Star.
London, England, 1825-02-15 00:00:00


Mr. CROK ER stated, that there could be no objec•
tion, and never had beep, to state to the House the
prices of stores and other materials, the want of which
could be anticipated. But such a detail as the Honour-
able Member seemed to waist, would include a state-
nsent of the nature of the service in which the money was
to be employed in the succeeding year,which, for political
reasons, it would be imprudent to make ; and on that
account the pewit rote had been generally considered as a vote of
confidence. Ile would ask whether. even in this time of profound
peace, it would be proper to publish a statement by which fo-
reigners, who might afterwards become our enemies, should be
made aware of the scheme of employment for our naval service
all over the word ? If any Gentleman entertained a jealousy as to
the price of stores, as he had before said, there would be oppor-
tunities for objecting to them.

Mr. MABERLEY had never heard such an explana-
tion of a vote as that given by the Honourable Secre.
tary to the Admiralty since he sat in Parliament ; and
should think necessary to make it the subject of a distinct motion.
'Hier were told that the House was called upon to give the Go-
vernment confidence for the application of the sum included in this
vote. It was called for under the head of wear and tear; and it
was easy enough to understand what that meant. But they were
now told by the Honourable Gentkman that something further
was dopy with the money, of which the louse knew nothing.
bIr.'CROKER Lat.!, thAt whit :le smoke of was the

.

ASSOCIATIONS IN IRELAND.
Mr. GOULBURN moved the Order of the Day 1, r
resuming the debate upon the motion for leave to bring in a Bill to
amend the law relating to unlawful Associations in Ireland.
Mr. G. LAMB said, that he felt a natural desire to
state his opinion to the House upon a topic which had
justly claimed so large a share of its attention, and of
the attention of the country. It appeared to him that,
notwithstanding the length to which the debate had
extended, the provisions of the proposed Bill had still
been left in considerable obscurity. He agreed with
the Right Honourable and Learned Attorney-General
for Ireland, that those who framed the Convention Act
of 1792 had a full regard for the Constitution. He
would not use a phrase which had lately got much
into vogue (and one possessing more no-meaning he
bad scarcely ever met with), he would not say that
the framers of that act respected the 'spirit of the
Constitution ;' but did they shew a becoming re-
spect for the practice of the Constitution, which had
not been followed upon the present occasion.—
The Convention Act contained a provision which stated
that it should net operate to prevent the meeting of the
people to obtain a redress of grievances. Now he had
beard of no such provision in the Bill about to be pro-
posed, and thus, for the firs; time they were called upon
to legislate against a right hitherto considered inalien-
able and indestructible. Whatever had been the conduct
of the Catholic Association, its origin was created by
the existence of grievances, and its object was to obtain
redress for them. That men should associate for such
a purpose was clearly constitutional : and if they pro-
ceeded to unwarrantable measures, the King's Attorney
General should be content with watching .them, and
stepping in when occasion demanded the earrei:e of the
powers vested in him by the law. The Attorney-Gene-
ral had indeed watched them ; but all they had to com-
plain of was, that he had used too much vigilance, and
preferred indictments against acts which were not in-
dictable. And now the House was called upon, as in the
case of the bottle and rattle assassination, to supply an
apology, then by enquiry, and now by Bill, for his de-
fective law and worse discretion. The Hon. Member
then argued that the conduct of the Government towards
the two parties in- Ireland, had no pretension to the im-
partiality which they claimed for it. It was clear too,
that the Orangemen thermelves might complain with
much justice of the proresed measure.—They might
sayn art
y theandGnerinumppeconitt,
e
You
haveate g
given
repayingusby forputting
tgrc
I
)
us down, not for any acts which we have committed.
but for the mi.conduct of our opponents." But why bad
l
Orangemen
theyinn heardgem en
that House?
of
this
Becauset b
et y friends of the
1,1
knew
ei
that the Bill would not reach them, and that it ss ould
thiant.
operate against the Catholics alone. They knew them-
selvesto be so strongly fortified in their illegal secrecy,
so long understood and so long practised—as to be be-
yond the teach of this or any other law. Ile nest came
to the orarfruten of the elm. ge against the Catholic As-
sociation; he meant that wilt
ill the speeches on the other
(hear, hear).—He contende

,•-

tich had beeti c'escribed in
I. side as levting uses.
Id that there WAS no
• -