Star.
London, England, 1824-06-15 00:00:00

77' 77

.

IT

':' -..-.

W7r"..r-

2na the wsfe of yogr bosom satiating the libidinous pls.
,sions of a lawless mob? The Insurrection Act is stron,.,
,Government will give us every support, and shall Ke,
under such circumstances, neglect ourselves ? Shall we
not use, to its utmost extent, the power intrusted to
us?" This was an address of those very Nl.igiiitrates
whose duty it would be to put the Insurrection Act in
force.—(Here an Honourable Member observed, that
the names affixed to it were fictitious). The paper had
been printed, and was, he believed, pretty widely di,
seminated. The Insurrection Act had put down mai.
nation, but it had left those people who conceived
themselves to have been injured, as anxious as e,er for
revenge. Such was the fact. " Under the Insurrec-
tion Act, (he farther observed) men, for little or un
cause, were sometimes thrown into prison for itiontll3.4
It appeared, then, that the Insurrection Act was oil, of
many causes; and when it was knos n that po hive evil
had been inflicted under ii, why should it be conti.

nued ? The chief offences cognizable under th.
rection Act were likewise punishable by the ci,:imina
law, and therefore the former WAS not nece-ears,

Blackburn also stated, that the lowest labottrii
in Ireland were not so active in distori,:thccs 4., o.y.

small landholders. Now he could not conceive ti.Al

House would, in the present state of Ireland,
the situation of that people, by forcing this taw n pit •n-
He contended that the experience which the Eit,t.:;

Government now possessed with respect to the cot
system of policy which had prevailed from the
Henry 11. down to the present petiOd, WA, .
convince the warmest supporters of this measuie
was not calculated to answer the ends of peace ail,'

tranquillity, much less to allow any favourable tlev;.-
lopement of the powers and resources, the industry and
virtues of that nation. One party repre,ented the Irish
people as noble and generow, grateful and
hearted—another party described them as perfidious,
untractable, worse than savages. Such a heterogeneous
character could not be the real character of ally veople
on earth. The fact was, that the Irish character was only
conditionally altered. Brave and noblc•spirued as ti,ey
had once certainly been, they had shown thentelve, occa-
sionally perfidious and cruel, because the ticatruent hich
they had received under the brutaliLing policy of suc.
ces,ive Governments led to that inevitable conwcinence.

The report of the Committee WAS really of no use, and
had been nullified for all practical purposes by the man-
ner of collecting the evidence. The Act itself was worse
than useless. Under this Act there had been taken o;►

since they last met no less than between two and 3,00
persons, not one of whom had been convicted : so 'het
here were 3,000 persons let loose upon the pea; :y of the
community, who, to all their pi evious reasons for e::,-
affection, would naturally add the odium of having suf-
fered unjustly. And this was the only effect which the
Insurrection Act could be expected in reason to produce.
Parliament was generally unwilling to travel oil' of the
sphere of its own information —(Loughter). Yet he
could not help mentioning one circumstance which had
occurred in his experience, bearing very much upon' this
subject. The Dutch Government was to Java what the
English Government had been to Ireland, with an ex-
cess, if pos,ible, of the pernicious consequences resulting
from that mode of rule. The character of the natives,
had obtained that atrocious complexion and character,
that they were dreaded like the pestilence. No one could
venture upon ever so short an excursion into the country,
without the defence of an armed escort. Their theft,
cruelty, and rapacity, caused them to he shunned as the
very worst of evils ; they were not allowed to cone ce
board any of the ships which approached the coast, and
their presence filled every one with consternation. Yet
such was the effect of the mild and just measures ef
Government introduced by Sir T. Raffles, that within
four years afterwards, he (Mr. Robertson) was in the
habit of travelling hundred of miles in the ieterior, with
no more than a single attendant in his carriage. The
House would do well, therefore, to suspend the Bill, t
least till they were better informed. He moved that the
Bill be read this day six mouths.
Mr. J. SMITH concurred in a great part of what
had fallen from the last speaker. He could not sanction
such a measure, unless much more satisfactory evidence
was produced. He had sat many years in Parliament,
but had never witnessed any inquiry into the cause of
the distress and disaffection of Ireland. He could not
consent to the present measure, because it was partial,
and therefore unjust. He had formerly complained of
the conduct of the Provost of Enniskillen, and he had
been told by the Attorney-Geeral for Ireland, that the
facts could not be true. He believed now there was no
doubt on the subject. In some of the most agitated
parts of the country, the Insurrection Act, had never
been applied. By a change from oppression to cnnei.
liation, a real union might be effected between the two
countries—( Hear)
Colonel DAVIES said, that if on the present occa-
sion he should not oppose the Bill, it was because.be be-
lieved a change of system had taken place on the part
of Ministers. He was therefore disposed to place con-
fidence in the Executive Government.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, that he opposed the
Bill as a bungling measure of a despotic Government.
It was the peculiar nature of the present Bill, that
three-fourths of those punished by it must be innocent
men, neither enemies of the Government nor deserving
of any punishment. Many who had been punished un-
der the Act, had been ignorant of its previsions, and
whose offence bad been stopping too long at a fair. The
whole of the Act was founded on the discretion of diffe-
rent Magistrates, that discretion which had been em-
phatically termed by Lord Camden, the law of tyrants.
In seven out of ten counties, only four persons had been
punished. All the witnesses had cautiously abstained
from stating that the Act had produced any positive
good. He could not consent to pass a most unconstitu-
tional Act, merely because it was desired by the Magis-
trates of Ireland, by whom its powers were to be admi-
nistered. Equal law to all was the only way to conch
bate Ireland. He must vote against the motion.
Mr. GOULBURN said, he felt as strongly as the
Noble Lord, or any other man could feel, when it wes
his painful duty to propose this measure, that it was la
some degree a departure from the principles of the Con-
stitution. He was quite aware that the severity el it'
enactments exposed it to be argued against as lia'aii: el
obuse, yet he was conscious also that a state of thine;
existed which called upon Parliament to interfere ee
some meads for the protection of property, and l'''
putting down, even with extraordinary vigour, 0o:e
lawless persons who have confederated to subeett t.e
Constituiioe. Upon the same principles, he eras eic•
pared to jas;.ify the renewal of the same measure. ‘l.:''''
could dale to complain of the non-resideuce in lee..ej.
if Parliament should refuse to give the only me-u 5
which wouh ,nahle Gentlemen to return to their etatea
in security :' The statement of the Noble Lord (1.07,1
John Russell): ncased that the oporatious of this Act nil