Star.
London, England, 1825-02-26 00:00:00

undecis'estihni *hitters -bdaid give no advice'to the
Crown upon the itifiect, he was sorry to see them
touringdeitin,ler itter'Veir,: With" iieW. measures -et a-r. ion,
Nwlilch the Nuoinet-Getterat for Ireland d'eetired tole inelfietent.
*Mr. W. COU'RtENAY 'aid, ' that he bad always
toted in favour of the Catholic claims; acrd believed their
grant to be most important' to the of Ire-
land. But he itippiked the'lnOticin befoile the House,
because he thotight the existence of .aSneety.-like-the
'Catholic Asiociativin one of the heaviest iffiktions with
which any country -Could be visited. He' maintained
;that an Asiociation,'Acting as` this had done, and pos.
sessing resouces 'which no inaividual could possess,
'as incompitible with the sprit ..of' the Constitution,
'and • might to be 'put doWn. He cOoleassure the
House, that feeling as he did on the questiOn of Catho-
lic ')Emancipation, he gave his votes for this Bill with
tegret ; but he felt that the tranquillity of the country
ilbsoltitely required it. There was only one part' of
the Bill upon Which he had any doubt, and the exist-
'rote of which might have induced him to oppose it—
)se meant that clause which gave authority to a single
Magistrate to enforce the provisions of the Act; but un
`this point he felt himself relieved by an intimation from
-Ills Right Hon. Ft lend (Mr. Goulburn), thaeit was his
intention to alter that clause, and to make it necessary
that there should be more than one Magistrate present in certain
proceedings under it--(Hear, hear.)
Mr. SYKES expressed himself altogether hostile to
'the principle of the Bill, which he contended was in
unnecessary'addition to the penal code of the country,
Inasmuch as all the evils said to have resulted from the Association
'might be corrected by the existing laws.
Sir J. NEWPORT Said, there were a few observa-
tions of the Iloaoarable Member for Exeter (Mr. Cour-
ting) to which he.felt himself bound to reply.
body could give that Honourable Member _greater,
credit than he (Sir J. Newport) did, for the liberality 01
his views upon the general questioo of Catholic
ctpation ; upon the present occasion, however, he could'
not help thinking he had drawn some erroneous con-
clusions. The Honourable Member opposed the Bill,
because, as he contended, the existence of the Catholic
Association had a tendency to generate counter Asso-
ciations ; but he (Sir J. Newport) would ask, was not
the Catholic Association a consequence, and not a cause
of other Associations? Did not Orange Associations
precede the Catholic Association ? And although Go-
vernment had, in the year 1812, taken measures foe
the suppression of those Associations, measures origi-
nated by the Right Honourable the President of the
Boas d of Conti oul, and passed by that House sena voce ;
sere they, he would ask, effectual ? Did not these
Orange Associations continue -and flourish, until the
Catholic Association started up in self-defence to coun-
teract them ?—(Hear). :The argument drawn from the
maladministration of justieehad been strongly opposed,
and it was contended by the advocates of this Bill that
justice was not ill-administered in Ireland. Admitting,
however, for argument's sake, the general fairness with
which justice was administered in Ireland, it would not,
he supposed, be contended, that in the present state of
the law, the poor were not precluded front access to
the superior Courts of Justice? Now, one great object
of the institution of the Catholic Association was, to
give access to those whose means could not otherwise
afford it. The Right Honourable Baronet here read
some extracts from the evidence given before the Com-
mittee of Inquiry, to prove the utility which had re-
sulted from the labours of the Association, and the ex-
ultation with which their exertions were hailed by-the
lower orders. The Right Honourable Baronet con-
cluded by expressing his decided disapproval of the measure, the
Vanity of which, he was happy however to perceive, had been
considerably moderated, in consequence-of the exertions of his
Honourable Friend the Member for Limerick.
Mr. GOULBURN said, it had been asserted that
this was partial legislation, and that the Government
had made no attempt to put down Associations of a
different description.. He denied the fact, and he ap-
pealed to the statute-book for proof, that the House had
legislated to put down other societies. Did Honourable
Members forget the Act passed in the year 1823, to put
down Associations of a particular description, by which
Orange Societies, though not mentioned by name, were
particularly aimed at? The Honourable Baronet (Sir
J. Newport) had said that there was one law for the
rich and another for the poor of Ireland. If that meant
to convey to the House, that there was in that country
a denial of justice to the poor man, he begged to deny
the fact; but if he meant only that great inconvenience
was felt by a poor man in prosecuting a suit at law, it
was no more than was felt in this country, and was in-
cidental to the condition of the poor in every State.
With respect to Magistrates, he Would assert, and he
defied contradiction, that there was no such thing
as a disposition amongst them to take bribes fur
the administration of justice to the poor— (Hear).
It had been said that the giving the power to a single
Magistrate to enforce this Act in particular instances was
without precedent; but did Hon. Members recollect
that the Convention Act gave power, net only to a
single Magistrate, but even to a Peace Officer, to pre-
vent or stop a meeting held contrary to the clauses of
that Act ? In the present Act,.uo such power was given,
except to a Magistrate. Yet, even on this point he was
ready to attend to the suggestions which had been
thrown out, and to make the presence of more than
one Magistrate necessary in certain cases ; and he as-
sured Hon. Members opposite, that from the first he
was prepared to give his most patient attention toevery
suggestion by Which the severity of this Act might be
mitigated as much as possible, without destroying its
Effect. He then proceeded to thew that the statement
nutde by the Hon. Member for WitiChelsea, regarding
the conduct of Baron McClelland on one of the recent
trials in Ireland, was utterly without foundation. The
Honourable and Learned Member had stated that the
acquittal of the soldier was attributable to the interfer-
ence of the Learned Judge in preventing one of the wit-
nesses giving ananswer to the question,why he had omit-
ted to State at the Coronet's Inquest that which he was
theti Stating to the Couto Since that statement had been
inside, he had received one communication from the
Learned Judge whose conduct was impeached by it, and
another from two of the Counsel oriployed for the pro-
seeution. Now, on the authority
,of the Counsel, he
could inform the House, that no such question had been
proposed to the witness as was stated to have been °b-
Jetted to ; and on the authority of the Learned Judge,
he ' The

•
has heel% the tier of a tear acquittal from the bqintiing."—'
,(Hear, The IHnomerabk and Learned Gentleman had ilso
made, !rm. what auikority he knew not, an 'they charge against
the Learned Judge,
Mr. BROUGHi:M.--4 made the charges:on the itt•
thority of one ofebe Counsel engaged In the prosecution.
Mr.. GOULBURK—The Honourable 'and Learned
Gentleman hld Said that the Learned Ju.dge had not
Only faborne to deter a trial, the name of which was
not mentioned, till the Counsel engaged in it was sent
for from another Court, but had also refused to read
over to him the evidence of the uitnesses who had been
examined previously to 'his coming snip it. The Right
Honourable Gentleman here read a letter frohi the
Learned. Baron, stating, that as the name of the case
had not been mentioned, he could not meet the charge
made against him with as positive a denial as he had
done the former charge, but adding that he had no
recollection of such a circumstance having occurred on
the Circuit, and that he believed that no such circum-.
stance had occurred, as it Was in direct contravention
to the conduct which he had long been in the habit of
pursuing towards the bar—(Hear, hear). After such a
statement, lie did not suppose that' anybody would
again impute to the Learned Baron the glaring and
ttfrninal miscondUct which had been attributed to him
.by the iihnourable and Learned Gentleman —(1 !ear,
hear). Such language was scarcely defensible when
used towards an individual convicted of crime, but was

. .
Quite univarraitahle when 'used towards an individual
of the Learned Baron's high station and character—
(lkar). He was sure those that knew him would agree
with him when he stated, that no individual discharged his functions
more impartially, or oftener interfered to prevent the recurrence of
the violent party disputes which so frequently came before the tri-
buttpla of ireland—(~Cheers).
Mr.DPIMAN said, that his Learned Friend and
himself had received their information from an eminent
-Counsel at theliish bar, and he protested against the
doctrine, that because one man stood behind the bar
and another sat upon the Bench, that a less weight
should be 'attached to the assertion of the former than
of the latter. The itmoui able Gentleman then de-

precated the conduct of Government in trespassing
against the Constitution of the country by the Bill then
before the House, and regretted that his Honourable
Friend, the Member for Limerick (Mr. T. Spring Rice)
'should be induced to move an amendment to any clause
of such a Bill. He had, however, the consolation of
knowing that the Bill would be totally unavailing. The
language which the Lord Chancellor had put into the
mouths of his colleagues was of a most extraordinary
nature, and when his Friends at that side of the House
called upon the Cabinet to pass Catholic Emancipation,
the reply was that the Chancellor was a man of con-
science, and would resign if they presied the measure;
and yet, strange to say, those Ministers kept their places
without resigning, while their conscientious opinions
were by him set at nought altogether. No man could
have the presumption to say that that Bill could be
necessary if Catholic Emancipation were conceded, add
if Ministers could not concede it, they should resign,
beating with them an untainted honour and a COMCIOUSIIM of rec-
titude, instead of the unworthy opinion which they must entertain
of their own proceedings.
Colonel FORD said, he knew Baron M,Clelland well,
and in all questions of party be acted with the strictest impartiality.
Mr. C. HUTCHINSON said, be had attentively lis-1
tened to the arguments in support of the Bill, and yet
be had not heard'one which- could for a moment in-
duce him to alter the opinion he had expressed on a
former night. He hoped the Catholics would persevere,
and send Petitions to the Throne, before Ministers could
have time to present that Bill for the Royal approbation.
Mr. LESLIE FOSTER contended that Ministers
were infringing upon the Constitution, and must expect
one day or other to meet with well-merited retribution.
Mr. Secretary PEEL was anxious to set himself right in
some points,wherein what he had stated on a former night
was more or less directly concerned. In the first place,
he entirely acquitted the Honourable Gentleman (Mr.
Hutchinson) of any intention to intimidate him per-
sonally, on a former night; and when the Honourable
Gentleman threatened to bring all the Members, almost,
on his (Mr. Peel's) side of the House to the block, he
(Mr. Peel) never supposed for a moment that he meant
anything more than to speak of them in a general
way, as in their capacity of Ministers---(4 laugh).—
It was impossible that he (Mr. Peel) should disregard
an appeal which had been made to him also, by the
Honourable Member for Taunton, in these discussions;
for he had the highest respect for that Honourable
Gentleman, who had raised himself to high rank and
influence solely by his own exertions, his talents, and
his integrity. But the Honourable Member would
pardon him for saying, that as in a very few days the
Catholic Question must, in some shape or other, be'
forced upon the attention of Parliament, he should de-.
cline, for the present, being tempted into any discus-
sion on that measure, on the Army Estimates, or any
other of the questions to which the Honourable Gen-
tleman's speech had related. Differing as he did
from so many of hie Honourable Friends, on the ge-
iieral question, he had yet supported concessions to the
English Catholics in the course of last Session, and all
his subsequent experience had confirmed him in the
(propriety of the step he had, then taken. With respect
to a question put to him on a former evening by
the Right lion. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Tierney),
as to what he (Mr. Peel) must have felt on hearing a
Right Hon. Friend describe Ireland to have been, in
1821, a wreck upon the breakers, he begged to say,
that he could feel no such displeasure as the Right Hon.
Member (Mr. Tierney) seemed to suppose; for what
was the fact? It was prectsely in that year that he
(Mr. Peel) accepted the office of Secretary of State. It
*as true that he had been before Secretary for Ireland;
but he had quitted office ever since 1816. It had been
his wish, in that office, to have remained in Ireland
another year, till 181 t. Perhaps he might be allowed
to say; that when he quitted Ireland, she was in a state
of perfect tranquillity : there was then no Catholic As-
sociation, no Catholic Board, nor anything of the kind.
With regard to what had fallen on a former night from
the Honourable and Learned MeMber for Wincheisea
(Mr. BrOugham), he (Mr. Peel) now to repeat;
as near as he could remember them, the very words he
used in speaking of one of the mostyublic and notorious
acts of the Catholic Association. He said that they had
conimitted an act of injiseretton,_ at least, by thiir ad,
-nr).,

• • • •
excite the. piarpspf all the riitestant. eorreMilwitY
.lrerand. Tlie• Flontirible iind Learned •GeoptiOn 'bed
`expatiated Clikiitcter. of, Mr 4
Ha thiltnn" RMottn eontencllirg. that he'viiss kriezlcelleot
father, landlord, rhasterthat he fulfiflid with :unipat
peachable integrity:all.theduties and all the relations.of
Apt had he (Nlt. Peel) impugnesl
.the pri-
vate ViAties of Mr: Hamilton rt the tarho.
tic •Aiiirclailiiin'ipeik Of itiein- in'Yheir`latlifiels to him ?.
NO ;•ilie' Association (ILlteited isian *hose
life hid been devoted, and altnasi sacrifiled in the cause
of his country"—(Hear). It was therefore of Mr. Ro%Van,
in this public light, that he spoke. The Honourable
and Learned Gentleman, in answer so his ibir. Peel's)
remarks, had- hid MI-Atc4an had beenlreard in
his defendef—he never had 'been tried:—.-and that the Go.:

.
.

vernmeut had not only pardoned, but placed himlmong
the Magistracy of Ireland. The Honourable and Learned
Gentleman might recollect the trial of Mr. JaCkson,
When Mr. H. Rowan seas called on for MI defence. In
the year 1794, was he not charged with the publication
of a seditious libel? Was. he not convicted and sen-
tenced to two years' iinprisonment ? . In the, course of
those proceedings, Mr. R. was atiainted of IlighTteason,,
and lied to' France. -The prosecuiiOn in "1794 was for
the publication of an Address from the United Irish-
men. At that time France was the enemy of this
country. The Learned Judge who tried him made the
follOwilgiddress:"lfhas appeared thatyou published I
letter persuading the 'soldiers to take up 'arms. You
called on the 'people to.artn, and, had they done so,i you
would have introduced a system of anarchy. It is happy
for you they did not obey. If they had, every- ratan
concerned would have been guilty of high treason."
Such a person might be a man of good private charac-
ter, but he would repeat, that the Roman Catlillic As-
sociation were indiscreet when they addr'essed the letter
to him as a public man, and that the act was sufficient to
alarm the Protestants of Ireland. He wished every
gentleman in that House might read the account of
Mt. H. Rowan's pardon, as given by himself, and pub-
lished in the Papers of the day. Government had been
charged with cruelty, yet Mr. Rowan himself had given
an account of their lenity. He stated to the Judge that
since he had the honour to appear before• the tri-
bunal, his children had not only been protected,
but in addition to that favour, he . had been
indebted to the Government for his life. His
gratitude was unb6unded, and he deelined his in-
tention to atone for his past Errors. After that kW.-
sion, made by Mr. Rowan himself, could there be the
least doubt respecting the liberality of the Governinent?
The Hon. and Learned Gentleman had then thought
proper to say—You, the. King's Government, must have-
r known Mr.H. Rowan, was placed 'among the Magistracy
of Ireland. It was asserted that Mr. Rowan -had been
a Magistrate. That declaration was made with so
Illikch boldness by the Hon. and Learned Member, that
he really supposed Mr. Rowan had been in the Coin,
'mission of the Peace. He had heard so many state:
ments involving doubt, that be was unwilling to remain
without correct information on the subject. The Right
Hon. Secretary accordingly ordered the necessary in-
quiry to be made, and this day he received the follow-
ing letter from the Hanaper Office, Dublin :+" Upon
search made in the records of the Hanaper for twenty
years past, I find Hamilton Rowan has not been in the
Commission of the Peace for any county in Ireland for
the last twenty yeas s."—("Phis informations was followed
by loud cheering). 4fter silence had been restored, Mr.
Secretary Peel concluded by observing, " I now appeal
to the House whether I have not dashed from the Honourable and

ixarned Gentleman's hand the poisoned cbalice?—(Hear, hear).—
(The Right Hon. Secretary sat down amidst loud cheering).
Mr. BROUGHAM said, Oat he could not recollect
the exact words used by the Right Hon. Gentleman ;
but he perfectly recollected that the impression was
very different from the mild and subdued statement
now given by the Right Hon. Gentleman. He thought
he recollected that the Right Hon. Gentleman used
the words " Attainted Traitor"— (Hear).—He ap-
pealed to the impartial part of the House; to those who
sat with no party, whether these were words that could
be said with impunity ? whether they ought to have
been uttered to wound the feelings of any man? He
might ask the Right Hon. Gentleman himself, whether
it was right to let a gallant officer, Captain Hamilton,
hear in the face of Parliament that his father was an
attainted traitor ?—( Hear ).—He should pass osier the
details of H. Rowan's case, but was still resolved to
defend that Gentleman and the Catholic Association.
He would defend them again and again, and repeat
that no alteration had been made in the harshness
of .the charge against Mr. Rowan. It was admitted
that he was not heard; yet he was implicated 'in the
trial of Mr. Jackson, and on that account. might have
made a defence. It was then said he was tried for li-
bel and found guilty. On that account it was indi•creet
in the Association to address him. It was indiscreet
to communicate with a man found guilty in the
worst of times of publishing a libel ; and they had
committed another indiscr,etion, in giving. their Peti-
tion to an Honourable Baronet, who had been found
guilty of publishing a libel, and who had also been
shut up in a state-prison upon the banks of the river
which washed the walls of thit House—(Hear, hear).
Bur what had Mr..H. Rowan done? If he told the peo-
ple to drive away their enemies, sword in hand, and
defend their civil rights, he had done no more
than the Volunteers of England, and the Mem-
bers of that House. The times in which Mr. H.
Rowan had taken a part ungracious in the eyes of GO-,
cerement were troubled times. It was difficult fur
public men to 'escape censure. The much-venerated
And lamented Mr. Grattan owed his safety in those
times to his absence from Dublin. With respect to the
letter sent to Mr. Rowan, it did not appear that Mr.
O'Gorman, who wrote it, was a Member of the Assn-
elation, but he was no doubt authorized to send ir.
But Mr. Rowan was pardoned: and because the King
smiled and gave pardon, were they to be told that the
Royal mercy was matter for sarcasm ? That the man
so pardoned by his Sovereign, was to be branded as an
attainted traitor ? He had certainly stated that Gentle-
man was in the Commission of the Peace. He was
informed so by a person from the sister country. He
had since asked more particularly respecting tne fact,
and the person said he had seen Mr. Rowan's -name
signed to an address of undersigned persons,
_being

iSqeer‘ivryrP.4r.Brouglaatttitere'rettra letter from the
Doke speaking :of Mr. Rowan, said,
oearf the 14'4 041144alacianf nay 4dinktistnation in Ireland was,
t 0 recwolne.n/I tlp CrOivn to ,p;edcn. 11„,,R0wa0.; No public
act Of Mine was more satisfactory, because a' mart .respeitable man
time Mr: Ifaiitilton Rowan did not exist hi kraland."
Who;theo,had a right to;Ounsplain of • Mr. Hamilton Rowan, and
411114 14-altaintgd traitor, ia,,the teeth, of.bis hlajesty, who had
pardoned Mtn? • The 110nR!salls.and Learned ISember then 'al-
hatred to what hid 'fallen from him with regard to. Nr. Btron
M'Clelrind; and 'said' 'tint be Only repeated what had been said in
tbit House by-an Hon.' demben upon a former occasion-
-" Non meushic semis, sed.quern precepit ofellus
Ainticus ab.nortnis sapiens criessaecue inerr..t.',
On the subject of the refusal of %iron M'Clellandl to allow evi-
dence to be called; he still believed the statement he had made to be
true. He had it from Counsel who was einploYed on the
fie deplored, the lutetium then before: the House as one of
the greatest evils that could, affect Ireland, and he c.,lled on the
House to pause before the mischie was complete.
,The zr.ea,ure
was not impartial. The Votholies were prohibited from meeting
for the purpose •of effecting alteration in Chuich' or State. the
Orangemen could meat; they did .Dot want to alter. the .Govern-
memo(' Church and o;a,te. , No; their object was so 1/4 ell!) things
as they are. His last hope was, that the House would n,otshut the
gates of mercy on Ireland. On Tuesday they would have the op-
pOrtunfty to retrace their steps, and give the people of Ireland
Emancipation. .. .
Mr. Secretary PEEL, in explanation,insieted that he
.bad been
regular in every sentence be uttered ;trisecting Mr. it,,gßn. He
read in a former debate the words " attainted traitor," Yrom the
-report of a Secret Committee. The wish to be. correct free
debate, had produced the strong remarks of the Honourable and
Learned Gentleman. •
The ,House then divided, ind the numbers were—
Ayes
. • 226
Noes . • • 96
, . Majority in favour of doe third reading ---130
The, other, Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the
House adjourned to Monday, at a Quarter to One o'Clock.
•

'lg

.1