Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

people; and much more was needed to restore, or, if they pleased, to create, tranquillity in that quarter. One remedy for the state of Ireland must be founded in a provision for the Roman Catholic clergy, recommended by all advocates of Roman Catholic Emancipation and among them, by Pitt, Castlereagh, and Grattan-as an essential accompaniment of that measure. He did not think that provision should be made at the expense of the Establishment: nothing but conflict, irritation, and bitterness could accrue from parcelling out the property of the Establishment among the different parties. He agreed with Lord Camoys, that the argument for maintaining the exclusive Establishment, founded on property, was altogether preposterous; it might pass, if it were a question of instruction in the method of breeding and training cattle, that the method established concurred with the opinions of the landholders, but not where the morality and happiness of a whole community were concerned. The establishment of Maynooth, unaccompanied by any other measure was erroneous; especially as the instruction there was limited to the narrowest and most purely theological kind. The additional Stamp-tax, passed last year, on conveyances and other law proceedings in Ireland, was also injudicious; since much good would be done by raising up a middle class of actual landholders in place of the "middlemen." Ireland could not remain as it was. He did not call for any sudden measure. He wished no sudden stroke of policy which was at once to reform and tranquillise that country;

such a coup de main. But he said no time should be lost in considering these questions. He should not oppose the second reading of the Bill, but reserve to himself the power of watching its future operation, in the hope that the Government would look the real causes of the present disturbances in the face, and apply to them not a temporary, but a strong and lasting remedy. (Loud cheers.)

Lord Brougham expressed his entire concurrence in Lord Lansdowne's remarks both on the measure before the House, and on the general subject. He then turned to the speech of Lord Camoys. He attacked him for his total forgetfulness of history in imputing constant coercion and irritation of Ireland to the Ministerial party. Were the Irish Roman Catholics irritated by the Duke of Wellington's carrying their own policy in 1829? Lord Camoys spoke as if all the coercion came from one side; but, said Lord Brougham, "I myself must plead guilty to having in 1833 and 1834, enacted, and continued, and carried into execution, one of the most stringent coercion Bills that I believe ever existed in this country towards Ireland. That Bill, too, was suffered to expire; but it was continued in a modified form by the noble Viscount (Melbourne) in 1835: it was only in 1840 that the Venue Bill was allowed to expire; that very Venue Bill, which I was told the other night was to all intents and purposes a coercive measure, was continued till 1840." Lord Camoys, too, exhibited most extraordinary oblivion of his own personal history, and of what, in that very place, two years ago, he swore to observe; when he took an

evasion, equivocation, or mental reservation whatever," "I do solemnly swear that I never will exercise any privilege to which I am or may be entitled "-including, of course, the privilege of a Peer of Parliament, which is the highest of all-" to disturb or weaken the Protestant religion or the Protestant Government in the United Kingdom." "My Lords," continued Lord Brougham, "I have lived long in the world; I have seen many examples of the effects of the wilful courses of designing men, and of the influence they have gained in prosecuting their wicked designs on less powerful minds, of less steady characters, of minds less capable of selfdefence; I have seen both here and abroad, the effects on weak and on youthful minds, the effects of the operations of the Roman Catholic priesthood for the accomplishment of their sinful and sordid objects; and I have seen in this country the consequences of political seduction by similar means and for similar objects: but, knowing, as I do, the honourable nature of my noble Friend, his pure motives, and the candour of his disposition, I do profess and declare, that I never yet saw so melancholy and striking an exhibition in my whole life of the effects of such insidious arts on such minds, as has this night been exhibited by the marvellous declaration of my noble Friend. It is only a lesson, my Lords, to you, and I am sure it ought to be to the Government, of the absolute and overwhelming necessity of looking to the education of the Irish people in spiritual things of looking to their condition under the control of a priest hood so educated as that which

them, and alternately agitates and seduces them-men ignorant of the most salutary branches of human knowledge, in which sound principles and right feeling find their best root. Either you must enlarge the institution of Maynooth College, or abolish it altogether, and restore the priesthood of Ireland to their former education on the Continent—an education which had some liberalizing effects."

Lord Camoys explained how he had put a different interpretation on the oath. When in the House of Commons, Mr. Wilmot Horton had proposed to restrict Roman Catholics from voting and speaking on questions affecting the Church, Sir Robert Peel had refused to place them on a different footing from Protestant Dissenters; and when Sir Charles Wetherell said, that Roman Catholics could not take the oath in their legislative capacity, Sir Robert Peel said that he was right.

The Earl of Shrewsbury supported views very similar to those of Lord Camoys. He remarked, that the Ministers did not meet the disturbances in Wales with an Arms Bill, but with a Commission sent down to enquire into griev

ances.

The Earl of Wicklow condemning Lord Camoys as the first Roman Catholic who had avowed in Parliament the opinion that the Irish Church ought to be subverted, and he subscribed to the views expressed by Lord Lansdowne, especially that part relating to remedial measures. The examples of the King of Hanover and the King of Prussia should be followed, in providing for the Roman Catholic clergy. Maynooth was a sad specimen of

have funds liberally supplied. Every encouragement should be given to men of a better order of society to enter it; and in order to induce the sons of the Roman Catholic gentry, the better sort of farmers, the merchants, and others, to feel ambitious of belonging to the clerical profession, as was the case in this country.

Lord Beaumont, with much earnestness of manner, repudiated Lord Camoys's interpretation of the Roman Catholic oath understanding it, as he himself did, he should feel disgraced if he were to give a vote injurious to the interests of the Established Church. The sentiments uttered that night, directly tending to fan the flame of rebellion, attested the necessity of measures to put down the agitation in Ireland. Still when that country was calm, a comprehensive policy towards her should have been adopted; the great want being occupation for the people.

Lord Campbell, at some length, defended Lord Camoys' construction of the oath: declaring that it did not bind the person who took it in his legislative capacity, any more than the Coronation Oath restrained the legislative powers of the Sovereign.

The Marquess of Headfort contended that equal laws were the only means for tranquillising Ireland.

He touched on some of the main grievances, primarily recommending a state provision for the priesthood, and an organised system of emigration.

The Marquess of Clanricarde followed the same course as Lord Lansdowne, intending to vote for the Bill.

The Marquess of Londonderry

ever, that his information from Ireland represented the agitation to be dying away, and deprecating Anti-Repeal meetings, especially one which was contemplated at Belfast.

The Motion was then agreed to without a division.

The next day the House went into Committee, when Lord Fortescue, who had been absent on the previous night, stated his concurrence with Lord Lansdowne's views. He assented, generally, to the Bill, taking exception, however, to parts: and he urged the removal of Irish grievances, recommending, especially, the appropriation of surplus Church revenue to "the endowment, in some respects, of the Roman Catholic Church; " also the fulfilment of Sir R. Peel's promise of inquiry into the laws of tenure, and an extension both of the Parliamentary and Municipal Franchise.

Lord Brougham took occasion to vindicate the memory of Lord Wellesley, whom, as well as Lord Anglesea, he conceived to be unjustly treated by the claim, which had been set up by some of Lord Melbourne's friends, of having been the first to think of admitting Roman Catholics to offices. It was Lord Wellesley who first suggested that step; for, in a despatch to Lord Melbourne, dated Aug., 1834, he said-" I conceive that one of the first steps towards the pacification of Ireland should be the correction of this difficulty; and for that purpose I submit to you, that it is expedient to admit a certain proportion of Roman Catholics into the Privy Council, to the Bench, to the high stations of the law, and to the legal or civil offices of

also a certain number into the Police."

The Marquess of Clanricarde bore testimony to the veneration in which Lord Wellesley's memory was held by the Roman Catholics;

and Lord Campbell attested that Nobleman's anxiety to employ and promote persons of that creed.

The Bill passed through the Committee, with very slight opposition, and was carried.

CHAPTER VII.

FINANCE.-The Budget-Speech of the Chancellor of the Exchequer Observations of Mr. F. T. Baring, Mr. Hume, Sir R. Peel, Lord John Russell, Mr. Stuart Wortley, Lord Howick, and other Members-Discussions on the National Finances in the House of Lords, brought on by Lord Monteagle, who moves Resolutions-The Duke of Wellington opposes the Motion, entering into details on the subject~ Able Speech of Lord Brougham on the same side-Lord Monteagle's Resolutions are negatived without a division. SUGAR DUTIES.-The Chancellor of the Exchequer moves a renewal of the Duties of the preceding year-Mr. Cobden remonstrates against the Expenditure incurred for the Colonies-Mr. Ewart moves an equalisation of Duties on Foreign and Colonial Sugars. The Motion is supported by Mr. Brotherton, Mr. Villiers, Mr. Ward, Dr. Bowring, and Mr. Gibson, and opposed by Mr. James, Mr. Bernal, and Mr. G. Berkley-On a division, the Motion is rejected by 135 to 50--Mr. Hawes moves to reduce the Duty on Foreign Sugar to 34s.-Mr. Gladstone and Sir R. Peel oppose the Proposition, on the ground of its tendency to encourage the Slave-Trade-Mr. Labouchere argues in favour of the Motion, which is rejected on a Division, by 203 to 122. DUTIES.-Mr. C. Wood moves for a Committee of the whole House, with a view to their reduction. He shows the decline of the Trade by Statistical Returns-Sir R. Peel alleges the decline of the Revenue as an argument against the Motion-It is negatived by a large Majority-Removal of the Restrictions on Export of Machinery-Mr. Gladstone brings in a Bill for that purpose-Observations of Mr. Hindley, Mr. S. Wortley, Mr. Labouchere, Mr. Cobden, and other Members-The second reading is carried by 96 to 18-It is opposed by Earl Stanhope in the House of Lords, but is incorporated with the Customs Bill, and passed.

THE
HE serious falling-off in the
revenue, which the com-
mencement of this year exhibited,
has been noticed in a former chap-
ter. Under such circumstances,
it could not be expected that the
Chancellor of the Exchequer would
be in a situation to exhibit a very

WOOL

of prospect of any alleviation of the national burthens. The most pressing and stringent of these, indeed, the Income-tax, however it might be complained of under the existing depression, could not but be felt in the diminution of the other branches of revenue, to

« ForrigeFortsett »