Sivut kuvina
PDF
ePub

CHAPTER III.

Affairs of Ireland-Distracted state of that Country and extreme Distress, from the renewed effects of the Potato Blight-Bill to continue the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, brought in by Sir George Grey, on the 6th of February-His description of the social Condition of Ireland-Mr. John O'Connell moves an Amendment, which is rejected, and the Bill brought in—Debate upon the Second ReadingSpeeches of Mr. Reynolds, Mr. Disraeli, Lord John Russell, and Sir Robert Peel-The Motion is carried by 275 to 33-Grant of 50,000l. in aid of distressed Unions proposed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer-Debate thereon-Important Speech of Sir James Graham-Mr. Grattan moves an Amendment-Mr. Stafford censures the Ministerial Policy in regard to Ireland, and moves an Amendment condemnatory of the Grant-He is answered by Lord John Russell-An Amendment proposed by Mr. Stafford is nega tived by a majority of 120, and the original Proposition is carried by 220 to 143-Select Committee upon the Irish Poor Law proposed by the Secretary for Ireland-Motion agreed to--The Marquis of Lansdowne moves for a similar Committee in the House of Lords, which is also nominated-The Committees having entered on their inquiry, Lord John Russell proposes a Committee of the whole House for the purpose of considering his Resolution in favour of a Rate in Aid-The Proposition is warmly opposed, and the Motion to go into Committee is not carried till after a long Debate-On the 3rd of March, Lord John Russell proposes his Resolution in CommitteeHis Speech on that occasion-Speeches of Mr. Stafford, Mr. John O'Connell, Mr. Fagan, Mr. Bankes, Mr. Monsell, Sir Charles Wood, and the Earl of Lincoln-The Government Proposition is at length carried by 206 to 34-Rate-in-Aid Bill brought in-Protracted Debate on the Second Reading, which is three times adjourned-Remarkable Speech of Sir R. Peel, in which he developes at great length his own Views, and suggests a Plan for the Redemption of Landed Property in Ireland-Speeches of Mr. Napier, Mr. Bright, Mr. Disraeli, Lord John Russell, Mr. Monsell, Mr. S. Crawford, Mr. Horsman, and other Members-On a Division the Second Reading is carried by 193 to 138-Debate in the House of Lords on the Rate-in-Aid Bill— The Earl of Carlisle moves the Second Reading, which is opposed by the Earl of Roden, the Archbishop of Dublin, Earl Fitzwilliam, Lord Monteagle, and the Earl of Wicklow; and supported by Lord Beaumont, the Marquises of Lansdowne and Clanricarde, Lord Audley, and Earl St. Germains-On a Division the Second Reading is carried

by a Majority of 1, viz., 48 against 47-The Third Reading is again strongly opposed by the Earls of Glengall, Mountcashel, and Wicklow, also by Lord Desart and Lord De Ros-The Earl of Carlisle and Lord Cremorne support the Measure-The Third Reading is carried by 37 to 29.

RISH affairs constituted this

IR

year, as usual, a large part of the business of the session. To restore the tranquillity of that unsettled portion of the kingdom was the first object; to save its starving people from destitution by grants of money, and to make provision for the permanent maintenance of pauperism by law, without imposing excessive burthens on property, was the second and more difficult problem. The repression of crime and outrage was the necessity which the Government felt itself called upon to meet at the earliest period, and accordingly, in the first week of the session, a renewal of the law passed in the preceding year for suspending the Habeas Corpus Act in certain districts was proposed by the Secretary of State for the Home Department. In bringing forward this Motion on the 6th of February, Sir George Grey observed that the circumstances under which he proposed its continuance were widely different from those under which Lord John Russell had proposed its enactment. There were no parties now in arms against the Crown in Ireland, but the secret organization which had stimulated the late insurrection was still more or less in existence, whilst the spirit of disaffection was yet prevalent, particularly in the districts which were the scene of the recent insurrectionary attempt.

Looking, then, at this organization, which was only in abeyance if not in actual operation, and at the spirit of disaffection which, in

some districts of the country, scarcely courted concealment, the Government felt bound, in order to prevent a recurrence of the insane movement of last year, and to restore, as far as possible, confidence and security to the well-affected in Ireland, to demand of Parliament the continuance, for a further limited time, of the extraordinary powers recently intrusted to the Lord Lieutenant.

The spirit in which Lord Clarendon had already exercised the powers confided to him was a guarantee that their operation, if continued, would be strictly limited to the necessities of the case. He then read the greater part of a letter addressed by the Lord Lieutenant to the Prime Minister, to show that it was his Excellency's opinion, founded upon the most ample information, that the continuance of the powers in question was absolutely indispensable to the maintenance of tranquillity in Ireland. As to the time for which their continuance was sought, it was the anxious desire of the Government to limit it to the shortest possible period. He would, therefore, propose that the Act passed last July should be continued for a further period of six months, and concluded by moving for leave to bring in a Bill to that effect.

Mr. John O'Connell warmly opposed the Motion, and proposed, as an Amendment, that a Committee, consisting of twenty-one Members, be formed by ballot, to examine such documents as might be laid before it; and to report to

the House its opinion upon those documents, whether the continuance of the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act be a measure necessary to the tranquillity of Ire land at the existing time.

The Solicitor-General opposed the amendment as totally inconsistent with the objects of the Bill, which, however, he stated would not at all interfere with the holding of public meetings for legitimate and proper purposes.

Mr. E. B. Roche denounced the Bill as arbitrary, unconstitutional, and unnecessary. Mr. Reynolds also opposed it, but recommended Mr. J. O'Connell to withdraw his Amendment. Colonel Rawdon supported the Bill. After some

further discussion the House divided upon the Motion for going into Committee, when there appeared

[merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

The second reading of the Habeas Corpus Suspension (Ireland) Bill was moved in the House of Commons on the 9th of February, when a long discussion ensued. The speakers for the Bill wereCol. Thompson, Mr. Trelawny, Lord Bernard, Sir W. Somerville, Lord Claud Hamilton, Mr. Hume, Mr. Disraeli, Lord John Russell, and Sir Robert Peel. Against the Bill speeches were made by Mr. O'Flaherty, Mr. Sadleir, Sir H. W. Barron, Mr. S. Crawford, Mr. Osborne, Mr. Reynolds, Mr. E. B. Roche, and Mr. Grattan. We give a short summary of the more important speeches. The debate in general contained little matter of novelty or interest.

Ire

Mr. Reynolds opposed the Bill, having heard nothing during the debate, either on that or the previous stage of the Bill, to justify him in giving it his support. land was now tranquil, but its tranquillity was like that of the grave. grave. The people in that country were now so prostrate as not to be in a fighting humour. He did not think that the censures thrown by some Members upon the Lord Lieutenant were deserved. If for nothing else, the Earl of Clarendon was deserving of all praise for having refused to arm the Orangemen when instigated to do so. He voted in the minority last July, when the measure was proposed, and when he admitted that there was some reason for demanding it, and it could not be expected that he would now vote for its continuance, when no necessity existed for it.

Mr. Disraeli had supported the measure of last year without reserve. He supported that now submitted to the House, because he thought that it was demanded by the exigency of the case. The circumstances under which the Bill was now submitted were not precisely the same as those which accompanied the passing of the Act of last year; but the general aspect of affairs was not so changed as to justify him in incurring the responsibility of refusing on this occasion to support the Government. But when the Chief Secretary told them that the present measure was submitted, not so much on account of the exigency of the case, as to draw from the House an expression of confidence in Her Majesty's Government, he could not give that silent vote which it was at first his intention to give,

lest his motives in doing so should be misconceived. The Government were in the habit of claiming support as a mark of confidence in themselves; but they were so in the habit of obtaining support on most occasions in the House, that they should not be too curious as to the source whence it sprung. He could not, for his own part, support them as a mark of his confidence in them. Their conduct, ever since he had taken a part in public life, had not been such as would form an emblazoned page in the history of Whiggism. And when he considered their Irish policy, he was still more indisposed to repose any confidence in them. He was surprised at a declaration made that night by Sir William Somerville. What effect that declaration would have upon the future conduct of the "provisional patriots" of Ireland remained to be seen. The Chief Secretary had drawn a distinction between treason and agitation. The distinction was, in his opinion, something like that existing "between adultery and rape.' The Bill, it appeared, was to be directed against treason, but not against agitation. He trusted it would be directed against agitation, seeing the evils which a very recent agitation had entailed upon Ireland. Peace was what was now wanted for that country-a peace which would enable the Government to introduce those comprehensive remedial measures which England now universally demanded on behalf of Ireland. It was to secure that peace and give the Government the opportunity of prosecuting such measures that he now supported them; and he held them responsible, the opportunity being given to them, for

[ocr errors]

such measures as the exigency of the case imperatively demanded.

Lord John Russell would not have thought it necessary to address the House on that occasion, but for certain allusions which had been made to his own past conduct, and to that of many with whom he had the honour of acting. He said that the Bill before the House contemplated treasonable designs and practices. The power to imprison persons suspected of treasonable practices was to be placed in the hands of the Lord Lieutenant, who was of opinion that, in the present state of Ireland, any agitation in that country should be carefully watched. Such as tended merely to the production of a petition, or the like, he could not, even if he would, interfere with. But the meetings of an association which was likely to ripen into a conspiracy, and which tended to lead to treasonable practices, should be carefully watched, and if such practices were carried on or threatened by it, it would be the bounden duty of the Lord Lieutenant to secure the peace of the country by the application of the powers conferred upon him by the Bill.

Mr. J. O'Connell here rose, and asked if the noble Lord imputed "treasonable practices" to him?

Lord John Russell observed that as the honourable Gentleman had asked him the question he would answer it. The honourable Gentleman might carry on agitation without intending treason. But, judging from the past history of the Association with which the honourable Gentleman was connected, he could have no confidence in the safety of any agitation which the honourable Gentleman might set

He

up in Dublin. (Cheers.) acquitted the honourable Gentleman of "treasonable practices," but he was not prepared to say that those whom he might assemble would be equally innocent of treasonable designs. He believed that any association which the honour able Gentleman might revive would be likely to come under the penalties of the Act. The noble Lord then went into a brief history of the Appropriation Clause, and of other political events of a recent date, in reply to the charges made by some preceding speakers against his conduct, and that of those with whom he had co-operated. He then, in conclusion, dwelt upon the necessity which existed for securing peace to Ireland at the present moment, in order that measures of amelioration might be introduced with a chance of success. Should Parliament sanction such measures as the Government might introduce, he trusted that they would be found such as would answer their purpose; should Parliament not sanction them, it would be for others to propose such measures as would secure its assent.

Sir R. Peel observed that it was his intention to support the Bill. He would vote for it with reluctance, but there would be great danger in permitting the Act now to expire. His vote would not be given from any particular confidence in those by whom the Bill was to be administered. He had great respect for Lord Clarendon, but that should not weigh in the slightest degree with him in the course which he was about to pursue. Lord Clarendon had not abused his powers, nor would Lord de Grey, nor Lord Heytesbury have done so. But the personal cha

racter of a Lord Lieutenant should

form no reason why they should depart from the constitution. He deprecated making Ireland a battle ground for party, but he could not avoid, after what had fallen from the noble Lord, following him in the review which he had just taken of party transactions, commencing with the Appropriation Clause. The right honourable Gentleman then proceeded to convict the noble Lord of historical inaccuracy in his relation of these transactionsan inaccuracy such as the noble Lord had himself charged other Members with. The right honourable Gentleman here amused the House by the account which he gave of the history of the Appropriation Clause. Referring to the Arms Bill, of 1846, he proceeded to show that it had not, as Lord John Russell had alleged, been rejected because it was unsuitable to the exigency of the case. opposing that Bill, the noble Lord had laid it down, as a condition of coercive measures, that measures of amelioration should precede them. He would, on this occasion, exact no such condition from the noble Lord, but would vote for this Bill to give him an opportunity of introducing such comprehensive measures for the amelioration of Ireland as they were all anxious to see enacted.

In

After a few words from Mr. Moore, the House divided, and the numbers were→→→

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]
« EdellinenJatka »