HL Deb 28 March 1844 vol 73 cc1590-3
The Marquis of Clanricarde

said, that it might be convenient that he should state, that in presenting the Petition of which he had given notice, to-morrow evening, relative to the State of Ireland, that it was not his inten- tion to offer any observations to their Lordships, or to enter into any details that could raise a discussion on that question. He had two reasons for taking this course. One was, because he wished to have the advantage of seeing the Government plan relating to the Municipal and Electoral Franchise in Ireland. A proposition on that subject was, he understood, to be made this evening, in the other House of Parliament, but in consequence of the state of public business there, he supposed, it could not be introduced till after the holydays; for that reason he had stated he did not wish to make any observation to-morrow on the subject of the Franchise, The other reason for taking the course which he proposed was, that there was a part of the petition which alluded to the administration of justice in Ireland, and on that he should certainly feel himself called to make some observations on a fitting occasion. It would, however, be quite impossible for him to make those observations without adverting, at the same time, to the recent trials in Ireland. Now, at this moment there was every reason to suppose that the proceedings on those trials would come before their Lordships in their judicial capacity; therefore he conceived that it would be highly improper to introduce a discussion on the subject now; because noble and learned Lords, on both sides of the House, would be prevented from stating their opinions on a question which hereafter would come judicially before them. He thought it better, therefore, to present the petition in silence. Shortly after Easter, however, he should feel it to be his duty to call the attention of the House to that petition, when he should make some Motion on it, for the purpose of bringing the whole subject under consideration; he would, perhaps, move that it be referred to a Select Committee.

Lord Brougham

concurred with his noble Friend as to what he considered to be his duty upon this important subject; and, in his opinion, the same principle would apply equally to the Motion of which notice had been given by the noble Marquess near him (the Marquess of Lansdowne.) There was one of two courses open to his noble Friend. He could postpone his Motion, which would, perhaps, be the better way; or he could take the other course, of having it most distinctly understood that there was not one word to be introduced into the discussion to-morrow which could in any way affect the pending law proceedings. He believed it had been officially announced that a Writ of Error would be brought forward with reference to the recent legal proceedings. Under these circumstances, the question was, whether it would not be better that the subject should be put off altogether for the present.

The Marquess of Lansdowne

coincided in opinion with his noble and learned Friend, as to the propriety of abstaining from entering into a general discussion on the state of Ireland; but he could not agree in the expediency of putting off his Motion with respect to the instructions given as to the challenging of jurors. In answer to a question which had been put to him, when he gave notice of this Motion, he stated that his intention was not at all to interfere with any proceedings that had taken place on the late State Trials, but to have a prospective inquiry as to the course to be taken by the Government, for the future in Ireland, with respect to the challenging of jurors. His Motion was grounded solely on the expediency of making known the instructions given by the Government to the Officers of the Crown in Ireland, for their future guidance. He should, therefore, allow his Motion to remain, on the understanding that there should be no reference to the conduct of the Government in the late trials.

The Lord Chancellor

said, it would be found that the course adopted by previous Attorney-Generals had been precisely the same as was adopted in this instance by the present Attorney-General. That would be the result of the noble Marquess's Motion, and he was sure that such a statement would be satisfactory to the noble Marquess.

The Marquess of Lansdowne

was very glad to hear what had fallen from the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack, which confirmed him in his intention to bring forward his Motion to-morrow. Nothing could be more satisfactory to the people of Ireland, nothing could be more beneficial to the Government, than the announcement which had just been made.

Lord Brougham

said, if his noble Friend (the Marquess of Lansdowne) thought that he was to be precluded from giving his opinion on the whole subject, if it should be introduced to their Lordships, he would find that he was mistaken. If his noble Friend, for instance, or if any noble Lord, in the course of the discussion, should allude to the conduct of the Government in the late prosecution, or to the conduct of the Court before which the cause was tried, he would not be wanting in his duty to the public, but would give his clear and explicit opinion on the subject; that was the whole matter of debate; and how could they say, when the topic was once introduced, where it would end?

Lord Wharncliffe

said, that it would perhaps put an end to the discussion, when he stated at once, that the Government had no objection to the production of the papers for which the noble Marquess intended to move.

Lord Campbell

understood, that it was agreed that during the discussion there should be no allusion to the late trials, because those proceedings would he brought judicially before their Lordships, by Writ of Error. In his opinion, the discussion could not be entered into with advantage. There would be very great difficulty in separating the two parts of the subject—the legal question and the constitutional question. It was much more expedient, he thought, that even now they should no further refer to the very difficult and delicate question which must, from what he had heard, sooner or later come before them. Let it not, however, be imagined that because he or others abstained from giving any opinion now, or should abstain from so doing tomorrow, that they admitted the recent proceedings to be constitutional, or that they, in any way, sanctioned the conduct of Her Majesty's Government.

Subject dropped.

Back to