Viscount Sidmouth declined to enter into any consideration of the speech of the noble earl, being persuaded that, consistently with the forms and usages of the House, the noble and learned lord on the woolsack could not put from the woolsack such a motion. The Lord Chancellor observed, that there was no member of that House who held the office of chief secretary of Ireland, and that no statement could have been made to parliament by the chief secretary which could be recognised in that House. He therefore could not put such a motion from the woolsack, unless ordered so to do by their lordships, and then he should feel it his duty to move the previous question. Viscount Sidmouth remarked, that the previous question could not be moved, unless the main question was first put, which, he contended, in this instance could not be done. The Earl of Liverpool observed, that the noble earl might attain his object of bringing on a discussion on the subject, by framing a motion in another shape. The Earl of Donoughmore said, he would shape his motion in another form; and his first motion being withdrawn, his lordship then moved for "copies of all communications, if any, to the lord lieutenant of Ireland, or his chief secretary, announc ing the happy event of perfect tranquillity being restored in the only barony to which his excellency had thought fit to apply the provisions of the Act, commonly called, Mr. Peel's Bill, for the Preservation of the Peace in Ireland." [The expression, "commonly called Mr. Peel's Bill," was objected to by the earl of Liverpool.] The earl of Donoughmore observed, that it was commonly called by that name. [The earl of Liverpool said, that it might be so in common acceptance, but it was not usual so to characterize in parliament an act of the legislature.] The earl of Donoughmore agreed to omit the expression and that part of the motion, and that it should stand as follows:-"That there be laid before the House, copies of all such communications to his excellency the lord lieutenant of Ireland, or his chief secretary, as have announced the complete, or any restoration of tranquillity, in the only barony in Ireland, that of Middlethird, in the county of Tipperary, to which it had been thought necessary to apply the provisions of the Bill of the last sessions, intituled, an Act for the Preservation of the Peace." Viscount Sidmouth observed, that he could not but consider the noble earl, throughout the greater part of his speech, to have infringed upon the spirit of the orders of the House, though he had avoided violating the letter of them; and he put it to their lordships, whether the noble earl, in detailing and commenting upon a newspaper report of what was stated to have passed in another place, had not, in fact, acted contrary to the spirit of their orders; although by the mode in which the noble earl had formed his observations, he had avoided the direct violation of the letter of those orders. He should be deviating into the same irregularity which he had complained of in the noble earl, if he were to comment upon the statement alluded to by that noble earl; but he felt himself called upon to say, in justice to his right hon. friend, that the report referred to by the noble earl was erroneous; not that he knew what the statement was that was made by his right hon. friend, the chief secretary for Ireland, in another place; but it was impossible the report could be correct, consistently with the official communications from his right hon. friend to him (lord Sidmouth), and which stated, not the restoration of perfect tranquillity, but only in the comparative degree, that the district alluded to was more tranquil than it had been. It was evident, therefore, that the statement alluded to by the noble earl must be erroneous. There was also another particular referred to in that report, which he was surprised the noble earl should not, from his local knowledge, have known to be incorrect; he alluded to the time when the Act for the Preservation of the Peace was carried into execution in the barony of Middlethird, which was not the 24th of Sept., but the 4th of Sept. The noble earl had asked, why the government had not chosen in preference the Insurrection Act? (lord Donoughmore observed, "if either were necessary"] and which he thought fit to characterise as the most lenient measure, but which he (lord Sidmouth) must consider as the most rigorous measure of the two. By the Insurrection Act, that happy privilege, the trial by jury, was not, as stated by the noble earl, given to the subject; it was, on the contrary, only to be allowed with the consent of the judge of the court. The Insurrection Act was, therefore, in every respect the more rigorous measure; whilst, on the other hand, the object of the Preservation of the Peace Act was only to administer the law as it stood with greater effect. It besides was not op. tional with the government to carry into effect the Insurrection Act, as it could only be put in force upon the representation of five magistrates of a county, that such county was disturbed. The Preservation of the Peace, or Police Act, on the other hand, as had been correctly stated, rested entirely with the government, under the advice of the privy council, to carry into execution. In the instance, however, of the proclaimed barony, the fact was, that there was a representation of a full meeting of magistrates, to the number of forty, of the county of Tipperary, of the disturbed state of that county, expressly averring that several murders had been committed there, and praying for the execution of the Police Act. As to the outrages enumerated by the noble earl to have been committed since, he knew of no object such an enumeration could have, except to shew the forbearance of the government. Did, however, the noble earl mean to object to the nomination of the respectable gentleman (Mr. Wilcocks) who was appointed the magistrate at Cashel under the Act, or did he mean to object to the selection of the constables? Lord Sidmouth said, he was satisfied that upon these heads no valid objection whatever could lie against the government. He felt some surprise at what had been said by the noble earl with regard to his right hon. friend, knowing the respect which the noble earl had for that right hon. gentleman; but he felt it merely justice to his right hon. friend to observe, that with that rare union of firmness, temper, and moderation which his right hon. friend possessed, he knew no man better qualified for the situation of chief secretary for Ireland. With respect to the motion, he knew of no such communications as those alluded to, and therefore he should move, that the House do now adjourn. The Earl of Donoughmore observed, that what had been urged by the noble Secretary of State, was so far satisfactory, with a view to the object of the motion, that it stated the report to which he (lord Donoughmore) had alluded, to be erroneous, in announcing the perfect tranquillity of the district referred to. It was, however, rather singular, that the mistake was not made merely by one person, but pervaded all the reports, as if the statement had been copied from some official document; but he was disposed to be satisfied, from what had fallen from the noble viscount, that there must have been a mistake. With respect to the meeting of magistrates alluded to, the noble viscount must have been aware, from the circumstances of that meeting, that it was not entitled to so much attention as had been paid to it. As to what he had said with regard to the right hon. gentleman who held the office of chief secretary of Ireland, he begged to be understood as not intending to convey the slightest imputation upon that right hon. gentleman. He still, however, could not help saying, that it was more advantageous for an old stager to be appointed to that situation. He must also be allowed to state, that there were other means of tranquillizing Ireland, besides those alluded to by the noble viscount. The question of adjournment was then put, and carried. HOUSE OF COMMONS. Thursday, November 24. LORD WALSINGHAM.] On the motion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the House went into a committee of the whole House, on the Prince Regent's Message respecting lord Walsingham's proposed annuity. The Chancellor of the Exchequer stated, that it had been for many years the duty of that House to vote rewards for services of a naval or military kind: those which were now to be recompensed were of a different nature, but also highly entitled to the gratitude of the country. He then entered into a description of lord Walsingham's public services in the other House, paid a tribute to his merits, and concluded by moving a resolution, that a sum of 2,000l. be granted to his Royal Highness out of the consolidated fund per annum, to be settled in the most effectual manner on lord Walsingham, during the term of his natural life. (or falsehood of these charges, he hoped SLAVE TRADE.] Mr. Horner wished to put a question to the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer, on a subject having a reference to the abolition of the slave trade. The continuance of this traffic, he would do his right hon. friend the justice to say, was, he believed, lamented by no man more than himself; but while be believed his right hon. friend was zealously disposed to exert himself to the utmost in effecting a general abolition, he was not sure that he could place exactly the same confidence in the noble lord, his colleague, to whom that cause was entrusted at the present Congress. There were two points on which he wished for information from his right hon. friend. By a publication of the American government to the world, of the proceedings during the negociation at Ghent, it appeared to be stated by the secretary of state of the American government, that a number of negroes, taken by our commanders from the southern states, or seduced to desert from their masters, had been carried by them to the West Indies, and there sold as slaves. This was a charge of the heaviest nature, and if there was any foundation in it, was one which deeply affected the character of the officers employed in the American service, as well as the government of this country. It was well known, that one of the principal obstacles to the abolition in foreign states, and the foundation of the reluctance felt by them, was their disbelief of the sincerity of the English go-to his colleagues, that he was only one of vernment and nation. As this charge had been made in so public a manner, he was anxious to know if there was any foundation for it; and if government were not possessed of sufficient information on the subject, he hoped they would be disposed to take the most prompt steps to ascertain the truth or falsehood of it. A great deal of time might be saved, by applying for the proofs, of which the commissioners at Ghent were declared to be in possession; for Mr. Monroe stated, that his department was in possession of ample proofs, and that these proofs had been sent to the commissioners at Ghent. For the pur pose, therefore, of ascertaining the truth The Chancellor of the Exchequer trusted that no doubt would be entertained by the House that the utmost efforts would be made by his Majesty's ministers for the furtherance of an object in which they were all so deeply interested as the abolition of the slave trade. He took to himself the credit of the sincere disposition in favour of it, with which he was complimented by his hon. and learned friend; and he ventured to assure him, in justice many who all felt an equal interest with himself; and that the noble lord especially, to whom the interests of his country were at present entrusted at the Congress, had manifested in every particular the disposition which was common to himself and his colleagues, in his negociations with the other powers of Europe. With respect to the first question of the hon. and learned gentleman, he had to state, that his Majesty's ministers had no information whatever respecting the subject to which it related. They had received no information that slaves had ever been sent from any part of the coast of America to the West India islands; and he hardly con goods upon credit to defraud their creditors, and to servants to rob their employers, as well also as by the frauds committed upon the public revenue; and that they tend to encourage the manufacture of inferior and disreputable articles, to the great injury of the manufactures and commerce of the country; and which will now prove still more injurious, when we shall have to contend against the rival manufactures of other nations; and that while the persons vend ceived that any British officer could have been guilty of so black and atrocious an act as that charged in this case; that he could possibly commit such a violation of the laws against the slave trade, and expose himself to the certainty of being punished for so disgraceful and base a crime. He pledged himself to make the fullest inquiry into this case, and to prosecute with the utmost rigour of justice any persons who should have so disgraced themselves. But he hoped, that till this mattering at these sales elude that responsibility, was cleared up, the House would not lightly believe it. It occurred to him, that in this instance the American government had given out this statement, how ever unjustifiable such conduct certainly was, with a view of striking a terror into their slaves. This was certainly much more probable than that any British officer should implicate himself in so abominable a transaction. There certainly was not in the treaty with Spain any provision for the abolition of the, slave trade. It had been found impossible, in negociating with that court, to make it sensible of what were its true interests in this respect. The House could hardly be surprised, when it considered the whole of the conduct of that court, that in this attempt his Majesty's ministers had been unsuccessful. But he assured the House, that no effort had been wanting on the part of the government of this country to induce the court of Spain to comply, with the just expectations and wishes of the people of this country. HOUSE OF COMMONS. Friday, November 25. LONDON AUCTIONS PETITION.] One of the sheriff's of London presented at the bar, a Petition from the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Commons of the city of London: setting forth; "That frauds and deceptions are carried on to a considerable extent, by means of numerous auction-rooms for the sale of manufactured goods, in small lots, in various parts of the metropolis, and most of the provincial towns, to the great injury of the manufacturer, the fair trader, and the public in general; and that they have long become an intolerable public nuisance, not only by the number of persons collected together, and the cheats and deceptions there practised, but by the power ful inducements they hold out to swindling, to unprincipled persons to obtain (VOL. XXIX.) as well as various taxes, which attach to the regular trader, disreputable articles are not only vended with impunity, but, as the petitioners are well informed, the auction duty is, to a great extent, evaded; and that memorials have been presented to the lords commissioners of his Majesty's Treasury, and petitions to the House, but no remedy has yet been obtained for these grievances; and that a Bill was brought into the House during the last session, and afterwards withdrawn on ac. count of some informality, but, for causes unknown to the petitioners, the same was not again introduced; and praying the House to take these serious grievances into consideration, and to grant such relief in the premises as to them shall seem meet." Ordered to lie upon the table. IRISH PEACE PRESERVATION BILL.] Mr. Brogden brought up the report of the committee on the Bill to amend an Act passed in the last session of parliament, intituled, "An Act to provide for the better execution of the laws in Ireland, by appointing superintending magistrates and additional constables in counties, in certain cases. On the motion, that the Bill be read a third time to-morrow, Mr. Ponsonby said, he did not rise with a view of opposing the motion; he merely wished to say a few words on the subject of the Bill. The opinion which he had formed after much inquiry was, that there never was laid before the House a statement less supported by facts in many instances, than that of the right hon. the secretary for Ireland last session, when he introduced the present Bill to the House. He was far from entertaining an idea that the right hon. gentleman had wilfully misrepresented the state of Ireland to the House; but he believed that he had given credit to the misrepresentations of others, without sufficiently inquiring into the truth or falsehood of their statements. The right hon. gentleman had (2 L) represented a general state of insubordination to exist in Ireland, a general insecurity, and a general disposition to combine for unlawful purposes. At the time this statement was made, he had heard it with no small degree of surprise, as he was in the habit of receiving letters from Ireland, and in none of them was there the least mention of any disturbances. He was still more surprised to hear one of the members for Queen's County (sir H. Parnell) deliver himself very much in the same manner with the right hon. gentleman. He was the more astonished, as he had many acquaintances in Queen's County, and he had not received the slightest information from any one of them on the subject. After he returned to Ireland, he made numerous inquiries, the result of which was, that there never was a period when there was less cause for the introduction of such a measure than that selected by the right hon. gentleman opposite. He was ready to admit, that partial instances of violations of the law had arisen-in fact, they were always occurring: true, partial combinations might have manifested themselves; but, he would again repeat, that there never was a greater exaggeration than the general statement upon which those Bills were founded that the whole country was in a state of insubordination. He had lately spent three months in Ireland, and he hardly recollected, for some time, that country in a quieter state. This pacific change the right hon. gentleman had attributed to his Bill; quite overlooking, however, a simple fact that his Bill could not have removed that which never had existence; and more particularly that the mere local operation of one Bill upon a solitary occasion, could imply an approbation of another and a more severe one, which it was never deemed expedient to carry into effect at all. In the year 1806, a greater insubordination prevailed in Ireland than certainly occurred at any later period. Outrages were then pretty generally existing in three or four different counties: a lawless body, called the Threshers, then ravaged those districts. The Irish government of that day were importuned by different persons to have recourse to violent and unconstitutional rigour, and at once, by measures of that description, to put an end and to punish (as it was said) this disobedience of the people. The then government refused so to shape their conduct; they appealed to the existing law, and they found it sufficient; they deferred, as they ought to have done, the ultima ratio, and the effect of their example shewed the wisdom of their decision. The right hon. gentleman should therefore have more fully inquired into the state of the country, before he called upon parliament for such an extension of power as those Bills conferred. The publicity of the insubordination which formed the ground-work of those Bills, had in itself an ulterior and perhaps a more injurious operation; it went to promulgate, in this country, an opinion which went to strike at the root of the benefit held out to Ireland at the Union. The right hon. gentleman had not, he was sure, stated what he did not himself believe to exist; but he ought to have inquired more strictly into the state of Ireland before he attached credit to these misrepresentations. There was nothing so injurious to Ireland, as to have it believed in Great Britain, that a disposition to disturbance existed in that country. At the time of the Union, it was held out as one of the advantages which would result from that measure, that the overflowing capital of England would find its way to Ireland, and give life to the industry of that country. He did not know what might have been the case had Ireland always been in a state of complete tranquillity; but he knew well that little or no English capital had been invested in Ireland since the Union; and he was certain that this would never take place while Ireland was supposed, by the capitalists of England, to be in such a state as to render any capital placed there inse cure. The right hon. gentleman had been deceived by representations from Ireland. Many would, no doubt, be made to him from the meanest motives, from motives of interest, by hoping to carry objects of their own by such representations. He spoke with the more confidence on this subject, because he had seen a great deal of this in 1806. The right hon. gentleman, no doubt, would think he had done a great deal of good; he certainly would not condemn the motives by which he seemed to be actuated; and in one instance the right hon. gentleman deserved his commendation. He had done the greatest service, when he refused to allow local persons to officiate under his Bill; for that class of persons who were anxious for such appointment, was but too numerous in Ireland. Here Mr. Ponsonby ad |