STATE OF IRELAND. (Hansard, 7 February 1822)

The Earl of Liverpool
gave notice, of his intention to move to morrow, that the Standing Orders, 26 and 105, relative to the passing of bills, be suspended, and now moved that their lordships be summoned.

The Marquis of Lansdown
said, he understood the motion of which the noble earl had given notice, had reference to a bill on the state of Ireland. He therefore wished to take that opportunity of calling the attention of the House to the papers which had been laid before the House, and on which the necessity for the bill would he founded. He had understood the noble earl to say in the debate on Tuesday that his conviction of the necessity of a legislative measure with regard to Ireland was founded upon urgent representations from the government of Ireland, calling for an extension of the law. Now, upon looking at the papers on the table, he found in them no urgent demand for additional authority—no representation that an extension of the powers already vested in the executive government was necessary. Their lordships, before they passed any legislative measure, ought to have the representation of the Fish government distinctly before them; and be put in possession of all the evidence upon which the application was made. He hoped, therefore, that the noble earl would consent to lay before the House—not all the despatches he had received from the lord-lieutenant on the subject of the disturbances—but such part of them as showed it to be the opinion of the Irish government, that an increase of authority was necessary to the restoration of tranquillity. He was the more induced to make this request, because, after reading the papers which had been laid on the table, though he saw reason to suppose that the Irish government considered the present disposable military force insufficient for the suppression of the disorders, he could no where find in those papers any declaration of an opinion, that the existing laws were insufficient. In one instance only did an individual express a wish for the revival of the Insurrection act. It might certainly be the opinion of the lord lieutenant that a farther extension of the powers of the law was necessary, but there existed no evidence of that opinion in the papers.

The Earl of Liverpool
said, that there was evidence sufficient to warrant the proposition he should have to make to the House, on a measure which he expected 95 would come to their lordships to-morrow from another place. Upon the face of the papers, there certainly did not appear any demand of the kind alluded to by the noble marquis; but it did not follow, that no such application had been made. He had no difficulty in most distinctly stating, that the measures which would be brought under the consideration of their lordships came recommended by the opinion of the Irish government. Their lordships would easily understand, that this opinion might be accompanied by communications which it would not be convenient to lay before parliament. Their lordships would recollect, that in passing measures similar to that now intended, it had not been usual to ground them on that particular kind of evidence required by the noble marquis. In the present case, a general view of the state of the country was sufficient; more particularly as the whole subject of the state of Ireland would at a future period come under the consideration of parliament.

Lord Ellenborough
expressed his surprise, that in the information communicated to the House, nothing had been said of the cause of the disorders. He thought that when a remedy was contemplated, the cause of the evil ought to be taken into consideration. In the papers on the table there appeared no demand for increased powers. Farther information, certainly, ought to be afforded. He could not help thinking it a very extraordinary circumstance, that though the yeomanry had been formerly called out, it was the yeomanry of the north, not those of the south of Ireland, where the disturbances prevailed.

Lord Holland
considered the course of argument taken by the noble earl opposite to be very extraordinary. He asserted that measures, such as that which was about to be submitted to their lordships, were not usually preceded by evidence of the kind he had required. In his speech he professed, that the proceedings on the measure were in the usual course, and yet his motion had for its object to enable their lordships to pass a bill in a way contrary to the usual practice of the House. From what little attention he had paid to the state of Ireland, it appeared there was reason to fear that an increased force might be required by the Irish government; but there was nothing in the information before the House to warrant the opinion that an increase of 96 powers was asked by that government. He could no where see reason to conclude that there was any deficiency in the existing law. The measure contemplated was equivalent to the establishment of martial law; and their lordships ought to be fully satisfied of its necessity, before they gave it their sanction. Much as he deplored the employment of military force, his consent to an increase of that force would be more easily wrung from him, than that alteration of the law which the noble earl had in view. If the noble earl would show that the measures of rigour he had in view were demanded by the Irish government, and that there were sufficient grounds for that demand, he would accede to his proposition, painful as it was to think that twenty-two years after the union with Ireland, coercion was still to be employed in the government of that unfortunate country.

Lord King
could not understand for what reason the opinions of the Irish government were not given. This was one of those practices which prevented their lordships from fixing responsibility any where. The servants of the Crown here say they make a proposition on the application of other servants of the Crown; but upon what authority the latter make the demand, was not in evidence before their lordships.