698 Mr. C. Calvert contended, that throw- | prosperity, took the opportunity of declaring open the licensing system would be ing that, although he was anxious to give highly injurious to the vested interest of relief to the people, he could not vote that numerous and respectable body-the either for the Motion of the hon. Member, publicans—and he hoped that the duties or the Amendment of the hon. Baronet, might be taken off Beer, without at the on which the debate was again to take same time doing away with the licensing place to-morrow night. He wished to system. He wished to see the former call the attention of the House to the measure tried by itself. petition which he held in his hand. It was signed by upwards of 13,000 people, and was agreed to at a public meeting, convened for the purpose. He should have felt great difficulty in believing that so much distress existed in Manchester, had he not been assured of the character of those individuals who had borne testimony to the extreme sufferings of the poor. There were many points, however, on which he could not agree with the petitioners. They ascribed our great distress to the change in the currency, the profuse expenditure for the army and navy, and the high salaries given to every public servant, which the petitioners considered quite disproportionate to the present value of money. He agreed with these petitioners that taxation was unequal, but he thought, notwithstanding the reduction of taxation which had been made by his Majesty's Ministers, for which he felt very grateful, that a much larger reduction must yet be made. The present distress was, in particular, complained of by the The Chancellor of the Exchequer, in reply to the hon. Member, begged leave to say, that the object he had in view in repealing the tax on Beer-namely, the interests of the large majority of the people-would be defeated unless he could at the same time throw open the Beer-licensing system. If that were not done, the abolition of the duties on Beer could only benefit the dealers in Beer. He could not take too early the opportunity of stating, that he considered the freedom of the trade in Beer to be essential to the abolition of the duties on Beer. He did not deny that the free sale of Beer would be a partial inconvenience to publicans; but he was bound not to consult any interests but those of the public at large. In reply to the hon. Member for Wiltshire, (Mr. Benett) he begged leave to state, that although those who had a stock on hand might be inconvenienced by the intended abolition of the duty on Beer, still it was deemed the best course to have no re-shop-keepers, who suffered very much funding, and let the Act of repeal come in force on the 10th of October. The interests of the people at large were the rule of his conduct, and not the advantages or disadvantages of individuals. He should be certainly ready to be brought before the Committee; but he must warn Members against adopting the exaggerated views of interested parties out of the House. Mr. Benett wished to know if the situation of those who took out no licenses I would not be better than that of the public brewers. Lord Althorp expressed his hope that the right hon. Gentleman would not depart from his plans, or if he did, that he would couple the repeal of the Malt tax with that of the Beer tax. Petition to be printed. DISTRESS AND TAXATION.] Lord Stanley, in presenting a Petition from Manchester, praying for the abolition of all taxes which enhance the price of the necessaries of life, and impede the national from the general pressure. Not finding Sir G. Phillips said, that although there might be various opinions as to the cause of the present distress, no person denied that distress existed to a great extent. He knew that the people of Manchester were exposed to much suffering, though the distress was not so great as it had been represented. He knew also that they were extremely desirous, as he was, of obtaining every possible reduction of taxation, and of putting an end to every monopoly, particularly to the monopoly of the Corn Trade and of the East-India Company. The expectation that the last would be abolished was very strong in the manufacturing districts. If the hopes of the people there were disappointed, they would be very likely to emigrate in large numbers, and carry their capital with them. There was an impression abroad, indeed statements had been made to that effect in the newspapers, that there was something like partiality in the investigation going on into the East India Company's Charter. The East India Company were raking up every instance of bad conduct in the East Indies for many years past, with a view to excite prejudices against alteration, and they, as well as the Board of Control, were opposed to the liberal policy of Lord William Bentinck. He also took that opportunity of saying, that he had not represented the other evening that there was no distress in the manufacturing districts, as the noble Lord (the Member for Northamptonshire) had seemed to suppose. He had on the contrary expressly stated, that among the hand-loom weavers the distress was very DUBLIN PIG MARKET.] Mr. O'Connell presented a Petition from Patrick M'Dermott, John Martin, and Miles M'Dermott, complaining of the conduct of the Lord Mayor of Dublin in removing the Pig-market of that city. The petitioners had been forcibly ejected from the market, though the law authorities of Ireland had given an opinion in their favour. They had a right to sell Pigs in the market. Mr. G. Moore said, that the Mayor was anxious to submit his conduct to investigation. The law opinions obtained by the petitioners were given on their own partial and incorrect representations. They had no right to sell pigs in Smithfield, which was held for cattle, exclusive of pigs; and the number of cattle being very great, pigs were kept out of the market. Lord Leveson Gower was sure that the conduct of the Lord Mayor was dictated by a regard to the public interest. That magistrate wished that the matter should be investigated before a proper tribunal, and he was sure that an Irish court of justice would be willing to afford its protection to the animals (bulls) for which the market was intended. Petition to be printed. COAL-METERS - DUBLIN.] Mr. O'Connell next presented a Petition from Stephen Fox Dixon, complaining of the conduct of the Corporation of Dublin in turning him out of a Coal-meter's situation, and of the bill which gave the Corporation power so to act. He had been a Coal-meter from 1806, and had received his share of the fees which were legally appropriated by the Coal-meters, through whom the corporation levied a tax on the public of several thousand pounds a-year. It had, indeed, proceeded so far that the interference of a court of justice had been demanded, which decided that the imposition ought not to be levied. According to the corporation, however, it was entitled to regulate the business of the Coal-meters by an Act of Parliament. In the course of these proceedings the corporation had turned the petitioner out of his situation, causing him considerable loss; and as he had no means of redress, he applied to the House. The prayer of his petition was, that the House would amend the Act by which theCorporation of Dublin was enabled to commit this oppression. Mr. G. Moore said, he would only observe that the petitioner had been appointed to his office by the guild of merchants, whose right to make the appointment had been recognized for several centuries. In consequence of complaints made against the petitioner, his conduct had been subjected to examination before a competent authority, the charges were regularly made, time was given him to answer them, and having failed to answer them he was suspended from his office, which suspension he illegally resisted. His conduct was then brought before the Lord Mayor and Board of Dublin, and after council had been heard on both sides, they came to the decision of which the petitioner complained. His complaint therefore, was, in fact, an appeal from an authorized tribunal, to the House of Commons. With respect to the amount of the tax levied on the public for metage, which the hon. Member had referred to, there [ call on the House to reject the Petition at was no just cause of complaint; as it was once. For that purpose he should now not more than an adequate reward for the move that the Petition be read. No Memservice of protecting the public in the ber for Scotland would venture to rise in supply of Coals. The duties for which that House, and propose a repeal of the the fees were levied were arduous, and re- Union with Scotland; and yet could any quired the Meters to be both intelligent Member say what was the difference beand zealous. As he believed the subject tween that Act and the Union Act of Irewould again come under the consideration land. It was no party question, but one of the House, he would not enter further which involved the integrity of the King's into it. Of the individual, he would re- dominions. It was a violation of constitupeat that he had a full and fair investiga- tional law, which no man could gainsay, tion, and that, failing to exculpate himself who was not an enemy and a traitor to from the charges, he was deservedly dis- his country. He moved that the Petition missed. be distinctly and audibly read. Petition to be printed. Sir M. W. Ridley saw no objection to the Petition being received. There was no Parliamentary law which forbade it; and as to its prayer attacking the Constitution, they ought to recollect that they received petitions against the Parliament itself, which was also a part of the Constitution. The Union was an act of the Legislature, which the Legislature might repeal. He did not say that it would be prudent or politic to review that measure, but he protested against the doctrine that there was any law or practice which made the presentation of such a petition an impropriety. UNION WITH IRELAND.] Mr. O'Connell, in presenting a Petition, very numerously and respectably signed, from the inhabitants of the city of Drogheda, praying for a Repeal of the Act of Union, through which they alleged that Ireland was suffering incalculable mischief, observed, that the petitioners referred to the total disregard shewn by the United Parliament to the local interests of Ireland, as a proof of their assertions. The Sub-letting Act, the Vestries' Act, the disfranchising of the 40s. freeholders were all passed in contempt of the local interests of that country. Mr. Moore, adverting to the petition preJobs were encouraged, and grievances un-sented by the hon. Member for Clare, from redressed. The colonies had local legis- the City of Drogheda, on a former evening, latures, but Ireland was governed by the said, he was instructed to say that the English Parliament. He moved that the statements of the hon. Member respecting Petition be brought up. the Charitable Fund of the Corporation-taken, of course, from that petition-were wholly unfounded. The Corporation challenged inquiry, and was willing to submit to the most rigid investigation. Mr. Vanhomrigh, as we understood, denied that the Petition expressed the sense of the influential portion of the inhabitants of Drogheda; and adverting to a petition presented the other evening, by Mr. O'Connell, respecting the abuses in the Charitable Foundations of Drogheda, which the hon. Gentleman had stated to be worth twenty thousand pounds a year, accusing the corporation of misappropriating funds to that amount, he declared, that the hon. Gentleman had come to erroneous conclusions from very ill-founded premises. He was distinctly authorized to deny the hon. Member's charge; he had inquired into the circumstances, and that charge was without foundation. Mr. Lockhart thought, the question respecting the repeal of the Union with Ireland of too much importance to be disposed of hastily; it involved the dismemberment of his Majesty's dominions, and therefore he should move, that the debate on the Petition be adjourned till Wednesday next. Mr. Secretary Peel confessed he did not feel much surprise at the doubts expressed by the hon. Member for the City of Oxford (Mr. Lockhart), and the hon. Member for Plympton (Sir C. Wetherell) respecting the propriety of receiving a Sir C. Wetherell thought, that a petition petition in support of a project so mad for the repeal of the Union with Ireland, and so absurd-so utterly destructive of mischievous and absurd as it was, seemed the prosperity of Ireland, and so much also so clearly an attack on the principles calculated to injure the integrity of the of the Constitution, of which that Union Empire-as that of a repeal of the Act of now formed a part, that he for one should! Union. He repeated, he was not surprised at the opinions of these hon. Members, but discussion which took place on another at the same time he doubted whether it petition should have been mixed up with would be proper to depart from the general the very important question now before the Parliamentary rule, and refuse to receive House. He believed that the hon. Member the Petition. He did not apprehend that for Drogheda was not present at the time the Petition proposed a diminution of the the former petition was presented. If he Empire, or a separation of Ireland from the had been, he would have known that ke control and government vested in the (Mr. O'Connell) did not say the revenues Sovereign of this country. Ireland was a for the purposes of charity in the hands of portion of the British Empire; the King the Corporation amounted to 20,000. a of England was also the King of Ireland year, or anything like it. He merely said before any Act of Union was thought of: that properties belonging to the Chariand the Petition, he supposed, merely ties had been alienated and disposed of, prayed that the two countries should be which, if they were to let now, would proplaced with respect to each other in the duce 20,000l. a year, and that even still same situation as they were before the there were sufficient funds left in the hands Act of Union was passed. He doubted, of the Corporation for charitable purposes therefore, whether they could, according if they were properly administered. The to the forms of Parliaments, reject the Pe- petition was signed by some of the most tition; but while he gave his vote for the respectable of those persons whom the reception of the Petition, he could not find hon. Member, no doubt, thought it an terms strong enough to express his repro- honour to represent. As to the question bation of the prayer of that petition, or of the petition for the dissolution of the his sense of the renewal of attempts to Legislative Union with Ireland, he totally disturb the minds of the ignorant portion differed from the hon. Member for Plympof the people by a representation of ton, with respect to the regularity of that advantages to result from the possession petition, and the object for which it of a Parliament in Ireland. The senti- prayed. He did not see any reason for ments of the people of both countries had depriving Ireland of a separate legislature, been freely and fairly expressed in the any more than Canada, Halifax, or Jamaica, formation of the Union between the two where independent Representatives were countries. That Union was finally con- permitted to deliberate on the local insolidated by the repeal of all those disabili- terests of the people. This he thought ties under which the great portion of the was as advantageous to the one country as inhabitants of that country laboured, in to the other; and he believed the day was comparison with those of England; and not far distant when the friends of Ireland he repeated, that he could not find terms and England would unite in their consent to express the strong disgust and reproba- to the repeal of the Union; and that it tion with which he viewed the attempts would be hailed as an advantage by the made to separate them. When all good best friends of both countries. Ireland, men were congratulating themselves on from the moment it obtained an indethe return of that tranquillity which pendent legislature, rose in power and they sought to promote, and which had importance; improving its agriculture, followed the healing measure of last year, and extending its manufactures with when all denominations of Irishmen were greater rapidity than had ever been exhiallowed free access to every depart-bited by any other country in the same ment of the State; when advantages had time. But the advantages of that situation been conferred on them, such as they never were afterwards lost. The opinions spread before possessed, it was too much that all abroad by the French Revolution, which the old feelings of discord were to be re-created divisions between man and man, vived for the gratification of some individuals, by such injurious and incorrect assumptions as formed the basis of that petition. At the same time that he could not too strongly express his abhorrence of its prayer and its object, he saw no reason for refusing to receive the Petition. Mr. O'Connell was very sorry that the unhappily excited a rebellion which paved the way for the Union. The new-born energies of Ireland were laid low by her own dissensions, and the Act of Union had ever since prevented the revival of them. In forming that Union, the opinions and feelings of the people of Ireland were not taken into consideration, nor were the good sense and interests of the people of Eng land fairly consulted. His opinion was, that if England wanted consumers for her productions, Ireland should be possessed of an independent legislature, for that alone could restore the prosperity of her people. As for the unfortunate petitioners, who had evoked such a storm of indignation, and who were ranked as traitors and enemies, he must say, that they were as patriotic and as loyal as their opponents. They were as honest in the opinions they entertained, which he shared, as any of the hon. Members who espoused very different opinions. At all events he would say, that he had heard no reason why a local legislature would not be as advantageous for Ireland, as for Canada or Jamaica. that Bill, to prevent their being handed over, bound hand and foot, to the Catholic population of that country. Sir J. Newport said, that whatever. might have been his opinion of the Union formerly, he was convinced that the repeal of the Act now would be productive of the most mischievous effects. It was his deliberate opinion, and he spoke it advisedly, than any attempt to cause its repeal now would be fraught with the destruction of Ireland, and the deep injury of England. He deprecated the remarks of the hon. Member, calculated as they were to interfere with that harmony and spirit of good feeling which he was delighted to find had so rapidly followed the passing of last year's beneficent measure. Ireland was now tranquillized and prosperous by the removal of all political disabilities, and it was most desirable that no subject of agitation should be introduced there. He hoped the House would receive the Petition, and put an end to that unavailing conversation. Sir C. Wetherell again declared, that a petition praying to dissolve the Union with Ireland was something little short of treason, and insisted that it should not be received. If the hon. Member for Clare thought the Act of Union should be repealed, let him move for leave to bring in a bill for that purpose, and he would see how the House would meet it. He thought he could guess its fate; but he objected now, on the threshold, to the reception of this petition, which was a sort of sidewind, a subterraneous movement,-to do by a dark, insidious course what no hon. Member would have the hardihood to proings of the people of Ireland were really pose specifically. Mr. Bernal expressed an opinion, that the hon. Member for Plympton was mistaken in the judgment he pronounced with respect to the Petition. He saw no reason why the House should depart from its usual courtesy on that occasion: when any hon. Member brought forward a measure to dismember the Kingdom, it would be time enough to raise the voice of reprobation, or to move an act of impeachment. The Attorney General saw no objection to the Petition being received, although he condemned its object. Mr. Hobhouse was also in favour of its being received. Mr. Portman was averse to the adjournment of the debate on a question which could not be considered important after what they had heard, but as the Petition was respectfully worded, he saw no objection to its being received. Mr. Brownlow observed, that if the feel averse to the continuance of the Union, he was persuaded that those feelings could not be put down by the rejection of the present Petition; which would be the sure method of kindling a still stronger spirit of hostility in their minds. For his part, however, he did not think that the existence of such feelings was to be apprehended to any great extent. The interests of all classes in Ireland were so identified with the continuance of the Union, that he was satisfied that there was no general disposition to attack it, and he trusted that the hon. and learned Member for Clare would abandon the wild speculation in which he had embarked on that subject, and would devote his talents to some better and more useful purpose. Mr. Trant thought the people of Ireland should take care how they presented sectarian petitions of this kind, because it might Mr. Hume said, he was one of those who happen that those who passed the measure wished to cement and strengthen the of last Session for the relief of the Roman union between the two countries. At the Catholics, would, from such petitions, see same time he thought that feelings and the necessity of repealing that Act, and opinions had been ascribed to his hon. excluding all Catholics from the House. and learned friend, the Member for Clare, It was time too for the Protestants of Ire-without any just cause. As to the Petiland to think of moving for the repeal of tion, it appeared to him that to reject it VOL. XXIII. 2 A |