Star.
London, England, 1825-03-04 00:00:00

r-1-1

.~

1

1,
'

' ...•

them ?

/* 1

1

without trial.—
.
Having heard nothing from the Nhble Earl on that
subject, he rose to give his cordial support to the motion
of his Noble Friend.- He was surprtild that the Noble,
Earl had not taken a more manly ground, instead
otil
saying that the measure was one of a general character.,
and not connected by name with the Catholic AssOcii.,
tion ; but could it be doubted that the Catholic Asso-
ciation was its object, when even the Petitions presented
in favour of the Bill prayed that it might pass in order
to ,suppress that Association? It would have been a
snore creditable proceeding in the Government to legis-
late exclusively against that body. Had that been
done, would the Noble Earlhave thought the Petitioners
entitle.' to be heard ? o, from Lord Liverpool).
The Noble Earl said no, and was obliged to say so,
because, had he admitted their claims in that view of the
case, he (Lord Grey) would have proved that they were
equally entitled in the other. It was said the Orangemen
had petitioned ; butt they considered themselves so little
affected by the Bill, that they had merely prayed to be
heard by the Comthitteesitti lig on the state of Ireland,
in order to repel the calumnies with which they had
been assailed. What was the character tithe measure ?
It imposed a new and a severe restriction upon a public
right on the a hole people of Ireland, on account of the
acts of the Catholic Association. Here theo, the whole,
budx of the people were to be dept ived of their rights,
on, allegations of individual delinquency supported by
particular facts... Now the petitioners said- that they.
denied those facts, and were ready to prove that those
allegations could not be maintained. Would their Lord-
ships not allow those individuals to vindicate themselves,
and yet proceed to mulct the people of Ireland of their
rights on account of their supposed delinquency ? They
were charged with creating alarm ; but they said in
answer, that they. had trot created alarm, and that, if it
cx:sted, it was only in the breasts of those who feared
that they would obtain the adjustment of their just
claims. They were charged with endangering public
tranquillity; but they answered, that they had produced
no disturbance, and that even the King's Speech admit-
ted lee peace of Ireland to be more complete than at
any former period. They were told that they assumed the
prerogatives of Parliament and levied taxes: but they
replied that they levied no tax, and what they took was
from voluntary contributions, as all other societies had
done since the period of the _Revolution. They were
accused of having a [hack And a Red Book, and of
inscribing in the Black the names of those who
refu;ed to pay the tent, in order to devote them
„pettecution. They denied having such a book,
and offered to prove that. they had not, and made
no such distinctions, at the Isar. But, said the • Noble
Earl, a Committee of Inquiry is going on, let them go
and he eSamined ; let Mr. O'Connell come and state
his objects, every latitude
.of investigation will be al-
io% ed. Ye., but meanwhile the Bill would pass. When
Measures hostile to the liberties of the country were
proposed, as the Noble Earl justly stated, they (the Op-
position Lords) had called for general inquiries. . Cer-
tautly, but what, was their object ? To investigate the
grounds of,those measures before, not after they had
passed. A.,Committee of Inquiry was now -sitting,
would the Noble Earl suspend his Bill till their Report
was received? If so, he (Lord Grey) would agree that
Mr. O'Conneltand the Catholic Association should be,
hard before that Commiitee. But it was an insult to
say, that the Bill .shoald
.first pass and that investigation
might follow.. Suppose, and he thought it most likely,
that it had been proved before the Committee in ques-
tion that none of the charges brought, against the Ca-
tholic Association.were founded on fact, that they were
all.caluunies, and that a report to that effect should be'
made to the House,ln what situation would their Lordships stand?
They would have passed a law restricting the rights of the subject,
and after inquiry it would be proved that there was no foundation
whatever for such a law. The .Noble Earl said that in cases of,
havaineat danger, hearing Petitioners apinst Bills might be init.,
doss • but waif' that Noble' Earl say, that great inconvaniamesi
would now arise.from suspending the progress of his measure sir
this Petitioners bad rescued themselves from the charges cast

,-JIOI.I.
The LORD CHANCEMOR, in speaking of the
Convention Act, - said, that its being still in force,
- ...
and .yet inadequate to prevent the existence of such
body as the,Catholie. Asspciation, was perfectly suf-
. tto shoe the necessity of legislative interference.
hat the law Might be, in Ireland he did not pre.
ten
grc V? know ii—he would not presume to say whether
, . pr9lesdings of such a Convention or Association, or
hy,..whatevir daine celled; were in Ireland legal or not.
*it he desired it to be clearly understood, that he was
• 1 • I • ...
9p} among.thoie who considered such pkoeeedings con.
stotent with the law of this country., Because his °pi-
pet% was._ that it there existed in England such a body
as. this Catholic Association, over-ruing or attempting
tonverltile the Parliament upOn iniPortant matters of
State upon which Parliameit alone cotild.and ought to
legislate, and to legislate with freedom, that body
would n(,)t.be a legal body. It had been said that this
kissiciati.‘,o would not come under the Convention Act,
became the persons wixf formed it were not delegated
by.the people ' tn-act" in Conventior. upon matters of
State.. But he begged to know what was the difference
intween them? It. was true there was no antecedent
delegation on the part of the people, bin there was a
subsequent approbation, of their acts, and the evil was
the same, whether such body had been originally dele-
gated, or subsequently approved by those whim they
at least pretended to - represent (fienr, kear.)--
U this Bill had • stated for its object die putting
citi,sip. the Roman Citholi,k
.Association, be was free to
confess tbat.he 'should have lika it better i because un-
doubtedly, it object was o pet lilted.
the ROM= Ca.
*lit Association, if .ip iiliduct was suih as the Bill
tletcribed and OroriddiA against. Ile did not,. at the
same titheonean to lot that, there was abr.. necessity
for, the object being fi,,stated.... Ate rernent4ered .that
it a former period, se)ieiqf Iris id thi,ttuii!Oir Con).
moat, he introdured•Cermito9ll tor'
pit iliiiin the
Societies then in existetiielnlm th*FOlhlie du intro,
duce the names of il4 kcieffepithicttlfek,feetitetideti
to put down. „if ihicitild.fieen.hii.:llll,•heA4dhave
pursued the awe .coorse. - . The objecvoi the ..snea.
sore ,was to continue the Conves)tion•A et itt• forts...
'l)Se.Mcaeitig of the Arq,cl44o,:siii4,: ibit iOlieretihere
h4:3iiittiuttecetiOn,Me.giil4?ii'‘ but .:ii).kiig iOdivi-
.Alsia/thadyerseed the sanse.eendnittcand.erosclied.the
-stem tab -end government -Ore the people •de it dm!
1,
~titlettt, deltkiiiiihri the jtrfir"4loo of the
it
lealkiltaisuree
ut„ihoitismiirlrolotiewx-odituf4ittsofto4
---.. .1, step/tem-,
Ithephadigooe thd
said 0.1'410g fh '
"lk'l
di F rites a
iii Parliament-3i
''ail' Intitinee ate
Istici, which was

not to be endured in any country, that be conteB.-
that the same mischief had been committed as if They
were:a Conirention ijelegated by „the people. If the
Roman Catholic Association, or any„ .her body, were,
permitted to have a controul overpqpesseeedings of
Cowls of .Justice, with sit minims '.bt
.poople to aide
them, what was to prevent thillrotestants from form-
ing similar Associations, and then where would they
find the possibility of obtaining justice, when no man
could be placed in the jury or witness box, who could
not be challenged for something which incapacitated
him from discharging his duty ? Was it not enough,
therefore, that they should act upon these general prin-
ciples; and pass a measure which had for its object only
to carry into effect the intentions pf the Convention
Act? There was no special necessity for hearing any
partici in this case. The general rule was, that a man
could not be heard against a measure without having
some particular inter eat in it.. There were cases
in which the House had, and he thought very laud-
ably, given away ; Gut that did not affect the.general
rule. In • opposition to the arguments of the Noble
Earl, he called 'to the recollection of their Lordships
that there-were cases in which the urgency of the
danger rendered delay impossible, and Bills were passed
through all their stages in one day, inflicting the heaviest
punishment upon individuals. In other cases, the danger
might be so great as not to allow time for the usual
deliberations—where, if theleast delay were permitted,
it would be impoisible to meet the danger before it be-
came realized. This, then, was a case in which they
ought to adopt the general rule, and not delay a measure which
was imperiously called for, if what it stated did apply to the con-
duct of the Roman Catholic Association ; and if it did not, then
the Bill would not affect them. If its statements were true, then
their Lordships ought to support the Bill; for if these parties had
renewed the state of things Intended to be suppressed by the Con-
vention Act,' the Bill ought to pass to enforce the intentions of that
measure. For these reasons, and thinking that Parliament had no;
right to make an exception to the general rule in this case, Ito I
should oppose the motion.
Lord, HOLLAND said, he not only believed that
this was not the Noble Earl's Bill, but very strongly
suspected he had never read it. He (Lord flolland)1
had heard with consternation the assertion of the Noble
and Learned Earl, that the :existence of the Catholic
Association might be according to the law in Ireland,
but that it was not according to the law in England.'
But the Noble and Learned Lord afterwirds explained
'himself, by adding that the Catholic Association at-
tempted to overrule Parliament. But if they did so,
Parliament had as much power. in the one country ay
the other, and why did they not proceed by some other
course than that of legislation? Upon the argument
respecting the hearing of Counsel, he wished to. say a
few words. All the declamation of the Noble' Earl
opposite (Lord LiVerpeol) about setting a precedent
which would admit other parties to their bar, and in-,
terrupt the business of Parliament, had been put on
one side 'by the cortection of the Noble and Learned
Lord, who told them that Ahem were exceptions to the
general rule, that parties had been occasionally heard ;
and yet not much inconvenience had resulted from it,
and their Lordships had proceeded with the business of
"Parliament as usual. But if the strearttor, precedents
ran all one way, and that against hearing Counsel at
their Lordships' Bar, he should say, that even then
they ought tatake.th.F, plain, direct, and honest course,
and hear these Petitionertbefore they were condemned
and punished. He cared nothing far precedents in 0p.,.
position to principle, but if he were to use them for the
present argument. he could shew, that whatever they
might be in that, or tlie,oiher House, in the Parliament
:of Ireland, the stream of. Pricidents ran all in favour of
hearing the Petitioners: Without detaining the House
While he went into the detail of those precedents, he
would merely state that Sir Theithald Butler, Counsel-
lor Malone, and Sir Stephen Rice were heard by the
Parliament of Ireland against the very penal laws
which this Catholic Association were endeavouring to
get repealed, andin support of the treaty of Limerick.
He thought the Noble and Learned. Lord was entitled
to credit for stating that he, wished the name of the
CatholiC Association had been. mentioned in theßill.
For the Noble Earl opposite (Lord Liverpool) he felt,
as the Noble Earl knew, great private, friendship, and
high respect fpr his, private character and conduct,
which be believecl_to.he incapable Of any mean artifice,
Bin they were now dealing with the interests and rights
of millions' and millions, and he must protest against
the argument that they were not to be beard because
the Catholic Association were ant named iathe•Bili.
Either this was good Us the Noble Earl's argument; or
it was not. And if it was, whi did hi cell upOn,their
Lordships to legislate upon the notoriety„ of the pro-
feedings of that bod 7 ? He (Lard' Hollandiprefeisedti
entertain a high opinion of thk talents and learning of
'the Leatned Gentleman who would in all polsiihilits
have appeared at the bar in behalf of the people ',fire-
land, and he thought it 'possible that die Considerable
talent and eloquence which he possessed might hive
had sortie influence on theii Lordships' Minds. But if
he possessed the genius of that orator whim' elo•
quence shook Greece to the centre, and the worst
designs that could, be imputed to him, , riot the
eloquence of a DemOstheaes, with the intention Of
a Catiline, could enable him to do so much harm to the
character of Parliament, as they were inflicting upon
themselves by the pisiing of this gn. He deClisted,
that if he were.an incendiary in Irelainct, and wished to'
deluge that country in blcied, uses to revive all the
worst scenes of her history, he 'llona tiPice lb being seat away
hem that bar unheard and insulted. Won all the Treat principles
of impartialand substantial justice, and „upon every feeling of ho-
arsehe called upon their Lordshjpa not to refuse the prayer of the
peddmiers. If they were determined to pass the measure' let
them at least imPreu the people of Ireland with the belief that
they were easy, indulgent, kind, and generous I. sand let theta teat'
fortify themselves behind the subterfuge of its being a
me sure, for the purpose, of *plying that people of the
right a freemen—aft to be coodmed before they were Mint
Earl DARNLEY stiOPMtail the prayer of the Peti-
',
ttl
,n, and said that their Lordships were bound to to•
:Ibted
with it beton they Could be justified 'in p» lug the &IL He
the time was not far distant, when the real interests of the
goon would be awaked .by the Legislature ; and that measure
'which could, alum arere,them,heltanted to the Catholics of Ire-
land. , Ile trot that upprtuoity of protesting against theßill aboke
to 'comeuOiler their Lo "ids' dkciOsion.
the tiiiiire'ibea divided; and the numbers were—
Content's' ' .
liot Catmints
_ . . -

. .

MajOrity against hearing Counsel
111114301/0 iIIEMIIIIO 01 TIM SILL.

Oen the of itiertien to the .Hettie,
The:Fait:l Qf 'LIVEIiPOOT
hig for the seeolid retdii
that even if ha h.td been
qf Ciiiholie EttialkiPutioi,
rjiasbips of this but, r
Assokinfloil tolie
`SOMe disidigl6)2, iltitive to
fin hid altelidr‘talkin pplace
!if, he must scorftes. 'gar

is
69
••-..46

.+w

• 4-.,
•
of the Housc, not to conamn melt n
Gran the Nhble

,t• latiy saitecedbitt, deitgatiTati'..
htliCticlettiatituriateilit:
.tatbrushasislcww-4Eit Alyea Ilifillithatitlie
•, •
t . of taxi/ talk iv:civic-1w said
(1 • • .•
• . •'• ilikavat grak • ti:rtrifect
ItiettbetraNd 'tket!df
_tiii .014414 tittik is dila 6114'14 lititicfl
• atioil :over be idministiatiini
..•
- • • . • • •

POOL Baas on • his legs, spoilt;
Wing of the pill. He
en the limit ardebt • stypeiter,
he should still haie urged
is he cutiside'red the Otoleedtn6
'injurious CAttbOlic
e to Ole kettiteol th 4
alie; Ilut, • tfragfe
tptleisicin whlh 411601eil