THA

CHAT we may be guided in our account of parliamentary proceedings, on fo vast a variety of subjects, by fome method more fatiffactory than the arbitrary, abrupt, and we may fay, fenfelef's order of mere time, our plan is, to arrange thofe proceedings, as far as this may be done eafily, into general heads or claffes, among which the principal are fuch as relate to finance, the grand fpring of government; to external and internal defence; and to national improvements, civil and political, economical and moral. The poet, who, captivating our imagination, carries Es rapidly along with him in his fights of fancy, and lays us down now at Thebes, and now at Athens, is an object of grateful admiration. The mere reporter of debates, as they occur, does, from ftupidity, what in the poet is the work of Evely and fublime genius: fo generally true, it is, that "extremes

meet!" But fuch a plodder, in his tranfitions violent and difgulling, is very far from either receiving or deferving our thanks. It is not pleafing to be dragged, as through rocks and cataracts, by tranfitions that do the utmoft violence to the imagination. Such a register may be confulted as a dictionary, but not read as a book of entertainment and instructi

Having already given fome account of the proceedings of parliament, refpecting finance, a due naval and military force for external defence, and alfo for prefervation from the attacks of that dreadful foe, famine, whether to be confidered as an enemy, domeftic or foreign, or both, we now proceed to notice the meafures of precaution that the legiflature thought it proper to adopt for the internal fecurity and peace of the empire: among the principal of which was a bill for continuing the execution of martial law in Ire land. In the houfe of commons,

March

March 12, lord Caftlereagh moved, "That the act for the fuppreffion of rebellion in Ireland fhould be read: which was understood to be done with a view to its continuance. The motion was oppofed by Mr. Sheridan, who confidered the whole of the question to be: whether, having every profpect that the recovery of his majefty might enable them to proceed in a conftitutional manner, and that they might have a regular communication from the throne, advifed by refponfible minifters, they ought to proceed with out fuch communication, and without fuch refponfibility? To juftify fuch a mealure, he faid, would require a very ftrong cafe to be made out; and unless fuch a cafe fhould be made out, he muft confider the bill as one of the moft indecorous, unconftitutional, and violent propofitions ever made in that house. He therefore moved that the houfe fhould adjoin.

Lord Caftlereagh faid, that that was not the first queftion in which the parliament of Great Britain had been called on to take measures, with regard to one part of the kingdom, which had not been applicable to that part called England. After the union of England and Scotland it was neceflary to pafs laws for Scotland, of unufual feverity, and unconftitutional in their nature. He alluded to the laws for difarming the Highlanders: which laws were paffed by a parliament ftrenuous in the fupport of the rights of the fubject. Lord Caftlereagh, therefore, only called on the house to do that for Ireland, which, on a former occafion, it had done for Scotland. Without a continuance of the fame fyftem of prudence and precaution, with regard

to Ireland, that country would be placed in a moft unfortunate predicament. He had always entertained a firm conviction, that neither the conftitution, nor the liberties of Ireland, could be preserved, but by the meafures adopted for the fuppreflion of rebellion. The house would fee in what a fituation Ire land would be placed, if parliament, from any fcruples, fhould withhold its fanction to a measure, on which its fafety and exiftence depended. It would have the effect of inftilling into the government fuch apprehenfions, that it would be impoffi ble for those to whom it was intrufted, to difcharge their duties to the public in the manner they had hitherto done, under the idea that the local parliament would always give them the means of acting withvigour. As to waiting for a communication from his majefty, the habeas corpus fufpenfion act had been frequently renewed, without either any communication from the crown, or inquiry by a committee, and merely on the idea that the circumftances of the country remained the fame as when it first passed, The fufpenfion of the habeas corpus in Ireland, in 1799, was without any communication. It was, no doubt, in the power of parliament to go into an inquiry if they thought this neceflary; but where there were grounds for the houfe to proceed without inquiry, it had never been usual, nor was it neceflary to chain it down to the fuspension of its proceedings, till an inquiry had taken place. His with was to propofe that this bill fhould only be continued for a limited time, name ly, for three months, in order that parliament might have time to go into an inquiry. Lord Caftlereagh

having clearly fhewn, that, on the prefent question, there was no neceffity for either a communication from the throne, or an inquiry by parliament, proceeded to ftate the reafons that appeared to him to be conclufive, for the measure to be propofed. From an examination of facts and circumstances, respecting the origin, progrefs, and termination of open rebellion, and the actual ftate of Ireland, in which there was still a fecret rebellion; he thewed that nothing but the exercife of martial-law could give free course to justice, and fave the country. Though Jacobinifm had been put down in the field, it yet continued to afflict the land in a manner not lefs deftructive to the jurifprudence of the country, but more difficult to be attacked by the king's forces in the field. The whole nature of the remaining dif turbances, in Ireland, was directed firit against the properties and perfons of the well-affected; and, fecondly, against the course of juftice. The houfe would therefore be fenfible, that unless thofe perfons, who were engaged in acts of rebellion, could be brought fummarily to trial, the friends of government would be subjected to certain deftruction.

Lord Caftlereagh did not expect that rebellion would altogether ceafe to exift, during the war. Heknew that the fpirit of rebellion had too many friends in every part of the empire: but he did not, at prefent, propofe to extend the rebellion act beyond three months. There was a meafure, which lord Caftlereagh took the liberty of propofing, as fubfidiary to this. There were perfons in cuftody in Ireland, under the fufpention of the habeas corpus act.

His lordship wifhed to leave them in the hands of the civil power. And, for that purpofe, he would propofe, that the act for fufpending the habeas corpus be continued, for the fame period as that for the fuppreffion of rebellion.

The continuation of the rebellion act was oppofed, and Mr. Sheridan's motion for an adjournment, fupported by fir Lawrence Parfons, Mr. Grey, Mr. Whitbread, Mr. Bouverie, and Dr. Lawrence. Mr. Sheridan's motion, on the other hand, was opposed, and lord Caftle reagh's fupported by the honourable Mr. Dennis Browne, fir George Hill, Mr. Pitt, Mr. Westerna, Mr. Canning, Mr. French, Mr. Tavlor, Mr. Fitzgerald, Mr. J. C. Beref ford, Mr. R. Martin, Mr. Ogle, Mr. Macnaughton, Mr. Somers Cox, Mr. Ogle, and Mr. Lee.

Sir Lawrence Parfons confidered the meafure brought forward by lord Caftlereagh as wholly unneceffary. Were not the courts of law. open, at this time, to try rebels ? During the two laft years, affizes had been regularly held throughout Ireland, twice a year, without a fingle exception. He defied the noble lord to bring one inftance of its being otherwife. He was afionifhed to hear that juries could not difcharge their duty. In what county had that happened? knew of no complaint on that topic, but that juries were fometimes too prompt to condemn. He had a refpect for the army, and he knew that, in their proper ftations, they graced their profeffions. But he would not chufe to take officers from the horse-guards, to fupercede the legal judges of the land. Hẻ asked Mr. Pitt, if he, when he was a barrifter, would have trufted the

cafe

cafe of any of his clients, to be deciled by a colonel of the horfe guards? Courts-martial could not afcertain the difference between in nocence and guilt. They had no principles on which to decide, but were, in their decifions, creatures of mere caprice and accident. If it were fo eafy to decide on fuch queftions; if there were no fach thing as the fcience of evidence and law, why had we judges? Why one law for England and another for Ireland? It was not pretended that this aft helped, in any way, to take the rebels. No: they were in cuftody; and the pretence was, that no jury would try them. He defired to know of an inftance of a jury not being found to try rebels? No one had ever occurred, though it had fometimes happened, that juries were fometimes too prompt to do their duty in fuch cafes. Judges of the law fhould not be fent to adminifter juftice fteadily and feverely, but to adminifter juftice. They would then be feared and loved. Courts-martial might be feared, but never could be loved. Sir Lawrence called the attention of the houfe to the opinion of a great lawyer, on the means of calming the minds of the Iri. He (poke of fir John Davies, the best prefent that England ever fent to Ireland. He was the attorney-general of James I. and he wished that every attorney-general of our day had as much relpect for the conftitution, as that great law yer. He was fent to Ireland after a rebellion, and he gives an account of the proceedings to quiet the Jainds of the people. The rebels having been put down, by the king's arms, the adminiftration of jattice was reitored. The judges

went the circuits; and most sweet and welcome, fays fir John Davies, was this courfe to the common people; and fo happy and effectual was this policy, that in fix circuits, held in five years, there was a lefs number of criminals, than in one circuit in England. Sir Law rence recommended this example to the houfe. Arbitrary measures never civilized men. If they could have done fo, Morocco would have been civilized and happy long fince. The prefent meafure was in the fpirit of a quack. It might heal the fore, but not correct the habit. He recommended to the house, to grace its firft act towards Ireland, by refeuing that country from military tyrants. Mr. Grey, too, contended, that the act propofed, was a fufpenfion of all law, and a violation of the conftitution, without neceflity. So alfo did Mr. Whitbread. This pofition they rested chiefly on the evidence that had just been given by the honourable baronet, who had just delivered his fentiments on the question before the houfe. Mr. Grey, alked why it had not been neceflary to ule martial law. against the Whiteboys? Mr. Bouverie did not contend whether martial law was neceffary in Ireland or not; all he should infift on was, that it was not propofed in regular fhape and form. Doctor Lawrence afked, why, with 100,000 men in Ireland, the number of officers conftituting a court-martial, was limited to three, when, even in Wales, five were required? Immediately after the rebellion, he obferved, there was, indeed, a murmur, a general dilmay, arifing from various caufes into which he would not then enter, as well as from Jacobinical principles; but the mo