in which the government did not act with
clemency.

Mr. French said, the diminution of illicit
distillation in the two first years after the
passing of the law, was to be attributed to
the dearness of corn and turf. The present
year, a year of ordinary supply, was the
best test of its merits. Yet in Mayo, at
the last assizes, there were eighty convic-
tions for illicit distillation; Sligo was
nearly as bad, and in the county he repre-
sented, there were many. He strongly
reprobated the law, and trusted the Eng-
lish and Scotch representatives would not
suffer the Irish gentlemen to be robbed
by such a law,

to believe that he was not one of those
who would seek the credit of consistency
for persevering in opinions, the erroneous-
ness of which had been forced on their
conviction. He, however, had seen no
reason to change his opinion of the law.
If it had been so pregnant with horror,
guilt, and crime, as his right hon. friend
thought, how had it happened that he had
not taken earlier measures to denounce it,
or that he had not accepted the invitation
to take part in the deliberations of a former
committee concerning it? He bore testi-
mony to the sincerity of the hon. mover's
intentions, but he thought it too much to
suppose, that all the distress of Ireland,
all the outrages and breaches of law, and Mr. Peel allowed that the law might be
even the state of the prisons, was to be accompanied with much hardship; but
attributed to this act. As to the number there was a question, whether it was not
of persons imprisoned in Doonegal, the a lesser evil than the system it had (with
fact was, that these persons were not the exception of two counties) succeeded
imprisoned under that part of the act in crushing. He feared lest the House
which it was now proposed to repeal. As should suffer itself to be induced by its
to the complaint, that the law for the en- feelings to take a step, of which, on cooler
couragement of small stills was not en- reflexion, it might repent. In 1810, this
forced, it seemed rather misplaced, at a law was suspended; in 1812, repealed;
time when that law was enforced to a but, in 1813, re-enacted, with only seven
greater extent than had been proposed. dissenting voices. It was re-enacted,
The fullest committee that he ever re- after an examination of several Irish mem-
membered a committee on which every bers before a committee of the House, and
member from Ireland was admitted-had now they were called upon to repeal it
concurred in recommending the present without inquiry. The House should be
law. Was it not a strange species of cautious of doing so, as they might be
logic, by which the demoralization of under the necessity of re-enacting it again
Ireland was imputed, not to the use of with accumulated disadvantages. He did
cheap spirituous liquors, and to the sys- not shut his eyes to the evils of the pre-
tem which began with the breach of re-sent system, but he feared the conse-
venue regulations, and ended with the
breach of all law, but to the act which
attempted to remedy these evils; which
imputed the murder of Mr. Buller, not to
illicit distillation, but to his attempt to
execute the law against it? The employ-
ment of a military force in the suppression
of illicit distillation, had not originated
with the act which it was proposed to
repeal, nor was imputable to it. It was
in evidence, that at the time when his
right hon. friend (Mr. W. Pole) took
those measures to suppress distillation,
which were found ineffectual, a military
force of 140 infantry and 40 cavalry was
sent against the illicit distillers of the
barony of Innisshowen, and successfully
resisted by them. The committee of
which he had spoken had declared, that
it was necessary to put an end to illicit
distillation, as directly subversive of the
morals of the Irish people. As to the
execution of the law, he knew of no case

quences of resorting to any other, and,
above all things, he feared the dangers
resulting from a perpetual vacillation,
which was in itself one of the greatest
misfortunes that could be inflicted in a
country,

Colonel Barry said, that the system of
still fines was injurious to morals, and a
great hardship to an innocent population.
He would admit that the law had great
effect in suppressing illicit distillation,
but so must any measure of unexampled
cruelty. It was not his opinion, however,
that it ought to be done away at once;
the best course to pursue would be, the
adoption of some concurrent remedial sys-
tem; perhaps the lowering of the duty on
spirits, and the encouragement of small
stills throughout the country.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer was of
opinion, that it would be wise in the
House to acquiesce in the suggestion of
his hon. friend who spoke last. At the

H

H

ADDENDUM.

The Reader is requested to substitute the following Report of the Speech of Lord Nugent, on presenting the Petition of the Catholics of Great Britain, March 4th, in the room of the one which will be found at page 858.

competent are the hands into which so great a trust has now fallen, I cannot but feel at the same time that it derives from the memory of those it has lost a melancholy but irresistible interest in its be. half.-The petition which, for so many years, derived support from the eloquence, the authority, and the character of Mr. Windham, cannot be devoid of interest in this House [Hear, hear!]. The petition whose cause was so often, and so lately, pleaded in this House by a voice whose captivating tones are still fresh in the recollection of most of us, by a man whose loss is the subject of so recent, and, I am convinced, so general, sorrow, cannot be devoid of interest to us [Hear, hear!]. Well and long will this House remember the eloquence-the grace far beyond the reach of ordinary eloquence

Lord Nugent said, that he rose, in dis- | charge of an awful duty, to present the humble petition of a very considerable body of his majesty's subjects, Roman Catholics of great Britain, praying to be relieved from certain grievous civil disabilities under which they now labour. The petition was signed by upwards of 10,300 persons, among whom were many of the representatives of the most ancient and noblest families of the land, at the head of which distinguished list stood the name of his grace the duke of Norfolk, earl marshal of England, and, by birth, the first subject in the realm. And, said the noble lord, in contenting myself for the present with moving, that this petition be now laid upon your table, it is not my intention to detain you by inquiring what particular mode or measure of relief it may hereafter appear desirable or prac--the statesman-like discretion, but above ticable for the House to adopt, still less shall I enter into a detail of the peculiar state of the Roman Catholics of this country, a topic, on which, from the many and full discussions it has received, not only in this House, but through every channel of public information out of doors, the minds of gentlemen may be expected to be already very adequately prepared. At the same time, the tone and temper of the petition itself forbids our considering it as in any way prescribing the means, or even the extent, of that relief to which I trust that this House will be of opinion that they have a just and a peculiar claim. The petition is expressed in nearly the same terms, and embraces precisely the same objects, as when, in those able hands to which, for years, it was entrusted, it obtained, even whilst it failed of success, general sym-tection, with one name more added to the pathy and applause from its unvaried good feeling, discretion, and modesty [Hear, hear!]. But connected as it now is with the memory of those great and good men, who used to support its prayer | with all that their eloquence and their authority, and their character, could give to its support, while I reflect, certainly with unaffected dismay, upon how in.

all, the zealous sincerity, with which those great men pleaded for years, in behalf of these petitioners, the cause of general conciliation. Those tones are for ever lost to this House; that support is for ever lost to the cause.- -The last of that distinguished class and connexion of men to which he belonged in this House is now gone. He has left behind him the example, a rare one, of a statesman who, after a long political life, passed actively too, in difficult and contentious times, has died with the general and unqualified regret of all persons, of all parties and opinions among us. The cause of this large and suffering body of your countrymen, which Mr. Windham, in almost his last moments, bequeathed to his illustrious friend, whose recent loss we deplore, has now devolved upon this House, for pro

venerable list of the patrons it has lost, a list already graced with the names of all the most considerable men of parliament, from Mr. Elliot up to Mr. Burke and sir George Saville, that is, from the repeal of the first of that cruel and unnatural code of what were called the penal laws, down to the present period.

Sir, the general question, as it affects

the Roman Catholics of your empire, and
embracing a much wider scope of discus-
sion than what necessarily belongs to this
petition, will, I trust, ere long, be brought
before you, introduced by the ablest
hands, and recommended by the highest
authority. I trust that the day is not far
distant when we shall again hear in his
place pleading in behalf, not only of his
own countrymen, but of your whole em-
pire a man whose venerable name affords
additional lustre to the best and noblest
cause, a name which never can be sepa-
rated from the glorious cause of universal
toleration and freedom, in which his
whole glorious life has been passed [Hear,
hear!]. The presence of my right hon.
friend (Mr. Grattan) forbids my farther
indulging those feelings in which, on this
occasion, I am sure the House sympa-
thizes with me. But I ought now to state
that, should his extensive and hopeful
views of general benefit fail of their im-
mediate effect this session, it will be my
duty, however inadequately, to found a
motion, of general influence still, on the
particular prayer of this petition. In the
mean time, it is not for me now, by imma-
ture discussion, or by anything like anti-
cipation of questions which do not neces-
sarily belong to this petition, however
naturally they may arise out of it,
to disturb that unanimity of sentiment
which I trust will accompany to your
table the prayer of this great and high-
minded, though patient and long-suffering,
portion of your countrymen. But this I
trust I may, even thus early, express as
my firm conviction-A conviction which
I should venture humbly to urge upon the
consideration of the petitioners them-
selves, were I not assured as I am, that
they already feel it much more strongly
than I can possibly express it. That, from
their uniform and steady conduct, from
the tone and temper of their applications,
every reliance may be placed on the ulti-
mate justice of this House. But that
no good can possibly arise, and much
mischief may be apprehended, from what
I have long thought the fatal mistake of
endeavouring on the part of the peti-
tioners, to make terms with parliament
on how far this or that security which we
may think fit to adopt may or may not be
consonant with their particular views or
opinions as to the discipline of their own
church. Let us, on the other hand, re-
member that, while it is our duty to legis-
late for all the subjects of this empire, it

would be weakness, it would be worse, it would be want of candour, to negociate with a particular class of them [Hear, hear!]. By petitions conceived in a spirit like that which characterizes the petition now before you, and received by parliament in a corresponding spirit of conciliation, much, perhaps all, may be effected towards securing general satisfaction and permanent union. But from negotiation I have always felt that, however ardent may be on both sides the wish of mutual accommodation, from negotiation between two such bodies as parliament and the petitioners no good can possibly arise, none can be hoped for. It can only end, for the petitioners, in bickerings with parliament, and in dissensions among themselves; it can only end, for us, in lowering the value of the boon we may be disposed to extend, and in compromising ourselves by stipulations to preserve for our own establishments those terms which we already have within our power-your petitioners have felt this. They have acted upon this conviction, and, in so doing, they have, in my judgment, acted wisely, dutifully, and well. For who, after all, can reasonably hope to succeed in treating on matters like church discipline with men who, on these very subjects, commence with differences from you which, like all other spiritual differences, probably nothing short of inspiration, nothing this side the grave, can finally or effectually adjust. Excepting indeed they be adjusted by community of education, community of pursuits, community of privileges, and that community of habits and of feeling which education pursuits and privilege in common are usually found to inspire. For our consideration, as it appears to me, this remains. Your petitioners complain that they suffer under two grievances-political disqualification, and religious obloquy. That the religious obloquy arises mainly out of the political disqualification, and that the political disqualification is inflicted on them, not on account of any political tenets now imputed to them, but on account of religious tenets only,-in other words, on account of certain scruples concerning which man is responsible to God only and his own conscience; but at the same time allow me to say, his unshaken fidelity to which gives the best earnest he can give to the state of his reverence for those moral and religious obligations which are the strength