Mr. Hamilton Rowan had not been tried | and perhaps at the present moment not for treason. It was admitted that he had to have formed a part of the empire. They been attainted without previous investi- were troublesome times in which Mr. gation. But then it seemed that a Mr. Hamilton Rowan lived. They were times Jackson had been so tried, and the right in which the wisest and best patriot might hon. gentleman thought that Mr. Rowan be exposed to danger. Not even that was implicated in that trial. But that most revered person, whom no man on was not all. The right hon. gentleman either side of the House could mention said, that although the attainder was not without respect-not even Mr. Grattan the result of any trial of Mr. Rowan, yet was safe. A consultation had been held that gentleman had nevertheless been in the Privy Council, on the propriety of tried. But, for what offence? For trea- trying Mr. Grattan ; and there was reason son? For any offence which gave the to believe that Mr. Grattan's leaving his right hon. gentleman a right to call him country to attend his duty elsewhere, an attainted traitor? By no means. saved him from much trouble on that ocAttainted he certainly was; but the of- casion. There were other charges, howfence for which he was tried was a sedi- ever, against the Catholic Association, and tious libel. If the Catholic Association, against Mr. Hamilton Rowan. In the however, had been wrong in putting an first place, he would observe, that Mr. O' address into the hands of Mr. Hamilton Gorman was not a member of the CathoRowan, because in troublesome and un-lic Association. But, he did not mean certain times be had written something to state that in defence of the Association. that was deemed a libel, they had since They might have adopted Mr. O'Gorman's committed another indiscretion of a simi- letter as their own. But, how did the lar nature. That was not their last folly. right hon. gentleman close his remarks Why did the right hon. gentleman stop? that evening? By reading the reversal of Why did he not declare that they were Mr. Hamilton Rowan's attainder, and the incorrigible? They first declare, that grateful expressions made use of by that they revere the name of a person who gentleman, on the occasion, to his majesty. was convicted of writing a seditious And yet, that man, so treated by his libel, in 1794, and, thirty years' ex- sovereign, so restored to his family and perience not having made them wiser, his country by a free pardon, was, for the they now confided their petition to that purpose of pointing a sarcasm against House to the care of an hon. baronet, who other persons, of rounding a period, or of had been declared guilty of a libel, obtaining a cheer, to be branded as an atand sentenced to imprisonment on the tainted traitor! It seemed, according to banks of the river which washed their the right hon. gentleman's own admission, walls. Once for all, he (Mr. Brougham) that Mr. Hamilton Rowan was received said, that he should not have felt any diffi- in private as if no charge had ever been culty in those times, situated as Ireland brought against him. His (Mr. B's.) then was, as an Irishman, a patriot, and a statement was, that he had been so relover of his country, to set his hand to ceived in public. It was true he had assuch a libel as that with which Mr. Ha-serted, that Mr. Rowan was in the commilton Rowan had been charged. It spoke of arming the people. That was in a country which had voted statues to Grattan. That was in a country in which the volunteers had been called the saviours of Ireland. What Hamilton Rowan declared was, that the people should arm to defend their country, which was in danger. If he meant that they were not to stop after they had driven back the external foe, but were to proceed to obtain civil liberty, that was only what had formerly been done with the sanction of the Irish parliament: that was only what the volunteers of Ireland had done: that was only what, if it had not been done, would have left Ireland to be degraded and enslaved, VOL. XII. mission of the peace. But he begged to inform the House, that of that alleged fact he knew no more than the right hon. gentleman knew, except from information which he had only received ten minutes before he rose on Friday, from persons connected with the sister kingdom. He had since seen the same persons, and had been told by them, that they had seen Mr. Rowan's signature to an address of the most unexceptionable character under a title which might have misled any one, namely, "The Address of the undersigned persons, being Magistrates and Grand Jurors of the county of Down." It was evident, therefore, that the mistake, if mistake it was, was very easily made. It must have 2 Z originated in Mr. Rowan's having signed | He would go a step further. He would ask, who had a right to complain of Mr. peated his opinion that this gentleman the address in the capacity of a grand juror, not in that of a magistrate. Having received the information as he had received it, he was bound to communicate it to the House. So far was he from repenting of the statement, that he should have been ashamed of himself if he had not made it. But there were some other statements to make on this subject, which he had omitted when he last addressed the House on the subject. Whether Mr. Rowan was a magis-nifesting their respect to him. He re trate or not, was only one circumstance. Let it be taken out of his (Mr. B's) defence, and that defence would still be impregnable. Mr. Rowan was restored to his family and country. Was not that enough? He received a free pardon: was that nothing? He regained all the rights and privileges of a citizen :—was that nothing? He was allowed to act as a grand juror-to pronounce on bills for high treason; was that nothing? He was received at the levees at the Castle: was that nothing? One lord-lieutenant after another treated him with courtesy and kindness. To show what was thought of him by one lord-lieutenant, he was authorized to read to the House a letter from his grace the duke of Bedford-a man not more disposed to be favourable to the propagation of high treason than the right hon. gentlemen opposite, although they assumed to be the only defenders of the altar and the throne. The right hon. gentleman opposite talked as if they were the only persons who had a stake in the country. He could not, however, help believing, that such men as the duke of Bedford had as deep a stake in the welfare and tranquillity of the country, if that was to be considered the test of loyalty, as any man on the opposite benches. The letter was as follows:-"One of the very first official acts of my administration in Ireland, was to recommend the Crown to pardon Mr. Hamilton Rowan. No one act of that short administration gave me more satisfaction; for a more honourable and respectable man never existed in Ireland." * Be it known, then, to the world, that the charge against the Catholic Association is, that even supposing Mr. Hamilton Rowan was not a magistrate, they ventured to join their countrymen in speaking with respect and affection of a man, who was described by the duke of Bedford as one of the most honourable and respectable men that ever existed in Ireland. Rusticus, abnormis sapiens, crassâque Minervâ,” The character of the learned judge to which he had alluded, was one drawn by an individual who had a much better knowledge of him than he could pretend to have. But other opportunities would soon be afforded for discussing this subject. A gentleman who had presented a petition to the House two years ago, complaining of Mr. Baron M'Clelland's conduct, was extremely anxious to be heard at the bar, in support of his charge, which was that of malversation. When that charge came to be heard would be time to determine on Mr. Baron M'Clelland's merits. All he would say at present was, that he saw no reason for retracting what he had said on a recent occasion.-As to the measure before the House, he deplored it as one of the greatest evils that could befall the empire. He denounced it as the harbinger of ill to Ireland; as shutting the door against conciliation in that country; as putting an end to the short reign of tranquillity which the Catholic Asso The Their The House then divided: For the third reading 226. Against it, 96. Majority 130. The bill was then read a third time and passed. Maberly, W. L. Martin, R. List of the Minority. Martin, J. Milton, visc. Monck, J. B. Moore, P. Newport, sir J. Ord, W. O'Brien, sir E. Palmer, C. F. Pares, T. Parnell, sir H. Philips, G., sen. Philips, G. R. jun. Power, R. Poyntz, W. S. Price, R. Ramsden, J. C. ciation had, by their efforts, established. | mittee, in which it was distinctly stated, His sentiments on the subject had been that Mr. Rowan had been attainted. What strengthened rather than weakened, since would become of the freedom of debate, he last addressed the House on the sub-if such a proceeding were to be considered ject. He now called upon them, for the as justly censurable? last time, to pause before they committed what might prove an irreparable mischief. The measure was partial. It was directed, not against the Örangemen, but against the Catholics; and the Catholics only. He had hoped that if not the substance, at least they might have had the semblance, of even-handed justice. But, no such thing. The Catholics were prohibited from meeting as a public association; the Orangemen were permitted to do so [no, no!]. He repeated, that they were. The Orangemen, as well as the Catholics, were prevented from meeting in secret societies; but the Catholics alone were prevented from meeting in public. bill prohibited meetings for the purpose of petitioning for the redress of grievances, or for any alteration in church or state. Now, who ever heard of Orangemen meeting for such a purpose? They were too happy to maintain the system as it stood. Alteration would be fatal to them. meetings would be only for the purpose of upholding the church and state in their present form. Under the mask of impartiality, therefore, the bill was a doubleedged sword against the Catholics, but a single one against the Orangemen. The Orangemen might have a parliament; they might have every privilege which the Catholics now possessed, provided they did not seek for alteration; which alteration they did not want. There was only one hope which he still cherished. His last prayer to the House was: If you have determined on passing this act against the Catholics; if you have resolved to commit this grievous injury to Ireland; if you have made up your minds almost to shut the gates of mercy against that unhappy country, at least, on Tuesday next, recollect yourselves; and unless you are insensible to every feeling of humanity, unless you are deaf to the voice of justice, of policy, and of reason, you will retrace some of the steps which you are now madly taking, and give emancipation to the Catholics. Mr. Peel, in explanation, denied that he had used any tone of peculiar harshness or vehemence. He now calmly re-asserted every expression that had fallen from him on last Friday. In the course of his observations on that evening, he had read a passage from the report of the secret com H. M. Folkestone, visc. H. Johnson, W. A. Webbe, E. White, S. Wyvill, M. TELLERS. Duncannon, visc. PAIRED OFF. Ponsonby, hon. F. C. Wilkins, W. HOUSE OF LORDS. Monday, February 28. SCOTCH JURIES BILL.] Lord Melville rose, pursuant to notice, to introduce a bill for better regulating the mode of choosing Juries in Scotland. It would be in the recollection of their lordships, that, on more than one occasion, when a bill for altering the present manner of choosing Scotch juries was formerly before the House, he had objected to it, on account of the complexity and inefficiency of the proposed remedy. The machinery of the bill brought from the Commons was very inconvenient; even more inconvenient than the one now in use. At that time, he had stated that he would, with the concurrence and assistance of persons in the northern parts of the united kingdom, well informed on the subject, undertake to prepare a bill, having the same object as that which had been rejected. That bill he had now the honour to tender to their lordships. As to the alterations, in the first place, their lordships were aware that at the union the law of high treason was assimilated throughout Great Britain; but, though the law on this subject was the same in Scotland as in England, it had been found difficult to render the mode of choosing the jury exactly alike. In England, assizes were held in each county; but in Scotland the circuits were held for districts, consisting generally of four counties. He therefore meant to propose, that, in cases of high treason, the lists of grand and petty jurors should be returned from districts, and not from counties. In the second place, it was to be recollected, in regard to ordinary trials, that the assize in Scotland was not at all regulated in the same manner as in England. The prisoner received a list of the names from which his jury was struck, fifteen days before trial; and he proposed, in addition to this, to make the mode of selecting the jury more conformable to the practice of this country. These were the general principles of the bill; and he had only to add, that he proposed to alter the present mode of choosing juries, which was left to the judge, and make them be chosen by ballot, leaving both to the prisoner and the prosecutor an equal right of challenge. The bill was read the first time. UNLAWFUL SOCIETIES IN IRELAND BILL-PETITIONS for and againsT.] Numerous petitions were presented to the House, both for and against this bill. The Earl of Darnley presented a petition from the parish of St. Catherine, Dublin, against the bill. He stated, that the petition expressed the sentiments of a very large proportion of his majesty's Roman Catholic subjects. He did not wish to be understood as standing up there in defence of every thing which had been said or done by the Association. Many things might be said in public assemblies for which it would be necessary rather to offer apology than defence. That, however, did not alter his opinion of the injustice and impolicy of the measure now before the House. Lord Holland said, he had a petition to present against the bill. The petition contained some strong reasons against passing it. By some noble lords these reasons might not appear objections to the bill, but arguments for it. If the objections to the Catholic Association were, that it spoke the sentiments of the whole Irish nation; if it were an objection to that Association, that it endeavoured calmly but firmly to procure the redress of an intolerable grievance; then he was afraid that these petitions and these objections would only appear to some noble lords as arguments for the bill. These petitions, as expressing the common opinion and feeling of the country, were entitled to the serious consideration of the House. He trusted, therefore, that their lordships would give to them their most serious attention. The Marquis of Lansdown, in rising to present some petitions of a similar nature, wished to state, that since he had presented the Protestant petition in favour of the Catholic clains, he had received letters from the marquis of Sligo and lord Ashtown, expressing a wish that their names should be affixed to that petition. It was too late for him to comply with the request, but, out of courtesy to these noble lords, he thought it due to them to state their intentions. The noble marquis said, he had several petitions to present, which gave him great satisfaction. From what he had heard of the bill, it would be both inefficient and unconstitutional. Lord Clifden said, he had a number of petitions to present from Protestants, as well as Catholics, against the bill. With respect to that measure, he did not think that much effect could be expected from it. It would be recollected, that about two years ago they had passed a bill to suppress Orange societies; but instead of those Orange societies being put down by that bill, they flourished more than ever. The Orange societies had their secret meetings, and from the experience which had been obtained on this subject, their lordships might infer, that the Catholic societies, after the passing of the present bill, would also flourish more than ever. The nature of the measure proposed to be adopted might be judged of, from the satisfaction it gave to the natural enemies of this country. He had it from good authority, that the French were quite delighted at the idea of this bill passing. Such measures were not the means by which the peace of Ireland could be secured. He would put to every impartial man, whether there was any prospect of terminating the existing discontents except by conciliation-by opening the doors of parliament to the Roman Catholics. He could assure their lordships, that the great body of the Protestants of Munster and Ulster were desirous that the claims of their Catholic brethren should be granted. Many would wish such a measure to be accompanied by an alteration in the mode of voting for members of parliament, by raising the value of the franchise. On this question he was far from now giving any opinion. The Bishop of Bath and Wells presented a petition in favour of the bill, from the archdeacon and clergy of the diocess of Bath and Wells. It intimated in one passage, that the Catholics had covered their designs with a cloak of loyalty, which they had now thrown off, and were proceeding to threaten. Earl Fitzwilliam condemned the language which the petitioners used, on account of its impolicy as well as its illiberality and injustice. He must object to petitions from the clergy for the exclusion of others from constitutional privileges, as coming from an interested body. If a rich corporation petitioned for objects which were supposed to favour its interests, why might not the army be allowed to petition in the like manner? He condemned all penal laws for opinions; all attempts to control the consciences of men. Such conduct was flying in the face of heaven; and it was dreadful to think of the consequences which might follow from thus persisting in inflicting severe penalties on six millions of human beings. The only pretext for this manner of proceeding was a conscientious difference of opinion in men who acknowledged the same Saviour, and, in all its great principles, the same faith, as themselves. He The Bishop of Bath and Wells was surprised to hear what had fallen from the noble earl respecting the language of the petition. What had been stated, however, consisted altogether of general assertion, which he could only answer by a general negation. In his opinion, the sentiments contained in the petition reflected credit on those from whom it came. was not aware of any improper language in it; if there was, the noble earl had not pointed it out. He could not see why petitions against a measure should not be received by persons whose interests might be affected by that measure; and, in the present case, he thought the clergy had as good a right to petition as any other class of his majesty's subjects. If any thing could show the unreasonableness of this exception, it would be the reception of a petition which professed to come from the whole body of the Catholic priesthood of Ireland. Lord Holland observed, that, always inclined to open the widest door to the applications of the people, he would make no objection to the reception of this petition. He would receive it notwithstanding the absolute falsehoods and the gross allegations of improper motives with which it was filled, and the spirit and temper which it displayed. The petitioners came before their lordships "humbly" representing their views and their fears; but, what evidence did they give of christian humility in their arrogant denial of equal privileges to their christian brethren? They professed their regard for christian establishments, but showed none for christian charity. His noble friend had objected to the petition, that it contained imputations of motives which the petitioners could not prove, and asserted facts, of which the Catholics could establish the falsehood. When this was denied, his noble friend had justified his assertions by an appeal to the words of the petition. It broadly stated, that the Catholics avowed the doctrine of the Pope's supremacy in civil matters-an assertion which the Catholics denied. It next asserted, that the real object of the Catholics was to overthrow the Protestant Church establishment, and possess themselves of its revenues; and this the Catholics denied. It did not become a body of men profess |