Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

a tumultuous body, and to make those who did not disperse when called upon, liable to punishment. With regard to the third point, he had to observe, that in many parts there were not magistrates sufficient to enforce the law with due vigour, and on the borders of the disturbed counties offenders might escape to another jurisdiction. He would therefore propose, that for the time being, the magistrates in the disturbed and adjacent counties should have a concurrent jurisdiction. He concluded by moving for a bill "For the preservation of the public peace in the disturbed countles, and to give additional powers to the justices for a limited time for that purpose."

Mr. Whitbread declared that he was by no means satisfied with this proceeding. The consequence of not being allowed to enter upon the verbal evidence was the jejune report with which the house had been affronted, and which left it in comparative darkness. The noble lord had made a statement of what he called facts, which in many parts was wholly unwarranted by the report on the table. His own wish had been to try the truth of the anonymous information, but though he had twice divided the committee, and had in one instance 7 out of 17, and in another 9 out of 19, they were obliged to content themselves with the intelligence which government had thought proper to supply. The honourable gentleman then called in question many of the assertions of the noble lord, particularly with respect to the existence of an armed force among the rioters, of regular leaders, distinct combinations, and

depots of arms. He strongly objected to the proposed measure of searching for arms, and alluded to the horrors which measures of that kind had occasioned in Ireland. He hoped the revocation of the orders in council would cause part of the evil to fall of itself, but said that peace was the only radical remedy for all our grievances.

Mr. Wilberforce said, that connected as he was with that part of the country which was the seat of these disturbances, he could not, without the most painful feelings, contemplate the necessity for the measures now proposed; it, however, appeared to him that these measures did not outgo the necessity of the case, and even if government had asked for larger powers, not for the purpose of carrying them at once into execution, but of cautiously feeling their way according to the situation of the country, he should not have hesitated to bestow them. As to the source of these disorders, he could not concur in the opinion that they proceeded from an interruption to commerce, or a scarcity of provisions. He was convinced that the disease was of a political nature, arising from certain mischievous publications industriously circulated to alienate the affections of the people from the laws and government of their country.

Several other members spoke on the subject, and the debate at length digressed into a discussion of the severities employed in Ireland at the period of the rebellion. Lord Castlereagh's motion was in fine put and carried without a division, after which he brought in his bill, which was read a first [12]

time,

time, and appointed for a second reading.

On July 18, the order of the day being moved for the second reading of the bill, Mr. Whitbread rose to declare that his opinion was not at all altered respecting it, but his objections were still more confirmed. There was no evidence before the house to prove the allegation in the preambie, that assemblies of men were in the habit of forcibly demanding and taking arms. He would repeat, that due exertions had not been made to preserve the peace under the existing laws; in some cases the magistrates bad been supine; in others they had acted with violence and a perverted judgment. There was now every appearance of a cessation of the disorder; and though the hon. member for Yorkshire had ascribed the evil to inflammatory publications, he himself, and others who thought with him, had declared that work and a lower price of provisions were likely to restore tranquillity.

Mr. A. Smith concurred with his friend the member for Yorkshire in the idea of the mischief that had been done by the circulation of pamphlets which stirred up discontent in the people. He agreed as to the necessity of arming the law with additional powers on the present occasion, and in general approved of the proposed bill. He, however, objected to that part of it which sanctioned two magistrates in collecting the arms which might be scattered in individual hands over the country.

The subsequent speakers in the debate only repeated with greater or less force the arguments for and

against the bill which had been already advanced. Mr. Brougham, indeed, adduced a number of facts to prove that the tumults were owing to distress solely, and to shew the mischief and irritation which had proceeded from the encouragement given to spies, and the intemperate zeal and prejudice which in some instances had been displayed by the magistrates. These cases, however, were by others said to have been grossly exagger ated, and the general impression was manifestly in favour of the bill. On a division there appeared, for the second reading 131, against it 16. It was accordingly read and committed.

On July 16, Lord Castlereagh having risen to move the further consideration of the report on the bill, took the opportunity of correcting a mistake which had prevailed in the house, that it was the intention of ministers to give ma gisterial powers to persons not connected with the disturbed counties. He said it was the intention merely to consign this authority to the sons of peers, and of persons qua lified to sit in parliament, though not in fact qualified to act as justices,

The bill being recommitted, a debate rose respecting the clause empowering single magistrates to search for arms on suspicion. This was objected to by several members as an excess of power which might lead to abuse; and Mr. Giles, observing that he saw no reason for the distinction of requiring two or more magistrates to sign the war rant for receiving arms, and not requiring it for the search for arms, moved, as an mendment, that

the

the warrants of two or more ma gistrates should be necessary in both cases. The clause was de fended from the impossibility in many instances of procuring the concurrence of two magistrates in time for an effectual search; and the clause was carried on a division by 77 against 18.

A second division took place on the clause empowering magistrates to lodge the arms so taken in a safe depot, which passed by 75 against 16. When the third reading of the bill was moved, July 20, the former objections were renewed, particularly with respect to the powers granted of searching for arms; and it was asserted that the necessity of such a measure no longer existed, tranquillity having been restored in the disturbed districts. Mr. Bathurst, however, declared, that on this very morning information had been received at the secretary of state's office that eight new attempts for seizing arms had been made within these few days. Mr. Tierney then proposed the following amendment to be inserted by way of rider: "Provided always that it shall be lawful for his Majesty, by and with the advice of his privy council, to declare such districts as are now subject to the operation of this act, to be no longer in a state of disturbance, and that this act shall no longer be in force in such districts."

Lord Castlereagh approved of the amendment. A division then took place upon the question of the third reading of the bill; ayes 69, noes 15: the bill was then read and passed.

The report of the secret commitee of the House of Lords was

presented by the Earl of Harrowby on July 14. It is much more copious and minute than that of the Commons, particularly with respect to the military organization of the rioters. See State Papers,

The bill for the preservation of the public peace being sent up from the Commons, its second reading was moved, July 23, by Lord Sidmouth, who introduced it with some observations on the necessity of such a measure, and hoped that its enactinent would not be delayed a single day. As it was understood that there should be only one discusssion on the sub ject, a few general remarks only were made by those who were hostile to the principle of the bill, and it was read, and committed for the following day.

On the third reading, before a very thin house, Lord Holland rose, and made objections to the bill, similar to those which had been urged in the House of Commons. He contended that the nature of the evidence brought to prove its necessity, was not such as could justify the measure proposed; and he particularly objected to the powers granted of searching for and taking away arms from private persons by a single magistrate. He concluded with moving the amendments of inserting two magistrates instead of one and that the magistrate should attend the search in person, and not delegate his power to the constable.

Lord Stanhope said he disapproved of the bill on several grounds, but principally because it was inconsistent with the law of the land, which provided that the

officers

officers of the hundred should go so sufficiently armed as to quell any riotous proceedings.

The Earl of Darnley also opposed the bill, which was defended by Earls Camden and Liverpool, The third reading being carried, Lord Holland's amendments were put and negatived. He then pro

posed as a third amendment, that the magistrates should not have the power of search in the night. This was rejected on a division by 17 against 6, and the bill was passed.

Its operation was limited to the 25th of March, 1813.

CHAPTER

CHAPTER XIII.

Mr. Canning's Motion for a future consideration of the Catholic QuestionThe Same by Marquis Wellesley-Bill for explaining and improving the Toleration Act-Lord Holland's Motion respecting Informations Ex-Officio-Mr. Sheridan's on the Attorney-General of Ireland-Bill to prevent the Escape of French Prisoners-Conversation on Overtures from the French Emperor-Prince Regent's Speech on the Prorogation of Parliament.

OTWITHSTANDING the repeated failures of the attempts in parliament to procure a concession of the claims of the Irish Catholics to an equal participation in the rights and preroga tives of their fellow citizens, the advocates of their cause, probably imputing the opposition in part to circumstances of temporary irritation, resolved not to give up the contest, but to appeal, as it were, from the heat of the moment, to a future period of calmness and sobriety. In pursuance of this idea, Mr. Canning, on June 22, rose in the House of Commons to make a motion on the subject. He began his speech with alluding to a circumstance which might be regarded as embarrassing to an advocate of the Catholics, but which he considered as only one symptom of the habitual irritation of the public mind in Ireland, and an additional motive for an immediate consideration of the question in the proper place; this was, the receipt on that morning of the resolutions of the aggregate meeting of Irish Catholics at Dublin. He shewed that the warmth of these resolutions

was not to preclude a temperate discussion of a great political question, but rather to inculcate the propriety of dropping the recollections of all that had passed in former debates, and considering the subject as if now presented for the first time. He then laid down three principles on which, in his opinion, the whole matter rested. 1. He would assume as a general rule, that citizens of the same state, living under the same government, are entitled, prima facie, to equal political rights and privileges. 2. That it is at all times desirable to create and maintain the most perfect identity of interest and feeling among all the members of the same community. 3. That where there exists in any community a great permanent cause of political discontent, which agitates men's minds without having any tendency to subside of itself, it be comes the duty of the supreme power in the state to determine in what mode it may most advantageously be set at rest.

The right honourable gentleman then went on to enlarge upon these several heads, with the force and eloquence

« ForrigeFortsett »