The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1844-08-20 00:00:00

TEO, LIVERPOOL. STANDARD.

board, and we have provided that the commissioners who
shall have the superintending and control of Roman Ca-
tholic bequests shall be exclusively members of the Ro-
man Catholic Church. I now repeat that the same spirit
which dictated that law will preside over its execution,
and I cannot entertain a doubt that it will in its execution
afford, as it was intended in its conception that it should,
facilities for making voluntary endowments for Roman
Catholic ministers, and voluntary provision for the build-
ing of schools and churches. These three measures—the
Presbyterian Marriage Bill, the Dissenters' Chapels Bill,
and the Charitable Donations and Bequests Bill—have all
been passed in the present session, on the proposition of
the government. Then there were also several other
measures to which I can hardly advert in detail, but which
add to the aggregate amount of legislation. Provision
has been also made as to the rise of future railways, and
security has been taken for the public interest in respect
of all future railways. I myself proposed two bills, ap-
plying the principle of prescription to the property of the
Duchy of Cornwall, thus settling questions which had
been the subject of litigation for many years, giv.ing the
duchy tenants a more permanent interest in their hold-
ings, and promoting, I firmly believe, the permanent in-
terest of the duchy itself. Another very important bill
was that for regulating the construction of buildings in
the metropolis, for which we are indebted to my noble
friend at the head of the Woods and Forests. I think I
have now said enough to show that the statement with
which I set out was correct—that a session more re-
markable for its amount of useful and beneficial legisla-
tion was not upon record. If, therefore, the noble
lord had been disposed to give a review of the ses-
sion, he would have been able to give a better account than
could be given during the last ten years. The noble lord
made a reference to some recent proceedings in Ireland.
Now, I will not be provoked into entering upon any dis-
cussion of that subject. The only part of the noble lord's
speech that took the character of an attack upon the go-
vernment was that in which he made a reference to these
proceedings. He stated that the government had given
no notice of their intention to prohibit proceedings which
they thought dangerous to the public peace, but at length
charged the parties engaged in them with a conspiracy—
the acts from which the evidence of that conspiracy were
to be gathered extending over a period of several months.
It was sufficient for him that the Court of Queen's Bench
in Ireland were unanimous on that point, and that Mr.
Justice Perrin, though he differed on other points, con-
curred with the other members of the court on this point,
and expressly said that the evidence was substantially
sufficient and unobjectionable. Then, with respect to
the other point alluded to by the noble lord, I believe
that the Queen's Bench were unanimous on that also. I
will not follow the noble lord into all the reasons which
induced the government to forbear from interference at
an earlier period, as I could not do so without necessarily
bringing into discussion the conduct of persons who are
now absent; and, therefore, whatever advantage the noble
lord may derive from that part of his observations, I
would rather leave to him than bring under the conside-
ration of the house the conduct of men who are absent
and unable to defend themselves. I must, however, say,
that the government determined, on two occasions, to
issue proclamations with respect to public meetings from
which they had reason to apprehend a disturbance of the
public peace, but that the necessity for issuing ceased on
the abandonment of the intention to bold those meetings,
and that the noble lord's statement that the government
forbore for the purpose of entrapping certain parties into
a violation of the law was wholly without foundation.
With respect to the observations of the right hon. gen-
tleman opposite as to the exercise of the prerogative, I
consider it my duty to maintain entire silence, and I con-
tent myself with saying that I should consider it unworthy
of my own character were I to disclaim the feeling of
personal vindictiveness by which the right hon. gentleman
supposed it possible that I may be influenced. I must at
the same time distinctly declare, that I cannot admit that
there is any wrong which parliament can be called on to
repair; and I deny that the trial of Mr. O'Connell was
other than a fair and just one, but considering the circum-
stances under which that gentleman is placed, and consi-
dering that he is absent and fulfilling the sentence of the
law, I will not go into any discussion of Irish proceed-
ings.