Lloyd in directing the arrest of this | land; but, at the same time, he could not esteemed clergyman. The Prime Mi- but regret that hon. Gentlemen below nister accused me some time ago of the Gangway had not met Her Majesty's want of courtesy to him. I should be Government in another spirit, and had very sorry to be wanting in courtesy not aided them in their effort to carry to the right hon. Gentleman. I can further the object the Premier had in assure him that, in explaining, I had view in proposing the Bill which became no intention to show a want of courtesy law in 1870. to him. ["Oh, oh!"] But I would wish to say that perhaps the Prime Minister, before accusing hon. Members on this side of the House of want of courtesy, might direct his own Followers to be more observant of the ordinary courtesy of Parliamentary life than they showed last evening, when they deliberately insulted many of the Irish Members as they were walking out of the House by interjecting remarks of a most offensive and personal character; and as such we passed them by. For my part, I regret that the Government have embarked upon this renewed course of outrage and coercion on Ireland. It will entirely mar whatever effect the Land Law (Ireland) Bill might possibly have as a matter of justice to Ireland, even if that Bill be very extensively amended. The course that you have taken puts it utterly out of your power to say that you have done anything with a feeling of justice to the Irish people, for you are treating them in a way which the high spirit and the sense of the people cannot possibly stand.

MR. GIVAN said, that he sincerely deprecated the arrest of Father Sheehy, against whose character he was sure nothing could be said. The arrest would create widespread indignation and resentment, not only throughout Ireland, but throughout America and every other part of the world where the Irish people were scattered; for if there was one feeling more indigenous in the hearts of the Irish people than another, it was their deep-rooted respect for the priesthood. He (Mr. Givan) had not the pleasure of knowing the reverend gentleman, but had heard that his life was devoted to the promotion of the best interests of his people. He could bear testimony to the manner in which the priests of the North of Ireland had restrained the people and counselled them against obstructing the remedial measures proposed by the present Government. There was, no doubt, some cause for disaffection and for agitation in IreMr. Parnell

MR. O'KELLY said, that his belief was the arrest of Father Sheehy would have a good effect, for it would place in the clearest light the conduct of the Government and the uses they were making of the Coercion Law, which they obtained under false pretences. The professed object was the suppres sion of violence and the arrest of ruffians, and not such arrests as those now complained of-namely, those persons who were the most respectable and the most respected in their several districts by the people. The right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland might, as a result of one of these ar rests, be complimented on having added to his title of "Buckshot Forster" an other with which he would be known by henceforth-namely, "Priest-hunting Forster."

MR. BIGGAR said, the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland had been exceedingly discourteous to hon. Gentlemen, and had exhibited the grossest ignorance on subjects which should have been within his knowledge, and had shown his incompetence for his position. He (Mr. Biggar) contended that the Government had misled the country as to the object of the Coercion Bill, as was proved by the character of the arrests which had been made. He quite agreed in the inconvenience of moving the adjournment of the House at Question time; but, he would ask, what were they to do when Ministers would not give them information which they had a right to obtain? At first, he did think they were men who could be trusted, when the Government came into Office; but as soon as the proposal was made to introduce the Coercion Bill, as soon as the Prime Minister turned his back on the professions he made before the Election, he ceased to have any confidence in any statement coming from the Treasury Bench.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member is not entitled to say of any Member of the House that he does not believe a statement he has made,

MR. BIGGAR begged leave to apologize for having used the expression, because, as the House knew, he was exceedingly anxious not to use un-Parliamentary language; but they could not surely expect Irish Members to have confidence in a Government such as the one now in power. Why, the Chief Secretary for Ireland was the pet of the Tories of Bradford, and it came with a bad grace for him to pose as an exponent of Liberalism. Nor could Irish Members be expected to place confidence in an Attorney General who was a confidential friend of the late Lord Leitrim, and who had defended the unscrupulous conduct of such men as Mr. Hussey, the agent of Lord Kenmare, and Mr. Townsend, the agent of Mr. Coote.

Coercion Act, now that it was in operation, as he protested against it when the Bill was before that House. To arrest one of the priests of Ireland was to do a very dangerous thing, and he did not. hesitate to say that it was an outrage on the feelings of the great majority of the Irish people. He also entered his protest against sending down to the South a violent and prejudiced Northern magistrate. Were they, then, come to this, that they had tramp magistrates in Ireland? He was satisfied of the imperfections of the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland; but having a very difficult duty to perform he (Mr. Macdonald) would appeal to Irish Members to show more mercy to the right hon. Gentleman, who, like the other Members of the Government, was anxious to give Ireland a good Land Bill, which, it was to be hoped, would settle the question.

MR. WARTON rose to Order. Were they discussing the Land Bill?

MR. SPEAKER said, the hon. Member for Stafford must be aware he could not discuss the Land Law (Ireland) Bill, as it was not then before the House.

MR. MACDONALD, resuming, said, he was not discussing the Land Law (Ireland) Bill, or thinking of such. He was in the hands of the Chair, and felt that if he in any way digressed that he should be told so. He totally objected to be under the ruling of the hon. and learned Member for Bridport, or any other novice that took upon himself the duties of censor of the House. He implored the Government to abandon the course they were now pursuing in regard to arrests.

MR. DALY wished the Government to realize the effect the arrest of Father Sheehy would have on the moderate men of Ireland. It would alienate the Catholic priesthood, to whom the Government had been largely indebted for the preservation of peace. It would be regarded as an outrage on the whole body unless serious ground could be shown for it. In saying that, he did not wish to suggest that a priest should be regarded as in any sense above the law; but he knew that the utterances of Father Sheehy had not been as violent as those of several men who were still at large. The Irish people required to be subject to some restraints, and the persons who had the power to restrain them were the Catholic clergy; but the arrest of one of them would weaken that power. It would rankle in the minds of the people, and all the more because of undue reticence in stating the charge. He did not blame the MiTaking all things into consideration, he nistry, but the Executive at Dublin denounced it the more on the part of the Castle; and he would again ask Irish Government, when bringing in a reme- Members to be more considerate in their dial measure, to make an arrest which treatment of the right hon. Gentleman. was an insult to the mind and sentiment["No, no!"] Hon. Members should of the Irish people. It was the bounden duty of the Government to make allowance for the condition of things in Ireland, and he was very sorry for the sake of the peace, which he loved, that such an insult had taken place to the people of Ireland. For that reason he could not but add his protest to the others against the arrest which had taken place.

MR. MACDONALD said, he felt it his duty to protest against this act of retrogression that had been committed by the Government under the operation of the

treat him kindly; whereas they seemed to be hunting him for his scalp every day. He urged the Government to release the priest, and allow the Business of the House to proceed, in order to promote the peace and happiness of Ireland.

MR. WHITWORTH was greatly surprised that the Government had employed the magistrate whose name had been mentioned. A more dangerous man they could not send to the South of Ireland. His (Mr. Whitworth's) brother,

who was a magistrate in Drogheda, | upon his shoulders, though, of course, told him that if this man were sent to he must share the responsibility with the disturbed districts there would be other Members of the Government. He bloodshed. At the same time, he blamed would make a strong appeal to the right the Chief Secretary for Ireland for being hon. Gentleman, and to the Prime Mitoo lenient. It was his great fault that nister in particular, in the interest of he was too lenient, and that he had not peace and of the measure before the put his foot firmly enough down. Every House, to reconsider this mistaken step, man who made a seditious speech ought with a view to the liberation of the to be arrested. Members of the Land priest. As yet, there was still time to League posed as the friends of Ireland. repair the harm that might have been He held that there were no greater ene- done. mies of Ireland than the Gentlemen he saw opposite. Nothing was wanted so much as English capital in Ireland.

MR. O'KELLY rose to Order. Was English capital the question before the House?

MR. SPEAKER: The Question before the House is, "That this House do now adjourn." I am bound to say that it is one of the many inconveniences of this proceeding that it gives the utmost latitude for discussion, and the observations now being made are not out of Order.

MR. WHITWORTH said, that an immense amount of injury was done to Ireland by the violent speeches of hon. Gentlemen opposite, who were not really friends of their country; but, on the contrary, before three years elapsed, would be considered its greatest enemies.

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. Law) said, he wished to enter his respectful protest against the language which had been used by his hon. Friend the Member for Drogheda (Mr. Whitworth), and some other hon. Members with respect to the magistrate referred to, who was not able to be present to defend himself. It was not desirable that a person holding the responsible position which this gentleman did should be described in the unmeasured terms employed by hon. Gentlemen. The magistrate had been described by his hon. Friend, not from his own knowledge, but from report, as a "dangerous character; but the charge did not appear to be founded on anything more than his hon. Friend's dislike to these public MR. M'COAN, as an Irish Protestant officials. In the case of a man occupyMember, said, the more he reflected on ing such a responsible position it was a the gravity and unwisdom of this act serious thing to make such charges of the Government, the more he felt without producing an atom of proof. compelled to add his protest to those ["Reasonable suspicion!"] It was not which had been delivered by his hon. a usual thing, in an assembly either of Friends around him. He did not share Englishmen or Irishmen, to abuse a all the sentiments which had been ex-person in the position of the gentleman pressed by Irish Representatives to- who had been thus attacked, when it night; but he believed that in the whole was impossible for him to defend himcourse of the Land League agitation self. and the action of the Government towards it, there had been no more unwise and unstatesmanlike step. He reckoned among his friends many Roman Catholic priests, and there were no persons whom he more respected and admired. The strength of affection and veneration with which the Roman Catholic priest was regarded by the people was intense; and if, even, one of them had been carried away too far, it would have been wisdom in the Government to give him a very long tether. As the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland had been in the House for some days, he hoped the direct responsibility for this arrest did not rest

Mr. Whitworth

MR. J. COWEN said, he would not have risen in this debate if it had not been for the observations which they had just heard from the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney General for Ireland. He (Mr. Cowen) had been in Ireland frequently recently, and he had many opportunities of becoming acquainted with the state of the country, and he must say he entirely agreed with the opinions which had been expressed by the hon. Member for Drogheda (Mr. Whitworth). There was "reasonable suspicion" to say that the person who had been attacked was a political and social firebrand. In whatever district he went he was calculated to excite dis

order and animosity. He (Mr. Cowen) did not wish to go further, as it was a mere matter of testimony. When Roman Catholic priests were arrested on a reasonable suspicion, there was at least equal ground for the opinions expressed by the hon. Member regarding the actions of the official in question in Ireland. He would not now go any further into the subject, as it was understood that it would be brought before the House next week; he would only repeat the experience of everyone familiar with the state of Ireland that the actions of the class of men referred to were calculated to embitter and exasperate the feelings of the Irish people.

MR. CALLAN said, he had not intended to take part in this discussion. [Laughter.] He wished to refer to the conduct of the hon. Member for Morpeth (Mr. Burt), and to express his regret that the hon. Gentleman should have gone out of his way to sneer at Irishmen to-night. The hon. Member had gone out of his way to laugh and sneer in a way which was very offensive. Such conduct was not creditable to the class of workmen to whom he belonged.

knew nothing whatever of criminal law. It was notorious in the Four Courts; the failure of the Crown prosecutions last winter showed it. The right hon. and learned Gentleman's ignorance of criminal law was only equalled by the ignorance of the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary of everything appertaining to Ireland. When he (Mr. Callan) was in Ireland, there was unanimity on two points only; one was the desirability of including in the Land Law (Ireland) Bill the jurisdiction of the County Court, and the other the necessity of removing from Office the present Chief Secretary. A Colleague of that right hon. Gentleman, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, had made a serious charge against Irish workmen, by suggesting that they were impoverished by superstition, by their observance of the holidays of the Church. The hon. Member for Drogheda (Mr. Whitworth) was, he (Mr. Callan) believed, the informant of the right hon. Gentleman; but he had very lately been in Drogheda, and had ascertained that the Catholic hands at the principal mill in that town, if they went to mass in the morning, came earlier, and worked the lan-usual number of hours, and were paid exactly as on other days. The charge, therefore, was altogether without foundation. With regard to Mr. Clifford Lloyd, the Attorney General for Ireland had described him as a most excellent magistrate; but the right hon. and learned Gentleman could not have spoken from his own knowledge, and those who had better information would have described Mr. Lloyd as a very dangerous character, and as the enemy of all the popular rights of the people of Ireland. Could the right hon. and learned Gentleman corroborate his statement by any specific proof? The right hon. and learned Gentleman said the charges against Mr. Clifford Lloyd were not proved. He (Mr. Callan) asked the right hon. and learned Gentleman to afford an opportunity to the Irish Members of giving specific proof of the charges. Doubtless, Mr. Clifford Lloyd fulfilled, in perfection, the duties assigned to him, and he had the courage of his opinions as the enemy of all popular rights. The right hon. and learned Attorney General for Ireland, on the other hand, changed his opinions with great facility three years ago. In

MR. SPEAKER said, that if the hon. Member had to complain of any guage used in the House reflecting upon himself or others, he should address himself to the Chair.

MR. CALLAN said, he did complain to the Chair. He was expressing the opinion to the Chair that it was desirable that discussions should be carried on without ill-feeling and sneers, and he thought his complaint was well founded. If there was to be harmony between English and Irish working men, it was desirable that one who was a Representative of working men should not Sneer at Irishmen. He was about to say he had not intended to intervene in the debate, because he did not approve the system of moving the adjournment of the House. The abuse had lately become common of that which he held to be the only real check they had upon evasive and contemptuous answers from Ministers. If such Motions were often repeated, he feared the Government might seize upon the opportunity thus afforded for abrogating the privileges of private Members of the House. The right hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney General for Ireland was an eminent Chancery barrister; but he

that House he denounced tenant right, | Sheehy robbed it of all the grace and fixity of tenure, and valuation of rents; advantage it might otherwise possess. and, in fact, every principle of the Bill which he now supported. He had eaten his words in an unprincipled manner, and apparently with the sole object of retaining his salary.