said, he rose for the purpose of presenting a Petition from the county of Essex, in favour of the Reform Bill which was now before the House and the public. The petition was agreed to on the 19th of last month, and its presentation was intrusted to him; but he had not had an opportunity of performing that duty at an earlier period. The meeting at which it was tarried was convened in consequence of a requisition addressed to the High Sheriff, and Was most numerously and respectably attended. At no time did he ever see more enthusiastic earnestness in support of any measure, than was displayed on this occasion in favour of the Reform Bill. It appeared to him that the great body of the inhabitants of the county had the success of this measure most anxiously at heart, and he believed that the dissentients were very few indeed. Attempts he knew were making to get up petitions against the Bill—private and secret attempts; and, doubtless, there would be some respectable names signed to them; but that the real sense of the people throughout the county was in favour of it, did not admit of the shadow of a doubt. The opinions of men were greatly altered on this subject; and he believed that there was not, at present, one man in that county who would have the hardihood to declare himself against all Reform. Of this, however, he was certain, that some persons who professed to be friends to moderate Reform were dangerous and insidious enemies to effectual Reform; and against them, those who favoured the present measure ought to be especially on their guard. He hoped that this Bill would pass. He trusted that the people would call For "the Bill, the whole Bill, and nothing but the Bill." He was very sorry to hear, the other day, that it was the intention of his Majesty's Ministers to make some alterations in the Bill. He hoped, however, that they would not attempt to interfere with its principle. In short he would say, let us have no alteration—he, at least, wished to have none. In his opinion, those alterations had been suggested by the enemies of the Bill, for the purpose of sowing dissension amongst its friends.

said, he did not rise for the purpose of creating any discussion on the presentation of this petition; neither did he mean, even for one moment, to insinuate that the petition did not contain the opinion of a considerable number of his constituents. But, when he took into consideration the extraordinary exertions of the friends of his hon. colleague (he spoke not of his own exertions) to add to the weight, respectability, and numbers of the petitioners,—when he took into consideration the continued zeal and assiduity manifested with reference to this subject by the hon. member for St. Ives (Mr. L. Wellesley), who, out of that House, was in the habit of considering himself member for Essex de jure—when he call-led to the recollection of that House, that even a few weeks ago, the hon. member for Essex de facto and the hon. Member de jure were, in point of opinion, "wide as the Poles asunder" on the measure of Reform,—when he considered these things, he could not but congratulate his hon. colleague on the unanimity of sentiment and opinion which appeared to have prevailed at the Essex meeting. The requisition at first purported to have emanated from the Grand Jury of that county, but he felt it right to state, that only eight of those individuals signed that requisition. It was true that the signatures of two noble Lords were affixed to that requisition but when he told the House that those two noble Lords (for whom he entertained the highest respect) were not known in the county, —that they were scarcely acquainted with ten freeholders, except their own tenants —it must greatly detract from the weight which might otherwise be attached to the circumstance. Besides, not one of three noble Lords who resided in the county had signed the requisition. His hon. colleague seemed to view the Bill as a measure of almost "absolute wisdom." In using that phrase, he did not mean to make any allusion to the worthy Alderman below him. On the other hand, the hon. member for Colchester (Mr. D. W. Harvey) did not allow that the Bill would give him all he wanted, but he accepted it as the means by which he would ultimately arrive at the object which he had in view. In his speech at the meeting, that hon. Member had gone into a long digression with reference to ecclesiastical Reform. The Times, and other papers, which professed to give an account of the meeting, had however omitted that part of the hon. Member's speech, although it occupied a considerable portion of the time of the meeting. According to the hon. Member's plan, the Bishops were to be put on half-pay, or Serjeant's pay; and he in the course of his address entered very largely into the question of Church Reform. Whether, however, his (Mr. Tyrell's) hon. colleague held the same opinion upon this point as the hon. Member, he could not pretend to say. With respect to the Bill itself, it appeared that this measure of Reform was to be reformed again. At some future opportunity, when he knew correctly the nature of the measure to be proposed,—which, as it was to be altered, he was not aware of now,—he should deliver his sentiments upon it.

would assert, and he challenged the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Tyrell) to contradict him, that within the memory of man no question was ever agitated in a county which had gained so much ground in a few years, as the question of Reform had done in the county of Essex. Formerly there was a strong feeling against Reform; but now large towns, inhabited by men of great experience, possessing property, and gifted with solid sense, were friendly to Reform. Those who now agitated that question were the very persons who, some years ago, had opposed it. With respect to any part that he had taken relative to these meetings, he declared upon his word and honour as a gentleman that he had not, in any way, influenced the meetings that had been called,—nor had he striven, in the slightest degree, to bias the opinions of his tenants; and therefore the hon. Member was not warranted in asserting that he had taken an active and zealous part in this business, When representations were made to him as to the necessity of calling public meetings in Essex, to speak the real sense of the county, in consequence of the attempt which was made to get up hole-and-corner petitions, he had said—"There is no necessity to do so, because the -feelings of the county had been sufficiently expressed:" but after what had been said by the hon. Gentleman, he would advise the county to assemble. The hon. Member would then have an opportunity of standing forward and stating his opinion, and he would then be enabled to satisfy himself as to the state of feeling which prevailed in the county.

wished to say a few words in answer to, and in consequence of, certain observations which had fallen from the two hon. Representatives of the county of Essex. He only regretted that his noble friend, the Paymaster of the Forces, was not present, to give to what he was about to say the full weight and sanction of his authority. Both the hon. Members appeared to entertain a misapprehension —which, he believed, prevailed to a certain extent in that House and out of it, giving great dissatisfaction to the friends of Reform, and great satisfaction to its enemies—as to the intention of his Majesty's Ministers. He therefore thought it right to state, most unequivocally, that his Majesty's Ministers did not mean, in any, even the slightest degree, to deviate from the broad and plain principle on which they had founded the measure of Reform. And he only wished that his noble friend was in the House to join with him, as he would do, in expressing his entire concurrence in the declaration, that no such intention to deviate from the principle of the measure existed now, or did exist at any time, on the part of his Majesty's Ministers. No greater misapprehension could arise, with reference to what had occurred in that House, than to infer from it that Ministers meant, for one moment, to lose sight of the principle which they had originally laid down. They were determined on the entire disfranchisement of those boroughs which did not come up to a certain standard of population, and on the partial disfranchisement of those which did not come up to another given standard. No alteration would be made in these points, except that which his noble friend had stated in the outset, as possible,—namely, that if any boroughs could fairly and plainly show that they did not come within the fixed rule and line marked out by the Bill, then those boroughs would be justly entitled to be excluded from the schedules of disfranchisement or partial disfranchisement. But that this measure of Reform would be carried to the utmost and fullest extent, as had been stated by his noble friend, in point of principle, did not, and could not, admit of any doubt. If it were the feeling of that House that the numbers constituting that House would be unnecessarily or extravagantly reduced by this Bill; and if it were deemed proper by the House that its numbers should be farther augmented beyond what was contemplated by the Bill, then that augmentation should not be the means of restoring those disfranchised boroughs, but the number of Members to be added should be taken from such great, populous, and important towns as might be considered to have a fair claim to Representation, in the event of the numbers being augmented.

said, that as the principle of this measure depended on its details, which, it appeared, were now to be altered, the Bill must be looked upon as a new one. The object of the measure could only be ascertained by the details which had been laid on the Table of the House, and which specified, that the number of Representatives should be decreased. But now the right hon. Gentleman said, that so far as regarded the number of Members, if the proposition were objected to, the number might be increased, care being taken that the right of returning Members should not be restored to the disfranchised boroughs, but that it should be given to great and populous towns. Now, he asked, would not that proceeding manifestly alter the principle of the measure? the effect of this measure would be altogether to divide and cut off the manufacturing from the agricultural interest. One set of individuals would wholly represent the agricultural, and another the manufacturing interest. This measure was not, he was convinced, half so popular as many Gentlemen seemed to suppose. What did the hon. member for Preston tell them on the preceding evening? He stated that the people were decidedly against this Bill. That hon. Member averred, that of 200,000 people whom he had addressed, there was only one in favour of the Bill. The people very naturally asked, would the Bill give cheap bread, cheap beer, and cheap clothes? The answer was, "No, it will not;" and then they declared against it. The hon. member for Preston had told the House, that the people who were excluded from the franchise would have been better pleased if, instead of extending it to the 10l. householders, it had been given to the gentry; and it was very natural, that not having it themselves, they should wish to have it given to those who were farther removed from them than the 10l. householders. The noble Lord had told them that he intended to make no alteration in the principle of the Bill; but it appeared that he was now disposed not to disturb the rights of those who had acquired the franchise of corporations by birth or servitude: but did not that go to the principle of the Bill? It had been objected to him that he was unreasonable in resisting the going into a Committee with the Bill; but his objection was to going into Committee on a different Bill from that which had been read a second time. The whole Bill had undergone a material alteration, and what guarantee had they that to-morrow it would not be still farther altered? He had heard of instances in which it was proposed to bring some boroughs, which would otherwise come into schedule A, up to the number of schedule B, by including the inhabitants of the parish as well as the borough. This, no doubt, might be done by the Treasury, but was that a way to dispose of the Representation of England? He had heard also of instances of including the parish and the borough in one in cases where they were of the same name. This, no doubt, in particular instances, would be found very convenient, but the effect of it would be, to make the Bill altogether different from that which the people had been led to believe it.

was surprised at the course taken by his hon. and learned friend (Sir E. Sugden), who, on the second reading of the Bill, rested all his objections on its details, and now, when about to enter into the Committee, where alone the details could be examined, he occupied himself with the principle of the Bill. What was stated yesterday by the noble Lord did not at all affect the principle of the Bill. The object was, to put an end to nomination, by abolishing those rotten boroughs in which such pernicious influence was exercised. The principle adopted was, that where the population did not exceed 2,000, the borough was altogether disfranchised; and where the population did not exceed 4,000, only one Member was allowed to remain. Now that principle remained untouched; for all that was to be done was, that if any borough could show that it did not come within the rule, it should not be included. But this left the principle as it was. Any changes which might be made were changes only of detail. As to the intention of not interfering with those rights which had been acquired in corporations by birth and servitude, he fully approved of it. It was the only objection that many parties in the country had to the Bill; and he thought it not unreasonable to allow the rights of all persons apprenticed or born at the passing of the Bill, to remain during the lives of those parties. The hon. member for Preston had talked of the feeling of the people in the country on this Bill. Now he had lately been visiting several counties, and he there found all classes, high and low, rich and poor, quite in favour of the Bill. There was a public meeting the other day in this county of Stafford, the requisition for which was sighed by ten Peers, and at this meeting there was not a dissentient voice from the Bill. The people approved of it, because they hoped that it would have the effect of giving them cheaper bread and beer, and higher wages,—that it would, in short, better their condition; and there was he doubt that, in the course of time, the economy and better system which a reformed Parliament would produce would have those effects.

said, that the hon. and learned Gentleman below him (Sir E. Sugden) had confounded the principles on which the Bill went. It had proceeded upon a scale of population, and as long as that scale was adhered to—and he saw no attempt to depart from it—the principle would remain untouched. The only change in the detail would be, where the numbers were so incorrectly given as to bring some boroughs within either of the schedules, in which, properly speaking, they ought not to be included. Errors of this kind had occurred in many cases, and in none were they more likely to occur than in those places where the parish and the borough were of the same name. It was no departure from the principle of the Bill, then, to include the population of both places in particular instances. The principle of the Bill had for its object to put an end to that corrupt system, by which Members got into that House, not by the choice of the people, but by the nomination of Peers and other individuals; and also by which, persons found their way into the other House as Peers, through the medium of borough influence in this; —that system of traffic for the payment of election expenses, which made seats and the influence over them the objects of bargain and sale. An end had, however, been put by this Bill to all such practices, and he was not surprised at the irritation manifested in certain quarters against a measure which was to destroy this odious traffic;—practices which had been carried on in some instances to so great an extent, and which might have gone on to tarnish even the seat of justice itself. This base traffic would be at an end; and he repeated, that he was not surprised at the irritation dis- played by some persons out of that House against the Reform Bill. He must own he was surprised at what had fallen from the hon. member for Preston (Mr. Hunt) as to the opinion of the people on the subject of this Bill. Those who were opposed to it could not be genuine Reformers, who would oppose a measure which would put an end to such odious practices as a traffic for a peerage by means of seats in that House, merely because they themselves had not been included in the elective franchise. He repeated that such parties could not be genuine Reformers.

concurred with the hon. and learned Gentleman that the change to be made in the details of the Bill amounted to an alteration of its principles. He should object very much to that change, particularly to the plan of giving the sixty-two Members to be taken from the boroughs to the large towns. Such a distribution of the Representation would destroy that balance of interests in the country which already existed. He would not take the interpretation put upon this measure by other hon. Members, for he heard from the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Stanley) that such was the intention of Government.

said, what he had intended to convey was, that if the House should decide upon retaining the whole number of Members, it was the intention of Government to give them, not all to large towns, though certainly some of them would be so disposed of, but to large and populous districts.

wished to know what modification was to take place in the Irish Bill, if so great a change was to be made in the English?

had already stated, that no change would take place in the principle of the general measure. The only modification in it would be, to exempt those boroughs which could make out a case to show that the returns with respect to them were erroneous. This was only an alteration of detail, and, as it did not affect the general principle, could not affect the Irish Bill.

considered, that as the general measure, as it first stood, would give five additional Members to Ireland, and take sixty-two from England, the retention of those sixty-two Members would make a serious change which would affect Ireland.

had not said a word of any intention on the part of Government to retain the sixty-two Members. All he said was, that if the House should be of opinion that the number should be continued, Government would recommend that they should be given to large bodies.

said, as allusion had been made to him, he could not avoid saying a few words. He would again repeat what he stated last night, viz. that the people in several large and populous districts in which he had addressed them, were without exception (not with one exception, as he was represented to have said) against the measure. His constituents were all for Universal Suffrage,—which they themselves enjoyed in an extreme degree, and they wished that every man who resided in the town should have a vote. The hon. member for Waterford had pretended to lament over him, as having ceased to be a genuine Reformer; and, in return, he might express his regret that that hon. Member had turned round and departed from his promises to his constituents to support Universal Suffrage and Vote by Ballot. If he were under prosecution, or even on the scaffold, no consideration on earth should prevent him from declaring his honest sentiments, or induce him to retract any opinion which he conscientiously held.

had understood, and in that he was not singular, that the noble Lord (Russell) had declared that the sixty-two Members would be retained, and given to the large towns; but now it was stated that no such intention existed. He owned he should like to hear some statement as to what really were the intentions of Government in this respect. He thought it right, that before they went into the Committee they should know how the sixty-two Members who were to remain after the disfranchisement were to be disposed of. In Liverpool, which had a population of 180,000 souls, there was very great difference of opinion as to this Bill, and great doubts of its advantages. The lower classes were not at all favourable to it; but this feeling was not confined to those classes. It was shared by very many amongst the merchants, bankers and others; and he was convinced that the more the people saw of the measure, the less they would be pleased with it; and he believed, that in a week more, petitions from several parts of the country would be presented against it.

said, that after what had fallen from his hon. and gallant friend who last addressed the House, he could not avoid saying a few words. He was not present when his noble friend (Lord J. Russell) addressed the House yesterday on the subject, but he was convinced, that he had not stated it to be the intention of Government to replace the Members who might be cut off by the disfranchisement of the small boroughs, and he would briefly state to the House what was the course which his Majesty's Government intended to pursue. On looking at the different returns and the schedules, they found that, from the incorrectness of those returns, there would be an addition to the Members which his noble friend had stated would constitute the House, because some of the boroughs had been found to have a population sufficient to exempt them from the operation of the Bill; but in this there was no departure from the principle of the Bill; the principle remained the same, but it would not apply to so many boroughs as was at first supposed. This would increase the number beyond what had been stated. As to the exact number of Members which should constitute the House, Ministers did not hold it to be essential to the principle of the Bill. But they were determined to carry the measure with respect to the reduction of numbers, if they could. He repeated, if they could accomplish that, they would not depart from the original plan as to numbers, except in those cases where, as he had said, boroughs could make out that they had a population large enough to exempt them from total or partial disfranchisement. But if it should be the opinion of the House that the present number was not too great, and that it should decide to retain the whole, Ministers might not think it such a deviation from the principle of the Bill as would induce them to abandon it. On the contrary, they would then be prepared to recommend to the House the manner in which those Members should be disposed of, adhering to their original principle, that no Members should sit for boroughs which came within the line of disfranchisement which they had felt it their duty to draw. The Members thus to be disposed of, should the House so decide, they would recommend to be given in many cases to large towns, but in all to large bodies, adhering as much as possible to that balance of interests which was at present kept up in the country; but he begged to be distinctly understood, that the retaining of the whole number of Members was in no one degree to touch that principle which went to the disfranchisement of the rotten boroughs.

said, that even after the explanation of the noble Lord, the House was still ignorant of what was intended by Ministers as to other parts of the Bill; and in order to put the House in possession of such information, he hoped the noble Lord would answer a few questions. He wished to know whether the additional Members were to be given to towns or counties; and whether they were to be given solely to places in England, Scotland, or Ireland; or to places in the three kingdoms.

wished the noble Lord to recollect to what his observations had applied, when he said the additional Members were to be given to populous towns. He had said, that if after the Government had proposed the number of which they thought the House ought to consist, the House should compel Ministers, by a division, to increase that number, then they would take in populous towns, or populous bodies of constituency, and bestow the elective franchise on them. It was true that he had made use of the words populous towns, and he believed it would be to them principally that such additional Members would be proposed to be given by Government. But the same rule would be followed with respect to the addition which Ministers of themselves would propose, they having for their object to keep up a fair balance between the representation of towns and counties. With respect to the last question put by the noble Lord, he had to state, that the additional Members would be given principally, if not entirely, to England.

said, that some of the enemies of the Reform Bill, and some persons who, he believed, had been connected with the late Administration, had been in the City that morning, expressing the delight they felt at Ministers having got themselves into confusion by the alteration which they had proposed to make in the Bill. He had himself seen some of these gentlemen, and certainly the expression of their countenances had considerably changed for the better from that picture of dismay and terror which it exhibited on the day of the important division, when their faces were as long as it was possible for human faces to be ["Name."] No, he did not mean to give any name, for that was rather a delicate affair; but as the hon. and learned Gentleman (Sir E. Sugden) had shown so much warmth on the subject, it was probable that he was himself one of the parties. He believed, however, that the Ministers had got into no confusion at all; and he considered the proposed alteration an improvement.

said, that hon. Members who spoke so warmly on the subject of preserving the proportion of Members for the three kingdoms, did not seem to consider that the proportion between the Representation of Scotland and England had been disturbed by the introduction of the Irish Members. All that Parliament had now to do was, to give Representation wherever it was wanted. He had never seen the necessity of reducing the number of Members in that House, and he did not see that any proposition to preserve the existing number would at all trench upon the principle of the Bill. He hoped that in selecting the places by which the additional Members were to be returned, the claims of Scotland would not be forgotten. There were many places in that country of the greatest importance, to which no Members had been given,— namely, the large town of Inverness, that of Perth, and Dumfries, which with its suburbs contained 15,000 souls. The Scotch county Members were to be reduced from thirty to twenty-eight, and one district of burghs, containing a population of 6,000, was to be disfranchised, though the revenue of Scotland, as compared with England, at the time of the Union, was as one to forty, while it now was as one to six or seven. The hon. and learned member for Weymouth had, for the first time, declared himself a friend to Reform, but not to the extent of the Bill. The hon. Baronet, the member for Tamworth, was also now friendly to it, and thought that Representatives ought to be given to populous towns. And how was this to be done without reducing the close boroughs, or increasing the number of Members, to which all were opposed? The fact was, that many, who now said they were friendly to Reform, had, by refusing to consent to moderate Reform in due time, contributed to bring about this new Bill. Many, some time ago, would have been satisfied with much less; and he, for one, even at the present moment, would have been satisfied with a less extensive Bill. One thing, however, was certain, and even the hon. and learned member for Boroughbridge could not deny it, that all were agreed that the people of the United Kingdom were not fitly Represented. The hon. member for Preston professed himself to be a friend to Reform, and yet his observations were always cheered by those who were the enemies of all Reform. The hon. Member had said, that the people were displeased, because the Reform Bill would not make bread and clothing cheaper. Now, he asked the hon. Member, whether he thought that if the elective franchise were extended to every man in the kingdom, it would make bread cheaper? The hon. Member had said that he had met 200,000 men, all of whom he found opposed to the Reform Bill. Now he (Mr. Ferguson) did not believe there existed 200,000 persons in the kingdom entertaining such sentiments. There were many, no doubt, who thought that it went too far. For his part he had not heard of any who said the Bill was good for nothing because it did not give Universal Suffrage Persons who held such an opinion, ought not to have the elective franchise. They were too ignorant to have it. Home Tooke said there were three descriptions of persons who ought not to be intrusted with the elective franchise; namely, the extremely miserable, the extremely dependent, and the extremely ignorant; to which he would add, the extremely selfish —a character that evidently belonged to the friends of the hon. member for Preston. He was decidedly of opinion that the principle of the Bill was approved of by the whole population of the empire.

thought, that as it was now Wednesday, and the Reform Bill stood for commitment on Monday next, it was important for all parties to know the course which Government proposed to take. In particular he should like to know whether it would be proposed to make any addition, beyond the number contemplated originally in the Bill, of Members to Ireland and Scotland. If that were the case he hoped the Representatives of England would not permit themselves to be betrayed by a false liberality to acquiesce, without the fullest consideration, in any proposition prejudicial to England. He wished, therefore, to know, whether the additional Representatives were to be distributed among the three parts of the United Kingdom; and whether, while proposing to make an addition to the Representation of Ireland and Scotland, that opportunity was to be taken to deprive England of fifty or sixty Members, which it was now entitled to send to Parliament? Both these questions involved considerations of the greatest importance, which ought to be reserved for separate discussion. He understood Ministers had discovered, that in the original schedules some errors were made with respect to particular boroughs, which did not fall within the principle of the Bill, but which would be disfranchised if the returns on which those schedules were framed were strictly adhered to. Would the noble Lord now state whether he intended to admit the population of parishes as a test by which this disfranchisement was to be regulated; and next, whether Government proposed to take the sense of the House by a division on the question of the reduction of the number of the English Representatives? What he understood the noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) to have said the other night was this —that he did not mean to restore the proportion between the Representation of the different kingdoms established at the time of the Union; that he intended to increase the number of Representatives returned by Scotland and Ireland; yet, finding that there was a strong feeling in the House adverse to the reduction of the number of the English Representatives, he proposed, not to restore the schedule A, or the schedule B, but to make up to England the present amount of Representatives in some way or other. He, and he believed every man in London, had so understood the noble Lord. Gentlemen now proposed to correct the errors in the schedules A and B, and the correction of those errors would of itself tend to restore to England some portion of the Representatives; and by that arrangement there might probably remain to England forty Members less than at present. Now he wished to know, whether that was a question on which the House was to be called upon to declare its opinion by a division? He also wished to know whether it was proposed to enter into the consideration of all these important questions on Monday next; on which day the House was to be informed, for the first time, of the names of several places to which Government proposed to extend the right of Representation?

said, it was intended, in estimating the population of the boroughs, to take the population of all parishes into account which were chiefly town parishes. With respect to the other point mentioned by the right hon. Gentleman, he repeated what he had said before, that the errors in the schedules A and B, which required alteration, were very inconsiderable, and arose out of the imperfect nature of the population returns. But besides that, it was proposed to rectify errors of a different kind; namely, such as arose from the omission of places of large population from the list of those to which it was intended to give the elective franchise; and it was further proposed, in order to keep up the balance between the Representation of counties and towns, that a certain number of Members should be added to the counties. The number of the Members of that House would be thereby increased beyond the original proposition of Government; and upon the whole, the present number would be reduced pretty nearly as was supposed by the right hon. Baronet. It was the intention of Ministers to submit the measure, with these additions, to the House on Monday next; and if the House should think the present number of the House ought to be preserved, he did not think any proposition of that nature would so essentially affect the principle of the Bill, as to induce the Ministers, if it was agreed to, to throw up the measure.

said, the Bill was then a perfectly new one. It was a new Bill, and on Monday next the House would be called upon, not to consider its principle, but to go into its details. By some towns it now appeared the privilege of returning Members was to be retained; and, besides having to take this alteration into consideration, the House would also have, on Monday next, to determine whether a parish in which a given town stood, was a town parish, or country one. On Monday next, too, it would be proposed to give the privilege of returning Members to a certain number of new places. Was it consistent with strict justice, that the House should not have four or five days to consider those matters before it was called upon to agree to them? If after four months' deliberation, the Government had proved to be fallible, was it not possible for the House to fall into error, if it should be called upon to decide on these important subjects without full time for consideration?

said, that the Govern- ment had no intention to take the House by surprise. A full statement would be made of the alterations proposed by Government on Monday next, and it was his opinion, that there would be found nothing in that statement to render the postponement of the consideration of the Bill at all necessary.

said, it would not be necessary for him to go into any explanation at that time. He was inclined to think, however, that the gallant General had not so far misunderstood him as he had represented, as he recollected perfectly well the gallant General putting some questions to him on the subject, and, on receiving his answer, said he should still persevere in his intention of moving the instruction to the Committee. The gallant General was at perfect liberty to go on, and when the time came he should be prepared to deliver his sentiments.

rose, and addressed the House:— He was understood to complain of the attack which had been made upon him by the hon. and learned member for Water-ford, founded upon statements which had appeared in the daily papers, the originals of which the hon. and learned Member, he would venture to say, had not seen. If the hon. and learned Member believed such statements, why did he not, manfully and directly bring forward a charge? He was ready to meet any charge that might be brought against him, but he protested against these covert attacks, founded on statements of which the basest and most scandalous use had been made- It had been asserted that he had not paid his election expenses, and that he had taken improper means of securing a seat in the House, in order to obtain from the Government a judicial situation. That was no new charge, and he threw it back with the contempt which it deserved. All who knew any thing of him knew that he had no desire for judicial station. He wished only to win his way by the regular course of his profession. This he said before the House, and in the face of the world. He could over and over again have had judicial station, but he refused it, because he desired to be independent, and gain his independence by his own professional exertions. Was it right, then, that he should be thus censured? Or, was it likely that he would have had recourse to base means to procure a station which he might have obtained with honour? An answer to a statement of his had appeared in The Times of that morning, and he declared, on his honour, that nine-tenths of that answer was scandalously false. He would not trespass further on the time of the House, but merely call on those who imputed to him improper conduct, to come forward in a manly manner, and make a charge against him.

said, he had found the hon. and learned Gentleman the advocate of parliamentary corruption, and, as such, he had impugned his conduct. He had been led to take up the subject from the following circumstances:—An individual of the name of Northcote came to him, and stated that he had certain documents which related to the traffic in seats in Parliament, and that he wished to keep his name from the public. He (Mr. O'Connell) refused to hear any communication unless he might give his name and produce the original documents. Mr. Northcote finally consented to this, arid then asked whether an individual belonging to the same profession with himself should be allowed to escape, after such a transaction, without animadversion. After this conversation, and the production of the papers, he told Mr. Northcote, unless the subject were brought forward by some one else, he would bring it under the notice of the House. He spoke of the traffic of seats, because he found that the expenses of the election were to be paid out of this traffic in seats, and this he saw in the hand-writing of the hon. and learned Gentleman. He thought it his duty, therefore, to make an allusion to the subject, which he believed was in conformity with the documents. For his part he had considered those documents altogether as public property, and he had, therefore, no hesitation in making use of them in this way, with a view to secure an advantage to the people. As for the hon. and learned Gentleman, he had thought fit to have made use of language which would not have escaped him, had he not presumed that he might safely do so in respect to him, from peculiar circumstances. He had made use of the phrase "boroughmongering," and charged that hon. and learned Member with the advocacy of parliamentary corruption. The phrase and the charge had both been published in the journals of the day, and public papers. The letters written were not disavowed or denied, though the hen. and learned Gentleman stood high in his profession, and had occupied a high station under the late Ministry. Was it not absurd then to call such a. state of things the Representation of the people in Parliament? The hon. and learned Gentleman, however, had so called it; and had challenged for this state of things the respect of hon. Members and of the country. What! was this, indeed, Representation of the people, that a man should, in such circumstances, be permitted to talk of vested rights and indemnities? Or hold out that persons had a right to make an outlay of 21,000l., by way of investing so much property in boroughs, reserving the return of one individual free of expense, whilst that party, so secured from all charge, had the boldness to state that a claim for indemnity might arise, on the ground of expense incurred, where none really had been incurred? He felt it impossible to restrain himself within very measured language, when he found the hon. and learned Member, this evening, instead of meeting the charge fairly and boldly, and denying his share of the correspondence, which he never yet had denied, resorting to a defence which was characterized by a spirit of low chicanery and artifice, calculated, as the hon. and learned Member had hoped, to conceal that which every one might see lurked behind the curtain—the hon. and learned Gentleman never had yet denied—would he now deny—the correspondence attributed to him? Would he join him now, and show his sincerity, by asking for inquiry on this subject? If he would do so, he would give him the opportunity, for most assuredly would he bring forward a malign upon the subject.

remarked, that the foundation of the complaint he had made against the hon. and learned Gentleman, had only been considerably increased by what had fallen from him within the last few minutes. The attack he now sustained had been made advisedly. Indeed, the hon. and learned Member had stated the intention to attack him, and he had, as the House observed, performed that promise, by imputing to him the advocacy of corruption in the borough system, whilst only doing that which he felt himself conscientiously called on as a Member of that House, to do. If the House allowed the observations just now made use of, and the language to be unreproved which had just escaped from the hon. and learned Gentleman's lips, then indeed he would for once admit that a Reform in that House had become necessary, though in a very different respect from that contended for by the hon. and learned Gentleman. As to the letters which he had been called on to disavow, he confessed he was unable to do so completely till he had them in his possession, from the circumstance of his letters being written, at least nineteen times out of twenty, in Court between different proceedings, and it was therefore impossible for him to take copies of them. From expressions, however, in them he felt persuaded, he could not have written those letters imputed to him. Having, however, no copies of his own letters, he would now invite the hon. and learned Gentleman to bring forward the originals, and from the inspection of them, he felt he should clearly prove, as he had already stated, that the whole of the charges brought against him by the newspapers, and by the hon. and learned Gentleman, were totally false. If he declined doing so, then it would appear that he did so decline, not out of a wish to do justice between him and his accusers, but because the hon. and learned Gentleman had said, he would make him the subject of attack in that House. He confessed he was sorry to hear the hon. and learned Gentleman league himself with persons out of doors to heap unfounded obloquy on other Members of that House. He would repeat, in contradiction to the hon. and learned Member's assertion, that he paid the whole of his election expenses in 1826, when, though not contested, those expenses were very considerable, and also the whole of those incurred in 1830. He declared upon his honour, that all the charges and insinuations made against him on the score of those expenses were totally false. He had already denied these charges as publicly as they had been made, and he would then add, upon his honour as a Gentleman, that he did not think, though disabled, from the want of copies, to speak more decidedly, that he either had written, or could have written, the letters alluded to. He doubted the existence of those letters, notwithstanding the hon. and learned Gentleman said he had seen them; for he certainly would not pay him the compliment to say he believed that assertion. That hon. and learned Gentleman had admitted and justified the attack now made on him, though it not only originated with the hon. and learned Gentleman, but was made totally without provocation. The advocates of Universal Suffrage and Vote by Ballot might hereafter expect the same treatment as he had now met with from the hon. and learned Member, wavering on those great subjects as he appeared to be at present. As, on the one hand, he had always been averse to courting a quarrel, so, on the other hand, he should always be anxious to prove that he never would flinch from maintaining his character there, or elsewhere, in the manner that it behoved every Gentleman to support it.

considered the hon. and learned Gentleman who last spoke, had violated order by the allusion made to the doubts he entertained of his hon. and learned friend's veracity, when he asserted he would not believe what his hon. and learned friend had asserted.

had heard nothing which he could consider disorderly, in respect to the assertion by the hon. and learned Member, that he could not pay the hon. and learned member for Waterford the compliment to believe what he had asserted relative to letters, of the alleged contents of which he had before expressed his doubts; which only amounted to this, that he would not believe those letters to have been written by him until he inspected the hand-writing. He could not refrain from expressing, however, a wish that the interference of the hon. member for Middlesex had taken place earlier. Great latitude had been, and, in his mind, ought to be given to hon. Members when called on to defend their characters from attacks. If, how ever, he were desired to give his opinion whether disorder had been apparent in this case, he should say yes; but, if he were called on further to explain his view of it, he should say it had its origin with the hon. and learned member for Waterford.

was of opinion that the subject was one which required further discussion and inquiry. Although the statement which had appeared in the public prints did not satisfy him that the hon. and learned member for Weymouth had been justly charged, yet on the other hand, the denial had not been such as to remove all impression from his mind that the hon. and learned Gentleman was wholly free from the imputation which had been cast upon him. He hoped, therefore, that the hon. and learned member for Waterford would bring the subject forward and he should be exceedingly happy if, on that occasion, the hon. and learned member for Weymouth should be able to give such explanations of his conduct as might relieve him entirely from the imputation.

wished to know what it was that the noble Lord desired to have examined before a Committee of Parliament? Was it if a seat had been obtained in that House by payment of money, or by nomination? If the noble Lord's sensitiveness was such that he could not bear to see men come into that House in any other way than was strictly legal and constitutional, let the noble Lord not make a personal attack upon him, but fairly look these abuses in the face, and endeavour to adopt some mode of getting rid of them. Among other instances of men getting into that House without having recourse to the free votes of a numerous constituency, was that of the members for the borough of Bletchingley, into which he thought an inquiry ought to be made, as well as into many other boroughs.

denied that he had made any personal attack upon the hon. and learned Member. What he had said was solely from a wish to see the character of Members vindicated. As long as he continued a Member of that House, he thought he had a right to endeavour to make the laws which governed it be properly pursued. One of those laws was, that the sale of seats there, neither directly or indirectly, should be allowed. The hon. and learned Member called on him to see that the principle of that law was carried into effect. Why, he was engaged in doing so, to the utmost of his ability, at that moment. The hon. and learned Gentleman then referred to the borough of Bletchingley, and said that some inquiry ought to be made into the manner in which the seats of that borough were disposed of. If the hon. and learned Member would take the trouble of looking into schedule A of a certain Bill that was now before the House, he would find, that however the seats for that borough had hitherto been disposed of, all opportunity of their being again made the subject of sale would be most effectually destroyed, and, therefore, if the hon. and learned Gentleman was really anxious for the purity of that House, let him assist in destroying that practice which was now the subject of so much complaint. The opportunity was now given him, and he might at once prove himself the friend of the purity of that House, by voting for a measure which he had as yet opposed, making himself as celebrated by supporting Reform as he had hitherto been by opposing it.

observed, that as the noble Lord had been engaged in a contest for counties, and in contests for open boroughs, and now held a seat for a nomination borough, he must have the means of affording some information upon every kind of corruption, and especially with regard to the exercise of patronage in nomination boroughs.

congratulated the country on this Motion having been brought forward by a member of the Government, as the first step towards the abolition of the system of unnecessary swearing. He hoped that this abolition would extend to the oaths taken at the Universities, as well as at the Excise and the Custom House. It was a most laudable measure, only it ought to be followed up, and it should have his hearty support.

said, that as the hon. Member had moved for a copy of a paper, to the production of which there could not possibly be the slightest objection, he understood the hon. Member's object to be, to introduce the state of the county of Clare to the special notice of the House. He (Mr. Stanley) was far from denying the extent of the grievances of which the hon. Member complained. He acknowledged that the attacks on both persons and property were lamentable, and that the difficulty of obtaining evidence of these crimes was as great as the hon. Member had described it to be, so that the crimes remained unchecked by the operations of the law, and by all the powers of the Government. The gravamen of the charge, however, against the Government seemed to be, that on the first complaint of local disorder, the Government had not at once overthrown the constitutional rules of law, and had not had recourse to the severe provisions of the Insurrection Act. He was far from saying, that it would not be necessary ultimately to have recourse to that measure; but nothing except the most urgent necessity could justify it; and if the Government should be compelled to have recourse to it at last, it would deserve the credit of not having adopted such an extreme measure until all others had been found unavailing. The first step which the Government had taken was, to increase the military force, to augment the amount of the constabulary, and to send into the county four stipendiary Magistrates to administer justice; as it was thought that persons unconnected with the county, and consequently uninfluenced by any of the feelings of the resident magistracy, would show a proper energy in the administration of justice. In that opinion the Government seemed to have been justified by what had taken place, when, according to the hon. Member's own statement, the gentlemen of the county deserted their houses, and fled to the towns for protection, setting, as he must say, no bright example of self-devotion to the maintenance of the authority of the laws, in defence of which the country had a right to expect they would stand forward, not only at the expense of the loss of their ease and comfort, but at the peril of their lives. Now, although it was quite true, that the Government had received information from many quarters respecting the disorganized state of society in that county, it did not consider it advisable that the magistracy of Clare should be armed with such extraordinary powers, until the Lord Lieutenant had, by personal inspection, satisfied himself of the absolute necessity of applying so rigorous a measure as a remedy for the existing evils. The Lord Lieutenant, not satisfied with receiving reports from a distance of the state of the county, determined to assure himself, by personal inspection, of the real nature of the evils to which it was necessary to apply a remedy. The Government would, in a great measure, be guided by the opinion of the Lord Lieutenant, founded upon his own personal knowledge, whether it would be necessary to come to that House for extraordinary powers to remedy the existing evils. He confessed that the state of the county of Clare was one of the most lamentable that could be conceived; and not the least lamentable feature of it was the utter disorganization of society, whether that arose from political or other causes. The hon. Member said, that political and religious excitement had hitherto produced commotion; but at the present moment the disturbances were certainly connected with no political or religious feeling, for it was a war of the lower classes against the higher. He would not enter into the question as to whose fault it was, or whose conduct was the cause, that the whole of the lower classes were in direct hostility to the upper. The hon. Gentleman had confessed, that, in his opinion, the rents were too high, and that the distress of the lower classes was the cause of the disturbances; and yet all the remedy that he proposed was, that, at the first blush—at the first appearance of disorder—the Government should apply the extraordinary power given by the Insurrection Act. He complained that that Act had not been put in force six weeks ago—that the Government had not applied, as an ordinary and common remedy of the law, the extraordinary powers of the Insurrection Act. The hon. Gentleman told the House that he believed the Insurrection Act would not now be sufficient, and called upon the Government to apply some vigorous measures. They must, indeed, be vigorous measures, if he was not satisfied with the vigour of the Insurrection Act. The hon. Gentleman said, that that Act would not now be sufficient, because it did not apply to offences committed in the open day. Here the hon. Gentleman was misinformed. The Insurrection Act did apply to officers committed in the middle of the day; it did not create any new offence—it did not make that an offence in the middle of the day which was not so at present—but it gave an extraordinary power of adjudicating upon offences, by dispensing with the attendance of a Grand Jury, or a Petty Jury, and inflicting the punishment of transportation, on the finding of an Assistant Barrister and the magistracy. If that measure should be found necessary, the hon. Gentleman would perceive that his Majesty's Government were disposed to adopt all necessary means to remedy the existing evils. He was reluctant, particularly in the present state of the House, to enter more fully into the condition of Clare. The Government would be provided with the best and fullest information; and whenever if should be necessary to adopt more vigorous measures, they would be prepared to communicate to the House such information, including, of course, the paper for which the hon. Gentleman moved—as would justify them in proposing the adoption of so extraordinary and unconstitutional a measure as the Insurrection Act. He would not enter into a consideration of the ulterior measures alluded to by the hon. Gentle- man, as emigration, the colonization of waste lands, and particularly the important and delicate question of a modified system of Poor-laws. On the latter point he would only say, that as it appeared to him, a modified system of Poor-laws could in no possible way, and to no possible extent, remove the present evils of the county of Clare, which, as the hon. Gentleman told the House arose from the poverty of the people, caused by their want of employment. That could not be relieved by a modified system of Poor-laws, which could only provide that all who were out of work should be supported at the expense of the parish. This must lower rather than raise the miserable pittance which the poor of Clare now gained when they were employed, and must introduce the abuses which were complained of in this country as to settlement and other points. The Government, he would state, in conclusion, trusted that the measures which it had in contemplation, would suffice for the pacification of the disturbed districts, and these measures they were resolved to try before they had recourse to the Insurrection Act, which was so unconstitutional in its nature, that the application of it could only be justified by the most absolute necessity.

concurred with the right hon. Secretary in the opinion that nothing short of the most positive necessity could justify Government in placing such tremendous and unconstitutional powers in the hands of any body of men as would be conferred by the Insurrection Act. He deeply lamented the state of disorganization into which society had been reduced in the county of Clare; but he sincerely believed, that the evil was not deep-rooted, and he looked upon it as of a nature which admitted of a gentler remedy than some, in their overweening apprehension, were anxious to apply. The people laboured under the most terrible privations; and for disturbances, which had their origin in the general distress, the remedy which would naturally suggest itself was, in his mind, the amelioration of that miserable condition which drove the people into acts of desperation. He trusted, therefore, that in the measures which the right hon. Secretary intended to propose, the first consideration would be, the distressed state of the peasantry of Clare, and the fact that by this distress they had been goaded into that unfortunate breach of the laws of society, and of the laws of the land in which they were then engaged; and that remembering this, his Majesty's Government would diligently inquire into the causes of that distress, observing critically how far it might be calculated to arise from the peculiar state of the social system in Ireland, or the peculiar circumstances of the country—and how far from the defects, or from the mal-administration of the law; and that then the measures they submitted to the House would be addressed to the removal of those causes in which the distress was ascertained to have its origin.

was likewise of opinion, that the causes of the evil, which was of a transitory nature, lay on the surface of society. While he stated this, however, he was at the same time bound to confirm the statement of the hon. Members who had already spoken respecting the deplorable condition in which the county he had the honour to represent was at that moment plunged. It was perfectly true that outrages deeply to be lamented had taken place, and equally true it was that the peasantry was in a state of fearful organization. This dreadful state of things, however, he attributed to the distress under which the peasantry of Clare had so long groaned, but under which they could not be expected to succumb for ever. The man who deemed they could, knew, indeed, little of human nature. The distress, he contended, had originated in that complication of evils to which the Irish peasant was exposed — the tithe system—the oppressive mode of letting the land—the draining of the country's wealth for the benefit of absentees—the attempt at proselytism, under the guise of education—the Grand Jury Laws—and, above all, the maladministration of the laws in general. In addition to those evils, which might be supposed to press upon the Irish peasant in every part of the country, there were particular evils that affected the peasants of Clare. They had been exposed to the most galling persecution, in consequence of the independent vote they had given in 1828; and there was no county in Ireland, in which religious bigotry assumed a more offensive form. On more than one property—but especially on the estate of a Mr. Synge, whose name had, he believed, been before heard in that House—the tenants were persecuted, unless they consented that their children should attend the Protestant schools, and abandon the religion of their fathers. The conduct of the Magistrates, too, with scarcely an exception, was oppressive, and in many instances most atrocious. To such people, he contended, it was most improper to commit such great—such unconstitutional powers as those which would be vested in them by the Insurrection Act. They had already abused the more limited powers winch had been intrusted to them. Was that a reason for investing; them with other powers which scarcely knew any bounds? He could, if necessary, detail many instances of oppression and improper conduct upon the part of the Magistrates in Clare. There was one man amongst them, who was both a Justice of Peace, and a Chief Constable of Police. He, in fact, conveniently combined the two characters. Me seized the wretched peasant as a police constable—as a Magistrate he committed him to prison. In more than one instance it happened that people were carried to gaol on informations that were not sworn; and in one he had to state, that a Magistrate actually descended from the judgment seat, to beat the unfortunate peasant he had caused to be dragged before him. In another district of Clare, there was another Magistrate to whom he wished particularly to allude. This Magistrate sat in one room, but a higher authority sat in another room, to which he was compelled to refer, and under whose authority he was bound to decide. He might hear the case himself, but before he attempted to decide upon it, he was obliged to ask his lady what he should do. He stated this upon the authority of Mr. Malachy Duff, who was a most respectable gentleman, and certainly would not deceive him. From what he had seen and knew, therefore, he could not vote for intrusting increased powers to the Magistrates of Clare. Until of late, that county had been virgin. It never, even in the worst of times, had been stained by insurrection, much less reduced to its present lamentable state. Much of the spirit of hostility to a certain class of the gentry which prevailed, he attributed to Mr. Synge and his proselytising schools. Apprehensions that disturbances would occur had been long since entertained. Four years ago, a memorial from the landowners was transmitted to the Government, explain- ing that the seeds of evil had been sown in Clare. The Government acknowledged the receipt of the Memorial, but nothing was done, and yet in that Memorial it was distinctly stated, that the organization of the peasantry had commenced. There was no interference, and, consequently, the spirit of insurrection spread through the land, until the present state of things was induced, under which neither life nor property was safe. And now, indeed, at the eleventh hour, Government came forward to legislate under circumstances of difficulty, for that which, four years ago presented none. Had it been then attended to, a most lamentable effusion of human blood might have been spared. The insurgents in Clare now called themselves Terry-Alts—the origin of the name was this:—Terry-Alt was an old pensioner—an honest and loyal man—but he got into a quarrel with an agent named Stevenson, (it was understood) about not sending his child to a Protestant school, and Terry thought proper to beat the agent. The quarrel was merely personal; but other peasants, to whom this agent was obnoxious, thought proper to serve him with a threatening notice, and, in a spirit of jest, signed it with the name of "Terry-Alt, the pensioner," of whose personal prowess, it was presumed, he must retain an uneasy recollection. He believed that the Marquis of Anglesey's visit to Clare had been productive of great harm. If it had not been for that, he thought it probable the peasantry would have given up their arms. A deputy from one of the parishes had waited on him and Mr. Steele, and promised that all the arms should be given up at a particular spot. He had no doubt this would have been done, and that the example would have been followed by other parishes; but when the man heard of Lord Anglesey's expected visit, he said he could be no longer answerable for the performance of the promise, as the peasantry had universally declared they would not lay down their arms until Lord Anglesey did something for them. Mr. Steele and he had, however, spent a day and a night in endeavouring to get them to deliver up the arms. They partly succeeded; and, with the help of God, he trusted all the arms would be eventually given up. He hoped that Government would not, because there happened to be a calm at present, suppose that the gale would not rise again, but would endeavour to ameliorate the condition of the people. What he considered would mainly contribute to the pacification of the country was the letting of the land to the people upon fair terms, the preventing jobbing in the making of roads, a change in the Grand Jury Laws, and the Tithe System, and in the Administration of Justice. He thanked the House for listening to him so patiently, and assured them his statement was not overcharged. He most sincerely hoped, that the measures of the right hon. Secretary would restore the peace of the country.

defended the character of the Irish Magistracy generally, and thought that any instance of individual misconduct should be referred to the Lord Chancellor of Ireland. He regretted to believe that vigorous measures were necessary to suppress the insurrection in those southern counties, and he was reluctantly induced to believe that the Insurrection Act was perhaps necessary. As for the remedies for the prevalent distress, the Poor-laws, he was persuaded, must be introduced in Ireland sooner or latter; not in the shape in which they were now in England, but in an improved form, similar to what they were in principle when they were originally passed.

regretted to hear so distressing an account of the state of the peasantry in the county of Clare, to which state of distress the hon. Gentleman who had entered into a detail of it, had attributed the recent outrages and disturbances that had spread in that county. But he knew that cases of as flagrant a description had taken place in other parts of Ireland, where no such cause prevailed. He believed that they might be traced to the system of agitation which had unhappily been resorted to. He could point out instances of insubordination to the laws, instances of acts of violence having been committed where no pretence of distress could be found. He would name two instances where such misconduct was manifested by the people against a landlord who had been invariably kind and benevolent to his tenants and the people in the neighbourhood, and against a Clergyman who had equally a claim to the gratitude of the people around the place where he resided. As an instance of the means which were had recourse to for provoking agitation and stirring up insurrection, he would mention what lately occurred in Queen's county. At Montrath a gentleman presented himself to a public meeting, and made a long and inflammatory speech, of which he would read a short passage. "Those gentry say, and say truly, that if the Union was repealed, tithes would be abolished; but if they think that by pro-longing that measure they will secure tithes, they will be miserably deceived. Tithes are virtually abolished. I never will again pay a penny of tithes. Understand me, my friends,—I say again I will never pay tithe; the law, then, empowers the tithe-owner to take my property and sell it. I calculate on being esteemed by my countrymen, and I think the Irishman does not live who will buy my goods; and if the tithe-owner appropriates them to his own use, I am sure my fellow-parishioners will compensate me, and I promise them in return, that if the goods of any of them be brought to sale, I will not buy them, and that I will assist to compensate them. We will act as the society of Friends do; we will be a Society of friends. I will transgress no law; I will pay no tithe, but I will not obstruct the law. I am certain many people and many parishes will follow my example; may I not, then, say tithe is virtually abolished?" Such language was calculated to excite the people to whom it was addressed, and render them discontented. Although distress had in some cases caused the peasantry to commit excesses and acts at which every well-constituted mind shuddered, yet he was persuaded, as he had before stated, that to other causes those acts of outrage might be traced; and if the same influence were exerted, still similar acts would follow.

said, that if he was right in supposing that the person alluded to by the member for Clare (Mr. M. O'Connell) was Mr. Tomkins Brew, he could assure the hon. Gentleman that Mr. Brew, though he had been a Police Officer, and was now a Justice of the Peace, had never held the two offices together. If it could be proved that he had been guilty of the very improper conduct with which he was charged, he should be dismissed without delay.

wished it to be understood that there was no connexion whatever between the disturbances in Clare and the famine at present spreading through some parts of the west of Ireland. The people in that part, who were suffering the most grievous distress, and in whose behalf an appeal was now being made to the benevolence of the English nation, were not in a state of insurrection.

said, that whenever he heard of movements in Ireland, such as had been described by the hon. member for Ennis, insurrectionary though they might be called, he invariably attributed them to the excitement of intolerable distress; and strange as it might sound to English ears, he did not think there was a people in the world more easily governed than the Irish, if they were not goaded into disorders by oppression and misery. The distress which prevailed in every part of that country was such as would not be endured in England for a single day. He believed that it was mainly attributable to the intolerable exactions which were imposed upon the people in the shape of rent. Although Clare suffered cruelly in that respect, he well knew that other parts of Ireland were scarcely treated more favourably. The question now was, what was to be done to remedy the disorders which undeniably prevailed? Was it to be supposed that the Insurrection Act would prove an efficient remedy? Could the distresses of a starving people be mitigated by a rigorous and unconstitutional law? He hoped the House would pause before it acted on the suggestion of the hon. member for Ennis, if he had rightly understood that Gentleman to suggest the revival of that law. Measures of relief would be far more appropriate and more efficacious. No people on the face of the earth were more willing to labour than the peasantry of Ireland for their subsistence. They only wanted employment; they asked for means of obtaining food; they would be satisfied with a remuneration for their exertions which would enable them and their families to exist. They had a right to relief from the produce of that soil which they cultivated. He hoped, that the House would pause ere measures so harsh as those recommended were resorted to. He trusted that they would not be applied. There was no necessity for it. He would strongly recommend the immediate institution of a system of Poor-laws into that country. It was vain to tell him, that the exports of Ireland were becoming more valuable— that the imports were increasing—that the revenue was improving—and that these and other symptoms of national improvement were not to be denied. But he would reply, that while those signs of prosperity were to be observed, the condition of the mass of the people was fast deteriorating. To use the language of Doctor Doyle, in a pamphlet of great ability and interest, which he had recently published, the great body of the people were in a state of rapid transition from wretchedness to ruin. He admitted, that the people of England had a right to say to the Irish landlords that their soil was abundantly productive, and their revenues abundantly ample, and that they could well provide for the subsistence of their people from the resources of their own country, without coming to this country to beg for their relief. But, at the same time he hoped, that in the present appalling distress, the benevolence of the people of England would not be appealed to in vain, and that the enactment of Poor-laws would prevent the necessity of any such appeal hereafter.

had no doubt that the disturbances were caused by distress, for the Irish were the most suffering and distressed people in the whole world.

had not intended to have troubled the House on the present occasion, but he could not refrain from adding one sentence to what he had said at other times, when the distresses of Ireland had come under their consideration. He was opposed on every ground to the introduction of the Insurrection Act into that country. An Act of that coercive nature might be a very good and effectual method for quelling disturbances and riots at the moment, but it ever left a sting behind it, in the bosoms of the peasantry, who would be readier to join in any subsequent insurrectionary movement from having suffered under the arbitrary oppression of such an Act. He entirely concurred in what had fallen from the right hon. Gentlemen on the other side, with respect to the real cause of the disturbances now-existing in the county of Clare. They were not the result of any political feeling, but the sole and only cause of those disturbances was poverty—grinding, hope-less poverty—and they had the additional stimulus to complaint, from seeing the produce of the country sent out of Ireland, to be sold for the benefit of the absentees, to the amount of 210,000l. a-year, not one farthing of which ever returned to them. He had been himself a long time opposed to the introduction of Poor-laws into that country, as he was aware of the inconveniences and evils with which they were attended. But in respect to Ireland, it had become a question of life and death, and he believed that the enactment of a legal provision for the poor, out of the produce of the soil, ought no longer to be delayed. The opposition of the people in some disturbed parts of Ireland to the exaction of tithes had been much spoken of; but he would ask, did Gentlemen think that the present system of tithes could continue? The people, for the support of the religion in which they believed, paid willingly for one Church, and the laws compelled them to pay for another with which they had nothing further to do than to support it at a vast expense. There were thus two funds in Ireland which ought to be made available for the support of the poor—one, the excessive income of the Church; the other the excessive rent of the absentees. While he was member for the county of Clare, he had made but one application for a gentleman to be put in the commission of the peace. That gentleman was a Mr. Bridgeman, a person in all respects qualified to be a Magistrate; but the late Chancellor had not condescended even to return an answer to this application. Notwithstanding what had been said of the respectability of the four stipendiary Magistrates in Clare, to whom the enforcement of the Insurrection Act would be intrusted, should it be put into operation in that county, he could assure the right hon. Secretary for Ireland that two of the four had been insolvents, and that people said, with what justice he did not know, that one of those gentlemen had not undergone a clean white-washing. But be the character of the Magistrates what it might, the powers given them by that Act were such as no man ought to possess. The necessary consequence of its operation was, to render the notion of constitutional law a matter of ridicule with the people. It turned the Court of Justice into a Court Martial, with all the arbitrary severity, but with none of the honour, of the Military Court.

begged to correct a misapprehension into which the hon. and learned member for Waterford had fallen, as to what he had said of the causes of the Clare disturbances. He had not attributed those riots to the existence of any political feeling in that county, but he had, in talking of the disturbances which arose from political feeling, alluded to other parts of the country where the condition of the people, as far as related to food and the other necessaries of life, was not such as to lead them to become insurgents from causes of poverty.

said, there was much reason to apprehend that the disturbance now prevailing in Clare would extend itself to districts only separated from it by the Shannon—districts in which there were 1,000 square miles without resident proprietors, and of which the produce was devoted to swell the revenues of absentees. There was no one, who paid the slightest attention to the altered state of the resources of Ireland, who must not be fully aware that those resources had of late years fearfully diminished; if the trade in provisions had increased, the price had fallen, and the linen trade might almost be considered at an end. In fact, at the present moment, the exports of Ireland might be looked on as reduced to the single article of corn, which annually amounted to between 2,000,000 and 3,000,000 quarters—that was the sum total of export to which the labours of 8,000,000 of human beings were to be directed, and he might add, to that alone. In such a state of things, he could only look to measures of amelioration. It was the duty of the Government to adopt measures of amelioration, for, without them, life would not be worth having. It was the first duty of the Government to see that the people had support and employment—and support and employment could only be ensured to them by a large assessment levied upon the lands of absentees, and upon those of other proprietors. He felt it his duty thus to come forward, as an Irish gentleman, representing a free constituency, for he felt that it was at once for the interest of Ireland, and of the empire at large, that the battle should be fought in that House, and not at fairs with pikes and bludgeons. At once he felt bound to declare, that the Legislature had the power, and should have the disposition, to adopt measures of amelioration. He was sure he spoke not only his own sentiments, but those of a large proportion of the gentlemen connected with Ireland, when he said, that unless some measure of amelioration were adopted, they could not hope for security, nor could they be ancillary to improvement.

said, that if the distress was so urgent, and the disorganization of society in Clare so serious as they had been represented to be, he begged to call the attention of the House to a matter still more serious,—namely, how far the Government was prepared to arrest the progress of this state of things to other parts of the country. Ministers must and would, he was sure, do him the justice to say, that four mouths ago he called upon the Government to arm themselves with force adequate to the coming danger; for four months ago he had foreseen that danger. Would the Government now dare to tell him—would they dare to tell Ireland, that within those four months they had taken precautions adequate to the emergency? The people of that part of the country in which his property was situated were quiet and tranquil at present, and he trusted that they would remain so; but was he for that reason to be insensible to the dangers which threatened other parts of the country? He would not then inquire into the causes of disturbances,— though he was prepared to enter into the inquiry at any convenient time, and when the inquiry was instituted, he did not think there would be much difference of opinion with regard to those causes. What, however, he wanted to know was this,—had the Government used proper precautions? He was not called upon to enter into a defence of the conduct of Irish landlords generally; it was sufficient for him if he could justify his own conduct as a landlord: but he must say, that no one had a right to stigmatize the Irish landlords without knowing what they had had to contend with for the last thirty-five years. Gentlemen might very coolly and very philosophically talk about the practicability of individual defences being made against the attacks of an insurrectionary mob; but had they ever, even in imagination, made the case their own? It was notorious, that in some parts of Ireland many gentlemen had been for thirty-five years past in what was called a state of siege. He was not interested in praising or censuring the landlords of Clare; he had nothing to do with their conduct, of which he knew little; but he must say, that no Government ought to excuse or tolerate open disorganization and outrage, on the ground that landlords had not conducted themselves as well as they might have done. It was the business of a Government to uphold the laws. If it were necessary for him to state it, he was ready to state what he as an individual, should be prepared to do under the circumstances; but he objected altogether to the Insurrection Act; he had objected to it twenty-five years ago, and he objected to it now. He objected to it principally on the grounds which had been urged by the hon. member for Waterford; but he objected to it in this particular case upon this other ground also,—namely, that if the gentlemen of Clare were, as they had been represented, afraid to remain in their houses, they certainly were not persons to whom the ad-ministration of such an Act ought to be intrusted. He protested against the having recourse to the Insurrection Act, and upon this, amongst other grounds—that it was a law which was extremely liable to be abused and perverted. In his opinion, when any departure was made from the law and practice of the Constitution of the country, it should be laid upon the responsibility of the Government, and not upon that of the local Magistracy. It was much to be apprehended, if measures were not promptly taken by the Government to put an end to the atrocities which were now continually committed in the south-west of Ireland, that the evil would spread to such an extent, and the system of disorganization would become so general, that it would be extremely hard to deal with it. He would therefore urge upon his Majesty's Government the necessity of adopting some measures for that purpose without delay. He would add further, that he hoped his Majesty's Government had estimated the extent of the danger, so as to provide a sufficient force to meet it. Every measure proposed to strengthen the hands of Government in Ireland would meet the assent of the House, and the execution of whatever extraordinary powers it might be necessary to invest the Government with, could never be exercised with more humanity and generosity than by the noble Lord now at the head of the Government of Ireland. He did not concur with those who thought that the distress or poverty of Ireland palliated the enormities which had been lately committed in some parts of Clare; but he would contend, at the same time, that the Government and the Legislature should speedily set about devising measures for bettering the condition of the people of that country. He was astonished by the doctrine which, if he had not greatly misunderstood the hon. member for Kil- kenny (Mr. Leader), had been implied in the statements made that night by that hon. Member—namely, that the agricultural exports of Ireland were productive of evil to that country, and that the 3,000,000 quarters of corn which he stated was the amount exported from Ireland, would, if retained there, provide food for the now destitute and starving population. The hon. Member seemed to forget, that if a prohibition were laid upon the export of corn from Ireland, the amount which was now exported from it might not be produced there. One of the sound and common-sense maxims of political economy might have reminded the hon. Member that such would be the effect of placing a restriction upon the exportation of the agricultural produce of Ireland. In his opinion, to advocate the doctrine that the export of produce was not beneficial to Ireland, was to maintain what might lead to the most mischievous consequences. The people, if they could be persuaded that such a doctrine was well-founded, might assemble at the out-ports and put a stop to the exports, than which nothing could occur that would be attended with more fatal and dangerous results. He contended, that nothing was more desirable for Ireland than to increase the export of its produce; at the same time that no one could be more desirous than he was, that the producers should live in comfort. His acquaintance with Ireland, however, led him to conclude, that it might afford abundance of subsistence for its own population, and that there would still be an enormous amount to export. He agreed with those who thought that nothing could be more criminal, and at the same time more absurd, than the treatment of the labouring population of Ireland. There was much improvement required in the mode in which the peasantry were treated in Ireland. The real interests of the landlords of Ireland would be truly consulted and promoted by affording adequate settlements, upon fair and moderate terms, to the peasantry upon their lands. Wherever capital was thus expended on land in Ireland, it invariably gave an abundant return. He could mention many instances in proof of the fact, and in his own case he would state, that he derived a return of twelve per cent and upwards from capital so laid out. It was the interest of every landlord in Ireland to place the labourers on his estate in comfort. It was truly stated by the hon. member for Clare (Mr. Maurice O'Connell) that those peasants who occupied land in the pasture districts suffered the greatest hardships; but he (Mr. Fitzgerald) would not countenance the opinion that any disadvantages which this portion of the peasantry suffered justified those outrages, which were an aggravation of the evil. The export of corn from Ireland was stated at 2,250,000 quarters, and, taking that quantity at an average of 1l. 10s. a quarter, it amounted to no more than 3,375,000l., which was no great sum out of the income of Ireland. For his part, he sincerely hoped that the exports from Ireland to this country would daily increase, and that the two countries would be more intimately identified. In conclusion, he called upon the Government to bring forward some measure of adequate protection for property in Ireland.

said, that nothing could be further from his mind than to attempt to limit the exports of Ireland; but, on the contrary, his earnest wish was to see them extended; and he had complained that at present they were so small.

said, that it was easy to dilate on all the mischiefs under which Ireland was labouring, but not so easy to point out to his Majesty's Government any remedy for the numerous diseases. In his opinion, the picture that had been drawn was much distorted and overcharged. With respect to the absentees of Ireland, he thought that it was a grievance to which they must submit; but his remedy for that evil was the making a permanent relief for the poor of Ireland. That question, he was happy to say, was making great progress in Ireland, and daily acquiring advocates, in spite of the attempts of interested persons to check it; and he had no doubt that it would finally be carried into effect. The Magistracy of the country were greatly maligned, but he believed much of the misconduct ascribed to them was to be traced to the absence of those from the country, who, if they resided in it, must have influence from wealth and property. The hon. member for Clare (Mr. Maurice O'Connell) in a speech of great promise, had justly described the high rents of land held in Ireland as one of the sources of evil. He thought a return shewing the amount of rents paid for land in that part of the country would be desirable. It would justify, he was sure, dissatisfaction—he did not say outrage—and would go far to ac- count for the disturbances which prevailed. As the question of Poor-laws for Ireland had been gaining ground in that country, and. in Parliament, for several years, he hoped his Majesty's Government would take it into consideration. It would be much better they should adopt some measure of that kind than look to the Insurrection Act, which had failed, after an experience of thirty years. As to exports, he thought the export of produce was the most miserable kind of export, and that most to be deprecated, and agreed with the sentiments contained in the best book ever written on Ireland—that by the hon. member for Newark—in which he said, that when there was distress the export of corn and cattle ought to be stopped, and applied to feed the people.

said, that he had listened to all the speeches that had been made; and they appeared to come to this conclusion, that Ireland was in a state of great distress, yet that a system of Poor-laws was the only remedy. If this was the case, why did not some Irish Member propose such a system to that House, and not leave it to English Members to do their business for them? He had never seen any reason why the people of Ireland should not have Poor-laws; and if the House was prepared to refuse them, the best thing they could do would be, to vote with the hon. member for Waterford for the Repeal of the Union.

said, that after the disturbances which had been taking place in Ireland, the Government was bound to take steps to prevent them, and in so doing they should have his humble support. With respect to Poor-laws for Ireland, perhaps something in that way might be done; but as to transplanting the English system of Poor-laws to Ireland, that, in his opinion, was impracticable. The residence of the gentry on the estates would tend to relieve the distress of Ireland. The county he represented (Wexford) was in a very prosperous condition, and this, he believed, was owing to the great number of resident landlords.

expressed his satisfaction at the candour with which the hon. Gentleman had done justice to the former Board of Ordnance, in acknowledging its economy.

approved of the arrangements proposed, and complimented the hon. Member on the clearness of his statement. The hon. Gentleman had admitted, as he understood, that the whole actual saving made by the present Board was only 3,000l. The other apparent diminution arose from the balances in hand, and from the Ordnance Board not requiring so many stores as had been formerly required, and from works having been suspended. There was, in point of fact, no important reduction of the expense of that office. He objected to the abolition of the office of Lieutenant-general of the Ordnance, and declared that, in the appointment of Major-general Cockburn to be Inspector-General of the Marines, the present Government had followed the example of the late Government; which, out of office, the present Ministers had condemned. They had objected also to the late Board of Ordnance being all military men, and they had appointed to the Board of Admiralty, even to the Secretary, none but naval men. Out of office, too, they had reproached the late Ministers with not attending to the recommendation of the Finance Committee; and in office they had positively declared, no longer than last night, that they could not follow such recommendation.

repeated his previous statements with respect to the total amount of diminished charges and saving upon the present Estimate. He denied that the right hon. and gallant Member was correct in describing the saving as being only 3,000l. —the right hon. Gentleman might just as well have asserted that it did not exceed 3l. He (Mr. Tennyson) thought that the details into which he had before entered must have satisfied the Committee that the actual saving would be, rating it at the lowest, 100,000l., if not 166,000l.

denied that a diminution of charge for a single year could be considered a saving, for it was merely abstaining from doing in 1831 what would be done in 1832, and without benefit to the public. He repeated, therefore, that the saving was only 3,000l. and cautioned the hon. Gentleman on the danger of allowing the Ordnance establishments, which were purely scientific, to go to decay; for if he did let them down, he would not find it easy to raise them up again.

wished to draw the attention of the Committee to one very important point, because it, was connected with the efficiency of the Navy. The sum of 53,000l. was called for on account of repairs. Now he doubted the adequacy of that sum, because he understood that a most experienced and intelligent officer had stated, that there were, at present, no less than 10,000 naval gun-carriages out of repair, and for which he could not answer. Situated as Europe was at present, this was a matter of most serious importance.

censured the plan which Government had long adopted, of collecting large quantities of stores to perish and decay. Here it appeared, from the statement of the hon. Baronet, that there were 10,000 rotten gun-carriages in store. The saving proposed in these Estimates by his Majesty's Government were, he was sorry to say, very trifling, but he trusted that they would be greater hereafter. The whole expenditure under this head was manifestly too large, considering the situation of the country.

denied, that he had spoken of rotten gun-carriages. He said it was reported that a most experienced officer had represented that there were 10,000 gun-carriages which were out of repair.

contended, in opposition to the gallant Officer (Sir H. Hardinge), that a very considerable saving had been really effected in these Estimates. He certainly considered the not calling for a grant, on account of certain works, as a saving. Some of those works might hereafter be deemed unnecessary.

only wished to observe, that a greater saving had been made under the Duke of Wellington. In the salaries of civil officers alone, it was 47,000l. The number of stations now was only one or two more than in 1792, though we had now seven or eight powder-magazines included amongst them.

said, that the late Government had acted in the teeth of the Report of the Committee of Finance, which had recommended the abolition of the office of Lieutenant-general of the Ordnance. The present Government immediately abolished the situation, and yet it was admitted the service was as well carried on without that office as with it.

said, the recommendation of the Committee was contrary to the evidence given before them.

admitted and praised the economy of the present Government, and said, that the conduct of the late Administration, in resisting reductions which had been recommended to them, brought about that measure of Reform which he so much deprecated.

said, that the present Government had not begun the Ordnance Estimates. They had only reviewed them. When they should have an opportunity of forming estimates of their own, a greater reduction might be expected.