Sitting of 23 February 1836

RAILWAYS.
Mr. Poulett Thomsonsaid, that in consequence of the adoption by the House last night, of his proposition for the appointment of a Select Committee, and the putting off the second reading of all Railway Bills fixed for that night, until Monday next, he now rose to propose a series of resolutions which would have the effect of placing those Bills in the same position, as if no such postponement had taken place. The right hon. Gentleman moved Resolutions to the following effect: That the House would not receive any petition upon a private Bill relative to compliance or non-compliance with the standing orders, subsequent to the second reading of such Bill—that the House would not receive any such petition relative to any Railway Bill, notice for the second reading of which had been given previous to Monday next—that it should be a standing order of the House, that seven clear days should intervene between the second reading of all Railway Bills, and the sitting of the Committee, and that in the cases of the Bills that had been postponed, the said seven days should be allowed from the day originally fixed for the second reading of such Bills, as if they had been then read a second time.
Resolutions agreed to. To be entered on the Journals.

MR. BUCKINGHAM'S COMPENSATION.
Mr. Tulk, after stating that Mr. Bucking-
758
ham's Compensation Bill was similar to that brought forward last year, moved that it be read a second time.
Sir Robert Ingliswished to know from what fund the proposed compensation could be provided?
Mr. Tulk: from the funds of the East-India Company.
Mr. Lawsonfelt it his duty to call the attention of the House to the manner in which this case appeared to have been got up. A few weeks ago he received a packet inclosing to him the draught of a petition in favour of this Bill, and requesting him to present it to his constituents for their signatures. He could not help thinking that this was a most unusual and unparliamentary mode of procuring petitions in favour of a private Bill. The note that accompanied the petition sent to him was from Mr. Buckingham. It conveyed to him that Gentleman's compliments, and requested that he would transmit the petition to his constituents for their signatures. This practice of one Member addressing another, and asking him to get up petitions in favour of some private claim of that individual Member, would, if carried to any extent, lower the character of that House in the eyes of the country at large, and it was a practice, in his opinion, more, worthy of an American Congress than of a British House of Commons. He begged leave to move, as an Amendment, that this Bill be read a second time that day six months.
Mr. Poultersaid, that though he opposed this Bill last Session, yet, upon an accurate examination of the subject, he considered himself bound now to give it his support. Looking at the whole of the case, it appeared to him that Mr. Buckingham had been induced to set up the Calcutta Journal on the strength of the principles then avowed by the Governor-General of India, and that those principles had been afterwards violated by the course of proceeding adopted towards Mr. Buckingham. It was no small testimony to the merits of Mr. Buckingham's publication, that a noble Lord of high character, late Governor-General of India, and now a Member of that House, had, in a letter addressed to Mr. Buckingham, expressed his regret that such a publication did not exist during his government. He thought that a case was made out to call upon the House to give an equitable compensation to Mr. Buckingham.
Mr. Vernon Smithsaid, that in the absence of his right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Control, who was obliged to give his attendance elsewhere, it devolved upon him to state the course which the Board of Control felt it their duty to adopt in this instance. Seeing the manner in which the House had, last Session, carried the Bill through the first and second readings, notwithstanding the opposition offered to it then by the Board of Control, his right hon. Friend despaired of making any effectual opposition to it in those stages this Session, and he had therefore not intended to oppose it in those stages. It was not that his right hon. Friend had at all altered his opinion on the subject; he was as strongly impressed as ever with a sense of the gross injustice of calling upon the East-India Company to grant a compensation of this kind. He himself had gone carefully through the whole of the case, and he was convinced that if hon. Members had taken the same pains to make themselves acquainted with its merits, they would be of his opinion, that Mr. Buckingham had no claim in justice on the East-India Company. If the hon. Gentleman opposite should persevere in his motion, he (Mr. Smith) would certainly vote for it. If that Amendment should not be carried, he would move that the petition from the East-India Company against the Bill should be referred to the Middlesex list, to which, of course, this Bill would be referred, and that they be heard by counsel against the Bill before the Committee. In that way the House would be put in possession of the facts of the case. The East-India Company had a right, as the law stood at the time, to act as it did in the case of Mr. Buckingham. The House of Commons was not a fit tribunal to decide a legal claim of this kind, which Mr. Buckingham had never brought before a court of law. The sending round petitions for signatures in its favour on grounds that should never have been brought forward, was, to say the least of it, unparliamentary.
Mr. Roebucksaid, that sitting there a Member of the British House of Commons, and as such intrusted with the care of the interests, not merely of the people of England, but of the people of Hindostan, he must oppose this Bill. What did it propose to do? It proposed to make the people of Hindostan pay for the exercise
760
of a discretionary power on the part of their Government, which power they (the people of England) had themselves, by Act of Parliament, placed in the hands of that Government. If Mr. Buckingham had been unjustly treated, and if he was entitled to compensation, let the people of England pay it—let it be put in the estimates, and brought forward by the Government, but let them not come down upon the East-India Company for it, because they had exercised a discretionary power vested in them by the Parliament of England. He had himself issued a publication—he had dared the Government to prosecute him; he did not mean to say he had violated the law, but if he had done so, if the Government had prosecuted him, and had obtained a verdict against him, with what face could he come to Parliament and ask for compensation? Why, Messrs. Cleave and Hetherington had as undoubted claims on the Parliament of England as Mr. Buckingham, and if this Bill should pass, he would recommend them to petition the House for leave to bring in a Bill claiming compensation from the British people for the injuries done to them in consequence of having violated an Act of Parliament. No man had a right to claim compensation for the consequences brought upon himself by a breach of the law,
Mr. Robinsonsaid, that last year he had opposed this Bill, and he saw no reason to alter his opinion of it now. It was proved by the counsel of the East-India Company last Session, that Mr. Buckingham had been over and over again warned that if he persevered in the course he was pursuing, he would subject himself to the measures which the Government of India found it necessary finally to adopt in his case. What weight was to be attached to the petitions presented in favour of this Bill, when the parties signing them were told that the people of Hindostan would have to pay the money? No doubt half the people of England would sign those petitions when told so. It would be a different thing, however, if they knew that the money was to come out of their own pockets.
Major Beauclerksupported the Bill, and denied that Mr. Buckingham had been guilty of any breach of the law in India. If the hon. Member for Sheffield had what was called "a tail," less opposition would be made to this claim.
Mr. Peasethought the House bound in justice to procure satisfaction for Mr. Buckingham, who had been the victim of the tyrannical proceedings of the Indian Government.
The House divided on the second reading: Ayes 81; Noes 125—Majority 44.

List of the AYES.

Aglionby, H. A.

Maxwell, J.

Attwood, T.

O'Brien, W. S.

Baines, E.

O'Connell, D.

Baldwin, Dr.

O'Connell, J.

Barnard, E. G.

O'Connell, Maurice

Beauclerk, Major

O'Connell, M. J.

Bentinck, Lord W.

O'Connor, Don

Bewes, T.

Palmer, C.

Blackburne, J.

Parrot, J.

Bodkin, John James

Pease, Joseph

Brady, Denis C.

Pechell, G. R.

Brodie, W. D.

Phillips, Mark

Brotherton, J.

Poulter, J. S.

Brudenell, Lord

Power, James

Cayley, E. S.

Pryme, G.

Crawford, W. S.

Roche, W.

Divett, E.

Ruthven, E.

Duncombe, T. S.

Ruthven, E. S.

Dundas, J. D.

Sanford, E. A.

Elphinstone, Howard

Scholefield, J.

Etwall, R.

Scott, J. W.

Ferguson, R. C.

Seale, Col.

Fielden, J.

Sheil, R. L.

Finn, W. F.

Steuart, R.

Fitzsimon, C.

Strickland, Sir G.

Fitzsimon, N.

Stuart, Lord Dudley

Gaskell, D.

Talbot, J. H.

Goring, H. D.

Talfourd, T. N.

Guest, J. J.

Thorneley, Thomas

Harland, W.

Tooke, W.

Harvey, D. W.

Trelawney, Sir W.

Hector, C. J.

Wakley, T.

Hoskins, K.

Wallace, R.

Hume, J.

Walter, J.

Jervis, J.

Wason, R.

Kemp, T. R.

Wilks, J.

Lampton, H.

Winnington, H. J. E.

Langton, Col. G.

Wood, Alderman

Lister, E. C.

Wrightson, W. B.

Lynch, A. H.

TELLERS.

Macleod, R.

Warburton, H.

Maule, Hon. Fox

Tulk, Charles A.

List of the NOES.

Acheson, Viscount

Brownrigg, J. S.

Alsager, Richard

Bruce, C. L. C.

Angerstein, J.

Bruen, Col. H.

Archdal, General

Bruen, Francis

Ashley, Lord

Buller, Sir J. Y.

Barclay, C.

Burrell, Sir C. M.

Baring, F.

Burton, H.

Beckett, Sir J.

Callaghan, D.

Bell, M.

Campbell, Sir H.

Berkeley, C.

Chandos, Marquess of

Bethell, R.

Chaplin, T.

Bonham, F. R.

Chetwynd, Captain

Bramston, T. W.

Chichester, J. P. B.

762

Clive, Robert

Lennox, Lord A.

Colborne, N. W. R.

Lincoln, Earl of

Compton, H. C.

Longfield, R.

Conolly, E. M.

Lushington, S. R.

Cooper, Hon. A.

Lygon, Col.

Coote, Sir C.

Mackenzie, J. A. S.

Cripps, J.

Maclean, D.

D'Albiac, Sir C.

M'Taggart, John

Dick, Q.

Mahon, Lord

Dunbar, George

Mangles, J.

Egerton, W.

Methuen, P.

Egerton, Lord F.

Mordaunt, Sir J.

Entwisle, John

Mostyn, E.

Fielden, W.

Packe, C. W.

Finch, G.

Paget, F.

Fleming, J.

Parker, M. E. N.

Foster, C.

Patten, Wilson

Freemantle, Sir T.

Pelham, C. A.

Geary, Sir W.

Penruddock, J. H.

Gladstone, W. E.

Perceval, Col.

Gladstone, T.

Pollock, Sir F.

Graham, Sir J. R. G.

Robinson, G. R.

Grant, F. W.

Roebuck, J. A.

Greisley, Sir R.

Sanderson, R.

Grey, Col.

Sandon, Lord

Halford, H.

Scott, Sir E. D.

Halyburton, D. G.

Sheppard, T.

Halse, J.

Sibthorp, Colonel

Hanmer, Sir J.

Smith, R. Vernon

Hardinge, Sir H.

Smyth, Sir G. H.

Hardy, J.

Somerset, Lord G.

Hayes, Sir E.

Stanley, Lord

Hogg, J. W.

Stuart, W. V.

Hope, Hon. J.

Tancred, H. W.

Hope, Hon. T.

Thomas, Col.

Horsman, E.

Trevor, A.

Hotham, Lord

Troubridge, Sir T.

Houldsworth, T.

Verner, Sir H.

Howard, P. H.

Vesey, Hon. T.

Inglis, Sir R. H.

Vivian, John Ennis

Irton, S.

Wall, B.

Johnston, J. J. H.

Welby, G. E.

Jones, Captain

Wilbraham, R. B.

Kearsley, J. H.

Williams, R.

Knatchbull, Sir E.

Wodehouse, Hon. E.

Knightley, Sir C.

Wood, C.

Lawson, A.

Wrottesley, Sir J.

Lees, John F.

Young, G. F.

Lefroy, A.

TELLERS.

Lefroy, Dr. T.

Clerk, Sir G., Bart.

Lennox, Lord G.

Ross, C.

COLONEL BRUEN—CARLOW.
Colonel Bruensaid, Sir, after several disappointments I eagerly seize the 6rst opportunity of claiming from the House that indulgence which it usually grants to Members who have the misfortune to be placed in a situation similar to that in which I stand—if, indeed, any Member ever was the subject of such foul and false attacks—coarser epithets might be applied, but. I refrain from following a vile example. Were it a matter of mere private concern, were my own character simply implicated, I should feel, however anxious I might be to repel

763
such aspersions, that this was not exactly the time to do it. But when I—(and who does not?) perceive the reason why these accusations were brought forward, I feel that I should neither be doing justice to myself, to the electors who sent me here, nor to the public, if I did not put the House shortly in possession of the real state of the case—at least of the leading facts connected with it. At the same time I am well aware that these things can by no possibility be in any way connected with the charge against the learned Member for Dublin—they have nothing in the world to do with it. Grant, for a moment, that all the allegations were proved—how could that authorise or justify the offence charged? I am persuaded there is not one hon. Gentleman who hears me who will for a moment suspect me capable of deliberately making an untrue statement; neither would common sense permit me to make so false a movement in the face of such an enemy. If, therefore, I shall state anything in error, or omit to mention what I should fairly bring forward, the House will in candour consider the peculiar difficulties of nay position, and judge accordingly. Conceiving from former misrepresentations that it might be possible that an attempt might be made to divert the attention of the House and of the public by an attack on myself and other landlords, I wrote to Ireland for an account of all tenants that had been ejected on my estate for the last five years, thinking that period sufficiently extensive to embrace all the cases that could be brought forward; I have accordingly received that account. I find several of the same townlands mentioned in both; therefore take it for granted that the cases are identical in my return and Mr. Vigors's petition. Although neither names nor yet dates are mentioned in his, I will commence with those in my list, and advert to the others afterwards; although, even if they were truly represented they must have occurred long before any of the clauses stated in the petition were in operation. Having premised so far, the first name that occurs is that of Ballyteglea. This case has been dwelt upon (by an individual mentioned with high eulogy by Mr. Vigors) at every election at Carlow for these four years, notwithstanding the most absolute and unqualified contradiction as constantly given. The correctness of his statements is soon likely to be put to a satisfactory proof, for I have at
764
length succeeded in serving the necessary law process on Mrs. Nowlan's partner in the lease. If the House please, I will state shortly the facts. Her rent amounted to 86 l., 8s. 5½d. An arrear accrued of 310 l. 4s. 3d,. any part of which she was unable to pay; neither could she properly cultivate the land. I sent for her, and represented this, stating the impossibility of allowing the land to continue in her possession, not benefiting her or me. I offered to forgive the arrears, and to make her a present of her cattle, stock, crop, and everything upon the land, and a sum of money, to enable her to look out for and take another farm. She returned home to consider, was badly advised, and behaved with the utmost violence afterwards. A person named James Corcoran was ejected from the lands of Bohermore; he abused his land, and allowed the buildings to fall to ruin; his rent was 58 l. 0s. 2½d., arrears due 104 l. 16 s. 1d. and this was the lowest arrear of any. Two persons named Terence and James Carty were ejected from the same place; they likewise seriously injured the land; and the house, an old mansion-house, was so completely destroyed, that it was found necessary to take it down; the rent was 50 l. 3s. 3d., the arrears 226 l. 1s. 10 d. One of these men, being a well-behaved person, is allowed still to reside on the land, though no part of the arrears were ever paid. James Carty was ejected from the same place under the following circumstances:—He became indebted to a money-lender in the neighbouriug town. He had reason to suppose that this man was about to enforce his demand; he therefore gathered a band of friends in the neighbouring hills, who descended by night with their cars, and carried off the crops, the cattle, and everything that could be removed, and although he was hotly pursued by the money-lender and his faction he outmanœuvred him, made good his retreat, and retired to America. In my own defence, as landlord, I was obliged then to step in and serve ejectments. His father, an old man, he left behind. I have settled an annuity on him of 12 l. for his life. His rent was 65 l 13 s.; arrears 190 l. 14 s. 10 d. The widow Harold, who, by the by, like many of the others, has been married for years, though she still retains, according to the custom of the country, the title of widow was, with her husband, John Bren-

765
nan, ejected from Kildrinagh, owing at the rent of 74 l. 5s. 6d., an arrear of 369 l. 13s., her husband having previously sold the crops and run away with the money. A man named Murphy, holding seven acres, owing an arrear of nearly four years' rent, agreed to leave the land on receiving a sum of money, and being forgiven the arrears. I afterwards made him a present of his crops; for my own security ejectments were served. Long previous to my getting this land, his sister, a widow, had come from a neighbouring town, and taken possession of a shed or outhouse by force. They carried on the war for a considerable time, each threatening the life of the other, to the scandal of the whole neighbourhood. At last Murphy forced her out, and threw down the shed; and I get the credit of it, although these facts are notorious to the whole country. One of the orphans, a young fellow who had been ill, and to whom I in consequence paid a weekly pension, on his recovery was employed by me to take care of some land, and keep off the cattle of a neighbouring farmer, which were continually trespassing on it. That farmer very soon invited him to his house, and whilst my pasture was found very agreeable by the cattle, he made himself equally so to the farmer's daughter; so much so that she robbed her father and ran away with him. Such is the history of this widow and orphan. I have been accused of destroying the village of Nurney; there is but one village on my estate called Nurney, built by my father, entirely at his own expense, and I have expended some thousands on it. The houses were slated, and neat gardens attached to each. Originally, I believe, the village was filled with Protestants. A great many Roman Catholics have, however, since come in in their place. They are asked for no rent, nor ever have been, except in two or three instances, as a punishment for bad conduct. I do not suppose that the whole amounted to 5l. They have pulled down many of the houses, burned or carried away the woodwork, defaced the gardens, and torn up the fences. After repeated complaints of dishonesty and disorderly conduct, some few have been sent away; no freeholder amongst them. But of those who were sent away some had houses provided for them in other places, and others got pensions. Some got nothing, owing to their own misconduct. I
766
do not find the names of Ballyloughan, Knockthomas, or Knockallard, in this list of mine. The first of these was recovered by ejectment in 1827, from a farmer named Kelly, he owing more than 4½ years rent. It was let to one of the undertenants residing on the farm, the brother of a priest, who afterwards rode about the county, at the head of a mob, canvassing against me. Twelve months ago this tenant owed me an arrear of two years rent, and this arrear has not decreased since. I could ruin the man if I pleased; but, notwithstanding my cruelty and bigotry, he remains in his farm still. Other people had cabins on the laud, but received each a sum of money and went away. All this, however, happened nine years ago, before any political or religious dissentions had distracted the country. In Knockthomas I know but of one farm that has come into my hands for several years; the tenant was a Protestant, and could not sublet. A Roman Catholic, however, got possession of it, and refused to give it up at the expiration of the lease. By way of annoying me, he collected as many vagabonds and poor families as the house could hold, and put me to the expense and trouble of a law process before I could get possession of my property. I did not feel myself at all called upon to do anything for these people. In Knockallard, at the time of my leaving Ireland, but one tenant had quitted his farm. He received notice to do so, having repeatedly given me great cause for complaint; however, being an industrious man, and at the solicitation of one of his neighbours, I desired my agent to make him a present of 50 l. Another man had received notice, and offered to go on receiving a sum of money, which I directed should be given. The townland of Schahanrane, where twenty-three families are stated to have received notice to quit, was leased to one tenant, who has been dead some years, at a very trifling rent. The last life in the lease, who was transported for forgery, before the rebellion of 1798, has also been dead several years. These under-tenants have, as I am informed, paid each so much per annum for the concealment of this fact, but, as might be expected, they have quarrelled, and the truth has come to light; as a matter of course and necessity, I have served notice to quit, and if they are all turned out, no man can say but they richly deserve it. As I before stated,

767
there are neither names nor dates in this petition as regards the tenants stated to have been ejected; it is not easy, therefore, to say to what time reference is made. Although in the commencement these unchristian persecutions are stated to be occasioned by the contests since 1832, and the whole drift of the petition is to impress that on the mind of the House, and so to suggest the inference, that Mr. O'Connell was in a manner obliged to go some degrees further than the most corrupt of the old Whigs and Tories had dared to go, and for the mere sake of the purity of election to sell a county to the highest bidder, yet the convenient phrase of "within the last few years," inserted towards the conclusion, enables the petitioner in one case to go back to the year 1827, and in others, I believe, still further, whilst the little word "partly" skilfully slipped in, leaves a door open for escape. If it is demonstrated that these transactions, if true, could not by possibility be imputed to the motives stated, but must have taken place in the common course of the exercise of the landlord's just and undoubted rights, how long these rights are to be continued remains to be seen. On the whole, then, I have ejected eight tenants in five years, being in the proportion of one out of 227 alleged in each year—each of these tenants, on an average, owing me more than four years and a quarter's rent. Not one of those mentioned in the petition was an elector; but I have ejected one who was a freeholder, owing arrears to a greater amount than any I have yet mentioned. This happened two years ago; he has ever since resided in his house, paying no rent, with his mother, a widow, and three brothers, desolate orphans, of the tender age of between thirty and forty, strong, able fellows, as capable of doing mischief, and as willing to do it, as the loudest clamourer for the liberty of Ireland could desire; so much so indeed, that I shall be obliged to have them removed, and very possibly afford an opportunity for another petition. I am accused of destroying whole towns and villages. I have expended some thousands in building and repairing one, in endeavouring to make the people comfortable, and in educating their children at my own expense. In place of being the persecutor of widows and orphans, let any gentleman who may have any curio-
768
sity on the subject, inquire whether I do not support a very considerable number of both who have no sort of claim on me? No one can have a better opportunity than the hon. Member for Greenock; for, if I am not misinformed, some of his connections or friends live in the county of Carlow, Let him make a rigid investigation into my character, and report the result to the House. I am not aware of one cruel or tyrannical act ever having been committed against my tenants, by those who act for me, nor of one that can even be tortured into such a shape in the eyes of any unprejudiced person—not even by the learned Gentleman, with all the exclusive advantages he possesses. So far with respect to the tenants. They were all bound strictly in their leases not to sublet; the farms were all of a moderate size, some very small; notwithstanding, in some instances, they did allow strangers and others to settle on their lands. Now, the question arose, what was the landlord to do with these strangers who, contrary to law, contrary to his express desire, and, in direct opposition to his interests, took possession of his land? What would be done in such cases in England or Scotland? Would any one here allow a set of paupers to take possession of his estate?—would he not cause them to be removed immediately, or endeavour, at the least, to persuade them to go as they had come? What was done by me? The agent was directed, whenever the people could be induced to take money for what they had thus got into their hands, to purchase it, and in almost every case this was done. In some cases they were allowed to remain, in some, houses were procured elsewhere, in others pensions were given, which continue to be paid to this day. There may be some few cases in which nothing was given, but it must have been from notorious bad conduct, or where they were collected merely for the purpose of annoying me. If I were resolved on obliging Roman, Catholics to leave my estate, merely because of their creed, I have, and have had for years, ample opportunity of doing so, of which, however, I have not yet availed myself. I have at this moment a considerable extent of land, exclusively and for years occupied by them without leases—some of them owing large arrears. I have other tracts occupied by none but Roman Catholics, owing hundreds, nay, thousands of pounds, which the tenants

769
could by no means pay, and which I could infallibly recover by ejectment. If I had that antipathy to them which is laid to my charge, could I not, long since, have gratified it, without any one reasonably finding fault with me? Unless it be determined that a man is to have no control whatever over his property, and to this point things are fast verging in Ireland. But I rejoice to say, that some of my warmest supporters are Roman Catholics, and this could hardly be the case, if all that is staled were fact. One townland, containing about 1,300 English acres, came into my possession; three Protestants were the tenants; they did not reside on the land. I took it from them, and gave it altogether to Roman Catholics. This does not look very like religious persecution. How long landlords can continue to act as they have really acted, will depend on circumstances. We may be supposed to have our feelings and opinions as well as others, and, perhaps, we may be allowed occasionally to gratify them, though we may not consider it allowable to go to the same lengths as others take the liberty of going. Possibly we, like the landlords of England and Scotland, may be permitted to select our tenants. We are responsible to the laws of our country. If we violate them, let us be punished. If we do not, I here protest against being called to account even by this House, much less by the learned Member or the priests, who notoriously set all law at defiance, at the very time they are heaping every species of slander and abuse on us for merely acting as the law allows, and by no means even going so far. With respect to the real character of the gentry of Carlow, perhaps, the state of the country before agitation commenced there may afford no bad criterion, and a more prosperous, a more improving, happy, or contented population, could not be found in the empire. A tolerable proof of this was, that crime or disturbance was almost unknown, the best understanding subsisted between all ranks and classes, whilst the land, and all its produce, bore a higher price in the market, and the peasantry in general were better fed, housed, and clothed, than in almost any other part of the country. It was truly called the garden of Ireland. The landlords have been so exceedingly moderate in their rents, that they often made a mistake against themselves of from 1 to 200 per cent. in the value of their
770
farms, as a late Committee must remember; and this piece of information was obtained, not from the landlords or their partizans, but from the oaths, repeated day after day, of a long string of respectably dressed witnesses brought forward by Mr. Vigors himself, under the superintendence of no less than three priests. The Carlow gentlemen, like others, may have their faults; but rapacity and cruelty have not been of the number. Our real crime is, that we will not bow down to the image which Daniel, the king, has set up; and, for this offence, we are to be cast into the burning fiery furnace of public indignation, which is to be heated one seven times hotter than usual, by the ruined towns and villages, fanned by the shrieks and cries of widows and orphans. But the attempt will fail—we shall pass unhurt through these fires; and if justice and truth be not a dead letter, our accuser will have the benefit of them himself. But if this be an offence, I must plead guilty to the charge. We are incorrigible offenders. But let us see for a moment, how the electors and landlords of Carlow, who presume to think for themselves, have been treated by those who now make this outcry against them—namely by the priests. No sooner did they perceive that the time was fully come that they had been so long watching for, than, like the soldiers of Cadmus, they started in an instant into view, fully armed and equipped; they placed themselves at the head of the lowest, the most thoughtless of their flocks, the very dregs of the people—
Mr. Methuen: I rise to order, Sir. So long as the hon. and gallant Officer confined himself to a vindication of his own character, I, of course, felt bound to listen to him with attention; but I wish to know whether the hon. and gallant Officer is not now going beyond the line which the indulgence of the House usually permits in cases of a personal nature?
The Speakerthought it was unnecessary to interfere with the hon. Member.
Mr. Warburtonfound upon the list of notices the following for Tuesday, the 1st of March—namely, "Petition on the subject of the late Carlow election, and to take that opportunity of making a statement to the House on the matter of the petition which was presented to the House on the 15th of February instant, and printed with the votes of that day, con-

771
taining matters personally affecting himself." Now he (Mr. Warburton) apprehended when notice was given—
The Speakerwas understood to say, that on seeing the notice on the votes for Tuesday next, he was surprised that the hon. and gallant Member should have risen to address the House on the subject of that notice to-day; but as the hon. and gallant Member had entered partially into his statement, it might be convenient for the House to allow him to proceed, so far as related to the matters affecting himself personally. But as there stood a notice of a motion respecting the proceedings in the county of Carlow for a future day, he trusted the hon. and gallant Officer would not be betrayed into remarks beyond what simply related to his own case, and that no other hon. Member would be induced to enter upon a premature discussion on the subject. generally respecting the county of Carlow.
Colonel Bruen: I shall bow with pleasure to the general feeling of the House; but I did think that an opportunity would be afforded me, after such serious charges have been preferred against me, not only to defend myself, but to defend those who have been equally guilty with me. I was endeavouring to show that the conduct pursued by the landlords of Carlow was not without some provocation, and if the House pleases, I will state a few of those provocations.
Lord John Russell: I rise to order, Sir, and I do so for the purpose of clearly understanding what it is that the hon. and gallant Member is going to do. If I understand him rightly, it is this: that having made his statement respecting his own character personally (and which the House, of course, has listened to with that attention with which it is always ready to listen to statements of a similar nature) he is now going to state what has been the conduct of other landlords in the county of Carlow with respect to their tenants. I may be wrong in so understanding the hon. and gallant Member; but if that is his intention, of course the House will no longer think that the statement is merely the hon. Gentleman's own statement; and if the hon. Gentleman should (as of course he would) impugn the conduct of other persons, those other persons will in fairness have a right to be heard in their defence.
Colonel Bruen: I shall bow to the
772
feeling of the House, and will not persevere in the statement which I was going to make. But I beg to call the attention of the House to this fact—that the other evening the House received a petition, in which many serious accusations were made against individuals, when it was wholly out of the power of the persons so affected to rebut those accusations. I do appeal to any hon. Member whether that was exactly fair, and whether those persons have not some reason to complain. But I must be allowed to finish, for I have not quite yet done with what relates to myself. This is the liberty we enjoy, and for an increase of which the learned Member is so anxious. The question is, not whether the elector in Ireland shall be allowed quietly to exercise his franchise, but whether the priest shall be openly allowed to drive him like a pig, where he pleases, and sell him to the highest bidder, which must be the case unless the landlord has the courage to step in. The power of these political priests will be increased to a frightful extent, if some measure now in contemplation be unfortunately permitted to pass into a law. And here I would not be understood as charging all the Roman Catholic clergy with the commission of these outrages. I believe there are many who sincerely regret the state of things, and would, if they dared, endeavour to check proceedings destructive alike to themselves and to the poor people; but so strong is the delusion, so resistless the torrent, that it carries them and the most respectable of their parishioners along against their will, and they are obliged to choose between their parishes and their consciences.
Mr. Methuenrose to order. He thought the hon. Member was not entitled to enter into these particulars.
The Speakersaid, that as the hon. and gallant Member was personally concerned in the question, he ought to be allowed to exercise his own discretion, as to the course he was to pursue.
Mr. Warburtonwas of opinion that the hon. and gallant Member ought to defer his observations till Tuesday, the 1st of March, for which day he had given notice of bringing this subject before the House.
The Speakersaid that the hon. and gallant Member had given notice for to day, but the notice had been erroneously printed in the votes.
Colonel Bruensaid, that after the dis-

773
inclination which had been expressed to his proceeding, he would abridge his observations as much as possible. But, continued the hon. and gallant Member, there is one case mentioned peculiarly atrocious, and the most remarkable in point of numbers—that of Ballytarsna. I am accused of driving from their houses here, in a wicked unchristian manner, nineteen families, containing 101 individuals, with the usual liberal proportion of widows, &c. Now what will any honest man say when he hears that I never turned off one single human being, man, woman, or child, from this land? that the power even to do so never was placed in my hands but once; and how did I use it? The House shall hear; and now that I have told you what I did not, I will take the liberty of stating what I did do. This town-land contains nearly 800 English acres. I receive 221 l. 10 s. 9d. yearly, not much exceeding one-fourth of the value. The lease is for ever; as long, therefore, as the head rent was paid, I had no authority or pretence for interfering. I do not know that I ever was on the land in my life. The owner of this estate, whom, to the best of my belief, I never saw, as he lived in another county, became exceedingly embarrassed, and was obliged to leave the country. Arrears to the amount, I believe, of 1,000 l. were due, other creditors were pressing, and it became necessary for me to look to myself. Ejectments were, therefore, served; time ran on, no creditor found it his interest to redeem, and I had every prospect of getting possession of this estate, and of adding many hundreds per annum to my income, and that without any blame that by possibility could be imputed. And how did this desolator of towns and villages, this tyrant, bigot, persecutor, fiend (I use the exact terms of the learned Gentleman), with a countenance scarcely human, this tormentor of widows and orphans, this modern Phalaris, regaling himself with the shrieks of his victims, this Tory, this Orangeman, this Conservative, how did he behave? What did he do? The tenants on the land were, I believe, exclusively Roman Catholic. He ordered the ejectments to be withdrawn, and the debt to be received by such instalments as the distressed tenant could conveniently pay. I have made the following memorandum on this point;—"The inhabitants have been ever since my most implacable enemies." Now I beseech the House to mark the truly diabolical artifice by which a retreat is attempted to be secured here; for to this, I suppose, is to be
774
applied the postscript:—"One of these townlands not being in the possession of Colonel B. at the time the tenantry were ejected." Why then was it mentioned? Would any man who had a spark of decency, not to mention honesty or good feeling, in his composition, have first deliberately charged another with committing a crime—have first coolly planted a dagger in his back, left it rankling in the wound, and then in a sort of appendix—a second or third edition—have insinuated or hinted, that possibly the accused was not quite so guilty, not having been exactly at that very time in a situation to commit the offence? But here again the character of the inventors and propagators of this atrocious falsehood breaks out—the cloven foot again appears. They well know every particle of the case, and that I have not, and never had, any authority over this land, some of the most mischievous and active of their own followers residing on it. I think, moreover, that there is an additional falsehood. Father Phelan states that Ballytarsna is in the same parish as the rest of the town-lands, whereas I believe it is in Mr. Tyrrell's; if, however, my supposition be incorrect, then it is in his own parish, and he must have known that every word he uttered was false—although his statements were made on a Sunday with his congregation around him, who must likewise have known the falsehood of he charge; but that is a matter of small consequence; an occasion was to be served—the end justifies the means. I have now done, and I trust I have convinced the House, even from the imperfect information I can now command, that most of the charges in the petition lately presented are gross and wilful misstatements, and that the others are so distorted, perverted, and exaggerated, that they scarcely bear any resemblance to the truth. Were my purpose attack or recrimination, I should find little difficulty in pointing out many of the learned Member's speeches and actions, which would throw all my exploits into the shade, and place in a very striking light the very different species of liberty that he takes himself, and is willing to allow to others. But I need not such a defence—my position is too strong. I heartily hope that the threatened royal Commission may be issued, to inquire into all the causes of the present unhappy state of Carlow. For years I have been anxiously endeavouring, at great expense and trouble, and at the sacrifice of all

775
my domestic comforts, to bring these matters under the view of the Committees of this House. I have hitherto failed. I will, nevertheless, continue my endeavours, and I have the satisfaction of inform the learned Gentleman, that I have long since secured the assistance of the same friends who have heretofore discharged their duty so efficiently to their clients, and so honourably to themselves. I now hail the promise of the hon. Member for Greenock to move for that Commission on an early day—I entreat—I conjure—I dare him to obtain it. If impartial men be appointed, who will honestly do their duty, a state of things will be disclosed, of which no Gentleman can form a conception—but which, nevertheless, very nearly concerns themselves. I will undertake to prove every tittle of what I have stated, and much more. I now sit down, confidently submitting that I have redeemed my pledge, and shown that the assertions of the hon. and learned Member for Dublin with respect to me are as worthy of credit as those he is in the habit of making.
Mr. Hopeconfessed that the embarrassment which he always felt on addressing the House, was very much increased by the knowledge he had that they were anxious to proceed to business of a more general nature, but he begged to obtrude a few minutes on their time in order to vindicate the character of a noble relative of his own, who had been most unjustly attacked on several occasions, and more particularly in a petition lately presented to the House. When that petition was presented no opportunity had been afforded to his noble relative of giving any explanation whatever. He (Mr. Hope) immediately conveyed to his noble relative information of the charges which had been made against him; and he had come down on the succeeding evening, prepared, if the course of the debate had permitted, to make a brief answer to those charges. Subsequently the hon. Member for Greenock (Mr. Wallace) gave notice of a motion for inquiry, by Royal Commission, into the facts and circumstances set forth in Mr. Vigors's petition. On seeing this, his noble relative declared that all he wanted was a full inquiry, and he should be perfectly satisfied if that hon. Gentleman's motion were carried. What reason the hon. Gentleman might have had for deferring his motion it was
776
not for him (Mr. Hope) to say. This was not the first time an attempt had been made to impeach the character of his noble relative, and to cast a certain stigma on him. Mr. Vigors, the late Member for Carlow, did endeavour to do so on a former occasion. The intimidation Committee was appointed in the course of the last Session. Now, if that hon. Gentleman had charges to make against his noble relative, or against anybody else, of religious bigotry and political persecution—
Mr. Jervisrose to order. The hon. and gallant Member opposite had been heard in consequence of the indulgence of the House being always extended to every hon. Member on whom imputations had been cast, and the earliest opportunity afforded to him to give an explanation of his conduct. But that was not the case of the hon. Gentleman who was now in possession of the House. He was addressing himself to a subject not relating to any Member of this House, and he (Mr. Jervis) put it to the House whether they would allow the hon. Member to proceed in making a statement which must, of necessity, lead to a lengthened debate?
Mr. Williams Wynnsaid that there was no doubt that upon the strict point of order the hon. and learned Member was correct. But the House must consider if they would receive petitions containing heavy charges upon individuals which they had no opportunity, personally, to answer, they being Members of the other House of the Legislature, whether, after giving a facility of reception to petitions much greater than used to be given in former times, and allowing them to have currency to the most remote parts of the empire, they were not in justice called upon to extend a like indulgence to those who were so charged, and relax their rules in favour of hearing the answers to the attacks that had been made.
Mr. Hopesaid he did not claim it as a matter of right to address the House, but asked to be permitted to do so as a matter of courtesy. He left off with stating that the time for bringing forward charges of political persecution and religious bigotry would have been when the intimidation Committee was sitting. Mr. Vigors did, in the course of last Session, get up a petition for the purpose of attempting to establish charges against his (Mr. Hope's) noble relative. He then received a com-

777
munication from his noble relative, desiring him to go to Mr. Vigors, and inform him that a time was appointed when he might bring forward his petition, and make his charges. Let the House observe that the statements had been made, although the petition had not been presented. He then went to Mr. Vigors, and saw him in the House of Commons. He told him then, that if he would meet him in the House of Commons next day, at four o'clock, he would be ready to meet any of the statements he might have to make. Mr. Vigors did not come down to the House of Commons at four o'clock on the appointed day. Mr. Vigors did not write him a line, or speak one word to him on the subject; and from that hour to the present, he had heard no more of Mr. Vigors, or of his charges in this respect. Now a few words as to the statements contained in the petition. The first name on the list was Ballinkillen. His noble relative was accused of having ejected from the town-lands of Ballinkillen, the property of Viscount Beresford, where the system first commenced, thirty-nine families, amounting to 205 individuals, including fifty-six widows and orphans. Now the lands of Ballinkillen fell out of lease twelve years ago. He, therefore thought it was unnecessary, in the present state of the House, to trouble them with any observations on that part of the case. He would simply say, that of six farmers put into these lands, three were Catholics, and three Protestants, and that they remained tenants to this day. So much for the charge of religious and political persecution on the lands of Ballinkillen. The next place was Ballyknocken; and the charge against his noble relative was, that from the lands of Ballyknocken he had evicted seven families, amounting to thirty-three individuals, including thirteen widows and orphans. Now the only change made by his noble relative in this place was this;—a man who now kept a public-house in Ballyknocken had twelve acres of land taken from him and given to another farmer. The next case was that of Sly-guff. Now when the lands of Slyguff fell out of lease, the first proceeding of his noble relative was to divide them into small farms. Every one of the tenants were restored to their farms, and were now in the occupation of them. There were a few exceptions to be sure; the nonresident tenants were not continued.
778
What did his noble relative do with the smaller inhabitants? To each of them he made an offer of emigration, if they chose to accept it; and to those who did not, he gave a certain amount in money, to buy up their interest. He also built a great number of cottages, in which many of these people were placed. Those who did not emigrate, and were not placed in really comfortable cottages—the providing which, when the miserable nature of the hovels they had previously occupied was recollected, must be considered an act of charity—had sums of money given them to buy up their interest. The case of Clonegaeh was the same. The principle of dividing the farms was the same, the principle of retaining the tenants was the same, the principle of making pecuniary compensation to the cotters who went away was the same; and many of the tenants forcibly refused to give up possession. He thought he had completely answered these two charges. Then came the allegation at the end of the petition, namely, that in the town-land of Slyguff fifteen families, amounting to ninety-four individuals, including twenty-three widows and orphans, had received notice to quit. The House would do him the favour of observing the facts in this case; he thought they would rather astonish them. There were only two individuals in the town-land of Slyguff who were now going to quit. One of those was under notice to quit, and the other had given notice himself, and both these individuals were Protestants. He was informed by his noble relative, with reference to the charge of political persecution, that he was not aware of having turned any one single elector off his land; and with regard to religious persecution, he hoped the statements he had made were sufficient to disprove the allegations of the petition. One word more, and only one. The town and neighbourhood of Slyguff had been mentioned frequently. These charges against his noble relative were all made when the townland of Slyguff fell out of the occupation of the life owner. Mr. Vigors, the unimpeachable Mr. Vigors, and Mr. Blakeney, the then Members for Carlow, came to his noble relative and mentioned the allegations which were then circulated in the country against him with regard to his intention to turn off all these people. His noble relative told them what his intentions were,

779
and what the principles were on which he meant to act. Mr. Vigors and Mr. Blakeney then expressed themselves perfectly satisfied, and asked his noble relative whether he would permit them to communicate to his tenants, then holding the land, his intentions towards them, as they were anxious for nothing more than his own statement of his intentions. What was his noble relative's answer? "No, Sir; I mean to act upon these principles; I will follow them up; but I do not choose any communication to be made to my tenants that does not come from myself, or my agents. Upon these principles his noble Friend had acted; upon these principles he was ready to defend his conduct; upon these principles he required investigation; upon these principles he was satisfied with the mode of investigation proposed to the hon. Member for Greenock; and he could only add, that relative to all the facts which now rested upon assertion, he was prepared to bring forward incontrovertible evidence.
Mr. O'Connell: Mr. Vigors had been mentioned. He would not detain the House one moment; but he wished to be enabled to state what he thought the House must be clearly agreed upon, that this matter ought not to be allowed to remain in its present state. If these charges had been falsely made, their falsehood ought to be exposed. Therefore, it was, that he intended to move, when he had an opportunity of presenting several petitions on the subject which had been intrusted to him, that the whole of the facts should be investigated by a Select Committee.

ORANGE LODGES.
Mr. Humerose to bring before the House the Motion relative to Orange Lodges, of which he had given notice. It would be recollected that on the 4th of August last he had brought forward the question of Orange Lodges generally. The evidence taken before the Committee appointed to inquire into the subject of Orange Lodges, afforded to his mind so much evidence, and so many strong facts, that it had appeared to him absolutely necessary that the last Session of Parliament should not terminate without the House coming to some Resolution oft the subject. It would be recollected, that in pursuance of a motion made by him, the evidence, so far as it was taken, was laid on the Table of the House. He then sub-
780
mitted to the House certain Resolutions, the object of which was to bring the nature and tendencies of Orange Lodges clearly before it, with the view of urging upon Parliament the decision of a question, the settlement of which appeared to him essentially necessary to the welfare and peace of the country. The noble Lord at the head of the Home Department, however, suggested to him that it would be better to limit the Resolutions to one branch of the subject—to Orange Lodges in the army, and to take the opinion of the House thereupon. Knowing that the system was making fearful inroads, and seeing that it was gradually tending to sap and undermine the discipline of the Army, he complied with the noble Lord's suggestion. He now begged to move that the Resolutions agreed to on the 11th of August, to which day the motion was adjourned, should be read. He should then submit a proposition, to which he considered it the duty of the House to lend its most attentive consideration, with the view of remedying what he could not but consider a serious evil existing at the present moment in this country. (The Resolutions of the 1lth of August having been read, the hon. Member proceeded.) In consequence of the Address of that House, his Majesty issued orders to his Commander-in-Chief, to the effect that any military officer or soldier who attended any Orange Lodge, should be liable to be tried by a court-martial. Notwithstanding this command of his Majesty, his Royal Highness the Duke of Cumberland had, as it seemed to him, equally set at defiance the orders of the King and the Address of that House. It would be his object to show more immediately, before he sat down, the ends which his Royal Highness had in view in pursuing this course; and this he should endeavour to show from documents which had come into his possession. In consequence of Colonel Fairman having refused to furnish the Committee with the evidence they required, and having avoided the Speaker's warrant, and having thus evaded the production of the documents which were stated to be, and which he (Mr. Hume) really believed to have been, in his possession, of a very serious and important nature, papers had been put into his hands purporting to be documents connected with Orange Lodges, which would show the manner in which those Lodges had been

781
conducted, and the mode in which their proceedings had been carried on, besides proving attempts to organize troops to carry into effect their objects, whatever they might be. It was his intention to bring the question of Orange Lodges fully and completely before the House: it would be for them to decide whether they would submit to have their Resolutions and the King's orders set at nought by a man at the head of the Army, who ought to have set a better example, and to have better remembered what was due to his station, his allegiance, and his name. The Duke of Gordon had, in the end, acted very properly. It appeared that he had no idea of, or at any rate had forgotten, the existence of the general orders of 1822 and 1829, which were entered in his regimental books, and which every Serjeant in his corps had an opportunity of perusing if he pleased. They appeared, however, not to have attracted his attention until the issuing of the order of the 31st of August, when a Grand Lodge was held, at which the Duke of Cumberland presided. He had been informed, within the last twenty-four hours, that, in spite of all the orders of the Commander-in-Chief, the Duke of Cumberland had presided, no longer since than Thursday last, at an Orange Lodge in Portman-square. It was proved, too, that his Royal Highness, holding his Majesty's Commission, not content with disobeying the orders of the Commander-in-Chief, had received and answered an address from a Grand Orange Lodge at Longford. He held that answer—which had been published—in his hand, and in it he assured all Orangemen that they might depend upon him; that nothing should induce him to desert the cause of Orangeism; that nothing, in fact, should induce him to withdraw from that association, until his brother, the Sovereign of this country, had declared no soldier should attend without rendering himself amenable to a Court-martial. This was not the time to tell that House, or the country, that the Duke of Cumberland received no individual pay. He had received honour, he was a Field Marshal, he stood on the army list of England; and he hoped that House would not allow him to act in utter disregard of its expression of opinion, and the orders of his Majesty. He would come now to the proceedings which had taken place since he first brought the subject under the notice of
782
the House, and to the present state of the question. At the time of his making the motion of the 11th of August, which the House was pleased to support, one folio volume of evidence had been laid on the Table. Hon. Gentlemen who had paid attention to the subject, would find that the second volume contained the third report of the Committee at large, and another had since been laid on the Table of the House. Every page of these volumes seemed to him to contain matter of the most serious importance, and well worthy the grave consideration of the House. After the 11th of August, in consequence of information he had received respecting the extent of Orangeism in England and Scotland, the accuracy of which was denied by the Duke of Cumberland, and also by the Commander-in-Chief, he was induced to submit to the House a Motion for inquiry. That inquiry was accorded; and its results had also been laid before the House in another portly volume. These three volumes were now lying on the Table of the House, and he begged their attention once for all to the fact, that nineteen-twentieths of the evidence contained in them was either produced by officers of the institution, or collected from existing documents. The portion of evidence taken from other individuals was extremely small, and looking to the nature of the great majority of it, there could be little of cavil, dispute, or denial. The hon. Member for Kilkenny had stated the other evening, that the impartiality of the evidence and the fairness of the Committee had been arraigned. On what ground, or on what principle, he was at a loss to understand: perhaps he should hear from hon. Gentlemen opposite. With regard to the Committee on Orange Lodges in England, he had heard no doubt of its impartiality or fairness expressed; and he begged the House particularly to observe, that the documents in the appendix were in the first instance prepared by the Secretary to the Grand Lodge, and submitted to the Grand Master, before they were finally decided on. By the Resolutions which had just been read, the House had affirmed the existence of upwards of 1,500 lodges in Ireland, and 350 in England—institutions of an exclusive nature, from which Catholics were carefully shut out, and which were enrolled for the avowed object of opposing their creed. An observation which fell from the right hon. and learned

783
learned member for the University of Dublin, a few nights since, had made a great impression on his mind. In the last sentence uttered by the right hon. and learned Gentleman on the occasion to which he referred, he said that Catholics were the natural enemies of Protestants. ["No, No,"] He certainly had understood the right hon. and learned Gentleman so; it would appear by all the proceedings of the Protestant party in Ireland that they thought so most undoubtedly. It had been further declared that the constitution of these societies was illegal, at any rate that they came within the provisions of the Corresponding Act, consisting, as it did, of a vast number of minor branches in constant correspondence with a central board, and receiving instructions and orders from it. The question of the legality or illegality of these bodies, he (Mr. Hume) would not enter into; he would leave it to his hon. Friend the Member for Cornwall, who would most probably second the Motion, and address himself to that part of the subject. It was sufficiently proved that there were in existence a large body of Orangemen, amounting, according to their own calculation, to 200,000 men in Ireland, and 100,000 men in England. Whether this was a correct estimate of their numbers or not, it was not for him to decide, but as nearly as he could calculate, taking the medium between the varying statements of Orangemen themselves, he should say that their numbers in Ireland were from 150,000 to 220,000. They boasted that it was in their power to call forth large bodies, selected from this great mass; for proof that they could do so, he need only refer to one instance which occurred in 1834, when 75,000 men were assembled at one time at Hillsborough; and cases were constantly occurring of the assemblage of 10,000, 20,000, or 30,000 men, at the summons of the Grand Master of the district. Could any man doubt that such institutions called imperatively for the interference of that House, more especially when he reflected on the unfortunate and distressed situation of Ireland. Were these institutions to be borne, when the people of Ireland, dissatisfied and discontented, were driven to desperation, and urged to defy the law, and to take their redress into their own hands? Orange lodges alone had not created the dreadful condition in which the Irish people were plunged, he knew
784
perfectly well; but they had done much to aggravate and perpetuate their miseries and misfortunes. No reasonable man could doubt, that in a country like Ireland, where seven-eighths of the population were Catholics, and where they had been so long labouring under Protestant ascendancy, and the oppression of a denial of civil rights, the people must be aggravated by the existence of such bodies. He found that in the year 1811, Orange lodges were described by Judge Fletcher, in his charge to the grand jury, as a serious evil. He told them that, in his opinion, they had fomented much of the disorder that existed; that they tended to prevent the due administration of justice; that they tended, in short, to render the Catholics discontented and dissatisfied, and to plunge the country into the state in which it was at the moment of his addressing them. He could not but think it must be matter of deep regret to every man in that House, who had watched the progress of Ireland from 1811 to the present day, that the right hon. Baronet opposite, and every successive administration, with the charges of Judges before them, with breaches of the peace and violations of the law daily and hourly recurring, and with the excesses of Orangemen constantly before their eyes, should have allowed these mischievous and illegal associations to continue in existence. But, independently of the mischievous effects which resulted from the centralization and correspondence of Orange Lodges, let it not be forgotten that they were armed, and that blood upon blood had been shed in consequence of these men being pre-eminently prepared—if he might use the term—to disturb the public peace, to concentrate their numbers, to employ their arms in concert, and to commit any act of vengeance or violence against the Catholics. Could any man doubt, knowing the acts of aggression—ay, the murders—which had been committed by the Orange party in Ireland, that the Government should long ago have disarmed these dangerous bodies? Well did he recollect what passed in that House when the right hon. Gentleman who now filled the chair and the right hon. Member for Montgomeryshire brought forward the question of Orange Lodges, when they challenged them as detrimental to the peace and happiness of the country, and brought before Parliament the facts of their existence, of their making

785
use of secret signs, and of their being banded together in opposition to the people. Well did he recollect the reply, that no such things existed, that it was mere rumour, and that such vague and unfounded reports were unworthy the attention of Parliament. The evidence now on the Table proved beyond denial that such ft state of things did actually exist; that from it the most lamentable, the most disastrous, the most deplorable results, had ensued. The existence of Orange Lodges gave rise to Ribbon Lodges; the existence of either was fatal to the peace and quiet of any country. He could show, that as Orangeism had spread in Scotland the peace of the country had been disturbed, and the blood of its people shed. He would show that this had been occasioned by the introduction and extension of Orangeism, under the fostering influence and protection of the Grand Lodge and Grand Master in England, In Airdrie, on the 1st of July, a large body of Orangemen, had assembled and committed violence against the Catholics, and insulted their religion. What was the consequence? Why, that on the 15th of the same month, upwards of 10,000 Catholics assembled on Glasgow-green, and marched from thence to Airdri in order to be revenged on their assailants. At about the same period of the following year, the Catholics assembled, made their arrangements, collected their numbers, and in their own defence, raised a formidable force to prevent a repetition of the outrages of the preceding year. Who could tell what might have resulted from a conflict between two such bodies, but for the excellent behaviour of the townspeople? Who could exaggerate the evils which such scenes must always produce? The evidence proved that in Ireland, when Orange processions or meetings took place, the Orangemen appeared armed, having along with them, generally, not only the gentlemen of the country, but magistrates, deputy-lieutenants, clergymen and others who ought to know better, but who used the advantages of their influence and station to oppress the people. Every page of the evidence proved these meetings and processions, and this description of attendance, to an extent which those who had not read it could scarcely form any idea of. He could only say, that strongly as he felt on the subject of Orange Lodges in August last, and dangerous as he thought them to the
786
Government and the peace of the country, the facts which had been elicited by the inquiry proved to him the impossibility of peace being preserved in any country where such institutions remained. His present object was, that the Government should take some strong measures to put down Orange Lodges in every case, as they had already done by their resolution in the case of the army. Unless they did this, he conceived, they would neglect their first duty. Their first duty was to protect the oppressed. How did they discharge it, when they stood calmly by, and witnessed the outrageous proceedings of these armed bodies? It was difficult to imagine how such processions, and such conduct as the evidence described, could ever have been tolerated. Judge Fletcher, in a charge delivered on the 5th of August, 1815, said—"He had found, from experience, that those societies called Orange Societies, had produced the most mischievous effects, particularly in the North of Ireland. They poisoned the very fountains of justice, and even some Magistrates, under their influence, had, in too many instances, violated their duty." The learned Judge did not hesitate to say, that all associations in Ireland, whether of Orangeism or Ribbonism, whether distinguished by the colour of orange or green—all persons bound together by oath, leagued for a common purpose, endangering the peace of the country—were contrary to law; and he added, "that should it ever happen to him to have to decide the question, he would send down bills of indictment to the Grand Jury against the individuals who were members of such associations." Of this Judge Fletcher was certain, that so long as these associations were permitted to act in the lawless manner they then did, there would be no tranquillity in that country, particularly in the north of Ireland, where those disturbers of the public peace, Orange yeomen, as they were termed, frequented fairs and public places, with arms in their hands, under pretence of preserving the public peace, but really for the purpose of excluding Ribbonmen and putting them down. "Murders (said the learned Judge) had been frequently committed, and though disastrous consequences had ensued, such had been the influence of these associations, that petty jurors had declined, on some occasions, to do their duty. These were his senti-

787
ments, not merely as an individual, but as a judge discharging his duty by expressing his opinion of these associations, whose only proceedings were the raking up of embittering recollections, and inflicting wounds upon the feelings of others; and he did emphatically state it as his opinion, that until they were put down, and their arms taken from them, it was in vain, in the north of Ireland, to expect peace." Such were Judge Fletcher's sentiments; and after twenty years more of the same facts, the same evils, and the same results, with a constant repetition of the same scenes in a greater or less degree, he (Mr. Hume) called upon the Government, and upon that House, to adopt some bold and definitive measure for remedying such a monstrous grievance, and putting down such odious bodies. He asked, was justice administered now in Ireland? The evidence proved that it was not—that the members of these bodies interfered and tampered with it in all its stages. There were instances of Magistrates having refused to take examinations against men charged with murder, or of postponing it so long as to deny justice to the relative's of the murdered man in a thousand cases. There were instances of men charged with murder upon oath, being permitted to escape, without one effort to detain them. The case of Hamilton, and many others of a similar description, were so well known, and so completely proved, that he should but fatigue the House by entering into one-twentieth part of them. When he saw the source of justice polluted—when he saw insult upon insult, and oppression upon oppression—when he saw Magistrates influenced by party feeling, regardless alike of justice and of decency—he was indeed astonished that Secretary after Secretary, and Lord-lieutenant after Lord-lieutenant, should have witnessed such scenes without an effort to abolish them, What were the proofs before the House which no man could controvert? Orangemen had been allowed to carry arms, where Catholics had not; and arms intended to be used to protect the public peace and maintain the authority of the Government and the supremacy of the law, had been proved, in a hundred instances, to have been used by Orangemen against the Catholics of Ireland. Talk of doing justice to Ireland! Was not the name of justice a mockery, and was it not a mockery to expect that the people of
788
Ireland could continue to suffer under daily insults and aggressions like those detailed in the evidence? Let him refer the House to Captain Duff's report, dated 27th of April, 1832: "Sir, I have the honour to communicate, for the information of his Excellency the Lord-lieutenant, that between the hours of twelve and one o'clock this day, a large body of Orangemen, in number from four to five thousand, marched into this town in regular procession, carrying twenty-four stand of colours, their bands playing 'The Protestant Boys,' in front; and leading the procession, I observed the following gentlemen, decorated with orange and purple:—First-Lieutenant, Colonel William Verner—(the hon. Member opposite, he believed)—a Deputy-Lieutenant of this county, as also a Magistrate for it, and the county of Armagh." After mentioning Mr. Joseph Grier, also Magistrate, and a captain of yeomanry, Mr. Jackson Lloyd, a captain of yeomanry, and other gentlemen not holding any commission under his Majesty's Government, the witness continued—"As the procession was marching round the town in the order before mentioned, some insulting language was made use of towards them, by four or five Roman Catholics, on which a riot ensued; stones were throne by each party; the Roman Catholics retreated, and when, on their retreat, either two or three pistol-shots were fired on them by the Orangemen, one of which took effect, and broke the left arm, close to the elbow, of a man named Peter Sally, a Roman Catholic." In another part of his evidence he said, "I observed Colonel Verner leading, and in front of the procession, decorated with orange and purple, and I have (he honour to enclose herewith, for the Lord-lieutenant's information the affidavits of one Serjeant and two privates of the constabulary under my command, who not only observed Colonel Verner in the manner I reported, but saw him distinctly take off his hat, and cheer the procession he was leading." Further on he said, "Colonel Verner not only headed the procession through the streets of Dungannon, decorated with an orange scarf, but he was 'pledged' to do so, four or five days previous to the procession of the 27th of April taking place, stating at the same time that he was regardless of the consequences." This was only one of a number of similar instances, He would state

789
another: "About the 8th of July (said Mr. Duff) I received information that the Orangemen would assemble near Dungannon, at Mr. Lowry's, of Rockdale, instead of Dungannon their usual place of meeting, and I wrote to Sir William Gosset, apprising him of the circumstance, and begging to know whether I was to proceed there, or send any force; and I received his orders to proceed there, and make a full report of what took place. I did proceed there, and this is my report, dated Dungannon, 13th of July, 1832:—'Sir, I have the honour to report, for the information of his Excellency the Lord Lieutenant, that the Orangemen of this district yesterday assembled in the demesne of Mr. Lowry, of Rockdale, Magistrate, in this county, and from thence inarched in procession to Mr. Grier's, of Desnerith. From the ground the procession occupied, there could not have been less, at the lowest calculation, than from 8,000 to 9,000 Orangemen decorated with scarfs, emblems, &c. &c., having sixty stand of colours, and forty bands playing party tunes; and 230 of them arrived with muskets, independent of concealed arms. After remaining for some short time at Mr. Grier's, they marched off in the most peaceable manner, by divisions, to the respective Lodges, and up to this hour all has been perfectly tranquil in respect of outrage having reached me. The procession was headed by several gentlemen of respectability and property in this part of the country. The only persons I observed as holding commissions under the Government were the following: Hon. A. G. Stuart, Deputy-lieutenant, as also a Magistrate for this county, and captain of the Killyman corps of yeomanry, horse decorated with orange and purple, but none on his person; Mr. Grier, a Magistrate for this county, as also for Armagh—the only emblem on this gentleman was that of his office of Grand Master of the county, namely, a medal suspended from an orange riband round his neck; third, Mr. Lowry, jun., captain of the Cameroy corps of yeomanry, decorated with an orange and purple scarf; fourth, Mr. Lloyd, second captain of the Killyman corps of yeomanry. The persons above named are all I observed in the procession, though I have received positive information that the Earl of Castle Stuart headed a procession in his neighbourhood. His second son, the hon. Charles Stuart, was decorated, and marched in the pro-
790
cession from Mr. Lowry's to Mr. Grier's; several clergymen of the Established Church also attended." These were only a few of the very many instances of this description of conduct on the part of public functionaries in Ireland which he could submit to the House. Now, he wished to know how was it possible for the noble Lord opposite (Stanley), when the lists of the Magistrates of the different counties in Ireland were submitted to him for revision, to allow those to remain who had so far forgotten their duties when in office as to connect themselves with these institutions? During his administration of the affairs of Ireland names of individuals on the list of Magistrates, who were also connected with the Orange Institution, must have frequently come under his attention. How could he have reconciled it with his sense of duty to permit these individuals to remain on the list of Magistrates? He would put it to the rankest Orangeman in that House, or out of it either, whether it was not impossible that, under such a system as that to which he had referred, peace could possibly exist in Ireland? Culpable, however, as were the Orangemen, they were not one-tenth as much to blame as the Government of the period in which such things had occurred. The Administration of that time, he repeated, was in the highest degree culpable; nor could he imagine how Lord Grey's Government had been so far imposed upon. Let the House look, for example, to the effect of their appointment of Lord Caledon as Lieutenant of the county Tyrone. What was his first act, as if in requital of the kindness of Lord Grey's Government? Why, to call and preside over a meeting of Orangemen at Dungannon, to address his Majesty, thanking him for dismissing the Whig Government. For his part, he had only to observe that the Government deserved it, for having made the appointment at all. They thought probably that they would have been enabled to conciliate the Orangemen. Conciliate an Orangeman, indeed! No; they might as well have thought they would have been able to conciliate the most intractable creature in existence; and it was to him utterly incomprehensible how Lord Grey's Government could have played, as they did, into the hands of the Orange party in Ireland. But when the heads of the Orange party acted in that manner, what was to be expected from the subalterns? When the

791
Lieutenant of the county and its body of Magistracy were found thus banded together in the cause of faction, was it to be supposed that the mass of those who constituted Juries and the police and constabulary of the county would be better disposed towards the cause of good government and impartial justice. With respect to the Juries, he should merely remark that for thirty years not a Roman Catholic had been appointed on the Grand Jury of Fermanagh. How could it be expected that justice would be administered under such a system. The evidence of Lord Gosford was conclusive upon the subject of Orange Juries. In reply to a question put to him by the Committee, he said he had known one or two Juries which were not Orange. Some other witnesses, too, had deposed that they knew "of one or two cases in which the Juries (in the county of Fermanagh, as we understood the hon. Member) were not Orange." When such was the manner of administering justice, was it to be wondered at that the people of Ireland should hold the law in contempt and look for justice at their own hands. When he (Mr. Hume) had heard a noble Lord opposite (Lord Stanley) detail to the House a series of outrages which had taken place in Ireland, and to which he referred for a justification of the Coercion Bill, he was at a loss to account for the cause of their existence, of which he was, in matter of fact, exceedingly sceptical. But when he came to read, or rather to hear the evidence given before the Orange Institution Committee, he was no longer at a loss to account for the insubordination, the existence of which had been referred to by the noble Lord. He could easily imagine how men might be driven by such a state of things as was described to crime, either as a measure of self-defence or of wild revenge. Here were the very sources of justice polluted, even before the people's eyes; Lords-lieutenant, Magistrates, Juries, constables, and police, the entire legislative and executive of what was called Irish justice, bound together in the bonds of this peace-destroying association. Ay, and it was too much to be feared that the very Judges of the land were strongly biassed by the influence, at least, in favour of the objects of this association. He did not mean to say that such was positively the fact, but most certainly such an opinion generally existed amongst the people of Ireland, and was calculated to destroy
792
all confidence in the administration of justice. Having so far trespassed on the House in tracing the effect of this institution, he declared his conviction that his Majesty's Government, if they acted consistently with their professed determination, to do equal justice to all parties in Ireland, should dismiss from all civil, as well as military offices, those who were connected with the Orange institution. It was deemed essential, in order to the maintenance of military discipline, to issue an order from the Horse Guards forbidding any soldiers to belong to the institution. Now he wanted to know why should not the same principle be applied to civil officers. If his Majesty's Government refused to do so, he (Mr. Hume) for one could not believe that they were discharging their duty to the people of Ireland or the empire at large. They would, in fact, stand condemned in his opinion. He was gratified, however, to be able to say that the principle for which he contended was at present being acted upon in Ireland. If there was anything for which Lord Mulgrave deserved more particular credit in his government of Ireland, it was for his determined exclusion of all Orangemen from civil employments. In this Lord Mulgrave was doing his duty to the Government who appointed him, and to the people over whom he ruled. He (Mr. Hume) trusted that Lord Mulgrave would persevere in this mode of administering the affairs of Ireland, and that during his government no Orangeman would find his way into a situation or appointment of any description in Ireland. If he (Mr. Hume) were right in his estimate of Lord Mulgrave's conduct, what must be the opinion of the House in reference to his predecessors? How infamous must have been their conduct who unblushingly made Orangeism the very passport to power? He should not detain the House by going through any portion of the immense mass of evidence which had been accumulated to show the state of the constabulary and police in Ireland. No one, he supposed, would be found hardy enough to deny that, instead of preserving the peace, their principal occupation was in directly violating it. He believed most sincerely that very much of the outrages existing in Ireland originated in the conduct of those bodies. He, therefore, trusted that his Majesty's Government would take means to turn out of the police and constabulary

793
force in Ireland, every individual connected with the Orange Institution. There was then that large armed body the yeomanry, many of whom were frequently transferred from the dock to the ranks of their different corps. [Oh!] Hon. Members cried Oh! but how many a time had it been proved that Roman Catholics had been shot by members of the yeomanry, and yet no punishment had been inflicted for the crime? It was fully proved before the Committee that this body was in the constant habit of attending Orange processions, and in one case it was sworn that no less than one thousand had, with arms in their hands, attended one meeting. With these facts before his eyes, could any hon. Member in that House wonder why disturbances were in the constant habit of taking place in Ireland. To show the feeling that pervaded this society, he should only mention, that upon the recent dismissal of some Orangemen, by Lord Mulgrave, at Roscrea, the brotherhood had met in very considerable numbers, and sent several addresses to the dismissed Orangemen. In fact, this spirit of opposition to his Majesty's Government, and to the impartial administration of justice, seemed to pervade all classes into which Orangeism had insinuated itself; nor could he (Mr. Hume) imagine how the country was to get rid of the enormous burden of supporting such an army as was stationed in Ireland, unless the House concurred with him in the necessity of adopting some measure for suppressing the Orange Institution, and of thus removing the principal cause of the disturbances which existed in that country. Indeed, it was at present a complete garrison; and yet what was their force of 40,000 or 50,000 soldiers, in opposition to seven millions, united by the strong bond of one common oppression? If the people were misgoverned they would combine in opposition to the law, and before that combination the army would be powerless, On the other hand, if well governed they would unite in support of the law, and the army would be useless. If then it were only from the interested motive of reducing their expenditure by reducing the army in Ireland, he called upon the House to agree with him in declaring the necessity of putting an end to the Orange Institution. To show the effect of this institution on the peace of the country, and what was the result of the connection, of certain individuals with
794
it, he should refer to the evidence of Mr. Cosmo Innes, who was examined before the Committee on Orange Lodges. In that evidence he found the following questions and answers:—"As the result of your official examination—what is the state of feeling and of peace in those towns in which Orange Lodges have been established?" "Whoever Orange Lodges have been established and active, they have been the occasion of continual breaches of the peace, either by their processions, which have been opposed, or by the bad feeling they have produced amongst individuals." "Have you discovered any other Lodges of Ribbonmen or any other secret society existing in that part of the country?" "I cannot say that I have discovered them; I cannot speak to their constitution. They were secret—but I am aware of their existence." He (Mr. Hume) did not mean to deny their existence; but he contended they were produced by a re-action. Further in the evidence he found the following:—"Does that information lead you to conclude whether the Ribbonmen were associated for their own defence, or as assailants against Orangemen?" All my authority is a sort of police information. I know nothing of this matter, except as it tends to disturb the public peace, and the breaches of the peace in Scotland on these matters have originated, certainly, in processions of Orange Lodges. I am not aware of any demonstration of Ribbonmen which has called for any opposition." "Does the private information which you have received lead you to believe that this riot and these proceedings on the part of the Catholics, has been a re-action against the associations of the Orangemen?" "Certainly." "So that the Orange organisation has produced, or if not produced, greatly augmented, the Ribbon organisation?" "I think it is highly probable, though I cannot speak with certainty of that fact, that there would be no Ribbon organisation in Scotland but for the Orange organisation." So that, not content with keeping Ireland in turmoil, the members of this institution were spreading the confusion of their association through Scotland. In other parts of his evidence Mr. Innes said, that "there were four Orange Lodges in Maybole,"—that "there was at present existing a considerable animosity, in all the towns and places where there are any

795
Orange Lodges, between the Catholics and Orangemen." One Lodge, it appeared, in Scotland was called the Gordon Lodge. He was asked by a Member of the Committee, "Are the Committee to understand that it is your opinion, after the inquiry you have made officially, that the existence of those Orange Lodges has tended, generally, to excite breaches of the peace, and re-action on the part of the Catholics V To that question he replied, "To a very great degree." Again, he was asked, "Did you learn that any deputation had come from London to assist in the formation of those Lodges?" He replied, "In examining, with regard to processions, I found that the last procession, previous to this year, was in consequence of a visit from Colonel Fairman, who had travelled over the country as the emissary from the Orange Lodge of England, as I understood, and who was received, wherever he went, or in many places, by the Orangemen in procession." "Was any reference made by these people to the Duke of Cumberland?" "I have here a copy, a fac simile, of a warrant constituting a Lodge, signed by the Duke of Cumberland, and they all looked to the Duke of Cumberland as their head, and with the greatest respect." "They regard the Duke, in fact, as their political head?" "Yes; certainly." "Was any reference made by them to him in conversation?" "Yes; frequently." "What do they say of him?" "They only talk of him as the head of their society and as their Grand Master; they certainly seem to dwell upon his being the head as proving the legality and loyalty of their proceedings." It was very obvious that the Duke of Cumberland, while he was considered as Grand Master of the Orange Lodge, was proposed by the members of the institution to be considered as the successor to the Crown. In another part of his evidence Mr. Innes gave it as his opinion that the Orange and Ribbon institutions were most injurious to the peace of the country, and both ought unquestionably to be put an end to. The effect, he said, of Colonel Fairman's visit to Scotland was to increase very much the numbers of the institution, which was neither so widely extended, nor so active in its operations before he appeared there. If there were no other grounds for calling on the House promptly and effectively to interfere, sufficient ground, he thought, was exhibited in the
796
extracts he had just read. The Duke of Cumberland, he thought, wag a dangerous man, whose connection with such a society required to be carefully and closely watched. It had been mentioned by Mr. Innes, in the course of his evidence, that Colonel Fairman had made a tour of Scotland. And in connection with that evidence he held in his hand a most curious document—a copy of an itinerant warrant—authorising the admission of members upon taking certain oaths. He begged the particular attention of the House to the fact, that this warrant was issued by the Duke of Cumberland, in 1834, in accordance with the rules of 1826. Now if these rules, as it was said and sworn before the Committee, were cancelled, and no longer acted upon—why, he would ask, was this warrant issued in accordance with them. Yet, so it was—this special warrant to admit and initiate persons into the Orange Institution, concluded thus:—"Given under my hand and seal at St. James's, this 13th day of August, 1832. Ernest, Grand Master." That itinerant warrant commenced—"Whereas the Orange Association was founded in grateful remembrance of one of the most glorious achievements recorded on our historical annals, that is to say, our deliverance from Popery, and arbitrary power." Then, after a recital of considerable length, it proceeded—"Be it known, therefore, that from a knowledge of his experience, and a confidence in his integrity, our trusty, well, beloved, and right worshipful brother, Lieutenant-Colonel Fairman, master of the Metropolitan warrant, member of the Grand Committee, Deputy Grand Master of London, Acting Deputy Grand Treasurer, and Deputy Grand Secretary of the Institution, is hereby nominated, constituted delegated, and appointed to undertake the said visitation or tour of inspection, &c.;" and it further proceeds, "For these objects and general purposes, by virtue of the authority vested in me as Grand Master of the Empire, by the code of laws and ordinances of the 30th of March, 1826, &c." Still further was the influence of the institution extended by the "permission" granted by the Grand Master "under his hand and seal, given at St. James's" to form Lodges in the Ionian islands and Malta. The hon. Member then referred to the letter of the late Mr. Haywood, to show the object with which

797
the "mission" of Colonel Fairman was undertaken. In corroboration of Mr. Hay wood's statement, he begged to read the following letter from Colonel Fairman, addressed to "John Sydney Taylor, Esq. Morning Herald office"—
"Dear Sir—From those who may be supposed to have opportunities of knowing 'the secrets of the Castle,' the King is stated to be by no manner in so alarming a state as many folks would have it imagined. His Majesty is likewise said to dictate the bulletins of his own state of health. Some whisperings have also gone abroad, that in the event of a demise of the Crown, a Regency would probably be established, for reasons which occasioned the removal of the next in succession from the office of High Admiral. That a maritime government might not prove consonant to the views of a military chieftain of the most unbounded ambition, may admit of easy belief; and as the second heir presumptive is not alone a female but a minor, in addition to the argument which might be applied to the present, that, in the ordinary course of nature, it was not to be expected that his reign could be of long duration, in these disjointed times, it is by no means unlikely a vicarious form of Government they be attempted. The effort would be a bold one, but, after the measures we have seen, what new violations should Surprise us? Besides, the popular plea of economy and expedience might be urged as the pretext, while aggrandisement and usurpation might be the latent sole motive. It would only be necessary to make out a plausible case, which, from the facts on record, there could be no difficulty in doing, to the satisfaction of a pliable and obsequious set of Ministers, as also to the success of such an experiment.—Most truly yours,
"Wednesday, April 6, 1830. "W. B. F.
"I have scribbled this at Peel's, and if you wish it, will write a paragraph on the subject. From all that I hear, there can be little doubt the King will soon resume his rides in the Great Park, now that the drawing-room is gone by.
"(Private.)"
The above letter was returned, as there is a post-mark dated seven at night, April 6, 1830, and addressed thus:—"To Colonel Fairman, British Coffee-house, Cockspur-street." Such language many Members of that House might suppose could only originate with a maniac, but he held the original of that letter in his hand. Could the House, doubt then, the object for which the mission of Colonel Fairman was undertaken. It should be borne in mind, too, that it was in the year 1829 that his Royal Highness the Duke of Cumberland first attended the Grand Lodge. He would read to the House some few
798
letters to show the nature and the extent of the peculiar connexion existing between certain noblemen and the Orange Institution. The first letter he should read was dated the 27th of April, and was from Lord Kenyon to Colonel Fairman. It was as follows:—
"Portman-square, April 27.
"Dear Sir—I heartily wish I could hope to be of any use in applying at Chelsea in behalf of the writer of the inclosed. I think we had better communicate it to his Royal Highness, as he is the only person, except yourself, who can judiciously interfere in military matters connected with the Orange Institutions. I hope your attack is going off, and that we shall have a thoroughly amicable meeting next Friday. Brother Mair seems very frank and well-meaning. If you could get Mr. Knipe, who is a favorite, I think, with his Royal Highness, to attend, it would be well.
"Ever, my dear Sir, faithfully yours,
"KENYON."
The next letter he should read was from the same noble Lord to the same gentleman:—
"Portman-square, June 13, 1833.
"My dear Sir—I am grieved that our valued brother Cumberland should suppose for one moment he could have given me the slightest offence. It may happen sometimes to me, as applied by Shakspeare to Brutus—
'Poor Brutus with himself at war,
Forgets to show his love to other men.'
But I never can forget to feel it for so zealous a friend to every cause most dear to me, as our brother Cumberland has always proved himself to be. The statement you made to me before, and respecting which I have now before me particulars from Portsmouth, are out of my sphere, and should be referred, toties quoties, to his Royal Highness, as military matters of great delicacy. At the same time, private intimations, I submit, should be made to the military correspondents, letting them know how highly we esteem them as brethren. I hope the circular will soon be out.
"Your faithful friend and brother,
"KENYON."
"To Colonel Fairman."
Here were two letters, in the first of which it was said, "as his Royal Highness, except yourself, is the only person who can interfere in military matters connected with the institution"—and in the second, "private intimations, I submit, should be made to the military correspondents—letting them know"—he begged the attention of the House to this—"letting them know how highly we esteem them as brothers. And this was written by one who had declared before a Committee that he knew not, "until very lately,

799
of the existence of Orange Lodges in the army," The next letter he should read referred to the connection of his Royal Highness with military districts:—
"Portman-square, July 10, 1833.
"My dear Sir.—I send you some anti-Roman Catholic books, which you may distribute among the following Peers—Manyers, Stradbroke, Liverpool, Harrowby, Northampton, Carnarvon, the Bishops of Llandaff, Lincoln (Warren's Hotel), &c. &c. I can say nothing as to Mr. Staveley's publication, but if done it should be forthwith, and I would take a few copies. You know much better how to manage our brethren than I do, and they must be kept together as well as they can be. If you hear anything further from the military districts, let his Royal Highness know all particulars fit to be communicated. The times I really trust are improving quietly and gradually. Let us act firmly and maintain all that is sacred, and provoke no one more than can be avoided.
"Believe me, my dear Sir, yours faithfully,
"KENYON."
Next as to the appointment or election of the Grand Committee, he would read an extract from a letter to show that in this case the rule of the Grand Master was supreme:—
"Portman-square, May 30, 1833.
"My dear Sir—With respect to the composition of the Grand Committee the pleasure of his Royal Highness the Grand Master is the only rule by which its formation can properly be regulated. Its being so framed as to produce harmony in the institution will no doubt be the principle by which his Royal Highness will be guided, and I am confident that, feeling as he must do, the essential importance (especially with reference to your undertaking a new tour to consummate the zeal and harmony of which you have laid the foundation in North Britain and the northern and trading districts of England), that you and the Grand Committee should be in entire harmony and mutual confidence; that, therefore, neither brother South nor brother Morris should continue a member of it. The will of the Grand Master is conclusive, and no names ought to be submitted to his Royal Highness in Grand lodge but such as will be satisfactory to him. The suggestion at the meeting of the grand Lodge is not for the purpose of election otherwise than in accordance with the pleasure of the head of the institution, whose authority is justly declared to be supreme. You may communicate this to the Grand Committee, for we must not let our high and zealous friends who meet at the Grand Lodge be disgusted any more by discussions at those meetings. Should any such be apprehended, his Royal Highness should be informed, that he may, previous to the anniversary of June, interdict the at-
800
tendance of any brethren who would so forget themselves.
"Believe me, my dear Sir,
"Your faithful brother and friend.
"KENTON.
"To Colonel Fairman, &c. &c."
He should now read another letter from the same nobleman to the same party, upon which he should not trouble the House with any commentary:—
"Eastwell Park, August 13th, 1833.
"My Dear Sir—Be so good as to send the Earl of Winchilsea, in a day or two (but not overweight, as yours of this morning is to me) the circular of June 4th, and any other circular which will contain good names and matter in it. You can say, you did it by my desire, and in hopes that he, as one of the staunchest of Protestants, would join us. I am glad to hear that several persons of judgment think we might have a Government with which the House of Commons would act. If so, it is a sad pity the Hero of Waterloo and others would not act as to have obtained such a Ministry during the existing Session. When Parliament is prorogued, it is well known nothing can be done, unless some death of importance occurs. I hope to be in town on Thursday morning, for two nights.
"Ever your faithful friend and brother,
"KENYON."
[The reading of this letter was followed by laughter and cries of "Earl Spencer."]
This letter let him into a secret. No doubt it alluded to the anticipated death of that venerable Peer, Earl Spencer, and this language was written by a party in intimate connection with the Duke of Cumberland.
An Hon. Member: The death of Lord Spencer occurred the following year.
Mr. Humeobserved that the expression in the letter was, "that as Parliament was prorogued, nothing can be done unless a death of importance occurs." This, at any rate alluded to some important death, which might be expected, and in his opinion, it was the death of Earl Spencer, which was anticipated. There were two or three letters published in the evidence on the table, which he considered of considerable importance. Two of these were directed to the Marquess of Londonderry, and were copies of letters purporting to be sent to that nobleman. These copies were found in a book, which was laid before the Committee. Some doubt, however, might arise as to whether they had been received or written to his Lordship, although they were entered on the book. There certainly appeared in the Report to be no answers to them; but he could only say, that he had the answer of the noble Lord to those letters

801
in his possession. The answer was dated Wynyard Park, and was directed to Lieutenant-Colonel Fairman It commenced,
"SIR—I was honoured with your two communications of the 29th and 30th."
The object of the letters of Colonel Fairman was evidently to prepare the way to resort to physical force. The first of them was dated the 29th July, 1832. After apologising for troubling the noble Marquess with writing; to him on the subject of the affairs of the Orange Institution, and urging the importance of extending it in the north of England, he proceeds:
"With Mr. Wright of Sunderland, who was recently in London, I had some conversation on the great advantages that might result from an extension of such a society at this conjuncture. Conceiving its principles to be strictly in unison with those entertained by your Lordship, in the course of our communications your name was introduced, when that Gentleman said if the matter were taken up with spirit by you, the whole district would follow the example, and cheerfully join such an association. To urge, it might be political for your Lordship to do so, in a personal sense, would be to offer you a very ill compliment; but to contemplate it, as shall presently be made to appear, in a patriotic view, the security of that part of the kingdom might be consolidated by such means. The pitmen would perhaps feel inclined to establish lodges among themselves, which might operate as an additional stimulus to their loyalty, and would likewise prove a partial check against their entering into cabals hereafter, no less to the preservation of private property than to that of the public peace. Knowing that your Lordship has firmness to espouse the cause you approve, on this occasion I address you with the less reserve. When the altar and the throne are alike assailed—when infidelity and treason are boldly avowed—when a Republic and a Lord Protector are confidently spoken of—when, indeed, we have a Popish Cabinet, and a democratical Ministry, who, having given birth to a monster they can no longer control, are now alarmed at their own popularity, and are the abject slaves of a ferocious, sanguinary, and subversive Press, little short of a miracle can work the salvation of our once happy country! It behoves us, nevertheless, to exercise our energies, and, by measures at once prompt and vigorous, to stem the torrent that threatens to overwhelm us. By a rapid augmentation of our physical force, we might be able to assume a boldness of attitude which should command the respect of our Jacobinical rulers. What the Catholics and the Unionists have achieved by agitation and clamour in a factions cause, we might then be enabled to effect in a righteous one. If we prove not too strong for such a Government as the present is such a Government will
802
soon prove too strong for us; some arbitrary step would be taken in this case for the suspension of our meetings. Hence the necessity of oar laying aside that non-resistance, that passive obedience, which has hitherto been, religiously enforced to our own discomfiture. The brave Orangemen of Ireland rescued their country from rebellion, and their gallant brethren in England would as heroically redeem their own from such perils. On the one hand we have had minor difficulties to contend with, and less danger to surmount, though on the other hand we have not had the same encouragement, and an equal share of support from the higher orders. We have Lodges at Newcastle, Shields, Darlington, and round about, but they are merely trunks without heads. Unless men of staunch influence and consideration would immediately step forward as County Grand Masters (I speak advisedly), it is of no manner of use for the classes in humble life to assemble for such purposes. The field is now open to your Lordship—the post of honour is exclusively your own. If, then, your Lordship would but profit of it, you would deserve well of this country, while at such a crisis you would confer fresh confidence on your own. In a long conversation I had yesterday with Lord Longford, he intimated that the brethren of Ireland were determined to resist all attempts the Liberals might make to put them down; at the same time reproaching us for our tameness in not affording an aid commensurate with the evils by which we were menaced. In proportion to an increase in the numbers of our institution, the defeat of the seditious Whigs will be rendered more certain. Should your Lordship feel disposed to entertain views similar to my own, the Deputy Grand Master of England is now in your neighbourhood to give them efficiency."
Two or three days afterwards he more boldly avowed himself in a letter he wrote:—
"Cannon-row, Westminster, 30th July, 1832.
"MY LORD MARQUESS,—In my letter of Saturday, I omitted to mention that we have the military with us as far as they are at liberty to avow their principles and sentiments; but since the lamented death of the Duke of York, every impediment has been thrown in the way of their holding a Lodge. The same observation that was applied to the colliers might be attached to the soldiery. As Orangemen, there would be an additional security for their allegiance, and unalterable fidelity in times like the present, when revolutionary writers are striving to stir them up to open sedition, and mutiny. In trespassing thus upon the attention of your Lordship, I am not so presumptuous as to suppose that any thing urged by me could influence your conduct; but, understanding the Duke of Cumberland has communicated with your Lordship on this subject, I felt it my duty to put you in possession' of certain facts with which you might not be acquainted.

803
"I have the honour to be, any Lord Marquess, your Lordship's very respectful and obedient servant,
"W. B. FAIRMAN."
"To the Marquess of Londonderry."
He would now, in justice to Lord Londonderry, read the answer which he made to these communications, as they showed that he was not prepared to aid Fairman. The answer was dated:—
"Wynyard-park, August 8, 1832.
"SIR,—I am honoured with your two communications of the 29th and 30th ult.
"You do me only justice in believing that I would most willingly embrace every opportunity, and do all in my power to espouse the cause and establish the institutions you allude to in this part of the kingdom; but the present state of liberal Whig feeling in this very Whig county, and the very refractory and insubordinate state of the pitmen, entirely preclude the possibility of successful efforts at this juncture. I have had a full conversation and communication with Lord Kenyon on all this matter, who has been in my house these last two days, and I have no doubt he will convince his Royal Highness, as well as yourself, that the present moment is not the time when the object can be forwarded.
"I will lose no opportunity of embracing any opening that may arise; and
"I have the honour to be, Sir, your very obedient servant,
(Signed) "VANE LONDONDERRY."
(Directed)
"Col. Fairman, Cannon-row, Westminster,
(Post mark, Stockton.) "London."
He thought that it was but justice to say that he was not in possession of this letter until a few hours ago, and he felt bound to add, that whatever might be the views or intentions of the individual to whom he alluded, that the noble Lord was not a party to them.
Lord Castlereaghrose to order. He wished to know if the last expression of the hon. Member was applied to Lord Londonderry or to Colonel Fairman.
Mr. Humesaid, that the last expression in the letter was, "I shall not lose any opportunity of embracing any opening that they arise."
Lord Castlereaghwas quite sure that the hon. Member would, on reflection, feel that the question ought to be pressed. He wished to know whether the hon. Member alluded to his (Lord Castlereagh's) father as the individual having certain intentions.
Mr. Humereplied, certainly not. He alluded to Colonel Fairman, and not to the noble Lord in question. He repeated, he did not know what might be the pro-
804
jects of that individual. He would proceed, step by step, with other documents. The next letter he had was dated the 28th of November, 1832, and was from Lord Kenyon to Colonel Fairman, it was directed from Peel Hall:—
"Peel Hall, 28th Dec.
"MY DEAR COLONEL AND BROTHER,—I am here again with my venerable aunt, eighty-nine years of age, on a Christmas visit, but return to Gredington next Thursday. Anxiously do I wish the Cock of the North may think it right to come to Glasgow. The warm feeling of Lord J. Campbell, who was a little my junior at Christ Church, Oxford, is very gratifying, and promises, please God we may be blessed with better times, much good in the north hereafter. His old relation, John Campbell, Accountant-General, was always proud of him as a Campbell, and I heartily wish he may live and indue time long enjoy the family honours. I will send our Grand Treasurer your circular. His Royal Highness promises being in England a fortnight before Parliament re-assembles, and I hope will come well. To him, privately, you had better address yourself about your military proposition, which to me appears very judicious. I wish such as his Royal Highness would, without neglecting the prime consideration, viz., the fitness of any thing proposed, attend, in addition to that, to what is popular. Our enemies attend to that alone, which is base; we seem to disregard it too much, which is foolish.
"Ever yours, faithfully,
"KENYON."
Here again there was allusion to a military proposition connected with the Orange institution, in a letter of Lord Kenyon's That noble Lord in another letter said, "It is a great pity, too, that the amiable Duke of Buccleuch does not see the immense importance of his sanctioning such a cause as the Orange cause, identified as it is with high Conservative principles." This letter was addressed from Ellesmere, and of the date of October 20, 1833, and was directed to Lieutenant-Colonel Fairman, Gordon Castle. The next noble Lord to whose conduct, with reference to these societies, he had to call the attention of the House, was Lord Wynford. That Nobleman, as was well known to the House, was an ex-Chief Justice, and had, since his retirement, been made an Orangeman, and he held in his hand a letter written concerning that noble Lord, the contents of which he could hardly bring himself to believe till he saw them. It was from Lord Kenyon to Colonel Fairman. It was dated Portman-square, June 1st. It was as follows:—"Lord Wynford has

805
fixed Monday, at half-past twelve, at the House of Lords to be initiated an Orangeman. He has a private room of his own there as Deputy Speaker." He did not think that they had an Orange Lodge within their walls. Bad as Orangeism was, he thought, that at any rate, it would keep at a distance, instead of exhibiting such reckless boldness as to form one of the Houses of the Legislature into a place to hold Orange Lodges. He quoted this, however, in order to elucidate what followed, and the feelings and language that were held by the noble Lord with reference to the Duke of Cumberland, who, be it recollected, alone had the management of the military affairs of the Institution. The letter was dated Chiselhurst, and was directed to Colonel Fairman at Birmingham. It began:—"My dear Sir,—I am much obliged to you;" and, after some unimportant observations, proceeded in the following terms:—"He (the Duke of Cumberland) is one of the best and most ill-used men I know; but the Whigs will never forgive his using the influence which his excellent understanding, and his steady adherence to his principles, gave him with his brother to unseat them when last in office. The Tories have not been sufficiently grateful to him. The country, as it becomes better acquainted with Whig misrule, will learn to appreciate his merits. As you are so obliging in your last letter as to ask my advice as to whether you should pursue the course that you have so ably begun, I can only say that you must exercise your discretion as to the company in which you make such appeals as that which I have seen reported. When you meet only sure Tories, you may well make them feel what they owe to one who is the constant, unflinching, champion of the party, and who, by his steady course, has brought on himself all the obloquy that a base malignant faction can invent." The next letter to which he should direct the attention of the House was from Doncaster, and was dated the 12th of Feb., 1833, and was from Colonel Fairman to Lord Kenyon. He would trouble the House with the following extract from it:—"Lord Wynford, the soundness of whose judgment few persons would be so hardy as to call in question, was kind enough to write me word he had read with much pleasure the report of my proceedings in Birmingham. I believe I mentioned that I bad consulted his Lordship
806
on the propriety of my continuing to introduce the Duke's name in the prominent shape I had previously done, and with the policy of which he seemed to agree. There is one strong point which induces me to cherish a hope that I have worked a change in the sentiments of the press, which is, that the foulest part of it, I fancy, has not attacked me, nor attempted to gainsay my comments in refutation of the calumnies so lavishly put forth, against our illustrious Grand Master. If he would but make a tour into these parts, for which I have prepared the way, he would be idolised." Hon. Gentlemen would perceive in those letters some allusions as to what Colonel Fairman was charged by Haywood with having done at Sheffield, namely—proposing plans as to what he and other Orangemen ought to do in certain cases. Haywood had challenged contradiction as to what he alleged respecting the doings of Fairman in this town. Did not this letter of Lord Wynford in some degree support those charges; for in it he told Fairman that he might speak more openly when he met only sure Tories. Certainly all that was alluded to in the letter was the propriety of making a more prominent use of the name of the Duke of Cumberland. He did not suppose that Fairman would, without great caution, propose to Lord Londonderry, Lord Wynford, and Lord Kenyon, what he would propose to persons in an inferior station; and they had evidence that this person, acting under the itinerant warrant of the Duke of Cumberland, did use language of the most dangerous character. There was another communication from Fairman to Sir James Cockburn, dated the 14th of July, 1831. It commenced, "By a late return it appears our strength in this country exceeds 135,000, and it is fast augmenting as regards numbers; we are infinitely less on this side the water in this respect. We are by no means so assiduous as we might be in attending to the increase of the numbers of the society, and enlarging its influence. My fine fellows who compose the lodges in the capital, none of whom are Reformers, are stanch to the backbone; and should it be necessary for the lives and properties of those great men who risk both to prevent revolutionary changes, I could muster them at my summons." This, he thought, was quite sufficient to satisfy the House;

807
but there were a number of other documents of similar importance, to which he also felt bound shortly to direct the attention of the House. The first paper was the draft of a letter, as he believed, to the Duke of Cumberland. There was no address to it, but from the tenor of it there could be no doubt, he (Mr. Hume) thought, as to its being addressed to the Duke of Cumberland. It was as follows:—
"Should an indisposition which has agitated the whole country for a fortnight, take a favourable turn—should the Almighty, in his mercy, give ear unto the supplications to his heavenly throne, that are offered up daily to prolong the existence of one deservedly dear to the kingdom at large—the divulgement I have expressed a willingness to furnish, would be deprived of no small portion of its value. Even in this case, an event, for the consummation of which in common with all good subjects I obtest the duty, it might be as well your Royal Highness should be put in possession of the rash design in embryo, the better to devise means for its frustration. At any rate, you could not then be taken by surprise, as the nation was last year, but might have an opportunity of rallying your forces, and of organising your plans for the defeat of such machinations as might be hostile to your paramount claims. Hence, should the experiment be made, and its expedience be established, your Royal Highness would be in a situation to contend for the exercise in your own person of that office at which the wild ambition of another may prompt him to aspire." He confessed that he did not exactly understand it, but possibly the public might. At any rate it was in Fairman's handwriting. Here, then, they had his Royal Highness at the head of the Orange Lodges, having in his confidence an individual who was sending inflammatory documents throughout the country, and spreading most dangerous doctrines in all directions, and endeavouring to keep up a constant agitation against the Government. They found, also, that the exposure of the proceedings of this person did not prevent his Royal Highness from continuing him in his confidence. He therefore thought that he was justified in assuming that there was something more in the transaction than he saw. All the papers and documents that had hitherto been produced had been written to or by
808
this person in his official capacity as Secretary to the Orange Institution, and he had positively refused to furnish the House with other papers and communications respecting this subject, which he admitted were in his possession. The House was placed in a very strange situation; but he trusted that they would act with firmness, and put a stop to a state of things that had been fraught with so much mischief. He need hardly read any more extracts from the returns of evidence, because he was sure that all the Members had seen it. He would, however, refer for a moment to the evidence of Mr. Crawford, with respect to the feelings with which the lower class of Orangemen regarded the Duke of Cumberland. That Gentleman stated, that some rioters who were arrested avowed that they were Orangemen, and that they acted under the warrant of the Duke of Cumberland, which was higher than that of the Duke of Northumberland. The evidence of Mr. Crawford also clearly showed the danger which was likely to arise from allowing such men to remain longer in the army. It was found almost impossible to undeceive the lower class of Orangemen, who, when they heard that the King's brother was at the head of their society, and that he was a Field-marshal, believed that they could break the law with impunity. The time was arrived when the House should come to a firm and determined opinion one way or the other. If any man in that House was of opinion that Orange Lodges were beneficial and should be continued, he would, of course, vote against his motion; but all who believed that they had proved dangerous to the peace of society wherever they existed—that they had proved so in Ireland, and also in those places where they had been established in Scotland—would vote with him. Lives had been lost in all parts of the country where they had been established, and in places where peace had previously constantly prevailed. The conduct of the Orangemen had led to the commission of murder at Airdrie, which, before an Orange Lodge was established there, was one of the most quiet places in Scotland, and for this crime he believed one man had suffered the punishment of death and another had been banished for life. It was the countenance given to these societies by the Duke of Cumberland, and the use that was constantly made of his name, that rendered

809
their existence so dangerous. On these grounds he put it to the House whether it would not agree to the resolutions which he held in his hand. Before, however, proposing his resolutions, he would refer to a few more documents. He held in his hand a copy of a letter from Lord Cole to Colonel Fairman, dated—1833, Florence-court. It begins—"Dear Colonel—Some of the signs and passports have been changed." He read this to show the footing Colonel Fairman was on with the heads of the party. Again, there was a letter to Lord Langford. He would, however, read some observations of Captain Fairman on the state of the public press; they were addressed to Lord Kenyon, and were as follow:
"My Lord—In forwarding to your Lordship the inclosure of yesterday, which for itself speaks so distinctly as to leave me but little to add on the same subject, I am persuaded you will not consider me to have been importunate or obtrusive. Should those with whom your Lordship is in the habit of acting, see the necessity, at a crisis of danger like the present, for such an engine, the sooner it shall be set in motion the better. The daily Press has long been monopolised by, and is row in the sole occupation of the enemy. Hence the multitude who seldom take much trouble to reflect, who possess not the faculty of judging for themselves, are led astray by the sophistries so sedulously put forth for their misguidance. That filthy concern, The Times."
It was necessary to inform hon. Gentleman, that be (Mr. Hume) held in his hand three or four propositions to establish newspapers, which were to advocate the principles of the Orange Society, and be in the interest of the Lodge. The hon. Member proceeded to read—
"That filthy concern, The Times, which spares neither age nor sex, public bodies nor private individuals, which, at a less degenerate era, would have been burnt by the common hangman—ought to be forthwith checked in its flagitious course of unparalleled infamy. Such a sacrilegious print is well worthy of its new friends, who are as inexorable in their resentments and political animosities, as the vehicle of their rancour has ever been vindictive and diabolically mischievous in all its aims."
[Loud Laughter.] There appears to have been some peculiarly strong link which bound the active author of these epistles to his illustrious Friend. The hon. Member concluded with observing, that though some of the latter part of his statements
810
had excited laughter, the subject was one of the moat grave importance. There was clear proof of the existence of a Society composed of (as was allowed by themselves) 300,000 men, united together, and so organised as to be in a situation to be called forth in a body on whatever occasion, whether for good or evil, when required to do so by their illustrious Grand Master. How wild and visionary the ideas of this Society were, was evidenced in the speculations put forth by Fairman, of how, in the event of the demise of the Crown, the heir apparent, the Princess Victoria, should be set aside, and in favour of whom? The whole system ought at once to be put an end to; and he trusted his Majesty's Ministers would do that. The hon. Member concluded by moving the following Resolutions:—
1st. That this House, taking into consideration the evidence given before the Select Committee appointed to inquire in so the nature, extent, character, and tendency of Orange Lodges, Associations, or Societies in Ireland; and of Orange Institutions in Great Britain and the Colonies; and seeing that the existence of Orange Societies is highly detrimental to the peace of the community, by exciting discord amongst the several classes of his Majesty's subjects; and seeing that it is highly injurious to the due administration of justice, that any Judge, Sheriff, Magistrate, Juryman, or any other person employed in maintaining the peace of the country, should be bound by any secret obligation to, or be in any combination with, any Association unknown to the Laws, and founded upon principles of religious exclusion, that even if justice were impartially administered under such circumstances, which is in itself impossible, yet any connection with such Societies would create suspicions and jealousies detrimental to the peace and good Government of this country.
2nd. That Orange Societies, and all other political Societies which have secret forms of initiation, and secret signs, and are bound together by any religious ceremony, are especially deserving of the severest reprobation of the House, and should no longer be permitted to continue.
3rd. That a humble Address be presented to his Majesty, that his Majesty will be graciously pleased to direct measures to be taken to remove from the public service, at home and abroad, every Judge, Privy Councillor, Lord-Lieutenant, Deputy Lord-Lieutenant, Custos Rotulorum, Magistrate, Militia Officer, Inspector, Chief Constable of the Constabulary and Peace Preservation Force, every Officer of Police in Ireland, and every functionary employed in the administration of justice, and in maintaining the peace of the

811
country, who shall attend the meeting of any Orange Lodge, of any Ribbon Lodge, or of any other political Club, Institution, or Association, whenever, or wherever assembled, having secret forms of initiation, and being bound together by any religious ceremony, and with secret signs and passwords for recognition of Members of such bodies, and who shall not withdraw from such Societies or Associations on or before the expiration of one month after the publication of any Proclamation which his Majesty may be pleased to direct to be issued hereupon, forbidding their continuing to be Members of such Orange Lodges, Societies, and Associations.
Sir William Molesworth: I rise to second the Motion of my hon. Friend. I would call the attention of the House to the concluding paragraphs of the Report of the Committee on the Orange Institutions in Great Britain. After having cited a portion of the Statutes of the 39th George 3rd, c. 79, the Report says—"It will be for the House to consider whether the present organization of Orange Lodges, in connexion with the Imperial Grand Lodge, comes within the words of the Statute, and, if so, whether the Law Officers of the Crown should not be directed to institute legal proceedings, without delay, against the Grand Officers of ail Orange Lodges." I know that the Orangemen consider this institution not to be an illegal one, because, in 1822, they obtained a favourable opinion from Sergeant Lens, Sir William Home, Mr. Baron Gurney, and Mr. Adolphus. Undoubtedly, according to the case submitted to those learned Gentlemen, the Orange Institution was not an illegal Society in 1822. A. Society, however, may, according to its printed rules, be strictly legal yet, in practice, depart from those rules, and be an illegal Society, and this I believe to have been the case of the Orange Institution in 1822; this, however, is of little consequence. The House must bear in mind this fact, that in 1832 the rules o the Society were materially altered from those which were submitted to Sergean Lens, and were assimilated to those of the Orange Societies in Ireland. Now it is in consequence of those alterations, it is in consequence of the existing rules, that I contend that this Society is an illegal one Though the printed rules of a Society are the worst possible evidence of its legality, yet, as admissions, they are the best evidence of its illegality. I am convinced that if hon. Gentlemen will examine
812
the rules of the Orange Institution, and will likewise look at the words of the Statute, they will not hesitate in affirming, that this Society is, to all intents, an illegal combination and confederacy. There are Statutes against illegal Societies. The 37th George 3rd, c. 123; 39th George 3rd, c. 79; and the 67th George 3rd, c. 19. Now, Sir, in. my opinion, the Orange Institution is an illegal Society, in various manners under these Statutes. I consider that it would be easy to prove, that the Orangemen in reality assent to a test or declaration not required or authorised by law, and if this be the case, the Society would be illegal under the 57th George 3rd, c. 19. I consider that, to all intents and purposes, the religious ceremony, called the ritual, is an oath not required or authorised by law, and if this be the case, the Society would again be illegal under the 57th George 3rd, c. 19. I consider that the Orangemen are bound, in consequence of being Orangemen, to obey the commands of their Grand Master, who is a leader or Commander, not having authority by law for such purpose, and if this be the case, the Society is illegal under the 37th George 3rd, c. 123. I do not intend to insist upon these positions, because I should be unwilling to appear to strain the meaning of a criminal Statute. I shall content myself with referring to that portion of the 39th George 3rd, c. 79, which the Committee has cited, and under which the illegality of this Society seems, to me, most manifest; the 39th George 3rd, c. 79, enacts that, "every Society which shall be composed of different divisions or branches, or of different parts acting in any manner separately or distinct from each other, or of which any part shall have any separate or distinct President, Secretary, Treasurer, Delegate, or other Officer elected or appointed by or for such part, or to act as Officer for such part." shall be deemed an unlawful confederation. 1. The Orange Institution is "composed of different divisions or branches." This fact is acknowledged in the Address of the Orangemen to the Carlton Club; after enumerating the advantages which the Conservatives would derive from becoming Orangemen, they say, in order "that the constituency may be able to know the patriot from the demagogue—the honest man from the pretender—where can they so well apply for information and

813
advice as to the Grand Lodge of the Institution, which being in active correspondence with all its branches, possesses the facility of knowing the principles of every man in the country. In order to prove my position more distinctly, I shall now prove that each Orange Lodge (or as it is sometimes called, warrant), is a separate and distinct branch of the Orange Institution, separate and distinct from every other Lodge. In proof of this position I would refer to the appendix, page 141. There the House will find a list of 265 warrants or Lodges distinguished from each other by different numbers stated to assemble at different places and at different times. In the evidence, I find that at Glasgow a Lodge is called "The Gordon Lodge;" at Barnsley there is a Lodge called "The Royal Cumberland Lodge." In the itinerant warrant granted by the Duke of Cumberland, powers are delegated to Colonel Fairman, "to open new Lodges, and to set them in full operation." These facts are in themselves sufficient to create a strong presumption that each Lodge is a separate and distinct branch of the Orange Society. I shall now explain in what manner, according to the rules of the Institution, each Lodge is distinct from each other Lodge, By rule 7, every member of the Institution, from the rank of Grand Commissioner downwards, must belong to some specified Lodge; and no person is of right entitled to a seat in the Grand Lodge, nor shall be proposed for office, unless the Lodge to which he belongs is mentioned in his certificate. This rule proves that each Lodge has its own members separate and distinct from the members of each other Lodge. Now, with regard to the duties of these members, if the House would refer to rules 21, 41, and 7, it would find that each Lodge has not only its separate and distinct members, but it has likewise, its annual receipts, separate and distinct from those of other Lodges; it has its own funds, separate and distinct from the funds of other Lodges; it has its own officers, its own by-laws, separate and distinct from those of other lodges; and members of other Lodges have no right to interfere either in the distribution of the funds, the election of the officers, or in the making of the by-laws. For instance, if I were an Orangeman, which, thank God, I am not, I must belong to some particular Lodge—say to the Grand Cumberland Lodge, at Barnsley—I should be
814
obliged to attend the meetings of that Lodge at least once a year; I should be obliged to pay an annual subscription; I should have a right of voting with regard to the distribution of the funds, the elections of the officers, and the by-laws of the Lodge. If I were to be in London I might attend the meetings of the Metropolitan Lodge, on the production of my certificate; but I should not be bound to pay a subscription to the Metropolitan Lodge; I should not be obliged to attend the meetings of the Metropolitan Lodge, and if I were to attend the meetings, I should merely be admitted as a visiter; I should have no right to bear a part in any of its proceedings; I should be unable to vote on any subject, either on the distribution of the funds, the election of the officers, or on the by-laws. Now, it is the right of voting in these meetings which, according to Sergeant Lens, is the material part of acting separately and distinctly; and this right is reserved in each Lodge to certain, individuals exclusively. Thus, as an Orangeman, I should be obliged to belong to some branch of it; and, consequently, the Orange Institution is a society composed of separate and distinct divisions and branches, and of parts acting separately and distinctly from each other, and is consequently an unlawful confederacy. But the Lodge is not the only branch of the society; each Lodge is attached to some district, which is likewise a division of the society. This fact is easily proved. In Appendix, page 145, there is a list of district warrants: each district has its Deputy-Grand Master, who is obliged to report to the Grand Lodge, and who, according to rule 3, represents in the Grand Lodge the masters of warrants. Each district has its half-yearly meetings for the arrangement of its affairs. In rule 8, the object of these district meetings is stated. They assemble for the purpose of investigating matters of a local nature, and in order to receive returns from the masters of each Lodge, which are afterwards [transmitted to the Grand Lodge, These meetings are composed of certain specific individuals, who have duties to perform separate and distinct from those of the members of other districts. The right of voting in these meetings is confined exclusively to certain individuals. As the arguments which I employed in order to prove that each Lodge is a separate branch of the society, are the same as

815
those which I should now have to employ in order to prove that the district is a branch of the society, I will not repeat them, but proceed to the last part of the case. I contend that the society is illegal, on account of the manner in which its officers are appointed or elected, according to the words of 39 Geo. III. c. 79, which I have already read, every society, "of which any part shall have any separate or distinct president, secretary, treasurer, delegate, or other officer, elected or appointed by or for such part, or to act as an officer for such part." Now, Sir, there are a host of officers appointed for particular parts of the society, and to act as officers for such parts; and there are other officers elected by parts of the society. App. page 131. In rule 3, I find "the Deputy-grand Masters of counties, cities, and boroughs, sending Members to Parliament, appointed by the Imperial Grand Lodge." "The Deputy-grand chaplains of counties, cities, boroughs, and districts appointed in like manner." "The Deputy-grand Masters of districts appointed by the Imperial Grand Lodge, on the recommendation of the brethren;" and if the House will refer to the annual reports of the Grand Lodge, they will find the names of those who are thus appointed. The officers of each Lodge are elected. In rule 3, it is stated—"The masters of warrants are annually elected by their respective members, subject to the approbation of the Imperial Grand Lodge." The election must take place in the first week in May. The fee on the first election is 5s. on re-election 2s. 6d.—Rule 41. The chaplains of each Lodge are annually elected. The committeemen are likewise elected. I need not trespass upon the patience of the House, by proving that these rules are adhered to—the evidence given before the Committee would easily demonstrate this fact to any person who will take the trouble of reading that evidence. Thus, Sir, to all intents and purposes, the Orange Institution in Great Britain is an illegal combination and confederacy. Sir, I would not, on any account, attempt to extend the meaning of a criminal statute, or endeavour to punish, as offenders, persons who merely have violated the strict letter of the law, without acting with the criminal intentions which the law meant to punish. But, Sir, when I read the preamble of the statute, I find its intention is to
816
prohibit societies whose acts are similar to those of the Orangemen. The Statute says, "Whereas many such societies are composed of different divisions, branches, or parts, which communicate with each other by secretaries, delegates, or otherwise, and by means thereof maintain, an influence over large bodies of men, and delude many ignorant and unwary persons into the commission of acts highly criminal." Is this not a just description of the Orange Institution? My hon. Friend has shown in what manner this society maintains an influence over large bodies of men, in what manner it has deluded at Airdrie and elsewhere many ignorant and unwary men into the commission of acts highly criminal. These Statutes, to which I have so often referred, are not obsolete—men are still suffering punishment under these enactments; they have been put in force against the poor and the ignorant—I now demand that they shall equally be put in force against the rich and the educated. The House must remember the case of the Dorchester labourers—those unfortunate men combined for the purpose of raising their wages, which is not an illegal act. They formed a secret association, which is not necessarily illegal. They were initiated with religious ceremonies, not more profane than those of the Orangemen, Unfortunately, their chief was not a prince of the blood—unfortunately, in their ignorance, they were not contented with mere ceremonies; in addition, they uttered certain words, which in a court of justice were considered to be an oath, and for their ignorance they were transported. The chiefs of the Orangemen are noble, rich, and well educated men. Their leader is the first male subject in the realm, not, however, thank God, as the hon. Member for Drogheda proposed to term him, the nearest to the throne. [Mr. Randal Plunkett rose to order. He called on the hon. Baronet to explain the assertion he had thus made.] The hon. Member most certainly used the term in question, and I will tell him and the House where. In the Report, page 114, there is a document containing these words: "The Orange Institution is the only society in Great Britain which already includes individuals of every rank and grade, from the nearest to the throne to the poorest peasant," &c. This document is indorsed, "Materials from the hon. Randal Plunkett for an address to the Carlton Club," I hope the

817
hon. Member's memory is refreshed. Well, these men have combined to preserve abuses, they have bound themselves together by religious ceremonies as solemn as any oath. For, according to the ritual, when the candidate is initiated he must have the Sacred Scriptures in his hands, with the book of the rules and regulations placed thereon; he is commanded to study the former and obey the latter; he is received as a member of the society under the assurance of his sponsors that he will carry equally in his heart the laws of the institution and those of the Deity; kneeling, he is decorated with the Orange scarf, and he is told in the words of Scripture, "This shall be for a token upon thine hand, and for a frontlet between thine eyes; for by strength of hand the Lord brought us forth out of Egypt. Thou shall, therefore, keep his ordinance, in his season, from year to year."—Exodus, xiii. 16–18. These secret signs and passwords are made known to him; and in conclusion the chaplain, in joy at the coming of the new associate, with impious mockery saith, "Glory be to God in the highest; on earth peace, good-will towards men."—St. Luke, ii. 14. Thus the holiest words of Scripture are profaned in order to enforce and sanctify obedience to the commands, whatever they mas be, of his Royal Highness Prince Ernest Augustus Duke of Cumberland. For his powers are illimitable, discretionary, and "absolute." To him the "honour and welfare of this society are implicitly confided." What that honour must be, in what that welfare must consist, all men who have read these Reports, and heard the speech of the hon. Member, must now be full and well aware. Thus these most religious men have not hesitated to desecrate the religion of peace and good-will towards men, by employing it as a means of evading the law; nor have they scrupled to use the sacred ceremonies of their creed for the vile purposes of party feud. They have enrolled bishops and other cassocked priests, whom they have commanded to attend their meetings, dressed and decorated with the insignia of their holy orders; thus to give the semblance of a religious sanction to these their unholy mummeries and impious mockeries. The object of these ceremonies evidently is to impress a conviction upon the initiated that they are bound with all the force and solemnity of an oath, The Orangeman,
818
when initiated, is surrounded by all the pomps of religion, the name of the deity is invoked, he is commanded to be obedient to the laws of the institution, and to keep secret their signs and pass-words; he kneels and vows, and by every conceivable sign acknowledges, his assent to these commands. Yet, say the Orangemen, as they never in so many words promise to obey, as they never say that they will keep secret the signs and passwords—they affirm that their tests are not tests—their oaths are not oaths—and their engagements are not engagements. Such is the miserable casuistry by which these men, who so boast their respect for the law, attempt to evade the law. In some respects they may have succeeded in evading that portion of the law under which the Dorchester labourers were punished; but in other respects, as I have shown, they have utterly failed. The question now is, whether the poor alone are to be punished for their illegal societies, whilst the rich are to be permitted unlawfully to combine for evil, and traitorously to organise oppression. The means of crushing this Institution in Great Britain are easy and simple; I am perfectly convinced that evidence could be produced in a court of justice, to prove everyone of my assertions if the law officers of the Crown will employ the powers vested in them by these Statutes. They can, if they think proper, stay criminal proceedings against any person who hag offended against these Statutes; let them promise thus to protect the witnesses, and I am convinced many would be found amongst the members of this Institution, who, now aware of its noxious effects, would willingly atone to their country by giving such evidence as would infallibly convict the chiefs of this Institution of a misdemeanour for which they may be transported. Offences under two of these Statutes are misdemeanours. Peers, therefore, would not be tried by the House of Lords, but by a common Jury. Let, therefore, the law officers of the Crown present to the Grand Jury of Middlesex bills of Indictment against the Imperial Grand Master the Duke of Cumberland—against the Grand Master of England, Lord Kenyon—against the Grand Secretary, Lord Chandos; and to these worthies let them not forget to add the right rev. Father in God Thomas Lord Bishop of Salisbury. Thus, Sir, these Statutes,

819
which were the creations of the sworn enemies of the people, may now, as it were, by a retribution of Divine Providence, become the means of crushing this institution—of destroying this imperium in imperio, and of laying prostrate its chief. At his fate none but his Followers will mourn. A few years residence on the shores of the Southern Ocean would teach him and other titled criminals that the laws of their country are not to be violated with impunity, and that equal justice is now to be administered to the high and to the low. Thus this institution may be crushed in Great Britain. I am not acquainted with the Irish Statutes, and consequently cannot affirm whether the Orange societies in that country are illegal or not; but undoubtedly the House will be gratified in learning that the whole of the Grand Lodge of Ireland, that is, all the chiefs of a society, might easily be transported; for all members of the Grand Lodge of Ireland are member so the grand lodge of England; and the words of the Statute are, "Every person who, after the passing of this Act, shall, directly or indirectly, maintain correspondence or intercourse with any such society, &c, "or who shall by contribution of money or otherwise, aid abet, or support such society, or any members or officers thereof, as such shall be deemed guilty of an unlawful combination or confederacy." Thus it is evident that any person who has attended a meeting of the Grand Lodge of England is liable to be transported. Now I find recorded as present at various meetings of the Grand Lodge, the following members of the Grand Lodge of Ireland:—Lord Roden, Lord Thomond, Lord Langford, Lord Cole, M. P., the hon. Randal Plunket, M. P. colonel Verner, M. P., colonel Perceval, M. P., Henry Mannock, esq., M. P., Anthony Lefroy, esq., M. P. It would be sufficient to put the laws in force against these gentlemen to destroy the Orange Institution in Ireland. Thus, Sir, it seems to me easy in various manners to put down these societies. At least, let the Government adopt the advice of my hon. Friend. Let them strike off the Bench every Magistrate who is an Orangeman; let them dismiss from their employment every functionary who belongs to those societies; let them oblige the Horse-Guards rigidly to enforce its orders; in short, Set them consider the muster-roll of that society as the list of their bitterest
820
foes; as the catalogue of those implacable enemies of the people's rights, to whom it would be madness for their own sake—to whom it would be disgraceful for the people's sake—to confide any public trust. Thus proscribed, the society would soon perish; and if the Administration have either courage or energy they will not hesitate long ere they strike the blow. It will be miserable folly to attempt to conciliate the Orangemen. If the Ministers do not crush them, they will crush the Ministers—the struggle is a mortal one. He who spares his foe inflicts a wound upon himself—he who refrains from destroying will be destroyed. The Orangemen are now in the power of the Ministers, let them not hesitate one moment, but seal the doom of these noxious societies, and crush the chiefs.
Lord John Russellrose and said: Sir, I think it my duty to address the House as early as possible after the two hon. Members who have moved and seconded these resolutions, in order to put the House in possession of the course of which I gave notice on a former debate, that I should think it my duty to propose to the House to follow on this occasion. In proposing that course, I certainly feel that there never was a question upon which it was of more importance to come to a right decision, and that in stating my views upon this subject, I must also be considered as stating the general views of his Majesty's other Ministers upon a question which at different times has occupied their most anxious and serious consideration. Sir, I have to say on the one hand, that we have considered it with a view—with an opinion, that the society which has been the subject of debate this evening is mischievous to the country, and that it is our duty to endeavour to put an end to it. On the other hand, I must say that I approach the subject with no such feeling as I understood the hon. Member for Cornwall to express. I do not propose the suppression of the Orange society, because, as the hon. Baronet stated, those noblemen and gentlemen who are the head of that body are the bitter enemies of the present Ministry; I wish to consider the society simply as one affecting the peace and well-being of the country, the due authority of Government, and the proper administration of the law. This being the feeling with which I approach the subject, I think I am entitled to ask the support,

821
not only of those hon. Gentlemen who consider it might be an advantageous thing to inflict a blow on the enemies of the present Administration, but also of those Members of the House who, though hostile to that Administration, still consider that the general results which I have mentioned are paramount to all party considerations, and ought to be binding upon themselves as well as upon us in this discussion. Sir, in treating of this matter, I feel it necessary to say in the outset, that I shall not enter upon any part of the question as to the papers and correspondence which the hon. Member for Middlesex has produced to the House this evening, I may be permitted to add, with little connection or arrangement. Whatever may be the importance of the matter—and I confess there is in it much that requires the serious consideration of the House. I do not conceive that I should be justified in pronouncing an opinion with respect to the effect and result of that correspondence on the present occasion. I shall therefore confine myself to that which appeared on a former occasion; to that which came out in the evidence taken before the House; to that which was declared in the resolutions of the House, read by the hon. Member for Middlesex at the beginning of the debate, and to that which is notorious to all who have paid attention to the subject. By far the most important part of this question, in reference to a political society, is that which concerns Ireland. After having attended as closely as I could to the hon. Member's speech, and having considered the whole effect of the evidence—more particularly the statements made by those who were members or chief-officers of Orange Lodges—I must say, without at present questioning what may have been their motives, or impugning their conduct, I must express my strong feeling that the effect of these societies has been injurious to the good government of the country. In the first place, the existence of societies of this kind, composed of bands of men, armed and prepared to stand in array by each other, following no recognised or lawful authority, but merely that of their own leaders, teaches a party of the King's subjects to enter into a state of warfare and defiance with another part of the King's subjects: this must be the unhappy result, whatever it be founded upon, whether a difference
822
of religion or anything else. The moment you create such societies, and organise them into districts and lodges, and so forth, you make a distinction between them and the other parts of the King's subjects, who immediately form into similar societies under some other denomination, and thus you institute a perpetual and ever-recurring source of quarrelling, discontent, and insubordination. It is another evil of these societies, when they unite persons of the lowest order with many of the highest, that the lowest are accustomed to look to those who are high in authority in their own society as the leaders whom they ought to obey, instead of obeying the Crown and the depositories in whom the trust of the Crown is placed. By sanctioning such societies you do so far weaken the allegiance of the subject that you give him two leaders—you give him two sovereigns instead of one. And while in the one case there is required only that abstract allegiance which yields to no passion, in the other there is a combination of party and passion and sectarian feeling, making the difference between an obedience to what is salutary and beneficial, and an obedience to what is turbulent and factious. It is another evil of these societies—and I am speaking now of their natural constitution—it is another evil that being thus supported by their leaders, and imbued with party feeling, they hold to that party feeling in spite of the supremacy of the law. Thus a state comes to be divided into parties suspiciously fearful of each other; and when a case is brought into a court of law, instead of its being decided on the principles of justice, those united in these societies think the prosecution is directed against them, and in this way hostile party feelings are generated, which are most injurious to the pure and quiet course of justice. Here I must be allowed to say I much regret that the hon. Member for Middlesex has spoken with a disrespect, which I think he is far from deserving, of a nobleman, on whose authority I must rely for a confirmation of the impression I have received with respect to these societies—of a nobleman of whom I must remark, that though he is certainly not connected with us as a party, yet is a person of so much prudence and moderation, that I think my noble friend opposite did not hesitate to recommend him for one of the Lords-Lieutenant of Ireland, Lord Caledon, I mean; and

823
no doubt he is a nobleman fully qualified for such a situation. Lord Caledon, in his examination before the Committee of this House in 1835, said, in reply to a question put to him, that he would answer by reading part of a letter which he addressed to Colonel Verner relative to an Orange procession on the 27th of April, 1832. His Lordship read as follows: "It is hardly necessary for me to add, that I neither did nor can subscribe to your position, that the word Orangemen means Protestants generally. I believe there are few who value the Protestant population of Ulster more highly than I do; but when a portion only of that body become members of a political society, I cannot consent that such portion should assume to itself the right of being considered the Protestant body at large. I look upon the Protestants as the main support of British connection, as the most industrious and intelligent part of our community; but I consider the Orange system as tending to disunite us when our religion alone should be a sufficient bond for our union; that is the opinion I entertained on the 5th of July, 1832, and which I still retain." Another question is put to his Lordship as follows: "In fact the Orange body, so far from assisting to execute the laws, are in the county of Tyrone the very people who are most active in infringing the laws, and against whom your Lordship is desirous of further legislative enactment?" His Lordship answers—"The Orange body is composed of men of different habits, and different ways of thinking; there are amongst them many who do maintain the laws to the utmost; there are others of very loose character. I think all party associations injurious to the peace of the country, and opposed to good order; though there are many individuals in the body who are well disposed to enforce the laws they have not the power to control those under them." Again the noble Lord is questioned, "Your Lordship is doubtless aware that one of the ostensible objects of the Orange system is, to provide for the security of Protestants en masse against the great body of the Roman Catholics in Ireland?" Answer; "I believe it is: but I consider every subject of these realms is bound to look to the laws of his country exclusively for protection in all cases, and I consider it most dangerous to inculcate upon the population of this empire, that it is unsafe for them to do so. I not only
824
object to the formation of all party associations on these grounds, but likewise from their tendency to give individuals a power and influence unknown to the constitution." These, Sir, are the opinions of a man, whose opinions are not what are called extremely liberal, but who, on the contrary, has generally supported those who are considered as opposed to liberal opinions; these are his sentiments, derived from the view he has taken of the society where he resides and is respected, both as a public man and a landowner. Such being my view of these institutions, and of all similar societies, considering them as injurious to the peace of the public, as weakening the authority of the Crown, as weakening the supremacy of the law, and, likewise, as disturbing that religious equality and harmony which otherwise must prevail. I certainly am one of those who declare that my object would be, if possible, to rid ourselves of all assemblies—whether called Orange societies, Ribbon societies, or any other name of this particular character. But in considering this question as a matter of state, we have to consider the various obstacles which may be opposed to the different modes suggested of effecting an object, and the course which, on the whole, is most likely to effect it. There might be a way of proceeding of a very decided character—very prompt and energetic, but which, so far from destroying the flame of this Association, would but raise it higher—carrying it up to a height which it would not Otherwise attain, and, instead of finally extinguishing it, would cause it to burn more steadily and more destructively. I will now consider the proposal which the hon. Member for Cornwall has made on this subject to the House. He has stated it to be the clearest matter possible—and it may be so to his understanding. When I say this, I know that many men, I believe exceedingly eminent as lawyers—certainly possessing a great acquaintance with the law authorities—are of the same opinion with the hon. Gentleman. I certainly did not mean any reflection on the hon. Gentleman, but only that he stated his proposition in a manner which might warrant the inference that it is not possible to entertain a doubt on the subject. After the report made last year by a Committee of this House, which concludes with saying that it is not necessary to enact new laws with reference to these societies, but that

825
the laws in existence, if carried into execution, would be sufficient for the total suppression of these Orange societies, I certainly thought it ray duty to see what view would be taken by the law officers of the Crown on this subject; and I also thought it my duty, instead of patting a dry question in an official shape, to see my learned Friend the Attorney-General, and converse with him generally on the whole bearings of the matter. The impression left on my mind from all he then stated was, that the question whether these societies were illegal or not, was one of great doubt, and that without looking most carefully into the whole of the subject, I should not like to pronounce absolutely whether such societies were legal or illegal. I farther understood that my learned Friend the Solicitor-General entertained a similar view. In considering, then, the bearings of this view of the case, the Government were of opinion that if this, which was a severe penal statute, did not contain positive enactments against this offence, it was not proper for us to seek to find some meaning in the law which would be constructed by our leading men of great eminence at the bar, as a straining of the penal statute—we were of opinion that it was not proper for us to take a course which would involve a discussion as to whether or not we had not forced the meaning of an enactment operating against the liberty of the subject, in order to procure a condemnation. I ought also to say, I think even if I had been able to discover that the Orange society had contrived to evade parts of the law, yet in other respects had conformed to it, in my opinion it would in principle be so mischievous to the liberty of the subject for Government to be attempting to strain the effect of penal laws, that I did not think that we should be justified, on our own authority, in proceeding at once to ascertain the degree of evasion. At the same time I must declare, that I certainly heard nothing from my hon. and learned Friends which would induce me to say, that their opinions sanctioned the legality of these associations, but, as far as might be judged from that which my hon. and learned Friend the Attorney General urged, without presuming to form an opinion on the subject myself—I should say, that the question appeared to be one of considerable difficulty. By the 39th of George 3rd the taking of oaths is illegal; this the Orange
826
society had dispensed with. The secret signs and symbols of the society are not illegal. But it is illegal to have district meetings, with several presidents in different parts of the country in communication with each other. But it appeared by the opinions given by Sir William Home, Mr. Sergeant Lens, and Lord Gifford, that the Orange Societies did not come within the meaning of the law in 1822, and therefore, if they came within the terms of any Act at the present, it must be by some recent change in their constitution. If they were considered legal in 1822 by great authorities, and if without any real and substantial mutation some merely formal change has taken place, which renders them amenable to the penalties of law, I should certainly be averse from bringing the question to issue on such narrow grounds. The hon. Member for Cornwall mentioned the case of the Dorchester Labourers. I will take the liberty of alluding to the course pursued by Government upon that occasion. At that time Trades' Unions existed in great numbers, and in the metropolis itself not less than 30,000 of them marched through the streets in procession for a particular purpose. There were extensive branches of these bodies in the country, and most of them were believed to have taken an oath, which brought them within the meaning of the law. The question carne before Lord Grey's Government, and he stated, in resigning office, that he had great satisfaction in finding that the Unions had nearly ceased, although no steps had been taken either rigidly to enforce existing statutes, or to pass new laws against them. It was, therefore, the opinion of Lord Grey's Administration that the proper method of dealing with associations of that character was not by immediately instituting proceedings against them in courts of law. In the case of the Dorchester Labourers the prosecution was not undertaken by the Government, but by magistrates in the county, on account of disturbances in a particular locality. It only remained for the Government to consider whether, a conviction having ensued, and sentence having been passed, it was expedient to make any change in it—a question totally different from the general policy of Government with respect to the unions in general. With respect to the question before the House the Ministers had to consider whether, if they would not be

827
justified in straining a penal statute to meet those cases, was it adviseable that a new law should be enacted? The opinion of the Government certainly was that it was not desirable to introduce any new law upon the subject. If they were to frame a Bill to be carried through Parliament for the suppression of these societies, such a law, if carried, would be looked upon by the parties against whom it was directed as a vindictive proceeding and a stigma directed against them. The great end of such a law would be defeated, and though the societies might disappear in one form they would not be suppressed. The very effect of such legislation would be to keep alive their spirit of party association, and they would rise up again in some other form. I will now refer to that portion of the resolutions proposed by the hon. Member for Middlesex, which pledges the House to recommend the dismissal from all employment under the Government of all persons belonging to these societies. Now it is very easy to point out the inconvenience of such a course of proceeding as the hon. Member proposed. In the case of Judges who may be members of the Orange Society, they could not be removed unless by an address from Parliament. It is the intention of the law in order to maintain the independent administration of justice, the Crown should not have the power of removing Judges, but if proper cause should arise, the Parliament must address the Crown for their removal. Now supposing that that House agree to an address for the removal of a Judge, is it certain that the other House of Parliament would do the same? It certainly is right, when a particular case arises, that the House should have the right to address the Crown for the removal of a Judge on sufficient cause; but nothing would be more inconvenient or more objectionable than a general address to remove Judges on account of their connexion with Orange societies, such as that which was suggested in the resolution before the House. As to the other part of the question, whether it be expedient that they should remove at once from all situations under the Government every person who belongs to these societies, I do not think that such a course would be advisable, nor that it would conduce to the object in view, of effecting the suppression of these societies. There are many men in Ireland, of high
828
character and station, many of them filling the situation of Magistrates, who entered into these societies from a sincere feeling that in doing so they were lending their aid to the Protestant interests, and to remove them at once by an address of the kind proposed, without any previous declaration, would place such a stigma upon them as to mate them conceive that they must in honour still remain bound together; and they would not consider such address as a fair declaration of the opinions of the House, but as an unfair oppressive and vindictive step directed against them. What was the course that the Government had heretofore pursued on this subject. They had had much correspondence with the Lord-lieutenant of Ireland on this particular point. This correspondence had reference to various circumstances bearing forcibly upon this part of the subject. Though it appeared that there were many persons connected with these societies hostile to the Government, and opposed to the authority of the Lord-lieutenants, yet they had not been removed from the situations which they held under the Government. At the same time the course which the Lord-lieutenant had been desirous to take was, that whenever any person applied to him, or to the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, to be appointed to a place of trust or emolument, if, on inquiry being made into his character, it was found that he was at the time a member of the Orange Society, the appointment was not bestowed. It certainly is the perfect right of the Crown, whenever parties apply to be appointed to places of trust, to refuse to appoint them, unless they are fully able to observe all the conditions necessary to the fulfilment of that trust. Certainly a gentleman who has appeared decorated with orange symbols, at the head of an Orange procession in a country market-town is not a fit person to be selected for any appointment under the Government. To show, however, the spirit which prevails among many persons holding a high station in Ireland, and the view which the Lord-lieutenant and many noble Lords entertain on this point, I will take the liberty of reading to the House two letters, out of a correspondence which passed between Lord Dunsany and Lord Morpeth, relative to a Mr. Smith, who was recommended for the post of a Deputy-lieutenant. The noble Lord then read the following letters:—

829
"Dunsany Castle, Dec. 27, 1834.
"MY LORD—I received your Lordship's letter of the 26th inst. this day. In your former letter you asked me whether Mr. Henry Smith held an office in an Orange Society. I answered that I had no means of ascertaining, not belonging to it myself. My son, Mr. Plunkett, was then in the county of Kilkenny; he is now with me, and informs me that Mr. Henry Smith no longer holds the office you mention, but another replaced him about a year ago. As to his being an Orangeman, I suppose he is, as he generally held office, and so are, probably, half the Magistrates in the county; and if so, they are the more watchful of the evil designs of the Ribandmen, of whom a large majority of the labouring classes are composed.
I have the honour, &c.
DUNSANY."
Having read this letter, I must say, that I consider it to be a proof of the distorted views which men of irreproachable character take of this subject. The answer of Lord Morpeth was dated the 29th of December, and was as follows:—
"MY LORD—As your Lordship, in your letter of the 27th instant, in recommending Mr. Henry Smith, states that yon suppose him still to be an Orangeman, and as it is His Excellency's intention not knowingly to make any more appointments of members of that society, his Excellency must therefore repeat, that unless Mr. Smith either denies his connexion with it, or signifies his intention of withdrawing from it, he must decline to nominate him a Deputy-lieutenant for the county of Meath. His Excellency cannot close this correspondence without expressing his most entire and unqualified dissent from the opinion which appears to be conveyed in the latter part of your Lordship's letter, that Magistrates, by becoming Orangemen, are thereby more fit to watch the designs of Ribandmen. Should such designs exist to the extent and amongst the persons your Lordship supposes, his Excellency will look alone for their suppression to the open and impartial discharge of their duty by the Magistrates as such, and not to their connexion with Orange Institutions."
Such is the view which his Majesty's Government—such is the view which the Lord-lieutenant of Ireland takes of these societies. Wherever there are Ribbonmen who act in opposition to the law, every means of suppressing them will be resorted to. But there is a great difference between the associations, and whilst Ribbonism is confined to a portion of the labouring classes, no person in Parliament—No Lord-lieutenant of a county—has, as yet, admitted himself to be in connexion with it; but,
830
with respect to Orangeism, persons of exalted rank and high station have deemed it right to avow such a connection, and expressed it as their opinion that such secret societies were the best counterpoise to disaffection. Therefore, it is, that the Lord-lieutenant of Ireland deems it his duty to abstain from appointing Orangemen to the Magistracy, lest, being biassed by any influence, they may not be able to view impartially the cases that come before them. Then I am prepared to say, that it is not only convenient to adopt measures of discouragement in respect to those societies, but I think, when their nature is so completely unveiled, as to be condemned in the opinion of liberal men of every party, they must gradually diminish. I will, however, propose as an amendment to the motion of the hon. Member for Middlesex, a resolution discouraging such societies, followed by an address to the Crown. As regarded the motion of the hon. Member for Middlesex, it cannot be supposed that the House of Commons is prepared to second an address, praying for the removal of the Judges of the land from their high offices, as if they were so many criminals, without some more clear and decisive allegations being made against them. This certainly is not to be expected; but if the House express a general opinion that such societies are dangerous and mischievous; if, on the expression of such an opinion by the House, an address, in conformity with it be presented to the Crown, and gain the sanction of his Majesty, the persons hereafter belonging or adhering to such societies, will be placed in a different situation from that in which they were at present. Not only will such a proceeding have its effect upon persons in that and in another House, but even upon one who has been described by the hon. Member for Drogheda as the person nearest the throne. I feel satisfied when that illustrious Personage finds the general sense of the House and the opinion of his Majesty against such societies, he will take a different view from that which he at present takes with regard to this subject; and though the Illustrious individual, as well as others might still continue to believe, that such associations were best calculated to promote the end they had in view, still I cannot imange that any person of proper and loyal feelings, anxious to promote the good of the country, will

831
resist an opinion so generally and so solemnly pronounced. I will say but a few words more on the general bearing of the question before the House. I am not surprised to find evils like that under the consideration of the House in a country circumstanced as Ireland is. Indeed, such is the anomaly of her condition, that nothing could have prevented their growth. When William 3rd. was selected to fill the Throne of these kingdoms, though he was acknowledged by a majority of the people of England and Scotland, the people of Ireland were only kept in obedience by the force of arms in the hands of a powerful minority. This minority was compelled to protect itself by the enactment of penal laws, harsh and cruel in their nature. As the danger diminished, and as the age became averse to such rigorous enactments, these laws were relaxed, and others were framed, in a new and better temper. After this relaxation, those who had been hitherto a powerless and abject, although a numerous majority, grew in strength, and wealth, and power, and intellect, and claimed as their natural due an equal participation in all social rights. This, of course, was calculated to offend the prejudices, to alarm the fears, and disturb the power of those who had so long held an undisturbed monopoly; and, as a means of obviating the threatened destructive inroads, the latter resorted to combination, to union, and to secrecy. This naturally produced a resort to similar means by the opposite party, and it was not to be wondered at, that the dissemination of societies, secret, partial, and exclusively religious was the consequence. But the time is now come when the people of Ireland ought to depart from these separate and hostile associations, when they should lay down the arms with which they waged this antisocial warfare, and resort for the decision of their differences to the temple of the law. The Protestant, the Catholic, the Presbyterian—every man of every faith should deem the British Constitution and the British Law sufficient for his protection, without any other auxiliary. If these are not found sufficient, let complaint be made to Parliament, and if Ministers, on such complaint, neglect their duty, then let the blame rest upon them, and let punishment follow. If the Judges of the land, or any persons in trust, do not perform their duty purely, impartially, and up-
832
rightly, let complaint be made in Parliament of inattention and partiality, and let that complaint be strictly and promptly attended to. With these observations I will conclude, by imploring the well-disposed of all parties to dismiss from their thoughts all reliance upon such false, inadequate, partial, and mischievous protections as those societies afford, and to rely only upon the laws and the Constitution. Such societies are only calculated to subject upright and well-disposed men to the machinations and practices of the vilest adventurers. For the good and the virtuous—and good and virtuous men belong to the association—these secret societies are powerless and useless; but they are both useful and powerful for mischief to active and designing intriguers. Let all good men, then, abandon them, and confiding in the powers of the Constitution, for the upholding of justice and of freedom—confiding, too, in that publicity of proceeding which is one of the great elements of the Constitution—let all unite in an address to his Majesty, in the humble but fervent hope, that it will impart present tranquility to the kingdom, and ensure its future welfare. The noble Lord concluded by moving the following resolution as an amendment, "That an humble address be presented to his Majesty, praying that his Majesty will be graciously pleased to take such measures as his Majesty may deem advisable for the effectual discouragement of Orange Lodges, and generally of all political societies, excluding persons of different religions, and using secret signs and symbols, and acting by means of associated branches."
Mr. Wilson Pattensaid, that whilst on the Committee which sat upon the subject of Orange Lodges, he had devoted considerable time and attention to this subject, and it was with great pleasure, he concurred in almost all the observations which had just been made by the noble Lord. Having gone through the whole of the evidence, it was his impression that all secret societies produced an injurious effect upon the peace and tranquillity of the country. He, however, must be permitted to say, that the speeches of the hon. Gentlemen who had preceded the noble Lord were like those of persons more anxious to attain victory than to arrive at truth. He certainly objected to the strong resolutions which had been laid before

833
the House, and he also deprecated personal reflections, as having a tendency to provoke personal hostility. He would take the liberty of reading to the House a resolution which it had been his intention to propose to the House. [The hon. Gentleman here read a resolution for an humble address to his Majesty, praying that his Majesty would take such steps as in his wisdom he might deem fit for the suppression of all secret societies which excluded persons on account of their religions faith, and which used secret signs and symbols.] It would be seen, that in this resolution he did not particularise any one secret society, but aimed it at ail generally, and he would suggest to the noble Lord the propriety of acting in the same manner with respect to the Amendment which the noble Lord had proposed. Before he sat down he would press upon the noble Lord the propriety of acceding to his suggestion of making his resolution more general by omitting to name any particular society.
Mr. Sharman Crawfordsaid, as his evidence had been specially alluded to by the hon. Member for Middlesex, he trusted he might be permitted to offer a few observations. In justice to the Orangemen of the North of Ireland, he felt himself bound to state, that on the occasion alluded to, when the Orangemen at Crosgar resisted his authority as a Magistrate, acting under the proclamation of the Duke of Northumberland, then Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, they were impelled to that resistance solely by the conviction of their having warrants signed by his Royal Highness the Duke of Cumberland. They acted under the false impression that this gave them a legal right to have their processions, and that it had all the power of an authority emanating from the Crown itself. As an additional proof of this, he said that they offered to surrender their warrants to him, if he stated he had an authority from the Crown to demand them, and that in such case they would immediately disperse. Thus the Orangemen were acting under a false impression, and not from any wilful opposition to the law. The Orangemen were sufferers by bad government with their Catholic brethren. They were cherished, supported, and encouraged in every measure for many years, by the several governments to whom power was committed. Latterly, unsuccessful attempts had been made to
834
put them down, and why were those attempts unsuccessful? Because their leaders, persons holding the highest situations; of trust and profit under the Crown, were permitted to abuse and malign the Government, from whom they derived their authority, and to represent to the people, that the conduct and proceedings of that Government were such as to justify a transfer of allegiance. Whilst persons of this description were permitted to hold their offices, and to be the deputies of that very Government which they so maligned, the people have consequently been impressed with the opinion that the demonstrations of opposition to the Orangemen, by the state, were mere pretences, or else that they were too powerful for the state to oppose them. Under such circumstances were the Orangemen to be blamed? Was it not injustice to pass laws against them, and leave the higher class without censure or punishment, who were the active promoters and direct encouragers of the very resistance to the laws they were appointed to administer. There could be no more valuable members of society in any other respect than the great body of the Orangemen of the North of Ireland; and he was satisfied that if Government were to take decided means to show that such societies were illegal, and temperately but steadily act in accordance with such a system of policy, by enforcing obedience from those to whom they delegated the administration of the laws; the Orangemen would submit to the law. The noble Lord at the head of his Majesty's Government seemed to doubt whether the Acts in operation in England were sufficient to justify legal proceedings against the body. He was at a loss to understand upon what grounds the Trades' Unions were declared to be illegal, even under the common law alone, in a proclamation issued some years back, unless on grounds equally applicable to the Orange institutions of Ireland. The noble Lord said, that the Unions exhibited themselves in large bodies of thousands. He asked did not the Orangemen do so in Ireland? Why, then, was there no proclamation issued to warn the people from connecting themselves with the Orange societies? Proclamations had been issued against processions, but not against that organization from which processions proceeded. Why was the evil to be thus trifled with, and why were the

835
people to be thus led astray? Why were they permitted to act thus under false impressions, and then afterwards to be punished for crimes which emanated from the faults of others, and from the imbecility of the Government itself. He thought it necessary to say this much in justice to the Orange societies, and he concluded by giving his cordial support to the motion of his hon. Friend the Member for Middlesex.
Mr. Henry Maxwellsaid, that from the situation which he held in connexion with the Orange Lodges, it was necessary he should say a few words. It would be in the recollection of the House, that when the hon. Member for Kilkenny gave his notice of Motion for the appointment of a Select Committee, at the commencement of last Session, to inquire into the state of Orange Lodges in Ireland; that notice was immediately met by the Grand Committee in Dublin, who petitioned the House to institute the strictest inquiry, placing at the disposal of that Committee all their books, and documents, sending over their officers to reveal the secret signs and passwords, and giving every possible information. That Committee was appointed; and he did not object to the numbers on both sides, during the whole of the proceedings, there being fourteen against, and thirteen supposed to be favourable to the Orangemen. He did, however, object to some of the gentlemen who were allowed to be upon the Committee. Of the fourteen who were against them, five were Roman Catholics, and all of them lawyers; out of the five, four were distinguished members of the Roman Catholic Association. The only individual who was not so was the right hon. Gentleman, the present Attorney-General for Ireland. Two gentlemen were distinguished members of the Irish bar. One of these gentlemen (the Member for Tipperary), even before the examination of witnesses commenced, stated distinctly, in the presence of the Committee, that his object was to condemn the Orangemen. He went there, in fact, with his mind made up, and his sentiments ware well known. It would be within recollection, that another learned Gentleman to whom he referred (the Member for Dublin) had made a most eloquent appeal, a few years since, to the worst passions of an infuriated populace, adjuring them by the hatred they bore to Orangemen. He was the
836
only partisan on the Committee; the hon. and gallant officer, the Member for Sligo, (Colonel Perceval) had been nominated upon it, but had refused to serve. At a subsequent period, and at the close of the investigation, the name of the hon. Member for Donegal (Sir E. Hayes) was added. With respect to the general conduct of the Committee, he thought he had every reason to complain. The hon. Member for Kilkenny (Mr. Finn) commenced the investigation, by examining witnesses who were brought for the defence. This course he (Mr. Maxwell) objected to, at the time, but not wishing to throw any impediments in the way of the fullest investigation, he subsequently acceded to this rather unusual proposal, but he did so upon the stipulation, that after the officers of the institution had been examined, witnesses for the prosecution, as he might call it, should then be examined, and a full rebutting case afterwards allowed to the Orangemen. This course was adhered to, with the exception of the latter part of the arrangement. The Committee refused, what, in strict justice, and according to agreement, they were bound to admit—namely, the production of witnesses, who were prepared to contradict and explain much of the inculpatory matter adduced before the Committee—but whose evidence was refused to be received, notwithstanding that the witnesses had actually been summoned. All he (Mr. Maxwell) could gain from the Committee was, the examination of his honourable friend, the Member for the county of Armagh (Colonel Verner), to enable him to answer charges personally affecting his character, and of Colonel Blacker—the Committee being as anxious as he (Mr. Maxwell) was, that they should receive information from a gentleman who had belonged to the Orange Institution since its origin, in 1795, to the present day, and to have the benefit of his historical knowledge of the operations of the society for a period of forty years. It was true that he was himself examined—but then it was merely for the purpose of explaining a clerical memorandum, which he had annexed to one of the original warrants—and that Mr. Blacker's re-examination took place for the purpose of explaining the nature of the Colonization Society, which had been loosely termed "Colonies," in one of the resolutions of the society. By this unfair conduct on the part of the

837
Committee, the Orangemen were precluded from what, both in common fairness and by a positive agreement, they were justly entitled to—the possibility of refuting, as they were fully prepared to do, the numerous calumnies and falsehoods which their enemies had brought forward in evidence against them, thus leaving the House and the public to form an opinion adverse to the Orange Society upon ex parte statements, which he (Mr. Maxwell) had ample means, but no opportunity, allowed him to disprove. There was one allegation in the speech of the learned Member for Kilkenny, which he was utterly astonished that any individual in that House could have made. That Gentleman had thought fit to assign in his speech, as the main reason for his not allowing the examination before the Committee to proceed, his conviction that the evidence which had been given was of so injurious a character to the Orange Institution, that the Orangemen on the Committee would (if he had not cut short the inquiry) have destroyed the documents which they had been so forward to place on the Table of the Committee. He would not have condescended to notice such an imputation except for the purpose of giving to it, as applicable to himself, his colleague, (Sir E. Hayes) or those high minded, honourable, upright, and honest Gentlemen whom he had produced as witnesses before the Committee, the fullest, the most unqualified, and indignant refutation. He had repeatedly addressed the House, during the many years he had the honour of a seat in it, in favour of the character and principles of the Orange Society, which he maintained was strictly defensive. He was aware that secret political societies were in themselves great evils, and could only be justified upon the ground of there being an absolute necessity for their existence—such an absolute necessity, he maintained, had existed, and did still exist, where the Protestant institutions of the country were not only threatened with extinction, but were absolutely visited with imminent danger in Ireland. The principles of the Orange Society of Ireland were those of uncompromising loyalty to the Crown, and devoted attachment to the laws of the land—and these were the principles upon which the Orangemen had invariably acted under all circumstances, whether of prosperity or adversity; they were principles, too, which the
838
Orangemen would ever retain, however much they might be aspersed by those to whom they were politically opposed. Having made this observation, he treated with contempt the charge which had been made against the Orangemen of Ireland, of wishing to alter the succession to the throne. Two hon. Gentlemen, who had addressed the House upon this subject, had spoken of the misconduct of the Orangemen of England. Of that body he (Mr. Maxwell) knew nothing; he was not acquainted with its rules and regulations; it formed no part of the Irish system; there was nothing in common between them, except that the Duke of Cumberland was at the head of the Orangemen in both kingdoms. It had been said, that the illustrious Duke was the irresponsible head of the Orangemen in England. He (Mr. Maxwell) knew not how that fact might be; but this he could say, that the Duke of Cumberland was not the irresponsible head of the Orange body in Ireland. In the Irish body the illustrious Duke possessed no more power than he (Mr. Maxwell) did, and he (Mr. Maxwell), as an individual, possessed no more power than the commonest member of the society. He would not now trespass further upon the patience of the House, than to state that it was not his intention to reply to any of the observations made in the temperate, moderate, and judicious speech of the noble Lord (Lord J. Russell). If the words "Orange Society" were omitted from the resolution which the noble Lord concluded by moving, he (Mr. Maxwell) should offer no opposition to it. The Orangemen of Ireland (continued the hon. Gentleman) as I have already observed, consider themselves bound to obey the law of the land. We consider as tantamount to the law of the land, the express commands of the Sovereign. If, therefore, His Majesty should express a decided wish that the Orange Society of Ireland (whether mentioned by name, or not, and I should hope it would not be specifically mentioned in the address)—if his Majesty should express a decided wish, that societies of a similar nature and tendency should cease, under pain of incurring his serious displeasure, I, speaking as an Orangeman myself—and, I believe, I may include the whole body in the assertion—declare that there is not an Orangeman in Ireland who, rather than act as a bad

839
subject, although the step might be most painful to his feelings, would not cease at once to be a Member of the Orange body.
Colonel Vernersaid, as my name stands in the list of notices for a motion upon the subject which is now before the House, I trust I may be permitted to address a few observations to it, which I feel more particularly called upon to do, from the nature of the noble Lord's resolutions which have just been read. I do not consider it necessary to notice the allusion made by the hon. Member for Kilkenny, respecting nine or ten houses which were burned at Armagh, now magnified, by him, into sixteen, or to follow him through his several charges against the Orange body and his many statements, upon the occasion of bringing forward his motion a few nights since, neither do I think it necessary to quiet the hon. Member's loyal apprehensions, with regard to the dangers to the succession to the throne. Danger to the succession, and from the Orangemen—there is not a man of common understanding who could seriously entertain the idea. I am quite sure the illustrious Princess, on whom the hopes and affections of the people are fixed, is not distrustful of any portion of the Protestants of Great Britain; but of this I am also sure, that even in the general attachment of all, the loyalty of Orangemen will not be least conspicuous. And if there were danger to the throne or the succession, and a day was come which I may be permitted to hope is far distant, that that illustrious Princess had to call upon her subjects—in the hour of danger—there is not throughout the extent of the land an Orange Lodge, in every member of which they could not find a champion ready to risk life and fortune, and shed the last drop of his blood in the maintenance of her rightful authority. The House is fully aware, as stated by my hon. Friend the Member for Cavan, that a Committee sat last session for several days to inquire into Orange Societies in Ireland—that it took the depositions of very many witnesses against that society—some in its favour, but many more were postponed, and ultimately refused to be examined. The House must also recollect that that Committee did not make any report upon the evidence adduced before it; and was it not rather too much for the hon. Member for Kilkenny to expect that when a Committee, especially
840
appointed to examine evidence, was unable to make a report to this House, the great majority of its members remaining unacquainted with the character of the witnesses and the value of their testimony, should accept the opinion of the hon. Member as the impartial decision of an unprejudiced person, and adopt it as their own? At least I should expect that the accused party should have, what the Committee denied it, a full hearing, and it would not be too much to claim that it should have what, in the hon. Member's Committee it had not, an impartial tribunal. I do not make this assertion lightly, I remember well that the hon. Member, when first he moved for a Committee, declared his wish that it should consist of Members without prejudice on the subject; he even desired, if I rightly remember, that it should consist of English Members, aided by one Irish Member on each side. Subsequently the arrangement was altered. I acquit the hon. Member of blame. I impute blame, indeed, to no party concerned; but it is right to state, that the original design of a Committee was abandoned, and that members were placed upon it who had declared themselves the inveterate enemies of the society, on the character and tendency of which they were to hear evidence and pronounce judgment. It was altogether a strange and inconsistent alteration. The hon. and learned Members for Dublin and Tipperary were placed upon the Committee, and I, when it was proposed that I should be substituted in the place of an hon. Member who had resigned, I was excluded. Was this fair? On what grounds could I be objected to? I was not impartial. Was this to be an objection, when the hon. Members for Dublin, Tipperary, Kilkenny, Waterford, and Dungarvon had been selected? What was the Committee? Was it a court where contending interests had their representatives? Was it a Jury where a cause should be impartially tried? If it were such a court, why was I excluded? If it were a Jury, why was the hon. and learned Member for Dublin placed upon it? I feel myself especially called upon to notice the fact of my exclusion, in consequence of a statement made in the Edinburgh Review, in an article in which indeed there is the candid acknowledgement that the Reviewer's object is not to do justice to the Orange Society, but to exhibit whatever demerits may be as-

841
cribed to it. In that article too it is asserted that Colonel Verner was a Member of the Committee, and therefore I think it right here to affirm, that that statement is one among the many inexcusable misrepresentations with which the Review is chargeable. I am unwilling to trespass upon one moment of the time of the House unnecessarily, and was it not that I feel confident I can, with the most positive assurance of success, satisfy the House as to the correctness of the evidence given by one of the principal witnesses who were examined before the Committee, I should not venture to crave its indulgence, while I, very briefly, call its attention to the evidence of one or two gentlemen, which I have reason to believe has not failed to leave an impression upon the public mind prejudicial to the Orange Institution, and there were some facts stated by Mr. Randal Kernan, which I hope to be able to show, to use the words of my hon. Friend the Member for Bandon, are anything but facts. In order to do so, Sir, it will be necessary that I should read to the House a small portion of the evidence of Mr. Randal Kernan. Sir, the first case to which I shall call the attention of the House, is the well-known case of Mr. Hamilton, The learned Gentleman states he was counsel for the case, consequently must have been well acquainted with all the particulars. The following was his deposition:—
"7327—The friends of the deceased and the party who were assaulted, heard that Lieutenant Hamilton intended to fly the country, they made a prisoner of him, and brought him before two Magistrates; the rev. Mr. Stack was the name of one, I have not the name of the other Magistrate.
"7329—The people applied to those Magistrates to grant a warrant to commit Lieutenant Hamilton. The Magistrates refused, saying, they would take the father's security for the son's appearance, and they did take his verbal security. Young Mr. Hamilton thought proper to forfeit the verbal bail taken by the Magistrates. He fled from the country, and did not return for some years. He is now returned, and is a Justice of the Peace for the Co. Tyrone.
"7330—I know Mr. Hamilton is now a Justice of the Peace in that county in which he is charged with having committed the murder.
"7334—I was counsel in that case.
The House will here observe that counsellor Kernan states, in direct terms, not once but twice, and from his own knowledge, that Mr. Hamilton is now a Ma-
842
gistrate for the county of Tyrone. The House will judge of the accuracy of this assertion when it has heard the letter of the Lieutenant for that county. Sir, this is the letter of Lord Caledon to the noble Lord opposite, the Chief Secretary for Ireland:—
"Caledon, 29th January, 1836.
"My Lord—As it was stated in evidence by Mr. Randal Kernan, before a Committee of the House of Commons which sat to inquire into the nature of Orange Lodges, when speaking of Mr. Hamilton, 'he is now a Justice of the Peace in that county (Tyrone) in which he is charged with having committed the murders, and on which charge a bill of indictment was found against him,' it becomes my duty to acquaint your Lordship that Mr. Hamilton neither is, nor ever was, a Justice of the Peace for the county of Tyrone.
"I apprised Mr. Kernan on the 29th of October, 1835, of the error into which he had fallen, and which he at once admitted, but as I know that his evidence has misled the public at large, I entreat your Lordship to adopt the mode you think best to undeceive it.
"I have the honour to be, my Lord, your Lordship's most obedient, humble servant,
"CALEDON.'
"Viscount Morpeth, &c. &c."
I shall now beg to call the attention of the House to that part of the learned Gentleman's evidence, where he states that Lieutenant Hamilton was made prisoner, and taken before Mr. Stack and another Magistrate, who refused to take examinations, or grant a warrant, but admitted him to bail upon the verbal promise of his father for his future appearance. Sir, the letter I am now about to read to the House is from Mr. Stack, the Magistrate named by Mr. Kernan:—
"My Dear Sir—In reply to your letter of the 16th instant, I assure you that if counsellor Kernan said I released Mr. Hamilton on the word of his father, it is a complete fabrication. Mr. Hamilton was never brought before me in. custody or otherwise, on the charge alluded to. You might of yourself, almost, have contradicted such an assertion, from your knowledge of the Magistrates here. I am much obliged for your communication, and remain yours, most truly, THOMAS STACK."
"Omagh, February 19, 1835."
The next case referred to in the evidence of Mr. Kernan is the case of M'Cabe v. Robinson; and, Sir, I shall beg leave to read a small portion of the learned Gentleman's evidence relative to it.
"7274—Can state a very remarkable case tried by Chief Justice Bushe in the county of Tyrone.

843
"7273—Cannot give the date precisely without referring to his notes, it was about ten, or from ten to twelve years. It was an indictment for murder.
"7275—The name of the party was M'Cabe v. Robinson and others.
"7276—The son of the deceased was the prosecutor, a man residing neat Portadown, of the name of M'Cabe.
"7277—He was a Roman Catholic.
"7278—It was in the Lodge-room the conspiracy was hatched.
"7279—The trial was at Omagh. The first time or second time the Judge went that circuit.
"7283—After the trial, the Chief Justice sent for me. I went to him, and he said, in substance—'You are the only barrister who took a full note of this trial, do you intend to publish it?' I said, "certainly I do." He said, 'Kernan, my dear fellow, do you think its publication would pacify the country, &c.'
"7296—Four or five were tried, has destroyed or lost his notes, and cannot tell the number indicted.
"7309—Either the Chief Justice, on reference to his notes, (he cannot forget the trial) or the clerk of the Crown, or the Crown Solicitor, on reference to the Crown hook, can, in a minute, state particulars."
The House will observe that this trial is said to have taken place from ten to twelve years ago, and to have been tried before Chief Justice Bushe, at Omagh, on the north-west circuit, in the county Tyrone. Now, I can take upon me to state that since that worthy Judge has had a seat on the Bench, he has never gone the northwest circuit. In the years 1810, 1811, and 1821, (the latter of which is fifteen years ago, that Gentleman went that circuit, as Solicitor-General; but I can affirm, without the fear of contradiction, that no such case as M'Cabe v. Robinson or any case resembling it, was tried before him, and what is more, that no such case appears on the Crown books of that circuit. So the conversation which the learned Counsellor states to have taken place between him and that upright and worthy Judge, in which he addresses him with the familiar expression of "my dear fellow," has no existence, save in the brain of the learned Gentleman. But as the learned witness so boldly referred to the notes of the learned Judge, I venture to say that he would have proved his discretion better had he made an application to that distinguished individual, before he gave his testimony; and I also undertake to say, that that most excellent Judge, who has for so many years exercised the
844
judicial functions in a manner to do honour to himself and to reflect credit on the Bench, would have answered him as I now answer his statement, that it was altogether without foundation. The only further observation I shall make upon this case is, that the learned Gentleman states the accused parties to have issued from their Lodge-room near Portadown. Now, Portadown is in the county of Armagh, consequently had the transaction occurred in that county the trial would have taken place in that county and not in Tyrone.—It is said that an Act of parliament to put down all secret societies would restore peace. Why, the only society which disturbs the peace in Ireland, defies Acts of Parliament, and has evaded the researches of all Government functionaries. What knowledge have these Gentlemen obtained respecting Riband societies? I shall let the House see. Here the hon. Member referred to the evidences of Colonel Stoven, Mr. J. Gore Jones, and Mr. Duff, c. c. 6, professing their total ignorance of the existence of Riband societies, differing so very materially from the evidence of that respectable gentleman, Mr. Sinclair, of Strabane, who stated that he knew they existed to a large extent; for as the hon. Member for Middlesex has quoted the evidence of Mr. Innes, of Glasgow, upon the subject of Orange Lodges in Scotland, I must be permitted to call the attention of the House to what that Gentleman has said upon the subject of Ribbon societies, and compare it with the evidence of those gentlemen whom I have just named.
Mr. Cosmo Innes gave evidence as follows:
"2959—Cannot say that he has discovered Ribbon Lodges, but is aware of their existence.
"2960—Had information of their meetings at Glasgow to a considerable extent. In all instances there was a meeting of twenty-four delegates from different Societies of Ireland—men at one time in Glasgow, when they were addressed and stimulated by a paid emissary of the Ribbonmen who had come from Ireland.
"2963—They meet every day in a different place—they never keep to one place of meeting.
"2970—Has no doubt that an emissary was sent from Ireland to attend a Ribbon Lodge in Glasgow.
"2971—Thinks he has got hold of an emissary but is not sure of convicting him, as the

845
evidence was not complete when he left Glasgow."
How are we to account for the superior information of this Gentleman? Because he was discharging a duty to the laws, and keeping vigilant watch on those who threatened, whether openly or in secret, the public security. In Ireland stipendiary Magistrates occupied themselves in finding out the politics of gentlemen, and ascertaining, not whether law was enforced or endangered, but how certain persons stood affected towards the Government or the Ministry of the day. I shall read an extract from the Report of Mr. Duff, given in by himself in evidence before the Committee:—
Mr. Duff, Chief Constable of Police.—Extract from his Report to the Government:—"As a further convincing proof as to Colonel Verner's wishes to oppose and embarrass the Government, I feel it my duty to state the following circumstance, which I can have proved at any time called on, and which took place during my absence on duty from this district—namely, that on the night the intelligence reached this part of the country as to Earl Grey's resignation, he (Colonel Verner) assembled the Orangemen of his neighbourhood to celebrate the event at his own house, in front of which he had an immense large bonfire erected, the bands playing party tunes."
This constable resides in a different county—in a different district from where he states this transaction to have taken place, and with which, officially, he is unconnected; how far the statement may be correct is immaterial; the act of that gentleman is all I have to do with; to have obtained this information he must have been indebted toothers—whether employed by him for the purpose, or not, it is impossible for me to say, but I would wish him a more profitable employment, and if spies are to be placed upon me, which is to me a matter of total indifference, I think it would be much better if they were persons who, while keeping watch upon me, were not neglecting matters of much greater moment. This gentleman describes himself as Chief Constable of Police and Captain of Militia. I am greatly mistaken if the members of that highly respectable and valuable body, which has rendered such services to its country, would not have preferred that the gallant captain had not given himself this title, or, having done so, that he had omitted to state the description of service in which he has been of late engaged, that of reporting se-
846
cretly to the government the private acts of the gentry of the country, and the occurrences which take place within the precincts of their desmesnes—and for aught I know, within the walls of their mansion. I am now speaking my sentiments as a military man—and, in my day, it was not the description of duty which was considered exactly creditable to a gentleman bearing the rank of captain in his Majesty's service. I shall now notice what I consider a very remarkable circumstance. That the hon. Members who have been most conspicuous in their exertions to put down Orange societies, have been equally notorious for their efforts to excite agitation in the Colonies and in Ireland. The endeavours of the hon. member for Middlesex are too remarkable to be forgotten, and were of a character that it was impossible to misunderstand. That hon. Gentleman, who looked with hope to see the Canadas liberated from what he called "the baleful domination of the mother country," labours also to see Orangeism put down in the Colonies. The hon. Member for Dublin, and I may add, the Member for Kilkenny, hope to see Ireland "great, glorious, and free," and hope that that establishment, the rival one in which the hon. Member takes some interest—the establishment which is called the Bank of Ireland may give way to that which is called the Hibernian Bank, and an Irish parliament may again resume its sittings in College-green. Well, these hon. Members whose hearts are set on the Repeal of the Union—the hon. Member who so frequently declared that if the Orangemen would join him, in twelve months he should have attained his object—who assigns even now, as a reason why he for a short time abstains from urging it, that the Orangemen are opposed to his wishes—these hon. Members seek to put down Orangeism in Ireland. Plain men, who would strengthen the bonds of British connexion with Ireland, and would keep up a good understanding with the colonies; plain men, who would oppose the repealer in Ireland and the disturber in Canada, will not think it unfavourable to the Orange Society that such persons are its enemies. I know it may be said that better motives than the wish to remove an impediment out of the way of agitation, may influence some who desire to destroy the Orange Institution. They may express a hope that the country

847
would be more contented if that institution were put down, and that it is to produce that contentment they labour for its destruction. Well, the hon. Member for Kilkenny, where there is no Orange Lodge, says that his county will become more peaceful if the Protestants of the North are insulted, and their institutions broken down. Will Kilkenny Juries be improved, or the condition of the people in Kilkenny bettered? Does the hon. Member for Tipperary affirm that the wages of assassination will rise in the county which he represents—that murders will be less frequent, and justice more surely visited on the offender? Does the hon. Member for Dublin mean to say, that any one of the counties in the province of Munster would become more tranquil, if Orangemen in Ulster were put down; or, will any of these hon. Members affirm, that any county in the south or west of Ireland, I care not which they name, any county, where, if they please, no Orange Lodge is in existence, equals in tranquillity—in absence of systematic disorder—in freedom from crime, the very worst county, or if they please to name it, the most thickly studded with Orange Lodges in Ulster. Will they submit this to the test of a strict and close inquiry? I will make, Sir, a bold statement, and a fair proposal. The province of Ulster contains nine counties, and a population of considerably more than a fourth of the people of Ireland. I affirm that over that entire province, during the thirty-five years which have elapsed since the Union with Great Britain, so many cold-blooded and atrocious crimes have not been committed as have been perpetrated within a single year, and in a single county, in the part of Ireland where Orangeism is almost unknown. Let a Jury of twelve English Members be impanelled upon the case. If I do not prove it triumphantly, I submit to be stigmatised for culpable presumption. If I prove it if I shew that the history of one southern county for a year, a month, records more atrocities than can be charged against the Protestants of the nine counties of Ulster during the lapse of five-and-thirty years, what is to be thought of their case who so strenuously labour to break the bonds of that Union, to which, under God, the tranquillity of the north should be ascribed There is another circumstance to be observed. I affirm that not a single statement hag been contradicted or shaken ad-
848
vanced in defence of the Orange body. We have placed it on record, that until the formation of Orange societies, Ulster was in disorder—that from that time to this it has been tranquil. I beg in conclusion to make one more proposal, and I respectfully address it to his Majesty's Ministers.—let them take up the county of Tipperary, where every thing will favour the experiment, and try their hands upon it—if within five years they restore it to peace, I undertake on the part of Armagh that we will receive with the utmost deference the slightest intimation of their desire and will. But if they give up Tipperary, or if they fail to raise it to that state for which we, in Armagh, have reason to be thankful, I would pray of them to leave us in Armagh in our present tranquillity—and I would add, that it is much easier to disturb a district which is confessed to be quiet, than it is to improve the condition of a disturbed one.
Colonel Percevalsaid, that circumstanced as he was—being an officer of the Orange Institution, he trusted that a British House of Commons would not refuse him a patient hearing. He begged to state that it was not his intention to address the House at any length, and if hon. Members would but attend to him, he undertook not to occupy them more than a few minutes. It had been his lot on many occasions to address the House on the subject of the Orange Institution,—and from the tone and temper in which the debate was conducted, he could not conceal from himself that the discussions on the Orange Institution were now about to come to a close. The great characteristic of the Orange Institutions of Ireland had been inalienable loyalty. In no case, under no circumstances, had any change taken place in their feelings of loyalty to the King, and attachment to the Constitution and the Protestant religion. Such had been their polar star heretofore, and now that a crisis had arrived, he entertained a confident hope that Orangemen would, one and all, manifest the same unflinching loyalty which had always been nearest and dearest to their hearts. He believed it now impossible that any Orangeman could for a moment think of averting the Address to his Majesty to discountenance all secret associations, and in that feeling he would imitate the example of his hon. Friend near him, and inculcate on those

849
with whom he had been now four years associated, to submit to the expressed will of his Majesty, which to them was tantamount to law, and to succumb to the opinion which the House was about to express. Having said so much he could not proceed without expressing his satisfaction at the tone, the temper, and the moderation of the noble Lord (John Russell) and he hoped that those with whom he was connected would act in the same conciliatory disposition; but he trusted that the noble Lord would not weaken the moral influence in Ireland of those on whom he thus called to make a sacrifice of their feelings, by introducing the words Orange Institution into the resolution, or diminish that power by which they might hope to prevail on their less informed brethren to imitate their example. With these feelings he trusted the noble Lord would consent to withdraw the words "Orange Societies," That body formed a part of the secret societies in Ireland, and he did hope that the noble Lord would not insist on maintaining the words, the effect of which must be to stigmatize that body who were ready to conform to his Majesty's wishes. The words would convey a sting, and would tend to weaken the influence of those in whom the members of the Orange institution placed confidence. He assured the noble Lord that the influence of those individuals who took the lead in the Orange Institution, and who are now willing to act up to the spirit of the resolution, would be greatly weakened, and their power of inducing others to imitate their example would be much diminished, if they believed (and they would believe it), if they saw that they only were mentioned that the chief aim of the resolution was to put down Orange associations exclusively. He therefore called upon the noble Lord to omit those two words, and then his resolution would embrace all secret societies, without stigmatizing the Orange body, as the address in its present shape so unnecessarily did. He concurred in much of what had fallen from the noble Lord, but he differed from him in thinking that Orange associations were formed to support Protestant ascendancy, and that Ribbonmen or Defenders arose out of those associations. He remembered that in the year 1795, when he was but a small boy, the Defenders—the Ribonmen of that day—existed as a party—that they
850
were in the habit of going about in the open day, in the county of Sligo, and attacking gentlemen's houses, and demanding arms. He remembered the attack made by a party of those Defenders on the house of his father, who was a clergyman of the Established church, and that the party would have hanged him, but for the prompt interference of the Protestants of the neighbouring village of Ballymote, in that county, who came to his aid. This was anterior to the formation of any Orange Societies. It, in fact, occurred in the year '95, whereas, the first Orange Lodge was formed in the county of Sligo, in the year 1796. The various ramifications of that Institution, in different parts of Ireland, will be found consequent upon similar outrages, thereby proving, that the Orange Institution was strictly of a defensive or protective character. The facts which he had stated, had the Committee been allowed to continue its labours, would have been proved by Colonel Irwin, a name known to and respected by every Irish gentleman who had been summoned over for that purpose. Having said thus much, he would only repeat to the noble Lord his earnest hope that he would consent to make the alteration to which he had already referred, in the wording of the resolution, in consideration of the feeling in which the spirit of that resolution was met by those who were connected with Orange societies at that (the opposition) aide of the house.
Lord Stanleyrose. Some Gentlemen, the noble Lord observed, were anxious for a division, but his earnest hope was that there might be no division on the question before the House. He was so much afraid to make use of a single expression which might disturb the harmony that pervaded the House, that he would not have arisen if he could resist the temptation to congratulate his noble Friend (Lord John Russell) on the triumph he had obtained by the mild, quiet, prudent, and statesmanlike tone he had assumed on this occasion. It was a source of great satisfaction to him, to observe that on a subject like that before them, which was so well calculated to excite strong feelings, and more particularly the feelings of Irish Members, there had not, with scarcely one exception, been uttered a sentiment which did not do honour to him who spoke it. He attributed this to the mild and conciliatory tone in which his noble Friend, had intro-

851
duced his amendment to the House. He (Lord Stanley) begged to congratulate his noble Friend and his Majesty's Government on the great triumph he had thus achieved, As an old and sincerely attached friend, he congratulated his noble Friend on it, and he also congratulated the Government on the great accession of strength it had thus acquired, and on the manner in which it had been acquired. His noble Friend had achieved this triumph not by flattering prejudices, which ought not to be flattered, but which, how everyone might differ from them, ought to be treated with forbearance, because they were held with sincerity. He was certain that even amongst those who were most anxious to support Orange Societies in Ireland, there were many who would be convinced that the tone of his noble Friend, though it was not that most calculated to flatter passions and prejudices, was at least that which would contribute most to the tranquillity of the country. In expressing his admiration of the prudent course taken by his noble Friend for the purpose of putting down all secret associations in Ireland, he must not withhold that meed of praise, which he was sure their most bitter enemies would concede to the gallant and manly conduct in which the conciliatory tone of his noble Friend had been met by hon. Members at that (the Opposition) side of the House. He was sure that in that way his noble Friend would acquire more strength to his Government, and would more effectually succeed in the object he had in view, than he could by the most severe penal enactments. At the same time he felt convinced that his noble Friend would do justice to the hon. and gallant Friends near him (Lord Stanley,) for their willingness thus to respond to his conciliatory tone by the sacrifice of early prejudices. His hon. and gallant Friends would excuse him for calling them prejudices, but he did so think them, though, at the same time, he firmly believed that they were most sincerely and conscientiously entertained. It was not his intention to enter into any argument on the question before the House. For his own part he was satisfied with the amendment of his noble Friend. His noble Friend had seen the advantages of a conciliatory course, and had fully availed himself of that experience. It was impossible for any one to doubt, from what had occurred with respect, to Orange Associations in the last
852
Session of Parliament, that they were most pointedly included in the spirit of the present resolution, and that that would have been the understanding with respect to them, whether they had been mentioned by name or not. His hon. and gallant Friends near him had so understood it, and had expressed themselves willing to make the required sacrifice, though the name of Orange Societies had not been mentioned. He would therefore ask his noble Friend whether he was not prepared, by way of completing his triumph, to omit those words which could not add to the moral force of his resolution, but which might have the effect of weakening the influence of those by whose co-operation that resolution might be rendered most available for its intended object [Oh, oh.] Gentlemen who cried ''Oh," had a very different idea of a ministerial triumph from that which he had. He looked upon a triumph not as that of a party over a fallen adversary, he looked to the triumph of a Minister, who, by his mild, conciliatory, and statesman-like conduct, had achieved a national triumph over party prejudices which two years ago any man would have deemed almost impossible. That was the kind of triumph which was within his noble Friend's grasp—that was the kind of triumph which he wished to complete, and it was from that wish that he earnestly hoped his noble Friend would consent to the omission of those objectionable words. For his own part he did not object to them; but though he did not, he still felt that they were objected to by others as tending to diminish that power and influence which they were prepared to assert in carrying out the spirit of the resolution. It was important for the purpose of the resolution itself that that power should not be diminished, nor any stigma be thrown on those who were ready to exert it. He was sure his noble Friend had not meant by the use of those words to cast any imputation. He was sure the resolution was so understood by Gentlemen of that (the Opposition) side. But the same feeling would not be found to exist amongst their less informed brethren. Amongst that class, the use of those words might have the effect of marring the exertions of those hon. Members who were disposed to act up to the spirit of the resolution. Let it be recollected, that in carrying out that resolution they had to encounter the prejudices and. feelings of those who would take a very

853
different view of it from his hon. and gallant Friends, and who might not be prepared to make a similar sacrifice. It was on these grounds that he earnestly hoped his noble Friend would wave the use of even one word which might offend the feelings of even one Member of that House. If his noble Friend did, he should have the satisfaction of knowing that he had spent one night in the British Parliament which had been marked by mutual forbearance, and that that desirable result had been brought about by the kind, prudent, and conciliatory conduct of old and valued Friends of his own; and that in consequence of such conciliatory conduct, there were many hon. Members prepared to make a sacrifice of their early prejudices, in that spirit which would greatly tend to the pacification of the country.
Lord John Russellhoped that the House would indulge him a few moments after the appeal made to him by his noble Friend. He assured the Mouse, that after the statement of the hon. and gallant Colonel, and of his noble Friend who had just sat down, he felt great pain in being obliged to state that he had heard nothing in the able statements of both which could induce him to alter the resolution in the way they had suggested. In saying this, he hoped he should be understood as not unwilling so to frame the resolution as to meet the wishes of the hon. and gallant Colonel, and of others who felt sensitively on this subject, if he could do so without departing from that which he considered his duty on the present occasion. It did appear to him, after what had occurred last year, that a necessity had arisen for putting an end to all secret associations, and that the House was bound to declare its opinion whether those societies were injurious or otherwise to the public tranquillity. He did not think, therefore, that the House would meet the case fairly unless it inserted in the resolution the words "Orange Lodges." It was beyond doubt that all the previous debate had referred to those societies, but, after what had occurred, and after mentioning other societies in general, it was their duty to mention these in particular; and he owned that he did not see why hon. Gentlemen should think that the use of those words implied a stigma on them; there was no opinion pronounced as to the legality of those societies—there was nothing more said than that these as well as other secret
854
societies should receive the disapprobation of the Crown. Under these circumstances, he regretted his inability to comply with the suggestion of his noble Friend.
Sir Robert Peelsaid, that the refusal of the noble Lord to comply with the request of his noble Friend, would not alter the tone and temper of the few observations he should make. He was sure that it would be for the tranquillity of Ireland that an end should be put to all secret societies in that country. The existence of any of them was an evil, inasmuch as it held out a bad example to others. His opinion and his wish were, not only that an end should be put to all such associations, but he also wished to see the spirit in which they originated entirely and effectually suppressed. If the spirit remained, they would gain little by the suppression of its external forms. But he did regret that the noble Lord should not have given way to the suggestion of the noble Lord's Friend (Lord Stanley), for he owned that though he was prepared to assent to the noble Lord's amendment, it was not without great sacrifice of opinion. He objected to proceeding by resolution; he thought they ought to indicate the will of the Legislature by a law rather than by a resolution of one branch of it. They ought studiously to avoid a course by which a dominant majority of that House could denounce any party. They should be cautious in denouncing by a majority of that House any proceedings of any bodies, which, though they might be objectionable in many respects, might still not be against any law of the land. The resolutions of that House had no force, except such as the prerogative of the Crown might give them; they had not the force of law, and this was the first time that he had heard of establishing the precedent of a resolution of that House, disqualifying for office on the alleged ground of conduct, the legality of which was at least questionable. However, he waved all those objections, for he perceived that all in that House were prepared to address the Crown to put an end to all secret societies. Independently of his own feeling on the subject, he objected to the words which had been used that Orange Societies were illegal. The hon. Baronet who had seconded the resolution, had declared that all those societies were contrary to the law of the land, and added that the Attorney-General had nothing to

855
do but to institute prosecutions, in order to have them so declared by the Courts of Law. Now, if that was so, it was a powerful objection to this resolution, because if they believed that the members of Orange societies ought to be prosecuted, and were amenable to the law, they ought not to send them to trial loaded with the declared opinion of that House as to their guilt. In fact, the only ground on which the resolution before the House proceeded was, that these societies were not contrary to law; the noble Lord was, therefore, right in not sending them, to another tribunal, for if the issue of such a trial should be a declaration of their legality, the noble Lord would find it much more difficult to put them down on a future occasion. If, then, there was a doubt as to the illegality of those societies, that was a reason why they should not be specifically mentioned in the resolution. It was not, as he had before said, to the mere Orange lodges to which he objected, but to the spirit in which they had originated. He admitted that the words of the resolution did virtually include Orange lodges, even without naming them; and he saw no advantage which they could gain by those societies being specifically mentioned. The acquiescence of that (the Opposition) side in the resolution of the noble Lord, was not that of a reluctant minority; they had come to the House prepared to acquiesce in a resolution couched in nearly the same words as that of the noble Lord. They had not expected his Amendment; they were prepared to oppose the criminatory resolution of the hon. Member for Middlesex; but when they heard the expressed declaration of many hon. Members, that they were prepared to give up all connexion with such associations, on hearing an expression of the will of the Crown to that effect, they thought that the object of that House, and of the Government, would be sufficiently answered by the resolution which an hon. Member (Mr. Wilson Patten) had expressed his intention of moving, which was, that an humble Address be presented to his Majesty, praying that his Majesty might be graciously pleased to take such steps as to his Majesty might seem most desirable, to discountenance all secret societies, having secret signs, and excluding persons on account of difference in religious sentiments. This was the Address to which they were prepared to agree, before they
856
knew the course which the noble Lord intended to take; and, after what had been stated by hon. Members at that (the Opposition) side of the House, he thought the most effectual mode of suppressing secret societies would be, by withdrawing words which were found offensive to those from whose example and influence they might expect co-operation in their great object. That great object was to restore tranquillity to Ireland. His hon. and gallant Friends on that side were disposed to make a great sacrifice of their opinions for that purpose. They expressed their readiness not only to withdraw themselves from those associations, but to induce all others over whom they had any influence to follow their example. It would, therefore, be prudent and politic in the House not to weaken the influence of those from whom they had reason to expect such co-operation. In Conclusion, he felt bound to observe, that after what he had heard of the intention of his hon. and gallant Friends to co-operate with them in their views—after what he had heard of the sacrifices they were willing to make of their prejudices and feelings, he thought it incumbent on the House not to allow any word to remain in the resolution to wound the sensibility of any one hon. Member. If those hon. Members who objected to the wording of the resolution as proposed by the noble Lord, did not choose to press their objection, they might save the House a division; but if they did, he felt that, after the declarations they had made, he could not abandon them. He must, therefore, vote with him.
Mr. O'Connellcame to the House strongly determined to support the principle of the resolution, but he hailed with great satisfaction the proceedings of that night. From that day party triumph ought to cease, and be buried in total oblivion; and he declared solemnly, that if he thought the words "Orange Lodges" could be construed into any thing like a party triumph, rather than a mere distinctive appellation, after the speeches of the right hon. Baronet (the Member for Tamworth), and the hon. and gallant Colonel (the Member for Sligo), he could not possibly consent to fix such a stigma upon that body. He thought the introduction of the words "Orange Lodges" was necessary for the intelligibility of the resolution, and if hon. Gentlemen opposite thought there was any other body in

857
Ireland a specification of which would render the resolution less invidious, he for one was ready to consent to it. But what course did the hon. Gentlemen pursue in 1829, in passing a temporary Act of Parliament making the Catholic Association perpetually illegal? It was done so as to put an end to it, and no man felt personally affected by that political exclusion. Its object was fulfilled. For his (Mr. O'Connell's) part, he sincerely hoped, from the candid and manly avowal of the gallant Member for Sligo, that the Orange Lodges would see the propriety of dissolving voluntarily, though from what fell from the gallant Colonel opposite (Colonel Verner), who seemed to say (and if he misunderstood him he should be glad to be set right), that he for one would not abandon the institution, he had no strong expectation of the fact. The gallant Member certainly possessed considerable influence with that body, and if he chose to lake that part and continue the Lodges, and that any future Administration received an address from an Orange Lodge—and there were Administrations who did receive addresses from Orangemen—then the resolutions of the noble Lord would stand recorded on the books of that House condemning the Act. That was one advantage in retaining the words in the resolution. The resolution was not a triumph to any party; there could be no triumph, after what had passed that night. The Orangemen had given an honourable proof of their conciliatory spirit, and he was sure, that their genuine loyalty, of which they were so proud, would be a shield and a safeguard to protect them from any imputation. He was sure not the slightest censure could attach to them. The words were not an imputation, but merely a specification. There was no possible disgrace or disapprobation, he repeated, to be inferred from them. The former resolutions of his Friend, the Member for Middlesex, were certainly calculated to affix a stigma and a censure, and for this reason, after what had occurred that night, he would not support them. The conduct of the noble Lord was highly temperate and creditable, and deserved the approbation of the House, and if there were a division he would, undoubtedly, vote for the noble Lord's amendment.
Mr. Randal Plunketthaving been himself personally assailed, as well as allusion having been made to a noble relative of
858
his, thought the House ought to hear him. He would just read the extract from the paper alluded to, and then the House would see that he could not have meant to convey the idea hinted at; but he would tell the House what he must have written, and then the House could judge. He must have meant that the Orange Society was the only one comprising persons of all ranks, viz., from the rank nearest to the Throne to the poorest peasant. He should not condescend to defend himself or the Orangemen from a charge of treason. He came down to the House fully prepared with most important documents to prove the existence and character of those combinations against Protestants, which render such an union thereof, if not absolutely necessary, at least desirable; but, in the present disposition of the House, he should not even allude to them. He could only say, that whatever might be the pleasure of his most gracious Majesty, in whatever way signified by his responsible advisers, he would exert his influence, as far as it extended, in the county over which a noble relative of his, who had been alluded to, presides as lieutenant. He did not mean to blame the manner in which that allusion was made, to induce others to obey honestly, sincerely, and promptly, notwithstanding the pain he felt at the present decision. But he must press upon the noble Lord, if he expected them either to have or to exert any influence with their brother Orangemen, to withdraw the offensive expression in his Amendment. The loyalty of the Orangemen was not conditional loyalty, as they should prove, whatever it might cost them.
Mr. Shawsaid, he rose for no other purpose, at that period of the debate, than to entreat his hon. Friends behind him, connected with the Orange society, under all the circumstances, not to divide the House. He felt for their situation, and he could not sufficiently express his admiration of the candour, the ingenuousness, and the manliness with which they had stated their willingness dutifully to submit to the pleasure of the Crown, when once it should be declared. He must, too, add his warmest and sincerest thanks to those which his hon. Friends had already received, for the great sacrifice they were prepared to make of private and personal feeling in deference to the wishes and opinions of those friends who had the good fortune to think and act with them, on almost every question of

859
public interest, and at a time when it was so important that no circumstance should divide the influence, or weaken the strength of that great constitutional party with which they were identified. He could not, however, but strongly put it to the judgment and great taste of the noble Lord, after the temperate and judicious speech the noble Lord had made, to withdraw the words "Orange lodges," to which objection had been taken by his hon. Friends, and leave the resolution general.—The noble Lord would, by that means, better promote the object he professed, of putting an end to secret associations, and allaying party spirit, without allowing the transactions of that night to wear the aspect of a party triumph—although the hon. and learned Member for Dublin (Mr. O'Connell) had altogether disclaimed that interpretation of it. He believed that the noble Lord would assent to omit the words, were he to consult his own better feelings and unbiassed judgment—but if the noble Lord still persisted in his refusal—he, notwithstanding, would implore his hon. Friends rather to suffer the objectionable words to remain, than bring the question to a division upon a point which was after all rather literal than real, when upon the substantial question they had so generously overcome their own inclinations—and when a division must tend to the embarrassment of others, whose anxious desire had been expressed, and he believed most sincerely was to act with his Hon. Friends on that occasion.
Mr. Anthony Lefroyrose amidst loud cries of "question," and said, that after so protracted a debate, he should rather have abstained from offering any observations, if he had not been personally alluded to by the hon. Member for Cornwall, in a speech which he must be allowed to say, appeared to him to be most intemperate, and to contain very unfounded charges against all Orange bodies; and therefore, being aware how much the silence of a sincere Orangeman on such an occasion might be misrepresented, he implored the indulgence of the House whilst he shortly addressed them, not in defence of the Orangemen of England—for if they had erred, as had been described by the hon. Member for Cornwall, it was sufficient for him (Mr. A. Lefroy) to know and repeat, what had been already declared by his hon. Friend, the secretary of the Irish Orangemen, that they formed no
860
part of the system with which he was connected, and that the body to which he belonged were strictly of a defensive character—and bound together by the strictest ties of loyalty and Christian feeling. His object now was to express the satisfaction he felt in the conciliatory, but firm tone of his hon. Friend, the Member for Cavan; and he agreed also with him, and the noble Lord, the Member for Lancashire, In thinking, that the Secretary for the Home Department had proposed the Address in mild and gratifying terms, particularly as he had, in reply to the wish expressed by his hon. Friends, declared that he had not intended to cast any censure upon the Orange body by the insertion of their name, but that it was done in accordance with the proceedings of the House; at the same time he could not express any approbation of the motives that influenced the noble Lord in proposing these resolutions; he believed that he was urged beyond his own sense of justice and fairness, by a secret and dangerous power; and he was the more convinced of this by the fact of the noble Lord still persevering in resisting the powerful appeals of the noble Lord, the Member for Lancashire, and the Tight hon. Baronet, the Member for Tamworth. Under such circumstances, if he were to consult his own feelings, he would not consent to the resolution; but as it appeared to his hon. Friends that more good would be effected by abstaining from a division, he would rather endure even the insult put upon him as an Orangeman, by such a majority of this House, than intercept the accomplishment of any real benefit; and from what he knew of Orangemen and their feelings, he hoped, nay, he ventured to declare, that if the House passed the resolution, and the King recommended the Orange Institution to dissolve, the Orangemen would sincerely and immediately acquiesce in the recommendation, and not adopt the example of those who had boasted they would drive a carriage through, an Act of Parliament.
Mr. Humesaid, though he liked his own resolutions best, he would withdraw them for the resolution of the noble Lord.
Mr. Edward J. Coopersaid The had the honour of possessing the confidence generally of the county of Sligo not only amongst Orangemen and Protestants, but Roman Catholics also; and he was of

861
opinion, that if the words were allowed to remain, the mass of Orangemen in that county would think it a stain and a stigma, and that a party triumph was achieved. And though he should go the full length of recommending the Orangemen of Sligo, who had placed him at their head, to conform, to the express wish of his Majesty, he yet could not conceal from himself or the House, that the means of accomplishing this end would be considerably weakened, if the words objected to were allowed to remain in the resolution.
Colonel Vernersaid, he should move that the words be left out, and that it was his intention to take the opinion of the House upon the question.
Colonel Verner's amendment was negatived without a division, and Lord John Russell's resolution was agreed to.

MINUTES.
Petitions presented. By the Duke of WELLINGTON, from Owners and Occupiers of Land in Hampshire, Complaining of Agricultural Distress.—By Earl DE GREY, from the Boroughbridge Agricultural Society, to the same effect.—By the Earl of ABERDEEN, from New Brunswick, against any Alteration in the Timber Duties.—By the Earl of ILCHESTER, from Yeovil Complaining of Agricultural Distress.—By the Marquess of WESTMINSTER from the Proctors of the Consistory Court of Chester, against the Probate Clause in the Ecclesiastical Courts

727
Bill.—By Lord WHARNCLIFFS, from Wakefield, against the Additional Duty on Spirit Licenses.

APPOINTMENT OF BOROUGH MAGISTRATES.
Lord Wharncliffehaving presented two petitions from the city of Rochester, relative to the recent appointment of Magistrates there, said he should at once move the Order of the Day, of which he had previously given notice, relative to the appointment of Magistrates in boroughs under the Municipal Corporation Act. He should have to bring before their Lordships certain circumstances with respect to the conduct that had been pursued in several boroughs in the election of Magistrates under the Act of Parliament which had been recently passed; and it was his intention, before he sat down, to move for certain returns that would tend to throw a considerable light on this subject. He was aware that, in making this motion, it was his duty, as it would be the duty of any other noble Lord who undertook the task, to adduce proper reasons in support of it. He should, therefore, in the first place, remind their Lordships of all that had passed in that House during the debate on the Municipal Corporation Bill. They had been told that that Bill would introduce a new era—that corporate funds would be fairly dealt with—that the administration of justice would be more pure and perfect—and that party and political feeling would no longer be the sole passport to municipal office. They now had popular election; but it appeared to him that the evils which had been complained of under the old system were not removed. He confessed that he had always thought that the accusations against the old boroughs were considerably exaggerated; at the same time he admitted that it was necessary to reform those institutions generally. He did not think that they were calculated to carry on the municipal government as it ought to be carried on, and therefore he felt that it was necessary that they should be reformed. He believed that his noble Friend behind him (the Duke of Wellington), and many individuals in another place, who had paid attention to this subject, and who endeavoured to improve the Bill, acted on the purest principle, without any factions or party view. They had stated that it was necessary that a reform should be effected, but they wished it to be a wise and a temperate reform. They wished that all undue influence should be removed from elections in corporate bodies, that the people should have a fair share in those elections, and
728
they had strongly urged this point, that while reforming the existing system care should be taken that the reform was real, and was not a mere change of power from one political party to another. He should, he conceived, be able to prove to their Lordships that, instead of the Bill having been productive of all the benefits which it had been confidently predicted would flow from it—instead of excluding the operation of party and political feeling, the fact was directly the other way. He should call the attention of their Lordships to the immediate operation of the Act; and it certainly appeared to him, that not alone in the choice of town-councillors, but even, still more, in the choice of Magistrates, the principle of exclusion was decidedly acted on. The change was merely a change of party—the principle of exclusion had been preserved. In order to come to a right understanding upon this point, it was necessary to look at the situation of corporations before the new Act was passed. Undoubtedly, at that time, the magistrates and town-councils were almost all self-elected—were almost all of a certain way of thinking. They elected upon the principle of exclusion; which, previously to the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts, and more especially previously to the emancipation of the Roman Catholics, was strictly adhered to. Now, it certainly was not unnatural that the principle of not admitting Dissenters and Roman Catholics into corporations should have prevailed, looking to the circumstances of the times, because, in fact, before the repeal of the laws to which he had adverted, they could not legally be admitted, But he would fairly confess that he felt that the principle of exclusion was one which ought not, and could not be continued; and he had, from that feeling, told many members of corporations, that if they persisted in that system of exclusion, they would force upon the Crown and upon Parliament the necessity of interfering to effect an alteration in the system. Such a sentiment was entertained generally, and in consequence Government introduced the Municipal Corporation Bill. When that Bill came up from the House of Commons it was the duty of their Lordships to see whether its provisions were likely to insure all the purposes for effecting which the measure was proposed. The first thing which naturally struck them was, to take special care as to the manner in which the town-councillors should be appointed; and

729
next, to separate that which had reference to the administration of justice from the other parts of the Bill. The measure, as it came to that House, gave the town-councils the power of nominating justices, leaving a veto only to the Crown. Their Lordships had prudently altered that clause, so as to take the nomination entirely out of the hands of the town-council. That alteration, it appeared to him at the time, was likely to insure the efficiency of this part of the Bill; but he regretted exceedingly that circumstances had since occurred which showed how that provision might be evaded. The bill, amended by their Lordships was afterwards sent down to the House of Commons, and they all knew that this particular amendment of their Lordships was at first rejected, and that the Commons insisted upon retaining the original clause. When the Bill was again returned, their Lordships most wisely and prudently insisted upon their amendment; and he undoubtedly had read with great surprise that, in the course of the debate which took place in the House of Commons, after the Bill had been sent down a second time, on that occasion the noble Secretary of State for the Home Department—the leader of the House of Commons—had stood up in his place, and (not using these very words, but words to the same effect) had stated—"that it did not much matter what their Lordships had done in this case; for, so long as he and his colleagues remained in office, the opinion of the town-councils would have the greatest weight with them." It appeared to him that a Minister of State who, after a Bill had passed their Lordships' House, would thus stand up in his place, and tell the people of England, "it is true the Parliament have agreed to such a clause, but I will show you how it shall be evaded," acted in a most unjustifiable manner. It appeared to him, he repeated, to be one of the most unjustifiable declarations that could possibly be made. In this state the bill had passed—such was the law; and that being the case the next question was, how had it operated. The election of town-councillors turned out just as he expected that it would. The great body of the voters, in many boroughs, had got rid of the old town-councillors, who were all of a particular class of politics—a result which, from the beginning, he expected. There was no doubt that it was quite natural for those who had been so long excluded from power to take this step. He, however,
730
confessed to their Lordships (and he did not doubt that such would be the fact) that, in spite of any improper elections that had been made, he did hope, that in the end the result of this Bill would be a fair representation of all parties; and, therefore, he would say no more upon the subject of elections. He was, however, compelled to refer to the proceedings of the town-councils. Those proceedings showed most clearly that of all people in the world, those bodies were the very last to whom the Secretary of State should have applied for information with reference to those whom they conceived to be fit to act as magistrates. They had, it should be observed, just achieved a victory—they were flushed with triumph, and it was at that moment of heat and excitation that the noble Secretary called upon them for advice. The result was, as might be expected, that the lists for the magistracy sent up by the town-councils consisted entirely of men of one set of opinions in politics. In some instances there might be found one, two, three, or four persons of Conservative opinions returned, but somehow or other it always happened that they were rejected. On the other hand, there were some boroughs where the majority of the town-council had been returned, of Conservative opinions, and, to their honour, the lists of magistrates sent up by them were distinguished by a very liberal spirit. He would first instance the borough of Southampton. The majority of the town-council there was Conservative; yet, to their credit, they sent up a list of ten persons as fit for magistrates, five of each party. In a letter addressed to him, five were described as Conservatives and five who were sometimes called Conservative Whigs, sometimes Whigs, sometimes Whig Radicals, and sometimes plain Radicals. Some of these terms he certainly did not understand. Between the Whig Radical and the Radical being the extreme of the party, he undoubtedly could perceive no difference, and unquestionably he knew not how the Whig and the Radical could ever have come to a point of conjunction. The next borough to which he would refer was that of Guildford. There also the majority of the town-council was Conservative. They returned a list of twelve names, of which nine were Conservatives and three were Liberals. He would next go to Bristol, where there was a very considerable majority of Conservatives, and they sent up a list consisting of twelve

731
Conservatives and twelve Whigs. Exeter was mainly Conservative, yet they had returned eight Conservatives and four Whigs. Again, at Ilchester, the great majority of the town-council was Conservative, yet their list of magistrates comprised individuals of both parties. He ought to observe to their Lordships, that no sooner were the elections over than a circular was issued from the Secretary of State's Office, calling upon the different town-councils to send up a list of the individuals elected, and pointing out those whom they recommended to be appointed magistrates. The first upon the list was Norwich, where twelve Conservatives had been elected to seventeen Liberals. Next came Yarmouth, which had placed on the town-council seventeen Liberals and three Conservatives. The town-council of Warwick was placed precisely in the same situation. They had elected twenty persons, of whom twelve were stated to be Whigs, one doubtful, and seven Tories, and what appeared to be very extraordinary was, that out of those Tories, as they were called, who were thus nominated, one was eighty-one years of age, and another seventy. At Cambridge and Liverpool scarcely any persons were proposed as being fit to act as magistrates whose politics were of a Conservative nature. Leeds had sent up a list of seventeen Liberals and one Conservative; and Coventry, under the same circumstances, had sent up a list in the proportion of twelve to one. [Viscount Melbourne: How does the noble Lord know the politics of all these people.] The noble Viscount might look at one of the newspapers which supported his own Government, and there he could easily ascertain the fact. He would not go through the whole list of boroughs, because the same system evidently prevailed in every case. Men were excluded on account of their political feeling, as was particularly manifested with respect to the rejection of the individual who had, in the preceding year, filled the situation of mayor of Newcastle-on-Tyne, who was perfectly acquainted with his duty, whose services would have been most valuable, and were indeed considered highly valuable in the eyes of the town. He quite agreed in the doctrine laid down on a former evening by the noble and learned Lord on the woolsack, with respect to the appointment of magistrates. He admitted that it was the duty of the Lord Chancellor, and of those who advised his Majesty on this subject, not to act upon the opinion of the
732
Lord Lieutenant—or of any individual or set of individuals—in appointing magistrates, but to satisfy themselves as to who were the individuals best fitted to fill the important situation of Magistrates. But, surely, as he had said before, men who were strongly excited—men whose political feelings leaned all one way—men whose passions had so recently been exasperated, were not the proper persons to give advice on a matter of so much importance as the selection of magistrates. He would now refer to some towns of great magnitude in which there had been contested elections. In Leeds the magistracy was contested, and he would just read an extract from the last Report of the Municipal Commissioners with reference to their inquiry into the conduct of the corporation of that town. They said, "The great respectability of the present members of the corporation, and their impartial conduct in the administration of justice, are universally admitted." If this were the case, when the corporation was to be renewed, and justices were to be appointed, why were the services of those individuals, which were thus handsomely acknowledged, not rendered available? Why were those persons rejected? No, the town-council had sent up the names of seventeen persons who were opposed to the old corporation, and the name of one who had been a member of it. They had also thought fit to make an individual a member of the corporation who was the editor of a party paper. A deputation was sent up to represent the impropriety of this nomination of Magistrates. The Secretary of State, however, retained fourteen of these persons. Three names were introduced by the noble Secretary, but of these only one could act. One of them was no longer eligible, not having an estate in the locality; the second was a surgeon in extensive practice, who could not spare time to perform the duties of a Magistrate; and the third was the son of a great manufacturer in the neighbourhood. Now, he would only ask, could the people of Leeds be satisfied when they found the town-council nominating none but persons who professed one particular line of politics? It was impossible that they could be satisfied. He might be told, that the office of a Magistrate was not one of emolument, and was not one of influence in counties. In towns, however, it was one of considerable importance, especially so in a borough where there was a contested election, and

733
where party spirit ran high. Every man wished to be distinguished, and to fill a certain rank in society; but no individual would like to have a mark put upon him on account of his political opinions. One of the reasons advanced for passing the Municipal Corporations Bill was, that it would remove all invidious distinctions; but he could not see how that principle was reconcileable with the fact of the Government setting aside all those who differed from them in political opinion. In Liverpool great dissatisfaction was felt towards the old corporation, but dissatisfaction was also felt at the conduct of the new corporation. It was an extraordinary thing, but the fact was, that only one person who had acted as a Magistrate when the old corporation was in existence had been re-appointed; and their Lordships themselves could not he more surprised if they were nominated to act as Magistrates at Liverpool than were the persons who had been appointed. With respect to Coventry, he admitted that the Report of the Commissioners was not so favourable as it was with respect to the corporation of Leeds. But he would ask the Government whether they could not have selected as Magistrates for that town highly respectable persons, of Conservative principles, who would have been perfectly qualified for the office, instead of taking them all from the opposite party. Why were not such persons selected? Why were they to be marked on account of their political opinions? The same system was pursued at Yarmouth. Out of the list of persons sent up to the Secretary of State, two, who were attornies, were objected to on account of their political principles, and others were substituted for them. With respect to the nomination of Magistrates for Leeds, it was a curious circumstance that the names of the persons who were to be appointed were published in a party paper there on the Saturday, although the Mayor was not put in possession of the information until the Tuesday following. With respect to Guildford, what had been the conduct of Government? Why, of the nine Conservatives who had been sent up, several had been thrown overboard by the Secretary of State, and persons were selected who had voted for the Whig candidate at the last election. Wigan was a place of considerable importance, and where he believed liberal principles prevailed to a great extent. The town-council of that borough had sent up a list of Magistrates, every one
734
of whom were on the Radical side. Two memorials were in consequence sent up, complaining of the selection which had been made, calling for inquiry, and praying that certain gentlemen named in the memorial might be placed in the Commission of the Peace. The answer from the Home Office was—"That before the arrival of the memorial, the individuals placed on the list had been appointed to the situation." To this statement the person who forwarded the memorial answered, "That the recommendation of the town-council could scarcely have been in the noble Secretary's hands at the time of sending up the memorials and on behalf of the gentleman who had memorialized the noble Secretary, he begged leave to remonstrate against the course which the noble Secretary had pursued, and to request that an inquiry might be instituted with reference to the persona named by the town-council, and that the Commission should be staid until that inquiry was concluded," The writer also "begged leave to remind the noble Secretary, that before the recommendation was sent up a letter, signed by 200 respectable individuals, protesting against the nomination, had been transmitted to the noble Secretary." This was a very extraordinary transaction. Here a request was made for the insertion of certain names, and for an inquiry into the qualifications of the persons recommended by the town-council, but neither representation was attended to. As to the nomination of Magistrates for Rochester it was, a subject of loud complaint, not only because none but Radicals had been appointed by Government, but because that appointment was procured through the instrumentality of the two sitting Members for that city one of whom had carried his election by a majority of one vote. The numbers in the town-council were equal when the contested lists of Magistrates were put to the vote. There were nine on each side, and of course neither lists could be carried. But the matter was settled by a letter from the Secretary of State, declaring that he had appointed six individuals, all of whom were Radicals. Well, then, at Rochester they could not proceed with the election, and, consequently, upon this there came down a Commission, in which the names of six persons of liberal politics were enrolled, and amongst them was the name of one gentleman, who could not, he believed, act as a Magistrate. That gentleman was brother of one of the Members for Portsmouth, and was collector of the Customs.

735
Now, it must be perfectly notorious that in such a place as Rochester there must be numerous offences against the Excise and Custom laws. Under these circumstances, be thought that gentleman must be incapable of acting as a Magistrate. In consequence of this selection made by Government, a deputation was appointed, which, in the first instance, waited upon Sir Edward Knatchbull, and afterwards proceeded to the office of the Home-Secretary. They informed his Lordship, that, in their opinion, there must have been some mistake; the answer made by Lord John Russell was, that the persons so appointed had been recommended to him by the Members for Rochester, Mr. Bernal and Mr. Hodges, from whom he understood they were most respectable men. Now here was a case in which the Secretary for the Home Department took the opinion, not of the town-council, but of the Members in Parliament for the borough. The town-council had come to a determination not to do any business, and not to recommend anybody. When the noble Secretary was informed of this, he said he had never heard it before. But then he took other ground, and said that the old Magistrates had refused to act. Now, he was informed that this statement was not correct. He spoke upon the authority of some of these Magistrates themselves. The misconception arose from this—there had been an endeavour to implicate the old Magistrates in such a course of proceeding, but they were too wise to suffer themselves to be entrapped. They went to the petit sessions, but there was only one Magistrate on the bench. A second time they went, and still there was but one Magistrate, and he said he could not swear them alone, but that another Magistrate, naming him, was in town, and that he would go with them to that gentleman, and get them sworn in, or else they might return again on the Saturday. The Magistrates assured him that no such words as those attributed to them had been used, but that an attempt had been made to entrap them. The noble Secretary then said, he would consider the case, adding, however, to the deputation, that they must not be surprised if he placed more confidence in the Members for the borough than in them. Might it not, then, be asked, were the new municipal corporations to be made use of for party purposes? Let them see what one of the Ministerial organs said upon the subject. The noble Lord read the following passage.
736
"A correspondent at Rochester reports to us, with great approbation, the appointment of six Liberal Magistrates for that town. Our readers will remember that at the late election of councillors under the Municipal Reform Act the number of Reformers and Tories were equal. The Liberal portion of the inhabitants of Rochester dreaded the possibility of the Magistrates being also appointed in the same proportion with regard to principles. The Government has relieved them from this apprehension, and decided in favour of an entirely Liberal magistracy. We sympathize with the good people of Rochester, who now exult in their triumph; but we do not believe that Lord John Russell would consider any strong expressions of approbation to be a high compliment for doing that which if not done would have been, on his part, weakness and inconsistency. The time is gone by for any puerile attempt to conciliate the Tories. We trust that the invariable plan of the Liberal Government henceforth will be to support their own principles, by preferring their own friends. This is the only way effectually to contend with a powerful faction like that of the Tories, and is essential to promote improvement." The Ministers, their Lordships would observe, had their lesson. They were expressly told they were to use the powers committed to them in such cases for party purposes, and that they were invariably to promote those persons who supported their Government. He hoped and believed the noble Lords opposite would repudiate such doctrines; he had said he believed, because he would not impute to any gentleman conduct of which he would not be guilty himself. He hoped Government had been unwittingly deceived into this course of proceeding; that they had been induced to put themselves into the hands of the two gentlemen he had named in doing that which they had done; but certainly the sooner it was undone the better would it be for the credit of the members for the borough, the Home Secretary, and the Government of which he was a member. The noble Lord then referred to Lord John Russell's circular letter to the town-councils, and said he would appeal to the noble Secretary for the Home Department; he appealed to the noble and learned Lord on the woolsack, who had affixed the Great Seal to the Commission, whether an advisable or becoming line of conduct had been pursued upon the occasion. He had other proofs, which, if not actually conclusive in a court

737
of justice, were quite satisfactory to his mind. He had other proofs on the subject, but he did not think it necessary to trouble their Lordships with them. There was a case at Dover to which he wished to refer. It appeared to be one of hardship and cruelty. At Dover it was well known that there had been some strongly-contested elections for Members of Parliament; there was, consequently, as it might be supposed, a good deal of party spirit in the town. There were some labourers who occupied Government houses within the borough, and the complaint against them, after the recent election of town-councillors, was, that they being employed by Government had voted upon a particular side. Why, what had this to do with the matter? Was it not one of the great objects of this Municipal Reform that the people of each town should have the management of their own affairs, and that every man properly qualified should exercise his own discretion in the choice of those to whom they would commit the guardianship of their interests? But to proceed: a Commission was sent down to Dover. Colonel Leith Hay, Secretary of the Ordnance, and Colonel Fanshawe were sent to inquire. The inquiry was made, and the result of it was, that three labourers who had voted in a particular way received notice to quit their houses, which they held from Government, in a month. On Sunday last, however, a letter was received at Dover, in which these notices were withdrawn. It would appear as if something had occurred which rendered it advisable to recal this act of cruelty. It was also alleged that a storekeeper whose offence was of the same nature, and who had inhabited a house of his own for the last twenty years, had also been treated with unbecoming severity. These were facts, from which he left their Lordships to draw their own conclusion, and to determine whether it had not been intended by the Government to make the municipal elections conduce to the furtherance of political objects. He feared that he must have wearied their Lordships; but he was now about to draw to a conclusion. He knew that a defence to what he had urged would be attempted on grounds which he had before heard put forth in that House—namely, that there had been partiality upon the part of the old Magistrates. He did certainly believe that this was not the fact. A majority of the old magistracy in boroughs might, it was certain, have been of Conservative
738
principles, but if they were to take any Commission of the Peace for any district of the country, they would find that the same might be affirmed of it. And let it not be said that this arose from any refusal to appoint gentlemen sharing the opinions of the present Administration—let it not be said that there was any unfair exclusion. No, the truth was, that three-fourths of the gentry of the country enjoying a station sufficiently high to enable them to belong to the magistracy, were Conservatives. Had he not authority for this statement, which the noble Lords opposite would scarcely think it proper to impugn? He had. In the Edinburgh Review, the ablest supporter of the Ministers' politics: the fact was positively and distinctly stated, that of the whole number of individuals enjoying an income of above 500 l. a-year, the great majority were on the Conservative side. He could certainly say, that in his own county he knew no instance in which a man had been excluded from the magistracy on account of his politics. He was, undoubtedly, acquainted with cases in which individuals, well known as agitators, were refused the Commission of the peace, for it was thought that there could be no worse conservators of the peace than men who were always tempting the people to break it. He could give an instance in which this wise and becoming feeling had operated, without going out of the county in which their Lordships then stood. It should be remembered, that Lords- lieutenant of counties acted under a serious responsibility. They had not alone to see that the peace was preserved, and that justice was duly administered, but that it was administered with decency, and after such a manner, and with such temper and discretion, as should give satisfaction to the people. If, therefore, an individual were not of that character which would enable him to administer justice decorously, and to the public benefit, the Lord-lieutenant was not to be expected to put him on the Commission merely because he asked, nor was it fair to say that such a man had been excluded for his politics. He would then ask their Lordships, was this the way in which this great measure of municipal reform was to be worked out? Were they, indeed, to have in all the boroughs, Magistrates of but one party—Magistrates elected for party purposes—he might almost say for Parliamentary purposes? If this were reform, he would have none of it, if he could help it. He was ready to say, that

739
to all classes of his Majesty's subjects should be accorded equal justice; but he never would be an advocate for a species of reform which declared that one party should have all the power, and that the other should be excluded absolutely. He would again call on the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack to look to these appointments. The responsibility lay with him. It was a new thing to hear of a Secretary of State interfering in such matters. That noble and learned Lord had fairly and honourable won his high station—had earned his great preferment by diligence, ability, learning, and, he doubted not, every quality which could adorn the office that he filled, and he now called on him not to allow the ermine to be sullied by such appointments. If he refused to sanction them, it would redound to his own honour, and promote the credit of the Government with which he was connected. The noble Lord concluded by moving, "That an humble address be presented to his Majesty, praying; that he would be graciously pleased to order that there be laid upon the Table of the House a copy of a circular letter addressed by Lord John Russell to the Town Clerks or other officers of the several Municipal Boroughs; also copies of the lists of persons sent up from the Town Councils as recommended for the office of Magistrate; also copies of the lists of names of persons assented to by the Government and appointed."
Viscount Melbournesaid, that before he proceeded to make any observations upon the noble Baron's Motion, and before he should offer any remarks upon the facts the noble Baron had adduced—facts concerning which he had certainly received a sort of general notice—but at the same time, as it appeared, facts of such a very particular and minute nature that, under the circumstances, he (Lord Melbourne) could not be expected to be so prepared as at that moment to treat of them—to dilate upon or argue respecting the individual character or peculiar politics of the persons to whom the noble Baron had at such great length alluded,—before he adverted to these matters, or made any observation or remark upon them, he begged to make one general observation, which was applicable to, and, in his opinion, overrode the whole of the noble Baron's speech. That noble Lord's case must be a good one—his arguments decisive, and his conclusion triumphant—for he assumed the facts he stated—he declared what was precisely the character of those
740
individuals; he explained their political opinions; and he declared their unfitness for the offices to which they were promoted. [Lord Wharncliffe: "No, no.] Virtually the noble Lord did. He would refer to the noble Lord's observations with respect to the case of Wigan as an instance; but for himself he thought, and would declare, that the whole gist of the matter, must lie in the question, as to whether the persons appointed were or were not fit for their offices. Now, the noble Baron had assumed they were unfit without proof. In fact, the noble Baron had the whole moral character of the nation in his hands, and at his own absolute disposal. He said this set of men are of this character, moral and political—that set of the other character and the other politics. [Lord Wharncliffe had said nothing to warrant any such inferences, or such a description.] That was the only interpretation he could put on what had fallen from the noble Lord.
Lord Wharncliffereplied, the noble Viscount might interpret it as he pleased, but he (Lord Wharncliffe) had taken especial care to guard against any such misconception. He had not spoken of the characters of these individuals—he had not said one word against their fitness; he had referred to the particular politics of the Gentlemen who were appointed.
Viscount Melbourne: Then, for anything the noble Baron knew to the contrary, the persons appointed might be fitting persons, and, if this were the case, there was no foundation whatsoever for the charge upon the part of the noble Baron. But again he would ask, how did the noble Lord know the politics of these men, about whom he spoke so confidently? The politics of individuals were a matter upon which there were perpetual mistakes. The politics of bodies of men were not as the noble Baron would fain describe them, all of one class and complexion. The politics of men were, he repeated, continually mistaken, and by none so much as by these who were opposed to them. He (Lord Melbourne) could not therefore adopt the noble Baron's description of those persons' politics as one that ought to be received as decisive. The noble Lord had committed great exaggeration in his description of the mode in which the Ministers had introduced the Municipal Reform Bill last year. They had not described it as a cure for all evils, and a promoter of all manner of blessings; but they said the old system was bad, and that their intention was to make an attempt

741
to introduce into all the towns and boroughs a better state of things. For his part, he thought the best part of the Bill was that which limited the powers of Justices in boroughs. They were limited to matters of summary jurisdiction. They were prohibited from sitting in Quarter Sessions. But still they did enjoy the power of licensing, which might be objected to, and certainly he should be glad to see it in other hands, so that these individuals might cease to exercise it. Let it be remembered, however, that in the Bill, as it came from the other House, there was another provision for licensing, of which their Lordships did not approve, and perhaps their Lordships did not err in their decision with respect to it. But this, at all events, showed the feeling of Government with respect to the exercise of this formidable power, which extended to licensing the practice of lucrative trades, and still worse, possibly, the putting a check to a trade already established. It would be well to consider if some remedy could not be applied to the evils which had arisen from it. The noble Baron had given a correct account of the Bill upon that point, both as to how it had been sent up, and how it had been corrected by their Lordships; but then the noble Baron went on to condemn a noble friend of his in the other House of Parliament, because he insisted that it was advisable to take the opinion of the town-council, notwithstanding the alteration made by their Lordships; and unless he had forgotten the debates on the subject, a noble and learned Lord (Lyndhurst) had, whilst he maintained as a principle that the right should remain in the Crown, said at the same time, "Take what advice you please." Therefore his noble friend was, in fact, in what he had done, but following the advice of that noble and learned Lord, and acting in the spirit which prevailed in their Lordships' House. They had been beaten out of giving the town-council the initiatory appointment, but they still thought they were not wrong; they thought it was fitting, that it was best for the due administration of justice, to appoint such persons as were recommended by the town-council. But the noble Baron said they were wrong—that thus they were appealing to a heated body. Ay! this was in cases where persons of particular politics were returned; but, according to him, they were right when they appealed to Tory councils, for they returned proper magistrates. It was only when they appealed to town-councils of a different
742
character that they committed error. As to the case of Leeds, the noble Baron stated that they were guilty of a great error in the appointment of the town-council. [Lord Wharncliffe:—Of the Magistrates.] Very well; but his noble Friend (Lord J. Russell) had formed a scale with reference to the population of the boroughs generally, with reference to which he proposed to regulate the number of Magistrates, giving to those of the largest population twenty-four Magistrates, to the smallest four or five. He then also laid it down as a rule that he would not permit any attorney or brewer to be named a Magistrate. He intended not to cast any imputation on persons following those very respectable avocations. His noble Friend's reasons for their exclusion must be sufficiently obvious to their Lordships. Then his noble Friend had written that circular letter for the production of which the noble Baron moved. The last paragraph which the noble Lord read referred to the subject, Touching the municipal elections, their Lordships well knew the feeling under which they took place. There was violent excitement from the state of the country and the peculiar circumstances of the period at which they occurred. But, in his opinion, the prevailing feeling had not so much reference to the great political parties of the state, or to general political opinions, as to local matters; for the old corporations, had, perhaps unreasonably, from their long and exclusive possession of power, become objects of great bate and jealousy to the communities. Was it improbable, or unnatural, or a thing not to be expected, that, under such circumstances, persons who had formed part of the old corporations should not find their names inserted in the new lists proposed by the town-councils, for the purpose of constructing the magistracy? He put it to the noble Lord, considering that the object of the Municipal Reform Bill was to produce harmony, satisfaction, and contentment in the towns—he put it to the noble Lord himself to say whether it would have been wise and prudent to obtrude on the inhabitants in the first instance the very persons who had long been to them objects of jealousy, suspicion, and dislike? He thought it was not to be expected that matters should have happened otherwise than they did, considering the circumstances under which the bill originated and came into operation, and the hot-bed of politics in which it bad been engendered [cheers]. Noble Lords opposite cheered the expression,

743
but he begged to ask, was that a fault all upon one side, or did they think that the violence had been confined to one party? The noble Baron had said in his speech to-night that he would not cast an imputation on any man that he could not endure himself—he wished his noble Friend had thought of that in his oration at Sheffield—a speech, of which he must say that he would not have made such a one in relation to his noble Friend—a speech which did, by the entire spirit of its argument and inferences, cast the gravest, and he would add basest, imputation upon him and his colleagues, [Lord Wharncliffe: "Hear hear."] Well, then, the imputation was avowed, and the noble Lord appeared to think very lightly of the matter. Quite alive to the injuries which we received, we were little sensible of the weight of the blows we gave. He had heard abundance of complaints of the violence of certain speeches in opposition to the noble Lord's politics which had been delivered during the vacation, but he had observed quite as much violence, quite as much foul imputation, quite as much base attack urged by noble Lords opposite, in speeches made in the course of the vacation, as could have been used by any person on the Ministerial side, be he whom he might. To return, it was plain why so few of the old corporation were included in the lists of the new magistracy. It was to be expected that a Bill of this kind, which conferred new powers upon communities actuated by dissensions and jealousies, should be attended in the outset with considerable violence and partiality, but in the course of time those animosities and dissensions would be softened down and die away, and the whole would end in producing a fair representation of the towns, and tranquillity and good government. The noble Lord had assumed that in many cases the persons selected as Magistrates were unfit for their situations; now, he understood from his noble Friend, the Secretary of State for the Home Department, who had inquired into the subject, that he had the best reason for believing those individuals to be in every respect qualified for the office. His noble Friend had taken the greatest pains to ascertain the fittest and ablest persons; it was impossible to say that in some instances he might not have been deceived, but on the whole there was good reason to think that his noble Friend's list contained the names of gentlemen of respectability, who would discharge their duty well, and
744
do credit to the situation in which they were placed. As to the case of Leeds, he understood that the first list sent up by the town-council was supposed to consist entirely of persons of one side in politics, and that on a deputation waiting on his noble Friend, he did select three persons who the noble Lord said did not differ in politics from himself. [Lord Wharncliffe only one of the old corporation was in the original list; and only one of the three individuals could be expected to act.] It was true the noble Lord had spoken of a surgeon in full practice, who probably would not act, but that gentleman had undertaken the office, and the inference was that he did not think the duties of it incompatible with his situation. However, if this or any other gentleman should not act, and the number of acting Magistrates were found insufficient, others might be appointed. With respect to Liverpool, the only charge made by the noble Lord was, that none of the old corporation was upon the list of Magistrates. Now, he did not wish to go into the political opinions of individuals, because nothing could be more uncertain, but he believed that persons who did not support the present Government had been added to the list by his noble Friend. As to Guildford, twelve individuals had been recommended by the town-council, of whom two had been excluded by the rule adopted by his noble Friend though not rigidly acted on; and out of the remaining ten, four were selected, with respect to whose political opinions he did not possess at present accurate information, but he believed that his noble Friend had acted in this, as in other cases, on the principle of securing such a body as would administer justice impartially, and discharge every duty of the office to the satisfaction of the people. With respect to Wigan, he was not acquainted with the circumstances of the case, but believed that the whole question proceeded on the fitness or unfitness of the individuals selected. The memorialists assumed their unfitness, as did the noble Lord. [Lord Wharncliffe: No; all that was asked for was inquiry].Hisnoble Friend, however, acting on the information he had received, thought he had made no improper choice. The case of Rochester the noble Lord had stated correctly; the town-council was equally divided—no mayor, aldermen, or magistrates could be nominated or chosen. In this state of things a representation was made to his noble Friend that Magistrates were wanted, and his

745
noble Friend concurred with the hon. Gentleman mentioned by the noble Lord, and appointed six individuals, one of whom was brother to a collector of Customs. [Lord Wharncliffe—He was a collector of Customs himself.] That was a question of fact, which might be ascertained hereafter. But the case of Rochester had not been permanently settled by his noble Friend. His noble Friend had appointed Magistrates because it was necessary; but when the Council should be able to act, he had it in his power to consider what juster measure might be adopted with respect to the constitution of the magistracy. His noble Friend had acted in conformity with the expressed opinion of Parliament and on his own principles, and adopted that course which he thought best fitted to give real effect to the Municipal Reform Bill, and ultimately to afford real satisfaction in the corporations, by providing for the fair and impartial administration of justice. With respect to the noble Lord's motion, he could have no objection to produce the letter written by his noble Friend to the Town Councils, neither did he object to furnish lists of the Magistrates who had been ultimately appointed; but with respect to the second part of the noble Lord's motion, which was for the production of the lists sent up by the town-councils to the Secretary of State, he would entreat the noble Lord to consider whether it was prudent to press it, especially as the production of these documents had not been pressed for in another place. Those lists were evidently intended to be in the nature of confidential communications, like the recommendations from Lord-Lieutenants relative to the appointments of Magistrates. If they were produced, it would appear that some individuals recommended by the town-councils had not been appointed, and it might seem a slur on those Gentlemen if the lists were laid on the Table and conveyed to the public. He knew the noble Lord would say, that these lists were very well known in the towns in question, but he begged the noble Lord to consider that his own argument proceeded on the supposition that there would be a better spirit abroad hereafter, and that the present violence would not continue; and this being the case, it followed, that though the lists had been made public now, they might not be promulgated in future, when the councils would be more conversant with their duty, and better able to perform it, through, the absence of
746
party spirit. He therefore thought that the noble Lord had better not trench on the improved course of conduct which might be hereafter pursued, by pressing for the production of lists which were not necessary for his own purpose. With the single exception stated, he had no objection whatever to the noble Lord's motion.
The Earl of Winchilseacould not refrain from offering to the noble Baron, who introduced the discussion, his sincere thanks for having brought the question under the consideration of Parliament. It was impossible for any one, not influenced by the strongest party feeling, to deny that it was a question of the deepest importance, affecting the liberties of the country. It had been truly said by the noble Baron, that the professed object of the measure under discussion was to produce peace and harmony in the Municipal boroughs, by destroying the power vested exclusively in one party. Now he would appeal to the House whether in any one way it had tended to produce such a result; or whether it had not in reality effected a direct transfer of power from one party to another? The noble Viscount at the head of his Majesty's Government had endeavoured to attach to his noble Friend (Lord Wharncliffe) an imputation which his noble Friend had never made, against certain of the lists of Magistrates, on the ground that none of the old corporators were therein included. The charge was this, that the Magistrates who had been appointed, were almost exclusively of one political party. In the case of Rochester the parties in the town-council were equally divided; there was no corporation; and it was agreed that no list of Magistrates should be sent in. The noble Lord, the Secretary for the Home Department, in such a case ought not to have selected six of one party, but have included in his list some professing the same political opinions with, if not the majority, at least an equality, of the town-council. Thus, then, the measure had been found, so far from producing the salutary effects of rooting out old animosities and dissensions, which had been anticipated, to have a directly contrary tendency, and, as these municipal elections were annual he doubted not that the ultimate consequence of the measure would be to keep up a continual and most injurious state of excitement and animosity, when its professed object was to produce peace. The Municipal Corporations Bill of last Session would undoubtedly be an instrument of

747
power in the hands of his Majesty's Government; the Magistrates were to be selected with reference solely to party feeling; and there was no one who could doubt the Parliamentary influence of Magistrates in a municipal borough; every noble Lord must know very well that they did possess very considerable Parliamentary influence; and thus the certain effect of the Bill would be to increase the political power of his Majesty's present Ministers. He trusted that his noble Friend would not withdraw any part of his present motion; the list, the production of which had been objected to, was not, he maintained, a confidential list; it was already made public, and could not, therefore, now be refused on any grounds of confidence. There was one doctrine which had been laid down in the course of his speech by the noble Viscount at the head of his Majesty's Government, which appeared to him (the Earl of Winchilsea) most strange and unconstitutional. The noble Viscount had said, that their Lordships had altered that part of the Bill, which vested the appointment of Magistrates in the town-councils, and had then added, that although Parliament had decided that the clause should not constitute part of the Bill, yet his Majesty's Government had deemed fit to act upon the principle contained in that clause. Why, it was useless for their Lordships to deliberate on any measure—it was useless for Parliament to sit at all—if any individual holding at any time thereins of Government might be at liberty to say, you have made such an alteration, but, nevertheless, in spite of that, we will act upon the principle which you have condemned. He should not trespass further upon the attention of the House than to express a hope that his noble Friend would not withdraw his motion.
The Duke of Wellington: My Lords, upon the present occasion, the subject being one which I have observed has excited very great interest in the country, I am anxious to offer to your Lordships a very few observations; and, first, I must beg leave to suggest to the noble Viscount opposite, that he has totally omitted in his consideration of the present Question one very important principle, which was frequently laid down by that noble Lord, and other noble Lords on his side of the House, particularly a learned Baron who is now absent, during the discussion upon the measure last Session, viz., the extreme importance of dividing the administration of justice from
748
the Municipal Government of the Corporations—the extreme importance of carrying that principle into effect by the Bill then under consideration. It was with that motive my Lords, and for the furtherance of that object, that I gave my vote in favour of vesting exclusively in the Crown the appointment of the Municipal Magistrates. The principle of the exclusive nomination by the Crown having thus been assented to both by this and the other House of Parliament, I confess, my Lords, it does appear to me that the noble Lord, the Secretary of State for the Home Department, ought never to have been induced to make that declaration which he made in the other House respecting the course which he should think fit to pursue in the nomination of Magistrates; in the propriety of that declaration I cannot concur, because it is a declaration entirely inconsistent with the principle of the measure as it received the Royal Assent; and because it is entirely inconsistent also with another principle of law, which is this—that it is the duty of the Lord Chancellor, and not of the Secretary of State, to advise the Crown as to the appointment of Magistrates. I do not say, that he may not take the advice of this council or that, but I do say, that it is my Lord Chancellor whose duty it is to advise the Crown upon the subject—that it is my Lord Chancellor who is responsible to this and the other House of Parliament for the appointment of persons fit and proper for the administration of justice in the country. The nomination of the present Magistrates has not given general satisfaction. The statements of the noble Lord himself have clearly proved that it was a party nomination. Is there any man in this House who does not believe that it was a party nomination? And these are nominations made by the Secretary of State, while the Lord Chancellor is the person who ought to have advised the Crown as to the appointments. This, my Lords, is a subject well deserving the serious attention of Parliament, because I do say, that the conduct of the noble Lord, the Secretary of State, is quite and irreconcilably inconsistent with the principle of the measure. I know that the nomination of Magistrates which has been made by his Majesty's Government has produced very great dissatisfaction in many parts of the country. There are many parties who feel strongly that they are not likely to have justice fairly and impartially administered to them—to have their rights and interests duly protected—or their affairs

749
satisfactorily administered. Under the circumstances, I beg also to return my sincere thanks to my noble Friend for having brought the subject under the consideration of the House.
The Lord Chancellorsaid, that the noble Duke who had just sat down had thought it right to remind him of his duty. Of that he did not complain; but he would take the liberty of stating, that he was fully aware of the responsibility under which he stood, before the noble Duke had thought fit to remind him of his duty. It was singular that the noble Duke should have thought that necessary in the particular instance, since he (the Lord Chancellor) had but a very few days before stated precisely the same doctrine in their Lordships House as that laid down by the noble Duke. The noble Baron (Baron Wharncliffe) had urged that the responsibility for the appointment of Magistrates rested upon the holder of the Great Seal; but, then, in the case of counties, the noble Lord held it to be a dereliction of duty not to take the nomination of the Lord-Lieutenant. It was impossible for the individual holding the Great Seal to perform that branch of his duty in any other manner than by applying for advice to those whose local knowledge enabled them to form a more fair and accurate judgment upon the fitness of persons for the office than he himself by any possibility could. In the case of counties, it was natural to apply to the Lord-Lieutenant as a person best calculated to acquire the necessary information for arriving at a correct conclusion. It was then the duty of the Lord Chancellor to consider well his advice; but if, after due deliberation, he could not concur in the opinion of the Lord-Lieutenant, he was then bound to act upon his own unfettered judgment. If that doctrine, then, was true with counties, was it not equally so with towns? They must go for advice to those whose local information rendered them the best judges as to the qualifications for the office. But what said the noble Lords opposite? They would urge us to go, not to the majority for advice, but to the minority, and to act upon the opinions of that minority. It did so happen that in certain counties there was a large majority of persons of one way of thinking, with a Lord-Lieutenant of the same opinions, and there a very great majority of the Magistracy would be also found of the same opinion; and the result, therefore, was, according to the noble Lord's opinion, that
750
where there was a majority of persons of one opinion there should be found also a majority of Magistrates of the same. But when the noble Lord came to the question of towns and not counties, he was then, surprised that, when it was admitted the great majority of the people were Liberals, there should be a great majority likewise of liberal Magistrates. In short, with the noble Lord the doctrine was excellent in respect to counties but quite the reverse as to towns. For his own part, he admitted most fully, that it was very proper that there should be a fair admixture of persons of both parties in the Magistracy; and he might be permitted to state, that the interference of the Secretary of State had never been employed but for the purpose of infusing into the constitution of the body a certain number of persons opposed in politics to the present Government, ["No, no."] Whether the noble Lord believed him or not, his statement was as much entitled to credit as those of the noble Lord himself. The case of Dover had nothing whatever to do with the appointment of Magistrates. In reference to Rochester, it was perfectly obvious that by no possibility could Magistrates have been appointed, the town-council being divided, but in the method which had been pursued by his noble Friend the Secretary of State. For his own part he was perfectly willing to admit the responsibility which rested upon the holder of the Great Seal, a responsibility from which he would not shrink. The noble Baron had admitted, that there was no complaint against the appointment so far as the individuals themselves were concerned. What then did his objection come to? Why to this—assuming that there was a preponderance in the lists in favour of one party, he complained that the uniform leaning was to that line of politics opposed by the noble Baron and noble Lords who sat on the same side of the House. Now, could the noble Lord think it advisable that the Magistracy should lean to the opinion of the minority? In respect to counties, the noble Baron admitted the converse; and he (the Lord Chancellor) would again ask, why should not the same principle be applied to towns? In conclusion, he begged to say, that the charge brought against the Government seemed to him to have fallen wholly to the ground.
The Earl of Ripondoubted not that the noble and learned Lord had been and would

751
continue to be actuated by the best motives; but he could not concur with, his noble and learned Friend in thinking, that because it was fit the holder of the Great Seal should consult with the Custos Rotulorum as regarded the appointment of county Magistrates, it therefore followed that a similar course ought to be adopted in the case of town-councils. The two cases were as different as possible. There was this fundamental danger in making application for advice to town-councils—that under such a system it might become a matter of canvass among persons desirous of the office of justice to obtain the nomination of the councils. If this plan should be persisted in, there could be no security that the persons hereafter elected Magistrates would be free from the taint of those party passions and prejudices which were utterly incompatible with the due and impartial administration of justice. He considered it to be a most unfortunate circumstance that this letter should have been written at the period when it was, for it could not be denied that the circumstances which attended the passing of the Municipal Corporation Reform Bill through that House had led to considerable excitement in those places which were to be affected by it. That was the very reason why it was most imprudent on the part of the Government to call upon those bodies to elect their own Magistrates, when it was evident that the Magistrates themselves could not be free from the passions and prejudices under which all were labouring He hoped that their Lordships were not to consider that unfortunate letter as intended to be a Standing Order for all town-councils in future. If that letter were so to be considered, he should augur worse than he ever yet had done of the consequences of that Bill which he had honestly and conscientiously supported. He should think that its character was altered—that its benefits were destroyed—and that its positive mischiefs were most grievously enhanced.
The Marquess of Salisburyhad previously complained, and must then reiterate his complaint of the Secretary of State for the Home Department, for having inserted in the Commission of the Peace the names of several persons who had not been recommended by the Lords-lieutenant of the counties in which they were to act as Magistrates. He considered such conduct to be unconstitutional. No Lord Chancellor had ever yet interposed his authority in such a manner, and he considered such an
752
interference on the part of the Secretary of State far more offensive and far more objectionable. He thought that there was a very great difference between allowing the Lords-lieutenant of counties to appoint the county Magistrates, and allowing the town-councils to appoint the borough Magistrates. The former were responsible for their appointments, but where was the responsibility of the latter bodies?
The Marquess of Lansdownewas desirous that their Lordships and the country should understand that his noble Friend, the Secretary of State for the Home Department, had no intention to set aside the declaration of Parliament, or to act contrary to the spirit of the Municipal Reform Act. His noble Friend was, at the time alluded to, engaged in what he should ever consider the laudable task of reconciling the differences which bad arisen between the two Houses of Parliament as to that Act; and he knew of no course that could be considered more expedient than that of letting it be perceived in the other House, that though their Lordships differed from it as to the source from which they thought that these appointments ought to emanate, there was still an opportunity left to the advisers of the Crown, of going to that source from which the House of Commons thought that these appointments ought to come. In doing so, his noble Friend did not on his own behalf, or on the behalf of the Government, abrogate or renounce the right of the Crown to exercise that nomination, nor did he shrink or recoil from the responsibility of exercising that right as one of its Ministers. His noble Friend had done that which he believed all future Ministers would do. He had taken means in the different local quarters to procure information as to what course it would be most safe to adopt, but bad reserved to himself, the right to inquire further for himself and to take away from, and to add to, the list of persons recommended for the discharge of these local functions. It was most desirable that those functions should be discharged, as his noble Friend had well expressed it, free from the taint of any local or general prejudices. He was afraid, however, that it was scarcely practicable to find any source so pure as to forward recommendations fitted for such a purpose. He knew that the heats of party and local contests must prevail over such recommendations; for he could confirm the observation which had fallen from his noble and learned Friend on the Woolsack, that

753
in a great majority of cases the interference of the Crown with the recommendations made to it by the town-councils had been to secure the introduction into the Magistracy of persons opposed to his Majesty's Government in politics. His noble Friend, the Secretary of State for the Home Department, had legitimately interfered for this purpose. He lamented that it was necessary for a Secretary of State to consider the politics of the persons so recommended to him, being convinced that all the good effects which Ministers anticipated—not rapidly and immediately, as the noble Baron had represented, but ultimately—from the Bill would not be accomplished until the qualifications of persons to discharge magisterial functions were considered on principles separate from political considerations. That could not be the immediate result, but he was certain that, in the working of the measure, when the heats of the moment should have subsided, this would be the view taken not only by the King's Government, but also by these corporations. He was the more sanguine in his expectations upon this point, as this was the view taken already by many of the new town-councils under the beats at present prevailing. The noble Duke had said—and if it were true to the extent which the noble Duke had mentioned, he should lament it exceedingly—that these recommendations were almost universally of a party character. He regretted it, if it were true, in some instances, but he had no hesitation in stating that, speaking of the corporations generally, it was not true. He could assure the noble Duke that a great number of cases might be brought forward in which town-councils, where there was a decided number of persons holding opinions of one complexion, and that too the Whig complexion, had seen the justice and propriety of mixing with their recommendation the names of gentlemen as Magistrates who entertained political sentiments widely different from their own. It would be tedious to enter into details, but as every one spoke of the town with which they were best acquainted, he might, perhaps, be forgiven for mentioning what had occurred in a borough in his own neighbourhood. In one of the principal towns of Wiltshire—he meant Devizes—after all the heat of a bitterly contested election, a decided majority of the council being of Whig politics, had, as their first act, sent in a list of Magistrates, consisting of an equal number of
754
persons of different political opinions. That had also been done, he could add with pleasure, in a borough where a majority of Tory councillors had been elected. He thought that this was consistent with good sense and good feeling; and, being so, he trusted that it would form an example which the new corporations in general would be eager to follow. The noble Marquis concluded by addressing a recommendation to town-councils to exclude party feelings in future from their considerations, and to select such persons for Magistrates as were best calculated to perform magisterial duties firmly, honestly, and effectually.
Lord Wharncliffe, in reply, expressed the satisfaction with which he had listened to the speech of the noble President of the Council—a speech which was a complete answer to the speech of the noble Viscount at the head of his Majesty's Government, and to that of the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack. There was not a word in the latter part of the speech of the noble President of the Council, of which he could express the slightest disapprobation. The case of Guildford was entirely opposed to that of Devizes. In that case Ministers had struck out the names of those Magistrates who were opposed to them in politics, "But, before I go into the general question," said Lord Wharncliffe, "I must call on the noble Viscount to be a little more explicit than he has hitherto been in the attack which he has made on me in regard to a speech which he says that I delivered at Sheffield. To what part of that speech did the noble Viscount allude? Was it to that part of it in which I alluded to the Irish Tithe Bill?"
Viscount Melbourne:—To the whole of that speech, and to the statement, by inference, that we on this side of the House have abandoned and given up all our principles to please those gentlemen whom the noble Baron has chosen to denominate Radicals. The noble Baron says, that the Radicals have not given up their opinions; and therefore he infers, as a matter of course, that the Whigs have given up theirs. That for the sake of power, and place, and emolument—["No," from Lord Wharncliffe.]—Yes. I have seen that charge; if not in the noble Baron's speeches, in other speeches, and especially in one made by a noble Lord, a very near relative of his. That for the sake of power and of place, and of base lucre, it is so; I can produce the report—we have given up

755
all our principles. I do not object to this. Everything, I suppose, is fair in politics. Every sort of abuse, I suppose, is fair in politics. But, at the same time, I must say, that when noble Lords of high character, of great influence, of most amiable manners, and most Christian principles, find themselves betrayed in the violence of the moment, by the heat of party animosity, into casting such base, and odious, and groundless accusations on others, they should have some consideration for those who may be acting under the impulse of equally warm feelings on the other side. What I complain of is, that the noble Baron says, that I and those with whom I have the honour of acting in the Government, have given up our principles entirely to other persona, for the sake of maintaining ourselves in place, and in the emoluments attached to place. I beg leave to tell the noble Baron that his deductions have failed, and that his powers of reasoning, eminent as they are in other cases, have in this case led him to a false conclusion, and that it is not true that we have sacrificed any principle, or any opinion, to any persons whatsoever.
Lord Wharncliffe: I do not recollect that the noble Viscount was ever attacked by me in the terms which he has just quoted. The noble Viscount says, that I have accused his Government and the Whigs generally of having sacrificed their principles and given them up to please some other persons. Now I am not singular in that opinion. Other persons have publicly said so. Have they not said, "We have not changed our opinions, the Whigs have changed theirs; the Whigs of to-day are not the Whigs of yesterday. We have not gone to the Whigs—the Whigs have come to us?" I would ask the noble Viscount to reject, if he dares, the support of those who say he has gone over to them, and that they have not come over to him. Will he dare to reject them? If he will not, I have a right to say that he has gone over to them. As to my saying that he has done this for the sake of emolument, I doubt much whether such an expression ever fell from my lips. I do not believe that it ever did; for I do not think now, nor did I ever think, that the public men of this country are swayed by such motives. I may have said, and I believe that I have said, that the present Government was kept in office by the assistance of persons holding extreme opinions—opinions which are now repudiated by the noble Lords opposite,
756
but which those persons tell us have been adopted and are now adopted by his Majesty's Ministers. The noble Viscount had said—Lord Wharncliffe continued—that he had objected to the majority of the Magistrates being of the same political opinions with the town-councils which had recommended them. He had done no such thing. He had said that there appeared to be adopted in these new town-councils that same principle of exclusion which had been the main cause of the reform effected in the old corporations, and he had regretted that that bad principle should be continued under the new system. The noble Viscount had also said that he (Lord Wharncliffe) did not ground his present motion on the impropriety of the appointments which had been made. Now he had distinctly said that it was not his intention to find fault with individuals. The only individual appointed a Magistrate, to whom he had referred by name was the collector of Customs at Rochester. It was not as an individual that that appointment was improper. Individually that gentleman was a very proper person to act as Magistrate; but on other grounds his appointment was highly objectionable. A person connected with the collection of the revenue was the last person to be appointed a Magistrate at Rochester, where the majority of offences which came before the Bench were offences against the revenue. In his opinion, the statement which he had made in bringing forward this motion was not in the slightest degree affected either by the answer of the noble Viscount, or by that of the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack. He had made this motion first of all to check this practice, which it was evident that the noble Lords on the Ministerial Bench themselves felt to be improper; and here he must say that he had been much comforted by what had fallen on this subject from the noble President of the Council. He had also made this motion, because their Lordships were shortly to have introduced to their consideration a Bill for reforming the municipal corporations in Ireland. He hoped that their Lordships and the public would take warning from what had occurred under this Bill. It was intended to have pledged their Lordships to proceed on the same principles in reforming the Irish corporations which had been laid down in the English Bill. But that intention their Lordships had fortunately frustrated on the first night of the Session. That the municipal corporations

757
in Ireland required reform, even more than the municipal corporations in England, no one was more ready to confess than he was. He would, however, take care, as far as in him lay, and he hoped that their Lordships would also take care, as far as in them lay, that the Irish Corporation Reform Bill should not be perverted to party purposes, and that it should not place power in the hands of a particular party in Ireland. If the noble Lord persisted in his objection to produce the list of the parties recommended by the town-councils, he would wave it as it was not material for him (Lord Wharncliffe) to have that information in an official shape, as he could at any time procure it by looking to the files of the provincial newspapers.
The address was agreed to.