No. 889. MONDAY, FEB. 14, 1825. THE POLITICAL EXAMINER. writings. Party is the madness of many for the gain of a few.-POPE. an dled up, as they are, in a corner, in the smallest type. We do not defend the practice, but on the contrary reprobate and lament it. It is a species of deception which lowers the character of the newspaper press, and gives a handle to those who decry it. But who, MR. COBBETT AND THE NEWSPAPERS. besides Mr. COBBETT, would have ventured, on this minor blemish, MR. COBBETT for some weeks past has been calling out for " to build a charge of universal venality?-to assert, that because a answer" to a late tirade of his against the Newspaper Press, and vender of lottery-tickets or "matchless blacking" is allowed to glorifying himself not a little at the victory he infers from the absence advertise his commodities in a newspaper, in a mode less direct than of any. We will tell him why there has been none-or rather none the ordinary one, that therefore any article, whether of news, comsince the two very sufficient articles in the Morning Chronicle and the ment, law or police-reports, &c. may be inserted for money? Mr. Globe and Traveller of January 22, the first of which he reprinted in COBBETT understands the machinery of a newspaper too well to be the Register. His attack was too absurd; nobody thought it worth ignorant of the fact, that the two things are essentially distinct. The while to set about formally proving the utility of newspapers, at this paid-for paragraphs belong entirely to the advertising department; time of day, when all the civilized world is agreed in considering they are received by a clerk, and delivered to the printer, just as so them as perhaps the most decisive sign the age affords of the pro- many advertisements; the Editor has no knowledge or control over gress of science, art, and-in a word-of MIND. We are not going the announcements of sales of estates, or the prices of beef and mutthem; and they have no more connection with his department than to take up the task which our contemporaries have thought superfluous, and which we are convinced not half-a-dozen readers of the ton at Smithfield. Mr. COBBETT means his readers to understand, Register itself think otherwise. Our only object is to mark, by a few that the reports and news in a journal are not to be depended on, observations, the extreme folly and inconsistency of this vagary of because they are, more or less, written by interested parties, who pay COBBETT, which will surely stick by him, as one of those special for their insertion. This is a falsehood-for it deserves no milder absurdities that occur every now and then in his generally shrewd prietors exclusively; and it is their interest to make their reports and term. The reporters of newspapers derive their pay from the proMr. COBBETT began by taking the part of the Judges in the recent news as full and accurate as possible. The principle of competition is law question regarding the right of reporting the proceedings in actively at work in all the details of a newspaper office, as well as be courts of law and police offices. He goes farther than those learned tween the proprietors. There are several grades among the reporters: personages however: they only maintain the right of magistrates to it is the constant aim of those in the lower ranks to obtain promotion exclude reporters, and the liability of the newspapers to punishment by fidelity and industry; and the fear of dismissal operates strongly for statements, true or false, which might prejudice individuals:- he with all. That some of the more needy and less respectable indifirst argues against legal reports as altogether pernicious, and after-viduals employed to purvey accidents, police accounts, &c. may take wards (mistaking the silence of contempt for inability to refute him) bribes to keep out an ugly statement, or thrust in a laudatory paratreats the whole contents of newspapers, including the Debates in graph, is no doubt true; and proves something against human nature, Parliament, as productive of more evil than good! In the endeavour but nothing peculiar against newspapers. But a reporter is venal at to make out a case, he is not sparing of the misrepresentation which his imminent peril: the occurrence he would suppress generally gets he always uses so abundantly when in the wrong. Some writer on wind; it is published in other papers with the more eagerness the question having noticed, among the benefits of police-reporting, liable not only to lose his present employment, but to be cut off from because of the attempt to hide it; his employer is incensed, and he is the frequent production of fresh evidence against a detained person, in consequence of his first examination being published,-Mr. COBBETT all future connection with the journals. And even this liability to ingenuously describes this argument in the following terms:corruption only applies to matters comparatively uninteresting to the public:-w :-we venture to say, that it is impossible to suppress anything really important or interesting; and every body must admit, on a moment's reflection, the equal impossibility of bribing the numerous body of gentlemen, all anxiously competing with each other, who discharge the arduous duty of reporting the debates of Parliament, and the proceedings of courts of law, for a dozen different rival establishments. The idea is indeed ridiculous-no man in his senses, however rich and shameless, would hazard the attempt, which could only end in his own exposure and disgrace. And what is the fact? The excellence of newspaper reports is become a standing topie of admiration: members of Parliament, judges, barristers, and orators of all sorts, never cease to wonder at being able to read, at their morning's breakfast, a faithful and excellent report of the speeches they delivered the night before. Many thousands a year are expended by every morning paper in London in obtaining the reports of Parliamentary Debates alone; and in no particular is the competition so great of the talent and rank in life of the gentlemen who devote themselves between the different establishments as in this. To say nothing then to the higher branches of reporting, bribery is clearly out of the question; their interest is opposed to it; and the hopelessness of success owing to the number of persons employed, and the certain exposure that would follow) prevents the attempt. Mr. COBBETT indeed abandons the pretence of venality as regards the Parliamentary reporters, but he substitutes a theory of favouritism, arising from an alledged intimacy between the reporters and the members. This is, "The reason, to be worth anything, must have a general application. So that all accused parties are, according to this notion, to be remanded; that is to say, to be kept in prison for some time, in order to see what fresh evidence, what new accusers, the newspapers will be able to bring forward! Was there ever so monstrous an idea broached before? What is the Magistrate, who has the accuser and the accused before him, to say to the latter: I do not find, in this accusation, sufficient ground to commit you for trial; but I will keep you in prison for a time, in order to see whether the newspapers cannot stir up against you some fresh accusation! The thing is too monstrous to merit another word to be said about it." Too monstrous indeed! though not quite so much so as Mr. Coв- In a like spirit is the unqualified assertion, that "it is as notorious as the sun at noon-day, that the columns of newspapers are to be sold to the highest bidder at so much an inch." This is wilfully gross: no man knows better than Mr. COBBETT the real state of the case, or understands more exactly the extent of the practice upon which (we suppose) he grounds his charge. It is known to all readers of newspapers, that besides the advertisements in the usual form, each beginning with a great letter, there are advertisements inserted in most papers, which are distinguished from the paragraphs of news caly by the nature of their contents, and their recommendation of something in the sale or success of which the advertiser is interested. In the majority of these the party concerned is named, and there is Consequently no sort of deception practised on the reader-the only advantage to the advertiser being, that his announcement stands a better chance of exciting attention, when mixed up with the miscellasous matter of a newspaper, than when lost amid the crowd of formal advertisements. There are however a few in which the adertiser is not mentioned, and the object of which undoubtedly is, to make it appear, that the conductors of the newspaper voluntarily recommend their readers to purchase a particular article, to visit a certain exhibition, to buy a new book, &c. Even in these, the private interest is generally so obvious, that a common reader can hardly fail detect it, and an experienced eye never finds the slightest difficulty dienewwaving all the muffs (such is the technical term) usually hud *It would be unjust to leave an impression that this degrading system extends to all the newspapers. The Times, much to its credit, invariably prefixes the word "[Advertisement.]"-thus printed-to every paid-for announcement or notice not inserted in the usual shape; so that such Among the weekly papers, the News and Examiner have ever been announcements are only dearer, but not less obvious, advertisements, entirely free from this stain. It is obvious, that some of the parties concerned in all transactions customarily reported in newspapers, must desire publicity, and would consequently themselves inform the newspapers, if the reporters were bribed to silence. if possible, more absurd than the other pretence. It supposes, that those members of Parliament who are the worst speech-makers, cultivate an acquaintance with the 50 or 60 reporters attending the two Houses (which is notoriously not the fact) and by personal civilities induce them, against their own interest and that of their employers, to give greater space and merit to their speeches than to those of the better orators!-But where is the necessity of exposing such nonsense? Let any one take up the Times or Chronicle, and see at a glance, in the Parliamentary reports, the most convincing proof of the impartiality of the reporters, and the wilful misrepresentations of Mr. COBBETT. The single circumstance of there being thousands of persons in London who daily read all the principal papers in the coffee-houses and taverns, is a sufficient guarantee for the independence of their proprietors on sinister influence in matters of any importance. If one paper has an article of intelligence not to be found in the rest, or has a good and faithful report where the others have a slovenly or partial one, the difference is remarked, and an impression is of course created to its injury. If this is often noticed, the paper is irreparably ruined. So also in regard to authentic or fictitious news: every omission or misrepresentation in a newspaper inevitably does it an injury, in proportion to its grossness or mischievousness: no check can be more complete. In short, it requires no argument to prove, that the public must always be so much better a patron of the newspaper press than any individuals, that the sinister influence of the latter will always be outweighed by the necessity of preserving the good opinion of the former. justice, would take place! And last (but not least, to us who find both instruction and amusement in his weekly pamphlet) what a desperate lack would Mr. COBBETT find of the infinite variety of ever new facts, by the help of which he contrives to go on, arguing, joking, and cutting right and left, against friends and foes, without tiring his readers! GLORIOUS PRECISION OF THE LAW! We copy the following report from a daily Paper, and ask if the severest satirist could more forcibly expose the monstrous uncertainty of British Jurisprudence, than the Noble Lord on the Woolsack ?" COURT OF CHANCERY, FEB. 1.-EXETER V. SCOTT. motion asked by the plaintiff, to restrain the defendant, a bond-creditor This was an appeal from the Vice-Chancellor, who had refused the to an estate of which the plaintiff is executor, from pressing his action for the recovery of the judgment debt. The Vice-Chancellor had refused the motion, because the plaintiff had entered on record in defence to the action a false plea of plene administravit, whereas he held 2,000l. which belonged to the estate. The LORD CHANCELLOR admitted that the judgment of his Honour was agreeable to a precedent which he had himself furnished in a similar case (which is to be found in Merrivale); but he now doubted the soundness of it, and would therefore restrain the action for the present, until suffer nothing from the delay, because he could not enter up judgment, he could apply his mind again to the question. The defendant could if he obtained a verdict, before the third day of next term; and in the meantime the point would be finally ruled. His Lordship spoke at some length on the comparative scope of his own and the common law jurisdictions, and contended that the Lord Chancellor had as much We may content ourselves with a similar appeal to the readers of power and authority in judging questions of common law as the Chief newspapers in regard to the law and police reports, and in reference Justices of the two Courts in Westminster-hall. Upon that point he to Mr. COBBETT's idle talk about a like coquetry between the newswas as confident as Lord Mansfield or Lord Kenyon could be. The paper reporters and the judges and magistrates. We need hardly which the Court of Equity gave to the judgments of common law. In common law did not give that consideration to the decrees of equity observe, to those who know anything of the world, that any acmost instances, he thought that those courts paid too little attention to quaintance between two classes of men moving in such distinct equitable circumstances, which a Court of Chancery could not overlook. spheres of life, beyond the knowledge of each others persons, conse- This made it often happen, that the Court could not establish the verdict quent upon the daily meeting in the same courts, must be very rare. sent up on trial of an issue from Chancery in those Courts. He menWe may safely pass over Mr. COBBETT's inferences from these mis- tioned an instance where the Chief Justices of the two Courts had sent up representations, after having demolished his premises. We have for- opposite judgments upon a case which he had referred to them, and Hɛ difmerly discussed the question of publicity against the Judges; and their fered from both. Lord Bathurst had once declared, that he never liked arguments are moderate and rational compared to those in the Regis-law so much as when it looked like equity. Lord De Grey had said, that he Lord Thurlow thought that ter. Some of the latter are indeed singular, as coming from a writer liked equity best when it looked like law. on the side of the people. For instance, he maintains, that the effect of there should be no difference between them. He himself was of opinion reporting is to make judges and magistrates look more to popularity that there was the greatest danger if they should be mingled ! ! !” than to justice! As if to do justice was not popular; or as if the nation at large, which must be disinterested, was not more likely to decide rightly, than individuals who, for fifty reasons, are peculiarly open to corruption and influence! Again, he contends, that it is "not the eye of the public" that watches the judicial functionaries, but only "the eye of the newspapers :"-a nice distinction, i'faith! The most rational and convincing view of this question, after all, is to consider the newspaper reports as a contrivance by which the whole people, instead of an insignificant portion of them, are constituted the audience of a law-court:-is it possible to have a better check on judge and jury both, than the impartial and generally correct opinion of a whole community? UNITED PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS. SCOTCH JUDICATURE.-JOINT-STOCK COMPANIES. The LORD CHANCELLOR reminded their Lordships, that a bill, last session, received their Lordships' approbation, for improving the system of Judicature in Scotland. The bill was brought before their Lordships at a late period of the session, adopted, and sent down to the other House. He thought it would be beneath the dignity of their Lordships to introduce a bill as it had been amended in the other House, on the suggestion of the press. He meant, therefore, again to introduce the same bill their Lordships had passed, and in the Committee such Amendments as seemed right might be adopted. While he was on his legs, his Lordship said he would state the object of the measure he meant to propose as to Joint Stock Companies. When he last mentioned the subject, he was not aware that there was an important action pending before the Court of King's Bench, which the Judges of that Court decided on the very day that he mentioned the subject. He did not mean then to state what his opinion on the law was, though that opinion was not now to be formed. His present object in an Act, making the sale of all shares of any Joint Stock Company for was only to state what he meant to propose. It was his intention to bring by Act of Parliament, illegal, and subjecting the persons so selling shares to punishment. The object of the bill would be to prevent the sale or transfer of shares in all such proposed Companies, till they had been incorporated by Parliament. What strikes us most in this furious abuse of the Newspapers by Mr. COBBETT, and denial of their utility, is the contradiction which his own Register affords to his absurd railing. There is no public writer who makes half so much use of the Newspapers as Mr. COBBELT himself! Look at his 30 or 40 volumes of the Register: with very few exceptions, the material of his articles is entirely furnished by the Newspapers-and especially by the reports of proceedings in Parliament, Law Courts, Police Offices, Public Meetings, Bible Societies, &c. &c. These form his armoury; from these he draws the weapons with which he hits so hard at Bishops, Ministers, Parlia-profit, before such Comuany had been incorporated by Royal Charter, or ment-men, Magistrates, Judges, and all sorts of characters who come into public notice. Sometimes he will write two or three whole Registers upon a single phrase dropped by Mr. CANNING at a Pitt Dinner, or by Mr. WILBERFORCE at a Bible Meeting, of which he derives his only knowledge from Newspaper reports, and on which he comments with as much confidence (and justly) as if he had heard the words with his own ears. Yet this is the man to vociferate, that Newspapers do more evil than good-that their information is never trustworthy-their columns filled with venal matter! Let any one, with however moderate a share of imagination, conceive the sudden and total suppression of the Newspapers: What an eclipse of the mental sun! What a stagnation of business, a cessation of discussion, an annihilation of public spirit, a stoppage of the great source of knowledge and amusement, an alarm and confusion, would ensue! Who could take his case into a court of law, with even a hope, whenever he suspected the Judges were hostile to his politics? What monstrous commitments, what hopeless imprisonments, what infinite wrongs and cruelties in every department of the administration of The Earl of LAUDERDALE objected to the course proposed. If a law now exists for punishing such proceedings, it would be only necessary that the Act should be declaratory. The LORD CHANCELLOR explained, that he intended his law to be an enactment, not a declaratory law. By the Statute of 6th George I. which rendered the transfer of such shares illegal, the punishments ordered to be inflicted were so severe, no less than premunire or forfeiture of goods and chattels, that the chances were the parties offending would go unpunished. He thought, by proposing a law with milder punishments, there would be a greater probability of correcting the evil. (Hear, hear!) Tuesday, Feb. 8. THE CATHOLIC ASSOCIATION. The Marquis of LANSDOWN rose to call for papers relative to the state of Ireland. He alluded to the passage in the King's Speech which spoke of the tranquil condition of Ireland, y stated that there existed in that country Associations of an unconstitutional and mischievous description, and called for legislative measures to remedy the evil. It was allowed on all hands, said the Noble Marquis, that Ireland was tranquil, and yet this was the time chosen to call for an extraordinary measure! It was evident, from the legal proceedings in Dublin, that the Irish public was not hostile to the Catholic Association; and if the object of the intended measure was to extinguish the Association or the Rent, it was a task which could not be undertaken without disturbing the existing relations of society; for unless the Noble Lord on the Woolsack could prevent men giving away their money, and arrest the communication of sentiment, he would do nothing whatever. The consequences of such an attempt might be fatal. The words, " Association" and "Rent" might indeed be got rid of, but would not the people still meet and pay, in spite of the law? He had no doubt they would. There were things to approve and disapprove in the conduct of the Association, but it grew out of the present condition of the Irish population, and it was proper that id:.:11. of presenting their opinions to the community, whether right Opinions resembled certain fluids and vapours, which, if pent up, would explode, and sweep everything before them; but if allowed to mix with the free and unadulterated air, lost at once their mischievous powers. (Hear!) On that account, he thought that Parliament ought to pause and inquire before they attempted to suppress the expression of opinions of which many persons might even justly disapprove. He therefore moved, "that an Address be presented to his Majesty, praying that he would be pleased to direct that there be laid before their Lordships copies of all despatches from the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland relative to the religious and political associations of Ireland, and their consequences." or Lord LIVERPOOL could see no ground for the motion. The proceedings of the Catholic Association, he said, were open and notorious to all. He denied that the Noble Lord on the woolsack was the contriver of the intended measure; it could not of course be introduced without his coneurrenee, but it was by no means his duty to coctify it,-if he might be allowed such a phrase! The measure was the measure of the Irish Government, approved of by the English Cabinet, resulting from a deep sense of its necessity. He did not fear much from inflammatory speeches in general, but those of the Catholic Association had been acted on; yet Dever was there a time when they were less justifiable-never was there a time when justice was more fairly administered, or when Government had shown a stronger desire to act with kindness towards the Catholic body. (Hear!) The Catholic Association was the greatest enemy of Ireland, and it was impossible such a body could exist without creating opposite associations and thus defeating the object of Government, who wished to extinguish all religious differences, and to promote, as far as in it lay, peace and charity among all mankind. If Parliament should not deal equal justice, and put down all associations, what would be the consequence? They must permit all associations; and if they did, they would produce a state of rancorous, religious, and political animosity, totally incompatible with the well-being of any country in the world. His objection to the motion was, that it had reference to a measure of which the House at present knew nothing. He also must contend, that their Lordships would stand in need of no information respecting that measure, because it would be founded on no special knowledge or official correspondence in the hands of Ministers, but on that which was matter of notoriety, and might be in the possession of every one of their Lordships. Earl GROSVENOR gave his decided support to the motion. He trusted that the Catholics would not relax in their legal endeavours to obtain Lheir object. Lord HOLLAND contended that the House ought not to proceed to the ado otion of an important measure without full information. The King's Speec. said, "It is to be regretted that associations should exist in Ireland which have adopted proceedings irreconcileable with the spirit of the Constitution, and calculated, by exciting alarm and by exasperating inimosities, to endanger the peace of society, and to retard the course of national impro vement." Now when he (Lord Holland) read this passage, be looked round bim to see what this association was, and it struck him that it was the Iris. Cabinet! (Hear!) That, indeed, was an associaon contrary to the spirit of the constitution of this country; for it was formed upon a system of disunion and counteraction, which might be seen Gevery one of its measu tes, and which was only equalled in this respect by the English Cabinet! The evils described in the speech were, exciting arm and exasperating ani osities, and thereby endangering the peace f society, and retarding the prosperity of the country. Now the line of duet adopted by Government seemed to him to be exactly calculated to keep up these animosities until one of the parties at length carried its jeet by force; for he could not help thinking the present measure the most impolitic that ever was proposed, and he conjured their Lordships, they valued the laws and liberties on their country, not to have recourse ta baneful and disgusting measure, without fall and substantial evidence of its absolute necessity. Lord BATHURST opposed and Lord CARNA VON supported the motionich was lost, on a division, by a majority o. 22,-20 voting for and 42 ainst it. was commonly called, was a subject of too paramount importance to be consigned to an inquiry of this kind. inquiry into the state of Ireland, was to imitate the strolling actors who Lord DARNLEY observed, that to overlook the Catholic question in an advertised the performance of the tragedy of Hamlet, with the part of Hamlet omitted for that night! disease, they were not to say a word about the remedy-for some good Lord HOLLAND approved of the inquiry, although, in ascertaining the must result from investigation. tered medicine to their patients before they consulted on the complaint. Lord KING said that Ministers had acted like empirics, who adminisSometimes they dosed them with steel, at others with opiates, but always before consultation, while the only drug that could effect a cure was peremptorily denied. The motion was unanimously agreed to. Tuesday, February 8. Mr. Sergeant ONSLOW moved for leave to bring in his Bill for the repeal of the Usury Laws, which was carried in the Commons last session by 120 against 22, but was thrown out in the Lords.-The motion was opposed, but it was carried, on a division, 52 voting for, and 45 against it. Lord ALTHORP obtained leave to bring in a Bill to facilitate the recovery of small debts in England and Wales, which failed last session in consequence of his refusal to allow of compensation to the holders of certain sinecure offices, but which "compensation" he would now admit, though he did not approve of that measure. IRISH MARRIAGE ACT. Dr. LUSHINGTON moved for a copy of the committal of William Quigley Ann and Martha Lowton, and another person to the jail of Londonderry in November last. A Catholic priest had married two Catholics to persons of the Scottish Church: an information was laid; the Magistrates declared that such marriages were illegal under the law in Ireland; and they committed the married parties to separate places of confinement, where they were detained several weeks, because they refused to give evidence against the priest, which refusal subjected them to three years' imprisonment, and the priest, for the act, to capital punishment as a felon! Dr. Lushington contended that this proceeding, founded upon a melancholy example of Irish statute law, was well calculated to keep alive in that unfortunate country a constant source of irritation among the Catholic population. It was pregnant with injustice, and struck at the root of all moral feeling it was, besides, a violation of every sound principle of reason and law-a stimulus to disaffection and disturbance; and ought, he thought, to be no longer permitted to operate. (Hear, hear!) Some conversation arose.-Sir G. HILL vindicated the conduct of the Magistrates, who had acted, he said, as leniently as the law allowed them to act, although it had been dragged before that self-constituted body, the Catholic Association, where it had been abused and overcharged and this Popish Parliament, he added, had ordered a prosecution against them; but he hoped that their proceedings would no longer be tolerated.-Mr. JOHN SMITH observed, that the Catholic Association could not possibly use the funds given them by their countrymen better than in endeavouring to obtain justice for them by the peaceable operation of the law, rather than leaving them to resort to private vengeance. (Hear!)-Mr. DAWSON defended the conduct of the Magistrates-called the Catholic Association a most illegal and mischievous assembly, and its leaders "most furious demagogues "Mr. NORTH said, such marriages in Ireland caused great mischief, as they were void in law, and the progeny were illegitimate. The crime however was not now a capital felony, as that part of the law had been repealed.-Mr. GRATTAN defended Messrs. O'Connell and Shiel from the imputations cast upon them.-The motion was agreed to. Mr. MABERLY gave notice of a motion for the repeal of the Assessed Taxes. Thursday, Feb. 10. Sir G. HILL presented a petition from the county of Londonderry, praying for the suppression of the Catholic Association.-Ordered to be printed. To a question put respecting the Report of the Chancery Committee, the SOLICITOR GENERAL replied, that he believed a partial Report would be made, in a very short time by the Commission. (Much laughing.) CATHOLIC ASSOCIATION. Mr. GOULBURN rose to bring in a Bill to amend the laws relating to unlawful Associations in Ireland. He said, that the Catholic Association had risen to a station which was calculated to alarm every honest man, because it was calculated to deprive Ireland of that returning peace and prosperity of which it stood so much in need. It had been admitted, that this Body did virtually represent the Irish Catholics; but the law was not to be virtually evaded, and a Body was not to be tolerated that superseded the legal Authorities of the land. Mr. Goulburn described the Association as self-elected; that it differed from other Assemblies, because there was but one opinion amongst its Members, and therefore there was no mitigating discussion; that among its body were men who were the friends of Tone, Emmett, Russell, and other traitors who had borne arms in the Irish rebellion against the King's troops; that some of the Catholic Aristocracy and Gentry were also Members; (Hear, hear!) that it proceeded according to all the recognised forms of a Parliament, having its Committees of Finance, of Grievances, of Justice, &c.; that it had subordinate Agents under its controul, and collected an onerous and grievous tax -Hear!) The Catholic Priests, Mr. G. said, were employed in procuring the payment of the Rent, and regular books were kept, in which not only those who paid, but those who refused to pay, were inscribed; and an influence, amounting to direct compulsion, (Hear, hear!) was absolutely in force, for censure was bestowed on those who were backward in their offerings. This could not therefore be called a voluntary contribution. He did not complain of the Association's retaining the Irish press in their interest, nor of its disseminating Cobbett's writings; but of its unjustifiable interference with the administration of justice, he thought the Legislature had a right to complain. (Hear!) He might be told, that Associations in England took a similar course; but it did not follow that that which might be permitted in England could be allowed in Ireland; and the mode of interference of the Catholic Association could not be permitted without manifest mischief. Their agents interfered with the criminal proceedings in the Courts, and they perplexed the administration of justice. It was true, the Association exhorted the Irish people to preserve the peace; -but how? Therer neiigion, by the hatred they bore the Orangemen! Could a real Christian have indicted this address, in which love of God and hatred of their neighbours were inculcated in the same sentence? (Hear!) Such a conjunction must be deemed abominable in any period of Christianity: yet this document was read from the Catholic altars instead of a sermon. The Protestants viewed such proceedings with alarm, Government could not tamely allow of them, and Parliament was called upon to rid the country of a danger which threatened not only to perpetuate political divisions, but to re-awaken religious animosities in all their force and bitterness. Mr. Goulburn next proceeded to explain the measure proposed to arrest the evil he had dilated upon. It was intended to extend the provisions of the Act he had formerly introduced for the Suppression of Secret Societies. The bill would render unlawful all societies assuming to act for redress of grievances, which were to have time, and which levied or collected money. It would also render illegal a permanent duration, or appointed committees to meet for above a certain all societies affiliated which corresponded with other societies, which excluded persons of any religious faith, and which took oaths otherwise than as directed by law. There would be exemptions of certain societies, which met for purposes connected merely with trade, agriculture, charity, and others of a harmless nature. The party charged with being a member would be prosecuted by indictment alone; so that in cases of vexatious prosecutions, the Attorney-General might have an opportunity of interference. He hoped most sincerely that these measures would restore peace to Ireland. By adopting them, Parliament would show to the world that it would listen to no threat-that it would despise anything like dictation. (Hear!) The result of the measure would be to remove from Ireland the scenes which he had described, and restore that muchdisturbed country to peace and happiness. (Hear!) In this hope, he rose to move "That leave be given to bring in a bill to amend certain Acts for the suppression of unlawful societies in Ireland." Mr. J. SMITH begged to remind the Right Hon. Gentleman of the cries, "To hell or Connaught!" fulminated against the Catholics, of the conflagration of their houses and the burning of their properties! (Hear!) They were matters of historical record. The Orange party had long possessed the power of domination, and in some instances the Magistrates had abused their authority. The late Lord Chancellor of Ireland said, after an acquaintance with that country of many years, that "there was one law for the poor and another for the rich; but both were equally ill administered." (Hear, hear!) He did not approve of connecting the Supreme Being with feelings of vengeance; but had the Catholics no exculpatory plea? was not their conduct the result of a long series of insult and injury?-If the Orangemen were united, was it wonderful that the Catholics should associate? Harsh measures would only irritate the Irish people. There was one mode, and one mode alone, of tranquillizing Ireland. (Hear, hear!) It was to grant to the Irish Catholics a full participation in those rights which their Protestant brethren possessed. (Hear!) Was it not shameful that such disabilities should be allowed to exist, at a moment when they saw, in his Majesty's Hanoverian posssessions, the most extensive toleration? (Hear!) The same observation was applicable to Canada; and he could also refer, on this subject, to several other parts of the world. Mr. ABERCROMBY was of opinion that the course about to be pursued towards Ireland, so far from producing tranquillity, was calculated to create irritation and engender sedition. Emancipation was the only weapon by which they could overturn the Catholic Association, for so long as they refused justice, so long would they keep up the Association. (Hear, hear!) How could the Catholics be blamed for endeavouring to obtain the general rights enjoyed by their fellow-subjects? They had a right to associate for a redress of grievances. As to the Catholic Priests, if their conduct was wrong in mixing in public matters, was not that of the Protestant Political Bishop equally censurable. For his own part he disliked the union of priest and politician, of whatever persuasion, considering it extremely mischievous. The Catholic Association had, it was said, interfered with public justice; but how? It had made the rich man feel that he was amenable to the law, and had shown the poor man that he need not despair of justice. This was a great good, instead of an evil. The Catholic spirit was increasing, and the proposed bill would only add to that spirit: if they would not emancipate them, they had better let things alone. The real ground of opposition to Catholic Emancipation was Protestant monopoly. (Hear, hear!) Lord Wellesley's system, it was clear, had failed, and se would every other system, until Emancipation was granted.-Mr. Abercromby concluded, amidst loud cheering, by stating that he should resist to the utmost the measure of the Right Hon. Gentleman. Sir H. PARNELL said, that the proceedings of the Catholic Association had been most grossly misrepresented, and he defied its opponents to prove that it had any mischievous intentions towards the Protestant interest. its conduct had been temperate and legal. The great object of the Rent was to show that the Catholic population was not, as had been so often alleged, indifferent on the question of Emancipation. Men who suffered ought at least to be allowed to murmur, and it was the safest way to let them. The bill would only create greater evils than those complained of. The Union with Ireland was only a union by Act of Parliament, and he warned the House of the dangers likely to follow on the enactment of this pernicious bill. (Hear, hear!) They should think of the temper it millions-discontented, irritated, and lying close upon England! --~gth of the people, not less than He conjured them to pause in this first step, for they might be assured of this, that they could not rest there. (Hear, hear!) down, for it was spreading dread and disunion throughout Ireland. Mr. J. WILLIAMS insisted that if the Bill should pass (which God that body had united to repel attacks made on itself? or to complain of the Mr. DENMAN, in allusion to the Bridge-street Association, asked if unequal administration of justice among its own members? or to volunteer state offences? (Great cheering) They acted as if the Attorney-General the office of Attorney-General, and to undertake the prosecution of various was either blind, or negligent of or inadequate to his duty; and thinking themselves very superior persons, when, in point of fact, they were very inferior ones, instituted a series of jobs, (Great cheering) which they called prosecutions against individuals for offences, for which, if they had been guilty, they ought to have been attacked by the Attorney-General. (Cheers.) The Catholic Association, on the contrary, subscribed only to prosecute those who had injured Catholics, and to repel aggressions under which he trusted that no class of the king's subjects would ever rest quiet. (Hear, hear!) They were aggrieved by degrading laws and unjust exclusions, and in consequence were treated with a degree of partiality by the magistracy of Ireland which was hardly credible in this country. Had the Orange system been abolished? (Hear, hear!) It had not; and it was notorious that this Catholic Association had arisen as its counterpart, to protect their population from lawless oppression, and to endeavour to secure for them that redress of grievances without which it were vain to hope for tranquillity. (Hear, hear!) It was idle to say that this Association had usurped the forms and functions of Parliament, and had levied taxes. The reverse wasthe fact. They had not levied taxes, but collected subscriptions, voluntarily given to protect themselves from oppression. (Hear, hear!) Again and again he would ask, why were the Catholics to be denounced for obtaining subscriptions for the prosecution of their rights? No such attempt had been made to drown the clamourous conventions among the agriculturists, when they pressed upon Parliament for relief. Indeed, he recollected at that time, that so loud were the country gentlemen in their demands for redress, that even the Hon. Member for Somersetshire (Sir T. Lethbridge) declared himself a reformer, so violent was his attack upon Ministers for deserting his favourite question-Hear, hear!) It was time that Parliament should seek to discover some other remedy for the evils of Ireland, than by the augmentation of penal statutes. There was a remedy that had never yet been tried, but which was plain and compendious-redress the people's grievances, emancipate the Catholics from the trammels of bad laws, remove the cause, and then the effect will follow; with the grievance will depart the evil; and then Parliament will have acted not only with justice and wisdom, but in obedience to the united recommendation of the wisest statesmen of modern times. (Hear, hear!)-After a variety of forcible remarks, Mr. D. concluded by avowing his opposition to the proposed measure, which he believed would turn out to be one of the most destructive ever introduced into a Christian country! (Loud cheers.) dertake, as a body, to bring about a reform in Church and State. The moment the Association became representative, that moment they acted against the privileges of Parliament and the spirit of the Constitution; for to assume the representation of six millions of people was to commit an act hostile to the safety of the kingdom. (Hear!) If the Government did not put such an Association down, it would utterly abandon its duty.-Mr. P. proceeded at some length in his argument, and then entered on a justification of himself for the changes which had occurred in his sentiments during his political life. He said that the Irish people would not at all regret the breaking up of the Association; and he spoke of Mr. O'Connell as a wild and extravagant politician, though of great eminence in his profession, and amiable in private life Mr. TIERNEY said he was not the advocate of the Catholic Association, but he could not consent to have the liberty of the subject violated by this attempt to put them down. The Association might be extremely objectionable, but, in God's name, let them have some better proofs than the bare assertions of Honourable Gentlemen! Oh! but intemperate speeches were made, and they had an army-an army of 30,000 men armed with a leather bag, and a slate to register their collections! (Much laughter.) And this army, too, was headed by 2,500 Priests! And, why not? If they used the money for an illegal purpose, why did they not say so: but the House knew the real state of the case, and this general contribution had only reached the paltry sum of 20,000l. (Hear, hear!) It were idle to suppose that the subscription would not go on, even if the do that secretly which was now openly done, which would be equally Association was destroyed. The Bill would only compel the Catholic to foolish and impolitic. But the proceedings of the Association were said to be contrary to the Spirit of the Constitution. The Spirit of the Constitution! (4 laugh.) This was always the phrase used whenever a measure of this sort was wanted; yet he could never learn what was meant by the Spirit of the Constitution-nobody could explain what it was! (Much laughing.)-The Roman Catholics were right in taking their grievances into their own hands, after the repeated disappointments they had endured. No country had ever been more insulted than Ireland. (Hear!) The question of the Catholic claims is blinked by a Cabinet, in which 6 out of 13 of its Members are said to support it, and a severely penal Bill is brought forward instead! He was quite satisfied, that, if the question was carried, it would not break up the Administrationsome at least of the Members would not turn tail—(laughter )-particularly a Noble and Learned Lord, of great influence-he, Mr. T. was quite sure, would not go away;-for there would be so many doubts and reconsiderations of the subject of retirement, that he would always see reason to hint that "they might have leave to mention it again on Tuesday!" (Much laughing.) He was convinced, that if the present Minority of six would do their duty in the Cabinet, all the Members Sir N. COULTHURST approved the Bill; which was opposed by Colonel would be as friendly together in a week as they were at present. The Hon. Gent. at the conclusion of his speech, insisted on the dangerous conMr. DOHERTY contended that no assembly had ever sat, which had dition of Ireland, and of the whole empire, so long as the Catholic question presumed to publish such inflammatory and incendiary discussions as the should be undetermined; and on the expediency of Lord Wellesley and Catholic Association. (Hear!) Such a body would not be endured in the Right Hon. and Learned Gent, withdrawing from office if they could England, and it should not be allowed in Ireland: it was a joint-stock not persuade themselves to give their earnest and serious support to it. company to carry on and foster litigation, and overawe the administra-He then expatiated on the immediate danger which any convulsions in France or Spain would threaten to Ireland in its present condition, tion of justice.( Hear, hear ! ) and the present condition of the question; and expressed his determination most heartily to oppose this Bill in every stage. The Right Hon. Gentleman sat down amidst loudcheers. Amidst tremendous cries of " The debate (at a quarter past two o'clock) was then adjourned. Friday, Feb. 11. CATHOLIC ASSOCIATION. ADJOURNED DEBATE. Mr. GRATTAN maintained that the proposed Bill was nothing less than an Orange measure, a declaration of war against the Catholics. The wrongs of Ireland were heavy and numerous, and the people were kept down by the bayonet. Captain MABERLY contended that Ministers had brought forward this ruinous measure on the very flimsiest pretences. He cautioned them to be circumspect, and earnestly recommended them to grant the Irish people the privileges enjoyed by their Protestant brethren, else a time might come when they would be exacted by a sanguinary but successful rebellion! (Hear, hear!) DAVIES. Mr. JAMES DALY was not surprised at the proceedings of the Catholic Association, when emancipation was so unjustly denied to the Irish people. Mr. WM. WILLIAMS was of opinion that the existence of the Associa- that question, the debate was FURTHER ADJOURNED till Monday, at a Adjourn," and after two divisions on tion was injurious to the real interests of the Catholics. Mr. D. BROWN supported the Bill; while Mr. R. MARTIN objected to it, believing it would fail in its operation. Mr. WARRE knew that Ireland was in a most deplorable condition, but he was convinced that the disease required a far different remedy than the one now proposed, which would leave things in a worse situation than they now were. Mr. WYNN supported the Bill, as it bore as heavily on one party as the other. Mr. CALCRAFT warned the House against attempting to stifle the voice of the Irish people by such a measure as the present. Mr. PLUNKETT said, that the bill attacked all the unconstitutional Societies in Ireland, whether in behalf or opposed to the Catholic claims. That country was in a state of unexampled prosperity, owing to the wise government of the Marquis Wellesley, not to the existence of the Catholic Association; but if he thought so, that would only be conclusive in favour of the present measure. (Hear, hear!) Peace was restored before the Association was founded, and the Roman Catholic Priests,-a most excellent, though calumnied body of men,-had been mainly instrumental in the good work. (Hear, hear, hear!) Then why, it might be asked, bring forward this measure? Because, though at peace, Ireland was in a high state of political excitation and alarm, owing to the desperate and dangerous proceedings of the Catholic Association. He was one of those who thought the Catholic claims should be conceded; but if they could not be carried, were they not to provide against the consequences to which a refusal might lead in the present sanguine state of the public mind in Ireland? (Hear, hear!) Mr. P. proceeded to describe the Catholic Association as a body whose existence was incompatible with the security of the State, as it levied contributions on the population, employed numerous agents, &c. &c. all in direct violation of the British Constitution, though not perhaps illegal in the strict sense, far if it was, they need not have resorted to the present bill. He contended that the people had no right to delegate persons who should un QUARTER TO TWO O'CLOCK. |