The Sun.
London, England, 1844-02-17 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY MORNING, FEBRUARY' 17, 1844..

and Learned Member for Bath, and.
„the Noble Lord the
I"l•anber for Sunderland, that they toeld not maintain the
onr\ioe aed destroy the Church lastablisameat.—(Crie.sh 0.,f,
k'i'h, '41," from the
itilhel that House to represent. the. people or the Unt'ed
4atatZni• to .I.he People of the United Kingdom were net
these wild and revoluimeary d0c,.rei.i1,,...
itneY wished to see a steady course of unit
4t adopted in Ireland and else. wher.e,
e not as to see amelioration attempted by the cl . wink
tf "t,horeky
cf destroying
there
was the E•tablislicl Chureh:—( Hear, i ear ) But
atat,_,,a third party in that II- use--the party 01 bet
,i"ty , famernment. lie be:ieved that their. rolicy, was to
maintain establishments—not to maintain their abuses , but to
iTherliittlta by improving them ; and he believed that the ma-
ii,,
.3' f the people of England were with them on that point.
he was certain that the were not for the grant of. 8,002/.. ie
t 'sir eo
"' was certain that theyy were not for the destruction of th Cfhlre.h. He belived tfiat they would best consult the feelings
a decided nstituents and the welfare of the country, by giving
its . , negative to the motion of the Noble Lord, having for
tit nothing that was intelligible, nothing that was prac-
re,!o°,le, nothing that was even respectable enough to be called
s lutionary —( H - hear )
air , • Car, .
to, '-'• BULLER, who was scarcely audible in corn-
ohelng his address,said that before he addressed himself to the
eels before te liouse, he would advert to two doctrines
of that novel applica-
tion
nu.n. d been thrown out in support
be... 1 the doctrine of conspiracy, which had been brought to
pe4t.tr. against certain Members of the!, House; where, by
e leg tegether half of one Member s sentence and half
was
first eii•°t:et's alember's sentence, a very foamidahlechasge was
atet °hut, of which neither Member was in fact guilty.. I:he
greaie"rge was that broached
Noble
that evening ; andwith
the great astonishment he saw the Noble Lord the Secretary for
stav voionies take a note of it.—( Laughter.) On the
arh"gth of the speech of his Hon. Friend the Member fort
f ef6e4it they were charged with conspiring to repeal the Act
not The Noble Lori himself (Lord Stanley)
,had
heuatrY,,e,t_s_,,,,,.:
Leen upon this 'subject.--(Loud cries of " Hear,
Goer and laughter.) They had only heard the views of the
ale nnient expounded to them by the Hon. and Gallant
tea'ber for the county of Donegal, who, he must
great otit of odium under which he supposed himself to labourre.
that Ltlat side of the House.—( Hear, hear.) He could assure
they and Gallant Member that, however opposed to him
Personal ht be in panties he believed there was no feelingreo!
tall 'la hostility to him on the part of Hen. Members ge ,n.
Nl' on that side of the House.—(Hear, hear.) On theh wereco
rgnezYtie,owhen he made inquiries among those Members w,
l'Posed to him, they all said that he was a very
ewroorthy
good
heelo man, and he (Mr. C: Buller ) thought he seeme a
He told "'re eland kind-hearted man. —( Laughter and cheers. )
sitte Rota Friend, and he supposed all of them on
atirl'ast
thern°l the House that he had no feelings of hostilit tw
lion He referred also to spoliation. He could. assure thewish
did • and Gallant Gentleman that he had not the least.
his'lrliate h( Laughter. ) He wished to relieve
thleimmaon
did, :nee__
,•(Laughter.) He must say that that gen e
said
he an", Ine strangest language he had ever hear
tf his'sl"°take d—d good care that they should notdeprive him
eleat„.
....0..a0
.Runicus ab normis —• •
ill
tot‘gNneter.rneus hic sermo, sed quod precepit Ofellus,
) The Gallant Colonel said that they were go-
d° a shyest him of his religion.—(Laughter.) He would
It
Wes jieell a. cruel thing for the world.—( Great laughtea.
la" was e
sues thing he ever saw that religion of his,. and.
4e,tire he did not wish to spoil him of it —(Continued
Of'cje",er)and if he might use a little variation, for th
seemedsake
acli—°r4a, he would observe that the Gallant Colonel )
NoWtli to take good care that they should not.--(Laughtenrn
h%ntl e thought one word would dispel the alarms ofl Hent.
eat erne° oPposite with regard to the Act of S. ett emf
the.
1,04 s Act was intended to guard against the claims o
iteadef),f Stuart, and as all the members of that house wererter
a-aare did not see what danger could exist in tbatqua ..
Le Thear, and laughter. )‘•-•There was another
.charge. towhich,.
lot —l'n Particularly refer 'because he recollected its efficiency in
V?: heirneo—the chartg; of alliance with Mr. O'Conhneflho—m
tnit erh' "ear.) lie ( alr. C. Buller) would . not ti,inted
withr
Alt, of!•,g—he had generally—almost invariably
neiee '-'onnell upon lrish questions except the repeal‘oe of the
"ats,C;;. il, e was not ashenmed of having done so.. He
aratd
aria ee"itu him when his aid was useful to the Liberal ,
thethe er •weluld not shrink from his aid now that he was under
o'ightof a Government prosecution.—(Loud cheers from
whatsP,P"'ltion benches ) He would declare in that House
lain had stated re eat ell elsewhere, that he believed no
sand,side:gariehildaunehnatdiedrnoanne.oP n,.uttehYf r his country as that Hon. and
heroefore, viewing his policy on one
trisli,tl„4, the Policy every s opponents on the other, he was
incise:; !° carp at fault or to run him down for everyd
afilietfe`t'un, but he would stand by him now that he. was unt.oenr
was -41' 'sots, he was of opinion that the Irish queshier
ne"e upon which it was worse than
which restelieeal their opinions on the grounds upon d
an
del, If there really did exist in the state of Irelan y
toe su was not" to be apprehended in
.any other part of
kt th d kingdom he thought the worst thing the could do
'tteseetr cuuntry Was to conceal it. It was in factyuselesds to
I,,,,iciPt, concealment—all the world knew ;the facts, and it
traria °° folly to endeavour by any solemn muttering,
in
th e"' t° gull the world into not believing
Ileierelistence of a danger which they perceived. themselves.et
for the fore it was he thouht the House would give him ca dti
!least; sincerity and earnest conviction that induced
thimcho.
iti
on
.and even if he might shock some gentleman by
rowudent
totes ',Tics which on ordinary occasions it was not
Ins ezos' in that House, the necessity of the case shouldp he
that douse
use. Another ground of excuse he thought should be
Y were aware that the tone in which they spoke in
ihat
4was more in unison with the state of public feet ing
lathae used to be. They could net disguise that the state of
',ide ,t.eeling and their own feeling, as shown by their
the in that:House, was different from what ued'ito be—that
the Public were aware' that there was some mischief in
epgite which was not to be counteracted by temporary
be eo,,tios of the old method of treatment, but which must
of th:ateracted forthwith, it they meant to maintain the peace
igg cia ettpire, They knew that, and that it was an encreas-
elat, l'iger, and that many ancient prejudices which used to
stead Were fast fading away, and that our countrymen,
tv,iiyi.t:rfsoblei begat
averse to the man who spoke the truth, would
v.. ether grateful to him, and still more grateful to
who would suggest
had
remtoedydeifr
with
*al the aTl' evil
which they
,orey .... aged disaffectionof thirish people. He was very
teed e to have to use, in that
.House, words that had been
farae"Y gentlemen on the opposite side who represented, the
th 'Re party in Ireland. He need hardly say?
d the t
, at when he used those terms he totally repudiate . spur.to
he was sre
,iie_nwhichthey were applied. But still he felt it impossible
aa7_y that, in a certain limited sense of the words, there existed
Ireland disaffection, not, indeed, to the Crown, but to the
Government and some of the institutions of the empire. He
could not doubt it when he looked to some of the proceedings
Aof the Irish people—to the language of those persons who had
egis weight with them; and when he looked to the language of a
t.,spaper (the Nation) which, having been only started about
iataslve months ago, had, within six months from that period, a
ger circulation than any paper in Ireland—when he looked
taitiite indications of temper manifested by the. public meetings,.e
re_er, he compared those things with the private accounts h
„yetired from individuals, he could not doubt that throughout
, greater part of the Roman Catholic population of Ireland,.n
there e •
4,4
hxisted the greatest alienation from this country. _ an-
'tereede‘y'all was prepared to believe that fact. We hadffg,
tie Ireland as if our object had been to alienate the a sc-
hat'
w of the Roman Catholic inhabitants of that country, and
tieaanut suprised at our having in a great degree succeeded.
atith'l'd this not lightly—not without consideration, and
tat, no intention to exaggerate. It was a frightful
teal to have te admit the existence of such a state of things
Itopehlta portion of the people, to believe that one-fourth of the
tveteeei°ll of the empire—as the Roman Catholics of Ireland
anewete ere as hostile to the Government of England as the po-
Pope 6: uf Poland was to the Government of Russia, and the
lthat ;akin, of Lombardy to ku,tria \Vas he not borne out in
id t'e-a`v uY the words of the' Government ? By what tenure
ttete:7 hold Ireland ° Was it not the same tenure by which
Pwe' he
Kland, and Austria held Lombardy, namely, the
wrong of an overwhelming military force ? If hie was
le .14 those matters, - he should have much pleasure
tectePaig corrected. But he was not to be cor-
ms seee"l,s; the mere expression of repugnance to
-hie forward But it was necessary for the Government to
Vie, an with proofs of the good disposition of the Irish
he 41n order to show that he g. In the meantime
%tett;
;take the evidenee of thewas wron
facts that were before the
'lttsit,,,Y , by those facts he could come to no other con-
'elY de'e,t,"an that the alienation of the Irish people was not
Nval art r and extensive, but also of a permanent nature. It
save,
a. alienation of religion and race.—( Hear, hear.) It
Pretest'l alienation of Roman Catholic Ireland from
li:irl" thatt Eenrigtilandt ,• and. it was evidently tending to-
which alienation of people
eotiolf tinder the same Government
atperiettiaetera rr,
, a ue-
-7 said
dvejinamt eanittehe t inevitably tend if not
Ilttials,°-' Lt'd the Irish people themmlrsuteihvews aevreowaetmdliyngasaktedtotal
e 10,4P:ration frorn us. Now, he must confess that when
tktrateitttlsaerit atthethe course that discontent was taking, he was
aspect it presented—the great numbers—their
Per gene: cownfeetitrated zeal—thair being m.arshalled under the
all eat or . one man—their exhibition of. the. most
thelle gainsaton, and of the greatest intelligence—
martial. 'were features that combined to present a
teallt t b aspect,
thi- tn the world He believed there was no Govern-
ee .4 the which that possessed a more powerful machinery
the side of
ltarri hostile , WM to be met with in Ireland, by
tee; 0C0.,...`°,! the regnlar Government. Honeo
titorual'ait exercised the most perfect controleoveYderthsiazt,
trs of 11:11 countrymen. The exertions of even an inert
theteY had
as` 'magnitude would be very dangerous, but
nog pew a leader Mr. O'Connell, who wielded
le we existteer'e ,bY an agency
teob
old
150cr ded
Oaers....hab,i lay that means, and by thteheorgamnoissattionfloci powerfula
l
44°11neu ‘,0„41 4ot exaggerate, surely, when he said that I 1 r.
allentti.idlit.athhteeymm. ass as though they had but one
"coti.nettVe beYwitsilli7.ll.t
wwerheen and whither they were. to
to be for action or inaction
wlitejn, the iLlwaYs implicitly obeyed. To any think-
they' the Irisilnost formidable feature inaspect
ote..Preserved. People presented, was . .the thequietness
lea pro . They broke out into no partial riots, and the
141tieY we vocation °Quid not force them to appeal to arms.
titee nn'ttetdotthLere as if conscious of their strength, and det.er-
hs ,e, Proper "row it away in any rash attempt, but to strike
W 4,444, let tarn°rnetite and with good effect. Wherefore it was
Den the plain em, not disguise the fact from themselves. That
theitle caltr,le't...l'a Of things in Ireland. They had a reflecting
Or 'ts.t.te„gtvaa.(ititiair. for the moment when they couldt. hings
the !nett It was . ear, hear.) Now, was that a state of h
liteCtiitenee;' V:sand just to their countrymen to eonntcoetaitl
caitileteu'a Certain it not rather the wiser course to
otters, with a view to seeing whereot they
• ettee-trillY a rem:
'edre Y Crnple ;Y • The policy of the Government was
had
. Goa sled nonne • It was that of mere coercion.
Y
Poise, .. of the grievance: of Ireland. They had removed
sea.Ya had reitv°_e Parsons in whom the people had conflence,
hattan ,0,7 city ~,71_7(4,1 the whole of the executive authority to .e a
bi.e.thee rest of the nation deteeled. They had
I•4ll44y,ei7tilthie'leuia
atiaeac't pose:rutnatrY with troops, and under the shield of that
Y had seized the lands of the people, and
tel
eY very gueatito penalties under a very questionable
.law.,
Ak, 4lUlated t "able Means. That was the policy which
eeiri 'lot eraculaotetepress only the immediate movement, butt t
tesi the Irish (I
t°
prevent any ulterior movement, by
telt' knee. II
la people, or, by preventing all hope of future
atei'ttleulatee t at any rate it would be admitted, that it was
lase, eze4Perate°.• conciliate the people ; on the contrary. it
trze
poweer rwefelip
Aerate had dune m, and his belief was, that all the ' .overn-
it,
,e existine L.
,ad been
simply and greatly to ex -5-
ga, and he trueted it would be
tahe eeirnelut jet 'ltri.i.e O'Connell to prevent any out-
with
:Posi:ist:
perfect
it;te: acwots rti not deceive themselves the . non (Atha Irish that they. had done anthing to alter the
svaVoula go Peopfe. They might tieperil upon it
tehe an assurance if ltimate su sets, and
the
,s)tv e, Now, he
of the plan they meant to pure
ye._ ag He
e, he did ask them whither ad that was
tiuertithet!es)
vleow lsieved that the best thing tor their ( the Go-
thin with an --he was sure he did not desire to charge
int 3 to st, tng of the kind,
.when he said that the beset
a arrecte al'ort their -
of i: He eertai I
e, an, which
A. Present policy would be al immediaee
not alt probability, be ultimately put
ae—',,eotintreine n Y did mean to sa om the character
inia4.heuent end it..,,, that the instant resistance was disarmed, and
lhe at'li.d the gun, their generous feelings would not step
ehose L'iheved theaatt"e of q 1
Coutpusii;unarvi,ew_wid bsetepaltintgeatnhte, rswf,eoergpoatwteany.
"lity"" which
4 that could now be so Touch better removed. He
its lon as l‘lr. O'Connell led the Ira people,

there was no dancer of an insurrection ; bet he asked if the
general peace of Europe were broken, and in the event of e
war, if foreign enemies laieted it; It and would they net lad
a large portion of the peeele of tbst eeuntry a frieudly 'peen'
tiou ?—"" No, no," Items both sides ef Cie ) Tuey
knew full tsell that that (Langer was not unreasonable appre-
hended before, and it was everted, not by any want of ability on
tart of our encodes, but beeauee the Irish peoele weee not
•, net! to rise against this nation. He had touehel upon I.ltat
subject very I,gtolv•, and he ventured no as,ertian of itls :se a
upon it.—( Hear, hear.) But, he seked. was there notlene
that subject which would etsiut out a waiit of in Ise-
land, in the case of a war? Was nut the contingency of war
publicly discussed in Ireland, and in America? And did not
Louis Philippe, simple as he was—( -1 laugh )—possess an
inkling of the matter ? Those were only the probable evils of
the present state of Ireland ; but the real evils wbieh it im-
posed were the enormous expense—the constant violation of the
constitutional principles and free form at government under
which we lived—anti, above all, the total imps-sibility of taking
any measures to ameliorate the condition of the people of Ireland.
The state of Ireland—the turbulent dispositii in and utter
misery of the peasantry of that country—made it the great eye-
sore of the whole of Europe. Intel agent travellers from ell
countries—men conversant with the state of every nation of
the continent of Europe—drscribe the destitution and misery
of Ireland as being beyond that of the peasantry of any country
in the world. This is a frightful thing ; it is more—it is a
scandal to us who have governed Ireland. And vet, exist
will till they removed the religioue grievances of the people,
for it was totally imposible to ameliorate the condition
of a disaffected people—it was totally impossible, till the first
was effected, to do any good. The great evil of Ireland put
out of the question any plan that wisdom might suggest for
the improvement of the people.—( Hear, hear.) Now he had
stated the existence of this disaffection without justifying it,
without palliating it, said even without reprobating it ; for he
wished to represent it simply to the House in a practical point
of view.—(An Hon. Member on the Opposition benches, we
believe Mr. J. O'Connell, expressed his disapprobation of the
word "disaffected.") He wished to present that feeling to the
House in a practical point of view, namely, as one
that they could net dream away, that they could
not doubt away, and that they could not allow
to exist unheeded. He had been guarded in his use of the
word disaffection—he had guarded himself against any mis-
apprehension, by stating his wish to present it to them as a
thing with which they must deal as " a great fact," one to be
taken into consideration as the basis of all their policy with
regard to Ireland. It would not do at this time of day, to lay
all the blame of the agitation on agitators and demacogues,
because the world at arge had pretty well arrived at the con-
clusion that a people ' might be provoked, but never instigated,
into a revolt. They must use the knowledge of this feeling, in order
to direct them in applying a remedy. They must not be
misled in endeavouring to apply that remedy, by attending
merely to what the people asked ; it was their business to at-
tend to that cry so far as it led them to an acquaintance with
their grievances, and those grievances it was their duty to re-
lieve when they discovered them. He did not say that, because
the people of Ireland demanded the repeal of the union, they
were to discuss that question as the only remedy, or to apply
any remedy except that which might be most just and the
most practical. It was impossible to look at the state
of Ireland, without seeing that the real grievance which had
alienated the affections of the people, was a religious grievance,
else why was the agitation going on through all the Cathol:c
population of Ireland? Why were the Catholic priests the
leaders of it, and why did the present outbreak take place on
the accession of an Anti-Catholic Ministry to power?—
(Cheers.) These coincidences showed that it was a religious
grievance. And when they looked round on the state of Ire-
land, and asked what it was that called forth the in-
dignant feelings of the people, they saw that which the
voice of the world hail pronounced to be a greater outrage on
religious feeling than was to be found in any part of it—the
ascendancy of the English Church in that country He knew
that there wet e some gentlemen who maintained that the hos-
tility to the English Church, on the part of the people of Ire-
land, was a sort of point of honour—a feeling tar too fine fir
people of commen sense—and who looked on the mass of the
people as a set of beasts, who, as long as their bellies were filled
—( Hear, hear, from an Honourable Member on the Mi-
nisterial side)—had no business to trouble themselves with
any point of the kind. Those • who held this opinion
totally overlooked the fact, that almost all great movements of
a national character that had ever taken place in the metro-
polis had been caused by outrages on national feeling, rather
than by injuries to national interest.—( Hear, hear.) It
seemed to him that the ascendancy of the English Church in
Ireland had every characteristic of an outrage on national
feeling. First, it was a great and palpable injustice—the
maintenance of the English Church as an establishment in
Ireland, was a thing so opposed to every principle on which
Church establishments were maintained by any rational
set of men, that no one could doubt that they ventured to
keep it up, solely from a scornful disregard of the feelings of
the Irish people. Why, the only national principle on which
he had ever heard the connexion of Church and State de-
fended, was that it was their duty to provide for the religious
wants of the majority of the people, and, above all, tor the
religious instruction of the poor. Now, what was it that they
had done in Ireland? They had plundered the many of the
provision made for their religious wants, in order to establish
a sinecure Church for the few.—( Cheers. ) They had robbed
the very poorest people in the world, in order to
gorge the avidity o; the rich. —( I fear, hear.) The
Irish Church was associated with more recollections of
suffering and grievance than any other institution in any na-
tion with which he was acquainted. He thought it was not
too much to say that—taking not only the intensity of its per-
secutions at particular intervals, the long period it had lasted,
and the numbers :over which it extended; but also, the
evils that had been their results —a greater amount of human
misery had been caused by the attempts made by Queen Eliza-
beth, and since the time of Elizabeth, to force the Protestant
religion on the people of Ireland, than by any other
cause that ever operated to the detriment of any nation. It
was impossible that in the minds of the Irish peasant the
English Church could ever be viewed except as surrounded
by a dark aloud of recollection, of conquest, of repeated
massacre, of as oft-repeated confiscation, as the source
of the laws that made his religion penal, that broke
the peace of society, and severed the ties of families
—the laws that pronounced unnameable barbarities as the
punishment of the teachers of his own faith—as the
source of evils from which he had himself suffered, or mise-
ries from which he had seen others suffer. It was impossible
for any man to look on the Church in Ireland but as associated
with these evils and mischiefs, or to regard it but with feelings
say
yaliethnaattiot
there
and
whaa:r ed.
not
oneßu But be
evil would otunl d
thego presentfurther he would
of
Ireland with which the ascendancy of the English Church
was not connected, either as cause or concomitant.
He attributed entirely to that ascendancy the alienation
of the rich from the poor, the horrible relations of landlord and
tenant, the neglect of a proper provision for education, and the
perverted administration of justice, which had deprived the
people of all confidence in their magistrates. The peasantry had
always been ill-treated under the name of Papists, and slid they
wonder that they hated the institution by which all this wrong
had been perpetrated ? He would now only ask one more ques-
tion on this subject. If this was tne feeling with regard to the
Church in the mind of the Irish peasant, what must be the
teeling of the Irish Catholic gentlemen, and still more in the
mind of the Irish Catholic priest ? The Irish Cathol.c priest,
was fully cognisant of all the horrors of the past—he was fully
cognisant of ail the evils that afflteted his coutery—he was per •
fectly acquainted with the position his Church occupied in all
the rest of Christian Europe, and he deeply f; It its
humiliation in his own country. Above all, he deeply
felt the mortifying position in which that humiliation
placed him. Under the influence of the common
teefings of human nature, could he feel anything but hostility
to the ascendancy of that Church which he bene ,ed was he-
retical, anti which he knew to be obtrusive Hear, hear. )
His opinion of all these facts, therefore, was, hat the great
barrier to all improvement, to the tranquillity of Ireland, was
the present position of the N grill h and the Cath lie. Church
tit that country. And until they removed that, and other
grievances connected with it—which he might call Church
grievances—such as the defects -if the franchise aild of the
municipal corporations, it would be impossible for them to
do anything fur the amelioration of the condition of the people
of Ireland. He wa, aware that he had used very strong lan-
guage, and which he feared might give offence to some gen-
tlemen. He saw with pleasure the sensitive manner in which
the Hon. Member for Kilkenny had taken up this ap•
plication of the term disaffected to the people.—
( Hear.) He applied it in a limited sense, and he wished
now to explain by an instance which he wished particularly
to press on the attention of the Right Hon. Baronet opposite ;
it was one that showed how easy it was, by a simple course of
justice, to remove the most unequivocal disaffection. He
wished to call the attention of the House to an instance
that had occurred within their own experience, and of which
they were cognisant. They remembered the state of Canada in
183 S. During that year there were no less than two
insurrections in that colony—a Hear, hear )—and in that
insurrection, nearly the whole of the French population of
the colony was implicated, either by having taken part in it, ur
by being known to be friendly to the insurgents. He was
sure that no one doubted—at least no one did when he was in
Canada—that had a toreign army made its aepearance, it
would have been able to have held its ground. The steps
taken to redress the grievances of Canada were founded en-
tirely on two recommendations. One was the union of the two
provinces—the second was to establish a. responsible Parlia-
mentary Government. Hd did not allude to the union of the
two provinces as a step that quite alleviated the French discon-
tent. Lord Sydenham was nut able to aleviate that discon-
tent. It went on increasing till the Right Hon. B ironet sent
out Sir C. Bagot to administer the affairs of that country. Sir
C. Bagot adopted the system of responsible government, that
is, he admitted the leaders of the French party to office, and
what effect did this step produce on the French popu-
lation? Why, within six months the whole of this
devoted people were offering up prayers in their churches
for the health of the Governor who had granted the boon,
and for the prosperity of the mother country, to whom they
were grateful for it. He brought with great pleasure this
instance before the Right Hon. Baronet, because it was an
instance of the conciliation produced by his own wise measures.
He had seen the effect of conciliation in Canada. Let him try
its effects in Ireland. Let the Government act in the same
spirit as that in which they had acted in Canada, and he was
bound to say that, however strong the feeling of tn.-2 people
might be, they would be conciliated by acting with jus-
tice and in a liberal spirit. He was not going to take up the
time of the House—( Hear, hear, from the Ministerial benches )
of the valuable time of those important gentlemen opposite.—
( Laughter)—but ho thought it was absolutely necessary that he
should specifically state how he thought these grievances might
be remedied. It could only be by establishing perfect religious
eeuality. He was always glad to have recourse to any preced-
ents when it was possible. and he believed it would have been
the best thine for the country bad Mr. Pitt been able to effect
the large and comprehensive plan on which he conceived the
union. He believed he intended first to enaancipate the Catholics
with respect to their civil rights. Secondly, to have granted
payment to the Catholic clergy ; and, thirdly, to have effected
the union. But the order of those measures was reversed, the
union was carried, but the other parts of his great and sound
policy were not effected. Phis was deeply to be regretted. If,
at the time of passing the union, these measures 'had been car-
ried, Ireland would have been as tranquil and as well Koverned
a country as any in the world. But he feared that toe time
for those measures had now passed away. He feared that they
were inscribed in one of the Sybil's books that had beets
irrecoverably consumed.—(Cheers.) In !See they might.
perhaps, have coupled with their liberal policy a measure fur
the endowment of the Catholic clergy, but now they would
distrust the spirit in which they tit tae the offer. —( Hear,
hear,) It would be believed th it their object was, as indeed
it was avowed to be, to bribe the priests. ant to seduce the
leaders frost the peeple. Toe offer would be entirely re-
jected, and would be viewed trots, ere red of Ireland to the
etlusr aril feelings of hostility. And more than tl;',4-74e !;.e •
lieved if Ile), nave to do this without the con sent of the
Catholic priests or ieriple they would be paying a costly price
fsethrveicGeoto
tro4r.e4ar): iiiisttrtuh.etieceattwbbAitcohpiesnaeustl s
wg.ettrtehetositf
,theetst.leigLt4e,sat
yeinwat, would tannediatelly bold the
destroyedy '')
the influeffeet the
Qye "ti.t'vrtips other hand, lie did not
peopleG°
believeyern; ntihan amidtt thus
I lriebl e‘l4;eiji)4l.ni e of the peepla of this countryi
could be gut over, utiles: the Geveretneot opee y de-
clared that a ineasur, like till' was absolutely neeosaey tilt
securing the tranquillity of Irel
and the p
Ireland. Andhorwiesctosulodf they
declare tkis, when both the peoplethat
eouality. in another way.
then give up their plan rem 14044;4
country rejected theirprcVsal?—( Hear, hear.) They must
Now' the plan he had to prepose had teen aireatsy alluded to
by the Noble Lord the Member for the City of London, and di*

eivirac,e

et ely

Nohle Lord the :timber for Sunderland. The Learned Nlena•
b,,r the eeeor lee o Dublin lied stated that 'he a-4"i' ing
the coogregatoo prii.eipl of payino the ;No' estant
- would be equivalent to so ipi i' of its
national estAblisliment. That was Plw-
groLifid on wh'e't, he would say. they ought
e principle.—(Hear, hear.) believed it
was not so ,each the .toiouot of the in niey paid • o h., church
that was übieeleti to by the Irish people. What hey objected to
was the doolinancy of the Church —( Lou.! cheers. ) If the
Pi otesi ants of the folstableheil Church were pail in the same
iii,aner as those o- iie Pre.diytert ..'hurch, lie thought that
the discontent would be in a great measure appeased. He
should wish in the change, which he proposed, to see a proper
regard paid to existing vested interests—( hear, hear)—and he
did not believe that there was a single Irish Catholic who
would not wish to have a proper regard paid to existing in-
terests.—( Loud cheers.) Let them take the whole property of
the State Church into the hands of Government, let them pay
the clergy of that Church on the congregational principle,
saying the increase as the incumbents died off, let them make a
fair and li'ae-al allowance to tne ministers of the Established
Church in Ireland, and they would have done all that was ne-
cessary on this point to retnove the indignation of the people
of Ireland.—(Cheers. ) This measure must be preliminary to
ev,ry other measure. This would remedy the religious ine-
qmdi ies, hut ii would nut better the physical condition of the
people. Bu it must precede every measure for bettering their
ph)sical condition, in order to prepare their minds for the re-
ception of those measures. Hence arose his chief repugnance
to the landlord anti tenant commission. Hr did full justice to
the talents and character of the NAle La d who was at the
head of that Commission. —( Hear, hear.) But the Right
lion. Baronet had begun at the wrong end.--(Cheers,) The
Right Hon. Baronet thought that the appointment of this
Landlord and Tenant Commission would allay all the discontent
in Ireland without a remedy of their religious grievances.
It would be impossible to allay that discontent unless
those grievances were fits: remedied.—( Loud cheers.)
It was not giving the reined al measures a fair chance.—
( Cheers.) He was convinced that if tho-e religious grievances
were redressed, it would not be long before they would secure
the material prosperity of a country which long wanted justice
done to it, to develope its great natural resources. —' Loud
cheers.) He was grieved to find that her Majesty's GOvern-
had taken their stand on maintaining the existing religious ine-
quality.--(Cheers.) They depended on the majority by
which they were backed in that House—( Cheering and coma-
ter-cheering)—and they placed reliance upon the prejudices of
the people of England; prejudices which had frequently been
brought to bear on these questions.—( Loud cheers. ) lie was
prepared to meet them upon that poiut. England never dealt
fairly with the people of Ireland on this question.—(Cheers.)
They had never fairly placed before the people of
England the horrible injustice which the maintenance of this
system perpetrated in Irelani.—(Loud cheers.) They had
been kept in ignorance of it.—(Cheers.) He was sure that
all the efforts to govern Ireland upon their present principles
would be wholly useless, and would only add anoiher chapter
to the disastrous history of that moat injured country,
Lord STANLEY would not deny he had no desire to deny
to the Noble Lord, the. Member fur the City of London. the
credit of having made on this important question a in ist able
and clever Opposition motion—(Cheers)—and a most able and
clever Opposition speech.—( Renewed cheers. ) It was a most
able anti clever opposition motion, because, in moving merely
for a Committee of Inquiry, the Noble Lord hoped,
that, in the certainty of the rejection of that
mots: n —and without teat certainty, the Noble Lord
would hardly haze ventured to make it—( Loud cheering
front tare Mint.terial benches) the Noble Lord trusting in
that certainty, hoped that he might hereafter be able to al-
lude to the rejection of that motion ; a motion, as he would
say, merely for inquiry, and taunt the majority by which he
had been opposed as heaping injustice, injury, and insult upon
the people of Ireland. —( Loud Opposition cheers.) A motion
for inquiry into the grievances of the Irish people had been
rejected, it would be said, with contempt by a Parliamentary
majority.—(Cries of " Nn, no.") No, not by the Noble
Lord. The Noble Lord would hold no such language, but the
Noble Lord knew well that there were those among his sup-
put porters who he:d, and who would hold, such lan-
guage.—( Loud cheers from the Ministerial side of the House.)
fhe form of the motion was intended to afford them
the greatest facility fur holding such languago.—( Renewed
Ministerial cheer.) No one in the House could doubt but
that the motion was intended as a direct and palpable vote
of censure on her Majesty's Government.—(Tremendous
cheers from the Opposition.) Such was the intention, but
such were not the terms.—(Cheering.) It would have been
more manly and straightforward in the Noble Lord to have
proposed a direct vote of censure -(Cheers)—but not so
politic.—(Cheers.) For the debate afforded ample opportu-
nity for insinuating charges against their political opponents,
while the avowed object of the motion was only to suggest
a remedy for grievances. He would not go to the whole
length to which the Hon. and Learned Gentleman who had
just sat down had gone, but he would admit that he viewed the
case of Ireland with care, with anxiety, and with some alarm.
He did not believe with the Hun.and Learned Gentleman that if
a for tgn army was to land in Ireland they would find a friendly
greeting from the greater part of the Irish people.—( Hear,
bear.) He had a higher opinion of the loyalty and good feeling
of the people of Ireland.—(Loud cheers.) If such, indeed,
were the case ; if in the event of a foreign war, a great portion
of the people of Ireland would be ready to welcome any army
that should be hostile to Great Britain ; if it were true as the
Hon. and Learned Gentleman had stated that Ireland was not
only disaffected but revolted—a revolted people coolly awaiting
the moment to show their hostility—excited almost to mad-
ness—at the command of one man who could either
lull them to temporary repose, or excite them to
action as might suit his ulterior purposes—if that
were the state of: Ireland could they conceive how
at such a moment, such a motion should be proposed for
mere party object—when everything ought to be merged in
patriotic feeling.—( Hear, and cheers.) Could they conceive
anything more tremendous than the responsibility of those men
who had once served the Crown, who might hope again to
serve the Crown, and who yet at such a moment could
bring forward a motion calculated to cause every possible
prejudice in the Irish people, whose feelings were already ex-
cited to the verge of madness—(Loud cheers)--and who en-
deavoured, by every species of misrepresentation, to obstruct
and to thwart those who under such tremendous circumstances
were charged with the safety of the empire ?—( Loud cheers.)
Now, what had been their course under these circumstances?
Had it been as ',the Hon. and Learned Gentleman had stated
it must and would be ?—(Cheers.) No.—(Cheers.) There
had been no violation of constitutional principle.—(Tremen-
dous Opposition cheers.) What prineiple had they violated?
--(Cheers and counter cheering.) What law had they strained?
--( Immense cheering from the Opposition.) 'What new powers
had they asked for ?—(Ministerial cheers.) What rights or
privileges had they restrained ?—( Renewed cheers.) They
were told that the country was in a most dangerous state ; that
Mr. O'Connell was at the head of a people actuated by hostile
feelings, and acting, or ceasing to act, according to the d.ree-
tion of their leader; they were told by the Noble Lord that Mr.
O'Connell possessed the confidence of the Irish people,
and the Noble Lord intimated that they ought to
be guided by the councils of Mr. O'Connell.
A inure forgiving man than the Noble Lord he had never
heard of —(Ministerial cheers.) They had been reproached—
nay, they were even now reproached—by Hon. Gentlemen op-
posite with not having interfered earlier.—(Cheers.) They
had, however, pursued a steady and a legal course.—( Cheers. )
Without any violation of the law—without asking for any in-
creased power—( Loud cheers)—but trusting to the law alone.
they had brought to judgment and to conviction the leaders of
the band --t Cheering and counter-cheering.) They told him
that the danger was not over—(Loud Opposition cheers)—that
they had not effected their object—(Opposition cheers)—that
the coavict,on had driven the people to madness.—( Cheers. )
And before the record could be received of that conviction—
before the law-officers of the Crown could appear to face their
charges and their calumnies, they thought it right—(Cheers)
—they thought it decent - (Cheers)—they thought it patriotic
—(Cneers)—there, in that House of Commons—(Cheers)—
to excite this already maddened people, by remarking in that
assembly, trusting to such reports as alone they could have yet
received, upon the conduct, upon the words, upon the voice,
aye ! even upon the gestures of the 'highest functionaries
of the law.—(Loud Ministerial and Opposition cheers. )
He was sorry to see Hon. Gentlemen opposite so strongly'ex-
ched.—( Renewed cheering.) The Noble Lord, at an early
period of the debate, had charged the Government with occu-
pying, but not governing, Ireland.—(Loud Opposition cheers.)
It had been made, ior a considerable time past, a matter of
charge against the Government that they restrained the people
of Ireland by military force, and not by law.—( Opposition
cheers.) The Noble Lord had commented on what he deno-
minated the fallacious returns of the amount of military force
in Ireland which had been produced by his Right Hon. Friend
the Secretary of State for the Home Department. An Hon.
Gentleman had called for returns of the reek and file in Ireland,
for every year since the year 1830; those returns had been
produced, and the result had been to show that this Govern-
ment, which was charged with having introduced a military
despotism into Ireland, with having superseded law by military
force, had actually during the two years which they had been
in office, up to the commencement of 1843, maintained in Ire-
land a force lower, on the average, by '2,000 men than the
average which had been maintained by Hon. Gentleman oppo-
site during the time that they administered the Government.
—( Cheers.) In 1832, the military force its Ireland amounted
to 19,301 men. Its 1833, to 23,998.—( Hear, hear.) In 1834,
to 23,035. During the next five years, from 1835 to 1841, the
average force in Ireland was 16,810 men. The lowest amount
of force was 14,687 men. During the two years 1842 and 1843,
the average force was 14,833 men, and in the month of
May, 1842, the force in Ireland was below 13,000
men, being the lowest force since the union that
had ever been retained in Ireland.—( Hear, and cheers.)
The Noble Lord moved for a letter of the Lord Lieutenant of
Ireland, offering to give up four or five regiments to quell the
disturbances in England in 1839. Why, in 1839, the force in
Ireland was 16,260 men, and if the whole four regiments,
being of the ordinary' strength of regiments, had been sent out
of Ireland, they would not have reduced the force in that coun-
try below the average at which they were kept by her Majesty's
present Government.—( Cheers.) But in 1843 commenced that
system which he might venture to describe as a system
of pernicious agitation—( Hear, hear, and cheers.) Mul-
titudinous meetings were held in every part of the
country which, if not of themselves strictly illegal, were of
such a character as to cause reasonable and serious alarm—not
of immediate violence, because that was not the object of the
leaders, at whose beck the people would rise or be still ; but
no man would tell him that a succession of those meetings, at
which 100,000 persons were assembled to petition Parliament,
but who did not petition Parliament—(Cheers)—using exciting
language, selecting scenes calculated to excite rancorous hos-
tility to England (Cheers) using at those meetings
language, the tendency of which was to create hatred
and ill-will between the two countries—if he said those
meetings were not in them elves illegal, their tendency was to
create a rersonable apprehension, if not of an immediate dis-
turbance of the public peace, at least of an attempt to overthrow
the functions of Government.—(Cheers.) Would any person
tell him that the responsible Moister of the Crown would be
justified, seeing, day by day, and week by week, meetings of
200,000 persons taking place, arrayed and disciplined, and
boasting of their strength, with a leader, who, according to the
Honourable and Learned Gentleman who spoke last, had
but to hold up his finger, when they would rise
up in their strength and might—would any person tell him
that the Government wonid be justified—nay, would not be
deserving of impeachment—( Loud cheers)--if they did not
meat that display of physical force by the exhibition of physical
force, suffi -lent, thank God, not only to check an outbreak,
bat even the possibility of such an outbreak?—(Cheers. He
admitted that, in 1843, they added a large increase to the
military force in Ireland; yet, even now they had riot
increased it to the same amount at which it stood in 1834,
nor had they raised the whole force in Ireland above what it
was in 18:34 and 1835. And though at an early period of the
Government they had somewhat reduced the military force,
ries Houze would recollect at the same time, that a large in-
crease was made to the pelics—Hear, gear)—and this Go-
vernment, which talked of nothing but moral intruenee, aria
governing Ireland by the means of that influence, had,
if not so large a military force in Ireland, in point of
(act, as large pllyeical three. (Hear, hear.) If the
House would per nit him, he would now deal with some of
those topics in which the' Noble 'Lord and other Members qt
the Muse dealt, and he must take the liberty.of Saying, that
whole poerse of the debate exhibited the prudence of the
course pursued by the Noble Lerd in bringing forward a motiqn
for a Committee, and net a substantive motion ; because,
though there was great unanimity in condemning the Govern-
ment on account of the present state of Ireland, there was great
discrepancy as to the causes which produced it, and great dis-
crepancy co;',:e which ought to be pursued, arid u to

IS a

In adopt

the measures which the Government, which was to succeed her
Nlajesty's present Government, ought to adopt with regard to
Inland. Objections had been urged to the curse adopted by
the Government—an objection was taken for not imerfering
sooner—anotrier objection was made fur interfering too soon—
another said they issued the proclamation too late, but he
thought his Right Hou. Friend proved, by fair statements of
&dos, that it was impossible the proclamation could have been
issued a day sooner after the intention of the party became
known. —( An observation was here made which did not reach
us. ) He ( Lord S'tanley ) believed that question had been set.
tied, but he would not weary the House by repeating what had
been said on that subject by his Right Hon. Friend, and was
satisfied to leave the statement to the House and the country.
Hear, hear.) But Hon. Gentlemen opposite gave him an
ironical cheer, when he said they did not strain the law ; and
would any gentleman rise up and tell him, the House, and the
country, what law had been strained?—( Hoar, hear.) What
course had been pursued by the Government which was not
only justified by circumstances, but compulsory upon them ?
With regatd to the accidental omission of the names from the
general jury list, it was a question with which the Government
had nothing to do. lie merely mentioned it as an instance of
the haste, the breathless haste, with which. gentlemen pressed
assertions against the Goveinment before the circumstances
were known. —( Hear, hear.) They heard over and over again,
us3que ad nauseam, that sixty Catholics—(t No, no)" —well
names, were excluded from the hit. The Government had
nothing to du with that ; but if ihat was so why, was the charge
made against the Government? It was said that the pr;soners
being Catholics —or a majority of them— were prej u:liced in having
a fair trial by excluding the names from the jury list, many
of velum were of the Raman Catholic persuasion. Was it
true that sixty names were omitted? No, nor thirty, but
twenty •four ; and of these fifteen were from one parish ; and
of these he did not know, nor did the Recorder, whose state-
m-nt he followed—( Hear, hear )—who were Roman Catholics
and who Protestants ; but this he did know, that the gentle.
man by whose negligence, or in consequence of whose omis-
sion, thosa names were left out, was himself a Roman Catholic.

—( lies-, hear. ) And yet it was made a charge against the
Government that they were omitted to prejudice the tra-
versers, being Roman Catholics, on their trial. This was the
charge with regard to the omission of the names. Then with
regard to striking the Roman Catholics off the jury—
Lord J. RUSSELL—Challenging them.
Lord STANLEY thanked the Noble Lord. He did not use
the accurate expression—which was challenge. What was the
fact ? The Noble Lord contrived to omit the distinction be-
tween a common and a special jury, and omitted to tell the
House this, that if they had a common jury, which they might
have had, it would have given the Crown a power of causing
persons to starri by, and they might than be charged—perhaps
unjustly charged—with packing the jury. They sought no
such advantage; they applied for a special jury—they applied
for it as the last special jury list stood. The traversers com-
plained that it was not correct, and they applied
for time to have a new list framed. The
Crown acceded to that request, and gave them time to have
a new jury list. Was this dune by any law introduced by
them, or according to any mode or arrangement of theirs?
No, but according to a law, framed, he pre.qtmed, to facili-
tate the due administkation of justice, and introduced, he
believed, by Sir M. O'Loghlin, when Attorney-General of
Ireland. What were the conditions of that law ? Forty-
eight names were to be taken by ballot from the general jury
list. From this number both the Crown on the one hand and
the traversers on the other hand had the right of striking out
twelve names each, and no discretion whatever was
left them in the exercise of that right ; but then it was
said that the officers struck off all the Roman Catholics. His
Noble Friend stated—an I he was sure any statement he made
would not be for a moment doubted—that positive directions
had been given by the Irish Government, which had the cor-
dial approval of her Majesty's Government here, not to strike
off any person on account of his religion. Ten Roman Ca-
tholics were struck off who were Repealers, with one exception.
Mr. SHEIL—No, no.

Lord STANLEY—The Right Hon. Gentleman possessed
a great advantage over him, because he had a little professional
bas in the question —( Laughter)—he was counsel for the parties.
He (Lord Stanley) was not.—( Cheers and laughter.) It
was sworn by the officer who struck the list, that the Roman
Catholics were Repealers, to the best of his belief.—(Cries of
" No, no," and " Hear, hear.") If the affidavit was not put
in, a statement was made on the part of the Government
officer, that he believed they were members of the Repeal
Association. On the other hand another affidavit was put in
by the traversers, to the effect that they were not Repealers.
—( Cries of "No, no.") He believed, in the first instance
that an affidavit was offered, stating that they were
not Repealers, or connected with the Repeal Association.
But after a considerable time it happened to be mentioned
that it was not forthcoming. The solicitors for the traversers
then came forward and filed an affidavit, that to the best of
their belief two of the number were not Ytepealers.—( Cheers
and laughter.) The Right Hon. Gentleman, the /Slember
for Devonport, conceived that, with regard to those who were
members of the Repeal Association, they would not be justified
in leaving them on the jury. One of these two was at the
time believed to be a member of the Repeal Associa-
tion, and he believed at least that he signed
a requisition for a repeal meeting. The tenth per-
son was struck off not because he was a Roman Ca-
tholic, because at the period of striking the jury he was
firmly believed not. only to be a Protestant in religion but a
strong Conservative Protestant—( Hear, hear) —and he thought
he could give confirmation of that belief, because upon, making
inquiry in Dublin (at least so lie was informed), he was re-
gistered as a Protestant on the part of the Conservative in-
terest.—(Cheers.) He was not struck out on account of his
supposed religion, and yet the greatest prejudice had been
excited on this subject, because it was said that they were
struck off, because they were Roman Catholics, were
insulted, and it was supposed they thought ghat
Roman Catholics could not be believed on their oaths.
He had now received the affidavit which had be.in alluded to
in the course of the debate.—(Cheers.) It was signed Wm.
Kemmis, and sworn before Mr. Bourne.—(Great cheering. )
Now the deponent in that affidavit stated that he did not be-
lieve that eleven persons professing the Catholic religion had
been struck off from the jury on the late trials in Ireland.
Mr. SHEIL—But he did not say that eleven Repealers had
not been struck off.—(Great cheering.)
Lord STANLEY—CouId any one doubt, after that observa-
tion, that the Right Hon. Gentleman had brought into that
House the quibbles and quirks by which, in courts of law, it
was sometimes sought to impede the course of justice?—
( Hear, hear.) The Crown was charged with striking off ten
Roman Catholics from the panel of the jury. Now supposinn
that to be so, which he denied, what had the traversers done?
—( Hear, hear.) Had they struck off any but Protestants ?
( Hear, hear.) He did not blame them for doing so.—( Hear,
hear.) '1 hey were entitled to adopt such a course.—(Hear. )
If a party thought A would be better for him than B, the
constitution of the country gave him the power of striking A
off the list, and God forbid that it should be otherwise.—
( Hear, hear.) Ile hoped that he had now disposed of this
question of striking off jurors.—( Hear, hear.) I3ut then it
was said that it was a matter of certainty that it was im-
possible for Catholics to have a fair trial in Ireland.—( Hear. )
nte l
He would appeal to that House, he would appeal to the
country,
at e
sbneeeenra
conducteder, in the
whether,
) l in. h
Gentlemen
greatest spirit of fairness. —( Hear, hear, and cries of
,• Oh,
oh. hear)—
but this he. would as,ert, that no law had been strained, the
charge of the Chief Justice had been most impartial--(Hear,
bear, and cries of " Oh, oh" )—and it was not fair on the
part of members of the legal profession in that House to use
the privilege they possessed to endeavour, if possible, to in-
flict a slur on those who administered the law of the land.
—( Hear, hear.) The law had been framed long aince ; the
Chief Justice, in summing
up to the jury,
his own opinion—(Hear, hear)—but the did not prononrice
unanimous opinion
of the whole Bench.—( Hear.) Then with respect to the jury,
he believed there was not one man in that House that would not
say that they had shown, in the most praiseworthy manner,
their determination not to violate their oaths—( Hear, hear)—
and before they pronounced their verdict of guilty, they acted
with the greatest discrimination.—( Hear, hear.) There was
no haste on their part—(Hear hear)—and no man could tell
him that the jury had not employed their time and attention
r
fullfto considert he case of the trpaversers.—( Hear, hear. ) Well,
these trials had taken place ; they had been conducted the
Government in the greatest spirit of fairness—( Hear, ear,
and " Oh, oh")—and had beenpbrou ht to a conclusion with-
out a violation of the public peaeeg.—(Cries of " Oh, oh.")
Such being the case, was it right—eras it ust—to come
forward and ask for a Committee of Inquiry ?—( The Noble
Lord who had brought forward the present motion had ex-
pressed in general terms his resolutions.—(lTear' hear.) In
doing so he had stated his pure veneration of justice.—(Hear,
hear.) He ( Lord Stanley) agreed with all he had said with
j
respect to that subject ; but he could not accede to what had
been stated by the Noble Lord with respect to the Govern-
ment.—( Hear, hear.)
If it was meant to be inferred that the
Government, in the late trials, had connived at injustice, he
denied the imputation with the utmost disdain. 1 he Noble
Lord had told them that the franchise was wretchedly confined,
and that the people, in order to vote, had to go great distances..
as
The Noble Lord had said the franchise ought to be inerciafsede ,
so as to meet the wishes of the people of Ireland. Nohwe, h
were
Here to take the wishes of the people of Ireland,
t
e
expressed by their leader Mr. O'Connell, he(Lordb* Stanl g
uidye.)
would say that he would not take Mr. O'Connell as
of
—( Hear.) The Noble Lord said, why not place the people
Ireland on an equality with the people of
England as regarded
the franchise ? He would answer the Noble Lord, that if the
Registration Law in force in this country was put into l o en
action in Ireland, with the English interpretation and qua if c h
tion, it would, instead of increasing very materially diminish
the existing franchise in that country.—(Hear, hear.) It was
further Stated by several Hon. Members who had spoken on
the other side, that there was no lasting peace, no contentment
foe Ireland, as long as the Protestant Church Establishment
existed there.—( Hear, hear.) Did the Noble Lord answer
that declaration? It was a very exciting question to bring
forward at any time, but especially dangerous at the present
moment, unless they knew the result. The Noble Lord dif-
fered widely from those who:now joined with him ; echoed by
those Hon. Members, he did not hesitate to bring into this
subject topics which were highly calculated to increase the dis-
content of the people, and which could not, by any possibility,
produce any practical result. Now, it the responsibility of
office were thrown upon the shoulders of the Noble Lord, he
would not, he could not, he dire not, propose the measures,
without which he now declares it is impossible to think of satis-
fying the Irish people. Could any thing be more miserable—
more wretched—than the suggestions or propositions thrown
out by the Noble Lord? He attacked the Landlord and Tenant
Commission, and used expressions well calculated to inflame
the tenantry of Ireland, and then turned round and said it was
a most difficult question.—( Heart hear.) He did not say he
could propose a remedy, but, if asked for one, the Noble Lord
could only say, " increase the number of stipendiary magis-
trates."—(Hear, hear.) It was a most lame and impotent
conclusion for the leader of a party, for one who had been a
Minister of the Crown, and hoped to be one again.—( Hear,
hear.) The Noble Lord said he did not wish to destroy the
Protestant Church or impair her revenue, but he thought
she had too much wealth. my principle, said the Noble Lord,
is equality between all religious denominations; but yet, when
he came to act upon this high sounding term equality, he would
find how impracticable it was. The Catholic Church might be
endowed with the revenues of the Protestant Church, or
the present revenues of the Established might Church be
divided and distributed, viz., 500,0001. among the Protestants,
Catholics, and Presbyterians, a third to each, er on the more
strict principle of equality, to divide seven-eighths of the re-
venues of the Protestant Church among the Catholics, and the
other eighth between Protestants and Presbyterians.—( Hear,
hear.) The Noble Lord the Member for Sunderland had
spoken out, and spoken truly. It was not the wretched ques-
tion of the appropriation clause—that, the Noble Lord said,
would never give any content The real question was, would
they or would they not destroy the Protestant Chorch in Ire-
land ?—(Hear, hear.) The Act of Un:on contained a provi-
sion, and no provision was more stringent in that Act than that
which guaranteed the recut sty of the Protestant Church Esta-
blishment. The Noble Lord then quoted from the address of
114 h Houses of Parliament, and from the Act of Union
ar,. peck
sagesin 'which the Ileevaity of the Protestant ChUrch was gua-
renteed. He also quoted from the speech of Mr. Grattan, in 1813,
in introducing a Bill for the removal of Roman Catholic disabili-
ties, in which he expressed his confidence that the securities of the
Protestant Church, would be strengthened and maintained by
adMittiiig Pathetic? to equal The isinio, Lord quae4
from a declaration spade by the Catholics of Ireland in 170,
in which they disclaimed and disavowed in the
most solemn
qr,y inteetion of selrePrtifig, the Protestant Church
Establishment ; but that if they were admitted to an equality
of civil rights with their Protestant fellow countrymen, they
wonld support the Protestant Church as established by law,
and would not endeavour to inure or impair it. In 1808, the

Roman Catholics declared, in their petition to the House, that
they did not in any way seek to injure the rights, privileges, or
possessions pertaining to the bishops or clergy of the Church
as by law established ; that their petition was an humble ap-
plication, praying that they might be governed by the same
law:, have the same privileges and be admitted to a participation
in the same civil rights as their countrymen,of a different persuasion
c
l
batrsattoTtaooslchhhhoininnt:filugt,,a,,lo:,,,gt:ehhiti,,rttlithErilyiitßOthti,tortBsitiepei,s,iie,nsob,elg2aiti,rimilai:,t4thle,dw,lbaon.::etaucdasolithlzicn.ili:stetri.ilise,a,aia)sweathotsirectnrileri:aesiflhaipa.dgnatt.d)rtottrii,get)ahse,ihpornhCbcs;
that
property
seetanoyti
eccepthl
ytnlgrsohhaoh,he,
et
consequently
isaahyoei ssssa(
dsael
ndealetecsdi
and
ystcoq'
bdhepfsano. there
_buuuroohesseteti
eerbi
deothninnhi
e(ceeti
tsetwaei
nthrtel
tsnl
tmayoohaneeebooatrflsdpteenuht:
dcsil
plundered
ilursicuelhbieyoeyetyrsnavyaeebtutederd
s
believed,
yonhhepeeai
idtbt
ir—gtheorwtl ,
Protestant
oteiaoeleoansci.
Church—that
Catholics
determined
esneyai
regarded
from
established as
mafcotueyarte,naoi
mdwoorh chsnitmtb,
nuel
they
oot
slightestt yeai übhdehott
law.—(Cheers
feelingseh.
mceedsdtui
eouhi
snrerfppscnrltreeemnoprhncußaossvaotoh:
rtgoma:teodpi
air
rb:khapnBl
meter
neeoapteurt2rni
the
r:anooote6si
nyyidetnr-ae,
f
benches, answered by " No, no," from the Opposition.) It
might be convenient just now for Hon. Members to call out
" No, no" at this moment, but he was sure there were finn.
Gentlemen on the other side of the House who would long
hesitate before they would consent to any measure that would
tend to thisresult.—(Cheers and laughter from the Ministerial
benches.) That former declaration had been over and over
again made by the Hon. Member for Sheffield.
Mr. WARD ruse to explain, but was, owing to the noise,
vociferation, and cries of "Order" from the Tory benches, quite
inaudible in the gallery.
Lord STANLEY said he had quite forgotten the principle
which the Hon. Member had laid down, He (Lard Stanley)
would allude to that by and bye. Previous to the passing of
the Emancipation Act, his Majesty, in his speech at
the opening of the session, in 1829, said—" They (the Par-
liament) were to consider, solemnly, whether those, and what
enactments against the Roman Catholics of Great Britain
could be removed with safety to the Church, as established by
law ; anti to the rights and privileges of Protestants bishops
and clergy of this realm, for those ►nstitutions which should
ever be supported." Such were the words of his Majesty in
1829 ; and, in reply to this speech of his Majesty, the House of
Commons did not content itself with acknowledging the
speech; it also stated that these were institutions which should
ever be maintained in their integrity, and stating that
that House thanked his Majesty for his gracious announce-
ment of his determination to support them. So far as it was
possible to be bound by a solemn declaration—by a declara-
tion as strong as it was possible to embody in language—that
declaration of their intention to support that Church, had been
made by Parliament. Nay, even that declaration on the part
of the Roman Catholics, one and all, had been given that
they had not the slightest intention to weaken the Church.—
( Ilear, hear, and cheers.) That was the language used
previous to emancipation, and his Right Hon. Friend at the
head of the Government declared that he trusted in their pro-
fessions, and rejected a proposal made by a Right HoniFriend
of his, now no more, to prevent Catholics from legislating on
any subject which might affect the Established Church. His
Right Hon. Friend the First Lord of the Treasury said he had
framed the oath sufficiently stringent to prevent the re-
suit anticipated ; that he believed the declarations
of the Roman Catholics, and would adhere to his original
determination. The subject which he now came to was one
which he trusted would not be considered offensive to any
Roman Catholic, because he thought a Catholic had as good
a right to legislate upon any subject as a Protestant, provided
only that he adhered to what he considered a conscientious
conviction. After this statement, lie thought the course he
should pursue could not he deemed offensive, and that he had a
right to quote the oath required to be taken by Roman Catholic
Members of Parliament, and which had been enacted for the
protection of the rights of the Protestant Church. The
Noble Lord then read the oath amidst much cheering from
the Ministerial benches, and continued to say this was the
oath which had been taken by the Roman Catholics, and
he thought the spirit of it must be evident to every per-
son. He again said he had no intention to impute any want
of conscientious principle to the Catholic gentlemen, but still
he thought that the question of supporting the Established
Church was one of too much importance not to require the
utmost precaution. The Hon. Member had alluded (as we
understood, from the manner in which he dropped his voice) to
the Settlement Act.

Mr. WARD (amidst much noise and confusion)—The in-
ference put on my expressions are not correct. What I
stated was that since the battle of the Boyne the Irish had
never been averse to the Act of Settlement.
Lord S FANLEY said he was going on to explain when the
Hon. Member interrupted him, that the Hon. Gentleman had
since withdrawn those expressions which had fallen from him
in the heat of debate. But he (Lord Stanley) did not think the
Hon. and Learned Member for Liskeard had very much im-
proved the case, because he said that the oath was unnecessary,
seeing that the intention of that oath was to exclude the Roman
Catholic descendants of the House of Stuart.
Mr. C. DULLER-1 did net say a word about the oath.
Lord STANLEY—The Hon. Gentleman said that the ob-
ject of the Act of Settlement was to exclude the Roman Ca-
tholic descendants of the house of Stuart, but the house of
Stuart was extinct, consequently the Act of Settlement was a
dead letter. How then could this be an insult to the Roman
Catholics, seeing that it was to operate against a
Roman Cathol.c family which did not exist ? Was
it not so ? It was not because this country felt
that Roman Catholics were not fit to enjoy civil liberty that
such an imposition was placed upon them. With regard to him.
self he could say that he was prepared, and he was sure that her
Majesty's Government were prepared, to give the same privi-
leges to the Roman Catholics that were enjoyed by Protestants.
But they would never consent to the destruction of the Pro-
testant Establishment.—( Cheers.) He did not think that it
was at all inconsistent, in doing the fullest justice to the Roman
Catholics, and in removing their grievances, if such grievances
remained—it was not inconsistent with the removal of those
grievances: if, at the same time, they firmly maintained the ex.
istence of the Protestant Church.—(Cheers.) What was it that
the Roman Catholics asked with regard to the existence of
the Established Church? Did they ask to be endowed with
the proceeds of the Protestant Establishment. No such thing.
They would refuse it. They would not take it if it were offered.
They would neither take a division nor the whole. They
did not want the plunder that had been taken from them to
be given back to them. They did not ask for the violation of
all those prescriptive rights which had been acquired by a pos-
session of three hundred years. What, then, did they ask ?
They refused to enter into an alliance with the Protestant
Establishment—that Establishment which submitted to the law.
How, then, could the Catholic Chnrch claim or ask to be
placed on an equality with the Protestant Establishment?
The Noble Lord (Lord John Russell) said the Catholic Bishops
ought to be placed on an equality with the Protestant Bishops.
Did the Noble Lord mean that those Bishops should have seats
in the House of Lords? He (Lord Stanley) would like to
know that.
__

Mr. C. WOOD—No, he did not.
Lord STANLEY—Then the Noble Lord denied that inten-
tion, which had 'keen imputed to him by an Hon. Gentleman
who was sitting immediately by him. But if the Noble Lord
did intend to advocate the admission of Roman Catholic Bishops
into the House of Lords, did he mean that those Bishops should
be appointed by the Crown ? No such thing ; they would be
the appointments of a foreign potentate.—(Hear, and
cheers.) If, then, they refused this alternative, what
became of their equality ! Would they remove the Protestant
Bishops from the House of Lords.—( Cheers from the Opposi-
tion.) That was a favourite doctrine with some gentlemen
opposite. Why did they not try their hand in this matter, and
bring forward a motion on the subject ? He would be glad for
them to take the sense of the House of Commons, and the peo-
ple of England, upon a motion for the exclusion of the Bishops
from the House of Lords. He (Lord Stanley) trusted that the
Noble Lord opposite did not represent the Roman Catholics of
anyof ththinisg
Ireland, but sure he was, that whether he did or not, the
sweeping propositions he had brought forward, amply proved
country.
He
way of compromise inconsistent with the maintenance
the
sr
dbpsyteotoifpiHonourable
ae N.
veorbiyilNoble
excitedrLlleloge Lord
rmdeieLserpdoerfetodocr
speech
e. Kaßraiunht
Russell),
saaer
ltiel (
twllaar
of the Protestant Establislimena. 'He had been particularly
repeat
h
e
the rejection which had been cast on
t
he had been raised to his present position on account of his
senti-
ment fall from the Noble Lord ; but he believed that it had
s
sure that it was not the deliberate opinion of the Noble Lord.
s
hmvs
eeeaddenenu.
secular
abhroeuNbar
Church
affairs.
ahweei
objection
neo
oHri
(Lord
teliohao
rsnnedad
sad
wbot
Stanley)
af
that
al
abolition
But he regretted more deeply having heard that sentiment
:osncautlscael
edbr
clergyman.
havea,
itnsts
hiai
signature
educsahphht
jourspowr
ohteeewoods
esitt
Protestant
nl tptt
of interference
clergy
tltnteoetresg it
yaf
theen:Ewt
fall from the Honourable Member for Kildare, because
Honourable Member.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentleman
yoho
nte:
a religious one. His objection was that the Protestant had so
he wanted a power of attorney, he was obliged to obtain the
knew not if this were correct, but of this he was certain, that
t
e
l)
e
of such a practice,. on the contrary, he believed that they would
tstbhailhhoeoi aereoes rttnr
Lord
(Lordomi
toitryeoad,
dtcdeohei
hirdeitarrhanrteni Stanley)o,Chancellor
r would, r e se n t
not the Protestantssipport
feel much indebted to any one who would abolish such a custom.
Well, then, the Hon. and Learned Gentleman said that the
certificates of marriages and of baptism must be obtained
from a protestant clergyman. Now, what was the grievance
in that respect ?—( Hear, hear.) He felt that he was tres-
passing too much.—(" No.") But if there were any grievance
really affecting the Roman Catholics in Ireland, he wished to
show that her Majesty's Government were disposed to remedy
it.—( Tory cheers.) In England, before 1836, there was a
real grievance in respect to marriage and baptism— (Hear,
hear)—for the law was that a Roman Catholic clergyman or a
Dissenting minister could not celebrate marriage except in
the presence of a clergyman of the Established
Church, and, according to the forms of that Church.
In Ireland, no such grievance existed now. But on
the contrary, a marriage by a Roman Catholic priest, accord-
ing to the forms of his own Church, was perfectly valid ; and
if any question arose in a court of lax, the evidence of the
Roman Catholic clergyman would be legal and complete proof.
—(Hear, hear.) What, then, was it that the Right Hon.
Gentleman required The certificate of the minister of the
Established Church was at present necessary, because he was
obliged to keep the register. And was the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman sure that the Catholic clergy would be willingt o under-
take the duty of keeping the register ? Was he quite sure that
they would not say " If you place us in that position, and im-
pose upon us the labour and responsibility of keeping the
register, we would rather be without any advantage which it
might coder ?—( Hear. ) lion. Gentlemen opposite knew well
that there was no question of greater difficulty, and that, in a
Committee of the House of Lords last year, copious evidence
was taken upon this subject ; but that evidence had not yet
been published, because, as he believed, the inquiry had not
yet been completed.—( Hear.) Another statement from the
other side of the House was that the Roman Catholic clergy
would not accept an endowment from the State. Now he
thought that the objection was not confined to one party in the
case. In the first place he was not aware that it was intended
to offer them any endowment—( Cheers and laughter)—and,
secondly, he believed that, on the part of the great body of the
people in this country, there was a very great disinclination to
any such grant. The Hon. Gentleman had spoken with great
contempt of a proposition which appeared to him (Lord
Stanley) to carry with it a very great recommen-
dation. That was, to give to the Catholic priest-
hood, and their flocks, a greater security for property,
whtch might be voluntarily endowed in their Church, and
this °could he done without offending the feelings of the Pro•
testant people in this country. The proposition was. to en-
able the Catholic clergy, or rather persons in trust for them,
to hold real property in the same manner as it was held in this
country by Catholics and Dissenters. Before the passing of
the 2,1 Wm. IV., real property was not allowed to be held
by Roman Catholic priests, Qua Roman Catholics for the pur-
pose of their religion. That Act, however, gave them the
power, and it wat proposed to extend the provisions
of tlia Act to Ireland, and to allow the Catholic gentry
and Protestant Dissenters to endow their respective clergy.
This would give the Roman Catholic clergy a fixed status, a
power of acquiring property in land, which they did not at
present possess. This ought riot be taken 19 any indioation of
hostile feeling on the p4rt of the Government towards the Ca-
tholiis of Ireland.—(lFory cheers.) He would say, if there
were grievances affecting the Catholics in Ireland—if there
were any assittartce which the Government could give them in
removing those grievances —bigots as gentlemen opposite might
think them, they would not find any want of that consideration
which was due to the priesthood of so large tt rortikn of the
people.—( Tory cheers.) But if it were truly the purpose of
4;9 ether ;ids to extinguish, covertly but entirely, the Estab-

lished Church in Ireland, he would ever raise his voice against
that policy. [The Noble Lord then turned round to his seat
and appeared to be about to sit dawn, when an Hon. Member
rose and moved that the "debate be now adjourned," where-
upon Lord Stanley returned to the table with a book in his
hand, and said]—Sir' I have not done yet. —( Great laughter. )
Before sitting down, he would call to the recollection of the
House the sentiments of a Noble Lord opposite to him (Lord
Palmerston), who was then a member of her Majesty's Go-
vernment—no, he begged pardon, nut a member of her Ma-
jesty's Government, but one who had assisted that Government
in carrying the Emancipation Bill into force. At that period
the Noble Lord said, and said most wisely, that
the changes which the Catholics aimed at could only be
brought about by the consent of the whole na' ion. He might
suppose an administration introducing a measure against such
consent, but the end of it would be to prove that they were
tottering in their seats, and the effect would be to give to their
opponents ten times the strength which they might previously
have possessed—for every honest and independent Pro-
testant would stand by the institutions of the country,
and s.veep with ignominy from their seats the men who
by such aids would endeavour to alter the ancient and admitted
limits of the Constitution. Such, in 1829, was the opinion of
the Noble Lord (Palmerston) as to the fate, and the well-
merited fate, of any Administration that would coalesce with
any party whose desire might be to weaken the Protes-
tant Constitution of these realms. He (Lord Stanley) would
not use terms more strong; but this he would say, that while
with the bulk of the English people, he was most anxious to
preserve to, and respect, every civil right of the Catholic body,
there was another feeling he shared in common with them, and
that was a fixed and unalterable determination to maintain and
uphold, in every. portion of the empire, the Protestant Estab-
lishment of the sountry.—(Loud cheers.)
The debate was then adjourned until Monday next.
STIPENDIARY MAGISTRATES—IRELAND.
Lord EBRINGTON moved for a return of the number of
stipendiary magistrates appointed in Ireland, from April, 1839,
to August, Nil.
Lord ELIOT took occasion, in assenting to the granting of
the return, to correct an error which had been made on the
subject. For that purpose, he begged to mention that four of
the magistrates mentioned in the return were appointed five
weeks previous to the dissolution of the late Government.
Sir J. GRAHAM said the return would show that between
the Ist of June and the Bth of August, seven new stipendiary
magistrates had been appointed by the Irish Government, and
one was appointed on the ith of August, the very day, if he
mistook not, before that on which they retired from office.
Mr. LABOUCHERE said, that the Right Hon. Baronet
had availed himself of an erroneous return to prefer against
the late Government, a charge the gravamen of which was that
seven magistrates had been appointed, by them in Ireland
under circumstances which led the House to have an impres-
sion that they were appointed not for the purpose of maintain •
ing peace in that country, but in order to effect a mere job.
It now appeared, that there were three vacancies, and that
they had only filled up those vacancies.
Sir J. GRAHAM said it was better to postpone the discus-
sion until the return was made.

Lord ELIOT said he had inadvertently been led to state
that the whole of these seven appointments were made between
the 15th of June and the 25th of August. It now
appeared that three of the magistrates were appointed
in the spring of 1841, and the other four between the 12th
of July and the 27th to 7th August. Four new magistrates
were appointed, he did not say for what purpose—in the last
five weeks during which the late Administration held office.
Mr. F. T. BARING said what appeared remarkable was
that the explanation of the Right Hon. Gentleman did not
confirm the statement of the Noble Lord. He would be glad
to know if the returns would show whether the appointments
were made to fill up vacancies, or whether they were new ap-
pointments? It was stated that one appointment was made on
the very last day ; it might be to fill up a vacancy caused by
death or resignation.
Sir J. GRAHAM—No, no.
Mr. F. T. BARING said he believed the practice of the
Treasury was to fill up all vacancies which occurred while the
Administration were in power.
Lord ELIOT said he had searched the Government Ga-
zettes that morning, in which it was customary to state whether
appointments were new, or made in the room of others, and it
appeared that four of these were new appointments.—( Hear.)
Colonel SIBTHORP said he could make some allowance
for the soreness of the Right Hou. Gentleman opposite, but
he hoped that that soreness would not be removed by their
coming over to that side of the House.
In reply to a question from Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL,
Lord ELIOT said he would endeavour to ascertain for what
districts the magistrates in question had been appointed, and
whether they had been retained.
The return was then ordered.
The House then adjourned, at a Quarter to One.

THE WILL FORGERIES.

MANSION-HORSE.

Yesterday William Henry Barber, Joshua Fletcher,
Thomas Griffin' and Georgiana Dorey, were brought up be-
fore the Lord Mayor, for re-examination on the various
charges of uttering forged wills, which have from time to
time been preferred against them.
Mr. Clarkson appeared for the prosecution ; Mr. Parry for
the prisoner Barber; and Mr. Flower, the Solicitor, of Hat-
ton-harden, for Mrs. Dorey. Mr. Humfrey's clerk attended
for 1. letcher. The examination of witnesses was immediately
commenced.

Dr. J. E. P. Robertson, one of the surrogates of the Prero-
gative Court of Canterbury, described the method usually
pursued in swearing parties to affidavits in that Court. On
the 16th of August he acted as surrogate, when two persons,
representing themselves to be Elizabeth Stuart and Thomas
Griffin, attended with a proctor, and were sworn to an affi-
davit, with the contents of which they stated that each of
them was acquainted; that the signatures were in their
handwriting, on which they were sworn to the truth of the
contents.

Mr. Richard Basset, a clerk in* the public drawing-office
in the Bank, deposed that on the 22d of June, 1841, he re-
ceived an order of payment for 446/. 55., on account of un-
claimed dividends in stock, in the name of Eliza Burchard.
He paid 1001. in notes to the bearer of that order.—(The
witness then gave the number of the dates of the notes
which he had so paid.)
Mr. F. C. Hillary, also a clerk in the drawing-office, re-
ceived on the 22d of June, 1841, an order for payment of
446/. 55., on account of unclaimed dividends, belonging to
Eliza Burchard, in the Three-and-a-Half per Cents. Reduced
Annuities. He paid 3461. 55., to the bearer of the order, who
wrote "E. Burchard, executrix, 9, Great Russell-street,
Bloomsbury," on the back of the order.
Mr. A. Irwood, a clerk in the London Joint-Stock Bank,
deposed that a person named W. H. Barber kept an account
in the London Joint-Stock Bank in 1841. He does not know
the person of the prisoner. On the 22d of June, 1841, a per-
son paid in 135/. to Barber's account ; of that sum 1101. were
in notes.—(The witness described the numbers and dates of
the notes, which corresponded with those paid to the account
of Eliza Burchard, by the clerk in the Bank.)
Mr. W. Smee, chief accountant at the Bank—On the 20th
of July, 1841, Barber, accompanied by a female calling herself
Eliza Burchard, attended at my office : she came to receive
the arrears of dividend directed to be transferred to her name
as executrix of Eliza Burchard, deceased. The dividends
had been unclaimed since 1824. Barber identified the female
as Eliza Burchard, and I gave an order for payment of The
dividends.

Mr. W. Blakesley, a clerk in Roberts's banking-house, paid
on the 20th of July, 1841, a cheque for 269/. 55., drawn by
W. West, 265/. being paid in notes, the dates and numbers
of which witness described.

Mr. R. C. Fish, a pay-clerk at the Bank, paid, on the 21st
of July, 1841, a Bank note • of 2001., which was undersigned
with the name of Burchard, with 200 sovereigns ; and on the
22d of July he paid other notes, also in the name of Bur-
chard, and in gold. These were the notes described by the
preceding witness.
Mr. H. Hill was, in 1841, clerk to his brother, a stock-
broker. On the 20th of July, 1841, Barber directed him to
sell 3001. Console, on account of Eliza Burchard. He sold it,
and accompanied Barber and a female to the Bank, and the
female signed the transfer. The 'stock was sold to Henry
Smith. °Witness handed Barber a crossed cheque for 2681.
17s. 6d. Barber objected to a crossed cheque. Witness
then received a cheque from Smith for 2691. 55., on Roberts
and Co., which was not crossed, and which was handed to
Barber.
Mr. E. Grattan, a clerk in the Southwark Branch of the
London and Westminster Bank, proved that the signature of
Eliza Burchard, on some of the notes, was in Fletcher's
handwriting.
Mr. Clarkson announced that the evidence in all the cases,
except that of Hunt, was now complete, and that he should
be prepared to go to trial at the next sessions, He would,
therefore, ask to have the prisoners remanded.
Mr. Parry, on behalf of Barber, accused the prosecution
of attempting to suppress facts, which, if known, would raise
the strongest possible presumption of Mr. Barber's innocence.
The prosecution knew that a highly respectable solicitor had
been imposed on by the same parties, and in the same man-
ner as Mr. Barber. The parties to whom Cookson had al-
luded had not yet been apprehended.
Mr. Clarkson, in reply, stated that his Learned Friend
would have a proper opportunity of proving all those facts,
but it could not be supposed that the prosecution would call
witnesses that were unncessary.
Mr. Parry asked for a remand for a fortnight, in order to
enable Mr. Barber's solicitor to make such inquiries as might
be necessary for his defence. The Learned Gentleman then
called,

Mr:Brumhall, the solicitor to Mr. Barber, who stated that
ou Tuesday evening last facts of the greatest importance had
come to his knowledge, which, when brought to light, would
establish Mr. Barber's innocence.

Mr. Clarkson begged to say that he himself had asked for
a remand to a day as near the commencement of the session
as possible.
Mr. Freshfield said there was another case in which, he
believed, a forgery had been committed, but he had no proof
of it. If Mr. Parry would furnish him with the proofs, if he
were in possession of them, he would cause those parties to be
apprehended. He understood that Mr. Dorey was sustaining
some prejudice on account of his wife's apprehension on this
charge. He felt it right to state that he did not believe that
Mr. Dorey had had any knowledge whatever of these trans-
actions until his wife had been apprehended. He thought
it right to make this statement, as he understood that Mr.
Dorey had been injured in his business in consequence of the
prejudice which these transactions had created against him;
a prejudice which he behaved was utterly unfounded.
Mr. Flower thanked Mr. Freshfield for the statement he
had just made, and stated that Mr. Dorey had suffered
seriously in his business. These transactions had taken place
before his acquaintance with Mrs. Dorey, and therefore he
could have known nothing about them.
It was ultimately arranged that the prisoners should be
remanded till this day fortnight.
The depositions of the various witnesses were then read
over to them and signed.