Colonel Bruensaid, Sir, after several disappointments I eagerly seize the 6rst opportunity of claiming from the House that indulgence which it usually grants to Members who have the misfortune to be placed in a situation similar to that in which I stand—if, indeed, any Member ever was the subject of such foul and false attacks—coarser epithets might be applied, but. I refrain from following a vile example. Were it a matter of mere private concern, were my own character simply implicated, I should feel, however anxious I might be to repel 763 such aspersions, that this was not exactly the time to do it. But when I—(and who does not?) perceive the reason why these accusations were brought forward, I feel that I should neither be doing justice to myself, to the electors who sent me here, nor to the public, if I did not put the House shortly in possession of the real state of the case—at least of the leading facts connected with it. At the same time I am well aware that these things can by no possibility be in any way connected with the charge against the learned Member for Dublin—they have nothing in the world to do with it. Grant, for a moment, that all the allegations were proved—how could that authorise or justify the offence charged? I am persuaded there is not one hon. Gentleman who hears me who will for a moment suspect me capable of deliberately making an untrue statement; neither would common sense permit me to make so false a movement in the face of such an enemy. If, therefore, I shall state anything in error, or omit to mention what I should fairly bring forward, the House will in candour consider the peculiar difficulties of nay position, and judge accordingly. Conceiving from former misrepresentations that it might be possible that an attempt might be made to divert the attention of the House and of the public by an attack on myself and other landlords, I wrote to Ireland for an account of all tenants that had been ejected on my estate for the last five years, thinking that period sufficiently extensive to embrace all the cases that could be brought forward; I have accordingly received that account. I find several of the same townlands mentioned in both; therefore take it for granted that the cases are identical in my return and Mr. Vigors's petition. Although neither names nor yet dates are mentioned in his, I will commence with those in my list, and advert to the others afterwards; although, even if they were truly represented they must have occurred long before any of the clauses stated in the petition were in operation. Having premised so far, the first name that occurs is that of Ballyteglea. This case has been dwelt upon (by an individual mentioned with high eulogy by Mr. Vigors) at every election at Carlow for these four years, notwithstanding the most absolute and unqualified contradiction as constantly given. The correctness of his statements is soon likely to be put to a satisfactory proof, for I have at 764 length succeeded in serving the necessary law process on Mrs. Nowlan's partner in the lease. If the House please, I will state shortly the facts. Her rent amounted to 86l., 8s. 5½d. An arrear accrued of 310l. 4s. 3d,. any part of which she was unable to pay; neither could she properly cultivate the land. I sent for her, and represented this, stating the impossibility of allowing the land to continue in her possession, not benefiting her or me. I offered to forgive the arrears, and to make her a present of her cattle, stock, crop, and everything upon the land, and a sum of money, to enable her to look out for and take another farm. She returned home to consider, was badly advised, and behaved with the utmost violence afterwards. A person named James Corcoran was ejected from the lands of Bohermore; he abused his land, and allowed the buildings to fall to ruin; his rent was 58l. 0s. 2½d., arrears due 104l. 16s. 1d. and this was the lowest arrear of any. Two persons named Terence and James Carty were ejected from the same place; they likewise seriously injured the land; and the house, an old mansion-house, was so completely destroyed, that it was found necessary to take it down; the rent was 50l. 3s. 3d., the arrears 226l. 1s. 10d. One of these men, being a well-behaved person, is allowed still to reside on the land, though no part of the arrears were ever paid. James Carty was ejected from the same place under the following circumstances:—He became indebted to a money-lender in the neighbouriug town. He had reason to suppose that this man was about to enforce his demand; he therefore gathered a band of friends in the neighbouring hills, who descended by night with their cars, and carried off the crops, the cattle, and everything that could be removed, and although he was hotly pursued by the money-lender and his faction he outmanœuvred him, made good his retreat, and retired to America. In my own defence, as landlord, I was obliged then to step in and serve ejectments. His father, an old man, he left behind. I have settled an annuity on him of 12l. for his life. His rent was 65l 13s.; arrears 190l. 14s. 10d. The widow Harold, who, by the by, like many of the others, has been married for years, though she still retains, according to the custom of the country, the title of widow was, with her husband, John Bren- 765 nan, ejected from Kildrinagh, owing at the rent of 74l. 5s. 6d., an arrear of 369l. 13s., her husband having previously sold the crops and run away with the money. A man named Murphy, holding seven acres, owing an arrear of nearly four years' rent, agreed to leave the land on receiving a sum of money, and being forgiven the arrears. I afterwards made him a present of his crops; for my own security ejectments were served. Long previous to my getting this land, his sister, a widow, had come from a neighbouring town, and taken possession of a shed or outhouse by force. They carried on the war for a considerable time, each threatening the life of the other, to the scandal of the whole neighbourhood. At last Murphy forced her out, and threw down the shed; and I get the credit of it, although these facts are notorious to the whole country. One of the orphans, a young fellow who had been ill, and to whom I in consequence paid a weekly pension, on his recovery was employed by me to take care of some land, and keep off the cattle of a neighbouring farmer, which were continually trespassing on it. That farmer very soon invited him to his house, and whilst my pasture was found very agreeable by the cattle, he made himself equally so to the farmer's daughter; so much so that she robbed her father and ran away with him. Such is the history of this widow and orphan. I have been accused of destroying the village of Nurney; there is but one village on my estate called Nurney, built by my father, entirely at his own expense, and I have expended some thousands on it. The houses were slated, and neat gardens attached to each. Originally, I believe, the village was filled with Protestants. A great many Roman Catholics have, however, since come in in their place. They are asked for no rent, nor ever have been, except in two or three instances, as a punishment for bad conduct. I do not suppose that the whole amounted to 5l. They have pulled down many of the houses, burned or carried away the woodwork, defaced the gardens, and torn up the fences. After repeated complaints of dishonesty and disorderly conduct, some few have been sent away; no freeholder amongst them. But of those who were sent away some had houses provided for them in other places, and others got pensions. Some got nothing, owing to their own misconduct. I 766 do not find the names of Ballyloughan, Knockthomas, or Knockallard, in this list of mine. The first of these was recovered by ejectment in 1827, from a farmer named Kelly, he owing more than 4½ years rent. It was let to one of the undertenants residing on the farm, the brother of a priest, who afterwards rode about the county, at the head of a mob, canvassing against me. Twelve months ago this tenant owed me an arrear of two years rent, and this arrear has not decreased since. I could ruin the man if I pleased; but, notwithstanding my cruelty and bigotry, he remains in his farm still. Other people had cabins on the laud, but received each a sum of money and went away. All this, however, happened nine years ago, before any political or religious dissentions had distracted the country. In Knockthomas I know but of one farm that has come into my hands for several years; the tenant was a Protestant, and could not sublet. A Roman Catholic, however, got possession of it, and refused to give it up at the expiration of the lease. By way of annoying me, he collected as many vagabonds and poor families as the house could hold, and put me to the expense and trouble of a law process before I could get possession of my property. I did not feel myself at all called upon to do anything for these people. In Knockallard, at the time of my leaving Ireland, but one tenant had quitted his farm. He received notice to do so, having repeatedly given me great cause for complaint; however, being an industrious man, and at the solicitation of one of his neighbours, I desired my agent to make him a present of 50l. Another man had received notice, and offered to go on receiving a sum of money, which I directed should be given. The townland of Schahanrane, where twenty-three families are stated to have received notice to quit, was leased to one tenant, who has been dead some years, at a very trifling rent. The last life in the lease, who was transported for forgery, before the rebellion of 1798, has also been dead several years. These under-tenants have, as I am informed, paid each so much per annum for the concealment of this fact, but, as might be expected, they have quarrelled, and the truth has come to light; as a matter of course and necessity, I have served notice to quit, and if they are all turned out, no man can say but they richly deserve it. As I before stated, 767 there are neither names nor dates in this petition as regards the tenants stated to have been ejected; it is not easy, therefore, to say to what time reference is made. Although in the commencement these unchristian persecutions are stated to be occasioned by the contests since 1832, and the whole drift of the petition is to impress that on the mind of the House, and so to suggest the inference, that Mr. O'Connell was in a manner obliged to go some degrees further than the most corrupt of the old Whigs and Tories had dared to go, and for the mere sake of the purity of election to sell a county to the highest bidder, yet the convenient phrase of "within the last few years," inserted towards the conclusion, enables the petitioner in one case to go back to the year 1827, and in others, I believe, still further, whilst the little word "partly" skilfully slipped in, leaves a door open for escape. If it is demonstrated that these transactions, if true, could not by possibility be imputed to the motives stated, but must have taken place in the common course of the exercise of the landlord's just and undoubted rights, how long these rights are to be continued remains to be seen. On the whole, then, I have ejected eight tenants in five years, being in the proportion of one out of 227 alleged in each year—each of these tenants, on an average, owing me more than four years and a quarter's rent. Not one of those mentioned in the petition was an elector; but I have ejected one who was a freeholder, owing arrears to a greater amount than any I have yet mentioned. This happened two years ago; he has ever since resided in his house, paying no rent, with his mother, a widow, and three brothers, desolate orphans, of the tender age of between thirty and forty, strong, able fellows, as capable of doing mischief, and as willing to do it, as the loudest clamourer for the liberty of Ireland could desire; so much so indeed, that I shall be obliged to have them removed, and very possibly afford an opportunity for another petition. I am accused of destroying whole towns and villages. I have expended some thousands in building and repairing one, in endeavouring to make the people comfortable, and in educating their children at my own expense. In place of being the persecutor of widows and orphans, let any gentleman who may have any curio- 768 sity on the subject, inquire whether I do not support a very considerable number of both who have no sort of claim on me? No one can have a better opportunity than the hon. Member for Greenock; for, if I am not misinformed, some of his connections or friends live in the county of Carlow, Let him make a rigid investigation into my character, and report the result to the House. I am not aware of one cruel or tyrannical act ever having been committed against my tenants, by those who act for me, nor of one that can even be tortured into such a shape in the eyes of any unprejudiced person—not even by the learned Gentleman, with all the exclusive advantages he possesses. So far with respect to the tenants. They were all bound strictly in their leases not to sublet; the farms were all of a moderate size, some very small; notwithstanding, in some instances, they did allow strangers and others to settle on their lands. Now, the question arose, what was the landlord to do with these strangers who, contrary to law, contrary to his express desire, and, in direct opposition to his interests, took possession of his land? What would be done in such cases in England or Scotland? Would any one here allow a set of paupers to take possession of his estate?—would he not cause them to be removed immediately, or endeavour, at the least, to persuade them to go as they had come? What was done by me? The agent was directed, whenever the people could be induced to take money for what they had thus got into their hands, to purchase it, and in almost every case this was done. In some cases they were allowed to remain, in some, houses were procured elsewhere, in others pensions were given, which continue to be paid to this day. There may be some few cases in which nothing was given, but it must have been from notorious bad conduct, or where they were collected merely for the purpose of annoying me. If I were resolved on obliging Roman, Catholics to leave my estate, merely because of their creed, I have, and have had for years, ample opportunity of doing so, of which, however, I have not yet availed myself. I have at this moment a considerable extent of land, exclusively and for years occupied by them without leases—some of them owing large arrears. I have other tracts occupied by none but Roman Catholics, owing hundreds, nay, thousands of pounds, which the tenants 769 could by no means pay, and which I could infallibly recover by ejectment. If I had that antipathy to them which is laid to my charge, could I not, long since, have gratified it, without any one reasonably finding fault with me? Unless it be determined that a man is to have no control whatever over his property, and to this point things are fast verging in Ireland. But I rejoice to say, that some of my warmest supporters are Roman Catholics, and this could hardly be the case, if all that is staled were fact. One townland, containing about 1,300 English acres, came into my possession; three Protestants were the tenants; they did not reside on the land. I took it from them, and gave it altogether to Roman Catholics. This does not look very like religious persecution. How long landlords can continue to act as they have really acted, will depend on circumstances. We may be supposed to have our feelings and opinions as well as others, and, perhaps, we may be allowed occasionally to gratify them, though we may not consider it allowable to go to the same lengths as others take the liberty of going. Possibly we, like the landlords of England and Scotland, may be permitted to select our tenants. We are responsible to the laws of our country. If we violate them, let us be punished. If we do not, I here protest against being called to account even by this House, much less by the learned Member or the priests, who notoriously set all law at defiance, at the very time they are heaping every species of slander and abuse on us for merely acting as the law allows, and by no means even going so far. With respect to the real character of the gentry of Carlow, perhaps, the state of the country before agitation commenced there may afford no bad criterion, and a more prosperous, a more improving, happy, or contented population, could not be found in the empire. A tolerable proof of this was, that crime or disturbance was almost unknown, the best understanding subsisted between all ranks and classes, whilst the land, and all its produce, bore a higher price in the market, and the peasantry in general were better fed, housed, and clothed, than in almost any other part of the country. It was truly called the garden of Ireland. The landlords have been so exceedingly moderate in their rents, that they often made a mistake against themselves of from 1 to 200 per cent. in the value of their 770 farms, as a late Committee must remember; and this piece of information was obtained, not from the landlords or their partizans, but from the oaths, repeated day after day, of a long string of respectably dressed witnesses brought forward by Mr. Vigors himself, under the superintendence of no less than three priests. The Carlow gentlemen, like others, may have their faults; but rapacity and cruelty have not been of the number. Our real crime is, that we will not bow down to the image which Daniel, the king, has set up; and, for this offence, we are to be cast into the burning fiery furnace of public indignation, which is to be heated one seven times hotter than usual, by the ruined towns and villages, fanned by the shrieks and cries of widows and orphans. But the attempt will fail—we shall pass unhurt through these fires; and if justice and truth be not a dead letter, our accuser will have the benefit of them himself. But if this be an offence, I must plead guilty to the charge. We are incorrigible offenders. But let us see for a moment, how the electors and landlords of Carlow, who presume to think for themselves, have been treated by those who now make this outcry against them—namely by the priests. No sooner did they perceive that the time was fully come that they had been so long watching for, than, like the soldiers of Cadmus, they started in an instant into view, fully armed and equipped; they placed themselves at the head of the lowest, the most thoughtless of their flocks, the very dregs of the people—
§ Mr. MethuenI rise to order, Sir. So long as the hon. and gallant Officer confined himself to a vindication of his own character, I, of course, felt bound to listen to him with attention; but I wish to know whether the hon. and gallant Officer is not now going beyond the line which the indulgence of the House usually permits in cases of a personal nature?
§ The Speakerthought it was unnecessary to interfere with the hon. Member.
§ Mr. Warburtonfound upon the list of notices the following for Tuesday, the 1st of March—namely, "Petition on the subject of the late Carlow election, and to take that opportunity of making a statement to the House on the matter of the petition which was presented to the House on the 15th of February instant, and printed with the votes of that day, con- 771 taining matters personally affecting himself." Now he (Mr. Warburton) apprehended when notice was given—
§ The Speakerwas understood to say, that on seeing the notice on the votes for Tuesday next, he was surprised that the hon. and gallant Member should have risen to address the House on the subject of that notice to-day; but as the hon. and gallant Member had entered partially into his statement, it might be convenient for the House to allow him to proceed, so far as related to the matters affecting himself personally. But as there stood a notice of a motion respecting the proceedings in the county of Carlow for a future day, he trusted the hon. and gallant Officer would not be betrayed into remarks beyond what simply related to his own case, and that no other hon. Member would be induced to enter upon a premature discussion on the subject. generally respecting the county of Carlow.
Colonel BruenI shall bow with pleasure to the general feeling of the House; but I did think that an opportunity would be afforded me, after such serious charges have been preferred against me, not only to defend myself, but to defend those who have been equally guilty with me. I was endeavouring to show that the conduct pursued by the landlords of Carlow was not without some provocation, and if the House pleases, I will state a few of those provocations.
§ Lord John RussellI rise to order, Sir, and I do so for the purpose of clearly understanding what it is that the hon. and gallant Member is going to do. If I understand him rightly, it is this: that having made his statement respecting his own character personally (and which the House, of course, has listened to with that attention with which it is always ready to listen to statements of a similar nature) he is now going to state what has been the conduct of other landlords in the county of Carlow with respect to their tenants. I may be wrong in so understanding the hon. and gallant Member; but if that is his intention, of course the House will no longer think that the statement is merely the hon. Gentleman's own statement; and if the hon. Gentleman should (as of course he would) impugn the conduct of other persons, those other persons will in fairness have a right to be heard in their defence.
Colonel BruenI shall bow to the 772 feeling of the House, and will not persevere in the statement which I was going to make. But I beg to call the attention of the House to this fact—that the other evening the House received a petition, in which many serious accusations were made against individuals, when it was wholly out of the power of the persons so affected to rebut those accusations. I do appeal to any hon. Member whether that was exactly fair, and whether those persons have not some reason to complain. But I must be allowed to finish, for I have not quite yet done with what relates to myself. This is the liberty we enjoy, and for an increase of which the learned Member is so anxious. The question is, not whether the elector in Ireland shall be allowed quietly to exercise his franchise, but whether the priest shall be openly allowed to drive him like a pig, where he pleases, and sell him to the highest bidder, which must be the case unless the landlord has the courage to step in. The power of these political priests will be increased to a frightful extent, if some measure now in contemplation be unfortunately permitted to pass into a law. And here I would not be understood as charging all the Roman Catholic clergy with the commission of these outrages. I believe there are many who sincerely regret the state of things, and would, if they dared, endeavour to check proceedings destructive alike to themselves and to the poor people; but so strong is the delusion, so resistless the torrent, that it carries them and the most respectable of their parishioners along against their will, and they are obliged to choose between their parishes and their consciences.
§ Mr. Methuenrose to order. He thought the hon. Member was not entitled to enter into these particulars.
§ The Speakersaid, that as the hon. and gallant Member was personally concerned in the question, he ought to be allowed to exercise his own discretion, as to the course he was to pursue.
§ Mr. Warburtonwas of opinion that the hon. and gallant Member ought to defer his observations till Tuesday, the 1st of March, for which day he had given notice of bringing this subject before the House.
§ The Speakersaid that the hon. and gallant Member had given notice for to day, but the notice had been erroneously printed in the votes.
Colonel Bruensaid, that after the dis- 773 inclination which had been expressed to his proceeding, he would abridge his observations as much as possible. But, continued the hon. and gallant Member, there is one case mentioned peculiarly atrocious, and the most remarkable in point of numbers—that of Ballytarsna. I am accused of driving from their houses here, in a wicked unchristian manner, nineteen families, containing 101 individuals, with the usual liberal proportion of widows, &c. Now what will any honest man say when he hears that I never turned off one single human being, man, woman, or child, from this land? that the power even to do so never was placed in my hands but once; and how did I use it? The House shall hear; and now that I have told you what I did not, I will take the liberty of stating what I did do. This town-land contains nearly 800 English acres. I receive 221l. 10s. 9d. yearly, not much exceeding one-fourth of the value. The lease is for ever; as long, therefore, as the head rent was paid, I had no authority or pretence for interfering. I do not know that I ever was on the land in my life. The owner of this estate, whom, to the best of my belief, I never saw, as he lived in another county, became exceedingly embarrassed, and was obliged to leave the country. Arrears to the amount, I believe, of 1,000l. were due, other creditors were pressing, and it became necessary for me to look to myself. Ejectments were, therefore, served; time ran on, no creditor found it his interest to redeem, and I had every prospect of getting possession of this estate, and of adding many hundreds per annum to my income, and that without any blame that by possibility could be imputed. And how did this desolator of towns and villages, this tyrant, bigot, persecutor, fiend (I use the exact terms of the learned Gentleman), with a countenance scarcely human, this tormentor of widows and orphans, this modern Phalaris, regaling himself with the shrieks of his victims, this Tory, this Orangeman, this Conservative, how did he behave? What did he do? The tenants on the land were, I believe, exclusively Roman Catholic. He ordered the ejectments to be withdrawn, and the debt to be received by such instalments as the distressed tenant could conveniently pay. I have made the following memorandum on this point;—"The inhabitants have been ever since my most implacable enemies." Now I beseech the House to mark the truly diabolical artifice by which a retreat is attempted to be secured here; for to this, I suppose, is to be 774 applied the postscript:—"One of these townlands not being in the possession of Colonel B. at the time the tenantry were ejected." Why then was it mentioned? Would any man who had a spark of decency, not to mention honesty or good feeling, in his composition, have first deliberately charged another with committing a crime—have first coolly planted a dagger in his back, left it rankling in the wound, and then in a sort of appendix—a second or third edition—have insinuated or hinted, that possibly the accused was not quite so guilty, not having been exactly at that very time in a situation to commit the offence? But here again the character of the inventors and propagators of this atrocious falsehood breaks out—the cloven foot again appears. They well know every particle of the case, and that I have not, and never had, any authority over this land, some of the most mischievous and active of their own followers residing on it. I think, moreover, that there is an additional falsehood. Father Phelan states that Ballytarsna is in the same parish as the rest of the town-lands, whereas I believe it is in Mr. Tyrrell's; if, however, my supposition be incorrect, then it is in his own parish, and he must have known that every word he uttered was false—although his statements were made on a Sunday with his congregation around him, who must likewise have known the falsehood of he charge; but that is a matter of small consequence; an occasion was to be served—the end justifies the means. I have now done, and I trust I have convinced the House, even from the imperfect information I can now command, that most of the charges in the petition lately presented are gross and wilful misstatements, and that the others are so distorted, perverted, and exaggerated, that they scarcely bear any resemblance to the truth. Were my purpose attack or recrimination, I should find little difficulty in pointing out many of the learned Member's speeches and actions, which would throw all my exploits into the shade, and place in a very striking light the very different species of liberty that he takes himself, and is willing to allow to others. But I need not such a defence—my position is too strong. I heartily hope that the threatened royal Commission may be issued, to inquire into all the causes of the present unhappy state of Carlow. For years I have been anxiously endeavouring, at great expense and trouble, and at the sacrifice of all 775 my domestic comforts, to bring these matters under the view of the Committees of this House. I have hitherto failed. I will, nevertheless, continue my endeavours, and I have the satisfaction of inform the learned Gentleman, that I have long since secured the assistance of the same friends who have heretofore discharged their duty so efficiently to their clients, and so honourably to themselves. I now hail the promise of the hon. Member for Greenock to move for that Commission on an early day—I entreat—I conjure—I dare him to obtain it. If impartial men be appointed, who will honestly do their duty, a state of things will be disclosed, of which no Gentleman can form a conception—but which, nevertheless, very nearly concerns themselves. I will undertake to prove every tittle of what I have stated, and much more. I now sit down, confidently submitting that I have redeemed my pledge, and shown that the assertions of the hon. and learned Member for Dublin with respect to me are as worthy of credit as those he is in the habit of making.
Mr. Hopeconfessed that the embarrassment which he always felt on addressing the House, was very much increased by the knowledge he had that they were anxious to proceed to business of a more general nature, but he begged to obtrude a few minutes on their time in order to vindicate the character of a noble relative of his own, who had been most unjustly attacked on several occasions, and more particularly in a petition lately presented to the House. When that petition was presented no opportunity had been afforded to his noble relative of giving any explanation whatever. He (Mr. Hope) immediately conveyed to his noble relative information of the charges which had been made against him; and he had come down on the succeeding evening, prepared, if the course of the debate had permitted, to make a brief answer to those charges. Subsequently the hon. Member for Greenock (Mr. Wallace) gave notice of a motion for inquiry, by Royal Commission, into the facts and circumstances set forth in Mr. Vigors's petition. On seeing this, his noble relative declared that all he wanted was a full inquiry, and he should be perfectly satisfied if that hon. Gentleman's motion were carried. What reason the hon. Gentleman might have had for deferring his motion it was 776 not for him (Mr. Hope) to say. This was not the first time an attempt had been made to impeach the character of his noble relative, and to cast a certain stigma on him. Mr. Vigors, the late Member for Carlow, did endeavour to do so on a former occasion. The intimidation Committee was appointed in the course of the last Session. Now, if that hon. Gentleman had charges to make against his noble relative, or against anybody else, of religious bigotry and political persecution—
§ Mr. Jervisrose to order. The hon. and gallant Member opposite had been heard in consequence of the indulgence of the House being always extended to every hon. Member on whom imputations had been cast, and the earliest opportunity afforded to him to give an explanation of his conduct. But that was not the case of the hon. Gentleman who was now in possession of the House. He was addressing himself to a subject not relating to any Member of this House, and he (Mr. Jervis) put it to the House whether they would allow the hon. Member to proceed in making a statement which must, of necessity, lead to a lengthened debate?
§ Mr. Williams Wynnsaid that there was no doubt that upon the strict point of order the hon. and learned Member was correct. But the House must consider if they would receive petitions containing heavy charges upon individuals which they had no opportunity, personally, to answer, they being Members of the other House of the Legislature, whether, after giving a facility of reception to petitions much greater than used to be given in former times, and allowing them to have currency to the most remote parts of the empire, they were not in justice called upon to extend a like indulgence to those who were so charged, and relax their rules in favour of hearing the answers to the attacks that had been made.
Mr. Hopesaid he did not claim it as a matter of right to address the House, but asked to be permitted to do so as a matter of courtesy. He left off with stating that the time for bringing forward charges of political persecution and religious bigotry would have been when the intimidation Committee was sitting. Mr. Vigors did, in the course of last Session, get up a petition for the purpose of attempting to establish charges against his (Mr. Hope's) noble relative. He then received a com- 777 munication from his noble relative, desiring him to go to Mr. Vigors, and inform him that a time was appointed when he might bring forward his petition, and make his charges. Let the House observe that the statements had been made, although the petition had not been presented. He then went to Mr. Vigors, and saw him in the House of Commons. He told him then, that if he would meet him in the House of Commons next day, at four o'clock, he would be ready to meet any of the statements he might have to make. Mr. Vigors did not come down to the House of Commons at four o'clock on the appointed day. Mr. Vigors did not write him a line, or speak one word to him on the subject; and from that hour to the present, he had heard no more of Mr. Vigors, or of his charges in this respect. Now a few words as to the statements contained in the petition. The first name on the list was Ballinkillen. His noble relative was accused of having ejected from the town-lands of Ballinkillen, the property of Viscount Beresford, where the system first commenced, thirty-nine families, amounting to 205 individuals, including fifty-six widows and orphans. Now the lands of Ballinkillen fell out of lease twelve years ago. He, therefore thought it was unnecessary, in the present state of the House, to trouble them with any observations on that part of the case. He would simply say, that of six farmers put into these lands, three were Catholics, and three Protestants, and that they remained tenants to this day. So much for the charge of religious and political persecution on the lands of Ballinkillen. The next place was Ballyknocken; and the charge against his noble relative was, that from the lands of Ballyknocken he had evicted seven families, amounting to thirty-three individuals, including thirteen widows and orphans. Now the only change made by his noble relative in this place was this;—a man who now kept a public-house in Ballyknocken had twelve acres of land taken from him and given to another farmer. The next case was that of Sly-guff. Now when the lands of Slyguff fell out of lease, the first proceeding of his noble relative was to divide them into small farms. Every one of the tenants were restored to their farms, and were now in the occupation of them. There were a few exceptions to be sure; the nonresident tenants were not continued. 778 What did his noble relative do with the smaller inhabitants? To each of them he made an offer of emigration, if they chose to accept it; and to those who did not, he gave a certain amount in money, to buy up their interest. He also built a great number of cottages, in which many of these people were placed. Those who did not emigrate, and were not placed in really comfortable cottages—the providing which, when the miserable nature of the hovels they had previously occupied was recollected, must be considered an act of charity—had sums of money given them to buy up their interest. The case of Clonegaeh was the same. The principle of dividing the farms was the same, the principle of retaining the tenants was the same, the principle of making pecuniary compensation to the cotters who went away was the same; and many of the tenants forcibly refused to give up possession. He thought he had completely answered these two charges. Then came the allegation at the end of the petition, namely, that in the town-land of Slyguff fifteen families, amounting to ninety-four individuals, including twenty-three widows and orphans, had received notice to quit. The House would do him the favour of observing the facts in this case; he thought they would rather astonish them. There were only two individuals in the town-land of Slyguff who were now going to quit. One of those was under notice to quit, and the other had given notice himself, and both these individuals were Protestants. He was informed by his noble relative, with reference to the charge of political persecution, that he was not aware of having turned any one single elector off his land; and with regard to religious persecution, he hoped the statements he had made were sufficient to disprove the allegations of the petition. One word more, and only one. The town and neighbourhood of Slyguff had been mentioned frequently. These charges against his noble relative were all made when the townland of Slyguff fell out of the occupation of the life owner. Mr. Vigors, the unimpeachable Mr. Vigors, and Mr. Blakeney, the then Members for Carlow, came to his noble relative and mentioned the allegations which were then circulated in the country against him with regard to his intention to turn off all these people. His noble relative told them what his intentions were, 779 and what the principles were on which he meant to act. Mr. Vigors and Mr. Blakeney then expressed themselves perfectly satisfied, and asked his noble relative whether he would permit them to communicate to his tenants, then holding the land, his intentions towards them, as they were anxious for nothing more than his own statement of his intentions. What was his noble relative's answer? "No, Sir; I mean to act upon these principles; I will follow them up; but I do not choose any communication to be made to my tenants that does not come from myself, or my agents. Upon these principles his noble Friend had acted; upon these principles he was ready to defend his conduct; upon these principles he required investigation; upon these principles he was satisfied with the mode of investigation proposed to the hon. Member for Greenock; and he could only add, that relative to all the facts which now rested upon assertion, he was prepared to bring forward incontrovertible evidence.
Mr. O'ConnellMr. Vigors had been mentioned. He would not detain the House one moment; but he wished to be enabled to state what he thought the House must be clearly agreed upon, that this matter ought not to be allowed to remain in its present state. If these charges had been falsely made, their falsehood ought to be exposed. Therefore, it was, that he intended to move, when he had an opportunity of presenting several petitions on the subject which had been intrusted to him, that the whole of the facts should be investigated by a Select Committee.