immediately rose and opposed the Bill, which he arraigned as an unconstitutional measure, and brought forward towards the close of the session, when most of the members for Ireland were absent, without any statement, that it was called for by any sudden emergency, or any new or extraordinary occurrence in Ireland. It was a measure which, as it stood, would go to deprive his Majesty's subjects in Ireland of the invaluable privilege of grand and petit juries, and transfer the office of these juries to county magistrates; who, with the aid of a serjeant or barrister at law, were to try and condemn to transportation, for an indefinite time, any persons whom they should deem guilty of offences, not defined by law, and at most, merely constructive. He deprecated the habit of bringing bills into the House of late, to pass new laws for Ireland, without laying any foundation to satisfy the House of the necessity of such laws; and in the absence of the members for Ireland, who were most competent to judge of such necessity; and such was the Bill introduced this night, for extending to Ireland the English law of extents, the policy of which was extremely questioned in this country by the ablest lawyers and statesmen, and must be therefore still more questioned in a country where it never was introduced before, As to the present Bill, he was convinced it must tend rather to exasperate the people, and considerably exaggerate the mischief it proposed to remedy, than to produce any salutary consequences; and he never could consent, without grounds, infinitely stronger than he had heard, to such a violation of the constitution of the country, as to abolish the trial by jury, or suspend the ordinary and constitutional operation of the laws, which must be fully adequate to all necessary purposes. He was aware of a too prevalent disposition in the lower orders of the Irish peasants to quarrelling and riot, but he feared they were not the only class of persons who required control; and he alluded to the recent affair at Castletown, where four men were shot by the military, who had been ordered, by two magistrates, to fire on an indiscriminate multitude; and one of which, four persons, was an unoffending man, and the father of ten children.

rose in reply to Mr. Horner. The hon. and learned gentleman, he said, had complained, that he could not understand the Bill, on account of the number of blanks and omissions. The hon. and learned gentleman must be aware, that there were necessarily a number of blanks in every Bill, which were to be filled up in the committee. He had presented the Bill in the usual form, and without a single blank; and if, in printing it, there had been any deviation from the established usage, in regard to the nature or the number of the omissions, he was not responsible for it. He had, however, apprized the hon. and learned gentleman and the House, that he might, by a reference to the Act of 1807, see the exact words of this Bill, because it was copied from that Act. Every member had it, therefore, in his power to have made himself acquainted with all the details of this Bill, without waiting till the blanks were filled up in a committee. Another complaint of the hon. and learned gentleman was, that this Bill made a great innovation in the law of Ireland, by taking away the trial by jury; now he had, when he had obtained leave to bring in this Bill, stated the full extent of the innovation, which was this, that in a court, composed of magistrates, assisted by a serjeant at law, or one of his majesty's counsel, the court might, in cases which appeared to them absolutely necessary, dispense with the trial by jury. This, he admitted, was a great change in the law; but did not the necessity of the case call for it? In the year 1807, parliament felt itself bound to adopt this very measure; and, surely, no one could say, that there was any thing in the circumstances of the present period, which rendered it less necessary than it was in 1807. In many cases, parliament had, under circumstances of great and pressing danger, sanctioned greater deviations from the law than that which was now proposed; and of the necessity of some such mea- sure at present he did not think, after the melancholy detail which he had submitted to the House, on a former night, and after the sentiments which had been expressed by every member from Ireland, who had spoken upon the Bill, that any doubt could remain upon the subject. With regard to apprehensions which had been expressed, that injustice might be done to the persons tried under this Bill, he begged leave to state, that, in the original Bill, a power was given to the magistrates to sentence a person, convicted, to transportation; but a clause was added by a right hon. baronet, member for Waterford, by which a serjeant or king's counsel was added to the court, and unless such serjeant or king's counsel concurred in opinion with the majority of the magistrates, the sentence could not be carried into execution. He was not, however, surprised at the observations which the hon. and learned gentleman had made, because he appeared to be totally ignorant of the object of the Bill. He seemed to suppose, that its object merely was for the protection of witnesses; now that was not the object of the Bill, nor had he ever stated it so to be—the object of the Bill was to put an end to that system of plunder and outrage, by which Ireland was disturbed and disgraced, and to afford protection to the quiet and industrious part of the community. That one of the objects of the Bill was to protect witnesses, was undoubtedly true; but it was far from being the only object. If the hon. and learned gentleman had looked at the Bill attentively, he would have found that it did not require any great weight of evidence to convict a person under this Bill, because it was sufficient to prove, that he was absent from his house at the time forbidden by law.—This Act was also calculated for the protection of jurors, and he would appeal to any gentleman, who heard him, and who was acquainted with the state of Ireland, whether it might not be absolutely necessary, in some of the disturbed districts, to dispense with juries, in order to secure the due administration of justice; because the cruel alternative in which a juryman, in such a case, might be placed, was this, he must either acquit the guilty to secure his own safety, or he must risk his own life by perforating his duty. But this Bill did not necessarily take away the trial by jury, it only gave the court a power to dispense with them in cases in which it appeared absolutely necessary. In the extraordinary state in which some parts of Ireland were at present, to go through all the forms of law, and to have grand and petit juries, would be utterly impossible. If some such measure as the present were not adopted, the offenders might continue their outrages with impunity; where a country was in such an extraordinary state that it was necessary to keep the people in their houses from sun-set to sun-rise, it appeared to him quite absurd to suppose that the ordinary forms of the law could be adhered to.—The hon. and learned gentleman had said, that there were others, besides the actual perpetrators of these outrages, who were guilty of promoting these disturbances. The hon. and learned gentleman was right, and he had in his own instance afforded a practical proof of the truth of his position. One of the many causes which had contributed to keep alive the spirit of discontent and irritation, and to foment those disturbances, was the exaggerated statements which were constantly made to them of the grievances under which they were supposed to labour. The hon. and learned gentleman had himself unintentionally, and from misinformation, no doubt, made a very exaggerated statement to the House, of the unfortunate affair at Castletown. The hon. and learned gentleman had talked of the rash and unprecedented conduct of the magistrates, in ordering the soldiers to fire, &c. Now, before the hon. and learned member took upon himself to make such a statement, would have been quite as well if he had waited till he had seen the result of the investigation, which he knew the government of Ireland had ordered to be math respecting this transaction. He thought such would have been the hon. and learned gentleman's duty, to have ascertained the facts, before he presumed to make such a charge. He (Mr. Peel) had not yet received the result of the official enquiry instituted into this affair, but he believed that the hon. and learned gentleman's statement was unfounded, or, at least grossly exaggerated. He had received a letter, informing him, that the report would be sent over in a day or two; and it added, that it had been ascertained that no order had been given to the soldiers to fire, ant that they did not fire until the mob had actually closed with them, and were endeavouring to wrest their arms out of their hands. The hon. and learned gentleman talked of the indiscretion of magistrates in calling in military parties to protect the public peace at fairs in Ireland, and of the ease with which the civil power could repress any of these little venial excesses, which occasionally break forth. The hon. and learned gentleman might be very well informed of the practice at a Scotch or an English fair, and his observations very applicable to them; but he appeared to have very little experience of Irish fairs. The hon. and learned gentleman seemed little aware that fairs in that country were the chosen scenes of the most sanguinary and preconcerted conflicts. In a recent instance, to which he had before occasion to allude, the fair of Shircock, at which there was no premeditated combat, a melancholy affray took place, in which seven lives were lost. Now did the hon. gentleman really think, that it would have been an act of criminal indiscretion, if any magistrates had been there, with a military force, ready prepared, to prevent such a scene of bloodshed; or would he consider it as a fair ground of charge against the military, if they had been present, and had fired in their own defence, when they found themselves assailed and an attempt was made to disarm them? Would this have been a criminal indiscretion on the part of the magistrates, or a wanton outrage on that of the soldiers? He meant to apply these remarks generally, and not as applicable to the particular affray at Castletown—the detailed report of which, he had not yet received. The hon. and learned gentleman had said, that all history and experience, and particularly in Ireland, had shewn that extraordinary measures of this kind had always tended to increase rather than to diminish the evil. To shew the hon. and learned gentleman how completely he was misinformed upon the subject, it would only be necessary for him to look at the effect which this very measure produced when passed in 1807. So far from increasing the evil, the very circumstance of passing the Act had rendered it unnecessary to carry it into execution; and his predecessor, Mr. Wellesley Pole, had thought himself justified, on the ground of restored tranquillity and peace in Ireland, to repeal, in 1810, the very measure which, in 1807, his brother (the duke of Wellington) had introduced, on the ground of disturbance and disposition to insurrection. The hon. and learned gentleman's argument, therefore, on the ground of experience, was utterly destitute of foundation.

rose to state shortly why he should vote against the Bill. The precedent of the Act of 1807 had no weight with him, because he then thought, and thought still, that no such Bill ought to be passed until a committee was appointed to enquire whether it were necessary. At the time the Act of 1807 was proposed, he recollected that a right hon. gentleman (Mr. Grattan) had stated distinctly, that a French party then existed in Ireland. If this proved the necessity of the Bill then, what could be said now, when we were at peace with France? The House could not be justified by any individual rising and stating, that so and so was the situation of Ireland, in depriving the Irish people of their rights. The facts should be proved before a committee; and it ought also to be proved, that an immediate enactment was necessary, and also why the Bill had not been sooner brought in. It was not proper to desire those who wished to know the provisions of this Bill to look into the Act of 1807. It was very truly stated, that the Bill dispensed with evidence; and when the right hon. gentleman talked of the odium to which jurors were exposed, he should have recollected that the odium was transferred by the Bill to the magistrates.

spoke strongly in favour of the Bill. The measure had been loudly called for by the nobility and magistracy of the county which he had the honour to represent, long before it had been brought into the House.

said, that as the hon. and learned gentleman prided himself on supporting his consistency, by opposing the measure, because he had done the same in 1807, parliament, he hoped, would maintain its consistency, by passing it into a law. As to the grounds for the measure of 1807, that a French party existed in Ireland, he thought it a much less weight in support of a measure of this kind, than the notoriety of the present disturbances; for though quite insufficient to suppress a French party, it would protect the property and lives of the loyal from nightly danger. The measure was one to bestow protection on the people of Ireland, and not to take it from them.

deprecated the idea, that any member, who honestly stated his opinions in that House, should be considered a party to the disturbances in Ireland. He denied, that the disturbances were notorious to the House, for he would venture to assert, that when the right hon. gentleman opened his terrible budget on a former night, the facts, stated by him, were perfectly new to the House. Unless the House went into a full enquiry to know in what way the law had failed, how was it possible to apply a proper remedy? The hon. member deprecated the measure, as it proposed to deprive the people of Ireland of the trial by jury, in certain districts, and place them at the discretion of local magistrates, who were, he was sorry to understand, in that country, too liable to the influence of very unworthy prejudices, and the more unworthy, as they originated in a spirit of religious dissention. But the enactment of a measure of this, nature was peculiarly exceptionable, as it was pressed forward so abruptly without any previous enquiry to satisfy the House and the country of the necessity upon which its authors professed to rest for their justification. The case of Ireland was, indeed, most deplorable; for while this Bill was so precipitantly urged, professing to be an enactment only for a temporary purpose, its advocates argued so as to induce an inference, that it was intended to make it a part of the permanent system for the government of that unhappy country.

said, that the more he reflected upon this subject, the more he was convinced of the propriety of the opinion which he expressed some days ago, that a measure of this extraordinary nature should not be introduced without a previous and ample enquiry.

spoke in favour of the Bill.

bore testimony to the necessity of the measure for the protection of the loyal subjects of Ireland, against robbery and outrage. Nay, he was persuaded, that in order to tender that protection effectual, martial law ought to be proclaimed in the disturbed districts of Ireland.

Mr. Croker and colonel Vereker followed on the same side.

expressed his regret, that the Bill before the House was rendered necessary by the state of certain districts in Ireland; but with a view to the permanent preservation of the peace of that country, he thought that a more comprehensive system was called for. He trusted, therefore, that by the next session, the right hon. secretary would be prepared to submit such a system to the consideration of parliament, as should serve to secure to Ireland that degree of tranquillity which it ought to possess, but which, in fact, it had not had the fortune to enjoy for a century.

spoke in support of the proposition for enquiry, before a measure of this extraordinary character was carried into a law. He pressed it upon the consideration of the English representatives, how they would feel, if it were proposed to put any portion of England out of the pale of the constitution, by depriving its inhabitants of the trial by jury. Why, then, should they look with such indifference at the fate of their fellow subjects of Ireland? The state of that country imperiously called upon parliament for a thorough investigation, and for a very different regiment from that which had been applied to it for centuries. From all, indeed, that he could learn of the history of that country, its disease lay deep, and required a radical remedy. It was in vain to hope much from the application of remedies to local complaints, or from the healing of particular boils which might occasionally break out upon such a diseased body. The whole system required examination; the blood must be thoroughly purified, and the best cure, which he could imagine for the evil complained of, would be to extend a full participation of the privileges of the British constitution to the people of Ireland, with a mitigation of the pressure of tithes, and other measures so often desired by the most enlightened observers of the real state and character of that country. This he decidedly thought a much better course, for the solid interest of the empire, and the permanent peace of Ireland, than a system of restriction and coercion, which centuries of experience had proved inapplicable to the character of the Irish people.

Mr. Courtenay supported the Bill; after which it was read a second time.

rose to propose an increase of half-pay to the ensigns and lieutenants in the army. The pay of the army had been originally fixed to correspond with the price of labour, but it had not increased in the same proportion. The pay of an ensign was, according to the proposal of the noble lord (Palmerston), to be 3s. a day, on the peace establishment, which was little more than the price of common labour; and certainly not sufficient to support him in that rank of life, in which his profession and education in general entitled him to move. It was said, that by raising the pay of the subaltern officers, it would approach too near to that of the captain. He did not think so; for the half-pay of the captain was sufficient to support him, and the lieutenant or ensign could not possibly subsist upon his. The difference was formerly half-a-crown a day, and he wished it to remain the same. The captain's half-pay would be 7s. by the new regulations, and be should propose to raise the lieutenant's to 4s. 6d. The hon. general concluded with moving, "That an humble Address be presented to his royal highness the Prince Regent, that he will be graciously pleased to take into consideration the state of the half-pay of the subalterns of the army, and to give directions that the same be increased."

seconded the motion, which, if agreed to, he was sure would be satisfactory to the army at large.

said, it was exceedingly painful to him to resist any motion like the present, but he submitted to the House, whether it was proper to bring forward subjects of this kind piece-meal. It was necessary to maintain a certain scale in the pay of the different ranks of the army, and also a certain proportion between the army and the navy. Other gentlemen might come forward with other propositions for an increase of the half-pay, and it might be thought by some, perhaps, that officers, in the higher ranks of the army, who had served longest, and were at a time of life which precluded them from entering into other professions, were most deserving of the consideration and indulgence of the House. Besides, he thought the addition of 6d. or 1s. would not, in a pecuniary point of view, answer the end proposed.

considered the additional increase proposed, as a retaining fee to subaltern officers, to keep them in the army. He was afraid, that otherwise they might lose the ensigns in toto. He did not think the navy a parallel case to the army.

begged to remind the last speaker, that there were midshipmen and mates in the navy, who had served eight, nine, or ten years, without the smallest prospect of emolument.

spoke of the duty of economy, though that alone was not the ground of the proposed regulations. The naval and military employments emanated from the crown. It would be dangerous to discipline, if the House indulged in propositions to exceed the amount of provision proposed by government, though it might be perfectly safe to question, and to recommend a diminution. Many details required looking into, to form a judgment on this point. Considering the army, with reference to the navy, it should be recollected, that navy lieutenants were on a par with army captains; but their half-pay was to be arranged in classes from seven shillings to five. An attempt to improve one branch of the system, without reference to, and comparison with, the general system, could produce only confusion and disappointment.

thought, that in giving 10,000l. to the guards, a sum was granted for no other purpose, that he could conceive, but to increase the patronage of the commander in chief, by placing 35 commissions at his disposal. He thought that prodigality, in this respect, was full as blameable as that sort of economy, which would refuse the small sum that was now asked for the subalterns. This day an estimate had been laid before the House, amounting to 46,000l. for the ridiculous gew-gaws constructing in the Parks. He thought that after this, ministers came before the House with a very bad grace, in refusing this small sum. This night, he understood that 100,000l. would be voted for the poor clergy, and would probably not be objected to; ant yet 20 or 30,000l. to the necessities of the subaltern officers was to be refused. He was convinced, that the population of this city would prefer a sum of money, being applied for the relief of meritorious subalterns, than to its being spent in the absurd manner in which it was proposed to show their rejoicings.

observed, that the 15,000l. a year which had been given up by the Princess of Wales, be nearly sufficient for this object. If other retrenchments were made, he was sure that it would be easy to find the means of providing, not only for this expense, but so the expense of rewarding the just claims of naval officers, who had been ten years and more in the service, without being now even entitled to half-pay.

stated, that if this motion were agreed to, it would certainly open a door for many other classes of persons engaged in the public service, to come to the House with a very plausible statement, and ask for increased pay. Such increases, if extended to all the classes employed in the public service, would amount to a sum that would be a matter of serious consideration on the ground of national expenditure. He thought that this was a subject which might be safely confided to ministers, who must be supposed desirous to push the liberality of the country as far as was proper upon such occasions. This must not be considered as an insulated question, but a part of that which must be considered as a whole. It was a pretty good proof, however, that the temptations to entering into the army were not too small, as there was no want of officers, or of competition for commissions: on the contrary, the number of applicants for commissions was so great, as to produce inconvenience to the administration of the army. He entreated the House not to allow itself to be carried away too far by its feeling on the present occasion; but to rest assured, that their opinions would he conveyed through the ministers to the Prince Regent, and would be duly considered when the whole of the subject should come under review.

did not see any reason why the claims of midshipmen and mates should not also be attended to, and considered this as no objection to his motion. He was rather surprised that the hon. admiral had not brought forward their claims directly, instead of alluding to them incidentally and comparatively. He had not appealed to the feelings of the House, but to their justice. As to the competition for commissions, there was always a competition for every thing that was given away for nothing. It might as well have been urged in opposition to all the proposed increases to salaries in the customs and excise, that there never was a want of candidates for such situations. The fact, however, was, that there was by no means the competition that there formerly was for commissions to be purchased. For some years past, almost all the ensigncies had been given away.

The House then divided; when Gen. Gascoyne's motion was lost by a majority of 32 to 28.

enquired of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what would be the whole expense of the works going on in the Parks.

replied, that the different officers of the household, in their anxiety to comply with the order of the House, had immediately made their return of what had been already expended, without estimating what remained to be expended. He believed, that in the Lord Chamberlain's department, there would be a pretty considerable increase beyond the return already made. He could not speak with accuracy on the subject at present.

declared himself surprised at this answer; as on the two last committees that had sat upon the civil list, it seemed to be perfectly understood that no new works would be begun without a previous estimate of the expense being laid before the House. It appeared now, that great works had been begun, and were carrying on, of which the House were completely without information as to their probable expense. We saw those new works in the parks rising every day, but how high they were to get up, or how low they were to fall, or what was to be the probable expense of them, the House was completely ignorant.

wished to put a question to the right hon. gentleman as to a great structure that was now building in the great park of Windsor. It was a most singular piece of architecture, but very capacious, and contained a vast number of rooms, and great accommodations. He wished to know who this palace was built for, and who was to be the owner or occupier of it. He also wished to know by whose taste it had been constructed, as he should wish to prevent, as far as possible, that person from having any concern in other buildings which were at the national expense. The walls of this edifice were of stone, and the roof of thatch; and it altogether appeared to him, as expressed by a poet,

"The craz'd creation of distemper'd brains."

replied, that this building was intended for the residence of the Prince Regent; and, notwithstanding there were already many royal palaces, he did not suppose that any one of them could be fitted up for the accommodation of the Prince at so small an expense as this, which was called the cottage in Windor park. As to the expense, the greater part of it had been already accounted for in the expenditure of the civil list of the last year.

saw in the accounts a sum of 2000l. for works in Windsor great park. He wished to know whether this was all that remained to be provided for on this account, as 2000l. was a sum which would go but a little way in thatch for this magnificent palace!

said, that the returns had been made last year, but he was not sure whether all the bills had been furnished.

said, that this building was for the accommodation of the Prince Regent; who, as a subject, had no house in the country to retire to within a convenient distance of town.

then moved for the plan and estimates of this building in Windsor park.

had no objection to a return of the expense already incurred, or an estimate of the probable future expense. He saw no reason, however, for the plan being laid before the House, and therefore moved as an amendment, that that part of the motion should be omitted.

thought it impossible for the House to know what they were doing, unless they had the estimate as well as the plan.

considered it of no importance to submit to the consideration of the House, whether this plan showed good taste or bad taste. He thought it right, however, that parliament should be informed of the expense.

did not wish to criticise the nature of the plan, but considered it absolutely impossible to form a judgment about the estimate of the expense, without having the plan of the building.

The amendment of the Chancellor of the Exchequer was carried by a majority of 43 to 9.

enquired from whom the board of works had received their instructions, prior to beginning the works in the parks.

said, that it was in the Lord Chamberlain's department.

observed, that in the Lord Chamberlain's returns, it was expressly mentioned "exclusive of the new works carrying on in the Parks." He believed that it was now evident that those works would come to a great deal more than the 15,000l. which had been at first mentioned.

said, that he had no reason to alter the opinion he before gave, that after deducting the value of the materials, 15,000l. would be sufficient to cover the expense of the preparations for the fire-works.

then asked, by whose directions, or by what authority, he had undertaken works to the extent of 15,000l.

said, that he thought himself justified by precedent. In the year 1749, the board of works had, by the authority of the King's warrant, gone to considerable expense for the preparation of fire-works.

then asked, was there a king's warrant for this expenditure of 15,000l.?

said, that he was not prepared to say that a warrant had been yet granted to that amount.—There had been a warrant for a part of it.

begged to be understood, that he did not mean to impute the slightest mismanagement or inattention to sir William Congreve, in the execution of that part of the duty which he had undertaken. All he wanted was a regular estimate of the expense, and not merely what might have been mentioned in a loose conversation from Mr. Nash to sir William Congreve.

said, that there was a warrant for the sum of 5000l.

then moved for an estimate of the expense of the preparations for the fêete in Hyde-park, St. James's-park, and the Green-park.—Agreed to.

wished to know whether the bridge over the canal in the Park, with all its ornamental superstructure, was included in the 15,000l.

said, that it was at first included, but as the bridge was intended now to be a permanent one, he did not think it could be fairly classed among the preparations for fire-works.

asked, whether the large ornaments upon the bridge were to be removed, or whether they were to be permanent.

said, that this would be a question of taste, and he could not say which way it would be decided.