Star.
London, England, 1830-11-10 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS, Nov. 9.

Several members were sworn anti took their seats.
Mr. WHIT MOR E presenttd a petition from Bridgenorth against
slavery in the colonies.

Sir J. WROTR.SLEY presented a similar prtition from Lake, in
Staffordshire.

Mr. SYKES p►esented •even similar petitions from places in 'York.
shire.

Mr. GREEN presented a similar petition from Lancaster.
SG% WAUGH resented ah. • lar petition front Guildford.
Lord KERING VON presented a similar petition from Devon.
AIL SPENCE gave notice that after Christmas he should bring
forward a motion respecting the Court of Chancery.
Lord KENNEDY gave notice diet he should, atter Christmas, move
for leave to bring in a bill to enable the eldest sons of Scotch Peers
to represent properly in that house.

REPEAL OF THE VEIOII.
Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition hem the county of Water-
ford, signed by MOO of his constitu-nts, for the repeal of the Legible.
tire Union. That measure, the petitioners said, had been carried by
the hues* treachery, and had impoverished Ireland, without benefit to
England. That the people of Ireland were in a state bordering on
despair, and the only measure capable of affording relief was the repeal
of the Union.

Mr. DOHERTY hoped the hon. member for Waterford would name
a day for the discui.sior of the subject. Whenever he should do that,
it would appear the people of Ireland had no desire for the repeal of the
Union.

Mr. O'CONNELL said no man could be more anxious for the pros-
perity and peace of Ireland, and far the connection between Ireland
and this country, than be was; and it was because he felt it so
deeply that he WWI anxious that Ireland should have a separate
legislature. The Chief Justice of Ireland bad &dared that the
Parliament of Ireland had not the power to transfer the Itini-
hture of their country ; and Lewd Plaskett had declared that,
like Hannibal, he would swear ►is sons to perpetual hostility against
the Union. Is was the anivereal wish of the Irish nation to have a
separate Irghisms. He would condom to discuss the ■ubjrct on the

presentation of petitions, till the public mind became familiar with the
subject, and they would then see the absolute necessity of the repeal of
the Union.

Mr. DAWSON said, that by the perverseness of the hon. gentleman
who had presented the petition, he had prevented the question or the
repeal of toe Union being brought to a fair bearing. If it were to be
brought forward to an Impartial hearing, he (Mr. Dawson) would
venture to say that the house would fired that every individual in
Ireland of infiu..nce, every individual of respectability, and
every individual possessed of property would oppose such a mea-
sure. With respect to the facts stated in the -petition the honourable
member had presented, he (Mr. 1).) would boldly deny them. It
stated that Leland was governed by tax-gatherers and excisemen.
Did the hon. gentleman opposite not know that for one tax-gatherer
or exciseman now, before the Union there existed at least forty.
The Union had had the effect of preserving the country from what had
been called the curse of the country—the existence of the tanlastlierers
and the excisemen. The tax-gathering sy.tem was al•tinst entirely ex-
tinguished. There was scarcely a tax.gatherer to he met thrimghnot
the country. The fact was that the repeal of the Union Act lad tit•wr
been thought of before the separation took place between Belgium Lei
Holland, and then it was that the lion. member had thought proper to
resort to his trade of agitation, and to excite the mob of Ireland by
raising his fresh question of discussion. The hon. member indulged in
the most extraordinary speeches both in and out of that house. lie
(Mr. 1).) had heard the hon. member say that no less than 800 families
had been driven by a noble peer from his estates in the county of
Wicklow. In consequence of this statement, he (Mr. Dawson)
had taken the trouble of making enquiries upon the subj•ct,
and be had got a most complete refutation of the calumniating asseroon.
Mr. Challoner, agent to hoed Fitzwilliam, residing in Ireland, and
dispensing around him all the advantage of his intelligence and acquire-
ments, had addressed a letter on the subject to the Editor to the
Dublin Post, to the following effect:—"Sir,—Having observed in the
public prints that Mr. O'Connell tins accused Lord Fitzwilliam, or,
rather, the person to whom his lordship has confided the managyment
of his Irish property, of an intention to drive NO families from his
estate, I beg mo.t unequivocally to smite that there never was a nicr-
gross falsehood uttered." (Loud cheers.) I will not say that what
the hon. member had said is false and base, but I will say that I do be-
lieve Mr. Elialloner, and that I do not believe the hon. member.
(Laughter and cheers.) This is the answer which I have received,
and by others have been termed one of the grossest falsehoods ; the
lion. member iwill hare the oprotunity of retraction—he will also
have the benefit of that retraction, and I do believe that his retraction
will be just about as satisfactory to the public as his gross and Ithe
astiertioba.

3lr. HUME rase to enter his protest against the course adopted by
the hon. member (Mr. Dawson) opposite. He begged to know what
right that hon. gem. had to inquire into the conduct of any member when
out of that house, and bring it fors ard fur die purpose of making an at-
tack on that tnember ? What right had the hon. member opposite to
call the hon. member fur Waterford an agitator of Ireland ? %Va• the
time of that house to be spent in harangues of the description that had
just been made ? lie hoped that those who belonged to the government
would trot set the example of giving cause for making splits to attacks
upon subjects totally irrelevant to the business of that house. There
was not an honourable member but whose conduct upon principle fur
any number of years past, might be exposed to 111-natured attacks, if
such a line of proceeding as this was always to be followed.—
' (Hear. hear.) How could the hon. member dare to insinuate that
' a petition declared in the house to be signed by 8,000 respectable bid,-
viduals was the petition of a mob ? IVers it the petition of a single
individual, and had that individual not one penny in the world. were
it couched in respectful terms, it was just as touch entitled to the re-
spect and attention of that house, as if it were a petition from it.,
wealthiest lord, or a petition signed by all the peers the country could
produce (cheers). 11 henever his learned and honourable friend was
celled an agitator, a dangerous man, or so on, Its always t. It that tbos-
using such language had no ground for making any well-ft 111 l ultsl act e-
lation. If thi hon. member opposite had really any complairt to make
against the hon. member for M aterfotd, let him do it regularly and for-
mally, and not again spend the time of the house in the useless manner
which he had now done.
Lord BELFAST was perfectly persuaded that ninety-nine out of a
hundred individuals in Ireland opposed even the agitation of the ques
tion of the repeal of the Union. lie knew it to be the opinion of the
respectable inhabitants of the town in which he had the honour to re-
side, as independent and as honourable as any class of persons in Ire-
land # and it was right that not only Irish, but English members of the
House of Commons should know this, that ninety-nine out of a hun-
dred would not agree to the agitation of the question. The agitation of
the question to the extent to which It had gone bad already one great
mischief; it had stopped English capital going to Ireland—it had put
people of property into a stateof consternation. (Loud cheers.) Aber
the unqualified statement that had been made, that the people,
and the whole people of Ireland, were in favour of a repeal of
the Union. he thought be ought to lose no time in giving the
assertion the broadest and fullest contradiction. All the property, all
the intelligence, all the independence of Ireland. were against the re•
peal of the Union (long and continued cheers)--and also against vet rt
the agitation of the question at the present time. His lerdship had
trusted that there was a quiet, a repose intended for Ireland ; but ll' ad-
vantage were to be taken of the dissensions in the Netherlands, alit!
that, too, by factious demagogues—(hear, hear)—who went about tht
country regardless of their character, regardless of all honour and de-
cency, to oppose and break down the laws of their country, then it was
high time for every independent gentleman to step forward for the pur-
pose of' putting down a train of such doings. With regard to the sug-
gestion thrown out by the hon. member for Middlesex, his lordship
could not but concur in the propriety of it, were the system to be car-
ried to any extent; but he would venture to say, that no insinuations
would be thrown out, nor any such course of conduct adopted towards
any member of that house, except the hon. member for N'aterfoid, who
had signalised himself by his singularity.

Mr. SHAW said, that by far the greater number of his conwiwents,
both in point of number and respectability, were decidedly opposed w
the repeal of the union.

Mr. O'GRADY was of opinion, that whenever the question of a w_
peal of she union was to be fairly brought forward, it must be brought
forward coupled with other important measures. There were prevailing
sentiments in Ireland in favour of the repeal, coupled with other cir-
cumstances, and many of those who were in any way in favour of it,
would shrink from giving the question their sanction, if it were to be
considered drily and nakedly. As to the tax-gatherers of Ireland,
Irishmen had been employed in that office ; but when their accounts
were tound to be incorrect, or their conduct improper, they were re-
moved, and Englishmen put into their places. This had caused great
discontent, and advantage was taken of it, as one ground on which to
tale and agitate the present question.

Mr. O'CONNELL acknowledged that he was singular lie sloth d
in his singularity, which consisted in this—that when lie war Uncalled
to the bar, he was the inferior of the hon. member for Londundeny, at d
by his increasing industry he had raised himself to be his equal, if nut his
superior. In the first place, he had called upon the pcnple of Water-
ford to return him as their member, because he was decidedly in favour
of a repeal of the Union. The hon. member (31r. Dawson) had said
that before the Union there were many more tax-gatherers than there
were now. This was a moat singular statement from a wan in
his s Libation. (Hear, bear.) Did he not know that the whole
number of persons in Ireland at that time did not ainuunt to mote
than about six millions 1 and by a reference to the hon. gentle.
man's own speech made in 1822, there was a minutia declaration
that there was no country known to be so lightly tamed as Ireland—no
country so lightly taxed as Ireland. He knew the reason why the ho-
nourable gentleman had addressed himself in the strain he had dune.
Why he had received from the country money enough to purcoase ;lei
fee siniple of the Isle of Man, and if he could ben g forward a soli.
tary Mountie in which he had done a single particle of good, lie wuuiel
get him a gift made of the whole island. (Ctieets.) I e introduced land
Fitswilliani's name with a calumny uptau his (3lr. O'Connell's,) we it
would be recollected by the house that when he mentioned the cumuli,.
stance that had been alluded to, he rued ,aid eight hundred persons, mid
not tight hundred families ; and triter. the boa. gemlennut read the ex-
ceedingly cautious letter he had read, common justice required that he
should have stated it was eight ha:o:red 'Naval* that had been men.
;toned in that house, and Thai he (31r. O'Connell,) bad replied to that
letter. Ile had never said eight tiondretl fatbilita were under twice
to quit; and what was morn, he had never been represented in any
newspapers to have stated any such thing. lie would defy any Man to
produce a newspaper in which he was represented to hare made suet) a
stateinent. Ile had said, and be repeated now, that there were WO
iialividuak, he verily believed. under notice to quit him die estate et
Lord Fitswilliam. ile Mid got documents to trove that 800 acres oc-
cupied by sixty families were to becouie vacant by 3lay next, and that
one Mille:dual, a .Ir. Simons, had the promise troy air. thallueer of
the 1111141 h . Again, the assertion that was suede by the petition be had
the hoeuur of presenting was the very language winch mad been wade
use of by Lord Chief Justice Dust e. Did gentleinen think that by assail-
ing him (Mr. ISC.) they would repress the wish in she bosoms ref the
people en Ireland to have a repeal of the Union ? No; they were egre-
giously mistaken if they did Mike so. lie knew there were three pro.
vinces in Ireland altogether favourable to the repeal; there was one
newspaper or Newry that had become a convert to the necessity .f it,
and advocates in favour of it were tieing up every day. lie had beard
four or fire lionotauLle members eptak upon the subject; but he bad
not heard one syllable Irvin any one of them hi favour of fate Union. As
English member .or a !Mita bonne, h had called this the petition of a
mob. and nothing could have been uttered more entirely unseat. Thome
who had signed it were equal in rank arid station, and impeder in insti-
-1 ligenCe to the honourable gialkalan al* had made the hold assertion—
were his equals—rant-tenths his aujieriure. (Load and costiased
Lodger.) the tow. member represented nothing sow that was kirk;
be had tried his hand ;he had failed halt ken toned ens--he bad
left his country, got into a rotten bonsib, and sow lea mos
forward to attack the man who stood tip to do Ilia duty to Ireland.
Ireland deserved a proper discharge of duty from hes sepassotadves;
he to the ounoret of his power should discharge kis dot), although in
doe language of CbitfJusticy lithise, behind had flew sonsetair airy
thing from Ragland, but that which had bogs muss Ism It Nit drips