The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1844-02-20 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-FRIDAY.

Mr. E. VILLIERS presented a petition from Liverpool,
praying that no increase may be made to the military es-
tablishment of the country, and praying the house to re-
fuse the supplies until a reduction in the military force
took place.
The debate on Ireland was resumed by Capt. Bernal,
who was followed by Mr. Disraeli, Mr. Ward. Captain
Conolly, Mr. Sergeant Murphy, and Mr. C. Buller.
Lord STANLEY gave credit to Lord John Russell for
the clever and convenient form in which he had shaped
his motion—a form which would enable the agitators to
say, a committee of inquiry was all that Ireland asked,
and even that the British Parliament refused her. If it
were a truth, which, however, he had himself too high an
opinion of the Irish nation's loyalty to admit, that they
were what Mr. Buller represented them, a revolted peo-
ple, what a responsibility was now undertaken by men who
having been, and hoping to be again, the servants of the
Crown, were then endeavouring to excite an already mad-
dened people ! And, after all the censures thus levelled
against the Government, he demanded to know what law
they had strained, what new powers they had asked ?
None. They had convicted the Repeal leader by the
regular process of the existing law. And he showed from
official accounts that the military force which they were
so loudly condemned for maintaining in Ireland, had, du-
ring their administration, been lower on an average by
upwards of 2,000 men than during the time of the late
administration. But in 1843 there began a for-
midable and unexampled system of agitation by a
display of physical force ; and the government would have
deserved impeachment if they had neglected to meet that
display by a military force, which, thank God, had been
adequate to overawe even an attempt at disturbance;
but even this military force had not been so great as that
which the late Government had stationed in Ireland
during the year 1833. The noble lord then shortly stated
the defences made on former nights by Sir J. Graham
and Mr. Shaw of the consultations in England before the
proclamation, of the omission of twenty-four names from
the Recorder's lists, and of the strike of the Roman
Catholics from the jury—reading on the last point, amid
prodigious cheering, an, of uavit from the professional
gentleman by whom the jury had been struck, which
exactly verified the statement of Sir James Graham. -Ile
rebuked Mr. Serjeant Murphy for having availed himself
of his parliamentary privilege to assail the Lord Chief
Justice, and directed the attention of the house to the
great carefulness and discrimination evinced by the jury.
Having justified his own consistency in proposing an in-
crease of county voters, notwithstanding his conduct upon
the Irish Registration Bills, he proceeded to the church.
The grievance was not the excess nor the abuses of that
church, but its existence; and the noble lord took up that
question at this season of excitement, although he knew
that if he himself were in office to-morrow he durst
not—he could not--nay, he would not, attempt the revo-
lution which those around him demanded. But he
talked about some appropriation of the church
property. In what proportions ? According to
numbers ? Why, on that principle, as the Roman Catho-
lics were seven-eighths of the people, the noble lord, call-
ing himself a friend of the Protestant church, would at
once take from it seven-eighths of its property. But, in
truth, all those questions about the amounts and the
modes were mere trifling ; the real question bad come to
be simply—" Will you destroy the Protestant church?"
He insisted on the Act of Union, and on the pledges given
for the maintenance of the church at the time of, and at
many different times since, that union ; and he referred
to a variety of declarations and undertakings, from the
days of Mr. Grattan downward, including the most solemn,
disclaimers from Homan Catholic bodies and leaders of
any intention or desire to interfere with the Protestant
church. He must now, without design to give offence to
Roman Catholic members, read the terms of the oath
taken by them on entering the house, and intended by the
Legislature expressly as a security for the Protestant
church. Having read it with great earnestness and
amid a profound silence, he appealed to every Roman
Catholic gentleman well to examine his own con-
science before he gave a vote against that church.
What was it that the Catholics now ask ? They tell
you that they will not take your church endow-
ment in connexion with the state nor any other pro-
vision which the state can make for them ; and as they
will make no alliance with the state themselvec. they willnot allow the state to continue its alliance with the Pro-
testants. Did those who talked about equality propose
that the Roman Catholic bishops, appointed by a foreign
potentate, should take their seats in the House of Lords ?
If yes, let them try to take the sense of the British peo-
ple on that head ; but if no, then what became of the pro-
posed equality ? If there was any real grievance pressing
on the Roman Catholics, he was ready to co-operate for
the removal of it. ile saw no objection to an enactment,
giving liberty to the owners of laud in Ireland to settle it
for the uses of the Roman Catholic clergy in that king-
dom. That boon, though but a small one, would indicate
at least his friendly disposition toward his Roman Catho-
lic brethren. The noble lord concluried by quoting, from
a speech made by Lord Palmerston in 1829, a passage
condemning, in strong terms, the profligacy of any politi-
cal party which, for the sake of parliamentary support,
should league itself with the Roman Catholic members
(when admitted under the Emancipation Act) for the pur-
pose of assailing the Protestant church.
The debate was then adjourned.

IRELAND.

THE STATE TRIALS.

Early on Monday morning groups of persons were
seen wending away their way along the quays towards the
Four Courts.

The morning was wet and gloomy, but about eight
o'clock began to clear up a little.
At half-past eight o'clock the avenues to the court were
crowded, and it was scarcely possible to pass through the
hall.

There was a very large police force on duty in the outer
yard to preserve order, which was exceedingly requisite,
owing to the eagerness of the multitude to crush in.
At nine o'clock the court presented a very gay and ani-
mated appearance at this hour.

The gallery was crowded, but there were very few
ladies present, either in the public gallery, the reserved
seats, or in the high sheriff's gallery.
The bar mustered very strong, not a seat was unoccu-
pied, and many members were forced to stand ; the side
avenues were also thronged to an inconvenient extent.
At this hour Mr. O'Connell entered, accompanied by
Mr. John O'Connell and Mr. Daniel O'Connell, jun.
All the other traversers were present, with the exce tion
of the Rev. Mr. Tierney and Mr. Duffy.
The Right Hon. D. R. Pigot, Mr. Moore, Q.C. "Mr.
Henn, Q.C., Mr. Monaghan, Q.C., Sir Coleman O'Logh-
len,- Mr. Thomas Hagan, and several others of the tra-
versers' counsel now entered and took their seats.
Immediately after the Attorney and Solicitor-General,
with Mr. Sergeant Warren, Mr. Martly, Q.C., Mr.
Brewster, Q.C. Mr. Bennett, Q.C., Mr. Tomb, Mr.
Napier, Mr. Holmes, and others entered.
Exactly at fifteen minutes past nine o'clock, Judge
Burton, the Chief Justice, and Mr. Justice Crampton
entered the court, and took their seats on the bench.
Mr. Justice Crampton, for the information of his
brother judges on the bench, related all that had transpired
during their absence on Saturday night after the jury had
retired to consider their verdict.

The jury were then called. The traversers and jury
having answered to their names,
Mr. Justice Crampton stated to the jury the coarse
which they were to pursue in returning their verdict,
and explained the meaning and effect of the various
divisions of the indictment, after which he advised them
to retire for a few minutes, and see whether they had act-
ed in accordance with his instructions. At 25 minutes to
ten o'clock the jury accordingly withdrew.
The jury returned at nine minutes to ten o'clock, when
The Clerk of the Crown said—Gentlemen of the jury,
hand in your issue paper.
The Foreman—We have put our names to the different
counts—that is, we have written them on the list, as there
was not room for us to write them under the separate
parts of each count. And here 1 would ask, on the part
of the jury, are they to get compensation for their time—
(laughter.)
Mr. Moore, Q.C. (to the Clerk of the Crown)—Call each
juror by his name.
This being done by the Clerk of the Crown, he asked—
Gentlemen of the jury, do you agree ?
Foreman—Yes.
Mr. Moore, Q.C.--I wish it to appear on your lord-
ship's notes that there is an objection, on the part of the
traversers, to the reception of the verdict, on the ground of
a misnomer as to the name of Rigby, one of the jurors, who
is one of the persons in the jury-box. He stated that his
name was John Jason Rigby, whereas the name which ap-
pears on the panel is John Rigby, and which, on this trial,
amounts to a misnomer.
The Attorney-General—Rigby was sworn as " John
Rigby," and there was particular notice taken at the
time of that circumstance by the Crown.