The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1843-05-30 00:00:00

HOUSE OF LORDS.-FRIDAY

In reply to a question from the Marquis of LONDON
DERRY,

The Duke of WELLINGTON said he had reason to believe
that Mr. O'Connell and other magistrates in Ireland had
been deprived of the commission of the peace for the part
they had taken in the agitation for the repeal of the union.
Hard notice been given of the question, he would have been
able to answer tha question positively.
In reply to a question from the Marquis of CLANRICARDE,
The Duke of WELLINGTON said it was the intention of the
government to advance £21,000 towards public works in
Ireland.

The Earl of MOUNTCASHEL presented several petitions
from Ireland complaining of the operation of the new tariff
in that country.

A desultory conversation ensued. It was long and so far
tedious that when the Earl of Mountcashel, who was the last
speaker, sat down,

The Duke of WELLINGTON asked if there were any more
to speak.
The question was answered by a laugh, and soon afterwards
their lordships adjourned.

The only practical result of the measure would be to transfer
the income hitherto received by our own exchequer into that
of Canada. Id e could not see the policy or advantage of thus
throwing away revenue for no earthly purpose.
Mr. 0. GORE, notwithstanding that her Majesty's present
ministers were essential to the welfare of the country, yet he
felt bound to oppose them in this instance, for he thought
the measure ill-timed and injudicious. The measure had
come like a thunder-clap upon the farmers, who had not as
yet recovered from the effect of last year's measures.
After some further observations the committee divided,
and the amendment of Lord Worsley was negatived by a
' majority of 203 to 102.
It again divided on the resolutions, which were carried.
by a majority of 218 to 137.
The house then resumed.

A motion of Lord CLEMENTS respecting the disbanding of
the yeomanry corps of Ireland led to considerable discussion,
but the motion was ultimately withdrawn, with a view to be-
ing again brought forward prior to the discussion of the Arms
(Ireland) Bill.
In reply to questions from Mr. M. J. O'CONNF.I.L,
Sir J. GRAHAM said he had received that morning a corn-
munication
from the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, intimating
that he had felt it his duty to remove Mr. O'Connell and
Lord Ffrench from the commission of the peace, in conse-
quence of their presiding at repeal meetings.
In answer to other questions Sir JAMES GRAHAM said
that the conduct of the Lord Chancellor in the course he had
pursued was approved of by the Government. He also said
the Government had received no intimation of any breach of
the peace at the repeal meetings, with the exception of one
at which a repealer had been killed, but there was great ex-
citement, and her Majesty's peaceful subjects were in a state
of alarm. He believed the Lord Chancellor had intimated
to Lord Ffrench that it would not be consistent with his duty
to preside over a repeal meeting.
Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL gave notice that on Monday next
he would move for the production of the correspondence on
he subject.
AThe other business before the house was then disposed of
and the house adjourned.