Lord Ellenboroughsaid, he was about to move for some returns, but if the noble Lord opposite had any objection to their being produced, he would not press his Motion. A return had been laid on their Lordships' Table that morning, made by the Chief Constable of Ireland, of all outrages committed within their bailiwicks during the months of March, April, May, and June, 1832. He wished to move that a similar return be laid before their Lordships, made up to the latest period.
§ Earl Greysaid, that he could see no objection to the return being made, but, under the present system of intimidation which he had described a few nights ago, many persons who had suffered from those outrages preferred to suffer in silence, instead of making it known, on account of the risk they would have run. He certainly should object to those returns if he were to understand that the noble Baron considered the production of them necessary before their Lordships could proceed with the Bill which was discussed on Friday. He hoped, however, that the noble Lord had no intention to delay that Bill by the present Motion.
Lord Ellenboroughhad no intention whatever of impeding the progress of the Bill introduced by the noble Earl. The returns which he moved for were all the evidence upon which their Lordships could agree to such a Bill as that was; therefore he regretted that his Majesty's Ministers had not thought it their duty to lay the Bill on the Table on the first day of the Session, or that they had not, at all events, laid the evidence upon which they had introduced such a measure before their Lordships at that early period. A measure of that importance ought not to be passed without the fullest consideration. If there was no objection to his Motion, he would then move it.
§ Viscount Melbournesaid, he had not the slightest objection to the production of the information required by the noble Baron. The noble Baron would see, however, that in the present state of Ireland it would require some consideration as to giving the names of those individuals upon whom outrages had been committed. It would be necessary not only to omit names, but localities, in order that persons might not be pointed out for further vengeance. At the same time, he must say, that the return would not answer the object of the noble Baron.
Lord Ellenboroughsaid, there would be no difficulty in the case, for he did not wish for names; all that he called for was a statement of facts. The noble Lord could not, he thought, have made himself acquainted with the returns already on the Table, or he would have known that they contained much useful information without the names of any of the parties.
The Marquess of Westmeathsaid, that of his own knowledge he could bear testimony to the statement of the noble Earl (Grey), that at present such a return as was 835 called for could not with safety be made; and it must be very inaccurate.
§ Earl Greyhad thought that the notoriety of the facts which he had detailed the other night would have induced any noble Lord to concede the measure which he had introduced. He had really thought, that when evils had arrived at such a pitch, so that no longer a hope could be entertained that the powers of the law could be enforced—he did not imagine that any person, least of all those who had been most anxious for such measures, would have stated any objections to them. He hoped that the measure would not be delayed, and he trusted that if the noble Lord's object was to delay the Bill, nobody would concur with him; nor would they, he (Earl Grey) hoped, consider it necessary to have the information to justify the Bill. Under the circumstances which he had the other evening detailed, his Majesty's Ministers felt it necessary to introduce a measure which they believed would be most effectual, and he trusted that it would be of the shortest possible duration. He had imagined, from the general assurance given a few nights ago, that the principle of the Bill was acceded to, and he trusted that the noble Lord would not object to the Bill passing before the returns could be produced.
Lord Ellenboroughsaid, he had already stated, that he had no intention to retard the progress of the Bill upon the Table; but he did much regret, that the noble Earl had not laid all the information which he possessed before the House at the first meeting of Parliament, and which had induced Ministers to bring in the Bill. The noble Earl had misunderstood him if the noble Earl imagined that the observations he had made applied to the noble Earl. They applied to the noble Viscount (Viscount Melbourne). He (Lord Ellenborough) had asserted that the noble Viscount could not have read the papers on the Table if he thought the production of the further report on that principle could injure any one. He was still of opinion that the information sought for by those returns ought to be produced. He did full justice to the noble Earl for the feelings which must have actuated him in proposing such a measure. He had no doubt, that the noble Earl must have suffered acute pain in producing that measure he must have forgotten all the feelings of his former life if he did not suffer pain in producing such a measure of severity. Those very feelings of patriotism by 836 which the noble Earl was actuated had induced him to come forward to their Lordships with the Bill, notwithstanding the pain which it gave him—a Bill similar in principle to one which the noble Earl had formerly opposed, because the noble Earl now thought the passing of the measure was essential to the peace and security of Ireland. He hoped, therefore, that it would not be said, that he had not done full justice to the noble Earl for the principles which actuated him in bringing forward the Bill. In conclusion he would beg leave to move for Copies of the monthly Returns of the chief constables of police in Ireland, of outrages committed in their respective baronies, since the month of June, 1832, in continuation of the Returns ordered to be printed on the 16th of July last.
§ Motion agreed to.