The Sun.
London, England, 1844-03-12 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, MARCH l2, 1844.

without remedy.—(Laughter and loud cheers.)
It is literally true. I am here talking to the common
sense of Englishmen—their sense of honesty, and above
all thingi, to that noble adhesion to fair play, which is
the highest and most dignified trait in the English
character.--(Loud cheers.) It is curious that in no
other part of the world can two men fight without the
people who come up taking part with one or with the
other. But in England it is proverbial,
that no people ever come up to see men
so engaged, that they do not immediately
insist on seeing fair play.—(Loud cheers.) I ap-
peal to that sense of fair play.—(Cheers.) There is
no word to express it in any other language, and
it deserves to have a word coined for itself.
The fraud is undenird to the present moment ;
and the only answer we got was, that as we did not
know the name of the person who commititid the
fraud, we had no remedy. I suppose that a person
is not robbed if he does not know the name of the
thief who robs him. (Loud laughter.) If
you were to go before Sir Peter Laurie, or any
other of your white witches, and bring a
man before him, saying, "I caught this man stealing
my property, and just escaping from my premises
with the goods," everybody would laugh, more than
they do at Sir Peter Laurie, if it were said " Oh, we
can't listen to your complaint if you don't know the
name of the man." (Laughter.) Yet upon
this most ridiculous assertion, we were told that the
fraud should go unpunished, and that we should be
punished for alleging the fraud. There remains
one impeachment more of these proceedings,
and that is my impeachment of the jury
sworn. In point of law, Catholics and Protestants
had an equal right to be upon that jury.—(Loud
cheers.) In point of justice, it ought to be
so. In fair play it would be so. Chief Justice
Fair-play will decide it for me at once. —(Loud
laughter.) Yet what was the first step ? Ele-
ven Catholics, who were on the reduced list,
were struck off by the Attorney-General.—(Cries of
" Shame, shame.") They say that they were Re-
pealers. In the first place that was not true. That
is one answer to it. In the next place, if it had been
true, it is no reply—(Hear, hear)—because though
to be a Repealer may be a great folly, it is not a
crime. It is not a crime that makes a man an out-
law, and if they say that Repealers would have been
favourable jurors to me, T ask whether the most vio-
lent Anti-Repealers—men who voted against me
three or four times over—could form a fair and
impartial jury against me ?—(Cheers.) I use their
own argument, I convict them out of their own
mouths.—(Cheers.) I appeal to the common sense
of Englishmen to say if Repealers would have
been favourable to me, would not anti- Re-
pealers be favourable to others ? But recol-
lect it was more important to have an impartial
jury on • this trial, as the crime was not a definite
one. Had it been murder, or robbery, or forgery,
any human intellect could have judged of
the nature of the crime, and would only
have had to decide on the question of fact ;
but here the crime was imaginary. One partaking
more of identity than of reality. One which empha-
tically required a thoroughly impartial as well as
intelligent jury. From that jury one Protestant
was struck off— an intelligent individual one
of a higher order of intellect than the others—that
intelligent Protestant was sent to keep company with
the eleven Catholics—(Cheers)—and they call that a
fair trial. I call that a persecution rather than a
prosecution. It was not a fair trial ; it
was shifting, scheming management.—(Cheers )
I say I am not convicted by due course of law, and
in prison I shall feel that I am a victim—(Loud
cries of" Never, never!")—and in that prison I shall
have the feeling at heart that will raise me superior to
the punishment.—(Cheers.) Why, I have plenty here to
open my prison doors—(Cheers)—but it would be very
idle to suppose that I am not thoroughly prepared for an
event of that kind. But whatever I may suffer for my
country, I shall rejoice in my suffering.—(Cheers.)
Whatever may be the inflictions which I may have
to undergo, I shall bear them cheerfully, for the
sake of my country.—(Loud cheers.) I denounce
the whole of the proceedings against me, and my
words will not be confined to these walls. Wherever
the English language is spoken—and the sun never
sets upon the countries in which that language is
spoken—wherever the accents of the English tongue
are heard, will these my words be borne upon the
wings of the press—(Cheers)—and throughout
America, France, India, throughout every country
in the world, will this my protest go forth against
that which I denounce as a dishonest persecution—
(Loud cheers)—and my contemptuous defiance of
those who have conducted it.—(Loud cheers.)
But I shall be asked, no doubt, what was my
object in holding those meetings. You will say
it is true you ought not to have been convicted of
conspiracy, but you have an account to render to us.
Now, 1 have been accused of wishing to separate
England and Ireland—l have been accused of unne-
cessarily Meddling with an agreement entered into
forty-four years ago, of needlessly reviving old causes of
complaint, and creating new grievances to add to them.
Now I am quite ready to meet that charge, and I should
be utterly unworthy if I were not ready here in the
presence of you Englishmen, to justify everything
that I have done, and to rebut every imputa-
tion which has been cast upon me—(Loud cheers)—
and to state to you the reasons why I have held
these meetings. They say there is a union between
the two countries. I utterly deny it.—(Loud
cheers.) There is a parchment compact—(Cheers)
—a parchment enactment—(Cheers)—but there is
no real union.—(Hear, hear, and loud cheers.)
What is the meaning of a real union ? A perfect
identification between the two countries—(Cheers)
—that there should be no difference between Eng-
lishmen and Irishmen, except the accent.—(A. laugh.)
that Englishmen and Irishmen should possess the
same rights, the same privileges, and the same fran-
chises—(Cheers)—that there should be no difference
in respect of rights and franchises between the men
of Kent and the men of Cork—(Cheers)—between
the men of Mayo and the men of Lancashire.—(Re-
newed cheers.) That England and Ireland should
be one nation, possessed of precisely the same rights, the
same franchises, and the same privileges.—(Cheers.)
I appealed to the Parliament to make that parchment
union a real one. The Tories, of course, refused, and
the Whigs were equally complimentary.—(Cheers
and laughter.) I do not wish to weary this assembly
by entering into the dry details of statistics.
I will, however, draw your attention to one or two
statements. The county of Cork, which I have the
honour to represent, has 713,000 inhabitants in its
agricultural districts, and upwards of 200,000
inhabitants in its cities and towns, so
that the total population of Cork is equal to
850,000 inhabitants. Now, the inhabitants of
Wales are 800,000, being 50,000 less than the inha-
bitants of the county of Cork. The county of Cork,
with its 850,000 inhabitants, returns just eight Mem-
bers to Parliament ; and how many Members do you
think Wales returns with its 800,000 ? Why,
just eight-and-twenty.—(Hear, hear.) Well, now,
surely one Welshman is not able to beat five Irish
men.—(Cheers and laughter.) They are a brave
and perhaps a somewhat intemperate race are those
Welshmen—(Cheers and laughter)—but at the same
time, I respectfully submit that one Welshman is not
worth five Irishmen. Man for man, I am willing to
admit their worth, but I cannot admit that as com-
pared with my own countrymen they are worth five
to one.—(Loud cheers and laughter.) I can-
not admit they are entitled to return twenty-
eight Members for the 800,000 inhabitants,
while the county of Cork, with its 850,000
inhabitants is only to return eight Members to Par-
liament.—(Cheers.) Now ought that to last ?
(Cries of " No! No! ") Is that a thing that
ought to be changed ?—(Cries of " Yes, yes.")
Then again let us look at the question in another
point of view. The Parliamentary returns made
seven years ago on the subject of the registration of
voters, showed that there are 4,000 registered
voters for the county of Cork, with a population of
710,000 inhabitants, while in Wales there are
36,000 registered voters. I was looking over
the Parliamentary returns this morning, and I
find the number of registered voters for Cori.
is now I,soo—but 1,500 !—(Hear, hear.) Tin
votes for the largest county in Ireland art
nearly extinguished by the operation of the Reform
Act, while in Wales the number of voters
has ;increased by 2,000. There are 38,000 registered
voters in Wales, and 1,800 for the county of cork.

—(Hear, hear.) Now is that common sense ?
(" No, no.") Is that justice?—(" No, no,")
Is that fairness, or is it honesty. —(" No,
no.") I have endeavoured to obtain redress

for the afflictions of my country.—(Hear, hear.)
I have felt how great is the delight of being borne
along, as it were, on the breath of the people.
—(Loud cheers.) Oh, if you had seen the
stalwarth men leaving their work and flocking
to the road-side to see me pass by; if you had seen
their eyes beaming with affection as they looked on
me, and their hands lifted up, which wanted
but a word from me to strike the blow
—(Hear, hear)—if you had seen the aged
women with children in their arms greeting me as I
passed by, and praying for my health and prosperity
—(Loud cheers)—if you had seen the merry children,
and heard the chirping cry as I went along—(Cheers)
asking for blessings on the head of him whom
they called the father of their country.—(Loud
cheers.) Oh, if you had seen and felt as I
have seen and felt, then your hearts would have
expanded as mine did. lou would like me here
vow never to relax in your exertions to obtain
equal rights and privileges for the land of your birth.
Those men have been taught the lesson of which I
have declared myself the Apostle, that no political ad-
vantage can be of so much importance as to justify the
shedding of one single drop of human blood.—(Cheers.)
This is the lesson they have been taught.—(Cheers.)
This is the lesson they practise—(Loud cheers)—
and this is the lesson they will continue to-
practise until the triumphant success of the efforts
shall imprint the maxim upon the minds and the
hearts of the wise and good of all nations.— (Cheers.)
The Irish nation is entitled to more than 160 Mem-
bers in your Parliament. It ought to have them:
For the sake of peace we will take less than our
right—we will be content with 160, but that
will not give us one additional. Then with
regard to the municipal franchise, Ire-
land is treated with the greatest injustice.
In England whoever is rated to that poor-rate is a
burgess, and is entitled to vote at municipal elections,
but in Dublin, in order to be upon the Burgess Lists,
it is necessary that a man should be rated at
101., that is, he should occupy a 201. house, and
that he should have paid no less than nine dif-
ferent rates. The consequence is, that not above
one-third of those who ought to be on the burgess
lists in Dublin are upon it.—(Hear, hear.)
1 now come to a subject which I have often alluded
to elsewhere, and which, therefore, I will not shrink
from mentioning even in this assembly—l mean, to
the existence of the English Church in Irelan
(Loud cheers, and cries of " Down with it.")
Gentlemen, I appeal to you whether the Church in
England, that has the state emoluments, is not the
Church of the great majority of the people ?—(Cries
of " No.") So much the worse. It ought to be.—
(Cries of " No, it is not.") Well, that is a disputed
question which I will not argue. The Church of Scot-
land—that is, the Church that has the emolaments—
is the Church of the great majority ; but the Church
of Ireland, which has no State emoluments, never
has been the Church of the people.—(Hear, hear.)
I do not want the emoluments of that Church for my
Church—l would not accept them. There is not a
priest who would not do anything sooner than accept
them.—(Hear, hear.) There is no Bishop in the
Irish Catholic Church who would be the vassal
of the State. lam borne out in that by the course
that has been pursued by the Catholic Bishops
in Ireland; my opinion is, that it would be detri-
mental to the state of the Church. The Catholic
prelates of Ireland have proclaimed, within the last
six weeks, that they will not take a farthing of the
money belonging to State endowments. I do not want
to impute selfish motives to any parties, but can
there be any doubt that the manner in which the
Irish Church has been used is both selfish and unjust ?
I do not think that there is a greater crime than that
one man should pay for the religion of another, that
religion being that which he did not believe. Upon
that principle the great oppression of Ireland'
Established Church was founded. Until this system
is put an end to it will be in vain to expect
tranquillity in Ireland. My Friends, I wish you
had seen the Irish newspapers. A short time
since a very respectable gentleman, named
Archdeacon De Lacy died. He was the nephew of a
Bishop, and, according to the advertisement with
respect to the sale of his effects, he was such an ex-
cellent man—that he had eleven hunters—an excellent
pack of hounds—and, as the advertisement stated, a
splendid cellar of wine.— (Laughter.) But it may
be said that these grievances of Ireland are rather
speculative than otherwise. I don't think it will
be said that the last is so.—(Laughter.) It is said
that men might be just and rich without Corporate
Reform. But is Ireland rich ? Let me state what
the condition of the Irish people is. Forty years after
the establishment of the union, the Commissioners
on the Poor•law inquiry reported that they found two
million three hundred and eighty-five thousand in a state
of destitution upon a population of 8,000,000, namely,
one fourth of the whole population ; and Captain Lar-
kom has reported that seventy per cent. of the
rural population were living in huts in one room
only—that thirty per cent. of the town popu-
lation families were living in one room, and in some
instances several families were dwelling in one place.
—(Hear, hear.) No sign shows greater misery
than a decrease in the population. An increase
in the population shows a favourable sign, but the
retrogression of a population of 70,000 a year,
is a most convincing proof of misery, dis-
tress, and wretchedness. Now, just to show you
that what I am stating is correct, I will
read you the description of Mr. Kohl, a German who
has beon travelling all over Europe. He has lately
published a book, in which is the following state-
ment :

" I remember, when I saw the poor Lettes in Livonia, I
used to pity them for having to live in huts built of the un-
hewn logs of trees, the crevices being stopped up with moss.
I pitied them on account of their low doors, and diminutive
windows, and gladly would I have arranged their chimneys
for them in a more suitable manner. Well, heaven pardon my
ignorance. I knew not that I should ever see a people on
whom Almighty God had imposed yet heavier privations.
Now that I have seen Ireland, it seems to me that the Lettes,
the Esthonians, and the Findlanders, lead a life of comparative
comfort, and poor Paddy would feel like a' king with their
houses, their habiliments, and their daily fare.
" A wooden house, with moss to stop up its crevices, would
be a palace in the wild regions of Ireland. Paddy's cabin is
built of earth, one shovelful over the other, with a few stones
mingled here and there, till the wall is high enough. But
perhaps you will say, the roof is thatched or covered with
bark. Ay, indeed ! A few sods of grass cut from a neigh-
bouring bog are his only thatch. Well, but a window or two
at least, if it be only a pane of glass fixed in the wall, or the
bladder of somo animal, or a piece of talc, as may often be
seen in a ;,Wallachian hut? What idle luxury were this!
There are thousands of cabins in which not a trace of a
window is to be seen ; nothing but a little square hole in
front, which doubles the duty of door, window, and chimney ;
light, smoke, pigs, and children, all must pass in and out of
the same aperture
" A French author, Beaumont, who had seen the Irish
peasant in his cabin, and the North American Indian in his
wigwam, has assured us that the savage is better provided
for than the poor man in Ireland. Indeed, the question may
be raised, whether in the whole world a nation is
to be found that is subjected to such physical privations
as the peasantry in some parts of Ireland. This fact cannot
be placed in too strong a light; for if it can once be shown
that the wretchedness of the Irish population is without a
parallel example on the globe, surely every friend of humanity
will feel himself called on to reflect whether means may not
be found for remedying an evil of so astounding a magnitude !"

And, in Ennis, the following statement was made
at a meeting, at which Sir Lucius O'Brien presided :
" At a meeting of the Guardians of the :Ennis Poor-law
Union on 'Wednesday, Sir Lucius O'Brien in the Chair, Mr.
Butler brought forward the resolutions of which he had given
notice, relative to the exorbitant amount of Grand Jury Cess
now leviable, and which he stated was entirely borne by
the occupiers of land. His object in bringing forward the
resolutions was, to call attention to the matter, in the hope
that the grievance would be redressed by the introduction of
a provision into the grand jury laws, which would render
the landlords liable for a moiety of the tax in the same man-
ner in which they are subject to poor-rates.
" The Chairman and Mr. Carrick supported the landlords,
attributing all their misfortunes to bad seasons, failures in
the crops, &c. ' • while Mr. James Mahon, B. Butler, Mr.
Finucane, Mr. Knox, and nearly the entire Board, were of
opinion, that the major part of the population were in a state
f dreadful destitution—that pouperism was frightfully on the
,ncrease, and that nothing short of sound remedies should be
considered."
Why do I harrow you with these pictures ? Why,
for.the purpose of calling upon you to exert your-
selves in the cause of my unhappy country, andto do all
in your power to render her happy once again. Does
this misery that 'I have pictured to you arise
from the laziness of the people of Ireland ?
No. Do they not travel far and near to obtain
work ? Do they, not crowd your streets and your
villages in hopes of obtaining work ?—(Loud
cheers.) But then it may be said that Ireland
is unproductive. Oh, no, 'tis one of the greenest
and the fairest isles of the glube.—(Loud cheers.)
Its crops are abundant, and its produce magnificent.
(Cheers.) It has the best hatbours and the finest
estuaries in the world. It has ail those ad.

vantages ; and, added to this, it has a cheer-
ful, lively, and affectionate people.—(Cheers.)
Then why is it that this misery exists ? From bad
government. It is impossible to give any other
reason for it.—(Great cheering.) Since the union
matters have become worse and worse in Ireland.
Tbey have given us a poor-law, ar.d that poor-law, I
will venture to say, will bring rebellion in Ireland if
it exists for two years longer.— (I fear, hear.) The
poor-law mould be the ruin of Ireland, and Minis-
ters were blind for not seeing it. They may send
me to prison if they please, but they may depend
upon it that the consequences of the poor-law will be
awful.—(Hear, hear.) I have trespassed on you long,
but how could I avoid expressing my gratitude
and showing you that I desire at least your good
attention, your kindness, and support.—(Cheers.) I
have never shrunk from standing by you in
any centest—l have al ways been at your side—
(Cheers)—I have never given a vote that was
calculated to increase the burdens of the English peo-
ple.—(Cheers.) But I have invariably supported every
measure that was calculated to increase the extension
of civil and religious liberty.—(Cheers.) I have ad-
vocated the cause of the slave in America, as well as
the peasant in Ireland. I care not what their creed,
or by what sun their face may have been burned.
—I care not what is a man's caste or what his lan-
guage, if I can but provide for him liberty
from all tyranny.—(Cheers.) I stood by you
in 'the Reform Bill I formed one of your majority.
It promised much. It was spoiled in its manage-
ment. Its nursing mother looked unkindly upon
her future child. In another struggle for
freedom I also joined you. I shall always be with
you in giving the protection of the Vote by Ballot,
and for the shortening cf the duration of Parliaments.
recollecting that short accounts make long friends.—
(Cheers.) I owe this statement to you; and now I
solemnly assure you, that if I was not thoroughly con-
vinced that the establishment of a domestic legisla-
ture was essential to the comfort of Ireland, and
that it was necessary to keep up the connection
between this country and Ireland, I would advocate
it no longer. I never wish to see Ireland separated
from this country ;—(Cheers)—but to accomplish
so excellent a measure, it is necessary that
something should be done to give to Ireland
what England had—a local Legislature. He
wanted for Ireland that the laws passed there should I
be passed upon the same principle as in Eng- I
land. (Cheers.) Such was the opinion of the j
wise and good, and such he hoped it ever would be.
Let them do justice to Ireland.—(Cheers.) But do
they show any disposition to do so ? They came
down with the insulting denomination of convicted
conspirators.—(Cheers) The renegades !—(Cheers.)
There is Peel, who has sacrificed every principle.
—the renegade Stanley, who was the principal con-
triver for destroying the Reform Bill—(Groans)--
the reluctant Sir J. Graham—(Groans)—who sat first
on one side of the House and then on the other.—
(Cheers.) I call them conspirators for they have
conspired against the public.—(Cheers.) But let
those who have desired to adhere to the law, who
desire to have it cheap and intelligible—let those do
all in their power to do justice to Ireland.—(Cheers.)
By adopting that course a union would be rendered
valuable by a domestic Legislature, and by a com-
plete combination of a firm and a loyal people.
The Honourable Member sat down amidst applause,
which lasted for several minutes.

The following glee and chorus was then sung in
excellent style :

Tho' dark are our sorrows, to-day we'll forget them,
And smile thro' our tears like a sunbeam in show'rs,
There never were hearts, if our rulers would let them,
More formed to be tranquil and blessed than ours!
But just when the chain
Has ceas'd to pain,
And hope has enwreatled it round with flow'rs,
There comes a new link,
Our spirits to sink !
Oh! the joy of such hearts, like the light of the poles,
Is a flash amid darkness too brilliant to stay :
But though 'twere the last little spark in our souls,
We must light it up now for O'Connell to..day.

Contempt on the minions who call him disloyal!
Though tierce to his foe, to his friends he is true;
And the tribute most high to a head that is Royal,
Is love from a heart that loves liberty too.
While cowards who blight
Their Sovereign's right,
Would shrink from the blaze of the battle array;
The standard of green,
In front would be seen—

Oh ! my life op his faith ! were he summon'd this minute,
He'd cast ev'ry bitter remembrance away,
And show what the arm of old Erin has in it,
When rous'd to defend her Sovereign's sway.
She loves the green Isle, and her love is recorded
In hearts which have suffer'd too much to forget,
And hope shall be crown'd, and attachment rewarded,
Aud Erin's gay Jubilee shine out yet !
The gem may be broke
By many a stroke,
But nothing can cloud its native ray ;
Each fragment will cast
A light to the last !
And then Erin, his country ! though broken thou art,
There's a lustre within thee, that ne'er will decay :
A spirit thIV; beams through each suffering part,
And now smiles through its pain on this happy day.

The Earl of SUREWSBURYWas then announced by
the Chairman to propose the next toast, and was re-
ceived with loud cheers. II is Lordship said he could not
tell them how extremely he felt the disadvantage he
laboured under, in having so immediately to follow
after the eloquent and instructive speech which
had been delivered to them by their illustrious guest,
but on this, as on other grounds, he felt he should re-
ceive what he so much needed, their kindest conside-
ration.—(Hear, hear.) The toast which had
been assigned to him to propose was that of the
people, and in proposing it he was sure that the first
idea which presented itself to their minds was
the cause of the people of Ireland. That
was a great and generous cause, for it was
the cause of humanity—(Cheers)—the cause of right
as opposed to that of wrong.—(Cheers.) They had
arrived at a new era in the history of that cause, for
they had at length embodied in it the sympaties and
the feelings of the people of England.— (Hear,
hear.) The time was when the people of Eng-
land were foolish enough to imagine that their
political rights and their commercial prosperity were
distinct from those of Ireland. This delusion had
been done away with, and they were now beginning
to see that the way to make her own empire secure
was to make Ireland her happy, her trusted, and
therefore her prosperous ally.—(Hear, hear.) They
now were beginning to find out that the prosperity of
England would never be stable and deep-seated—
that there never would be security for herself—unless
she shared all her privileges and franchises fairly and
equally with Ireland. Ireland was now universally ac-
knowledged to be one of the finest countries in the
world, but she had been governed by persons blinded
by prejudice, and thus her great natural advan-
tages had never been fairly developed.—(Cheers.)
Lord Camoys and the Hon. Charles Langdale then
addressed the meeting, whose speeches, at the con-
clusion of the meeting we shall give in a
FIFTH EDITION.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.
(THIS EVENING.);

ORDS.
HOUSE OF L
(Continued from our Third Edition.)
MAYNOOTH COLLEGE.

f iklaYn
arlutshio'n to a Stat. and in doing
Lord MONTEAGLE rose to put a question to the Noble
so,Lord b
e opposite,did
not
m respectingean to
make
tprovision for the Roman Catholic clergy. During the existence
of the penal laws, Catholic clergymen were compelled to seek
in foreign countries for their education, and it was not until
subsequent to 1795 that any grant was made to the Catholic
College. He knew 'hat many of the men who were educated
College
slightesto
as Catholic clergymen abroad before the French Revolution,
were men of very highly educated and enlightened minds,
but at the same time ho thought, as a. matter of policy,
it would be better if the Irish Roman Catholic clergy
were not compelled to receive a foreign education.
He now came to the condition in which the College of May-
nooth was at present placed. It was asked why should this
college not be enlarged, and why should it be kept exclusively
for Catholic ecclesiastics ? Why, at the time of the endowment
of this college a petition was presented to the Irish House
of Commons, praying that Protestant students might be
admitted to the College. This prayer was not granted.
On the contrary, a provision was introduced into the Bill
which endowed the college, by which no person professing the
Protestant religion could be admitted into the
college. It was
therefore unfair to complain of this prohibition, considering
that that prohibition had been created by our own laws.
In the year IWOB an application was made to Parliament
for an increased grant to the College of Maynooth. In answer
to that application the Noble Duke opposite (Wellington), then
Sir Arthur Wellesley, wrote to the authorities of the college
to state what ground they had for making their application.
Upon the answers which were then furnished to the
Noble Duke, he (Lord Monteagle)
, had founded the
motion with which he intended to conclude. Although
he knew there was no intention on the part of those in autho-
rity to withdraw it, yet he feared that from ignorance of the
facts many persons in this country were averse to the
only available means by which it could be made
useful, namely, by increasing the grant. There were
aio students altogether, 250 of whom were supported
out of the funds of the college, yet the amount of the
grant was only 9,0001. ; and the cost for each of these persons
was only 231. a head. He thought this very wrong in
the case of men who were to exercise a vast influence
in the country in after life. The labour they were ready to un-
dergo, and the virtue which they displayed in all cases, was
moot adtairible. M in instance, In mid Attu owl scow.

ding to the Government returns, in one week no less than
ten Catholic clergymen were carried off by typhus fever
in the county of Kerry, and he could name many other cases
in other counties. At present. the College of Maynooth was in
a state of great dila;Aida!ion front the want of proper funds to
repair it. Surely that was not a fit. state of things for
such an establishment.—( Hear, hear.) lie believed that
the Government, by taking an enlarged and liberal view of
this matter, would be doing far more for the benefit and tran-
quilisation of Ireland than by any other measure. The more
sensible people of Ireland vi ere in favour of their clergy receiv-
ing that liberal education which would place them upon a level
with the Protestant clergyman and the country gentleman.
By doing so the Government would also.show to the people of
that country that they were anxious to promote their temporal
welfare and spiritual happiness. How could Noble Lords ex-
pect that children who were reared in happy and comfortable
homes would join such an establishment ? There were no fel-
lowships or scholarships attached at present to this college ;
but still he thought that there ought to be some small
endowments for the benefit of the more deserving stu-
dents. The Government, even if they did not take the
general support of the establishment upon themselves, yet
ought to place the building itself under the superintendence
of the Board of Works, and guarantee that it should be
kept in proper repair. As a matter of policy they •
ought to get the hearts and feelings of the Roman
Catholic clergy with them, and they would be their
best coadjutors in maintaining peace and good order. It was a
mistake to apply the term, "agitating priests" to the Catholic
clergy of Ireland, because the greater Lumber of these
priests were against all system of political agitation. The
Noble Lord concluded by moving for certain returns
with respect to the Roman Catholic College of Mattiowh.
The Duke of WELLINGTON said he would have no ob-
jection to lay before the House the returns moved for by the
Noble Lord. He was glad that the Noble Lord had
brought the matter before the House. At the
present moment, he, (the Duke of Wellington),
was not prepars d to state that there would be any alteration in
the present grant fo the College of Maynooth ; but if there
were any intention of that kind, a declaration to that
effect ss ould be made in the other House, from whence
the grant emanated. Ile should afford the Noble Lord
all the information of which her Majesty's Government were
in possession.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE thought it essential that
the Catholic clergy should be men of high education, in order
that they might properly discharge their religious functions;
but how, he would ask, could this be done, when the
grant was so paltry ? One of the great benefits which was
attributed to the system of the English Universities was that
it brought the clergy and upper classes of the laity into more
intimate intercourse, and he thought it most desirable that the
same should be the case with respect to the Catholic clergy
and the upper classes of the Roman Catholic laity in Ireland.
The fullest information was already before the House with re-
spect to this subject, and he called upon her Majesty's Govern-
ment to act upon it, for upon them lay the whole responsibility
of this truly important matter.
After a few words from Lord MONTEAGLE in reply, the
returns were ordered to be laid on the table.

Their Lordships then adjourned at Half-past SeYen.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
DUTIES ON IMPORTS.
Mr. COBDEN (in continuation from our Third Edition)
said—As r, garde cheese, I am likewise prepared to prove
that more than one-half of that which goes to market, goes to
the landlord in the shape of rent. For every sd. paid for
cheese, 2.1 d. goes to the landlord ; and in the same way in the
grazing districts, such as those of Northampton for every sd.
worth of beef that is sold, lid. goes to the landlord. This
is a point the public need not be concerned about for the
farmer. I do not put it forward on that ground. I never
told you that you raised the rent of your land by the corn-laws.
1 never believed it. Bet if you come to this House
and enact apparently for the benefit of the farmer,
and say that free trade ruins the agriculturist, then I must put
forward the real state of the case. I shall now touch upon
another and more important branch of this question, I mean
the interests of the farm labourer. We are told that he is be-
nefited by a system of restriction which makes the first ele-
ment of existence scarce. Do you think posterity will believe
it? They will look back upon this doctrine, in less than twenty
years, with as much amazement as we do now
upon the conduct of our forefathers when they burnt
old women for witchcraft. Yet in the face of the plainest
evidence you go on maintaining a law which makes food scarce,
in order to benefit the agriculturist. We have had a volume
presented to us on the condition of the agricultural population,
which ought to be before the House long before this time.
A Commission was appointed last year to inquire into the em-
ployment of women and children in husbandry, and I wish to
state the manner in which that Commission had been appointed.
I was a party to having that Commission named; as
a motion was made by an Honourable Friend near
Me for tie purpose of having a Committee then
sitting on the employment of women and children
in manufactures extended to the agricultural labourers.
The Committee had been sitting for two years in a particular
form, and was afterwards engaged, I believe, for four years in
inquiring into the condition of labourers in other trades and
manufactures. What my Hon. Friend and myself wished was, that
a similar inquiry to that then carried on before that Committee
should be instituted into the condition of the agricultural poor.
—( Hear, hear.) An application was made for the purpose to
a member of the Cabinet, but he refused to consent to the ap-
pointment of a Committee, and would only agree to allow a
Commissioner under the poor-law to take evidence on the sub-
ject. He also refused to allow the Commissioner more than
thirty days to carry on the inquiry, notwithstanding the
length of time that the Committee to which I have alluded had
taken for a similar inquiry.--( Hear, hear.) Having under
the law only thirty days to complete the inquiry, Mr. Austen
set forward on his task, and lost two days in his journey. He-
had thus only twenty-eight days to inquire into the condition
of the agricultural labourers in four counties in the south of Eng-
land. —( Hear.) We have, however, some facts elicited on
that inquiry, which ought to have drawn forward remarks from
Honourable Gentlemen opposite as to the wretched condition
of their own constituents,—( Hear.) Before I allude to the
condition of the agricultural labourers, I wish to state that
whatever may have been the animus which influenced others in
invading the manufacturing districts, I have no hostile feel-
ing whatever towards the agriculturists ; for, bear in mind,
that my conduct has been throughout marked by consistency
towards them.—( Hear.) I brought forward the case of the
manufacturers, and I have throughout maintained their
interests. We first knocked at the door of this House
in 1839. We have since then continued to do so,
without intermission. We have knocked at the doors of
Ministers and Prime Ministers, until they complained of
intrusiveness on our part. We stated the entire of the
distress to which the manufacturers were exposed. We
did more. We prescribed a remedy for that distress.—
( Ilear, hear.) And here I may state my solemn belief that
one of the principal reasons why the last four years of such
fearful suffering and destitution among the manufac-
turers of Lancashire, and Yorkshire, and a part of
Scotland, has passed over without any consider-
able destruction of property,' or the loss of a single life,
was because they knew that a great body was actively
and incessantly at work to make known their suffer-
ings, and to find a remedy for their distress.—( Hear,
hear.) I also state as the result of my conviction,
that the labouring poor would not have taken the diabolical and
insane course of burning property in order to make knomi
their sufferings, if any party devoted to their interest had come
forward in this House and in the country to make suggestions for
their relief.--( Hear.) If it were known that the sympathies of
the country were aroused in their behalf, the fact would have
produced such a humanisin effect upon them, that they would
never have had the blindness to destroy the very property that
ought to give them employment and support. ( Hear,
hear.) I have looked through this volume, which is the
result of Mr. Austin's twenty-eight days' travels through the
agricultural districts, and 1 find that during that period he
visited Somersetshire, Devonshire, Wiltshire, and Dorset-
shire. He has given the testimony of various re-
spectable gentlemen in these several localities, as to
the ecndition of the agricultural labourers. Some of these ac-
counts are highly important. The first that I shall refer to is
the evidence of the Rev. J. Guthrie, who states that he could
never make out how the poor labourers lived and supported
their families on the wages which they received. The next is
the evidence of Dr. Greenock. (The Honourable Gentleman
then read extracts from the evidence alluded to, in which
the witness stated that in the union to which he be-
longed the support of each pauper cost, an ass average,
is. 6d. for food alone, though the guardians, by purchas-
ing provisions wholesale, were able to procure.them 10 per cent.
cheaper than the public generally ; and that he could not con-
ceive how an agricultural labourer, earning 6s. a week, could
possibly support his wife and four or five children,
and at ttie same time pay rent and procure
clothing. Another witness, a medical gentleman in the
same district, stated that the women and boys who la-
boured in the fields suffered materially in their health, not
from the extent of work which they performed, but from the
want of a sufficient supply of food. He also read a passage
from the evidence of Robert Boland, a farmer, stating that in
the great majority of cases, a family, consisting of a man and
his wife, with four or five children, were obliged to subsist on
eight shillings or nine shillings a week, and passages from the
evidence of the wives of two agricultural labourers, describing
the inferior uature of the food which they made use of, andstating
that their children were always anxious to get more food when
they rose from their'meals.) The Hon. Gentleman then continued.
That is a just speciinen collected in the south of England, in
the purely agricultural districts, by Mr. Austin. I have my-
self had the opportunity of making considerable observations
in the agricultural districts, and I have come to this result,
that the further you travel from that much maligned region of
tall chimneys and smoke, the less you find the wages
of labourers to be ; the more I leave behind me
Lancashire and the northern parts of England, the worse
is the condition of the labourers, and the less is the quantity of
food they have. Does not this, I will ask, answer the argu-
ment that the agricultural labourer derives any protection?—
(Hear, hear.) Now what I wish to bring out before the Corn-
mittee is this—that even during your casual high prices, caused
by scarcity, the agricultural labourers always suffer.—( Hear. )
Pauperism increases as the price of food rises—( Hear)—and
in short,' the price of the loaf is in a direct ratio proof of the
increase of pauperism.—(Cries of " No, no.") An
Honourable Gentleman says, " No, no." I hope
I shall have him on the Committee, and if he will only hear
me out, I am sure I shall persuade him to vote for the Com-
mittee. With regard to the condition of the agricultu-
ral labourer, 1 have taken some pains to ascertain what has
been the progress of wages in agricultural districts. I
know that it is a very sore point indeed for Hon. Members
opposite, but I must tell them that in those very districts of
Wilts and Dorset the wages of labour now are about on a par
with wages 60 years ago, while the rent on land has increased
from two-and-a-half to threefold.—( Hear, hear.) Now, I
consider that to be a very sufficient answer to the statements
that have been made of the increase of wages. When you have
a law that produces scarcity, while it increases rents,
you must not be surprised if you are called upon to look at how
the system works upon those you profess to say it was made
to improve the condition of.—(Hear.) Now, the following
is, I believe, a correct statement of the price of wages. In
Devon they are from 6s. to-7s. 6d. a week. In Wiltshire
from Cs. to 7s. In Somersetshire from 7s. to 9s. In Dorset
from 6s. to 75., wheat being at the time ss. a bushell, and
in Gloucesteashire from Cs. to 75., while the rents have in-
creased three-fold. Now, you have chosen to take
this course in an illegitimate way.—( Hear, hear.)
You cannot theiefore wonder when I call upon this House to
consider how these laws have acted upon you, and upon those
whom you profess to serve. I was down in Gloucester a little
while ago, and had a good deal of conversation with a Mr. Hand-
ford, an experienced land agent, who stated that he had lately
sold properly which had belonged to his great grandfather, and
which brought him ten times the price his ancestor had given
fur it. I have lately been reading a work published by Judge
Hale, somewhere about the time I am referring to—somewhere
about I663—and th it he states that the thin wages of the
labourers averaged 10s. per week ; and he remarks, unless a fa-
ther, mother, and four children, have this amount per week,
how are they to get on but by stealing. Now, in the
present day, wheat is forty per cent. higher, and
wages have dropped pretty generally to only seven
shillings per week. It is an actual fact that I found,
on the journey that I am referring to, that the labouring
poor out of doors are actually compelled to live on less than
what is allowed in the workhouse. ( Hear, hear. )
A gentleman of the name of BUnt, a guardian of
the poor in that district, told me, that on consult-
ing with the medical officer as to the diet, he found
it on 6 liC46 Mich biBher than these who were working hard

out of doors were enabled to get.—(Hear, hear.) Now Ihave
spoken of the food of these people, and when I do that I imply
also lodging, clothing, morality. education—aye, and religion
also.—( Cheers. ) There is a point in the volume of evidence
which I have already referred to, who:- more especially-
calls for the attention of this House. 1 mean the subject of
lodgings for the agricultural poor.— ( Hear, hear.) In this
question, more almost than in any other, is the character of the
landlords concerned. Mr. Austin shies an instance of a fa- '
mily at Stourbridge of eleven persons in one room
sand three beds. In the first bed was the father and
mother, a little boy, and a little girl; in the second bed were
three daughters, two of them twins, twenty years old ; and in
the third tour sons, 'fifteen years old, seventeen years old, and
the like.—( Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") There were no cur-
tains to the beds, nor anything else to assist in observing the
decencies of life.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. Phelps, agent for the
Marquis of Lansdowne, has given an instance which occurred
at Studeley, where twenty-nine persons were living under one
roof—the married people and the young persons being
all huddled together in one small tenement.—( Hear, bear. )
Mr. Austin further says, that a married woman told him the
room in which she was being confined was shared with
thirteen other persons, in three beds; anti that it was neces-
sary to lay her on the middle of the floor, in order that proper
attention should he given to her, and she declared this to
be the roost painful part of her illness.—( Hear, hear. )
Another clergyman of Dorsetshire stated that he resided in
the neighbourhood of a Noble Duke—whose name he
(Mr. Cobden) would not mention, although the Noble
Duke was not himself very fastidious as to the terms in
which he spoke of the members of the League—the
labourers were as badly off as they could he. Nothing could
exceed their immorality, even between brother and sister.—
( Great sensation.) In some cases, in order to prevent this, the
males of two families were taken to sleep in the one house,
and the females in the other.—(Cries of " Hear, Lear.")
Mr. Austin declares that he could see no regard to chastity
in the females, and no respect to that sex in the
men.—( Hear.) Sir, I should not do justice to my feelings if
I did not express my indignation at the conduct of the owners
of land, however they maybe described.—(" Hear," from Lord
Ashley.) I am glad to hear that cheer from the Noble Lord.
However you may remark upon the owners) of mills and
factories, and upon the evils of town populations, I think you
must acknowledge that these cannot come under the cog-
nisance of particular individuals, and certainly not
of any particular proprietor ; but if you go into the villages
under the control of the landlord, you will find them living in
a state worse than in the wigwams of the Indians. It was
well said by the late lamented Mr. Drummond, that " property
had its duties as well as its rights," and I say that the landlords
neglect their duty when they allow their tenants to live in pig-
sties, and worse than pigsties. I never saw the Rev. Adol-
phus Osborne; I think if we met, we should differ upon many
points ; but I cannot but admire the moral courage with which
he exposed the state of the population in Dorsetshire.—
( Cheers.) He says that "in the neighbourhood of Bradford,
from one year's end to the other, the people live in the
greatest destitution. They had nothing but bread and pota-
toes, with sometimes a little bacon of an inferior kind, and,
from what:he knew of the quality of the bread, he was not sur-
prised at the diseases with which the children are afflicted."
Another clergyman gave evidence to the same effect,
from which I shall trouble the House with an
extract. (The Honourable Gentlemar. then read a
passage from Mr. Austin's Report, in which the
witness alluded to states that he had on one occasion four
blankets given to him for the most destitute persons of his
parish. Endeavouring to discover the fittest objects of the
bounty, he found that amongst eighty-four individuals there
were but thirty-five blankets—of these ten were tolerably
good, as they had been in use only four years,
but twenty-five were completely worn out.) Thus you
see that this is not a sudden case of distress, but the
constant and permanent condition of the agricultural labourer.
( Hear, hear.) The periods of manufacturing distress are, after
al!, remote—certainly not permanent—and we charge them
upon your bad legislation.—(Hear, hear ) (The Hon. Gen-
tleman then read further extracts to show the crowded
state of the cabins in Dorsetshire, and the frightful immorality
of their inmates.) You talk of the immorality of our 'nano-
facturing towns—what can you show us to equal this ? Your
villages are normal schools for vice and prostrution.—( Hear. )
You cannot blame us for the vices of our towns, if you rear the
people thus and send them into our towns.—(Hear, hear.) I
say emphatically 1 do not attack individuals, but a system.
Although I hold the proprietor to be resposible for the state of
'lodging on his own land, I do not hold him responsible for the
price of wages. I never held the farmers responsible for the
price of wages, although it has been foolishly said
of me that I did so. I challenge the Argus-eyed
opponent I have to deal with, to show that I
have ever done so.—( Great cheering.) What does
Mr. Austin say of clothing—you have heard what he said
of food and lodging? He says, that to have a change of
clothing was all nonsense. If a woman came home with wet
clothes from her work, she must put them on in the morning
as wet as when she came home.—( Hear.) And yet you tell us
that these are our great home customers. —( Cheers and laughter. )
Lincolnshire is an exception.—(Hear, hear, from Col. Sib-
thorp. ) It is an exception both with regard to the condition
of the farmer and the labourer.—( The Hon. Gentleman then
adverted to the wretched condition of the farmers and farm
labourers in Scotland and Wales, and quoted the description of
the state of the population of the latter country
given by the reporter of the Times.) I need
hardly refer to the condition of the population
of the sister country across the Channel. It "is acknow-
ledged that there, are 2,500,000 destitute persons in that
country. They are frequently on the point of famine ;
and yet, at this moment there is a duty of 18s. 3d. a quar-
ter on the corn imported into that ceuntry.—(Hear, hear.)
(The Hon. Gentleman then quoted from the Report of Dr.
Southwood Smith, respecting the state of the fever hospitals,
in which there were 1,462 patients, being 418 more than in
preceding years, and consisting chiefly of persons coming from
the agricultural districts seeking for labour.—Hear, hear. )
I have now given a description of the state of the agricultural
population ; and I ask of the Members of Counties, whether
they are not put out of court;?:There is no class of the country
benefited by these laws, and all I ask is, that we should have
a Select Committee to inquire into the facts.—( Hear, hear.)
Yon don't want an Act of Parliament to protect the farmer ;
you want a fresh bargain with him. You want leases upon
fresh terms. The men. I should bring to be examined before
the Committee would tell you how they could employ more
labourers. They would tell you that they could do so by
breaking up some of that old land which is lying not under
grass, but under moss, and has been lying in that way for,
perhaps, a hundred years, in order to please some landlord who
prefers teeing in that state to seeing corn growing there or the
plough passing over it. All such coxcombry as that would
disappear before such a practical farmer as my Lord Ducie,
who would be ready to come and tell you what to do.
You would derive immense advantage from the examination
that would be gone into in such a Committee as that which
I propose. Men would be examined who look upon land as
we look on our raw material in our manufactures, as that
which is to give employment to the people. We have
now advantages presented to us for holding this Com-
mittee that we have never had before. Recollect
that hitherto you have not heard two sides of the question be-
fore your Agricultural Committees. Now I wish to impress
this upon the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite (Sir, R. peel)
—1 strongly appeal to him to allow me to have this Committee.
There have never yet been two aides of the question stated in
Committees of this House. The witnesses that have
been examined were all in favour of protection.
You have never had any enlightened agriculturist
brought forward to state both sides of the question. In the
evidence taken in 1836, great doubt was expressed as to the
value of an intervention by Act of Parliament. No direct
evidence, however, was brought forward as to whether it
would not be better to get rid of the old system altogether,
and adopt a system of perfect free trade. Now it is on that
ground that 1 especially appeal to Hon. Gentlemen opposite.
Ido not want men examined who are farmers only. Let them
be landowners if you choose. I would respectfully ask Lord
Ducie and Earl Spencer first. 1 presume that the Duke of
Buckingham and the Duke of Richmond would be chosen by
gentlemen opposite.—(Laughter.) There is nothing that I
should more wish to see than four noblemen brought before the
Committee, and subjected to a cross-examination. We would
take your Noblemen and you should take ours.—(Laughter. )
This is what I should wish to see. But, however, you have
Hon. Gentlemen on your own side of the House who make out
my case altogether. There is the Hon. Member for Berk-
shire who well knows what the land is capable of, who
knows what is wanting, and who knows that those
districts where there is the most pauperism and distress are
the very places in which farming is most neglected. He says,
I wish to see more drains cut, and more lime used, and more
manure procured ; and I should like to see their cattle fat-
tened up, which have hitherto been starved." Hera is testi-
mony, you see, from your own side, that nothing is right. Now
suppose you could read a book upon manufactures, in which
you could show that every thing was wrong that we manufac-
turers were doing. Suppose a theorist could come to me in
my business, which is the manufacture of garments—things
almost as necessary in a civilised land anti cold climate as
corn—(Laughter)—now, suppose this theorist were to
come to me in my manufactory and say, " You must
bring your indigo from India, your madder from
France, your gum from Africa, your cotton from Ame-
rica, and compound all these together, and you can then make
a peasant's gown for two shillings." Why this is all done.
They are doing this daily in my manufactory. It does not require
a theorist to tell us to do it. If we did not do it we coulii not
carry on our competit ion with each other and with other countries.
This, however, can be said to you. "You have materials moul-
dering at your own door. You have only to get over a hedge
—to dig under the surface—to improve the condition of your
people." We should make great advances in agriculture if
this Committee were to be appointed. I know that
you would have a majority of protectionists on that
Committee. I am perfectly willing that you should
have it. I know that—l understand at least that there is a sort
of ettiquette in tl.is House by which the mover of a Committee
is appointed Chairman of that Committee. Now I waive
all pretension to that office. I will sit as a humble
individual in the minority ; all I ask is to be
there. What possible objection can you raise to it?
I cannot understand what objection there can be. Are you
afraid that it will increase the agitation? I ask tke Hon.
.Ba-
ronet, the Member for Essex, whether he thinks the agitation
is going down in his part of the country ? I understand they
have lately raised a large sum of money in Essex. Now do
you think that the appointment of a dozen gentlemen, to act in
a room for the purpose of taking evidence, would add anything to
the excitement out of doors on this subject ? hy, by the ap-
pointment of this Committee you would draw
(Laughter.) me away.
I tell you what will cause excitement. Excite-
ment will be caused if you refuse this Committee, and allow
me to go down to the counties with your votes in my hand, and
say, I only asked for inquiry.
.1 offered them a majority of
their own party, and offered to go into the Committee merely as
a member of the Committee, and not as the Chairman. I
offered them every possible advantage in the Committee, and
they
.would not,, or they dare not, grant me that Committee of
Inquiry." Now, I desire to have no advantage of that
sort. If you let us have the Committee, let us set
to work with a desire, if possible, to elicit
a fund of information which shall be beneficial to the country.
(Hoar, hear.) I feel that much good would be done by this
ommittee. Ido believe that the system at present pursued,
instead of being a protection to agriculture is the destruc-
tion of agriculture. Let us see if our Committee cannot
counteract some of the effects of the foolishness—l will
not use
a harder name—which, under the pretence:of protecting native
industry, has been allowed to go forth„by which she farmers
have been induced to depend upon an Act of Parliament for
prosperity, rather than upon their own energies. Let us
conduct the Committee as though we wished to elicit facts
—as though we wished to counteract the mischiefs of
that system, than which I cannot imagine any-
thing more demoralising—for such a system deserves
no better title than a system of demoralisation. What
is it that you tell the farmers? You get them to feel that
they cannot compete with other men.
.You bring long lists of
figures and delusive accounts, showing that the culti-
vation of an acre must cost 61. or S/., and then you
tell them to.
compare that with the cost in Russia.
You put every impediment in the way of their doing that which
they ought to do. Do you think that is the way to ma:e nice
succeed in anything ? How should we do ? We who are ma-
nufacturers. If we get a pattern of some rival manufacture
abroad, should we call our men together, and say, " It
quite clear we cannot compete with the foreigner. It is
quite useless to compete with Germany or America."
We don't do that, but what do wo du? Why, we call our men
together, and we say such and such a thing is being done else-
where, now we are Englishmen, and whether these things are
clone by tiuniaua or Germans, we will do it."..(Cliottri.)

r believe that the present system is demoralizing the people. The
Noble Lord, the Member for North Lancashire, Lad no right
to go down to the agricultural meeting at Liverpool and tate
Lamer that they ought net to do as their grandtatherss bad
ilof,e before them, merely content themselves by putting ore
food before the other. He had no light to talk to them in that
way. What is it makes them do so? Why, every
man who comes here or who goes to Lancashire and talks
about our " invasion of corn" from a place in Russia which
shall be nameless.---( Cheers and laughter.) The men who
I come here and tell us to look to protection instead
of looking to our own energie;—these are the . men
who Paused the farmers to put their hands behind their back,
and it is that which prevents them faom being equal, if not
supyrior, farmers to.. any on the face 'of the earth. * I, be-
lieve that much good will result from such a Com-
mittee as that which I proposed, because I beliefs
that the present system is as injurious to agriculture as it is to
manufactures. It is becaese I believe that it robs the earth of
its fertility—robs the labourer of his hire—cheats the
people of their subsistence, and robs the farmer of
his independence. It is because I believe all this
that I hope you will accede to the motion which I now
make—" That a Select Committee be appointed to inquire
into the effects of protective duties on imports upon the in-
terests of the tenant-farmers and farm-labourers of this
country."—( Loud cheers.)
Mr. GLADSTONE rose, and was
(LEFT SPEAKING.)

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.. •
NORTHERN CIRCUIT.—Durham, March 7.
(Before Mr. Baron Roia and a Special Jury.)
TOPHAM AND WIFE V. M`GREGOR AND wa-r.. • •
This was an issue out of Chancery, to try the validity of i
win, executed in favour of Mrs. Topham by her fornier.hus-
, band, Mr. Wrightson. The peculiar nature of the case, and
the large amount of property depending on its dOsion, havi
excited very great interest in this county. The Court was
crowded at an early hour.
Mr. Knowles, Mr. Wortley, and Mr. Addison, appeared for
the plaintiff's ; Mr. Fitzroy Kelly (who had been brought
down specially in this case), Mr. Martin, and Mr. Crompton
conducted the case for the defendant.
Mr. liseowLEs stated the case for the plaintiffs. They
were, he said, called upon to vindicate their claim to certain
property, to which Mrs. Topham had become entitled under
the will of her former husband, a Mr. Wrightson. The case
was a very important one, not only on account of the amount
of the property, though that was considerable, but on account
of other considerations, and other and still higher interests
involved in its issue. The cause must necessarily be a long,
one; but it would not, he was assured, be to the jury a tedi-
ous one, as every point would receive at their hands a full
and patient consideration. The testator, Mr.Wrightson, was the
son of an attorney, but he himself, for some time, at all events,
before his death, was of no particular profession, though in
his earlier years he had held a commission in the North
York Militia. lie resided at Ilaughton, in the neighbour-
hood of Darlington. He had no children, and his mode of
life, from his limited means and ot,her circumstances, wag
necessarily quiet and retired. While there he became ac-
quainted with Mr. Mewburn, a solicitor at Darlington. Mr.
Wrightson's sister, now Mrs. M'Gregor, and one of the de-
fendants in this cause, had been acquainted with Mr. Mew-
burn long before, and it was through her that the introduc-
tion took place. The acquaintance, however, between Mr.
Mewburn and the testator never became intimate. It con-
tinued, indeed, strictly of a profeSsional character—that
merely of solicitor and client. In the summer of 1829 Mr.
Wrightson removed to the town of Darlington itself, and
towards the end of that year a circumstance took place which
made a very great difference in his circumstances and pros-
pects. There died in that year a lady of the name of Garth,
who resided .at Cockerton, near Darlington, and by her will
she bequeathed to Mr. Wrightson a very considerable pro-
perty. This was the Ist of December, 1829, and immediately
after her death, indeed that very day, Mr.Wrightson'removed
to Cockerton, and he resided there until the following year,
when he died. Mrs. Garth at her death had in the house every
large sum, amounting to about 4,000/. in notes and gold, and
the immediate removal of Mr. Wrightson to Cockerton was
thought necessary for the purpose of protecting the property.
At Cockerton, Mr. Wrightson found two persons who
had for a great many years been in thesservice of Mrs. Garth—
George Ilind, who acted as bailiff, and Jane Fenny, who had
been a servant. These persons had been left each a consider-
able legacy in Mrs. Garth's will, and they continued to dis-
charge the same duties as before in the household of Mr.
Wrightson. As a necessary consequence of so large an ac •
cession of property, Mr. Wrightson had occasion more fre-
quently to consult his attorney. There was the probate of
Mrs. Garth's will to take out, certain rents of which Mrs.
Garth was only tenant for life to be apportioned, and various
other business to transact. Among other matters were two
estates, one the Newhall and Fowlaw.fann, which' on Mrs.
Garth's death came to Mr. Wilkinson, the pleader, of the
Temple ; and another, Buttsfield, the reversion of which
was in a Mr. Greslille. Application was made to Mr.'Mew-
burn by Mr. Wilkinson for his deeds, and after some corre-
spondence (which the Learned Counsel read in detail), it
was arranged that Mr. Mewburn should at an early day go
over to Cockerton, and examine and arrange all the Seeds
belongine. to Mrs. Garth's estate. On the 26th of December
Mr. Mesiburn wrote to Mr. Wrightson, saying, that if he
had no engagement Mr. Mewburn would have the pleasure of
coming over on the Tuesday following, spending the day, and
going through the deeds. Mr. Wrightson, at a former in-
terview, had requested he would, when he came otit, dine
with him, and take a long day at this business. To this
letter Mr. Mewburn received a reply, stating that Mr. and
Mrs. Wrightson would have great pleasure in seeing Mr.
Mewburn, as they had no engagement. On the 29th Mr.
Mewburn went over to Cockerton. He was engaged the
whole day in the examination of the deeds. He stayed din:-
ner and tea, and in the afterpart of the evening some conver-
sation, the subject being introduced by Mr. Wrightson, took
place about his making a will. It was by no means an im-
probable occasion for such an idea to occur to him. The
late death of Mrs. Garth, and the occupation in which they
had just been engaged naturally suggested it to him. It was
natural, too, that in making such an arrangement, his wife
' should be the principal object of his bounty. Except his
sister, Mrs. M'Gregor, he had no immediate relation. She wan
married, she had no children, she resided at a distance, and
there had not been between her and her brother any great cor-
diality. When the subject of the will was first mentioned, Mr.
Mewburn thought it would of course be one of considerable
length, from the limitations usually introduced in such
cases where property to so considerable an amount was to be
disposed of. Mr. Wrightson, however said it would be very
short, as he intended to leave all to his wife. The Learned
Counsel then went on •to state the mode in which the will
was executed, as subsequently detailed by Mr. Mewburn. It
was attested by Mr. Mewburn, and the two servants, George
Ilind and Jane Fenney. Mr. Wrightson died in December,
1830, and Mrs. Wrightson entered into possession. In 1831
she became the wife of Mr. Topham and the two persons.
Fenney and Hind, continued in her service fur a considerable
time. Year after year passed away, and it never occurred to
any one to throw any doubt on time validity of Mr. Wright-
son's disposition of his property until so late as the year
1842, when a bill was filed by the present defendants. Mrs.
M'Gregor, formerly Cordelia Wrightson, was married to Mi.
M'Gregor a year or two before the making of the will, and
had for many years resided in Edinburgh. When a party
tiles a bill of this sort in the Conrt of Chancery, he is, as
a matter of course, entitled to an issue, and the
validity of the will is left to be decided by a jury.
There would be two main points in this case ; one was the
will signed by the testator in the presence of three witnesses.
On this point they would have the evidence of Mr. Mewburn,
the first attesting witness. if the other witnesses to the will
were called to give other testimony, he would again have to
address them, and to comment upon that evidence. The
second point would be, was the testator capable of making a
will ? Ile hardly thought his Learned Friend Mr. Kelly,
after the evidence that would be laid before them, would
deny his capability, though it might perhaps be sought to
show that some considerable time after the rule was made,
and in the latter part of the year 1830, he • had in some
degree fallen into habits of intoxication. In the meantime
he would leave the case in their hands, and for the present
detain them no longer, especially as, in all probability before
the case closed, he would be under the necessity of again
addressing them.
Evidence to the effect stated by the Learned Counsel was
then given, and the Court adjourned.