Lords Report of 19 July 1822

IRISH INSURRECTION BILL.
The Earl of Liverpoolrose to move the second reading of this bill. He said, there was no disposition, in the government of Ireland to exercise unduly the power which it was unfortunately necessary to give, nor to retain it a moment longer than the safety of the country required. But the dispatches from the lord-lieutenant showed, that though tranquillity and security to property had been ensured by the act, there was reason to apprehend the most injurious effect would take place were it to be suspended.
The Marquis of Lansdown, though he admitted the measure to be necessary, considered himself bound to enter his protest against continuing to act on the principle of this bill; which was the off spring of a system of palliation evils,

1715
unaccompanied with any parliamentary evidence of an intention to adopt means for the removal of those evils. It was stated, that the Insurrection act had a temporary effect, but that the moment its operation was withdrawn from a district, the same evil recurred. Thus it was evidently no remedy. It was to the full protection of the law, and to a conviction of that protection in the minds of the people, that their lordships must look for tranquillity.
Lord Ellenborough, though he disapproved of the principle of the bill, felt himself bound to agree to it, as it afforded a protection which the people of Ireland were by habit brought to expect. In giving his consent to this bill, he held the government to be distinctly bound to introduce measures of conciliation.
The Earl of Limericksaid, that if the bill did not pass, there would be no security for the lives and property of the loyal inhabitants of Ireland.
Lord Redesdalesupported the bill, on the ground of immediate necessity. The cause of the evil of which all complained, was, that the law had never been properly administered in Ireland. The consequence was, that the character of the people of Ireland was affected by that mal-administration.
The Earl of Darnleygave his consent to the bill under the same qualification as other noble lords. He expressed a general confidence in the noble marquis at the head of the government of Ireland. With regard to Ireland, no real good could be expected from palliatives. It was necessary to go to the root of the evil.
The Earl of Donoughmoregave his reluctant assent to this measure, as one of imperative necessity. That Ireland had been long and cruelly mis-governed was a notorious fact; but the question here was, what could be done in the midst of a lawless and powerful confederacy against all order. Such a state of things must be put down, and he was compelled to admit, that there was no other way of meeting the existing evil than by resorting to such a measure as the present.
The Earl of Rosslynfeared, that the present measure partook more the character of a permanent than a temporary regulation. He objected to the bill, as giving an excessive power to the magistrates, without providing any redress for the people in case of its abuse.
The Earl of Rodensupported the bill, as the measure, most likely to restore the tranquility of Ireland, and attributed the evils under which she laboured to the number of absentees.
Lord Hollandsaid, that if he could confide to any man such frightful and unconstitutional powers as were granted by this bill, he would confide them to the noble marquis at the head of the Irish government. The powers, however, that were granted by the insurrection act, he would never again grant to any individual. He had once in his life supported such a bill; but, without any affectation, he would say, that the vote which he had given in support of it, lay like a lump of lead upon his mind, and was the only act of his political life, of which, upon a retrospect he sincerely repented. One of his objections to the bill was, the enormous extent of its powers. Allowing that they were necessary, still he would ask, why was not the bill conferring them accompanied by some measure of a conciliatory nature? One noble lord had attributed much of the evil in Ireland to the want of respect paid to the laws by the population of that country. He would, however, ask, were the laws themselves respectable? So long as they were of a nature like, that upon their table, they would never excite respect in the breast either of the people or the magistracy. As an English gentleman, he would say, that if such a bill were passed in England, he would immediately throw up his commission as a magistrate; because he was convinced that no one could execute it without becoming a worse man, and a worse subject to a free government. The bill placed arbitrary power in the hands of those who were likely to abuse it, sometimes from fear, and at other times from a wish to take revenge. Indeed, he would rather confer such authority as it gave upon the military officers of the Crown, than upon those whom it employed in Ireland in a civil capacity. The bill was calculated to aggravate all the evils under which Ireland at present laboured. He therefore could not consent to the passing of such a measure.
The bill was read a second time.