was matter of doubt with many of those respectable personages, even before the insurrection of the 23d of July, whether they should not state to government here, the propriety of recommending to Parliament the adoption of precisely the same powers and provisions which that insurrection rendered so essentially necessary, and which it is the object of the bill before the house to re-enact. I know that the expediency of proposing the suspension of the habeas corpus act, previous to the unfortunate event in July, was in the contemplation of the noble lord who held the seals in that country, who had full opportunity of judging of the state of the public mind, and who cannot be suspected of any inclination to adopt a measure which would abridge the liberty of the subject, without the conviction of strong necessity-a necessity which now exists too notoriously to be denied. The hon. gentlemen do not indeed directly deny it, but they call for the formality of evidence to prove it. What, can it be said, that at this crisis it is not necessary to give every possible strength to the executive government in Ireland, when it is recollected that an enemy, who is ever active in his exertions to annoy us, and who meditates an invasion, which, if he means at all to execute, Ireland is his object, and the season is now come when he will probably make the attempt? Under such circumstances, I will put it to the good sense of the House, whether there can be any excuse for hesitating to accede to the motion in debate, and to give to the government of Ireland all the strength that is requisite to enable it to encounter with effect the danger with which that country is threatened? I again call upon gentlemen to separate in their minds the question as to the conduct of the Irish government in July, and the policy of assenting to the present measure; and in reply to the calls for a preliminary inquiry into the grounds of necessity, I answer, that notoriety, connected with the enemy's preparations and avowed objects, furnish sufficient grounds to sustain the assertion, that circumstances imperiously demand such measures as ministers have on this occasion submitted to Parliament; and I can shew, from a retrospect of the conduct of the legislature for the last ten years, that notoriety was held in several instances as a sufficient ground to justify the introduction of bills to suspend the Habeas Corpus Act, and that too in cases which were defended by the right hon. gentleman who spoke last, and where the notoriety was far from being as strong as that which exists at present. As to the principle of appointing a Commit

1

tee of Inquiry, I perfectly agree in the opinion of my noble friend (Lord Castlereagh), that such appointments should not be made on light grounds. The House is bound to avoid it, unless the necessity should be urgent, and unless the result of such inquiry should promise to be satisfactory, by fully gratifying the just curiosity of the House. But, if in the present case a committee of inquiry were appointed, it must be a confidential committee, and it would be quite competent to ministers, although with some difficulty, to lay before such a committee, such materials as would be sufficient to convince their minds of the necessity which called for the measures under consideration; but still the report could not afford to the hon. gentlemen, who were so anxious for the committee, the satisfaction they seemed to desire; for such a report must necessarily be general as to the necessity, before it could go into such a specification as the hon. gen tlemen demanded, without revealing the communication confidentially made to the committee; a communication which would lead to the most serious mischief. There is in fact no detailed information upon this point, which it would not be injurious to publish therefore, there is nothing which, consistently with prudence, the hon. gentlemen could obtain from the report of a committee, which they have not already; namely, a statement in general terms of that necessity, the pressure of which is quite manifest, and from these considerations I shall resist the preliminary which the hon. gentle men wish for previous to giving their assent to the motion of my right hon. friend.With regard to the allusions made to the peace of Amiens, as at all tending to produce the present state of things, I will ever. continue to repel the charge which upon that ground has so often been levelled at his Majesty's ministers, and contend that very dif ferent consequences are deducible from that treaty to those which the right hon. gentleman who has just sat down, and his friends, are in the habit of ascribing to it. Ministers, I am confident, have never had reason to feel any regret for the advice which, upon the occasion of that treaty, they thought it their duty to offer to his Majesty.-With respect to the proposition before the House, 1 contend, that none of the objections advanced against it are tenable upon sound principles of reasoning, or upon precedent; particularly upon the precedents of late years, when the melancholy necessity for similar measures has so often occurred.-There is one circumstance I have yet to mention, which, in my mind, is worthy of great attention. It.

is rather singular, that in the last session of parliament, most of the gentlemen in this House belonging to Ireland, gave strong assurances, that the mind and disposition of the great mass of the Irish people were much improved and alienated from discontent and disaffection. From that opinion, however, one gentleman, and one gentleman only, dissented; and it is now but three days ago, that the gentleman to whom I allude, (Mr. J. C. Beresford) took the opportunity of correcting his mistake, and declaring that his opinion had undergone a complete change; and notwithstanding that alteration of sentiment, his observations strongly tended to enforce the necessity of the present bill. For although he says he is convinced of the improvement which has taken place in the public mind, yet he urges the adoption of this measure, as absolutely necessary to preserve the tranquillity of all the loyal people of property in Ireland. I beg pardon, Sir, for having detained the House so long upon a subject, which I could not imagine would have experienced so serious an opposition; and I have only to state my conscientious conviction, that it is indispensably requisite for the present safety of that part of the United Kingdom.

Mr. Wilberforce expressed his opinion upon the grand distinction which should be made between the civil and military code: that there was no ground of doubt why the measure should not be carried into effect. In the organization, breaking out, and progress of past insurrection, he found a complete justification for voting in the affirmative. With respect to the argument set up by a right hon. gentleman, that some grounds should be stated to the House, it was only necessary for him to remark, that the bill was supported by the same constitutional system which enabled his Majesty to proclaim martial law, and to call for the aid of all his subjects in case of the enemy's landing. He did not coincide in the sentiments of the right hon. gentleman, who had argued, that a despotic government would be the best of all governments, if administered by angels. For his own part, he was convinced that the nature of despotism was so bad, and tended so much to corruption, that he preferred the British constitution, administered even as it was, to the despotic government of angels. thought the House was called upon to bestow the most serious consideration upon the state of Ireland: for it was a melancholy reflection, that a country which had been connected for several hundred years with this, enjoying the same benefits, and in possession of the same constitution, should be afflicted

He

with such evils and calamities. The causes of its distresses were certainly well worthy of the mature consideration of the British Parliament. He felt himself called upon to say, that the wisdom, benevolence, and justice of Parliament, could not be more urgently required. He hoped no temporary expedients would be resorted to, but that a wise, liberal, and enlarged system of policy would be adopted, which might make the people of that country permanently happy.

Dr. Laurence, after expressing his agree ment with the concluding sentiments of the last speaker, vindicated his right hon. friend (Mr. Windham) from the charge of inconsistency. With regard to the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, it was a measure of a very different nature from the present. That was a measure of precaution, this of punishment, and of punishment in a manner which was looked upon by the constitution with peculiar jealousy. It was barely tole rated, never praised. An assertion had been made that similar bills had been passed by the United Parliament without enquiry, This assertion was not borne out by the fact. He had himself on a former occasion voted for the measure, because, from the procla mation, he was led to believe that a necessity existed. But, what document was there before the House to prove the existence of any such necessity at this moment? The evidence, such as it was, led to a contrary conclusion. It was now acknowledged, that the murder of Lord Kilwarden was not the effect of a premeditated plan, but had taken place from his being the first person who was presented to the fury of the mob. But it was on the ground of the law being more directly struck at in the person of one of its chief administrators, that he had voted for the Martial Law Bill. On the other side, a hope had been expressed by his Majesty, that his deluded subjects were returning to a state of obedience. By one gentleman the notoriety of the necessity had been urged; by another it had been stated, that an invisible necessity existed. (Lord Castlereagh here said, that he had not called it an invisible necessity, he had said, that there was a necessity though not visible.) The hon. member then pro ceeded, to say, that he would leave the noble lord to explain to the House the distinction, and, in compliment to him, would use the term non-visible, instead of invisible. The necessity was not visible, and the notoriety which had been mentioned was, he supposed, not audible. The law, it was acknowledged, had never been acted upon, but in one solitary instance, and in that one instance he would assert, that it had been

misapplied. It had been directed to the punishment of a man who had attempted to seduce the soldiers from their allegiance; an act, which, though perhaps, even more criminal than open violence, did not come within the meaning of the statute. The hon. member noticed the assertion made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that it had been in the contemplation of some members of the Irish government to propose the enactment of Martial Law previous to the 23d of July, and he contrasted it with the declaration of the right hon. gent. only five days before the insurrection, that there was more loyalty in Ireland than ever, and that tranquillity was perfectly secure. Should a distinct enquiry into the business of the 23d of July ever take place, he hoped the right hon. gentleman would take for his defence, ground a little more tenable than that on which he stood at present. With respect to the measure now before the House, he wished the House to consider what had been the policy of our ancestors, when called upon for extraordinary powers, even under circumstances of great danger. In the reign of Edward III. ministers came to the House for advice, and stated, that in divers countes, cities, and towns, ill-disposed men had leagued together, and sworn, when they should receive news agreeable to their desires, to rise, to rob and murder their neighbours, and procure a general insurrection throughout the land. This was at a period when the King was with his army in France, and the news, which was desired by the illdisposed, was no less than the ruin of that army, at the head of which was the Sovereign. In this situation what was done by the House of Commons? Did it declare martial law? No. It answered, that if the guardians of the peace were not capable of performing their duty, they must be reinforced by others more sufficient, and that no persons arrested must be released on bail till they were delivered by persons of sufficiency, and the most respectable of the country, such as knights and serjeants. This last clause was in effect a mitigated suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act. Such was the wisdom of our ancestors. Here was no recourse to martial law, a sort of law, which, even in its best form, was alien to the constitution. But, the martial law they were now called on to sanction, was of an aggravated nature. It had none of those checks which had been carefully introduced into the old martial law to modify and correct the virulence of its operation. The learned member then entered into a view of martial law. It took its rise, he said, from the ancient

Courts of Chivalry, and the administration of it was originally presided over by a person professing the law. Under the Mutiny Bill, courts martial were to consist of thirteen officers, and one of them was to be a fieldofficer; thus preserving the appearance of a judge and jury. The culprit too, was entitled to a copy of the proceedings and the sentence. In short, there had been always an endeavour to make the martial law as like the constitutional law as possible. In the present instance all these ideas were abandoned. Courts martial were allowed to be formed by a smaller number of officers, than, under the Mutiny Bill, was allowed in any part of the British dominions, with the exception only of the slave coast and Botany Bay, where, from circumstances, it was impossible to apply the general rule. From the first of these places, he was sure one hon. member (Mr. Wilberforce,) would not be ready to draw any precedent; and he was himself, and he believed the House would be, as little disposed to take one from the second. It was utterly impossible to assign any reason why, in a country like Ireland, where so large an army was stationed, so small a number of offices was allowed to form a court martial. A want of officers could certainly not be pleaded. The learned member then urged the impolicy of suffering martial law to remain in existence a moment longer than was absolutely necessary. To shorten the dominion of the sword, and to bring back society to its original state, had always been the wish of every wise legislator. In the opinion of mankind no disgrace attached to the memory of those who fell in a state of warfare. But very different was the case of those who suffered by the operation of the laws. A solemn verdict of persons, who perhaps, were their neighbours, of men without passion or prejudice, established their guilt, and their names were for ever branded with ignominy. This was felt by one of the leaders of the late insurrection (Emmet) when he was taken, and an apology was made for his being hurt in the struggle, he replied, that every thing was fair in war; but when he was sentenced by a jury of his countrymen, his feelings were very different: conscious of the shame that was incurred by his end, he desired that no man might write his epitaph. Having enforced, at considerable length, the various heads of argument, the hon. member concluded by expressing his disapprobation of the measure now before the House.

General Loftus considered the bill before the House merely as a measure of precaution, and by no means one upon which the

noble lord at the head of the administration in Ireland would be disposed to act without the most urgent and indispensable necessity. He knew that noble lord, and was convinced of his disposition. He was a member of the Irish parliament when a similar measure was originally enacted. He had the honour also of serving as a general on the staff in that country, when the noble lord opposite to him was chief secretary (Lord Castlereagh); and he could assure the House, that even then, when the country was very generally agitated by a rebellious disposition, martial law was only resorted to in those counties or districts where the King's judges were prevented by insurrection from going their regular circuits, to carry into effect the common law of the land. The government of Ireland, he was well assured, would not resort to it but when it was found absolutely necessary for the preservation of the state.

The Attorney General observed, that the whole of the hon. and learned gentleman's arguments were directed against the bill, as if it were intended to be carried into adoption permanently and universally throughout Ireland: whereas it was merely intended to be temporary, and only to be acted on in such places as those wherein the ordinary process of the law should be impeded; so far, however, from its being a measure subversive of the common law, or tending to supersede generally the ordinary course of justice, it was in fact solely intended as a measure auxiliary to the common law, and tending to protect its administration by proceeding in the summary process of martial law in districts where rebellion or insurrection should render the process of the ordinary law impracticable. He could not avoid considering the arguments this night offered. against the adoption of this bill, as very extraordinary, considering the period at which, and the persons from whom, they came, and more especially from the right hon. gentleman opposite to him, (Mr. Windham,) who was a member of his Majesty's government, when a measure exactly similar to the present was first introduced, and was himself one of its most strenuous advocates and defenders. The right hon. gentleman, this night, was loud and vehement in his reprobation of this bill, and in his declaration, that it most undoubtedly was a measure which violated the constitution, and ought not to pass in the present posture of affairs. He remembered, however, when a similar measure was proposed during the administration of the right hon. gentleman; and when it was resisted by the opposition of that day, as one calculated to exasperate the people of Ireen, and to dispose them still more to re

bellion, the right hon. gentleman's language was-" who is it we are to conciliate? Is it those who are conspiring in rebellion against us, and against those whom we know to be the loyal supporters and friends of governmeat? In favour of whom is it that we are called on to relax in exercising the powers of government? Is it in favour of traitors, to the abandonment of our loyal fellow subjects?" From this language of the right hon. gentleman, upon a former occasion, he begged leave to furnish himself with arguments this night in support of this bill; and he would ask if there was a loyal man this night in Ireland, who could conceive, from the passing of this bill, the most slight cause to abate in his loyalty and attachment to government; and if, on the contrary, it would not be received as an additional pledge to every loyal subject, of the care and protection of the government. He was clearly of opinion, that the people of Ireland would not be satisfied that parliament had done its duty, if it were to separate without passing the

measure.

Mr. Windham wished the honourable and learned gentleman to consider, that if he meant to expose the opinions of any one, he must take care to state them correctly: for that otherwise the triumph which he would obtain, would be a triumph only over himself. He (Mr. W.) had never said, that the measure in question, though proper in itself, ought to be rejected, because it would be complained of by those, o. whom it was likely to operate He had never said, as a foundation for such an opinion, that the measure in question was proper. On the other hand, he was as little inclined to say, that it was improper. What he complained of was, that proper or otherwise, the house was adopting it without proof.

The Hon. C. Hely Hutchinson.-Sir, while I highly admire the display of talent which has characterized this debate, I cannot but be of opinion, that many of the observations which have been made, might have been well spared. I confess, Si, that I felt during a great part of the discussion, as a parent who had been just deprived of a beloved child, with the physician seated by me, detailing the circumstances, and reminding me of the agonies under which my child had perished: whilst I eagerly watched the opportunity to exclaim. “ spare me, Sir, this torturing and now unavailing narative; my child is gone-ti at loss is irretrievable: but, in the name of God, try and avert the ravages of a cruel disease from the rest of my family;" and in the same manner should I be inclined to address the gentlemen of this House, "no more of the

severity of this measure, of which happily for you, you cannot judge of the necessity by a reference to any thing which passes here. No more of the useless detail of the outrages and atrocities which have lately disgraced that unhappy country; for her crimes and her sufferings she has much to mourn; but the past cannot be recalled: in the name of mercy then, save her from again plunging into the guilt of rebellion, and incurring its heavy penalties."-I perfectly agree with those who consider the reenactment of the present bills as a most extraordinary exertion of legislative power; such a one, as in the judgment of a Briton may almost appear unconstitutional; but, Sir, the hon. gent. (Mr. Wilberforce) under the gallery, has given the true reason, why a measure, which in this country would be exclaimed against as most severe, becomes unfortunately necessary for Ireland; namely, that its state is not like that of England: no, Sir, there exists between the conditions of the two countries a melancholy dissimilitude, and it is only because I fear that the sad necessity exists for thus strengthening the hands of the executive in that country, that I am induced to give my consent to the passing of the bills before the House; I do so in the hope, however, in the sanguine expectation, that the wisdom and justice of the United Parliament towards Ireland, will, at length, confer upon her those blessings to which she anxiously, and I must be allowed to add, justly looks; and that, by devising for her a system of extensive and harmonized polity, such as will ensure for the future the happiness and tranquillity of that people, a recurrence to such measures as these before us, will be rendered unnecessary at any future period.—I will not rake up the ashes of the dead, for the purpose of accusing your ancestors of cruelty and impolicy in the system they had adopted towards Ireland; I am ready with my countrymen to forget our sufferings, and to forgive our oppressors; and I do most solemnly declare, that in looking wistfully to the future, I have no object but the prosperity of my country, and the consolidated strength of the empire. The proper subject for the consideration of Parliament is speedily to inquire as to what ought to be done to ameliorate the situation of Ireland. It has been observed during the debate, that "an improvement had taken place in the public mind, and that a better disposition was rapidly growing up there;" but I caution gentlemen not to allow themselves to be deceived as to the nature of that disposition : true, indeed; it was an increasing and imVOL. IV.

proving dispotition as against Buonaparté and his accursed satellites; but it did not, therefore, incline the more favourably towards a system truly vicious and defective, and approved by no honest, thinking man. The inhabitants of Ireland, when by the Union they joined their fate with that of Britain, were, indeed, taught to anticipate the blessings, as a noble lord (Castlereagh) has justly observed, which would result from such a connexion; but I positively deny, that in these their expectations, they have been satisfied: on the contrary, they have not advanced one step towards their accomplishment; it would, therefore, be prepos◄ terous to suppose, and most wicked to attempt to induce the House to believe, that there was a growing disposition of content and satisfaction, when there was every ground for the reverse; and I implore gentlemen not to be persuaded into any such most dangerous opinion.-We who are deputed on the part of Ireland to assert her rights, to uphold her interests, and to enforce her claims, appear amongst you in consequence of the most solemn engagements made to us on the part of your King and of the Nation.-I complain of the neglect and duplicity of the present ministers, which, if not calculated to alienate the affections, have, at least, marred the hopes; but I trust not irrevocably destroyed the confidence of the Irish people. I trust it is not in the power of those who have proffered Union to be the cause of separation, and having sworn to uphold the throne of their Sovereign and Master, they will not, 1 hope, be suffered by their conduct to endanger the integrity of his empire. The responsibility they have incurred is possibly more than they are aware of. They are not to compare themselves with any other minister who had ever had to advise as to the management of Ireland; and should they persevere in their neglect and indifference to the interests of that country, he should hope to see them one day at the bar of another house, where the penalties, however heavy, which they might incur, would be but a poor and inadequate atonement for the mischiefs which the prosecution of their present system is likely to entail upon the United Empire.-I venture to hope, that as so many gentlemen have so humanely adverted to Ireland, and have manifested a generous interest in her fate, that the House will speedily consider the means of relieving her; that while they give additional strength to the executive, they will, at the same time, think of administering some comfort to the people; for surely it is not

* Tt