queen, their emphatically Protestant | particulars, much worse than even that of queen, to protect, at the expense of their brethren of the same faith in Ireland. much wealth, and at the hazard of But let me not be misunderstood. Let excommunication and death, this Protes tant land, against what too?-Against no less than the consecrated banner of the pope himself [Hear, hear!]. Let the wiser policy of even those violent times testify that even then a very important branch of the legislature, and the highest posts of honour and responsibility, both in army and in state, might be safely laid open to them. The earl of Effingham, who commanded queen Elizabeth's fleet against the popish armada, was himself a Roman Catholic. The lord Howard, another Catholic peer, was, at the same time, lord warden of the Marches, to hold the frontier of Protestant England against Scotland; part Presbyterian, part Catholic. The lord Pembroke, another Catholic peer, at the same time was governor of Dover Castle, held the advanced work of Protestant England against the Catholic continent. And the same lord Pembroke had held the great seal of England. When enfranfranchised, and before penal laws had divided our country into political sects, were the Roman Catholics enemies to the constitutional safeguards of your country's liberties? Magna Charta they gave you! The integrity of your laws they vindicated by their ever-memorable protest against popish innovation, and the Bill of Rights itself is but an instrument declaratory of those rights and privileges which you derived from your Catholic ancestors [Hear, hear!]. As the best pledge of their attachment now they point to his tory, they point to conduct, they throw in, as proof and earnest, that scrupulous faith, that nice unblemished honour, which, by the oaths which you prescribe, are most unfortunately and most unjustly made the very means and instrument of their disfranchisement. Were it not for that faith and honour, where are your securities? With that faith and honour as your securities, against what is it that you seek to protect yourselves by acts of exclusion? Sir, I present this petition on behalf of the English Roman Catholics only; and that for many reasons. But principally because the condition of these petitioners, as is well known, is, in many
the petitioners not be misunderstood. The measure of justice which I think we are bound to extend to them cannot be confined to one class or description of your Roman Catholic subjects. Whatever really useful measures of relief are in the wisdom and humanity of parliament to be founded on this petition must be for the relieving and conciliating all within your dominions of the Roman Catholic persuasion who now disdain to barter religious scruples for political power. If your petitioners, pleading in their own behalf, inviduously separated their interests from those of their suffering brethren in Ireland, I can only say that deeply as I feel the strength of their cause, highly as I admire their uniform conduct I should feel myself to be a still more ineffective advocate in their cause, than even now, nor, with the opinions and feelings I entertain, could I make myself the humble instrument of laying their petition now before you. But on the other hand, if, from the pernicious advice of some, or from the irregular zeal of others, partial instances may be adduced to throw discredit on certain persons interested in the general result of a Roman Catholic petition, let us for God's sake remember the many years of severe mortification and undeserved restraint and insult they have endured, let us remember that they have feelings and passions like our own, and let us pardon something to that genuine English free spirit which is restless under restraint and proudly jealous of suspicion. Let us, above all, remember that our object and our duty is, by certain indulgent allowances for suffering impatience, to conciliate and unite, not to accuse and alienate. Every law which excludes any portion of your subjects from the public service is, pro tanto, a positive evil to the state, and can be justified only by showing, clearly showing, some greater and equally immediate evil against which by such law of exclusion you protect yourselves. In this spirit, Sir, I hope that this petition may be received. To the humanity, to the wisdom, to the justice, of this House I commit it, humbly moving that it be now laid upon your table [Hear, hear!].
INDEX TO DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS.
Address on the Prince Regent's Speech at | India; War in, 760.
the Opening of the Session, 20. Aliens and Denizens Bill, 993.
Bank of England; Secret Committee on the State of, appointed, 202, 289, 1392, 1420.
Bank Restriction, 78.
Bank of Scotland, 993.
Care of his Majesty's Person Bill, 80, 105,
Cash Payments Bill, 1392, 1420.
King's Person; Bill for the Care of 50, 105,
Lunatics Estates in Chancery, 460.
Navy; State of the, 1161.
Offices in Reversion, 385.
Chimney Sweepers Regulation Bill, 899, 981. Prince Regent's Speech on Opening the Ses-
Coal Duties, 992.
Congress at Aix-la-Chapelle, 422.
Consolidated Fund Produce Bill, 1173. Cotton Factories, 288, 339, 652.
Criminal Laws; Petition from London com- plaining of the, 119.
Prince Regent's Message respecting her late Majesty's Establishment, 325.
Prisons of the Country; State of the, 79, 509, 645.
Roman Catholic Claims, 1110.
Royal Household Bill, 1162, 1230.
Hastings, Marquis of; Vote of Thanks to, Slave Trade, 510.
Address on the Prince Regent's Speech on Bank Restriction, 72, 104, 108, 131, 188, 212,
Bank of England; Committee on the State of Caledonian Canal, 1119.
the, 280, 350, 1398.
Bank of Ireland, 440, 1423.
Bank Notes, Forgery of, 73, 137. Bank Prosecutions for Forgery, 137,
Camelford Election, 1448.
Care of his Majesty's Person Bill, 333. Cash Payments Bill, 1598.
Chancery Court of; Delay in the, 1261.
operation it confounded the innocent within the eyes of God and man for all the consequences.
the guilty. Mr. Terry, alluding to the extensive prevalence of illicit distillation, recommended the erection of barracks between the different military stations. It was by military force alone that the system was carried into execution. In the counties of Donegal and Derry prosecu- tions were often anticipated by the objects of them lodging informations against the townlands. Judge Fletcher had said, that the system of which he complained was as repugnant to the principles of justice and the common sense of mankind as it was to the general spirit of British law. It appeared to have originated in a des- perate attempt to collect revenue by any means and at any sacrifice. Amongst its other evils it violated the first rule of evi- dence, by allowing a party interested to prove his own case; it encouraged per- jury, and induced juries to find verdicts against the clearest evidence. The ex- cise officer, seeking merely to put money into his own pocket, connived at the illicit still, and entered into stipulations; the effect of which was, that some old worn- out still was seized, and the town land prosecuted for the fine. Not only civil trespasses, but perjuries, conspiracies, and assassinations, were multiplied to a frightful degree; and in the county of Donegal nearly the whole of the busi- ness, public and private, arose from this source. This was the opinion of a learned judge, speaking from long ex- perience, and upon mature consideration. Why the system of small stills, which was found so advantageous in Scotland, should not be equally beneficial in Ireland, surpassed his comprehension. If proper inspectors were appointed, and a severe punishment inflicted upon the illicit dis- tiller himself the inhabitants at large would exert themselves, not to screen him from, but to bring him to, justice. If conciliatory instead of coercive mea- sures were adopted, he had no doubt that the character drawn by sir John Davis of the Irish people would be fully realized. That writer had declared, that if protected against wrong, there was no nation on earth more attached to the prin- ciple of equal and impartial justice [Hear!]. He should conclude by se- conding the motion for a committee, and by expressing his feelings that unless the right hon. the chancellor of the exche- quer should apply some remedy to this enormous evil, he would be responsible F
Mr. Leslie Foster wished to call the at- tention of the House to a consideration of the facts in this case; and if upon a fair review of them, an alteration in the mode of collecting the revenue on spirits in Ireland should be deemed necessary, he would lend his cordial assistance to the undertaking. The question was important in every respect, and it was right that the House should be aware that in its decision depended one-fourth of the Irish revenue. In the last year the amount of this branch of it was 1,300,000l., being 239,000l. ex- cess above the produce of the preceding year. This improvement was a great fi- nancial recommendation, although it had certainly no bearing on the moral part of the question. There was no system of re- gulation that could be devised under which this revenue could be collected without some cases of violence and hard- ship. In the course of last year 1,300 illicit stills had been destroyed, but during the prevalence in 1811, 12, and 13, of the system of small stills, which it was now proposed to renew, 6,588 private stills had been destroyed in one of those years, and scarcely any left in the country. Yet in the following year upwards of 6,000 were again destroyed, and more than 5,000 in the following. All this had been accomplished by military force, and with a much greater degree of violence than had been exercised since the change which had been effected in the law. The mis- chief was before so extensive, that the commercial chambers of Belfast and other towns presented petitions, stating that the regular distilleries could not be carried on, and that the morals of the people were greatly deteriorated by the dangerous practices which prevailed. These petitions were referred to a com- mittee, which was of opinion, that the only efficacious mode of collecting the revenue was the system of fining town lands, and a bill to that effect was accord- ingly introduced by an hon. namesake of his, in the year 1814, and passed into a law. The vice of illicit distillation had at that time taken such fast possession of the champaign country, that the sufferings produced in eradicating it were, during the first year, of extraordinary severity. It was gratifying, however, to find, that the amount of fines had been rapidly de- creasing since, in all the counties of Ire land, except Donegal and Tyrone, the
could produce evidence that they had not connived at the illicit distillation, the fines would be remitted. But, from his own experience, limited as it was, he had reason to believe that the inhabitants of the town lands were almost always con-
the system of small stills was likely to cure this evil, and the example of Scot- land had been adduced in support of that opinion. In Scotland there were 39 small stills licensed, each paying upwards of 500l., and yielding a total revenue of 20,000l. Now in Ireland there were 12 small stills, larger indeed than the Scotch, but paying 9,600l. a-piece, and produc- ing a gross revenue of 115,200l. There certainly was something in this which he could not understand. He had a great respect for Scotland, and did not wish to cast any reflections on the manner in which the revenue was collected in that country; but he could not but observe, that the revenue derived from the Scotch stills was far less than was derived from the Irish. If the House were prepared to introduce the system of small stills into Ireland, and to renounce the re- venue altogether, the consequence would be, that they would have the coun- try filled with smugglers with licences, instead of smugglers without them.
mountainous nature of whose situation had always afforded peculiar opportunities for the commission of such offences. It appeared by the report of two officers, Mr. Coffley and Mr. Logie, high in that branch of the public service, that 51 stills had, however, been voluntarily surren-scious of the guilt. It had been said, that dered in Donegal: that more might be expected; and that the town lands were generally willing to enter into securities, if the law were not to undergo any altera- tion. It was true that the board of ex- cise had had the misfortune to employ a person in the first instance who had com- mitted many unjustifiable acts in the county of Donegal; but he, together with two of his assistants, had been subse- quently removed. He was sorry to say, that much perjury was certainly committed on account of the trials for illicit distilla- tion; but at the same time he was con- vinced, that it would be greatly exceed- ed by the quantity of perjury which would be occasioned by that species of trial which it was proposed to substitute for the present. It was clear, that if perjury prevailed under the present system, it must become still more prevalent if the prosecutions were directed against the persons of offenders, and if the liberty of the individuals were at stake. Much had been said about the evils and expense occasioned by the employment of so great a military force under the present system; the House, however, ought to be in- formed, that under the system of 1811, 12, and 13, when the present laws were suspended and small stills were licensed, great assistance had been derived from the military. From the report of the commissioners of excise, it appeared, that during these three years, there was paid to the military and the officers of ex- cise no less a sum than 161,000l.; while at present the average charge might be taken at 50,000l. a year; so that the House were deceived if they thought that by substituting the small still system, they would get clear of military hunting and legal prosecutions. It had been said that the principle of the present system was to punish the innocent for the guilty; but in his opinion, its general operation was to give the innocent an inducement to prevent the guilt for which they were pu- nished; and that indeed, was the only ground on which it could be defended. Besides, the board of excise had the power of remitting fines; and he was cer- tain that whenever the parties convicted
Sir Henry Parnell trusted it was unne- cessary to say, after all the House had heard, that the present system of law was most severe, unjust, and unwise. He hoped the House would agree with him in thinking, that the time had now arrived for getting rid of that system altogether, for surely no case had been made out to justify the law. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Foster) had stated that the system of small distilleries had been tried, and failed-he (Sir H. Parnell) was satisfied that that statement was not correct- every gentleman who had attended to the subject knew that the small stills had never had a fair trial-they were impeded and discouraged in many ways; indeed it was impossible that they could have ex- isted under the regulations that had been made-the interests of the small prietors were always obliged to give way to those of the proprietors of large distil- leries; but, above all, they laboured un- der the power the commissioners had of withholding licences, instead of giving every man a fair opportunity of employing his capital and his industry in the trade. The establishment of small stills would
have a powerful effect in putting down | tillation from grain was suspended; and it illicit distillation-the proprietors of small was not possible, therefore, for the small distilleries would find it their interest to still system to be established, when no put it down-the people would be induced distillation was allowed to go on. Was to assist in putting down illegal distillation, it fair, then, to say that this system was and until they assisted, it could not be put established in 1810, 11, and 12? The down, though the country might be co- gentlemen from Ireland, not taking into vered with military force and revenue of consideration that all legal distillation was ficers. As to the statement made by the suspended, came to the chancellor of the hon. gentleman, to show that illegal distil- exchequer by acclamation for the repeal lation was on the decline in Ireland, he of the system, who very properly listened would observe, that in the first year he to them. He did not blame the chancel- referred to, corn bore a very low price lor of the exchequer for acceding to their in Ireland, there was no market, and it request, but he blamed the gentlemen of resulted, as a matter of course, that the Ireland for allowing themselves to be run superfluous corn should find its way into away with without experience. He had illicit distillation; the third year he re- then opposed the recurrence to the fine ferred to, there happened to be a high system, but nearly all the Irish members price, and a sure market for corn, and the divided against him. Mr. Gregory, now Irish farmer naturally exported it. The under secretary for Ireland, who was sent same year was one of great distress in down to Innishowan, reported, that the Ireland-besides, from the wetness of the effect of the fine system was such as to season and the consequent want of fuel, beggar all description. This was af- illicit distilleries were not worked by the ter the system had been in operation people. These reasons would tend to many years. In 1812, the same gentle- explain the statement made by the hon. man was sent down to the very same spot gentleman; it was to these local, tempo- and the improvement under the new sys- rary, and incidental causes that the alter-tem was so great as to be hardly credible. ation was to be traced, and not to the Having paid much attention to this sub- effects of a system which was only preg-ject, and knowing from the most respect- nant with public immorality, misfortune, and discontent.
Mr. Wellesley Pole said, that in 1810, when he held the office of Irish secretary, he found the fine system in full operation. On a representation of the horrors and crimes committed under this system, and of its inutility to prevent illicit distillation, the then chancellor of the exchequer and himself investigated the subject, and they agreed to remit some of the fines, and to suspend the operation of the act. His hon. friend had said, that the small still system had been in full operation in Ire- land in 1810, 1811 and 1812. The fact was, that the fine system was only sus- pended in 1810. His friend, the chan- cellor of the exchequer, who remained in office after he himself had gone out, did not encourage small stills-and in the ses- sion of 1812, he had brought in a bill, framed with the greatest care, the effect of which he hoped would be to prevent the necessity of recurring to the horrid system of fines. But at the time this bill was brought in, a circumstance took place which changed the whole question; the distillation from grain was then suspended. The fine of the town lands system was only suspended, and not repealed, and the dis-
able sources the effects of the fine system in Ireland, no human power should induce him to give it his support. In October 1816, when Mr. Terry, deputy chairman of the commissioners of excise visited In- nishowan, he found that the places where illicit distillation flourished most, were those very places which had already been fined; for the illicit distillers resorted to places which had nothing on them, every thing having been carried off. The same gentlemen who were almost unani- mous in wishing the fine system in 1812, were now unanimous against it. If it was a grievance, it was a grievance of their own seeking.
Lord Mount-Charles said, that at the recent assizes in Donnegal, there were no less than 300 town-lands fines trials. In the late presentments of the grand jury, application was made for a certain sum of money, for the enlargement of the county gaols, which had become necessary, in consequence of the numbers confined from inability to pay the fines.
Mr. V. Fitzgerald said, that though he had been the person whose duty it was to propose the re-enactment of the law which had been held up to censure, he hoped the House would do him the justice
« ZurückWeiter » |