The Sun.
London, England, 1829-04-07 00:00:00

POOR LAWS IN IRELAND.

The Earl of WINCHILSEA presented a petition from
certain Freeholders of Middlesex and Surrey, in favour of
the introduction of Poor Laws into Ireland. It was his
Lordship's firm conviction that a modification of the sys-
tem prevailing in England would be beneficial to Ireland.

The Earl of LIMERICK, without meaning any disre-
spect to the Noble Earl, begged to say that an opinion that
any system of Pcor Laws would benefit Ireland, could
only be founded upon the grossest ignorance.
The Earl of MALMESBURY insisted that it was an
anomaly not to be justified, that the poor of Ireland
should be supported by England. He was one of th, ig-
norant persons who entertained the opinion that Poor
Laws ought, in justice to this country, to be introduc(d
into Ireland.

The Earl of LIMERICK remarked that according to
the showing of the Noble Lords, the Poor Laws were to
be introduced into Ireland for the advantage of England,
and in order that she might be relieved from the burden of
maintaining the poor Irish.
The Duke of HAMILTON adverted to the hardship of
the situation of Scotland, as regarded the influx of poor
from Ireland : those who could not find subsistence at
home poured into Scotland in such numbers, that mere
justice to that country required that something should be
done for her relief from the burden. The Noble Viscount
opposite (Melville) had objected last year to a measure
which would tend in some degree to remedy the netorious
and crying evil, although it certainly depended upon dif-
ferent grounds. Scotland required nothing more than
was just and reasonable ; he had communications from the
western part ofethat country, which filled him with alarm :
a mass of forty thousand destitute people existed there,
two-thirds of iwhom were not natural-born Scotchmen.
He contended that it was the bounden duty of Govern-
ment to afford some relief.

Lord FARNHANI was not one of the landed proprie-
tors of Ireland who would object to the introduction of
a regulated system of Poor Laws, although he admitted
that he was not so well acquainted with the South of Ire-
land.

Lord MELVILLE had opposed the Bill of last year,
referred to by the Noble Duke, because it enacted one
system of law for the natives of Scotland, and another for
the natives of England and Ireland—a principle quite at
variance with the Legislative linion between the two
countries.

After a few words from the Duke of HAMILTON, the
Earl of IlloiniTcAineL, Lord CAABERY, Lord Ross-
LYN, and Lord DE DUNSTANVILLE, the petition was laid
upon the table.

DISFRANCHISEMENT BILL.
The Order of the Day for the second reading of the
Irish Freeholders' Disfranchisement Bill having been read,
The Duke of WELLINGTON spoke as follows :—lt is
nowliny duty to state to your Lordships the nature of the
other measure which it has been the duty of Govern-
ment to propose to Parliament, in cenformity with the re-
commendation in the Speech from the Throne—namely,
the Bill to regulate the Franchise of persons to rote for
Members of Parliament in counties in Ireand. The Irish
Act of 1793 gave Roman Catholics the power of voting
for Members of Parliament; and very shortly after that
date it appears that the evil commenced which has now
grown t.) such magnitude, that, fire years ago, it drew the
attention of Parliament to it; and it was then thought
necessary to take some measures to apply a remedy. I
believe that, shortly after the paring of the Act of 1793,
certain persons in possession of leases for one or more
lives, under grants from so•ne of the great proprietors
in Ireland, commenced the system of granting free-

holds by virtue of their leases. This was done for the pur-
pose of creating fur themselves political end Parliamentary
influence; and I am afraid that it laid the ground for the
example being followed by others, their superiors in station,
their superiors in fortune, and their superiors in intelli-
gence. No doubt the system has since been extended to
an enormous degree ; in Ireland there are many more
freeholders than are necessary for the freedom of election
upon any well-regulated principle, and many of the at-
tendants upon the system are such as to have become the
general subject of complaint throughout the country.—
(Hear, heat`)--The persons who have become entitled by
the abuse of the power of making freeholders to vote fo
Members of Parliament are, as appears by the proceed.
ings of a Committee of your Lordships' House and of the
House of Commons, of the very lowest cease of society.--
(Hear.) —ln making out their right to vote, in possessing
themselves of their freeholds, and in all the circumstances
attending the transaction, perjury is committed) the
people are demoralised in every stage of the proceeding;
and on that account atone, if on no other, the subject dos
serves the most serious attention. But, it appears, betides,
fi om the Reports of the same Committee., that these people
are not at all sensible of the advantages attending the free..
holds they possess, but cannot be said to enjoy. The law re-
quires that they should register the freehold 12 months before
they vote : if they were sensible of the advantage of the
right of voting, your Lordships might suppose that they
would willingly attend for the purpose of registration and
pay the expense, which I believe amounts to one shilling.
It is well known that they will net pay even that charge
—that it is paid by the landlord, by tlie candidate, or by
some club interested in procuring vote for a particular
individual. It appears also by the evidence taken before
the same Committees that they are forced, absolutely
driven, to give their votes at elections—that they are
reckoned, in fact, part of the live stock of the estates,' add
that they are hardly treated like human beings.—(Cheers.)
On these grounds also, if no ethers could be stated, it
must be obvious that some change is necessary. As I
said before, these freeholds were originally formed for the
purpose of giving political and Parliamentary influence t
ccertain individual ; but latterly, and more palliculari
since those Committees mad e their reports, it appear the
the influence resulting from the system I have been slete
scribing has fallen into the hands of persons in whose pose
session there can be no doubt the Legislature never in-
tended that any political power or Parliamentary influence
should be found—l mean the priests.--(Hear, hear.)—
The continuance of such influence in such hands would
be highly detrimental to the public interest, under what-
ever system we should continue to govern that part of the
United Kingdom. But when we consider the measure
that was adopted the other night, there can be no doubt
that this evil ought not to be allowed to continue. After
the vote of Saturday night, I may safely say in this
[louse, that if a Roman Catholic gentleman possess pro•
perty and talents to enable him to serve his country and
to entitle him to a seat in Parliament, it is desirable that
he should have one.—(Cheers.)—But I am sure there is
not one of your Lordships who will not agree with me that
it is not desirable that he should obtain: that seat by the
exertion of Popish or religious influence.—(General
cheers. )—I say, therefore, that on this ground it is fit
that the Bill I now propose should be passed into a laves
I would Ilewise beg your Lordships to observe, that ooe
of the objects which I particularly held out some nights,
ago, when I recommended another measure to your no-
tice, was the desire I felt to put an end to combinations—
illegal combinations, in Ireland. Those illegal combina-
tions are founded upon religious opinions. I beg your
Lordships to advert to the advantages and to the induce-
ments held out for the formation of such combinations if
we are to continue that policy of law which now exists in
tliet country.--(;Hear.)--Therefore I proceed with confi-
dence to entreat your Lordships to consider tLis system,
and, in order to change it, to adopt the measure the second
reading of which lam about to propose. I know it Way
be asked, " If you take away from the forty-skilling free-
holders their right of voting, why do you not adopt the
same course with regard to the same class of electors in
England ?" But I beg of you to look at the difference
in the situation of freeholders in England and of those
who are called by the same name in Ireland. In Eng-
land, I am aware that the freeholders for life come to tho
poll to vote, but in general they are persons really pos-
sessing land to the value of forty shil ings a year; and
they, besides, are rated, and pay the land tax. They
are able to show for what amount they purchased their
property, and moreover they do not receive assistance
from the pout's-rate, unless engaged in actual service iii
the Militia. I beg your Lordships to compere the sort et.
persons composing the Militia and forming the body of
small freeholders in England with those persons in Ireland,
and to mark the difference between them; and in order to
enable you to do so, I will read a statement respecting
those who have been recently registered in Ireland, and
from that statement you may convince yourselves of
the truth of what 1 say. In the county of Antrim, in
the North of Ireland, there have been registered since 1822,
6,126 forty-shilling freeholders, of whom 1,798 could not
write their names. In the county of Armegh, since the
same period, there have been registered 8,813 forty-
shilling freeholders, and of these 3,590 could not write
their names. In the following counties, C.e proportion
of freeholders registered since 1822, who could not write
their names,has somewhat varied from those in the counties

I have already mentioned. In the county of Clare the num•
bens registered were 10,753, of whom 3,855 could not
write their names, In the county of Limerick 4,682
have been registered, and those who could not write their
names amounted to 3,356. In the county of Mayor
21,672 freeholders have been registered, and of that num-
ber 195205—(A laugh)—could not write their names ;
and in Waterford 5,335 have been registered, and 3,420
of that number could not write their names. Nov, my
Lords, I think I can confidently say that that is not the
case with the small freeholders of England. I come now
to another objection which has been raised against this
Bill ; and that is the number of freeholders in fee who
will, by the operation of the proposed Bill, be deprived
of the same rights as the other. From the return laid on
the table of the House in 1825, your Lordships will be
able to see the number of those small freeholders. In six
counties there are none at all. In others there are but
a few ; and the truth of the matter is, that in general
in Ireland there none of that description. It happened
that two years before the return was made, a clause
was inserted in the Act of Parliament which en-
abled persons to register freeholds, and three wrie
often registered without the persons claiming to register
them being called on to produce their titles or to chew
whether they held on leases for lives, or in fee, or without
showing any ground whatever, except that the person was
in the possession of the land. Neither did he show that
he tilled it or grazed it, or for what other purpose he held
it, but merely that he was liable to pay a quit rent for it.
Among those persons who showed no right whatever to
the freeholds, were those who came to vote, and whose
votes could not legally be refused. But, my Lords, be-
sides these evils resulting from these tenures, there are
other abuses connected with this particular description of
freeholders, which well deserve your Lordships' attention.
I have been informed that there are more instances than
one of persons interested in the elections of Ireland, who
having thus created a large number of freeholders under
leases for lives, were doomed to disappointment in certain
expectations, when, having found reason to believe that
the elections would occur earlier than they expected, they
have been compelled to transfer the freehold. in such a
manner as to convert them from freeholds on lives into
freeholds in fee, by which the fictitious freeholders, taking
advantage of the registry required by Act of Parliament,
have obtained freeholds in fee, instead of their fictitious
freeholds, and thus the Act bas operated as a bounty on
fraud. Now, really, my Lords, after a statement such as
this, there can be no doubt that the exclusion of such per-
-130118 from the elective franchise is a measure that ought to
be adopted. I know one or two other circumstances
which warrant me in expecting your Lordships' support
to this measure, but with the mention of which I will not
trouble your Lordships at this moment. Besides, my
Lords, this measure comes recommended not on!y as a re-
medy for evils that are now in existence, but it is benefi-
cial as providing the means of ascertaining the right of those
persons who claim to vote in respect of their freeholds.—
It provides that freeholders shall prove what is the value of
the freehold in respect of which they claim to vote. It
gives the mode of appealing to a Jury, and it affords
guards such as we hope will satisfy your Lordships that
we really wean only to provide a fair mode of discovering
the rig 11, of persons entitled to vote at elections, and of
persons interested in their result. I can assure your Lord-
ships, that it is not our wish or intention, nor would your
Lordships consent if it were, to give an influence over elec-
tions into the hands of any particular class of persons.—
Our wish is, that the possessor of hod should have as fair
au influence under this system as under any other ; but we
wish also nut only that the possessor of land should enjoy
this advantage, :.:it that all other percons whose talents are
such as to qualify them to serve the public, and who wish
to exercise those talents by obtaining a seat in Pm-fief/tent,
should have an equal chance of finding their way hither.—
.

more, my Lords, that this Bill be read x second

The Dube of RICHMOND—It is not Without pain thi.t
upon this, as well as upon the other Bill, I feel obliged to
differ from the Noble Duke ; but I ant compelled to da
so, because I look upon this Bill as a plan which, by one
single enactment, goes to disfranchise a lane body of
electors unaccused, unheard, cad unisonderaned; and for

that reason, as it is, my opinion, contrary to the practlte
and principles of the Constitution, I shall feel it my duty,
on every occasion, to remind your Lordships that it must
not he drawn into a precedent. I have no doubt your
Lordships are aware—and I must fairly acknowledge that
in the early part of my political career I did not pay much
attention to political science—l have always, however,
known enough to understand that our Constitution pro-
tected the liberties as well as the property of hi; Majesty's
subjects, lam not a lawvcr, my Lords ; but t,-hen I look
into the Acts of Parliament passed at the time of the
Union, I find that your Lordships gave a compensation
to those boroughs which resigned their elective frsechise.
That shews to me, my Lords, that the Dective Franchise
is a property—(hear, hear)—and if it t property, it has
as much a right to claim your protection as any other pro-
perty whatever. My Lords, a great authority was quoted,
on the late discussion, to show that all the great men who
had been in Parliament had been the advocates of Catholic
Emancipation. I should like to know, whether any Noble
Lord will make the same observation on this Bill, or will
tell me that Mr. Pitt, Mr. Fox, Mr. Canning, or Lord
Liverpool, would have justified this contraction of the
Elective Franchise? Will that Noble Earl. who, with so
much eloquence, and se little reluctance, attacked his col-
leagues in office ; or will that Noble Lord, who was sent
to Ireland by Mr. Pitt, to carry that measure--will he, or
dither of them, turn round and agree with the Noble
Duke ? My Lords, the Noble Duke has justified this great
measure, by the fact of the spirit which influenced the forty-
shilling freeholders in the late election at Clare. It
is true, that the spirit he described did influence them,
and, combined as it NV 49 with a spirit of disaffection in the
people, did produce the rejection of a Cabinet Minister
who was a candidate for the representation of that county.
But, my Lords, have we had no example of the same in
England? Have your Lordships forgotten the honest and
independent conduct of electors, who, blind to what

might be deemed the best cause for the advancement of
'their temporal concerns, voted also against a Cabinet Mi-
nister? nave your Lordships, I ask, forgotten the Uni-
versity of Oxford? I do not believe that your Lordships
'ill consent to pass this measure, so contrary to the prin-
tiples of the Constitution. You will not conclude this
night's debate by adopting a measure so prejudicial to the
principle of the elective franchise. Whether the electors,
in right of their forty-shilling freeholds, are too numerous;
whether those who in England purchase the land-tax—a
body of persons, of whom there are great numbers in the
county in which I have the honour to reside, ought to be
diminished, are questions intimately connected together;
and if the number of persons I have just alluded to should
increase, I ask whether, after passing this Bill, you can
refuse to disfranchise them ? My Lords, if the machi-
nery of this Bill is sufficient to prevent the creation of fic-
titious freeholds of 101. per annum, lel y will it not equally
prevent the creation of fictitious freeholds of forty shillings
a year ? I don't see why it will not as well prevent one as the
other. 'This is the reform I understand to be required;
for I beg it to be understood that I am not advocating any
new rights or any new principle, but I wish to protect
what is old. lam certain, that if your Lordships reform
abuses in the manner now proposed, and by one el-met-
trent send good and bail together without inquiry, you
nil eanfer but little benefit on the country. Your Lord-
_ _

ships are told there was inquiry in 1825. I ask, if these
abuses then existed, why were they not remedied
Why, if the facts now stat,d were then known, was Ireland

left to all the miseries that have arisen, and that will arise

from three forty-shilling freeholders? Looking at this evi-
dence, on which we are required to act, I ask, whether
even that is all one way ? Have I not the evidence of a
Noble Earl who then expressed his hope that we should do
no such thing as that which is now required of us ? If this
Bill passes, you will turn off both farmers and proprietors
from their lands; they will come here, and their arrival
will be made use of as an argument for the establishment
of Poor Laws, and the dilemma in which we are now
placed will be increased. If any real abuse is proved to
exist, there is no man in the House more ready than my-
self to afford a remedy ; but I will not begin a sort of Par-
liamentary Reform by disfranchising thousands of men
without inquiry. if a really good measure were proposed
I would support it ; but if there be not, any others shall
have my decided opposition ; and this measure has it on
principle, and on principle alone. I beg to move that this
Bill he read a second time this day six months.
Lord REDESDALE supported the Bill, and after going
through the statutes relating to elections, contended that
by the change in the value of money, the forty-slliiling
freehold. had now passed into the hands of a class of men
much below those originally intended to be electors, and
that consequently this Bill was but a return to the old
standard of qualifications.
Lord FARNHAM did not mean to deny the abuses of

the forty-shilling freeholders, but he had a strong objec-
tion to the provisions of the Bill ❑ow on the table. He did
tort mean to cast any imputations upon the Assistant Bar-
isters, but he most say that this Bill put them under the
influence of the Crown. In the first place, it made them
almost absolute judges of the whole constituency of the
Kingdom ; a power which he thought ought not to he
vested in the hands of men who were appointed by the
Crown, whose salary was not fixed by statute, but who
were to be remunerated at time pleasure of the Crown, and
who were removeable at the will of the Crown. He
thought that, by such agency, his Majesty's Ministers
could, if they were so inclined, obtain, and unfairly ob-
ta;n, the most dangerous influence over elections in Ire-
land.—(Hear.)—This he thought was an evil which their
Lordship, as legislators, were bound to prevent. He
fully concurred with the Noble Duke as to the conduct of
a certain class of Irish freeholders, to whom his Grace
had alluded ; but he felt that the proposed Bill would be a
hardship upon persons who held freeholds in fee simple
under 10/. Why, he asked, should not these freeholds be
obtained ? By doing so they would get rid of all fictitious
freeholds, and thus the evil would at once be remedied
without injury. There was one other point to which he
wished to allude, as any observations upon it in Co►n-
mittee would not carry so much weight—he meant the
power of an appeal in the event of an affirmative as well
as a negative decision on the part of the Assistant Bar•
rister. He would in such case allow the appeal to be
made to any two Magistmates of the County.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH said, that the Bill provided
such an appal.
Lord FARNHAM added, but the appeal to be so made
should he decided before the then next ensuing Session.
Lord MANNERS said, that judging from the practical
effects of the Bill of 1793, he could not conceive any mea-
sure more calculated to improve the general state of Ire•
hod, and benefit the poorer classes of its inhabitants than

the proposed Bill. It would renew and strengthen those

ties between landlord and tenant so beneficial to both, but
which had been so grievously broken in upon by the Act
of 1793. He looked upon the Bill as an act of justice,
and one which would confer considerable benefit upon a
great portion of the forty-shilling freeholders themselves.
From his long professional habits, he must be supposed as
anxious as any of their Lordships to support vested rights,
but he was not so anxious to retain a bad law, as to resist
an improvement of it.—(Hear, hear, hear. )—lt was quite
a mistake to suppose that the forty-shilling freeholders re-
presented the landed interest of Ireland ; as well might it
he said that universal suffrage would give a faithful repre-
sentation of the landed and moneyed interest of the coun-
try. As the law at present stood, many of the forty-
shilling freeholders came to vote with a suspicious title;
some on a lease of lives, with an old life thrown in, in
order to strengthen the title ; those leases were held at a
high rack rent, and the land was tilled by the occupier, he
being unah:e to pay for the labour of another. In 1793,
it was thought necessary to grant concessions to the Ro-
man Catholics ; and it was thought better to grant them
the elective franchise than give them admission to Parlia-
ment, the latter being deemed the less constitutional mode
of concession. Now their Lordships had heard the effects
of the Act of 1793. It had demoralized the country ; it
had produced great mischief, and no good ; and, in addi-
tion, it had inflicted serious injury upon the forty-shilling
freeholders thetnAelves.—( Hear. )--He supported the Bill
now before their Lordships, from a conviction that it
would improve the morals of the country, and add to the
pnblic pace of Ireland. But as this Bill was so intimately
connected with another measure still within their Lord-
ships' House, he hoped he might be allowed to say a few
words upon it. He had voted against that other measure;
but he had done so with pain, as it must ever give him
pain to vote against the Noble Duke, for whom he
uniformly entertained the highest respect.—(Hear, hear.)
—But he assured the Noble Duke and his colleagues,
that in having changed their opinions upon this great
tioestien, they had not diminished, but increased his con-
fidence in them—(hear, hear)—for lie felt that in doing so
they had made great and painful sacrifices to the discharge
of their public duty.—(Hear, hear.)—And when he saw
the Noble Duke and his friends supported by so many
Noblemen whose wisdom and talent and integrity were
unquestioned—men whose only interest was iu the pro-
sperity and tranquillity of the country—so far from dis-
trusting the Noble Duke, he could not help feeling that his
own opinion was not right. He hoped he should find that
it was wrong ; and when the Bill was passed into a law
he trusted it would have the effect of tranquillizing Ire-

land, of uniting both Protestant and Catholic, or at least
of depriving the latter of all cause of complaint ; that it
would strengthem the -bands of Government, and give the

country at large a more general confidence in the protec-
tion of the Legislature.
The Marquis of BUTE said some Noble Lords bad op-
posed the measure on the ground that sufficient time had
not been given to inquire into the effects it would pro-
duce in Ireland. Now he would ask what more strict in-
quiry could be instituted than that of 1825 ? They were
anxious that the great question of Catholic Emancipation
should be carried, yet, however thankful he might be to
Ministers for that measure, still he wou'ti not consent to
suppot t •lie Bill then before their Lordships, if he thought
it, contrary to the feelings of the parties more immediately
interested in it. It was because he was satisfiel, from the
information private anti public which had reveled him on
the subject, that the forty-shilling freeholders themselves
acquiesced in it, that he gave it his support. He felt,
too, that in doing so he was conferring a benefit on Ire-
land, but more particularly on the forty-shilling free-
holders themselves.

The Marquis of CLANRICARDE was anxious to make
a few observations upon this Bill. However anxious he
was to carry the other great measure, which was calcu-
lated to tranquillize, he could not support that now before
the House, because he could not see that there existed any
necessary connection between the one and the other. If
he thought that the other Bill depended in any way upon
this, be would go out of his way to support it ; but not
without a conviction, that in doing so, he would be com-
mitting a direct act of injustice. Much had been said
about the evils which exist, and the benefits which this
Bill would confer in removing those evils. It would, in
his view of the case, have been better to have shown that
the Bill would introduce a better system than that at pre-
sent existing. As the law now stood, it would be impos-
sible to bribe the forty-shilling freeholders of any county in
Ireland ; but when the number of voters was reduced,
votes would become of value, and there would always be
found plenty of men who had their price; and ihen, if
the bribery oath should be adminstered, the perjury and
demoralization would be as great as at present. It was
said that the fortyashilling freeholder was insensible of
the value of his vote. He maintained that recent events
proved the contrary. When the forty-shilling freeholder
was called upon to decide, he decided against those who
he considered were continuing his injuries ; and by so
doing ke carried Catholic Emancipation. The Noble
Duke wished to introduce a race of yeomen into Ireland.
—But what was he to do—how was he to provide for the
thousands who must be removed from the soil, in order to
make way for them ? It was true that peace and tran-
quillity would introduce manufactures--manufactures
would beget industry and give employment. Then, and
not till then, could the more humble classes be safely
withdrawn from the soil. But all this must be gradual,
and the work of time—whereas the proposed Bill was a
premium on sudden and rapid depopulation. On these
grounds he felt it his duty to oppose the Bill.

The Earl of ROSEIiERI;' differed with his Noble
Friend and Relative, and from other Noble Lord's who hail
expressed a determination to oppose the Bill. He thought
it would he productive of beneficial effects, and would
therefore support it. Indeed the only ground of objec-
tion which he could at all perceive in it was that it had a
tendency to interfere with vested rights. But when he
reflected how the Elective Franchise had been exercised by
the forty-shilling freeholders ; when he found that that
privilege, instead of turning out a benefit, had proved an
injury to the parties exercising it, he thought a case i❑
favour of the Bill was fully and clearly established on the
part of his Majesty's Government. It was not only that
there were no benefits, their Lordships must he aware that
considerable mischiefs had grown up out of the system,
and that not only much benefit would he caused by the re-
pression of the mischief, but other and most beneficial
effects would flow from the Bill now before them. The
prominent mischief which had arisen in Ireland from the
present state of the franchise, and which had been sa
clearly stated by the Noble Duke in his address to their
Lordships, was the controul exercised by the Catholic
Priests over the great body of the people. Another mis-
chief, not inferior to this, was the subdivided occupancy of
the land, which was occasioned by the desire to obtain
votes and Parliamentary influence, and which produced
the secondary mischief, viz, that the subdivision of the
land led to a great redundancy of population, which was
the more mischievous as it occurred in a country
destitute of all manufactures to employ them. It
produced the further mischief, that the great redun-
dancy of popularity, which wm, perhaps, unexampled
in Ireland, prevented the people from finding employ-
ment, plunged them ail in the greatest wretchedness
and penury, brought on them all the evils of idleness,
and made them, at all times, the ready instruments of tu-
mult and disorder.—(Hear, hear.)--An additional opera-
tion of this system, he believed, was—and lie spoke it
with great deference to the Noble Lords who came from
that part of the country—that the people found it neces-
sary, in order to obtain support, to enter into a competi-
tion for the occupation of land, by which rents were largely
and even ruinously increased.—(Hear, hear.)—He thought
it hid been proved that the Bill would put an end to one
of the evils complained of, viz. the controul now exercised
by the Catholic Priests over the freeholders. He could
not help feeling sanguine also that the regulation now pro-
posed would slowly but effectually cure the other evils. He
therefore should be ready to give his vote for the Bill, as a
good substantive measure, though he must candidly and
fairly avow—notwithstanding he thought the Bill wisuld
produce much positive good—that he should not have
voted fit it, unless it bad been accompanied Ly the mea-
sure for Catholic relief. He would now vote for it, not
merely on its own merits, but as the Bill was a great
agent to procure the support of those to that great measure
which he had uniformly hoped, ever since he had a seat in
that House, would ultimately be carried, thinking, as he
did, that neither this nor any other measure would be of
any.beneficial effect. The Catholic Relief Bill was made
the basis of our legislation. It had been stated that the
measure would produce considerable discontent, and it had
been wished that the right of the present possessors might
be preserved, and that the Bill might be made only pro-
spective. He doubted if this would satisfy the commu-
nity ; or if it would have gained the support of those whose
support was of incalculable benefit in carrying through
the other measure. What he bad heard had not altogether
satisfied him, that if ever another election should ensue,
whether it was a single election or a general election, be-
fore that measure were adopted by Parliament, and conies
into execution, he for one should consider it a great re-
proach that the country should lie left exposed to the jail
ence exercised by the Catholic Priests over the forty-shil-
ling freeholders. The measure was certainly a violation of
a principle, anti he deeply regretted that it should be ne-
cessary to support it ; but under the present circumstances
no time was to be lost ; and as Parliament had arrived at a
correct conclusion in consenting to the other Bill, be
hoped it would also consent to this, not merely as essential
to complete the other measure, but as carrying with it be-
nefits on its own grounds.—( Hear, hear.)
_ _

The Earl of MOUNTCASHEL was understood to
support the Bill, though he did not think it would di-
minish the influence of the Catholic Priests. He con-
ceived they would have as much influence over the Catho-
lic freeholder if the franchise were raised to 101. or 201.,
as they have over the forty shilling freeholders. He
was anxious to see Ireland prosperous and her people
comfortable, and wished to see an independent body of
yeomanry, who would be able to obtain a good educa-
tion fur their children, and would be better judges of
who was fit to represent them in Parliament than the
present ignorant peasants who dwelt in mud-huts, which
they shut up in summer, and, turning their children out
to beg, came themselves to England to seek a little money.
He would like to see the measure extended, and the qua-
lification raised still higher. It would follow up the Act
which had been passed last Session, called the Sub-letting
Act, and would prevent those subdivisions of property by
which respectable farms were gradually turned in nume-
rous cabbage-gardens. It was impossible that a man
could support a family and pay rent out of half an acre of
land. It was supposed, if the land was not so subdivided,
that the people would starve—that no employment could
be found for them if these small portions of land were again
united into respectable farms. There was yet a great
deal of uncultivated land in Ireland, and these people
might he settled on it; bringing it under tillage would be
greatly to the advantage of the country. This bad been
practised in some cases, and might be done on a great
scale. He wished also to see the principle of the Bill ex-
tended to boroughs, otherwise there would be a tempta-
tion to build mud-cabins about towns, that would be a dis-
grace to Ireland.—(Laughter.)--- He wished also, that a
clause might be introduced, baking away from the forty-
shilling freeholders the right of voting for Coroners, as they
were not capable of judging who was a proper person to
fill that important office.
The Earls of Winchilsea and Malmesbury rose toge-
ther, but the former Noble Lord giving way, the Earl of
MALMESBURY proceeded :—lle had been anxious fur
some time to rise, as some appeals had been made to the
party to which he belonged—he being one of those who
were not particularly fond of change, and who were satis-
fied with the existing order of things. He did imagine,
when he came into the House, though it was difficult to
comprehend how it should happen—hut he did imagine
that extremes would meet, and that he who was averse
from reform, and that those who were the champions of
reform, were to join in their opposition to that Bill. He
• had expected that one of the Noble Lords opposite would
rise and protest against that act as an infringement of the

rights of the people. He was an enemy to reform, and he
should be ready to oppose any measure which went to alter
the representative system. This measure was supported
as necessary to the prosperity of Ireland—to the prospe-
rity of Ireland he was a great friend, and had given prac-
tical proofs of it. He had advocated her interests on all
questions concerning the Corn Laws. He had advocated
the measure for admitting her agricultural produce into
this country, first brought forward in 1816, and he had
alwa) s urged the necessity of allowing the average prices
of Ireland to be taken into consideration in determining
the average prices of the whole country. If he opposed
the present measure, it was not because be was the enemy
of Ireland, but because he regarded the Bill as altering the
Constitution. He looked at the Bill as correcting abuses
and remedying an evil, and he expected to find that exl-
pressed in the preamble of the Bill, but he found no such
Cling. The preamble only stated, that, " Whereas it was
expedient and necessary to raise the amount of the quali-
fication for election in Ireland."—(Hear, hear.)—To him
the Bill appeared one of the most complete measures of re-
form that had ever been brought into Parliament. He
had learnt from good authority—the evidence taken before
Committees of both [louses five years ago—that there were
many freeholders in fee-simple in Ireland. In the evidence
taken before the House of Commons, he found 31r. Hoch-
ford asserting that there were many such freeholders in
Ireland, as we have in England ; be meant a class well
known, probably, to their Lordships, who fixed themselves
on a common, and by prescription obtained a freehold, to
which they hail as good a right as le had to his estate.
However that right might originally have been acquired,
the were now bone fide farty-shilling freeholders in lee,
and they were by this Bill to he swept away at one fell
swoop. He voted conscientiously against the measure, on
the principle which had made their Lordships, when bo-
roughs were accused of corruption, most anxious not to take
away their rights without a full inquiry. If there were
any thing sacred, it was the elective franchise. He did
not agree with his Noble Friend (the Earl of Winchilsea)
who had avowed himself a Reformer, and if he were to
vote for this Bill he should act unquestionably in a very
f4olish manner ; and when any question were raised here-
after about Reforxi—if it were proposed, for example, to
take away the burgage fees, which he thought an anomaly,
what answer could be give if he were reminded of any vote
he might give in favour of this Bill; the Noble Duke said
that the forty-shilling freeholds was a system of great abuse ;
but why not make it a substantive and separate measure—
why not raise the franchise to 101. by a measure that had no
connection with any other measure ? The measure was now
towed through that House against wind and tide. He
hated all bargaining in legislation, and would rather see a
measure of such importance brought forward by itself.
de apprehended the measure was one of the most inivor-
tant that ever had come before Parliament, and he did not
like to see it slip and glide through the House in spite of
justice and in spite of opposition, because it went in the
wake of another measure. He would rather see both Bills
stand each on its own merit, and would rather see the
Catholic question conceded, denuded of all securities, Olen
see it accompanied by a measure of this kind. lie found
himself placed in a strange situation, arising from the
strange manner in which the words friend to civil and
religious liberty were banded about. Ile imagined him-
self to he a friend to civil and religious liberty ; but if he
were to describe that character, he should now say of him
that he was a man professing to be the friend of civil and
religious ►iberty while he held in one hand the clause of a
Bill, making it a punishable offence to he in this land,
which only to touch gave freedom to a slave—and hold-
ing in the other a Bill to take away the elective franchise
from the body of the people without hearing them in
their behalf and without inquiry.— (Cheers and laughter.)
He was sorry to oppose measures originating with Govern-
ment with which he generally acted, but in that opposi-
tion he was, perhaps, not so much to blame as the Members
of that Government, who were now supporting measures
they had formerly opposed.—(Hear, hear.)—He would
give his support to the amendment.

Lord HOLLAND and the Earl of WINCITILSE A rose
together, and both claimed for some time t''•se right to ad-
dress the 'louse ; at length the former Noble Lord gave way.
The Earl of WINCHILSEA would not long detain
the House, for he was sure, after the decision their
Lordships came to on Saturday last, that they would not
he inclined to listen with much attention to any argument
he might adduce as to the danger which was likely to arise
to the best interests of the country. He, however, could
not avoid observing that their Lordships were called upon
in the most unconstitutional manner, without going into
an inquiry, to establish a precedent, by which some de-
spotic Minister might make an infringement upon the
dearest rights of the country.—(Hear, bear.)—Their
Lordships were told, that this measure would be beneficial
to Ireland, and the grounds for bringing it forward were
stated to be, that the forty-shilling freeholders were re-
gardless of their privileges—that they were prevented by
poverty and distress from registering their freeholds —and
that they were driven in flocks to the vote.—( Hear. )
Another reason given for disfranchising the forty-shilling
freeholders was, because they could not write ; but their
Lordships should remember, that not one of those indivi-
duals who gained for England the great charter of her li-
berties could ;vrite.—(Hear.)—A Noble Lord had alluded
to what he had said respecting Parliamentary reform ; and
he would, with the permission of the House, state his views
on that subject. He believed that the measure, the prin-
ciple of which had bee❑ assented to by their Lordship
on Saturday last, was contrary to the sense of the nation ;
and if it should pass, he certainly should not enter
into the walls of that House again, or take part in any
discussion, until the people had had an opportunity of ex-
pressing their sentiments on the subject. He admitted the
power of Parliament to abrogate any laws, but still the
opinion of the people ought not to he disregarded. The
reform which he would propose would he to have triennial
Parliaments instead of septennial. He believed that a ne-
cessity had existed at the time for altering the period of
Parliament's duration from three years to seven ; but when
that necessity ceas••d to exist, the period for the duration
of Parliaments, as regulated in the reign of William 111.,
ought to have been re-established. Had that been the
case, he was convinced that the late great change in the
Constitution would not have been effected. There was
another reform which he would recommend. Last year
the Reverend Bench opposite had consented to a measure
which separated the established religion from the State,
and this year many of that hotly had agreed to a measure
which would have the effect of making the Protestant re-
ligion no longer the religion of the country. Upon their
conduct, however, he did not mean to comment, but he
agreed with a Right Rev. Prelate, with whom he had had
a conversation, that there ought to be some discipline in
the church, and power given it to remove such members
as were a disgrace to it. He would propose that there
should be no transitions from one see to another ;
(Hear, hear)—that the incomes of the Bishops should
be equalized, and that they should be paid in proportio❑
to the duties they performed.—(Hear.) He would pro-
•use that no Minister should have the appointment of
Bishops, but that they should be chosen by their own
body, !subject to the approval of the King ; and his last pro •
posal would be, that the Bishops should no longer have
seats within the walls of their Lordships' House.—( Cheers
and laughter.)—There had been many very extraordinary
changes of opinion of late ; and with the permission of the
House, he would relate an anecdote which had been told to
him by the Hon. Member for Kent, which he thought ap-
plicable to the present circumstances. At the commence-
ment of the late war, two soldiers—one a black maa, and
the other a white—were walking in the neighbourhood of
Harwich, where there was an encampment, and they met
a woman and a sailor, who were going to he married in
the ensuing week. They committed an act of violence and
atrocity on the person of the woman, and nearly murdered
the man. For this offence they were both hanged. At
the end of nine months, the woman, who was ill-treated,
gave birth to two children, one black and the other white.
(Laughter•.) This he considered a very extraordinary
circumstance in the natural world ; hut no less extraordi-
nary in the political world were the twin speeches which
the Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsack had de-
livered.—(Loud laughter. )—He ought to add, that a libe-
ral subscription was raised for the woman, but he did not
know how the Noble and Learned Lord was to be re-
warded for his painful delivery.—(Continued laughter. )
The Noble Earl sat down amidst the loud cries of hear,
after stating that his opposition to the Noble Duke at the
head of his Majesty's Government was founded not on
personal but solely on public motives.
Lord HOLLAND did not think the present a proper
time for discussing the questions of Parliamentory reform.
He had never given his vote, or delivered his senti-
ments, on that subject in their Lordships' House, but
he certainly was not prepared to go the length of the
Noble Earl behind him. He expressed his satisfaction at
finding the Noble Lord did not think the Coronation Oath
contained any bar to the legislation of Parliament on the
subject of Catholic relief. The Noble Earl (Wincldlsea)
admitted that Parliament had a right to change the Con-
stitution of the country ; also that they could effect one
change which the Noble Earl appeared to wish to see
made—that was, that the Spiritual Lords should be
turned out of the House, and that their revenues
should be equalized. This was rather a bold proposition,
a stroke of sweeping reform to come from such a quarter.
The words of the Coronation Oath, if they did apply to
to the Legislative power of the throne (which he denied),
did certainly apply to such a case as this ; aad compre-

hended measures like these now suggested by the Noble
Earl. For according to the terms of the Coronation I
Oath, the Sovereign was bound to maintain the Church
and the Clergy of this kingdom in their rights and privi-
leges.
That one of those rights and privileges was that
the Right Rev. Prelates who filled the opposite bench should
sit. in Parliament, none could deny. Yet the noble Earl wished
to see the Bishops excluded from their Lordships' House.
However, as it was possible that before he sat down he
should have to say one word on the subject of consistency,
he would now do the Noble Earl the justice to say, that not
only was he consistent with himself in the proposition
which he made, but he was consistent with the persons
and things he most admired. The 30th of Charles 11. it-
self bore the Noble Earl out in his opinion ; and the Earl
of Shaftesbury, a roan, it must he admitted, of most extra-
ordinary powers of mind, notwithstanding the atrocious
blots upon his character, stated something similar to the
Catholic Lords, and persuaded them to vote against the
Bishops' test. The Earl of Shaftesoury said that the
Catholic Lords would rot be the worst body in the House,
thereby meaning that the Bishops ought to go out instead
of the Catholic Lords. The Noble Earl, therefore, upon
this point was consistent with himself and with the Earl
Of Shaftesbury, with whom, however, the Noble Earl's
ancestors had seldom the happiness to agree. He knew
not whether it was a dispensation of Providence or a fata-
lity attendant on the imperfection of human nature, that
seldom was there any subject or any political action on hu-
man affairs in which there did not arise something of a
nature unpleasant, ungrateful, and disagreeable to our feel-
lings. In the best measures we found some want of com-
pleteness or imperfection. He felt that he was discharging
a duty, but a distasteful one, to that part of the country
more immediately interested in the present measure, and to
the empire at large, by supporting in the first instance the
second reading of this Bill ; and he also felt that he should
be discharging a still more distasteful and painful duty in at-
tempting to reconcile himself to all the clauses and provi-
sions contained in it, except he found, which he much de-
sired, that the supporters and originators of the measure
should not be of opinion that the preservation of these
clauses was necessary to its existence. It hail been said
there was no evidence before the House to justify the pre-
sent measure. He denied this. There was a mass of
evidence on the subject taken and laid before their Lordships
in 1825 ; and upon that evidence only was it that he felt
prepared to give his vote for this Bill ; and he would tell
their Lordships shortly why. He was aware there was
an answer to the argument founded on these considerations;
but the Noble Earl had forestalled the objection, although
he was the last man whom he should have expected to
do so. There certainly was an observation pregnant with
some considerations likely to lead one to another conclusion
on that evidence—namely, what had happened since that
evidence was taken. Ile surrendered in this respect all
claim to consistency ; Noble Lords might have the ad-
vantage of the admission, and use all their artillery—they
had plenty of it—against him. What had happened since
1825, he at once admitted lie thought calculated to weaken
the objections entertained towards the system and exercise
of the elective franchise in Ireland. The evidence taken in
1825 contained the true grounds for objecting to that
system; what happened since arose from an accidental
excitement. He should be told that instead of being
governed by their landlords—that was, treated as so much
live stock dispoleable at the will of the owner—the
Irish tenantry were now swayed by the priests. Ile was
not fond of an undue influence on the part of the priests
of any kind ; he was as free from that weakness as any
man could well be ; but if slaves were to be driven, he
would rather they were driven by drivers of their own
choice, than by persons of whom they less approved,
although they might happen to he the original drivers.—
The conduct of the Irish electors since 1825, so far from
being an aggravation of their offence, was directly tire con-
trary. It was to their praise that these poor unhappy and
most unfortunate men, who had been long lab.uring under
the yoke which your ambition imposed upon them,—
these slaves and serfs of the land,—it was to be spoken to
their commendation, that, impelled by religious and strong
political notions, they had incurred the risk of actual des-
titution and punishment by opposing their task-maeters.—
Though it might be true that the basis of the English
Constitution and representation consisted in property, it
was false that the over-weening property of one nom
could constitutionally command the votes of others.—
The really guilty men were the proprietors of land in Ire-
land, who, for the basest, lowest, and most grovelling of
political objects had bestowed rights and privileges upon
their fellow-countrymen. He supposed the Noble Lord
would not object to the evidence of Archdeacon Trench.
That gentleman stated that he hail frequently seen herds
of voters driven to the hustings to be polled—driven, he
added, like herds of oxen, by a man on a mule with a
long whip. He (Lord Holland) asked the witness
whether he had seen the men actually lash the
voters ? The Archdeacon replied he had not. He
then put it to him to say, whether he believed that
the whip was intended for the voters, and not for the
mule? The answer was, that he not only believed it, but
knew it, for the whip was of such a quality and length
that the mule could not be struck by it, and the voters
could. The Noble Duke who had moved the amendment
would probably he somewhat moderated in his anxiety as
to the rights and privileges of the freeholders, when he
considered that the liberty which they enjoyed was a little
like the liberty of the negroes in our West India colonies.
When he recollected this evidence, and considered the con-
current testimony from so many quarters as to the manner
in which this strange, vicious, and imperfect system
worked, (whether the vice consisted in the original con-
struction of the law, or in its subsequent perversion, he
knew not,)—wheu he knew that a large portion of these
unhappy individuals themselves would consider the depri-
vation a relief—at any rate, when he saw that they felt so
strung a wish for the accomplishment of the other great
measure with which this had been connected, that they
were ready to accept it and its accompaniments with gra-
titude—he found it impossible to oppose the second read-
ing of the Bill. But he acknowledged he could not vote
for this Bill with the same degree of satisfaction and plea-
sure as he had felt, when, two days ago, he went below
the bar in support of the other measure, with a mass of
talent, liberality, arid learning—a conetellation of all that
was most brilliant and benignant in human nature, such as
perhaps had never before been enclosed within that nar-
row space. Though by some mysterious means these two
measures had been linked together, as was truly stated
by the Noble Earl, they had no necessary connection.
—lt was true they were twins of the same parent,
hut he thought they ought to have no affinity, awl cer-
tainly they bore no more resemblance to one another
than tire two bantlings which the Noble Earl hod
described to the House. The Relief Bill was a mea-
sure not of expediency and necessity exclusively ; it
did net, as was said, invade the Constitution of the coun-
try, shake the stability of the throne, endanger our reli-
gious rights and privileges; it was a measure of justice,
mercy, and peace ; it restored the Constitution of the
country to its proper condition ; it did not menace evil to
any—implied the subjugation of none; it restored to the
King, Lords, and Commons their just and full privileges;
it restored to the Protestant King of this country the
unfettered exercise of his just, ancient, lawful, and consti-
tutional prerogative ; it restored their Lordships' House
its full power and dignity; it rendered the Peerage of Eng-
land what it had a right to be, what it always was before
the accursed law of Charles 11.,—it made it a full and en-
tire Peerage; it restored the integrity of this House,
which had been suspended and mutilated as much as the
bust of Titus Oates himself;—it restored to the other
House of Parliament its ample and unfettered privileges,
it restored to the people the right of electing the repre-
sentatives who could best represent them,—and to all men
it restored the eligibity to office, executive and legislative.
The Noble Lord, after noticing the assertion that the pre-
sent was a terrible infringement on the Irish elective fran-
chise, and glancing at the argument relative to the dif-
ferent value of 40s. now and in the time of Henry VIII.,
proceeded to observe, that, although for the reasons al-
ready stated, and in accordance with the tendency of the
evidence taken in 1825, he was ready to vote for the Se-
cond reading of the Bill, yet, much as he wished to recon-
cile his mind to all the clauses and provisions suggested by
those individuals who has! so nobly, boldly, wisely, and
magnanimously brotight forward the measure of relief,
he could not deny that there were clauses in the present
Bill to which he could not give his hearty concur-
rence. He did not like the principle of retrospection.
which the measure directly involved—he did not like to
see that no attempt was made to separate the bona fide
from the fictitious freeholder. He should be glad if the
proposers of the Bill could consent to remedy these and
other defects. He was sorry to hear, from what fell from
the Noble Duke, that the measure was to be considered as
definitive, and preferred taking the language of the Bill
itself as his authority. He found some consolation in it. ;
for more clearly, even than the declaration of King Wil-
liam himself, or the standing orders of their Lordships'
House excluding the Catholics, did this Bill recognize the
power of the alteration and revision in the legislature.
This implied that the measure was to be parsed in sedan
shape that it might be necessary to alter it ; and that con-
soled him greatly with regard to some clauses and provi-
sione in the Bill which ke found hard of digestion. Above
all, although there were great blemishes in the Bill, he
hoped it would not really impair or defeat the great mea-
sure with which it had been connected. He hoped-it
would not be the dead fly which could taint the whole

ointment. He did not think it would, although there
were things in the Bill very much to his distaste, calcu-
lated to offend his palate, and which, under other circum-
stances, would be likely to revolt his stomach altogether.
Ilis Noble Relative seemed pleased at that admission, and
he hoped the Noble Lord would make the most of it. What
would be the effect of rejecting this Bill ? What the con-
sequence of adopting it with all its imperfections? The
consequences of its rejection, connected as it was with the ,
other measure, would be some things not fit to be de-
scribed. From its adoption, always bearing in mind its
connection with the Relief Bill, he did not augur so many
ffsatleantages as did some Noble Lords. The Bill, taken
abstractedly, would seem to possess a lowering and re-
pulsive aspect ; yet it had not been so contemplated by that
open-hearted, magnanimous, and excellent people upon
whom it was intended to take effect. When he gut
over the minor objections that naturally arose out of
consideration of the measure, he saw much ground for
encouragement in the confidence to be reposed in the Go-
vernment that tad acted so wise and noble a part, he saw
still greater ground for encouragement in the confidence
which he felt in the good temper and magnanimity of the
people of Ireland. Ile had heard it asserted that the prin-
ciple of gratitude in great bodies was seldom firm or to be
relied on : he believed that wrong feelings of gratitude for
benefits conferred were implanted by the hand of their
Maker in the minds of all men, and that the principles
which actuated individuals actuated great bodies of men
What reason was there to suppose that such a feeling would
not be found in the body of men in question ? But it was
possible to overrate a benefit. We talked of a boon and
indulgence. What boon? What indulgence? Was it the
indulgence of allowing men to live ?—the indulgence of
permitting them to breathe the air of heaven ?—the in-
dulgence of letting them enjoy the fruits of their honest
labour ?—the indulgence of saying they should be able to
bold their own lands ? These were the sort of indul-
gences granted. Granted to whom ?—granted by whom ?
To the people of a whole nation by a ens ill knot of
the inhabitants of that nation ! It was a mockery of the
rights of a free people to talk of such things as indul-
genres. Talk of the Bill of Rights ! Whose rights ? The
rights of the people ?—are the Roman Catholics no
part of the people ?—are the rights contained in the
hill of Rights no part of their rights? Then why this
mockery anti attempted delusion about boons and in-
dulgences to the people? The reasons which induced
him to hope that the people of Ireland would acquiesce
cheerfully in this Bill, in their great anxiety to secure
the other measure, arose from the conduct up to the
present moment. He believed they were disposed to
follow the example set, and the advice given to them,
by the Noble Marquis who was lately Lord Lieutenant of
that country, and who men thought had been so extra- •
ordinarily removed from his high office. However that
might be that Noble individual in question had put aside
all personil feelings on the subject of his recall, and gave
Iris entire weight and influence to the support of this great
measure of relief; and sure he was that the example of the
Noble Marquis would induce the Irish people to overlook
all minor conmidTratione, and concur in expressing their
joy and gratitude at what had been done by increased loyalty
and affection towards a Government which deserved so well
from them. He now felt a little inc,ined to do that (with
their Lordships' pardon) which since he had enjoyed
the honour of a seat i❑ this House he had never mani-
fested any extraordinary propensity for doing. He was
disposed to say a few words about himself,—sonrething
concerning- the motives anti reasons be had for acting as he
did. He had seen a good deal in the House, and much out
of it, to convince him that those persons, who, under
cover of a shower of violent indignation and feeble argu-
ment, began by describing the horrible measure brought
forward for the relief of the Roman Catholics as a sort of
renewal of the days and dangers of bloody Queen Mary in
this Protestant country,—as a subversion of the state, a
violation of the privileges of the church, and an infraction
of the Constitution,—that those same individuals now gene-
rally planted their feeble batteries, and endeavoured to bring
their artillery to hear against the consistency of
indivi-
duals rather thin on the measure itself. We had nothing
to do with the principle of consistency as it was employed
by the Noble Lords : the decisions of Parliament were our
rule : we were not to consider any thing but this in relation
to the present question. This by the way. The Noble
Earl complimented persons upon this side of the Horse
for their consistency. He (Lord Holland) neither bragged
nor wished to be thought proud of his consistency : his
whole object was to think as justly and act as honestly as he
could ; and if he happened to he consistent in his public ac-
tions, it was because his opinions had not changed. If they
had undergone an alteration, he trusted he had virtue, honour,
patriotism, and honesty enough to act on the change. He
wished to show, by his actions, that these were his real
opinions—the sentiments upon which he had always acted ;
and therefore he wished to show the sharp-shooters of the
opposite party, who endeavoured to bring down every body,
that he was a fair mark for them. He wanted to show
them that he had—not a white feather—that he did not
believe be possessed—but a few discoloured feathers ; and
that therefore they might have a slap at him. On the sub-
ject of reform they might think him vulnerable, for like
the Noble Lord who spoke the other night he thought that
that which abridged the number of votes in the country
was an evil, and that extending them was a good.
Notwithstanding this, he supported the present Bill. It
was clear, then, that he could not interpose the shield of
consistency against the projectiles of such skilful marksmen
as he saw around him. For his part, he held retrospec-
tion in legislation in perfect abhorrence. Happily the day
might arrive when his Noble Relative would have it in his
power to confess that a change had taken place in his sen-
timents, which would do him honour in deserting that
cause which he might imagine to be the cause of duty, but
which he could not but consider the cause of prejudice,
and, Ire hoped, antiquated intolerance. It was, however,
an omen► in his Noble Relative's favour, that he so far
advocated the cause of liberty, which it might there-
fore be presumed was natural to his generous temper,
by his opposition to a Bill which was to extinguish
the rights of so numerous a body of his Majesty's
subjects. The measure of concerion had been always
confessed to be a choice of evils; but be ima-
gined the difficulty or choice of evils would be ten
thousand-fold increased, should their Lordships, after what
had been already done in the meditated alteration of the
law, attempt to halt and disappoint the expectations which
had been so generally excited throughout this and the
neighbouring kingdom. He could not contemplate the
dangerous effect of such a hire of conduct without being
appalled at the too probable consequences. This was the
most powerful of all the many reasons which suggested
themselves, or had been recapitulated, in favour of the
Bill ; and, impressed as he was with the weight of this ar•-
gutnent in favour of its expediency, be could not but give
it his most sincere support.

The Duke of HAMILTON rose, and expressed his
conviction that this measure ought to be considered in the
light of a totally distinct and sepsrate measure from that
with which the Noble Lord had appeared so intimately to
unite it.—(Here the Noble Duke discontinued his speech,
and very abruptly resumed his seat.)
The Earl of LONGFORD was satisfied no Bill could
be framed for the improvement of the representation of Ire-
land, which was more calculated to produce the best and
most salutary consequences.
The Earl of HADDINGTON said he should vote in fa-
vour of the Bill, not so much on account of his satisfaction
with the Bill itself, but because it was so intimately con-
nected with, and so necessary perhaps to the success of
the Relief Bill, which it accompanied in its progress
through their Lordships' House. He professed he had not
courage to contemplate even the evils and horrific results
which might flow from a failure of that measure to which
this Bill relative to the franchise might be considered an
accessory or adjunct. It should therefore have his decided
support.
The Earl of DUDLEY believed the Bill, even if it stood
alone, would prove a singular benefit to the Irish people.
The great grievances of Ireland, it was said, consisted in
the exclusion of men of property and education from ele-
vated stations and offices of state. This all went to pro-
hibit the illiterate and the uninformed mass of the lower
orders from exercising a power to their own prejudice, and
often to their own disgrace and degradation. Had the
forty-shilling freeholders not been proved by examination
at their Lordships' bar to he a wretched set of ignorant
I sings, too often driven like a herd of cattle to prostitute
the elective franchise to the will of their landlords?—
(Ilear.)—Latterly, the terrors of this world had yielded
to the terrors of the next, and the priest ruled instead of
the man of property over their deluded consciences. From
such a system, and from such consequences, it was high
time that the country should be relieved by the strong mrm
of the Legislature, and he should therefore cordially support
the Bill for its own intrinsic merits, as an excellent politi-
cal enactment.—(Cries of " Question, question.")
The Duke of WELLINGTON confessed he was not
surprised that on this Bill there had existed, even amongst
the friends of the other accompanying measure, a difference
of opinion. Ile felt it however necessary to call to their
sLoo s
mr
thh ps
ng'
lriekceo ltl ca
tti that a few
whic
had
yearstie ago,ho whenhonour iirt a
introduces mas eur e
to their notice last week relative to the Catholic disabiliti s
had been introduced, another measure like that now before
them made some progress through Parliament. To those
measures, differing in different respects, though generally
resembling these in principle, be could not, he felt, assent
or be a party, becaate they did not in hie wind appear to

I

be complete. He could assent only to a complete system of
measures which would be likely to effect the great objects of
the pacification and improvement of the condition of that
country to which those measurer, were directed. He should
have deceived those with whom he acted, and deceived the
nation, if he had brought down to them a project which he
did not feel convinced was a complete one. To the objee-
tions which were not weighty in his mind, the answers
would be found in the state of the Bills now before Parlia-
ment, in the anxiety of all classes of the community, and the
state of Ireland. He conceived that the appointment of aa-
sistant-barristers to register and examine the value of the
freehold was a better regulation by far than that resorted to
by the magistracy heretofore. In fact, the magistrates had
been tried and failed ; and he believed no class of men were
more independent than professional gentlemen who bat
a character to lose, and professional respectability to up-
hold. Ile believed no class of men in society would
be less likely to yield to the seductions of ministerial
authority or influence. In reply to the Noble Lord
on the cross-bench, that it was likely the priesthood
would have the same influence over the 101. freeholders sta
over the forty-shilling freeholders, he begged their Lord"
ships to recollect that it had been preyed before them that
the influence alluded to was proved to exist always in pro-
portion to the degree of ignorance and poverty of the
parties.—(Hear, hear.)—Could any parallel of this un-
favourable nature be drawn between the man who could
neither reed or write, and the better informed 7—between
the person who had been finind by a barrister to be, in his
own clear right, without connivance, possessed of a free-
hold of 101. a-year, besides possibly a business or property
of another description, and the poor dependant or beggar
who swore himself, or forswore himself, to be the possessor
of a forty-shilling freehold ? " I have brought," said his
Grace, in concluding, " your Lordships this Bill in at
nearly perfect a state as I could conceive to be practicable;
I entreat you wilt allow it to he read a second time to-
night, that it may go simultaneously to the Committee!,
with that other measure, there to be examined ; and 11
your Lordships deem it expedient, there to be amended•
But I do also entreat your Lordships will not unnecessarily
amend it so as to deprive it of its essential character, is an
appendage and auxiliary to the greater measure which it
accompanies."—( Hear, hear. )—The question being loudly
called for, their Lordships divided—
For the original motion—
Content (present) 159
Not content (present)

Majority in favour of the 2d reading 122
The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to
be committed on Thursday next. 0
Adjournment at Half-past Eleven o'clock.