HC Deb 29 March 1831 vol 3 cc1135-7
Mr. G. Moore

presented a Petition from certain Bankers, Merchants, and others in the city of Dublin, connected with the West Indies, praying that the House would not interfere with the property of West-India proprietors, in any measure which might be proposed with respect to the abolition of negro slavery, without allowing to the individuals who would be affected by the measure, a full and fair compensation. The learned Gentleman stated, that the petitioners had no objection to any measure which might contribute to the abolition of slavery, but they deprecated sudden measures as likely to be injurious to the slaves themselves.

General Gascoyne

complained, that the debates which were got up on every Irish petition greatly impeded the progress of business, and the evil had become so great, that if the hon. member for Water-ford would propose the Repeal of the Union, he would vote for it, in order to get rid of the Irish Members. If the noble Lord who had brought in the Reform Bill would propose the removal of sixty-two Irish, instead of sixty-two English, Members, he would give the motion his most cordial support. Evening after evening he was prevented from presenting petitions because he found the names of two or three Irish Members always before his. The noble Lord was, it appeared, about to add to this calamity by increasing the number of Irish Members; but he should oppose that proposition when it was brought forward, because the number already in the House created considerable inconvenience. After the holidays he would move that the names on the Speaker's List be taken de die in diem.

Mr. Crampton

said, that the two petitions presented by the hon. and learned member for Dublin were perfectly consistent and accordant with each other. It was not surprising that those who wished to prevent Parliamentary Reform, should be also desirous of retarding the abolition of negro slavery. The want of Parliamentary Reform, and the continuance of Negro Slavery, were the two great spots which disfigured the political character of this country; and, to place Great Britain in her proper situation, it was necessary that they should be removed, although the petitioners would much rather perpetuate them,

Mr. Calcraft

rose for the purpose of rescuing himself and other English Members from the imputation of countenancing the observations which had just fallen from the hon. member for Liverpool, than which he certainly had scarcely ever heard any thing more illiberal. The gallant General pointed out to the Members for Ireland what course they ought to pursue in presenting petitions. Now he should like the gallant General's suggestions to be sustained by reasoning, but he attempted nothing of the kind. In presenting petitions, he had been always guided by his own discretion, and he always would; and he must say, that in the course of his parliamentary life, he had often derived as much advantage from debates concerning the interests of those who had intrusted petitions to his care, when presenting those petitions, as he had done when a field-day was set apart for the discussion of the question to which they happened to have reference. He regretted the necessity which existed for presenting so many petitions, but, in presenting them, Gentlemen must decide whether they would or would not speak in their support. He felt, that the Members of that House generally represented Ireland as well as England; and he did not suppose that any Gentleman would have expressed such illiberal principles as those which the hon. member for Liverpool had uttered.

Mr. G. Moore

said, that he thought he was best consulting the time of the House, by reading one short extract from this petition, to show the sentiments of those from whom it came; and with that object in view, he had not added a single observation of his own. As to the observation of the learned member for Saltash (Mr. Crampton), he would only say, that the petition against the Reform Bill, and that relative to the West-India question, came from two very different classes of persons.

Mr. Briscoe

said, notwithstanding what had fallen from the hon. member for Liverpool, he should take that course which appeared to be most proper to him in presenting petitions; and, of course, other Gentlemen had a right to do the same. He had a large number of petitions to present, on the subject of colonial slavery, but he had been prevented from laying them before the House, in consequence of discussions on other subjects. He hoped, therefore, that those who had intrusted him with them would not impute the delay to any fault of his.