The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1833-02-22 00:00:00

DISTURBANOES IN •IRELAND:I3.UL.

On the order of the day ,for thair lordships going into com-
mittee on the bill for-the 'better siwpression of ,disturbances in
Ireland,
Lord TEYWIIAM•said it was his intention, for-the puspose-of
guarding against any improper use being made of the-powers
bestowed upon. the Lord Lieutonantiof -Ireland -dry this bill, to
move au amdadment, whereby it should be provided that procla-
mations declaring places in a state of disturbarioe.under this act
be issued under the lands and seals-of not less than six .privy
counsellors.

Lord,CooNouaay said,-it ought tole shownAo the people of
Ireland that, while-the-high-court of Parliament-was determined
to put down acts of insubordination -in that country, they were
also anxious to do it with as little infringement of-the ordinary
law of the land as possible. Out Of the 32 counties in Ireland,
some six or seven of them only were-in a disturbed state,. That
state of disturbance could have been put an-cud-to if, at the out-
set, the magistrates -had acted -as, b eeame -them. When ,the -dis-
turbance broke out-in the county of-Carlow, where he had some
property, and in the-adjoining counties of lililkenny- and Queen's
County, he, in reply -to-some magistrates who -wrote tolim-for
advice, suggested -that-they should arm the farmers and others
'as special-constables, -and by doing.SO, they-would-enable them
to withstand-the attacks of the lawless-incendiary. The -magi-
.strates, however, would only select 'the constables ,from .those
persons whom they •liked, -and -refused -to take -them -from-the
-entire of -the-persons paying rates-and:liable-to -serve,au juries.
The consequence-of this-was,-that the-disturbances hadatow -risen
to a fearful height, and could only be put -down-by - strong and
-efficient-measures, -Had •Sir H. Hardinge continued in-office
as secretary for Ireland, he thought, thatamich ,good would-have
resulted to Ilse .country, -for he -had-introduced-into iParliament
no. less- than-19.bills, which,:if carried - lnto-exeeution,- would-have
-produced -the most beneficial results. He had -no doubt but
his thlajesty's ,present•ministors -would have introduced.-siteh
-measures hofore -now, -had_ they -not -Len engaged--in placing
upon a firm basis the new °hurter of the constitution which
some-time agoreeeived Aheir lordships' assent. -(Hear,-hear.)
'He -was -opposed to the domiciliary visits -permitted under
this bill, which he knew to have been -on tomer -occasions
productive of most vexatious and-tyrannical-proceedings. The
conduct of government in two recent instances—that of the or-
der to the-police .not to afford _protection .to certain itinerant
methadistpreachers intruding themselves into the chapels in
the county of Clare, and that of the dismissal of a policeman
for haying posted,,npon a chapel door in the north, an orange
notice,—was what:it-ought to be, and.he could assure the house
that it would have have a considerable effect in restoring.poace.
Ile would confidently say that Ireland might be as well.go-
yerned-as.any country in the world, it the people had fair play.
If the:gentry Of Ireland would unite steadily, and firmly .abide
by
.one another,—it'-they would administer justice fairly and
strictly,--rthat country would :anon become happy and pros-
perous.
-The Marl of Wicx tow said. he could not allow the noble lord
to-reflect, as he had done, ou the magistrates of Ireland, with-
out giving-his statement the most decided contradiction. He
confessed that he did noi.know so much of disturbed times as
the noble lord. He was well, aware that the nelde lord bad
taken au active part in those disturbed times; but, whatever
the experience of the noble lord might have been, this he would
say, that a more high-minded body of ,usen than the Irish ma-
gistracy did not, exist. The noble lord had said that the magis-
trates would not act with him. (Hear, hear.) Uponinquiry,
it might, perhaps, be -found that the -magistrates were not to
blame on that account. (Hear, hear.)
The Marquess of WEST)MATH observed, that the plan advo-
cated by the noble lord (Cloncurry)—of arming the small farm-
ers, had tried and failed. That he knew to be the fact,
and, therefore, he feit that his, noble friend - had:been inisled.in
his inquiries. The noble lord wished that:all the farmers in
Queen's County should be armed. Let arms be put into their
:hands, and then their lordships would see (as the magistrates
there had anticipated) how they would use them. The-noble
lord appeared to have a correspondence with..anumber of priests
from whom he derived his information. Now it appeareu to be
questionable how far-such information pught to be relied on.
Lord CLONCURRY denied that-he kept up any correspondence
with priests. He took the statements-relating to the itinerant
methodist preachers from the public newspapers.
Lord TEYNHAM'S motion was negatived.
On the motion of Earl Gal:voile house then :resolved itself
into committee on the bill before- unused.

On the 7th clause being read,. relative :to the .proclaiming of
disturbed districts.

-- --------- rose and stated, that provision ought
to be made in this clause to prevent the lighting of bonfires.
These, in themselves, were innocent,.bnt they were often used
as signals by which large and mischievous bodies of people wei e
assembled. The ringing of bells for the purpose of collecting
large assemblages of the people ought aim to be forbidden. His
lordship then moved, " That in any district proclaimed under
this act, no church or chapel bell shall be rung, except at the
ordinary time of .divine service; and that no -bonfire shall be
made or lighted. individuals conducting themselves contrary
to this provision to be deemed guilty of a misdemeanour, and
to be liable to be tried and; punished by any court constituted
under this act."

The Earl of WicKoow said, that by the law of the lapd, no
place of religious worship, except a Protestant church, had any
right to have a bell at Ile believed, however, that some
chapeis•had liells.attaelicil to them latterly, but still it was con-
trary tO•thulaw ; and he _feared that, if this amendment weie
agieed to, in its present foul!, it-would seem to legalize the use
of belts in chapeis., to which he could not agree.
Earl L.:1:1:y observed, that he had no obje(.tion to that part of