The Earl of Glengallwished to make some observations with respect to the present unsatisfactory state of Ireland. Previous to Easter, he had asked whether any measures were about to be taken, to put a stop to the system of outrage which prevailed, to a very great extent in Ireland. Nothing, however, appeared to have been done, and the country was as much disturbed as ever. Recently, Mr. West had been murdered, and he wished to inquire, whether the Irish Government had, previously to that event, received any information that such a crime was contemplated? He also wished to know, whether Government was prepared to enforce the Registration of Arms Act, and to direct that a strict search should be made for arms?
The Marquess of Normanbyhad not the slightest hesitation in saying, that the Government had received no information whatever of the intention to murder Mr. West, nor heard of the murder until the lamentable event had occurred. With respect to the other question, he was in communication with his noble Friend at the head of the Government of Ireland, who was at this moment prepared to make a most rigorous search for arms in the disturbed districts. His noble Friend was not, however, prepared to press for any additional measure on the subject at present.
§ The Earl of Charlevillesaid, that certain parts of Ireland were, at present, in a most dangerous state, and it was most important that a strict search for arms should be made. The system of outrage was going on increasing from day to day. A meeting was held in consequence, on Friday last, at Palace Henry, in Limerick, when Mr. Rhodes, a magistrate, stated, that he had been a close observer of the county, and for thirty-five years it never was in such a state of lawless insurrection as it was at present. But it was not in that district alone that outrage existed. He had received information from a neighbouring county, that arms were commonly kept by reckless persons for felonious purposes, In- 240 formation of that nature was recently conveyed by a gentleman to the Government, accompanied with a statement, that the informant knew the character of certain parties to be of the very worst kind, that he firmly believed those parties were in possession of arms improperly, and expressing a hope that the Government would afford him the assistance of the police in making the necessary search. In answer to that application, the gentleman who made it was required to give certain information before Government would interpose. Now, what could he state but what he had stated—his positive belief that arms were in the possession of four men whom he named, who were known to be of the worst character, who were suspected of being intimately connected with the Riband Society, and who were supposed to have taken part in the recent outrages. The Crown Counsel farther "required to know whether the persons named had registered the arms alluded to, because, if not, the fact should be stated," together with various other points and the communication concluded by declaring, "that any information not containing such statements could not be acted on by Government." Now, if such a system as this were acted on, it would be almost impossible to detect crime, because such information as was here called for could never be procured. The informer, it should not be forgotten, came forward at the peril of his life, to give information. Under these circumstances, if a magistrate stated his positive belief that individuals were guilty of keeping arms for improper purposes, if he declared his conviction that such parties were connected with the outrages committed in the county, he did think that a heavy responsibility rested with Government in refusing to a magistrate the power to demand the assistance of the police in searching for arms. In consequence of the system pursued, the efforts of the police were paralyzed, and they seemed to be influenced by the feeling, that their promotion depended rather on the neglect than on the strict performance of their duty. There was a recent case, where a body of armed men appeared, not far from a police station. The police heard shots fired, but the parties were not molested, because it was supposed that the noise they made came from some boys who were shouting and firing at wild fowl. Again, Mr. Westcott was threatened with assassination, as he was proceeding to his farm. And what was the reason? Because he chose to sell 241 his milk chiefly in the town of Palace Henry, to certain individuals, and refused to supply others who had paid him nothing for his milk last year. Therefore it was that he was threatened with murder. In the county of Limerick, within the last six months, there had been twenty-two eases of crime, and only two persons had been brought to trial. He trusted that, for the future, something more effectual would be done, both for the prevention, and the punishment of crime.
§ The Earl of Devonsaid, that in justice to the unoffending part of the population of the county of Limerick, he must declare, from information which he possessed, that those unfortunate occurrences to which the noble Earl had alluded, though they might have taken place in some parts, were by no means general throughout the county. On the contrary, that part of the county of Limerick with which he was connected had, during the last eight or ten years, become progressively more and more quiet. The people were now well ordered and well conducted; and he thought that, to show a want of confidence in them would have a very prejudicial effect on their feelings. He thought it his duty to a large population, and to his own position, to bear this testimony.
The Earl of Wicklowwished to understand clearly, whether it was the intention of the Government to bring in a bill to enable magistrates to make a search for arms hereafter, which could not be done if the supposition were correct that the present act was about to expire?
The Marquess of Normanbysaid, it was not the intention of the Government of Ireland to leave that country without an Arms Act. But he believed that his noble Friend was misinformed as to the expiration of the Act, which he thought would not take place till the Session after this. He was very glad that he had given way to the noble Earl (Devon), and he could not but contrast the manner in which he had spoken with the tone and temper which the noble Earl opposite had evinced in making his observations. The noble Earl (Charleville) had taken upon himself on this occasion, relying on rumours which had been conveyed to him, and which he believed to be exaggerated, to throw out a most unfounded imputation against his noble Friend who was at the head of the Government of Ireland, and which he was sure his noble Friend would, at the proper time, triumphantly refute. The noble Earl 242 had said, that the police throughout the country were led to believe, by the conduct of the Government, that their promotion depended, not on their activity in the discharge of their duty, but on their neglect of it. Did the noble Earl know the effect of that accusation? Was he aware, that it was directly in the teeth of all the evidence, on oath, produced on the inquiry into the state of Ireland before a committee of their Lordships' House? Did he know that the opinion of every individual on that committee was, that the police did their duty efficiently, that they were ably officered, and admirably conducted? Was he aware that the condition of that portion of Ireland which was in a state of tranquillity was mainly owing to the exertions of that maligned force, of whom it was now said, that they were encouraged not to do their duty, in order that they might curry favour with the Government?
§ The Earl of Charlevillesaid, that if the noble Marquess would move for a committee to investigate the facts, he would second the motion. The noble Marquess would find, that 200 men had met in arms in a place between three police stations, and that the police must have heard the shots that were fired, although they did not disturb the parties. He could produce evidence that the police did not properly do their duty. He could show that the police were paralyzed in obeying the orders of the local magistrates, and was prevented from fully doing their duty. Why, even in a case of murder, a policeman, with a warrant in his hand, could not act upon it without first applying to his superior officer.
The Marquess of Normanbysaid, the noble Earl had directed an accusation against the Irish Government, and against the distinguished officer, Colonel Macgregor, who was at the head of the police force in Ireland. The noble Earl had stated that the force was paralyzed in the performance of its duty by the hope of obtaining rewards, not for doing that duty, but for shrinking from it. Now, when the noble Earl said this, he (the Marquess of Normanby) contended that the responsibility lay on the noble Earl to prove his charge, if he could, and it was not for him to ask for a committee before which he might disprove it. If the noble Earl brought any proof before him that a policeman refused to act upon the warrant of a local magistrate, then he would say, not the whole police force was paralyzed, 243 but that that particular policeman had not done his duty.
The Marquess of Westmeathsaid, that notwithstanding the triumphant tone which the noble Marquess who had just sat down had assumed, the House would remember that the charge which his noble Friend had made, was not that the police did not do their duty, but that they were paralyzed by the orders and directions issued by the Executive Government in Ireland. He intended to move for copies of the orders and directions given by the Government to the police in Ireland, and it would then be seen that the assertion made by his noble Friend—namely, that the local magistracy had been put aside, was quite correct. The charge, therefore, was against the Government, and not against the police. Why, the noble Marquess was not aware that the Arms Act would expire at the end of this Session, and yet he had stated, that there was no intention on the part of the Government to introduce a measure to renew that act.
The Marquess of Normanby.—No, I did not. I stated, that I thought the Arms Act would not expire until the end of next Session. I have sent out to inquire, and I find it will expire at the end of the present Session. I also stated that there was no intention to leave Ireland without the protection of the Arms Act.
The Marquess of Westmeathhad understood the noble Marquess, on a former occasion, distinctly to say, that there was no intention on the part of the noble Lord at the head of the Government in Ireland to recommend any measure in relation to the Arms Act.
The Marquess of Normanby.—I stated that my noble Friend, at that moment, was not prepared to recommend any alteration in the Arms Act.
The Marquess of Westmeathsaid, it was a dereliction on the part of the Government, that a measure (admitted by the noble Marquess to be necessary) to renew the Arms Act had not been introduced before the present—he might say advanced —state of the Session. It would seem that Ireland would have been left without the Arms Act but for the question which had been put by his noble Friend, and the inquiry on the part of the noble Marquess to which that question had led.
§ The Earl of Charlevillebegged, in answer to the charge brought against him by the noble Marquess at the head of the Home Department, that he (the Earl of 244 Charleville) had made assertions which were founded on vague rumours, to say that he had stated his opinions to be founded upon communications he had received and information he had derived from magistrates of the county. If the noble Marquess had leisure to read the proceedings of the meeting held on Friday last, he would find that the statements made by local magistrates, persons best acquainted with, and therefore most capable of judging of, the state of the county—he would find that his (the Earl of Charleville's) assertions were not founded on vague rumour. Great as was his respect for his noble Friend (the Earl of Devon), he must say, that resident magistrates were much better able to judge of the real state of the county than his noble Friend, who did not reside there for any lengthened period.
§ Lord Monteaglesaid, that though nothing could be more inconvenient than these desultory discussions without any species of notice, yet, as this meeting of magistrates had taken place within a short distance of his own property, and as some of the members of his own family had been engaged at the meeting, he felt it to be his duty to endeavour to undeceive the House as to those conclusions to which the observations of the noble Earl who had just sat down would lead it. The noble Earl seemed to consider his statements to be supported by the proceedings at that meeting. The gravamen of the charge brought by the noble Earl was, that the police of Ireland were encouraged in the neglect of their duty by reason of the supposed impunity with which that neglect was passed over by the Government, or from the encouragement they received from the Government in that neglect; and the noble Earl said, he made that charge, not on vague rumour, but upon the authority of the justices of the peace of the county in which the meeting in question was held. He had received copies of the resolutions which had been passed, and he must say, that they gave no countenance to the assertion that the police were encouraged in their neglect of duty by the supposed connivance of the Government. The charge, therefore, rested upon those loose statements which had been made by the noble Earl, and which the noble Earl had not had the generosity to retract. He (Lord Monteagle) could bear his testimony that his part of the county of Limerick was never in a state of more entire and complete tranquillity than at present; and, he must 245 further observe, that Sir Robert De Vere, a deputy-lieutenant of the county, and several other magistrates, had declined to join in the resolutions passed, on the ground that they were premature and ill-timed. He could not, therefore, but condemn the charges thus made upon mere vague rumour.
§ The Earl of Charlevillesaid, with regard to the objection raised to these desultory discussions without notice, that he had understood the noble Earl who had commenced the present conversation (the Earl of Glengall) to have intimated on a former occasion his intention to renew the inquiry he then made. With regard to the other observations of the noble Lord who had just spoken, he found it reported, that at the meeting in question Mr. Rhodes, a magistrate and a close observer of the state of the county for thirty-five years, had said, that he never knew it to be in so bad a state. Another Gentleman declared, that the cause of the outrages which had been perpetrated was the want of the co-operation of the police with the local magistracy. One of the resolutions passed was to the effect, that "the meeting viewed with deep concern the increased and increasing disturbed state of the district, and pledged itself to use its exertions to put down the insubordination now so widely extended." Let it also be remembered, that this was the second meeting of the magistrates held within three weeks in consequence of the disturbed state of the district. How, then, could it be said, that his statements had been made on vague rumour, or that the county was in a perfect state of tranquillity.
§ Lord Monteagleobserved, that the charge the noble Earl had made was, that the police had acted corruptly under corrupt orders issued by the Government. He was glad the noble Earl had now called attention to the resolutions, which did not contain one word against the Government, but, on the contrary, there was one which expressed a determination to apply to that very Government charged with acting corruptly for additional assistance. He, therefore, could not but thank the noble Earl for thus confirming all he (Lord Monteagle) had stated.
§ Subject dropped.