HC Deb 26 February 1833 vol 15 cc1146-8
Colonel Perceval

said, that he had given notice of a Motion with reference to the return ordered on the 14th instant, respecting the number of persons committed for trial for offences in Ireland, to add the words "distinguishing Roman Catholics from Protestants;" but the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Rice) had told him that his Motion was incorrect. This, however, was not the case, for had not similar returns been made some time since with respect to the counties of Kilkenny, Mayo, and the Queen's County, in which the identical distinction was made for which he now sought? The Protestant were distinguished from the Roman Catholic delinquents in those returns, and he therefore could not see what difficulty there could be in supplying the informa- tion that he required. The right hon. Gentleman had stated to him that prisoners were not classified according to their religion, but, as there were clergymen of both persuasions in attendance at the different gaols, all that he desired could be obtained from them. In bringing forward this Motion, his object was, and he had no hesitation in avowing it, to show that the imputations which had been cast upon the Irish Protestants were unfounded, and that they had not been mainly, or at all instrumental to the disgrace which now attached to their country. If the distinction for which he sought was made it would be seen that neither the crime, anarchy, nor confusion existing in Ireland was attributable to the Protestants. He had been informed by a noble Lord who was likely to know the fact that such a return had been made out for Longford; and if a little trouble were taken, he had no doubt that the information to which his Motion was directed could be obtained. He would avail himself of that opportunity to notice a statement which he had read in a newspaper of yesterday, in which a noble friend of his was most unjustly and unwarrantably attacked. His noble friend was accused of having forgotten an atrocious murder which had been committed by a Protestant at Dundalk. But not only was there no truth in the statement to which he alluded, but it was a gross and discreditable libel, calculated to prejudice the individual who was about to stand his trial upon the charge. That individual, it was perfectly true, was a Protestant, He was a native of Scotland, and a glazier by trade, and, so far from committing murder, he merely stabbed a man with his "putty-knife," after he had himself been knocked down and ill-treated. He was an inoffensive respectable man, of the name of M'Creath, and was on his return home after finishing his day's work, when he was beset by a party and knocked down, and it was in self defence that he used his putty-knife, an implement of his trade which he usually carried about him. The hon. and gallant Officer deprecated such statements as calculated to prejudice a man on his trial for life, and declared that the whole statement was a tissue of misrepresentation. The hon and gallant Officer concluded by moving that the words "distinguishing Roman Catholics from Protestants" be added to the return ordered on the 14th instant.

Mr. Spring Rice

said, that having been personally alluded to be felt it necessary to offer a few observations. Notwithstanding what had fallen from the hon. and gallant Member, he still entertained the opinion, that such a return as that for which the hon. and gallant Member had moved could not be obtained, for they all knew that parties were not required by law to state the religion to which they belonged. No return that was not certain could be useful, and it was very obvious that certain information was not to be obtained in the present instance. But there was another, and not a technical, ground on which he must resist the present Motion, and that was, that it would be manifestly invidious and unjust in its tendency. It could promote no real good, and would, in all probability, have the effect pf raising an unfair and unjust impression against that class of persons who formed the great majority in the chronicles of crime in Ireland. Crime for the most part was committed by the poor, they being most open to temptation, in consequence of their poverty: and as it was well known that the poor of Ireland belonged chiefly to one religion there could be no great occasion for the return now asked for, and therefore he hoped the hon. and gallant Member would not persist in his Motion.

Mr. Pease

declared that he should also resist the Motion. Party spirit had long been the bane of Ireland, and party spirit it was that had reduced that unhappy country to its present awful condition. He therefore hoped and entreated that the House would not countenance party measures, or agree to a Motion that would have the effect of easting a stigma on the religion of any portion of their fellow subjects.

Motion withdrawn.