The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser. — 1833-03-19 (Liverpool, Merseyside, England)

STAMEY.—The hon. gentleman asked him " what he considered to be rights of property?" He was perfectly prepared to answer the hon. gentleman. lie considered it to be a right of property that a man should be allowed to let his own land to whom he pleased. (Hear, hear.) He considered it to be a right of property that a man should be permitted to take land from whom he pleased. (Hear.) It was a right of property cultivate land as a man pleased. (Hear.) It was a right of property that a man should be maintained in the safe and secure enjoyment of his dwelling and his land, without being ex.posed to the incursions of nightly marauders and murderers, terrifyinc, the peaceable inhabitants, burning their houses over their heads, dragging them from their beds, murdering them at their doors, and parading the roads and highways by night and by day in the commission of every atrocity. (Loud cheering.) complained that the right hon. secretary only adopted such a portion of the report as he thought suitable to his purpose, at the same time that he introduced a measure never contemplated by the committee. Ile took the liberty, with great respect, of asking the right hon. secretary whether, as far as a judgment could yet be formed from the result of the assizes now taking place, he conceived that justice had or had not been fairly and fearlessly administered ? (Cheers.) Lord ALTHORP said that a good deal of confusion had been produced by the different subjects and questions introduced to the notice of the house on this occasion. With respect to the assizes now in progress, if he were not misinformed, though there might have been some convictions for offences described in the bill at the assizes, the outrages were still going on, and it could not be affirmed that the assizes had been successful in the repression of crime. Mr. O'CONNELL said the question raised was, whether the bill was not, in truth and in fact, a tithe bill, though it embraced some other objects? He was of opinion that it was a tithe bill. What had all the meetings referred to in the preamble, and which it was sought by this bill to repress—what had they been held for if not for an abolition of tithes ?  Mr. SHAW said that he, for one, would not be indebted for the preservation of his life and property to the breath of the hon. and learned member for Dublin. If that hon. gentleman could give them peace he surely could destroy it—he was at least as powerful to do evil as to do good, and he, (Mr. Shaw) for one, would never consent that the peace of Ireland should be dependent upon his mandates. Mr. O'CONNELL very much doubted whether it was becoming on the part of a judge of the land to pursue the course which the lion. and learned gentleman was now pursuing. Mr. M. I YFERRALL remarked, that if the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Stanley) had adopted the measures recommended in the report of the committee of last session. such a measure as the present would not be at all required. Mr. SHAW said that he was not a judge of the land, but that even if he were, had he been wholly unconnected with the trials in question, he did not see how it would be unbecoming on his part to give an oinion on the subject, and he fancied that he Lad as good a right to do so as the prisoner's counseL