS DAY.)
THE QUEEN V. KENEALEY.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition.)
Edward Hyde, the child in question, was then called;
and, in answer to his Lordship, repeated the Lord's
Prayer. The child was then sworn, having previously
said that people would go to hell who bore false
witness. He then said. I remember the day I was found
in the street. I lived with Mr. Kenealy before that time.
I was beaten by him before I went into the street. He
beat me with a cane—with this cane—which I had with
me when I was found in the street. He bi at me for not
learning my lesson. All my clothes were off, excepting
my shirt, when he beat me. Be beat me in the little
room where I slept. I was not tied to anything. My
neck was hurt by a rope being put' round it
by Mr. K ,nealey. Mr. Kenealey was catching
hold of the other side of the rope. My neck
was hurt by his squeezing. I did not try to get away.
It hurt me round my neck. The flogging was done all
at once. After the flogging I went to bed for the night.
The nt xt morning, when I got up, I dressed myself and
went to light the fire. I went out of doors after that by
my self to play. After playing I went home. I remem-
ber being found in the strut with a crowd about me. I
went out by myself, and when I got into the street I
turned to the left. I went far before the people came
round me. Mr. Kenealey told me to go out and to go to
Highgate.
Cross-examined—Mrs. Kenealey told me to wait at
the corner of the buildings, and to wait for him, and that
he would take me for a walk to Higbgate. I went on,
instead of waiting, until I lost myself. I was not
frightened when I had lost my way, nor when the crowd
was with me. Mr. Kenealey often took me for a walk
to Highgate, and sometimes into St. James's•park to
feed the ducks. He taught me to read and spell, and
say my prayers. He bought me play things and picture
books. I sometimes told him lies, when he was very
angry with me, and told me I should always tell
the truth. When I told the truth he was
always kind to me. He always told me to
be a fine, good boy, and that it was very
wicked to tell lies. When the weather was
fine he sent me into the square to play, and when the
weather was bad he gave me things to play with. He
told me stories, and bought me little toys. I was with
him some hours every day, and slept in his bed every
night. I remember his bringing me over from Ireland.
I had not then learnt to read or to say my prayers. He
began to teach me to read as soon as he brought me to
London. He kissed me every day. When he told me
not to tell lies I promised him I would never do so any
more, and he would then take me in his arms and
kiss me.
Re•examined by Mr. CROWDER—When I came from
Ireland he taught me lo read. I read to Mr. Kenealy.
I was not reading on the night he beat me. I had been
doing nothing on the night he beat me. I had no les-
sons to do that night he beat me. I was beaten for not
learning my lesson.
Lord 'CAMPBELL thought there must be a verdict
against Mr. Keuealy. He (Lord Campbell) did not in
the slightest degree wish to prejudice the case; but,
although Mr. Kenealy seemed to have been a most affec
tionate patent, and to have devotedly studied the wel-
fare of the child, he seems on this occasion to have done
what the law would not justify. It was, however, for
the jury to say whether this was a moderate chastise-
ment on a child of tender years.
Mr. WHATELY addressed the jury for the defendant.
He would remind the jury that they were not trying
Mr. Kenealy for having inflicted punishment on this
child, but whether he was guilty of the wicked
and deliberate cruelty charged in the indictment. He
contended that the evidence would not bear out the
cruelty charged against the defendant in the indictment;
but, on the cantrary, the child's own statement proved
that Mr. Kenealy had evinced the tenderest regard for
its welfare. He was found constantly instructing the
boy, taking him with him in his walks, participating
in his little amusements, and sharing his bed with him.
He (Mr. Whately) did not deny that the child had been
severely punished by Mr. Kenealey, but the jury were
to judge whether that punishment was or was not ex-
cessive.
Lord CAMPBELL, in summing up, left it to the jury t 3
say who. her the punishment which had been inflicted on
the child had been excessive. This was a most distress-
ing case, but they must deal with it according to the
rules of law, and with a regard to the truth.
He rejoiced that the truth had come out,
and that no serious stain will attach to the cha-
racter of Mr. Kenealy. He appeared to have taken
a most tender care of the child, treating it
with all kindness, taking care of its education
and attending to its personal wants ; but the jury were
to say whether a part of.the charge against Mr. Kenealey
was not made out, and if it were it would be
their duty to fled him guilty. He (Lord Campbell)
might say for himself he was not one of those who
thought coporeal punishment of young persons entirely
unnecessary.
The jury then retired, and in a few minutes found a
verdict of Guilty against the defendant on the second
count.