HC Deb 10 February 1844 vol 72 cc489-90
Mr. Escott

was desirous to ascertain from the noble Lord opposite (Lord J. Russell), whether it were his intention upon Tuesday to proceed with the motion of which he had given notice relative to the state of Ireland, if the trials should not happen to be concluded by that time.

Lord John Russell

was certainly very anxious to bring on his motion upon Tuesday. After the question which the hon. Member had put to him, he should perhaps explain that he quite concurred in the propriety of having no discussion in that House, which might influence the decision of the jury, but he did not think it was at all necessary that they should be acquainted with the decision of the jury previous to entering upon his motion. He should, therefore, propose, to bring it forward upon Tuesday.

Sir James Graham

thought it right to state to the noble Lord, who, he was sure, was desirous that the matter should be fully and fairly discussed, that he believed it would be impossible for the learned Attorney-general for Ireland to be in his place in Parliament upon Tuesday next. It was important in his (Sir James Graham's) opinion that the hon. and learned Gentleman should be present, but he feared that it was not at all likely that he could be. He deemed it right to state this circumstance to the noble Lord, but he did not wish in the slightest degree to sway the noble Lord's determination, or to induce him to delay his motion for a single hour, if the noble Lord thought that would not be consistent with his public duty if the noble Lord adhered to his determination of bringing on his motion upon Tuesday, he hoped the noble Lord would not think it unreasonable if he asked the noble Lord to state the precise form of motion which he then proposed to introduce.

Lord John Russell

would candidly confess to the House, with respect to the first suggestion of the right hon. Baronet, that though he should very much lament the absence of the Attorney-general for Ireland when he brought on his motion, yet he did not think that the absence of the hon. and learned Gentleman should in- duce him (Lord J. Russel!) to delay his motion. With regard to the motion itself which he intended to make, the actual form of it would be nothing more than he had already given notice of, viz., that the House should resolve itself into a Committee of the whole House, to inquire into the state of Ireland. He should, perhaps, in candour add, that if the House or the Government should think proper to agree to that motion, he should then consider it his duty to propose certain resolutions to the House, some of which would inculpate very strongly the conduct of the Government. He thought it only fair to state thus much, but the form of the motion itself conveyed no such intention.

Sir James Graham

would exercise the same candour towards the House as had characterised the remarks of the noble Lord. He could only say, that if the House determined to go into Committee upon the state of Ireland, it would not then be his duty, as a Minister of the Crown, to resist the Resolutions of the noble Lord.

House adjourned at half past five.