-
Articles/Ads
Article HOUSE OF COMMONS. ← Page 2 of 5 →
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
House Of Commons.
of the greatest political agitation in Ireland had uniformly proved to be those least remarkable for prtedial outrage . Before the passing of the Coercion Bill , crimes hacl diminished from three to one ; whereas that bill left nearly the same proportion remaining . The measure about to be brought forward , regarding tithes , ivould , it was said , give relief to the people , without lessening the amount of their burthen , which was
something like playing a game at which every body would win . Their attention having been called to the Coercion Bill , he would allude to a circumstance in some degree connected ivith it . It had'been publicly stated that votes had heen procured in support of that measure in a manner so disreputable as to be scarcely within the bounds of belief , but he did not wish Ministers to suppose that he believed the part which was
attributed to them in the transaction . He wished , however , to give them an opportunity of refuting the charge . 'The utterance of the calumny was attributed to the Hon . Member for Hull , who was represented to have saicl , — " It is impossible for those not actually in the House to know all the secret machinery by which votes are obtained . I happen to know that an Irish Member , who spoke with great violence against every part of that bill , ancl voted against every clause of it , went to Ministers and saicl , ' Don ' t bate one single atom of that bill , or it will
be impossible for any man to live in Ireland . ' ' What , said they , ' this from you who speak ancl vote against the bill ? ' ' Yes , ' he replied ' that is necessary , because if I don't come into Parliament for Ireland , I must be out altogether , and that I don ' t choose . '" —The constituency of Ireland had a right to know whether there was such a person as was thus described . He believed that it was totally untrue .
He therefore inquired of the Noble Lord , whether he or any other Member of the Cabinet had ever stated that an Irish Member had acted in the manner described , and whether any Irish Member ever went to the Noble Lord , or any other Minister , ancl made the imputed statement ? Lord ALTIIORP said that , to the first of the questions he coulcl
answer positively for himself , and , to the best of his belief , for his colleagues , that no such assertion had ever been made . AVith respect to the second , as far as he was aware , no Irish Member hacl made any such statement to a Cabinet Minister . [ The Noble Lord placed a strong emphasis on the word " Cabinet , " ivhich was remarked by the House , and elicited loud cries of "hear . " ] But he should not act a manl y
part if he did not declare that he had good reason to believe that some Irish Members , ( certainly more than one ) -who voted and spoke with considerable violence against the bill , did in private conversation use very different language . —Mr . O'CONNELL , starting up , exclaimed ,
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
House Of Commons.
of the greatest political agitation in Ireland had uniformly proved to be those least remarkable for prtedial outrage . Before the passing of the Coercion Bill , crimes hacl diminished from three to one ; whereas that bill left nearly the same proportion remaining . The measure about to be brought forward , regarding tithes , ivould , it was said , give relief to the people , without lessening the amount of their burthen , which was
something like playing a game at which every body would win . Their attention having been called to the Coercion Bill , he would allude to a circumstance in some degree connected ivith it . It had'been publicly stated that votes had heen procured in support of that measure in a manner so disreputable as to be scarcely within the bounds of belief , but he did not wish Ministers to suppose that he believed the part which was
attributed to them in the transaction . He wished , however , to give them an opportunity of refuting the charge . 'The utterance of the calumny was attributed to the Hon . Member for Hull , who was represented to have saicl , — " It is impossible for those not actually in the House to know all the secret machinery by which votes are obtained . I happen to know that an Irish Member , who spoke with great violence against every part of that bill , ancl voted against every clause of it , went to Ministers and saicl , ' Don ' t bate one single atom of that bill , or it will
be impossible for any man to live in Ireland . ' ' What , said they , ' this from you who speak ancl vote against the bill ? ' ' Yes , ' he replied ' that is necessary , because if I don't come into Parliament for Ireland , I must be out altogether , and that I don ' t choose . '" —The constituency of Ireland had a right to know whether there was such a person as was thus described . He believed that it was totally untrue .
He therefore inquired of the Noble Lord , whether he or any other Member of the Cabinet had ever stated that an Irish Member had acted in the manner described , and whether any Irish Member ever went to the Noble Lord , or any other Minister , ancl made the imputed statement ? Lord ALTIIORP said that , to the first of the questions he coulcl
answer positively for himself , and , to the best of his belief , for his colleagues , that no such assertion had ever been made . AVith respect to the second , as far as he was aware , no Irish Member hacl made any such statement to a Cabinet Minister . [ The Noble Lord placed a strong emphasis on the word " Cabinet , " ivhich was remarked by the House , and elicited loud cries of "hear . " ] But he should not act a manl y
part if he did not declare that he had good reason to believe that some Irish Members , ( certainly more than one ) -who voted and spoke with considerable violence against the bill , did in private conversation use very different language . —Mr . O'CONNELL , starting up , exclaimed ,