HL Deb 07 April 1840 vol 53 cc620-6
The Marquess of Westmeath

said, he rose, pursuant to the notice which he had given, to present a petition against the Irish Municipal Corporation Bill from the city of Dublin. The petition was signed by 7000 inhabitants of that city, whose registry, on the most accurate calculation, was 73,000l. a year. The petitioners strongly condemned this measure, and demanded what result could be expected from it? They considered that it would inflame that spirit of party which all well-disposed men must deplore, as detrimental to the peace and prosperity of the country. They prayed of their Lordships to annihilate the Irish corporations altogether rather than pass this most objectionable measure, which was calculated to increase the taxation, already most burdensome, on the city, to excite turmoil and ill-feeling at elections, and still further to foment those ill-feelings and that party spirit which every good man must deplore. This bill would be to the petitioners a bill of confiscation. He was perfectly convinced that it would be a bill of confiscation, not only with reference to property in existence, but with respect to property which was yet to accrue. The power of taxation which would be granted under this bill would be five times greater than that which existed at present. The amount of corporate property of the city of Dublin was 15,000l. a year; but the additional power of taxation contemplated by this bill would raise it to 50,000l. or 60,000l. a year. Looking to the situation in life of the petitioners, the present petition might be considered as coming from that class of persons who were described by the noble Marquess (Normanby), when he presented, a short time ago, a petition from Liverpool, as the persons for whose advantage municipal corporations in Ireland were chiefly intended, namely, those who might fairly be supposed to represent the moral worth, the religious feeling, and the property of the country; and, therefore, he had a right to expect that the noble Marquess would support the prayer of a petition coming from such parties. Considering the objectionable nature, in every point of view, of this measure, it appeared to him to be only one proof more, in addition to many others, on the part of Ministers, of their deliberate design to unprotestantize Ireland, by taking property away from its present owners, and placing it in the hands of those who might be regarded as the enemies of that unfortunate country. They were tearing it from the Protestants, who now enjoyed it, and placing it under the control of the Roman Catholics, who coveted it, and who were most anxious to possess it. By this bill, the respectability of the corporation would be destroyed. According to its provisions, all householders would have a right to elect the common-council, the common-council would be empowered to elect the aldermen, and they, of course, would elect the mayor; and it was not difficult to see, under such a system, what sort of persons were likely to be elected. Again: the practical effect of the bill would be to grant salaries to as many officers as the thus elected corporation thought proper to appoint, to any amount within the limit of the corporation funds. They might appoint Roman Catholic chaplains, they might apply money to what the corporation might call improvements, which improvements might turn out to be the building of Roman Catholic houses of wor- ship. They all knew the mischief which continued agitation had created in that country; they all knew that it was the duty of the Government, by proper means, to discourage and put down that system of agitation; but let this bill be passed, and it would place in the hands of those whom it especially favoured the power of legalizing agitation, and of so annoying and distressing the Protestant inhabitants of the city of Dublin and of other places, that no man of independent mind would remain in the country if he could possibly avoid it. Those who lived chiefly in the interior of the country knew that the great wish of the agitators was to annoy the Protestants, to distress them, to pursue them, to harass them, and, if possible, to drive them out of the country; and a better plan for assisting that design could not be devised than this measure presented. How could it be doubted, if such a system were allowed to prevail, if it were chiefly supported in the metropolis, that it must be detrimental to the welfare of the country? Would it not operate against the trade and commerce of the country? Assuredly it would, for what man of property and enterprise would remain in a place where such a state of things was tolerated? He would ask the noble Viscount whether he had informed his Sovereign, before this bill was introduced, that a measure was contemplated, the effect of which would be to confiscate the property of Protestants in Ireland, and hand it over to their Roman Catholic adversaries? Had the noble Viscount informed his Protestant Sovereign, that before she came to the throne a compact was entered into at Lichfield-house by which the Protestant church was to be despoiled of its property, and that every effort should be made until that spoliation was accomplished? He would ask if the noble Viscount had called upon the Protestant Sovereign of these realms to reflect whether it was possible for her Majesty, conformably with her coronation oath, to give the Royal assent to this proposition for the confiscation of Protestant corporation property? The corporation of Dublin had many claims upon the consideration of a Protestant Parliament. In the time of King Charles I., when that monarch was engaged in war with his rebellious subjects in Ireland, the Protestant corporation of Dublin raised a body of 800 horse soldiers for his service, and supported them for 36 months. For that service there had been conferred on them 500l. a year, which had been paid ever since from the Treasury of this country. Now, he would ask, with what justice could any man, or any set of men, confiscate that grant? With what semblance of justice could they not only take it away from its present legal owners, but place it in the hands of those who, if the battle, as might he the case, were to be fought over again, would probably bear arms against her Majesty? He would ask the noble Viscount upon what point he could impeach the corporation of Dublin? What fault or crime could he allege against them to justify the confiscation of their property? For what reason did he wish to inflict on them a punishment which none were visited with, except in cases of felony or treason? He would not put off this question till the second reading of the bill on Friday night. He called on the noble Viscount to answer it now, immediately, off-hand and off-book. He asked the noble Viscount to state, at once, distinctly, why he brought forward such a measure, and to justify the course which he had taken, if he could. The bill was altogether a mass of errors. There was no provision in it with respect to the qualification of magistrates; and the consequence would inevitably be, that if the bill were passed, the magistrates would be taken from the very dregs of society. The magistrates of the corporation of Dublin, as at present elected, had performed their duty to the perfect satisfaction of the Lords-lieutenant for a long series of years. He could even adduce the authority of the noble Marquess (Normanby) in their favour. The noble Marquess had addressed the Lord Mayor of Dublin, on his inauguration, at the period when the noble Marquess had completed the second year of his vice-royalty, had praised the conduct of the corporation magistrates, and pointed to the conduct of the precedent Lord Mayor as a fitting guide for the future conduct of the new city monarch. With that testimony at their heels, why, he asked, was it now proposed to annihilate, or worse than annihilate, that corporation? Why hand over its power to a class of persons who, by the provisions of this measure, would assuredly be taken from the very dregs of the people? In considering this subject there was another very material point for their Lordships to look to. In the year 1835 a commission of inquiry was appointed to investigate the concerns of these various corporations, and to report thereon their opinion to Parliament. Certain portions of the evidence given on that occasion were laid before Parliament; but what surprise, astonishment, and, he might say, indignation, must their Lordships feel, when he informed them that the evidence given in favour of those corporations was suppressed? It remained in manuscript, and was not laid on their Lordships' table. Therefore, it was clear that their Lordships were hoodwinked on this subject; favourable evidence was suppressed, while that of an unfavourable and hostile nature was prominently put forward. He would ask, were her Majesty's Protestant subjects of Ireland to be tortured in this way by the Ministers of the Crown? He did not believe, he could not credit, that that House, that that Protestant House of Lords, would allow the bill for the destruction of Irish corporations to pass in its present state. He did not think that they would suffer such a monstrous wrong to be inflicted on his unfortunate country. He could not conceive, that by passing it, they would add to the accumulated evils occasioned by that base system of agitation which was now allowed to proceed unchecked. He did not mean, on the second reading of the bill, to make any observations. He, therefore, hoped for the indulgence of the House while he made a few other remarks in addition to what he had already said. He had omitted to state that the corporation of Dublin had incurred a very considerable expense by raising the 100th Regiment of Foot, called the "Dublin Regiment," in the time of George III. They had also been subjected to a heavy charge by raising seamen for his Majesty's service. Ought not these matters to be considered when a bill was introduced which nearly affected their dearest rights—a bill which, like other measures, was brought forward in compliment and as a propitiato persons who ought not, in point of fact, to be seated in the other House of Parliament? Those persons, however, he was convinced, compelled her Majesty's Ministers to do many things contrary to their better judgment. Was the noble Viscount, he would ask, cognizant of the provisions of this bill? The noble Viscount had the whole business of this great empire to superintend. Colonial affairs in an embarrassed state, and foreign affairs with the chance of a speedy war, must claim much of the noble Viscount's attention; so that it was very probable that he had not had time to make himself master of the details of this iniquitous measure. With respect to the noble Marquess at the head of the Home Department, from him, he confessed, looking to past experience, he expected nothing beneficial for Ireland. But, though he conceived that he had not been fairly-dealt with by that noble Marquess when he ruled in Ireland, still, he would say, that he entertained no feeling of anger towards the noble Marquess on that account. But when he looked to the public acts of the noble Marquess in Ireland, he must say, that unless the noble Marquess was impeached, and lost his head, then Denventwater, and Balmarino, and Radcliffe, and the ancestor of a noble Earl opposite (who, he believed, suffered himself to be a little too much in the secrets of Popery at a time when the Hanoverian succession was not so popular as it afterwards became) were all murdered men. Should the noble Marquess be impeached, no power on earth should compel him (the Marquess of Westmeath) to sit on his trial, after the decided and plainly-expressed opinion which he had thus given as to his proceedings in Ireland. There was a growing disposition in Ireland, not to be content with what Ministers were willing to do for those who practised agitation, but the agitators were inclined forcibly to carry whatsoever measures they might think best suited their own views. To illustrate this point he would read an extract from the speech of a Mr. Reynolds, delivered on St. Patrick's-day, to a great assemblage of members of the temperance system. Mr. Reynolds said, There was a day approaching when men, unpurchased and unpurchasable, would call to account those who, having by their means attained the summit of their ambition, betrayed and neglected their friends. When he saw 200,000 men assembled, and not a symptom of drunkenness apparent amongst them, he could not doubt that they would compel those in power to grant their just demands. Now Ministers had done everything that the agitators had hitherto asked them to do, and he feared they were ready to do as much more as their Lordships would permit them to do. But he besought their Lordships, for God's sake, and the sake of the whole empire, not to suffer the Ministers to proceed further in their ruinous course. He would not trouble their Lordships further. The petitioners prayed with outstretched hands that their Lordships would not pass the bill, and he heartily concurred in that prayer.

The Marquess of Headfort

could not help making a remark in answer to his no- ble Friend who had just sat down, and who had accused the Roman Catholics of Ireland of a conspiracy against the Government of her Majesty. Such a charge was altogether unmerited. The Roman Catholics would rise to a man in defence of her Majesty, to whom they felt the deepest gratitude for the favour which they had experienced.

The Marquess of Westmeath

had been altogether misunderstood by his noble Friend. He had never charged the Roman Catholics of Ireland with conspiracy against her Majesty. Was it probable that he, whose immediate ancestors were Roman Catholics, would make such a charge? He had always felt the greatest friendship and affection for his Roman Catholic fellow subjects, but he did not identify them with priests or demagogues. A more amiable people than the Irish Roman Catholic population did not exist, if left to themselves. They would be angels if they were not made devils by being worked upon by the artifices of designing persons, and by those who were assisting the church of Rome to uproot the Protestant institutions of the country. It was absurd to think that he should have made such a charge as his noble Friend supposed.

Petition laid on the table.

Back to