them. The last part of the collection was a large quantity of antiquities, which had been discovered in the neighbourhood of Babylon and Nineveh, on which were inscribed characters which had not yet been deciphered, and which it was obvious, never could be deciphered, but by means of comparing them with other similar remains. Notwithstanding the long and intimate connexion which we had had with Asia, the library of the British Museum was almost wholly destitute of the productions of oriental literature. This was one reason why he recommended the purchase of the collection. Another was, that it was in itself complete and entire, and contained not one duplicate of any thing the Museum at present possessed. He had, in the course of the last session, when he called the attention of the House to the munificent gift which his majesty had made of the late king's library, expressed a belief that this example would be followed by others. He had great pleasure in stating now (not because it was a fulfilment of his own prediction, but because it was highly honourable to the generosity and public spirit of the individual to whom he alluded) that sir Richard Colt Hoare had expressed his intention of presenting to the trustees of the British Museum, for the use of the public, the large and valuable library which had been collected by himself and his family. It contained among other valuable books, a complete collection of Italian history and topography, and amounted to not less than 17 or 18,000 volumes. After stating, that the computed value of the collection of the late Mr. Rich was 8,000l., of which 6,0007. was for MSS.; 1,000l. for the medals; and 1,000l. for the antiquities, the right hon. bart. brought up the petition. He then moved, that a committee be appointed to report to the House their opinion on the proposed purchase; which was agreed to. The House being in a committee of supply, Mr. Bankes moved "That 15,416. be granted for the service of the British Museum, from 25th Dec. 1824 to the 25th March 1825." Mr. Croker rose, not for the purpose of opposing the vote, or to repeat an observation which he had made last year respecting the price at which the catalogue of the Museum was sold. A catalogue was, as it were, the key of the Museum, and highly necessary to the persons who wished to consult the books. The price of it was 7 or 8 guineas, and this made it wholly impracticable for poor scholars to procure it. He was sure the House would agree to no vote more readily than to one which would enable the Museum to sell their catalogue at a cheaper rate. Mr. Bankes said, the price of the catalogue was four guineas, but that, he was aware, was too large a price. Mr. Hume wished to know whether there was any objection to adding one or two days in each week to the three on which the Museum was open to the public. Mr. Bankes said, that there were only two days at present reserved for private inspection of the Museum, and this reservation was made with a view to accommodate foreigners and other curious persons, and whose object would be frustrated by the admission of a crowd. Mr. W. J. Bankes reminded the House of the circumstance of the collection which had been ceded by Mr. Salt to the British Museum; 4,000l. had been given to him for that collection; but he was still a loser by it, owing to the sum which he had had to pay for the alabaster sarcophagus. Mr. Salt made no demand for the sum he had lost, but he (Mr. B.) hoped that some opportunity would offer of remunerating him. The vote was agreed to. UNLAWFUL SOCIETIES IN IRELAND BILL.] Mr. Goulburn having moved the order of the day for the third reading of this bill. Mr. Leycester said, that, in his opinion, the society ought to be tolerated by the government, because, if it were put down, it would give rise to other societies which would be far more formidable than this, and which no human power would be able to put down. He was sure that the Association had contributed to preserve the peace of Ireland; and he could not doubt that it would continue to do so. He believed, too-and this was another reason which would make him regret to see it put down-that Catholic emancipation would be hastened, and rendered more certain, by means of the Association. It was wholly incompatible with Orange Associations and Orange triumphs; and by annihilating these, which had always been the destruction of public tranquillity in Ireland, it would produce real and lasting benefits to the country. It was said of a great man of old, that he could, by a stamp of his foot, raise thirty thousand men but the right hon. Secretary for Foreign Affairs might do more; for he could, by advancing one step towards the Opposition side of the House, raise six millions of people from a state of degradation to an equality with their fellow subjects. Mr. Spring Rice said, he did not mean to occupy the attention of the House at any length, for though he was prepared to defend the legality of the Catholic Association, and to controvert the truth of every charge that had been brought against that body, still he felt that branch of the subject to have been so amply discussed as not to require any further argument on his part. He would, therefore, take leave of the Association, admitting it to be evidence of a lamentable society in any country where any association, whether Protestant or Catholic, could, to a considerable degree, assume and exercise the functions, and wield the whole population at its will and pleasure. The objections which he was now prepared to make to the bill before the House had not, as yet, been touched upon. They were founded upon the unconstitutional principles of the measure proposed for the adoption of parliament. For the first time the imperial legislature was called upon to adopt the principles of the Irish Convention act. Not only were they called upon in the recitals of the present bill to adopt that most unjustifiable statute, but to declare (for the act was declaratory), that a delegation for the purpose of effecting a redress of grievances was illegal. This he denied; he knew that at former times the names of Chatham, Portland, and Fox, were known to parliament as the names of delegates. In Ireland, the illustrious men whose exertions had procured liberty for their countryCharlemont and Grattan-they were delegates; and if the Convention act was true to its declaration, these true patriots ought to have been met, not by a vote of thanks from parliament, but by an information or an indictment at the suit of the Attorney-general. If the Convention act was true in its declaration, then parliament informed the people of Ireland, that it was from illegal societies, for which the members were liable to pains and penalties, that freedom of constitution, and freedom of speech had both proceeded. Was this a safe or a salutary lesson? Did it not lead to dangerous inferences? Again, if the declaratory part of the Convention act were to be considered accurate, it only declared the common law-the common law of England as well as of Irelandand the House were admitting a principle which hereafter might be turned against themselves. He begged to read to the House a protest entered on the Journals of the Irish House of Lords, and which was sanctioned by the names of lord Charlemont and Leinster: "Because we are clearly of opinion, that the laws, as they now stand, are amply sufficient to curb licentiousness of every sort, and to prevent or punish all such crimes as may be injurious to the state, or subversive of public tranquillity.-Because that, as this bill assumes to itself the style and character of a declaratory as well as an enacting law, we cannot enough testify our disapprobation of the dangerous principle, of grounding a declaration of law upon old statutes, fallen into disuse from the increasing spirit and wisdom of the times, and esteemed by all sound and constitutional lawyers the disgrace of the Statutebook.-Because we conceive it improper and indecent that this law should be brought forward when this House is illattended, and deprived of its best and wisest members." But, supposing the Convention act to be true in its principle, it was utterly unfair to have argued as if it had even been intended to apply to the Irish Catholic committee of 1793. It was intended solely to apply to the Protestant delegates assembled at Dungannon, and to the congress about to be called together at Athlone. The Attorney-general of Ireland, lord Kilwarden, expressly stated, in reply to Mr. Grattan, that not one of the framers of the bill considered it to apply to the Catholic committee. "After the legislature had acceded to their claims," observed that learned and excellent person, "no one would be mad enough to insult the Catholics by a bill in parliament"-and yet, that very course which lord Kilwarden considered that no person would be "mad enough" to suggest, the House was now called upon most rashly and unjustifiably to pursue.-Before he quitted this part of the subject, he would just remind the House of the opinion of Mr. Ward, now a member of the upper House, who, in 1812, so far from objecting to meetings of delegates, considered that mode of proceeding as the safest, wisest, and most constitutional. He now begged leave to call the atten- | that surpassed all others in its objectiontion of the House to one of the marginal able nature, and he intended to move that notes of the present bill, which he could it be omitted. It was that clause which not consider immaterial, although he knew, empowered magistrates to invade the in point of law, it was of no force or sanctuary of every private family. He validity. It was the suggestion that the would read it to the House:-" And be it Convention act had been "evaded." He further enacted, That it shall and may be denied the fact; the act only prohibited lawful to and for any mayor, sheriff, or delegation or representative meetings; justice of the peace, and they are hereby and no meeting which was not of a repre- respectively authorised, empowered, and sentative character could fairly or legally required, within his and their respective be termed an evasion of the act. All that jurisdictions, to command all meetings was not prohibited by law remained hereinbefore declared to be unlawful assemstrictly legal. He objected to the word, blies, immediately to disperse; and if any because it might hereafter be applied as a such meeting shall not thereupon immerule of the construction of the present diately disperse, to apprehend all persons act, and matters might be sought to be offending in that behalf, and to demand brought within the spirit of a new bill, as admission into any house, out-house, or persons are said to fall in action by the office, where they shall respectively have wind of a cannon-ball. A penal statute good reason to believe that such unlawful is strictly and accurately defined by its assembly shall be, and, if refused, to enter words of limitation, and the Catholics of by force." This he considered to be one Ireland will be justified, after the passing of the most monstrous and unjustifiable of this bill, in preserving their union, and provisions that could be proposed to be persevering in their meetings in every way inserted in an act of parliament. Even if not directly forbidden. Even if they the magistrates of Ireland were all that could "evade," as it is called, the letter was most pure, it would be wrong to of the act, it should be recollected, that intrust them with such powers; but when they had Orange authority for so doing. it was a matter of notoriety that many of In 1823, an act was passed against Orange the magistracy had committed acts of the societies in Ireland: no sooner had the greatest injustice, how much more imporoyal assent been given, than the following litic would it be to do so? [hear]. He circular was addressed by the Grand did not intend to make a sweeping charge Lodge to all its affiliated societies. This against the entire body of the Irish maprecious document began in the form with gistracy. There were among it many which Frederick the Great might have pure, upright, honorable men. addressed his friend Joseph of Austria. self was a member of that body, and so "Sir and Brothers:" and it then pro- were some of those most near and dear to ceeded as follows:-"It is now illegal him; but if he could show that it conto administer an oath to any person be- tained some persons capable of exercising coming a member, or to exact or permit their ordinary power with a mischievous any test or declaration tantamount there- activity, he conceived that would be an to. In a few days the grand lodge will argument against vesting them with exforward to the different counties a new traordinary and discretionary authority; form for the admission of members, in and an authority, which, in the terms of strict obedience to the law of the land; this act, was almost without responsibility. which every member of the Orange Asso- He contended, that allowing a mayor, ciation is bound to support and yield obe- sheriff, or justice, without information on dience to." He did not read this as a oath, if he shall see "good reason" to charge against the Orangemen-they were enter a house forcibly by day or night, justified and justifiable but the Catholics gave those magistrates an indefinite and would be equally so if they took a similar an irresponsible authority. When these course. Nor would it seem that the acts new powers were about to be granted, it of the Orangemen had been disapproved was at least necessary to inquire into the of by the Irish government, as, from the character of those who were to administer year 1823 to 1825, no step had been taken them. This he would proceed to do, howto discountenance the lodges in their new ever reluctant he might feel on such a shape. subject. It should be remembered, that if reflections were to be thus cast upon the magistracy the fault was not his-it The proposed bill contained many unjustifiable provisions, but there was one He him rested with the framers of this most ini- | and highly creditable to the Irish govern quitous bill: they, and they only were ment. But, what were the observations of chief-justice Bushe on that occasion? He stated, that "it would be a mockery to open courts of justice, and for judges and juries to assemble to administer the law, if the very fountains of justice were to be polluted in their source; and if men who were invested with an important public trust were to make their authority ancillary to their private ends." In another case, tried also at Waterford, it appeared, that a landed proprietor, of the name of Matthew Power, finding that some country people had assembled for the purpose of cutting and collecting some sea-weed for manure, and considering this to be a violation of his exclusive privilege, seized the sea-weed. In consequence of a rescue, Mr. Power ordered out the armed police, and one of the country people was shot. Thus, to try a civil right respecting sea-weed, a human life was lost, and the latter was literally considered by these Waterford gentry, "projectâ vilior algâ." The observations of the chief-justice to the prisoner were the following:-"It would have been more fitting that Mr. Power should have been placed at that bar than you. I can conceive nothing more deplorable than that gentlemen, in vindication of their real or supposed civil rights, should resort to such rigorous and unwarrantable proceedings against men in the humbler classes of society. I am quite convinced that this vindictive and overbearing spirit has been one of the principal causes of the turbulent and lawless proceedings which disturb so large a portion of some neighbouring counties; and I cannot feel surprise that it should produce such consequences. If persons in the higher ranks in society will lord it over their inferiors with a strong hand-if, in the assertion of their own rights they trample on public justice, or convert the laws which should afford equal protection to rich and poor, into instruments of oppression towards the weak and powerless, is it not in vain to hope that the common people will feel for them either respect or affection, or that they will refrain from endeavouring to procure for themselves, by violence, that redress which the conduct of their superiors teaches them is not otherwise to be obtained? I would fain hope, however, that the circumstances of this melancholy case, coupled with the verdict obtained yesterday against Mr. Boyce, will produce some effect in putting an end to these petty oppressions. I trust they will be long remembered by the gentlemen of this county, and that they will impress on their minds a lesson never to be forgotten; and I sincerely hope that it may never again be the duty of any judge to denounce from this bench such mischievous proceedings as have been developed in these instances." Such is the character of some of the gentry, as given by the chief-justice of Ireland from the bench. And, was it to this gentry they would give the powers of this bill-to break into any poor man's house, upon any suspicion, however vague, and trampling upon justice and the people? supposed by any rational man that Mr. Falkiner imagined Carroll was violating the Insurrection act in his visit to Walshpark. It was a monstrous absurdity to suppose that the law of the land would suffer the Insurrection act to be converted into an instrument of oppression." A verdict for the injured party was accordingly given. He hoped the case would be remembered, should the government apply for a renewal of the Insurrection act. Should such a case unfortunately occur, he would implore the House to pause before it again gave the power to a magistrate, of committing a man because he refused to take off his hat. Some of these delinquent magistrates had been removed from the commission of the peace, and he would do his hon. friend opposite, the secretary for Ireland, the justice to say, that his letters reflected the highest credit upon him and the government. He had said, one of the defendants whose cases he had stated, was utterly unfit to remain in the magistracy, and he had been accordingly removed from it; but would any one say that this purification had been sufficient:-that the removal of one or two individuals, charged with such crimes as these, would leave a body fit to be intrusted with such a power as was contained in this bill? No, he would go further; he would say, that he would not trust it to the magistrates of England-no, nor to those of Utopia-no men should possess a power to break into their fellow-subjects' houses at their own discretion. He would fearlessly ask, what was there in the avowed opinions of the Catholic Association stronger or more vehement against the conduct of the magistrates than this condemnation of the lordchief-justice? He would not intrude upon the House this detailed and painful statement, but they were told from the other side, that general assertions were unfair. Could they, then, be blamed for bringing forward particular cases of oppression and misconduct. But his subject was still unexhausted. His next illustration should be taken from the case of Patrick Carroll against Mr. Falkiner, a magistrate of Tipperary, tried at Clonmell on the 23rd July, 1823. The action was one of false imprisonment, and as the of fence was committed under the Insurrection act, it was of peculiar importance to the House and to the public, how that most severe law was sometimes adminis- He would mention another case, contered. The plaintiff Carroll was intrust-tinuing to give his examples of the whole ed with the execution of a civil process from one circuit-this was the case of against a Mr. Walsh ; at the house of the "Laurence versus Dempster;" it took latter, he met Mr. Falkiner the magistrate. place at Clonmell. This Dempster apBy Mr. Falkiner, he was commanded to prehended Laurence under the Insurrectake off his hat, and not giving obedience tion act, while every one was walking to this order as quickly as might have abroad, even his own wife, making the been expected, he was committed for object of his antipathy the victim of his trial under the Insurrection act. Under resentment and hatred. He committed this charge, he was conveyed, in most in him to a narrow gaol, and left him 48 clement weather, a distance of eleven hours imprisoned in his native town, Irish miles, and was confined in a wretch- charged with a transportable offence. ed bridewell at Borrisakean, after having On this occasion as on the former, his vainly tendered bail. Mr. Falkiner did learned friend Mr. Doherty had been not, however, think it advisable that the concerned, and his observations then victim of this injustice should be brought made were entitled to the greatest respect to trial, and he went in person and order- and attention. He stated "that he reed his discharge. In this case the chief joiced that the cases of oppression under justice informed the jury that "the only colour of this law, developed at one asquestion for them to consider was, the sizes, were not earlier made public, lest amount of damages, as it could not be the sturdy guardians of liberty who yieldVOL. XII. 2 X |