IRISH COERCION BILL.

THE Country is threatened with calamities of such alarming magnitude, that although that portion of our impression which goes to London has been already dispatched, we eagerly take the opportunity that yet remains to us, of addressing a few words to the People of Scotland, to the People of Ireland, and to his Majesty's Ministers.

A Bill for totally suspending the liberties of Ireland has been brought into the House of Lords by Earl Grey; pushed forward with unprecedented speed, amidst the unanimous cheers of the Tories; and been already passed in that House, with the concurrence of nearly the whole of our Hereditary Legislators. Into a detail of the provisions of that Bill we need not enter. The newspapers have already made them familiar to all. Had all of those Edinburgh newspapers which profess liberal principles accompanied their promulgation of this atrocious Bill with the expression of that indignation which such a measure might be supposed to call forth, from every enlightened journalist who aspires to rank above the mere tool of a faction, this Postscript should not have beer written. But the Edinburgh press, we grieve to see, is engaged in palliating the atrocity of this deadly wrong to Ireland, representing it as imperatively called for, and hallooing on Ministers in their mad career. Such conduct in some of these papers, which have been long regarded as the Guardians of Liberty, constrains us to speak.

That this coercive measure is, in the highest degree, unconstitutional, is admitted by Earl Grey himself, and is not denied by any one of its approvers, either in or out of Parliament. The alleged excuse for it is, that it is necessary. This Bill is intended, as the preamble informs us, to put down" a dangerous conspiracy against the rights of property and the administration of the laws;" "tumultuous movements of large bodies of evil-disposed persons, who have, by their numbers and violence, creat ed such general alarm and intimidation as materially to impede the due course of public justice, and to frustrate the ordinary modes of crimi nal prosecution;" "meetings and assemblies inconsistent with the public peace and safety, and with the exercise of regular government." The real purpose of the Bill is here at last avowed. It is a Bill to put down public meetings for the purpose of petitioning against Tithes, or for the Repeal of the Union. But the right of holding public meetings for the discussion of grievances is a principle so well recognized by the people of England and Scotland; and the authors and abettors of this gagging Bill have been so much connected with such assemblies during their struggle with the Tories, that had such been declared to be its object when it was first announced, public indignation would have been too strong to admit of any hopes of the Bill being carried. The course that has been pursued has been cunningly devised. No allusion was made, in the discussion on the King's Speech, to public meetings, or to the resistance to tithes; but only to those murders and outrages which are but too common in Ireland. Long catalogues of murders, forcible seizures of arms, threats of death to Jurors, &c., were brought forward. Public feeling was excited. Ignorant people, in both Houses of Parliament, and throughout the country, expressed their horror at such crimes. "The perpetrators of such enormities must be put down," "life and property must be rendered secure," were the common remarks. Will this co

VOL. II.-NO, XII.

3 L

ercive measure put down murder and intimidation? was it intended to do so? will it not aggravate the evils it pretends to cure, or cause other evils of yet greater magnitude ?—these were questions which it occurred to only a few to ask either the authors of the Bill or themselves. Ireland was regarded as a country in which there was no safety for either property or life; therefore this Bill should be supported—were the assumption and conclusion too generally adopted. We deny both the assumption of fact, and the conclusion drawn from it. Murders and robberies are too rife in Ireland; but we deny that there exists that dreadful insecurity which the Ministry proclaim. Miserably poor as the Irish are, and reckless of human life, when incited by real or fancied wrongs, there are few robberies, except those of arms; few murders, except those dictated by a sort of "wild justice." The Irish have been oppressed by bad laws, administered with shameless partiality. Resistance to the exaction of tithes was sure to lead to conviction and severe punishment; while the savage policeman, who visited the offence of a riot caused by his own conduct, in converting orderly and merely passive resistance into a tumult, was sure of acquittal. Law has been administered in Ireland in so scandalous a manner, that it has become odious in the eyes of the people. The consequence has been, that a sort of barbarous law has grown up, and been administered, with unhesitating ferocity, towards all by whom the peasants think themselves wronged. They scruple not to assassinate the new tenant by whom their sickly wives and famished little ones are ejected from their farm, rather than see them die of starvation. The conviction of a friend, guilty only of rather a rough resistance to an oppressive impost for a church held in abhorrence, is often prevented by threatening denunciations; sometimes punished by death. All this is criminal, we admit. But this state of things is very different from that state of universal insecurity of life and property which the friends of this coercive measure would have the public believe exists in Ireland. A wild and barbarous system of natural law prevails in Ireland. Still it is a system. People know what to expect; and may be safe from either robbery or murder, if they choose to conform to the savage system of laws to which they perfectly understand that they are amenable. That such a system should not be tolerated in any part of the British dominions, we admit, But how is it to be cured. Can Earl Grey, by sending over an army of fifty thousand men, and proclaiming martial law, prevent the peasantry, infuriated by this additional insult to their country, from visiting, with their "wild justice," any of those offences which it is known they never pardon, even in the neighbourhood of the troops? He cannot. From assassination there is no protection, but the certainty of punishment; and unless the sympathies of the people among whom the crime is committed, are with the avengers, and not with the slayer, no certainty of punishment can exist. Our conviction is, that even in the districts put under martial law, and filled with troops, the present number of murders would be increased, rather than diminished. Were it otherwise, is it possible, we ask, to cover the whole disturbed districts of Ireland with troops? The thing is absurd. But although the suspension of law in Ireland will prove no protection against murder, it may be very efficient in the putting down of public meetings. Long oppression from the British Government, and hoplessness of justice, have created a strong desire among the Irish for a Repeal of the Union with this country. Instead of endeavouring to put down the cry for Repeal, by removing its cause, the Ministry have

determined to put it down by " the strong arm of the law;" that is, by military violence. The Irish have determined that they shall no longer be pillaged for the support of an alien church; and Ministers have resolved to collect tithes at the point of the bayonet, all other means having failed. Upon these two points, the British Ministers and the Irish people are at issue. And to enforce the payment of tithe, and to put down all public meetings unfriendly to Ministers, are the objects of the Bill for the suspension of the liberties of Ireland. If passed into a law, we may have the Manchester massacre re-enacted upon the occurrence of every public meeting. That good feeling towards the British army, which is now universal among the Irish peasantry, will, by the operation of so injurious a law, be exchanged for the rancorous hatred with which they regard the armed police,—the rascally Peelers, as they are called; and Ireland will once more become the theatre of the atrocities of the last rebellion. This consequence is by no means unlikely. Let any man read carefully the enactments of this Bill, and say, whether he thinks such a people as the Irish, rendered desperate by want, and goaded by a sense of oppression, are likely to be able to endure the degrading restraints upon their liberty which the Bill imposes, even although they should resolve to submit with patience to what they must feel as the most insulting tyranny.

In proof of our assertion, that this precious bill is meant to suppress the political agitation of Ireland, for which it is adapted, and not to put an end to murder and robbery, for which it is not adapted; it may be mentioned, that the Irish newspapers and the Irish Members of Parliament deny that there is any increase in the number of outrages committed in Ireland within the last year; and they should be better authorities on this subject than Lord Grey, who seems to have no evidence of the strong assertions he has made in support of the alleged necessity of this extraordinary measure, which he dare shew to the Legislature, while asking such powers as should never be conferred on any man without the most undeniable proof of their being necessary. It may be observed, too, that there is heard no cry of murder across the Irish channel from those the Bill is meant to protect; no cry of vengeance from the relatives of the slaughtered. There is no appearance of there being any wish, on the part of the Irish people, in the most disturbed districts, for the interference of the British Government in their behalf. We entreat our readers to bear in mind, that the threatened victims and the slayers dwell together; and that, were life and property so insecure as the Whigs pretend, there surely would be petitions to the Legislature for protection, and associations for mutual protection.

It may be readily believed, that the people of Ireland have no more fancy for being robbed and murdered, than the people of England or Scotland. Did not their sympathies go along with the murderers rather than with the law, the murderers would be hunted out and delivered over to justice there as well as elsewhere. But in Ireland there is no respect for the law; there is no trust in it; nothing is looked for from it but oppression for the tithe-recusant, and impunity for the slaughtering policeman. The only cure for this is the abolition of tithes, the removal of every degrading restriction on the liberty of Ireland; and the introduction of Poor Laws, that the rich, by being compelled to support the poor when reduced to a state of starvation, may take some interest in their condition.

Already the empire is threatened with dismemberment by the agita

tion of the Repeal of the Union; an agitation which must be stopped, if it is not now too late, by far other measures than this tyrannical Bill. Justice and conciliation must be tried, instead of heaping additional wrongs and insults upon a people who have never received any thing but oppression at the hands of the British Government. We are no repealers, but anxious to preserve the integrity of the empire; and therefore do we call upon our countrymen, in all parts of Scotland, to meet and petition the House of Commons to delay the Irish Coercion Bill, and call for evidence as to the state of Ireland, and of the necessity for such a measure. Those petitions will do much good. Along with the numerous addresses of the People of England, who, we rejoice to see, are in motion against the Bill, and the strenuous remonstrances of the Irish Press and the Irish Members, they will be certain to effect delay, and procure a demand for evidence; if the Bill be not thrown out at once by the House of Commons, on account of the exorbitant and unjustifiable powers it demands to be lodged in a Government that certainly has not, in the case of Ireland, made the wisest use of the powers it has possessed.

Were the Reformed House of Commons so far to betray its trust, as to pass this execrable Bill, the petitions of the people of Scotland and England will serve the important purpose of convincing the Irish, that the sympathies of the British nation are with them; and that, in the present, as in all past wrongs, they must distinguish between the People and the Government. Such a conviction in the minds of the Irish would do more to maintain that union between the two countries, which we deem essential to the welfare and power of both, than even the detestable measure of Government would do to hasten the separation.

To the People of Ireland we now address a few words. They may rely upon our assurance, that, so far as the real situation of affairs in Ireland is understood, the sympathies of the People of Scotland are with them. The Scottish nation is, to a man, averse to the Repeal of the Union; but it is nearly unanimous in favour of the abolition of those oppressive regulations for which a repeal of the Union is desired. A love of religious liberty, and a hatred of tithes, and all compulsory exactions for the support of even that Church to which they are warmly attached, are among the chief characteristics of the People of Scotland. A century and a half ago, they vindicated their right of resistance to the forcible imposi tion upon them, of that very Church Establishment which has been forced upon the People of Ireland, and maintained solely by force since its first imposition. With the utmost satisfaction, the People of Scotland will witness a quiet, orderly, and passive resistance to the exaction of tithes, or to any other real grievance under which the People of Ireland labour. But a very exaggerated idea prevails in Scotland of the disorders in Ire、 land; and to imperfect information alone, any appearances of want of sympathy with their condition should be ascribed by the Irish nation. The Scottish Press must not be taken as the index to Scottish feeling towards Ireland. We grieve to say, that the Scottish newspapers are, with few exceptions, engaged in the support of one of the two great parties, or steering in a sort of middle course between both. The Irish should not be surprised to find the Whigs and Tories of Scotland, and the Aristocratic classes generally, against them, and speaking the same language as the Whigs and Tories in Parliament. Until the Taxes on Knowledge be taken off, so as to admit of a much more extended circulation than the Scottish newspapers can now obtain, most of these papers

must look for support to one of the two great parties. But the People of Scotland are not all Whigs or Tories. Although the Reformers of Scotland have a strong attachment to Earl Grey and his colleagues, they are beginning to think for themselves upon all public questions; and will not support the Whigs in any act of injustice to Ireland, if the injustice be made manifest to them. The working classes of Scotland who, from their position in society, are removed from the influence of party, are all Radical Reformers, and take the warmest interest in the liberties of Ireland. The same feeling prevails generally among those of the enlightened portion of the upper classes, who have kept free from the shackles of party. Meetings to protest against the Irish Coercion Bill, have already been held in Dundee, Paisley, &c.; and, if we are not much mistaken, meetings in other parts of Scotland will soon bear testimony to the truth of our remarks.

Before concluding, we must add a respectful remonstrance to His Majesty's Ministers, as to the course they are pursuing. That they mean well, we do not doubt. We give them the fullest credit for good intentions. But we beg to assure them, that the course they take is totally wrong; and, if pursued, has every probability of ending in their defeat and everlasting disgrace, besides bringing great calamities on the nation -perhaps causing that dismemberment of the empire which they are so anxious to prevent. We know the difficulties with which they are surrounded that they have the People eager for thorough or Radical Re. forms on the one hand, the Aristocracy and the King opposed to those Reforms on the other; and that they would have the whole Aristocratic portion of the House of Commons, the House of Lords, with a few noble exceptions, and His Reforming Majesty, King William IV., for enemies, were they to act in such a way as to secure the friendship of the People. They are, besides, embarrassed with divisions in their own councils. There are Tories, traitors to the cause of the People, in the Ministerial camp. The consequence has been, a fatal compromise of principle; and a practice, as yet, differing very slightly from that of their Tory predecessors. Ministers do not consider what ought to be done, but what can be done, without endangering a collision of the Aristocratic and Democratic divisions of the State. They would willingly do nearly all the People wish, if they could hope to carry their measures through the House of Lords; and they are not so zealously attached to Reform but that they would willingly do nothing, if there appeared any prospect of the People allowing them to rest in peace. An attempt is making to steer a middle course, and maintain a sort of balance of the opposite parties. The Globe, a ministerial organ, has truly observed, that the taking off the Taxes on Knowledge would be the first step towards a Revolution: that is, a great increase of knowledge among the People would lead to such a sense of the grievances to which the People are subjected, and to such a feeling of their strength to throw those grievances off, that the power of the people would predominate; the balance of the Aristocracy and Democracy be destroyed; and Ministers forced either to head the movement, or resign. Such a decided course is far from being consistent with the genius of Whiggery. Upon such a course, however, the Whigs will be forced by the country. The juste milieu will be found impracticable. If two sets of people are demanding opposite measures, without any appeal to the principles of justice and true liberty if there be any doubt which of the two claims is right, or how far either of them is well-founded, it may do very well to adopt the