Star.
London, England, 1821-02-23 00:00:00

MEETING,

Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, he held in his hand
a Petition, signed by certain of the Nobility, Gentry,
ancLFreeholders of the County of Dublin, complain-
ing of the conduct of the High Sheriff of that county,
in having grossly misconducted himself in his office.
In bringing the subject before the House, he hoped
he might be allowed, in justice to the parties, to de-
tail minutely the circumstances with which it was
connected. It was not without some regret and sur-
prise he had seen, that, among so wady able Mem-
bers from the Sister Kingdom, no ,One had under-
taken to present the Petition, but that it was entrusted
Ito him. However incompetent ht felt himself to the
task of doing justice to the facts of the case, yet he
'was ready to attribute this to that generous feeling
for which the people of Ireland were so distinguished.
They wished to sbew that the grievance of which
they had to complain was not one which affected Ire-
land only, but the whole United Kingdom—(Hear,
hear).—lt .appeared from this Petition, that on the
27th December a Requisition was presented to the
High Sheriff orthe County of Dublin, calling upon
him to_convene a Meeting, for the purpose of Con-
sidering the propriety of voting a Loyal Address to
the King. He (Lord John Russell) knew- very well
that the Noble Lord opposite (Lord Castlereagh) af-
fected to say, that County Meetings did not express
the, sense of the Country ; but wheh Those who sup-
ported Ministers had found themselves defeated in
every quarter, then they thought proper to call
County Meetings, for the purpose of expressing their
loyalty to the King, however unnecessary a decla-
ration was at the time. It was not, however, till they
found themselves baffled completely that Ministers
cried out sour grapes, and asserted that County Meet-
itris did not express the public sentiment. The Meeting
being called, pursuant to the Requisition, several
persons, favourable to its object, were admitted pri-
vately, and the place crowded with Police Officers.
One should have thought that the presence of so
many Police Officers would have prevented the very
unconstitutional proceeding to which the Sheriff sub-
sequently resorted. A motion for a loyal. Address
was made by Lord Ilowth, and seconded -by Lord
Frankfort de Montmorency. Upon that motion the
Sheriff never put the question—(Hear, hear)-1:14
proceeded at once to name a Committee to prepare
the Address. A most respectable Freeholder, who
opposed the Address, wished to take the tense of the
Meeting upon it; but the Sheriff refused,' in the most
peremptory terms, to put• the question, and named
the Committee without farther delay. He would ask
Honourable Gentlemen what would be the feeling of
that House if the Right Honourable Gentleman in
the Chair had proceeded to name a Committee, be-
fore the House bad decided whether these should be
a Committee or not?—(Hear, hear.)—The Gentle-,
man whose constitutional demand had been spurned
by the Sheriff, attempted to remonstrate; but le was
told, if he said another word he should be turned
out !—The Address being brought in, the quiption
was put for adopting it; upon which Mr. Byrft*, a
respectable Barrister, after expressing his loyalty to
the Sovereign, said he disapproved• highly of thecon-
duct of Ministers, and the High Sheriff would not
suffer him to offer another observation on the subject!
(Hear, hear).—He would put it to the Noble Lord
opposite, whether thii was not altogether a most un-
constitutional proceeding ? They were told that the
sole object of the Meeting was to vote an Address el
Loyalty to the Throne ; the People knew of no loyalty,
in ordinary times, but obedience to the laws, and to
act in accordance with the principles of the Consti-
tution, which, of course, presumed fidelity to the King.
There ought to be some peculiar circumstance to
call forth a distinct expression of personal regard for
the Sovereign, but no circumstance of that descrip-
tion had occurred. But then it was said, that the
machinations of seditious persons were the cause of
the numerous Loyal Addresses which had been pre-
sented ; and those machinations were alluded to in
the London Gazette, where the Addresses were to be
found. Now, he thought. it competent for any one to.
6 say, " I agree in your declaration of loyaky to the

King, bet I don't approve of the con deterorhis Mi-
nisters, nor do I conceive the Throne endangered"—,
(Hear, hear).—ln fact, Ministers themselvos.counte-
nanced the opinion of Mr. Byrne; for in the Speech
from the Throne, there was not a single word about
blaspheme or sedition, and they were reducing the
army in the face of the danger which, by their parti-
sans, -was alleged to exist. The Noble Lord then read
the Amendment on the original Address, which was
proposed by Mr. Byrne, and which has been already
before the Public. He proceeded to observe, that
the Amendment was drawn up in .a manner.which
every man, who was faithful to the King and the
Constitution, must admire. That Amendment Mr.
Byrne was about to propose, when the High Sheriff
interfered, and told him, that if he did not immedi-
ately desist, lie would call in the military I—(llear.)
A detachment of military was in the neighbourhood,
prepared to be called in. The Sheriff refused to hear
the Amendment read, and he put the question on the
original Address, but only in the affirmative. He
then left the Chair. A great majority of the free-
holders of the County, Who disapproved of the ori-
ginal Address' remained in the Hall, and when it
was proposed that Lord Cloncurry should take the
Chair, they voteli it unanimously... The Meeting was
held in a room,: according to the provisions of •the
new Acts ; Lord Cloncurry was in the Chair; and
yet the High Sheriff-declared the Meeting illegal.—
Mr. Byrne was proceeding to move the Address, when
several soldiers rushed iii with muskets loaded and
drawn bayonets, and by threats and force, which they
applied to the person of Lord Cloncurry, they com-
pelled him to retire—(Hear, hear).—After this state-
ment, which he took from the. Petition, he thought
it would be impossible for any man to deny that it
justified a demand for a Committee of Inquiry. At
the time when the military were introduced, the Meet-
ing was conducting itself with every possible degree
of decorum. if there had been any symptom of dis-
order, there was a large body' of Policepresent, who
were fully able to repress it. But the Sheriff did not
make use of the civil power ; he at once resorted to
the last extremity, of calling in the soldiery. Lie would
think it unbecoming in him to say one word with
a view to persuade the Ilouse of the illegality of this
proceeding. He would not apply any argument to
shew, that all that jealousy which our ancestors felt
at the interference of the military, must be extin-1
guished in this House, if it refused an investigation
into this outrage upon. the Constitution—( Ilear
Such conduct shewed an utter disrespect ter the Ccu-
stitution of England, and one would have imagined, '
that when an application was made to the Irish' Go-
vernment to institute an inquiry into it, such an ap-
plication would not have been met by the answer,
which the Lord Lieutenant gave it—namely, that if
the applicants thought themselves aggrieved, the!
Courts of Law were open to theml—(Hcar;)—Why
should it be imposed upon them to go into the Courts
of Law, without the aid of the Government, and
with the certainty of incurring no inconsiderable ex-
pense? Besides, it was very justly to be apprehended,
that if . they, took that course, there waca faction in
Dublin who were concerned as parties in the transac-
tion, and who would use all their influence, which
was very great, to prevent law ptnceetlings from
going an. It was well known, that u,nitss they were
prepared to prove corrupt motives on the part of
sheriff, the Courts of Law would he slow to interfere.
This was made pretty clear by the proceedings on
the Manchester question; and ',it , was conformable
to the opinions of several distinguished Lawyers.—
But it was the duty of this House.to permit no public
ofscer, even though he acted without malicious or
corrupt motives, to overstep the bounds of discretion.
Many Magistrates of high character were also..ais-
missed or censured by the Government, for violating
the Constitution; and- if the Government.did not do
it, it behoved the House to take the matter into their
serious and solemn consideration—(Near, liedr4, Such
a doctrine as this had been recognised in the cele-
brated Protestation of 1621; which declared, that
" the arduous duty of defending' the Realm •and
Church of England, and of winking, and defending
and altering Laws, was. a 'Proper subject serf debate in
Parliament." The Bill of Rights also stated; that
" the redress of ptiblic grievances, the maintenance;
preservation, and alteration of laws, belonged to Par-
liament." If the Rouse acted on the same spirit. which
dictated these declarations, they could not but look
upon the present with great jealotrsy; The Noble Lord
concluded with mot ing,t hat the etition be brought up.

The Petition having beeu brought up, on the ques-
tion that it be read,

Colonel TALBOT begged permission, as one of
the Representatives of the County of Dublin, . to say
a few words on this subject. He had not been pre-,
sent at the outrage complained of by the Petitioners,
but he had reason to believe that the Petition Con-
tained .a true and very moderate account of. what
happened on that occasion. A numerous Meeting,,
assembled by the invitation of the High Sheriff, in
the expectation that they were to
.he allowed the
power. of free discussion, had been dispersed by a
nsilitary force, while in the exercise of their constitu-
tional rights: A-Meeting for the purpose of petition-
ing Parliament for redress had, in eonsecittence, taken
place, not at Kilmainham, but in the City of Dublin,
out of the reach of that power which had violated
their rights and outraged their liberties; and at that
Meeting the present Petition had been agreed to.—
He begged leave to read
.an extract of a letter from
Mr. Byrne, on the subject of this military outrage.'
'That Gentleman wrote as follows :---a When I was in
the act of proposing.the amended Address, the
tary were called in and dispersed the Meeting. I had
a copl of the Amendment in my hand at the time,
which dropped on the Boor, and in stooping down to
pick it up,.; a soldier thrust his musket With violence
in under the seat, and, had it.come in contact with
my head, it would have brekewit, 'hard as it is."—
(Loughter).—ff.the 'Jodie allowed se. ch 4 proceeding
as this to pass unpunished, County Meetings would
deserve no other name than that ofPolitical Farces!
(Hear, hear.—His 'countrymen were .a. generous
people ; and if any of them were discontented, let
Government remove the causes of discontent by re-
dressing their wrongs, removing the religious restries-
tionsimposed upon them, andosbove all, by removing
the tax on the light of HEAVEN I=.(llcar, hear), •‘
The Petition was then read... The names attached
wep those of Lord CLONCUILRY and S C. MOIWAN.

Lord*JOHN- RUSSELL ttioved-:-.4 Thatu elect
Committee be appointed to take Tutu conbideration

ale
to the Ho matter
use. or this Petii;on, and to t•Pl3rt tb •
e. 4 °Ptak'
"

Mr. C. GRANT said, he trusted the
give him credit when he said the Irish
were in no way connected with this transaction.
knew nothing of the High Sherifexcept -
detstood him to be a Gentleman of hir
'able character. Ile (Mr. Grant) de'el
strongly as any man could do, the ems
• /Unitary but under the strongest -
was the opinion of the Irish Governmei
opinion that Government had invariabl
Governinent had, throughout this bash
to interfere ; it was but justice to the
however, to state, that he and several
spectable individuals, denied positivel•
gations contained in the Petition. Ile
Gentleman then read a letter from the
in which he denied that he had threat(
the or that he named Nye C,
that he refused to put the question i!
on the Address. It was not till after
was dissolved that the military appearei
was only the customary prison-guard
prison adjoining the Court-house, in w
ing was held. There was also the letter
of the guard, deaying tile allegations il
entered with loaded muskets and fixed
such fact. existed ;„ neither did the guar(
lence towards Lord ClOncurry. Upon
dictorystateneeets could the Irish Gc
teed to censure or. .supersede the Sheri
tended they .would nut have been justi
so, especially as the Co:ninon Courts of,
open, and the pertieseemplaitiing were
affluence, and teal talenn and had no
encounter in 'instituting such legal imp
deed, lor•did understand that such imp
in progress; and he contended that on
principles the Executive 'Government
backward to interfere in such a questit
ip Ireland iii particular. to take any step
the most distant appearancb of influencir
There was a perpetual' call on the Erecir
merit to interfere, though the Courts ch
open. The principle of non-interference
strictly adhered:to ethat was'ehe priesir'
ference wiss.the•erce:stion. By acting
ciple he was ierare that Government
time, be exposed to much obloquy,
the good effects of the principle
the EribunalS' or'the country afforded
was the recognized Merlin, and had been
by the Houserthet the. Executive Gov,
not interfere: From a Court of Law ,
nesses were examined on oath, a satisfactory
could only.,be *ained. Ile could not
Petitioners, who were. so confident as tc
the case, Should decline an appeal to the
bunal. He•mttst, therefore, oppose thr
Mr. M. FITZGERALD entirely concurred
general- principles which-had been laid
Right Hon. Gentleman, which, however.
strangely misapplied. He could only
would heie reqUired no better aro i.
pis own view of the case. As, to what
about the tenderness whic)a the House:
Test in-interfering in such a case as this,
dismissal of a Sheriff was prayed for, le'
.ienrbered that the best Sheriff that
'when hii situation was viewed with 7
vagrant breach of public right, must
insignificance. The Sheriff had taken ,
the tranquillity, perhaps for the impartiality
Meeting, by -the introduction of marry '
doors were opened. When the 'doors
aoe a rush took pla,ce, the appointed
seconder of the Address happened to b
These Noblemen were wound up-by pi
langkies)—and thus-conveyed into the
ing. No motion was heard, and no
two Reverend Lords were seen bowire
and Doodle in the Court of Tom Thu.
A Gentleman of-the highest respeetabilii
Cotinsel.*happened to use the words
Ministers?' The Sheriff objected that th
the scope of the Requisition. This war
regularity committed, and for any '
that the Sheriff was - accinintable.
would be allowed, and, without an a,
out an opportunity for expressing a di,
'nion, there could be no diszussion. The
dared the Court then dissolved. A
Nobleman. was afterwrirds called .to
a state of tranquillity was then e
oot existed before. The doors were I
the military, detachments moved (Al* he
and the Chair was taken possession of
the best rules of military tactics. A
to which he had alluded had t...ken;ilac(
County, during the warm discussions
*ofthe Union, when the Mern%er for the
now Postmaster-General for Ireland,
Ross, called a Meeting to Petition akin
The Meeting was in .an open place, aa(
were readily led to the spot, provided
of grape-shot—( Hear ).—The Meet
and the Union was suffered to pass wh,
Lion from the King's County against it. Ai
ham, the Commander was too good an.
charge with the bayonet; but the sn!ders
with their bayonets in their hands, and one
to' point the bayonet to the breast of a
This was the skilful mode of rising the ba:
close attack. At the siege of Acre, the ba)
applied in the same way. He did trust
who suffered such an outrage would meet will
ration in that. House—(ieer, hem.). Jn the:
case to which he had referred, the F!lettf had
called, to the Bar of the House of Conin;oi:.
cheers). Although that House of Commons
acted a part which shewed that they
lation, yet they called that Sheriff before
saver for such conduct- (Checis). Ireland etranquil during. proceedings uhich.artrted,
besom in Great Britain. • He lamented that
had hero 'tranquil, not on aecouneof the
which had . been „going on, but on act _
cause of Ireland's tranquillity.. Ireland ea, s°
jetted with calamities as to be unable .
anythipg but its, ciwn misery-411ei:n1:0)
could .liiiieters_liave wished more than _
of Ireland on the stibjeet? But that was a",
tient. They ievaeled Ireland with tiltraleqx,
dresses, They found Ireland
on this tn. casien,
ever blundering, yet capable of di

)°lthirbttrafci,ree,idshelliPlienlinctgtUPesiesi::harlclisnY,ticseattyiden:ldec°ll4o.*;:4,.ll'
e
riably acted.
the nigh 8641
everal
ively all the
The Right
the High Shed'
neatened to rah E
to Committee..
In in the or% I
after the M
>eared,.and
Ltd on ditty atgli J
wh:ch tbc..
Iter of the •
as that the
Aed barons,
;nerd use ac, i
Pon thew : •
Govercuest
Sheriff? He
justified in 4;41
Is of Justice am
were men of
id no di?tcultyry r
inquiry ; and, ig,
inquiry sea; rat
:on constitr:::a tl
nent ousirs y a
section Ib
ly step 41 a
uencing I h' 11
irts of Law
ferencc
ilia. a
ting on • that pi. !I
neat would, kr; ti
y, but. F
uld appear.
rded a teak!, c
d been 6
1_
rovernmenisbotll
aw where the wt.
Lo'
satisfactory nab b
d not see why the to
as to the miser 7,J.
to the proper "
e the motion..
concurred is
laid down by b
xever, he t r
only say that he sal
L men ts support 1
chat had been ,* of
ruse shoald m,,*
as this, when '‘‘
for, let it be •
th
e:rust ti
paprreertfiviekerrcaliettional,7l66,.i...
iy
many before
ors were opt
lintel more
to be shut'
y;alleys—( st
the plact. of
•
o wooding; • la
ring, like N a
',uorb—(
:tabilitr, a
srds "the rge
la:itliis
idvr‘citviieiiean.gsearuiri:themenisirn•licerse
.ghtt..tyaht .j,
The Shag 31.1
o.thebl .ead
ati
,Fbythei Chew
re
forced
I
la of aotortilt
. A similar or is
place in tbegal;
against tale 1~. h
and them' of
led with a At
leering d " Id
s without a d''
and as Otsar' if
id tru►t that
rd, he meant
before them to !!
Ireland b& ;
ch agitatede
ein,' that I '
of the proceeds'
rri iicoont 4,, c
-eland was so
nable to at, 1
w'l ntil le:
at t
ll
t ,1 C
hat
I Ultra' LOP'_i t
Lis 0CC,15i64 .

non his Majesty and his Ministers—(Cheers). In
fin, a trial was made of the disposition'of the
people to support Minister!. In Dublin, there was
btde, petty irnperium in imperio, a petty cabinet, a
soodescript body, sometimes riding over the Govern-
out, who did infinite mischief. They wanted a
bale adulation for Ministers. Now, he would say,
distil the discontents of Ireland Originated in local
orgs; to bis Majesty they were most loyal and at-
otbeti. If his Majesty should visit Iceland, as it
os said he intended, he would be received with a
pidial ent:iusiasm, characteristic of that gallailt,
• fie, and generous People7-(Cheers). If, however,
be might propose an amendment to the proposed in-
m ation, without exposing himself to the consc-
iences of an amendment at Kilmainham, he would
pole that his Majesty, when half seas over, should
Throw his Ministers overboard!—(Shouts of laughter
ino both sides of the House). If anything could
senwace his Majesty's visit, it would be some sum-
terry process of that kind against -his Ministers—
(ears). But he did* most seriously consider it of
the utmost importance that the Sovereign should
biusw the miseries and the virtues of Ireland—.
peers). He had no doubt that the Cabinet Minis-
mswould join the Right Honourable Gentleman in
firing all the benefits of the British Constitutionito
Wand; but if that was their intention, this was the
best opportunity to prove the sincerity of their dispo-
sition, by granting a Committee to inquire into such
an outrage—(Near). He thought it right to men-
tion that the Sheriff, who had formerly been called to
the Bar, had been soon afterwards rewarded with a
very valuable office—(llenr, hoar). -This instance
might base been present to the mind of another She-
rif, who might have con•idered such conduct not
only spirited and loyal, but profitable—(Loud cheers).
Mr. ELLIS (one of the Members for Dublin) said,
though he had no acquaintance with the Sheriff, yet,
as a letter had been addressed to him by that Officer,.
be felt it his duty to state the facts. lie had been
sz the Meeting, and he must say, that some of the
staternenti, in the Petition were unfounded, and
all overcharged. What took place before the Meet-
ing, had been kept out of view ; and he was confident
the facts were unknown to the Noble Lord (Russell),
and might have been partly the cause of the selection
tithe Noble Lord, whose name was inseparably asso-
ciated in the minds of Englishmen with the cause of
Fremlom. A preparatory Meeting had been held,
and the population of the Town was, in consequence,
added to that of the County. He had seen placards
of the most inflammatory nature on the walls. He
bad heard the question put by the Sheriff, and though
he had not heard the question put negatively; hehad
been assured by Coe Sheriff himself, and the Noble. Se-
conder, that it had been put negatively. 'Though be
should not have acted in the way the Sheriff had done,
it did not follow that, in a situation of extreme diffi-
culty, that Officer had acted wrong. But was. the
?beriff, for a mere error of judgment, to be dragged
iefire the House, without die imputation or a cor-
net motive? Was not the question of the motive
equally important in that House as in a Court of Law?
Till it could be proved that there was no other mode
of redress—(Hear, hear! from the Opposition)—the
notion ought to be negatived. When the Assembly
Was ordered to disperse, the order was disobeyed;
and he then called loudly for the Police, who, from
whatever cause, did not obey the call. The military
were then called, and the Nobleman in the Chair was
civilly, and without violence, handed out of it—
Pughter).-- The question was, whether the interfe-
rence of the military was necessary? and, if necessary,
ere Sheriff was justifiable, even in the event of his opi-
;:on being erroneous, while the motive-was not corrupt.
. J. NEWPORT said, all that was wished for,
sus a fair and impartial inquiry into all the circimi-
s!ances of the case. The late outrage, of a similar
kind, had been brought before the Parliament of Ire-
land, at the time of its dissolution ; and it would be
a grievous case for Ireland, if the first case of the
same kind should be passed over by the Imperial Par-1
liament. If there was a case in which the military
should not interfere, it was one like the present. If
the Sheriff was to be allowed to call in the military,
the right to petition was a mere nullity. Did any
English Sheriff attempt to introduce the military?—
The Meeting here was in a room; and a Magistrate
had been placed in the Chair. The Sheriff conse-
quently had no power to disperse them till lie had
read the Riot Act. A question, involving the dearest
rights of the subject, was not to be turned over to a
Court of Justice. He could not believe that the Im-
perial Parliament would be guilty of such a derelic-
tion of its duty.
Mr. 1). BROWN stated, that the conduct of the
Sheriff alluded to, at the time of the Union, had been
inquired into in a Court of Law.
_ _
__. •

Sir J. SEBRIGHT lad voted for the Bills to pre-
-vent Seditious Meetings, as the transactions at Man-
chester had been made use of for the worst of pur-
poses. It was the bounden duty of the House,
however, in this case, to appoint a Committee; and
.he hoped Ministers would throw no obstacle in the way
of inquiry, as such inquiry would alone justify him,
and the majority of the House who had voted for the
Bills that were to narrow the right of petitioning.
Mr. BATHURST stated, that the late Act did not
extend to Ireland, and the rase then was the same as
if the Act had never passed. If the Sheriff had acted
wrong, he was amenable to a Court of Law, and a
prosecution then would be a sufficient punishment,
and prevent the repetition of such conduct. The case
could only be sifted to the bottom in a Court that
had the power of examining witnesses upon oath. In
the ease of the High Sheriff of the king's County, the
Parliament of Ireland came to the resolution that his
coadnet had been highly meritorious, and calculated
to preserve the public peace. It had been stated that
kgal proceedings had already commenced, and should
the Sheriff be brought also before that House, he
might be acquitted by the one Tribunal and con.
deruned by the other. The chief grievance of the case
was the introduction of the military, and for that 4
Court of Law afforded an adequate remedy.
M. M. litrzoenato and Mr. BATH intsr explained.
Mr. J. P. GRANT observed, that the result in this
cise might be the same as in that of the Sheriff who
had been called to the Bar of the Irish Parliament.
But the protection of petitioning was not to be left to
:e ordhipary Courts of Law. The case was made
6ut. against the Sheriff, even upon the statement of
sight Hon. Gentleman sopposite. It was more
thii- sight
matter of mere iniiscretion, to put down by
l'Jrct a Meeting )esally convened. Lt. the awn:mine ,

used on the present occasion had any weight, they
would take away the whole of the inquisitorial power
of the House of Commotii.

"Mr. MARTIN, of Galway, considered the present
subject not only as not desirable for the Consideila-
tion of a Committee ; but it ought not to occupy the
attention of the House. A legal remedy could be
obtained for the injury, and that-too without the in-
terference or the order of the House. If the parties
injured were unable from poverty to obtain redress,
the House might order legal proceedings ; but the
Noble Chairman of 'the Meeting (Lord Cloncurry) ,
was not only asue of the Millionaires of the County,
but.was supported by his Lawyers, Mr. O'Byrne and
Mr. O'Connor--(A laugh). He thought, besides, that
the House ought not to prejudge the proceedings,
for it could not be doubted that the opinion of the
House would have a strong tendency to prejudge the
accused: indeed it would be like a Barbarian throw-
ing his sword into the scale, and he hoped the House
would not exercise its sword in this manner—(Laugh-
ter). With respect to the observation of the Right
Hon. Qentleman opposite upon his Majesty's Minis-
ters, he (Mr. Martin) thought that if the sense of the
County represented by that Honourable Member
were taken, it would be seen that that County thought,
as he himself thought, that it was impossible to find
any Administration that deserved better of the coun-
try than his Majesty's present Ministers—(A laugh).
Mr. PEEL should feel it his duty to vote against
the motion of the Noble Lord ; but not from an ap-
probation of the conduct of the Sheriff. He had
been accused of proposing strong measures to the
House in the case of Ireland, and his object had been
to do away with the necessity of the constant em-
.ployment of the military. The conduct of Govern-
ment, in refusing to censure the Sheriff, or to institute
a local inquiry, he. wholly approved ;.as nothing was
more to be deprecated than the interference, of the
Government with Public Officers:. Upon the same
principle that he approved of the conduct of Go-
vernment, he must approve of an appeal to the Courts
of Law. The more illegal had been the conduct of
the sheriff, the more tit was it to be brought under
the review of a Court of Law. He never would
believe that the Grand Juries of Ireland would refuse
to do justice under the sanction of an each ; and
therefore the law was open to the parties.
. Mr. C. GRANT explained, •
Sir JAMES MACKINTOSH said, that this ques.
tion was qne of the utmost consequence to
,the Con-
,stitution and liberties of England. It was a ques-
tion as to the conduct of a Public Offrcer 'who bad
interrupted the sacred right of petitioning by mili-
tary force, a thing .which our ancestors thought a
sufficient:reason
.for getting rid of a-Monarch, and
changing the right. of succession to the, erciwri.:-.
{Hear; keel.- He conten&d that the rrisli_Govern-
mem shcadd have ternoyed 'the-Sheriff -Of Dublin.
The Government of this country had no scruples of
delicacy when they removecl -one of the most vir-
tuous of men, and :respectable. of_ Noblemen that
ever lived—Wear, irear).grslns his Lieutenancy of
County, because he supported the right of public dis-
cussion and of petition in a case which did not please
his Majesty's Government—(Hear, hair). That dis-
mission from cffice of this most kcellent Nobleman
was first made known to him through one of the Go-
vernment Journals. He blamed the Sheriff of Dub-
lin for not having put the amendment audibly; and
yet it appeared that he who whispered menaces, and
drawled out amendments, could roar out, in a voice
that resounded through the Hall, for Police-men.
But was there nothing in the threat of military exe-
cution, and in the dispersion of the Meeting by mili-
tary force? There was no remedy in the Common
Law, or Statute Law, that he knew of, and therefore
they, the Grand Inquest of the Nation, ought to in-
stitute an inquiry into the whole of the proceedings;
for the doctrine that the House of Commons should
not interfere in matters of this kind would lead to
the commission of all sorts of political crimes. An
inquiry into such gross violations of political rights
could only be made by a Committee of the House
of Commons.

Mr. SHAW (of Dublin) was one of the persons
present at this Meeting. The Sheriff used a.very in-
discreet conduct at that Meeting; and, if no reJress
could be attained at law, be would vote for this mo.
tion ; but it was well understood in Ireland that the
Courts of Law were open, and that proceedings would
be instituted at law.
Lord CASTLEIMAGH was not at all surprised,
at the speech of the Hcinourable and Learned Gentle-
man opposite (Sir James Mackintosh), because it was
so perfectly consistent with the course which that
Honourable Gentleman had taken • and taken with
perfect absence of success, on the Manchester ques-
tion. The case of the Noble Earl (Fitzwilliam), to
'which the Honourable and Learned Gentleman had

also alluded upon a former occasion, was not exactly
is point ; because a Lord Lieutenant was necessarily
a confidential Officer, a Sheriff not being quite so,
in
quiry'
like connected with Government, For an
like that now demanded, there was but one precedent
in the Parliamentary history of England; and that
was a case occurring not in the best of times, for it
occurred in the reign of Charles 11. A proceeding
in the Irish House of Commons had been attempted to
be set up as a precedent; but, first; he (Lord Castle.
rea,,h) denied that the House was at all bound by
'suet a precedent; and, next, he maintained that the
circumstances of the ease in Ireland were essentially
different from those of the case before the House.
The question was, could the matter be better investi-
gated in the House of Commons than in a Court of
Law ? He denied that it could be so ; and if there
was any inquiry in the House, it must be an inquiry
acthe bar; because a Committee up stairs could not
go into matters affecting the character, and even the,
personal liberty, of the Sheriff. If the House under-
took„
to investigate and arrange all the disputes which'
took place at Public Meetings, it woild cut out for
itself such a copious supply of work as must preclude
its attention to all matters of importance, He there,
fore hoped the House would come to the same con-
clusion it came to on the Manchester question, namely,
to leave it to the Courts of Law, and net allow them
to make it a subject of constant declamation.
Sir J. NEWPORT, Lord CASTLERP.Grip a4d Mr.
M. FITZO ERA to, Mutually explained.
E. r) BECTIVE denied that anything was given to
any person of the County' of Meath to sign an Ad-
dress to his Majesty; • In this opigion,- the conduct of
the Iligh'Shctiff-Of Dublin was proper and correct.
Mr. ciMENI.Y.-Ilie Noble Lord b4d.4llidOd to

what he (Mr. Creevey) had said upon a former occa-
sion; tespecting the 61;4,0:petition, and had repre-
sented it as something very novel and extravagant.
Now, he was of opinton that the Noble Lord did not
know the period to which ate had alluded : it was to
the year 1680, when the right of petition was fir*
form'allyestablished. Ne had never expected that. he
should have, had to stand up in defence of that tight,
(which a Russell and a Cavendish had vindicated
against such a Wretch as Jeffreys. It was because
that right had been violated and destroyed sir years
afterwards, that the Second James had been driven
from the Throne; and he trusted that, even in the,
present day, it' the Meetings of the People to petition
were disturbed by military violence, they would have
the virtue and the spirit to do themselves that justice
which they had done themselves before, under the
auspices of a Russell and a Cavendish—(Hear).
Mr. W.WYNN thought there was sufficient ground
in this case for an information in the Court of King's
Bench ; because the Bills of 1819, had no controul
over such 4 Meeting as this was. The House could
only commit the Sheriff for a high breach of the pri-
vilege of Parliament, in preventing the petitioning of
the House of Commons, if he had done so. _ _

Lord JOHN IWS§ELL had always heard the
Honourable Gentleman anxiously speaking against
the power of that House to institute inquiry ; but he
never heard him doubt the power of that House,
which should indeed be used warily—he meant the
power of judging and committing, In his opinion,
a Meeting should not exactly be dfsmissed by mili-
tary force, on account of claimant. and uproar. In
this country clamour aad upmar prevailed most at
Elections: and yet the policy of our law was, that,at
Elections, no soldier should make his appearance,
Mr. GRANT and Mr. W. Wysst mutually cz,
plained.—The House then divided.
• For the Motioa • . • 90 -
In Against it • • . - . - 124 •
Majority - • - —.14
Lord BINNING obtained leave to bring in a Bill to regulate
the appropriation of Prize-money unclaimed by Soldiers and
Seamen hi the East India Company's service,