HC Deb 04 August 1807 vol 9 cc1057-9

The order of the day having been read for the house to resolve itself into a committee on the Irish Arms bill, Mr. Long moved that the Speaker do leave the chair.

Mr. Whitbread

would not oppose the motion for going into a committee, although the bill appeared to him to be so highly objectionable, so calculated to defeat the purposes which it had in view, and so alluring to the enemy to invade Ireland, that he did not think it possible to amend it in such a way as to render him friendly to the measure.

Mr. Herbert

reprobated the bill. He entered into a description of the state of Ireland, to show that the bill was unnecessary, and ámong other things mentioned, that in a Militia regiment, of which he had the honour of being second in command, four-fifths of the privates, half the non-commissioned officers, and six of the commissioned officers were Roman Catholics; but that no unpleasant circumstances whatever had thence arisen.

Mr. Long

observed, that the clauses of this bill had made a part of the former Insurrection bill, and had only been changed for the purpose of mitigation. The bill had been prepared by the late attorney general for Ireland, and, if it was necessary six months ago, nothing had since occurred to make it less necessary.

Mr. Elliot

admitted that the draft of the bill had been prepared by order of the late government, but that the clauses had not been finally determined upon. Many of the clauses required modification, and if his hon. friend had not intimated his intention to propose the amendments he was to move, it would have been his duty to do so. At the same time, he must say that the late government would not hake taken upon themselves the responsibility for the state of Ireland, without the controul of this measure properly modified. For this reason, he should not oppose the speaker's leaving the chair.

Mr. Ponsonby

was not satisfied of the necessity of the measure and should therefore oppose its pi ogress in every stage.—The House then resolved itself into the committee.—A discussion then took place upon the clause for authorising magistrates from time to time to call for an inventory of the arms of persons, whom they may suspect of having arms illegally.

Mr. Whitbread

contended, that this was a clause that gave magistrates the power of grievous oppression of the subject, in calling for the inventory of his arms from day to day.—The clause was amended on the motion of Mr. W. so as to require the Magistrate to demand the inventory of arms by a requisition in writing under his hand, and to allow the party called upon to make affidavit of the truth of his inventory, before any Magistrate of the county, in which the party may reside.—The next clause Mr. W. declared to be so tyrannical, that he doubted if any modification that could be made in it could reconcile him to it. The clause was, the one authorising magistrates and those authorised by the warrants of magistrates to search for concealed arms An amendment proposed by him was agreed to, authorising a magistrate to make search in person, in case of reasonable suspicion, but that no persons other than magistrates, shall make such search, except by warrant from two magistrates, such warrant not to be granted but upon information upon oath of one or more credible witnesses.

Mr. Dillon

proposed a further amendment, that no search should be made except between sun rising and sun setting; and if this amendment were to be resisted, he should propose that the magistrate should be present at the search.—A long discussion took place upon this amendment, and upon another, which was proposed to be substituted for it by Mr. Dillon, namely, that the power of search should be confined to the proclaimed districts.

Mr. Sheridan

said, that every modification of the Insurrection bill had only rendered its provisions more severe; and the same spirit seemed to be extended to the present bill. This measure was not only to operate on the disturbed counties, but on the peaceable districts, and was to become the most tyrannical law that ever insulted Ireland. The gentlemen of that country, possessing landed property, who held the magisterial office, were of great respectability; but it was notorious that magistrates, in a different condition of life, were selected for the purpose of carrying into execution such bills; and it was therefore of the highest importance to prevent oppression, from their misapplication.

Colonel Barry

defended the Irish magistracy from the attack of his right hon. friend. If they were deserving of his representation, it must have been the fault of the late chancellor; and he appealed to an hon. gent. opposite (Mr. Ponsonby), whether the late chancellor had not required from the county members, and the governors of counties, characters of the persons in the commission of the peace, with a view to purify the magistracy of the county?

Mr. Ponsonby

declared, that the late chancellor had acted from a conscientious conviction that the magistracy wanted to be purged, and was prevented only by the late change.—A division took place on the amendment, when the numbers were, for the amendment, 23; against it, 79. On our re-admission, the remaining clauses were gone through, and some new clauses added, the latter of which limits the duration of the bill to two years, and until the end of the then next session of parliament. After an amendment had been moved by sir J. Newport to limit the bill to one year, and until six weeks after the commencement of the then next session of parliament, which was negatived without a division, the house resumed, and the report was ordered to be received to-morrow.