Star.
London, England, 1825-02-19 00:00:00

`boners,- . •
and would have their ease decided aeon prin-
ciples applicable to all. He-would ask, was compliance
with the prayer of the Petition required on the ground of
parliamentary precedent? Was it reqUired as an act of
justice to the petitioners ? Or was it required for the pur-
pose of supplying some evidence which was not hid be-
fore the House when the measure of his Right Hon.
Friend (Mr.Goulburn) was introduced? With respect to
precedents, he was prepared to contend, that not one of
the cases put was fairly urged, so as to meet the question.
He conceived the principle to be, that Parliament was
ever ready to hear Counsel in cases where the private or
personal rights of individuals were to be interfered with.
In such case they acted, as it were, as a court of judi-
cature, where all parties interested in the case were al-
lowed to he heard: and he apprehended that all the
precedents quoted on the other side fell within this de-
scription. He would notice the Hon. and Learned
Member's mot splendid instance, and which by being
pre.erved for the last, seemed to be his strongest case,
he meant that of the " Hawkers and Pedlars."—(A
laugh). That felt within the rule which he considered

to be adopted by the House. The Bill against which the
hawkers and pedlars desired to be heard, did not affect
all classes of the community, but they uiged, that it had
a specific objtct, and was calculated to take away their
bread. Even there, however, he thought the House re-
fused to hear the petitioners. He would not be certain :

he had looked at the dates given by the Honourable
and Leatued Member, and according to the entries in
the Journals, he though such had been the result.-
13nouGuANE here intimated that they had been
heard at the bar of the Hothe. It was the year 1785
Mr. Secretary PEEL, in continuation, said the hawkers
and pedlars only complained of the additional duty on
them, and its effects upon their future condition, and he
believed that they were heard. However, he did not

consider the case as at all in point. He looked upon it
as falling within that description of cases which the
Parliament had admitted as allowing the right of indi-
viduals to be heard, where their private and prsonal
interests were concerned. But he would discuss this
question on principle; and he would ask, if the House
agreed to hear Counsel and witnesses on this question,
what would be the consequence? The Habeas Corpus
Suspension Bill had been passed without having
any such claim made. The Alien Act had been men-
tioned ; but that Bill had been passed without having
any such claim recognized on the part of individuals ;
and so, in fact, had all the general measures of the last
ten years. If the claim were admitted upon every public
measure upon which certain individuals might differ
from the opinion of Pailiament, the House would be
occupied, not in its usual business, but for a great por-
tion of its time in hearing the eloquent addresses ,of
Counsel at its bar. It was well known that a Counsel
never thought of any other interest than that of bisclient.
He could cite a very memorable illustration of this in
the instance of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman (Mr.
Brougham), who, on the trial of the Queen, had em-
phatically declared, that be the consequences what they
might, he could look to no other interests than those of
his Royal client. He (Mr. Peel) did not mean to deny
the justice of the doctrine thus laid down, but he wished
the House to see what would be the effect of 'it. The
whole privilege of general discussion would be cut up,
and Gentlemen not accustomed to professional habits of
speaking, would be completely overborne by the
eloquence of Counsel. He remembered that last Ses-
sion, when the Marine Insurance Bill was before the
House, there were not fewer than six large wigs at one
time at their bar; and if so limited an interest as that con-
nected with the Marine Insurance should send six, what
number might not the Catholics of Ireland send ?
He well recollected,on that occasion, that when four of
the Learned Counsel had exhausted themselves in ad-
dressing the House, an imploring look was cast towards
the remaining two, as if to entreat their silence; but it
was cast in vain. The interest of their clients was, in
their mind, paramount to all other considerations, and
they continued to occupy the attention of the House for
some time longer. It would be the same in the present
case; it would be the same on the question of Catholic
Emancipation ; it would, be the same in every case of
public importance—(Hear, hear). He recollected when
a Bill was before the House,for authorizing the removal
of some West India slaves from one island to another,
that a benevolent individual undertook their cause,
and wished to have Counsel heard, on the ground that
the proposed removal was wholly against their wills.—
On that occasion, the Honourable and Learned Gentle-
man (Mr.Brougham)had opposed the hearing of Counsel,
and stated, that if Mr. Stephens were heard as next of
kin to the blacks, some other Counsel, on some future
question, would claim to be next of kin to the whole
population of England. and would pray to be heard on
that ground. Though he (Mr. Peel) did not think the
case one in which an exception might be made, yet so
persuaded was he, after hearing the Honourable and
Learned Gentleman's eloquent appeal, of the bad con-
sequences of such a precedent, that he voted against it
—(Hear, hear). He would not allow himselt to be
swayed in his vote on this occasion by any tears of bad
consequences in case the measure was refused, or by
any fear that those consequences would lead to any such
event as that which had happened with respect to the
United Provinces of America. He had too good an
opinion of the Catholics to anticipate, for an instant,
any such results; and be was surprhed that even
a hint of the kind should come from those who were
their defenders. Could he be persuaded to hold such
an opinion, his conscientious objections to the claims
of the Catholics would be increased tenfold. Then,
leaving the dry question of Parliamentary precedent,
it was stated that we had no instance of such a Bill
having been introduced without some previous commu-
nication, or without laying some documents before the
House to strew its necessity. This, he begged to say,
was not the fact. We had the Habeas Corpus suspended
more than once, without any such communications, or
papers being laid before Parliament. The House, in
those and other instances, had gone upon the notoriety
of the facts. This was the case on th' passing of the
Convention Act by the Irish Parliament, in 1793 (for,
as Irish precedents were to be quoted, he thought they
might be of weight on one side as well as the other).
In that case there was no communication from Govern-
ment—no papers laid before the House—no Committee
of Inquiry. It was true the Lords had a Con3n.ittee;
but it was for another purpose; and in their report,
they noticed the existence and dawerous tendency of
assemblies acting by branch Committees, and collecting
voluntary subsci iptions (quite as voluntary as those of
the present day); and on this report, and the general no-
toriety of the facts to which it alluded, the Parliament le-
gislated. In the same way it proceeded, in the year
1 1795; to pass an Act for the more effectual suppression

of unlawful aiiiibblies, withotit hkvbsg rticeiitei
special communication or any papers from the Governs.
ment on thesubject. Without waiting for or requiring
such eidenci, Parliaiment did then what he hoped It
would do now, legislate on the general notoriety of the
facts. There were on the present occasion no green bags
brought down--"ono secret or Select Committees ap-
pointed, but Ministers had come boldly forward, and
without such documentary evidence, had determined
to act on their own responsibility. Such conduct, he
thought, would have been hailed.by Gentlemen on the
other side; instead of which, it seemed, they now op-
posed everything which' at all went upon Ministerial
responsibility. The measure was introduced for the
purpose of putting dawn secret societies of every
kind—(Cheers fro* the Opposition). He understood
the nature of those cheers. They seemed to insinuate
that lie would support societies on one side, and now,
for an appearance of consistency, would agree to a mea-
sure which affected to put them both down. He assured
Honourable Gentlemen that he had no such feeling.
He had fiom the first expressed his dislike of all party
associations of any kind ; and two years ago, when a
measure was introduced for putting down societies of
one particular description, he gave it his support—
though he must say that he did not then hear any of
the constitutional scruples which were now avowed on
the other side of the House. The associations then at-
tacked, were not much in favour with the Hon. Gentle.
men opposite, and that si ould account for their silence.
The Act which had' then passed, had, he understood,
been since evaded, but he could assure the House, that
be would be ready at any moment to lend his support
to any Act by which Parliament might assert its autho-
rity in putting dawn ail such societies. But he appre-
hended, that if Alderman King, who had appeared at
their bar on one occasion, had come forward. and
avowed himself as the Deputy Grand Master of the
Orange Lodges, and had prayed to be heard against any
measure tending to put them down, tint his prayer
would have met but a cold reception from the Hon.
Gentlemen opposite—(Cheers).—But to come to the
ground of this motion of the Honourable Mem-
ber (Mr. Brougham) being necessary for the purpose of
supplying evidence not already before the House, he
would contend, that on that ground it was uncalled
for. There was, he maintained, evidence to satisfy the
House of the injurious tendency of this Association. He
would adduce it from their own public acts. Without
taking the intemperate speeches of one or snore
members of this body, he would demonstrate their per-
nicious tendency from that which they laid before
the House in support of this motion—(Hear, hear).
In the petition presen:ei yesterday, it was stated that
" the Catholics of Ireland felt the necessity of bestirring
themselves in their own affairs, and it was deemed right
to enter into an association to promote the geheial in-
terest of their body." Why, was not that, lie woull
ask, in itself evidence of representation ? But what was
their prayer ? That " that House would adopt no mea-
sure against the Catholic Association." That, no doubt,
would be fair enough ; but did they contii.e their prayer
to that alone? No; they prayed farther, that the House
might not pa. s " any measure against any portion of
the Catholic people of lielan J." This is as a tliiccs ac-
knowledgment of representation, against which he
should enter his protest. The petitioners further said,
that they met fur the purpose of consideting " va-
rious grievances which affected their body.' Here
then was a public body, holding a weekly meeting—a
body which had met 20 times at least since October last.
This body appointed Finance Committees, Grievance
Committees, and Committees of Education. Was this
a system which should be allowed to continue? that
men should thus usurp the privileges and practice of a
Parliament, and these men forming an assembly, of
which any man might become a member who paid his
guinea? It was said they assembled for the discussion
and redress of grievances. He would protest tgainst
such body taking on itself the power of pointing out
and publicly denouncing particular gtievances, in cases
where they were afterwards to become the prosecutors.
The petitioners denied the charge of levying contribu-
tions. He did not mean to say that they could legally
enforce the payment of those contributions, but there
was a moral as well as a legal influence, and that
they did not fail to take advantage ot. The names of
subscribers were publicly read at the parochial meetings.
Was it no exercise of their power that the names of
those who did not contribute should be placed in their
black-book, as an Hon. Friend had described it ?
He would ask whether subscription; collected under
such excitements could be called voluntary ?—(Hear).
But, voluntary or involuntary, was it to be borne that
funds should be thus collected for the purpose of secur-
ing the press—for prosecuting all who might injure
Catholics, and for opposing Orangemen lor any other
society? Could an association with such objects be car-
ried on without irritating the public in Ireland? He
would not pin his own construction on their objects:
let their own public document speak for them. The
Committee of the Association appointed to consider the
necessity of raising subscriptions, state in their report,
" that it was necessary to have pecuniary resources to
animate the energies of the Irish people." Now, with-
out asci ibing any bad motives to those who framed and
agreed to this resolution, giving them full credit for all
the honesty of intention which they claimed for them-
selves, he would say, that these resolutions were, on the
very same day, followed by an act, which was in itself
calculated to excite the strongest suspicion, and to
awaken feelings of alaim, which it might be oifficult to
allay. On the very same day that they declared the
necessity of raising a supply of 40,0001. " to ani-
mate the energies of the Irish people,"—on the
same day that those people were called upon 41 by
the hate they bore to Orangemen." to forward the
views of the Association, they arced unanimously to
an address to Mr. Hamilton Rowan—(Hoer, hear).—
In the letter of the Secretary, communicating that ad-
dress, he spoke of inlaying been adopted with an energy
and unanimity seldom ss 'messed. The Right Hon.
Gentleman bele read the principal passage of the letter,
in which the whole conduct of Mr. H. Rowan had been
praised, and the warmest eulogy had been, passed on his
having almost sacrificed his lite for the good of his
country. He then proceeded to read to the Home an
extract from a Report of a Committee on the state of
the country, which sat in the year 1799. The Report
stated, that in the month of Apri1,1794, a Mr. Jackson,
a Clergyman, came over to Ireland from the Directory
of France, to arrange the clan of a French invasion of
that country. Mr. Jackson stated that he met and
had several interviews and conversations on the sub-
ject of his mission with Mr. Hamilton Rowan, a princi-
pal leader of the United Irishmen, who had since escaped
the country, and had been anointed of high treason.—
He had also met a Mr. Wolfe Tone, who h'

'hid— -e-sc-aTedt
-