Star.
London, England, 1821-03-03 00:00:00

LATE OUTRAGE AT KILAfAINUAM.

The Duke of LEINSTER presented a Petition
from certain Freeholders of the County of Dublin to
the same effect with that presented in the House of
Commons by Lord J. Russell, mentioning the Meet-
ing that took place at Kilmainham, on the 30th of,
December last, and the violent exclusion of the free-
holders from the Court-house, where they had as-
sembled, by a military force. After having read over
the Petition, his Grace observed, that there was not
the least occasion to have called in the military, for '
there were numerous police officers present, and the
Riot Act was not read. It was not his intention to
make any motion on this Petition, but merely to
move that it be read.

The Earl of BLESSINTON observed, that the
Meeting alluded to in the Petition had been convened
by the High Sheriff, for the purpose of presenting a
Loyal Address to his Majesty ; on that occasion, a
Mr. Byrne addressed the Meeting, and was allowed
to go on without interruption, so long as he spoke'
in favour of a Loyal Address to the King; but the 1
moment he began to express disapprobation of the
conduct of his Majesty's Ministers, he was not suf-
fered to be heard. Nothing could be more improper
than the conduct of the Sheriff, who, departing from
the duty he was bound to observe as Chairman of
the Meeting, acted as a partizan. But what else
could be expected in a country where the Sheriffs
were appointed by the Viceroy, and were Officers of
the Government? And if such Officers were to have
a discretionary power, in determining what senti-
ments were or were not to be uttered by freeholders,
there was an end to every kind of freedom in his un-
happy country. With respect to the power of the
Sheriff, he had no more power at a Public Meeting
than any other person who had a right to be there,
for any freeholder might have been called to the
Chair. When the High Sheriff of Dublin withdrew
abruptly from the Meeting, Lord Cloncurry was
called to the Chair, and the Meeting still continued
to be a legal one. At this moment a body of armed
soldiers entered the Hall; Lord Cloncurry was drag-
ged out of the Chair by a Military Officer, and the
freeholders bad to encounter the muskets and bayo-
nets of tthe soldiers, or retire from the place. For-
tunately this outrage upon the public peace was not
attended with the loss of any life, or any personal in-
jury; but it was a great public wrong inflicted on the
nation, and it would be as useless for the freeholders
to try to obtain redress in the Court of King's Bench,
as was the attempt of the Manchester sufferers to do
so. The power of granting redress rested with the
Parliament alone; and it would have been ridiculous
' for any of the injured parties to sue for damages in
any Court of Law, as had been lately suggested in
another place. As one of the freeholders of the
County of Dublin, he felt it his duty to stand forth
and protest against the public wrong which had been
done there ; and he should second the motion for re-
ceiving the Petition.—The Petition was received, and
ordered to be laid on the table.
AUSTRIA AND NAPLES.

The Dicier of the Day for the Lords to be sum-
moned being read—
The Marquis of LANSDOWN said he rose, pur-
suaut-to.the intimation he had given, for the purpose
of bringing before the notice of their Lordships the
transactions that were now carrying an upon the
Continent of Europe. However strongly he felt on
this subject, he hardly knew whether, after what had
lately passed in the other Hothe of Parliament, he
ougtit now to call the attention of their Lordships
to it.—However, in the present general feeling of tLe
Public, he did not think he should perform his duty
if he declined to attend to • that reeling. and give
it the most au:livaic record which it could receive in

that House, by the motion he was about to make.-:
If he had before felt it necessary to call the attention
of the House to this question, how much more ne-
cessary must it be now,'when the most extraordinary
Idelusion existed, as to the events in Nipples, in conse-
quence of the Circular issued by the Ministers of this
:country ? He would now call the attention of the
House to the subject, and he asked them to express
their opinions upcn. it in a way which could be no
longer misunderstood. In doing so, he should be
necessarily obliged to refer to the last conduct,—or,
rather, the past omissions of conduct in Ministers ;
but he declared he would take no other advantage of
these omissions, than passin,t; a censure on them for
stiffer ing so many months to elapse without declaring
their opinions in a clear manner, upon a subject that
was so vitally interesting to this country and to Eu-
rope. To proceed, then, he should divide his obser-
vations into two parts : first, as to what the pi inciples
were which the Allies proclaimed, by their Declara-
tion, to be the ground-work of their future proceed-
ings; and, secondly, what would be the probable
tonsequences of their continuing to act upon these
principles. In setting out, he was bound to state,
that whilst he spoke of the parts severally taken by
the Courts of St. Petersburgh, Vienna, and Berlin, in
these transactions, he should guard himself against
using the most disrespectful hint as to the poliefof
these Courts, in the government of their own States;
nor should he take any objection to that preponderat-
ing situation which they filled on the Continent of
Europe—a situation to which, from their power and
respectability, they were justly entitled, and which
they had, on some past occasions, exercised for the
general benefit and general tranquillity. But his ex-
ceptions were directed against these Powers, because
they professed, in theory, an universal equaliaing
system of which he could not approve ; for he knew
it was the character of man in society to have differ-
ent—nay, jarring principles of legislation and g 0...
vernment, in action in different countries : at the same
time, he objected to them, because he saw them now
attempt to carry into effect a scheme hatched in tho
very heat of the French Revolution, and by men
falsely called philosophers—that chimerical, imprac-
ticable scheme, of reducing the whole world to an
uniform system of government. It was cn these
grounds he took exceptions to their conduct, and he
would tell them that, whether the scheme was to set
all free, or make all slaves, it was, and he hoped it
would be, equally impracticable and impossible to be
carried into execution—(Hear, hear).—Vt hat was the
difference between the Declaration of the French
Itevoltitionists and that of the Allies ? Only this,
that one contained principles of general liberty and
universal equality, whilst the other contained a ceri.
tain ideal standard of a Monarchical Government,
with a few grains of liberty in it ; and so abiolute
was this, that that only was to be tolerated. It was
with the principles disclosed in this Declaration of the
Allies that he had now to deal—principles which were
said to be contrary.to.the fundamental laws of this
realm, and yet which the State Paper to which he
referred-nOw said, wet e in conformity with the feelings
of the Government of this country on the subject !
That paper certainly stated, that though this Gb-
vernment did not agree upon the expediency of the
measures at present pursuing by the Allies, yet, oh
general principles, and in the general viow of affairs
on the Continent, they were entirely agreed with
them. It was upon this account, and because the
country was so pledged, that he called upon the
House to examine with him what these principles
were. He regretted that a document, which had al-
ready appeared in the Public Prints, did not lie on
the table of that House. The document to which he
alluded was, the Declaration of the Allied Powers,
which he would now use from what he believed to
be a faithful copy of it, namely, the second copy
which appeared in the Public Newspapers. In that
Declaration there was an exposé, • or, rather, an ex•
posure-of the motives• which induced the Govern.
ment of Austria to march its armies upon Naples. It
set out by saying, that unexpected changes had taken
place in that kingdom, in consequence of the in-
fluence and interference of a certain sect. As to
changes having been effected by a sect, he would
contend, that of whatever nature these changes were,
or by whatever party brought :theta, it mattered not
to Austria—as a foreign State, Austria could never
be justified in interfering with the internal concerns
of another State under any circumstances whatever.--_
(Hear). Yet this was one ground taken by her as a
justification of this outrage on Naples. Another was,
that the objectionable sect took its measures in se-
cret. As to the existence of political sects generally,
living in a free country such as this,. he (Lord Lans-
down) would say, that he bad a great objection to
their existence; but was he, therefore, to say, that
there were no cases—no Governments, under which
they mild not be useful and necessary? He was
not prepared to say but that if he lived under a des-
potic Government, Which did not protect his. Fred
perry, or revere his liberty, he would not countenance
and foster a private sect, whose objects would be to
attain the accomplishn-ent of both these. -In despea
iic Governments it was the only way of attaining any
imp: ovements. The sect alluded to here, were called
the Carbonari, which, •though said to be of revert
origin, yet he had good authority for saying, existed
in Italy since the time of Leopold, under the name
of Charbonois ; that they subsequently assumed other
names and characters, and that at the time the tya
ranny of Bonaparte extended itself over Italy, they
were cherished and encouraged as the only party that
could rid Italy from French influence. The nest es..
cuse in the Declaration was, that the changes in N. a.
ples were not only brought about by a political sect)
but that this sect took all its measures in the dark.
This was a strange accusation in a country where the
smallest act of a sect of men would draw upon tl.ent
the immediate interference and vengeance of the con-
stituted Authorities Could a chip e be pus bli
-
effected in the Government by any ter titan secrA

measures? Did the Emperor of. Austria think that
the Neapolitans ought to have given notice of their
intention of a change in a country where there was
no Assembly to discuss or relieve their grievances?
Were the Carbonari to post up on the turnpikes and
on the doors of the Churches their revolutionary in-
tentions, and serve notice regularly of such intentions
upon the Courts of St. Petersburgh, Vienna, and Ber-
lin? Was that the way to bring about a change in
Naples? Could it be done otherwise than by secret
measures? Yet this secrecy, this unavoidable mys-
tery of proceedings, was made the corpus deliai of
the charge against the Neapolitans. But the Decla-
ration went on to affairs of which it could not pos-
sibly have any knowledge. It presumed to say, that
the Government which had been displaced at Na-
ples wai the best the people could have; that it was
its object to reform abutes and concede improve-
ments. One of these improvements would have been
to extinguish the Carbonari. The Austrian Govern-
/neat complained that the tranquillity which reigned
at Naples for the four or five years preceding had
been disturbed. What had preserved that tranquil-
lity ? Was it not the presence of an Austrian army,
and could popular feeling find a vent under such cir-
cumstances? It was said the old Government of
Naples were ready to listen to the complaints of the
iseople; why did they not, then, remit the taxes—
tliose taxes Which pressed so heavily upon the peo-
ple, after a season of war and exertion ? But why
did not the Government give to the people that
greatest of boonspersonal liberty? There were
few, he believed, who would deny that great abuses
existed in the Government of Naples, though he did
not now mean to connect those abuses with the King.
He could also assert that no disposition was shewn
by the GovernMent to reform these abuses. One in-
stance within his own knowledge he would state, prin-
cipally.to spew what little regard was paid to personal
liberty under the old regime of the kingdom of Naples.
Four or five years ago there was great distress, ap-
proaching to famine, in that country, and a Minister
of the Crdwn at the same time had a share in the
monopoly of corn. It happened that an English
General Officer lived then in Naples, and he had an
application made to him from a quarter to which he
was bound, from a knowledge of the person, to pay
attention, to come and visit a person who was in
rdistress. The Englishman, for the reason stated,
stat no time in complying with the request, and he
was directed to a prison, where he found his friend
in a dungeon half fiiled with water. He had lain
there for some time, but the reason of his detention
he was utterly at a loss to conceive—he was con-
scious of no offence against the State, and the only
thing which occurred to him as at all likely to lead to
this outrage on his person, was a conversation which
he recollected to have had with a friend some time
previously, about disposing of some corn which lay
on his hands. To this trivial Circumstance, and this
alone, he attributed his imprisonment, and he judged
rightly that the monopolizing Minister was connected
with it. furnished with this clue, the English Officer
bestirred himself; "he went without delay to the Mi-
riister—questiOned him as to the fact—received at
first an evasive answer, but was at length told plainly.
lay the candid Italian, that he bad no share in send-
ing the Neapolitan to prison. What did lie then do ?
He returned to the prison, and learned from the jailor
that the prisoner was, in fact, confined by order of
the Minister. Again he returned to the Minister's
house, but he did not meet him ; he saw his Secre-
tary, however, and this latter confirmed the infor-
mation received from the jailor. He learned, too,
that his friend was not confined for any crime, but
simply because the Minister wished to have him in
A place of safety, where he could speak with him!—
.The Neapolitan was eventually released by the inter-
ference of his English friend ; but he -(Lord Lens-
down") could not say how long he had been confined.
Was this a state of things to be protected ? or were
the Neapolitans to be treated as disturbers of general
tranquillity, if they strove to get yid of it? Another
reason assigned was, that the Constitution was forced
upon the king; that, against his will, he was com-
pelled to give his unction to a foreign and aSpanish
Constitution. With regard to its being a Spanish
Constitution, be (Load Lanssiown) did not now, like.
a Noble Friend of his (Lord Holland), on a Former
oecation; feel himielf called upon to defend that
cfpnstiiution. He would sot say whether it was, or
was not, the most fit Constitution for Naples. He.
would only say, there wis nothing extraordinary in
the Neapolitans taking a Constitution from a people
ho were of the same religion, and governed by a
Monarch of the same family with themselves. The
ritish Constitution they could not have, for the
King had, two years before, refused it in ie case of
Sicily. Besides, the Neapolitans had the sanction
Of the British for their adiptinn of the Spanish Con-
stitution. Did not• Lord William Bentiuck, in IS 4,
address to them this Proclamation, when he called
I= the Italians to defend their liberties, and put
t selves in the same position that Spain then was?
His words were, " Warriors of Italy, assert your
rights and your liberty: call upon us, and we will
hasten to your assistance, and when our forces are
joined to yours, we will make such an effiart as will
again place Italy as she was in her best days, and what
Spain is now." And in an earlier passage, " Portugal.
Spain, Sicily, and Holland, attest the liberal prin-
ciples of Great Britain ; Spain, by the great under-
asking which with her Allies the accomplished," &c.
What was that undertaking, but the recovery of her
sberty? or what did the Noble Lord call upon the
Italians to do, but to imitate the example of Spain ?
And was it tOrgotten, that the Austrians, who now
protested against the existence of that liberty even
.an hour, were then parties to, and sanctioned
circulation of that Proclamation ? The power
*bids the Austrians now had, was owing to the re-
_ inks of those excitements to liberty which they had
lzatberto sanctioned. When war was made upon 80.
;apart', his 'attacks upon the independence, and in.
terference in the internal affairs of nations, was made
a prominent cause. Yet the Austriar.s themselves
. wont to war now, because some changes hid beta
made in the internal goyernment of Naples. And
- what were the circumstances in which they argued
. .
ykaac the interference of a foreign Power was defeq-
• p‘ almost every possible case. For, said the
.mg.,.Peetaratian,'islaen a Rev ol utionwas brought
&thatby a sect—an arittp:-by private rueetings,7-in
a gaissry Thete public meetings were not permit.
ted--where a Press was not muttered to exist- in all