Lords Sitting of 11 May 1837

MINUTES.
Petitions presented. By Lord REDESDALE, from places in Gloucestershire, against the abolition of Church-rates.—By the Earl of BRADFORD, from places in Oxfordshire, against abolition of Church-rates By Viscount MELBOURNE, from various places, in favour of the Ministerial plan for the abolition of Church-rates, the Irish Municipal Reform Bill, and the Irish Tithe Bill.

IMPROVEMENT OF LANDS (IRELAND).
On the motion of the Marquess of Clanricarde, the House went into Committee on the Improvement of Waste Lands (Ireland) Bill.
The Earl of Wicklowwas of opinion that this bill ought to have been introduced by his Majesty's Ministers, and not by individuals. The present bill was similar to one formerly passed, which had never been productive of the slightest benefit to Ireland. There was one part of the bill to which he wished to draw the particular attention of the noble Duke on the cross-bench (Richmond), who had moved for a Select Committee to inquire into the propriety of substituting declarations for oaths. If he looked into this Bill, he would see that it required the administration of oaths to an enormous extent. In the 9th clause the Commissioners were empowered to compel the attendance of persons to give evidence, however great the distance might be. Now, in a bill at present before the other House, and having relation to Ireland, though power was given to compel the attendance of individuals before the Commissioners, it was provided that that power should not extend to those who lived at a greater distance than twenty miles. In that

795
measure also, although power was given to call for papers, yet a special protection was inserted against the production of title deeds of estates, but no such provision was to be found in this bill; and if it were suffered to remain thus, much inconvenience, to say the least of it, would be the consequence.
Lord Fitzgeraldsaid, on referring to the votes of the Other House, it would be found that there was more than one bill which went farther, with reference to local improvements in Ireland, than the present measure. Therefore, if it were convenient, he would propose to his noble Friend to refer this measure to a Select Committee, where it might be thoroughly considered, so as to prevent its provisions from being defeated or rendered useless by other bills.
The House resumed. Bill referred to a Select Committee.

EXECUTION AT GLOUCESTER.
Lord Segravesaid, that in consequence of what had fallen from him, and from the noble Duke on the cross-bench the other night, on the subject of the execution at Gloucester, he understood that the high sheriff supposed that some imputation had been cast on his conduct. But, certainly he could state, that there was no imputation thrown out on the part of the noble Duke, or on his own. He knew the high sheriff very well. He was a most respectable man, and if these indecencies took place at, or rather after, the execution, he was convinced that no man would be more shocked at the circumstance than that gentleman. He believed that the conduct of the executioner was most disgusting. After what occurred on Friday night he wrote to the governor of the county gaol, who, in answer, stated, that the conduct of the executioner was, to say the least of it, marked by great levity, and his impression was, that the man was drunk. If the greatest decorum were not observed On such an occasion, the most brutalizing effects must certainly follow. He had stated his authority for what he had said, and he hoped, that on investigation, other evidence would be adduced to outweigh that which led him to the conclusion at which he had arrived. He feared, however that such would not be the fact.
The Duke of Richmondhad meant to cast no imputation on the sheriff, but he thought it right to call the attention of the Go-
796
vernment to the circumstance. With respect to the recent case of Greenacre, he greatly disapproved of the conduct which was pursued towards that individual. He believed that, on the 27th of April a remonstrance had been made against allowing persons to see him who had not a proper cause. The magistrates of the city of London might at present allow individuals to see persons in that unhappy situation, even though it were contrary to the will of the sheriffs. He thought that a provision should be made to prevent orders being given to visit persons awaiting execution, except they were issued by the Secretary of State or by the sheriffs. Subject dropped.

CHIEF BARON JOY.
The Earl of Rodentook the opportunity of having to present a petition, to call the attention of noble Lords opposite to a subject most deeply interesting to their Lordships, as it certainly had proved to be most painful to the individual who was most nearly connected with the matter. It was, he knew, irregular to allude to words made use of in a former debate; but when their Lordships considered the importance of the subject, he hoped that it would be looked on as a sufficient excuse. The noble Viscount at the head of his Majesty's Government had, on a former evening, made a statement which, when he explained the circumstances, would, he hoped, prove to the noble Viscount that he had been misinformed on the subject, and would draw from him an acknowledgment of the misstatement which he had made. The words, as far as he could remember them, used by the noble Viscount were these:—"With respect to the appointment of sheriffs by the going judge of assize, the Chief Baron deviated from the usual course, and sent in a list of names, which Government found to be very deficient." Such a charge against so inestimable an individual as Chief Baron Joy, appeared to him, who was long acquainted with the Chief Baron, who admired his virtues, and who considered him an ornament to that part of the empire, as a subject that ought to be inquired into, for the purpose of ascertaining the correctness of the statement and affirmation of the noble Viscount. He, therefore, had made an inquiry into the matter, and he had no doubt of the truth of the facts which he was about to state to their Lordships. He believed

797
that the noble Viscount was totally misinformed with respect to the statement which he had made, and it would appear, that Chief Baron Joy did not depart from the course usually pursued on such occasions, and that he did not send in a list which was found by the Government to be deficient. The course pursued in the appointment of sheriffs had prevailed from the time that Sir Robert Peel was Chief Secretary, and the Chief Baron had adhered to it. Chief Baron Joy submitted to the Lord Chancellor a list of three most unexceptionable gentlemen to fill the office of High Sheriff—three gentlemen of the county of Louth. The noble Marquess had stated, that one of these gentlemen, Mr. Fortescue, was unwilling to serve. That, however, formed no good ground for setting him aside, and choosing in his place a person who was not recommended by the judge. He recollected when he himself was compelled to serve, and, therefore, unwillingness afforded no solid ground for exemption. The second gentleman, Mr. Bellingham, had a good ground of excuse, having served before. Then it was Said, that the third gentleman oh the list, Mr. Brabazon, was so young, that it Was impossible that he could be intrusted with so important an office as that of sheriff. Now, he knew that gentleman. He was some five or six-and-twenty years of age, and weighed twenty stone. Either one or the other of these gentlemen ought to have been made to serve, instead of the Government deviating from the regular line of proceeding, and appointing a person who was not recommended by the judge. The statement, therefore, of the noble Viscount, that the list sent in by the Chief Baron was deficient, appeared to him not to be well founded, because one of the two individuals whom he had named might have been made to stand, if Government had exercised its power. The circumstance had caused a strong feeling throughout Ireland; and, therefore, he felt it to be his duty to that House and to the public, to give the noble Viscount an opportunity of correcting his error.
Viscount Melbournesaid, if he had been aware that the noble Earl had meant to introduce the subject, he would have been prepared with the necessary information. He had not the slightest idea of wounding the feelings of the Chief Baron, but he was not aware that he had stated anything
798
but facts. He should be most anxious to make an immediate acknowledgment of error, if he had committed any, but he was not aware that he had. What he had said was, that the Chief Baron had not pursued the course usually adopted by the judges. He believed the practice always was for the judge to inquire of the present sheriff what persons were proper to be recommended to fill the office of sheriff for the next year—not that he was bound by the information which he might receive, for he might still exercise his discretion; but—because it was wise and prudent for him to know who were considered to be the most eligible individuals. This the Chief Baron had not done on the occasion in question. In consequence the Chief Baron had returned three individuals, out of whom it was impossible to select a person to serve the office of sheriff. He had not said that the Government had superseded those three gentlemen because the Chief Baron omitted to ask the opinion of the former sheriff, but because he had returned individuals each of whom had a good excuse, or at least a reason, for being exempted.
The Earl of Wicklowbegged to tell the noble Viscount that he was in error, because the judge had not deviated from the customary rule in such cases, but the Government had thought proper to disregard the recommendation of the judge, and chose to appoint another person of their own selection.
Lord Fitzgeraldwas glad that a conversation on this subject had arisen, because it had afforded the noble Viscount an opportunity of removing from the mind of Baron Joy an impression that the noble Viscount had intended to cast any censure upon him. The subject was certainly one of great importance, considering the nature of the office, and the duties of a sheriff. He could confirm the opinion of his noble Friend that no deviation from the usual practice had taken place, and that it had not been the custom of the judges to prefer the persons pointed out by the former sheriffs. It was clear that the judges could have no discretion if they were to be bound by the return of the former sheriffs. Nothing, however, could be more obvious than that if the Government were ready to release persons from serving the office, the list of the judge could be of little or no use.
Petition laid on the table.

THE ROMISH CLERGY.
The Marquess of Westmeathsaid, he had to present a petition from a dignitary of the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland, who wished to appeal to their Lordships against certain severe treatment which he had experienced at the hands of his ecclesiastical superiors. It was the petition of Eugene Mulholland, a native of Ireland, who had been ordained a priest of the Romish Church. In 1818 he went to Rome to prosecute his studies, and received the degree of doctor of divinity there. In 1826 he returned to Ireland, and was appointed to a parish in the county of Louth. In 1833 one of those controversies, which unfortunately were too prevalent in that country, became particularly conspicuous in his neighbourhood, and he was charged by another Roman Catholic clergyman with having connected himself with insurrectionary proceedings. He referred the charge to the dignitaries of his own church, and it appeared to be their opinion that the charge ought to be withdrawn. However the charge was not withdrawn. He then brought an action against the other priest, who had, as he thought, maligned his character, and while that action was pending he was dismissed from his curacy by the dignitaries of his church, and was thereby deprived of the means of obtaining an honest and honourable livelihood. They made him the subject of ecclesiastical censures and privations for having appealed to the law of the land in vindication of his character. The Roman Catholic prelates did not deem that appeal to be an offence against the ecclesiastical canons, but still they dismissed him. He then appealed to Rome, and a document called a rescript was sent out to Dr. Croly, the Roman Catholic Primate of Ireland, requiring him to be reinstated; and ultimately he was ordered to be appointed to an office which was equal to a perpetual curacy in the English Church. Having applied to the vicar apostolic of London for assistance, he received an answer which was remarkable for the peculiar expressions it contained. That personage condemned the course pursued by Dr. Mulholland, in first going to law with a brother clergyman, and afterwards presenting petitions to Parliament on the subject, as a most disgraceful exhibition. Among the subsequent measures which he took for his own justification, he applied to a great champion of public liberty to take up his
800
cause, Mr. Daniel O'Connell. That Gentleman told Dr. Mulholland that it became him to express his regret for the course he had pursued, having caused great scandal to the Catholic Church by the controversy he had created, and by endeavouring to enlist the services of men in Parliament in hostility against the dignitaries of his church. He told Dr. Mulholland, moreover, that the Legislature had no control over the Roman Catholic Church, and that if he had suffered any wrong from another, the criminal law was open to him. Although it was asserted that Parliament had no right to interfere with the Catholic Church, he would remind their Lordships that the College of Maynooth was endowed by a Parliamentary grant, and that the discipline and mode of education there adopted ought to be inquired into, seeing that there was every reason to believe that the institution seemed only intended to fit the students for a degree of submission and degradation that was totally incompatible with the genius of a free country. Could their Lordships doubt, then, that this was a case of oppression, and that many such cases occurred in consequence of Roman Catholic priests refusing to lend themselves to that course of conduct which was now agitating that country? But what was the behaviour of those immaculate right reverends who thus endeavoured to coerce the inferior clergy to further their political views? He held in his hand a letter which had been addressed to a noble Duke near him (the Duke of Wellington) through the public newspapers on the subject of the revenues of the established church, in which after expatiating in a bombastic style on civil and religious freedom, and asserting, that nothing could check its progress, the writer remarked—"Witness your impotent laws against the Catholic Bishops who are assuming their ancient and hereditary title. His Majesty's Bishops may become possessed of all the favours that his Majesty, the fountain of wealth and honour, can give them; but they cannot make that happen which is not to be, or deprive the Catholic Bishops of their rights." The writer concluded by expressing his determination not to pay tithes or any tax in support of the Church of England. So wrote John Tuam, as he signed himself. He would next direct the attention of their Lordships to the language used by some of the Roman Catholic

801
Clergy of the second order who were educated at the College of Maynooth. A priest at an election which took place at Clonmel thus addressed the electors respecting the candidate:—"Haven't we brought him to ye? I hope you'll keep him along with ye. We have brought you a man who will give his best aid and exertions in exterminating, root and branch, that abominable and dreadful nuisance—the church." Hear the sentiments of another person of the same class. They were part of a sermon which he delivered in a Roman Catholic Chapel:—"Who are those that will be saved? Those who possess the franchise and use it for the public good—those who vote for the liberal candidate at the expected election—those who consider the public good, and not their own private interest—those who will support the man who will oppose that church which I may call a nuisance, for it is the cause of all the murders, and massacres, and slaughters, that disgrace the present history of our country. Wo, wo, to the man that betrays his trust!" Such were the sentiments of men who had been educated at the public expense; such were the men whom the Legislature had protected and provided for. The majority of the Roman Catholic Bishops were members of that association in Ireland which had been condemned both in that and the other House of Parliament. The second order of the Roman Catholic priesthood were for the most part, the nominees of those Bishops who compelled them to act with them in the political movements that they deemed advisable to promote. Unless, then, some inquiry were instituted into this state of things, how could they indulge any hope of seeing Ireland tranquillized? He did not intend to make any motion on the subject, but he hoped that an inquiry would be promoted, and if it took place first in another place, perhaps it would be better, because there were many persons in that place who were interested in the question, and who could state their views of it, and would have an opportunity of showing upon what principle the present plan of education at Maynooth should be continued. The prayer of the petition which he now presented to their Lordships was for an inquiry into the case of the petitioner, not merely with regard to his own particular statements, but in reference to the actual condition of the second order of the Roman
802
Catholic Clergy. He hoped the noble Viscount opposite would turn his attention, to the subject, and examine into the state of things at Maynooth, with a view to ascertain whether it was not necessary to take some step to advance Christian piety, but not Popery.
Petition laid on the table.