Tithe-payers of Clough, for a change in the Irish Tithe that others containing offensive expres

inhabitants having heard that two British | These were admitted facts, and some officers had been dismissed from the army inquiry ought therefore to be instituted to because they refused to assist at certain show how far military duty was to interCatholic ceremonies at Malta. fere with a man's conscience.

Mr. James E. Gordon said, he had been gratified with the remarks of the hon. member for Kerry, as the practice complained of was against that liberty of conscience which all persons must desire to see promoted.

Mr. Ruthven said, he considered that the officers were merely called on to perform a military duty, and they chose to mix their religious feelings up with that duty. To allow this, was not a good way to keep up discipline in the army. He considered that every man, whatever his opinion might be, should pay at least decent observance to the religious ceremonies of the country where he happened to be.

Sir Robert Bateson said, he should move that the petition be printed, for he re

Mr. O'Connell said, if the hon. member for Dundalk would move for the appointment of a Committee to investigate the business, he should be happy to second his motion. He (Mr. O'Connell) considered it a most grievous case, that two officers should have been expelled from the army for refusing to violate their con-membered, when a similar petition had sciences. He should have felt it a most serious grievance if Catholics had been subject to similar treatment in a Protestant country; he therefore hoped the matter would be brought fully before the House.

Mr. Wilks considered the case as one of extreme grievance, and one which every man, whatever his religion was, ought not to tolerate. The officers had only desired to be exempted from violating their consciences, and had been, consequently, dismissed from the army and deprived of support.

Mr. Frankland Lewis said, an explanation had been given on this question on a former occasion, and, to the best of his recollection, it was, that the officers were not called upon to participate in the religious ceremony as individuals, but only for the performance of military duty: they were not called upon in the slightest degree to recognise the religious part of the ceremony, and were dismissed from the army for military insubordination.

Mr. James E. Gordon said, if the right hon. Member would examine the evidence, he would find that the offences of these officers was, a refusal to perform a military duty connected with the elevation of the host, and other ceremonies of the Catholic religion.

Mr. O'Connell observed, that the circumstances occurred at the festival called Corpus Christi. All the Catholics of the place knelt down, but the soldiers were only required to present their arms or to salute. These officers were of opinion that to salute was an act of idolatry, and they were dismissed the army for obeying their consciences in preference to a militaryorder.

been before the House some time since, he had not been satisfied with the explanation then given by the Secretary at War. He believed there was some doubt about the propriety of soldiers assisting at religious ceremonies in the minds of some officers, he therefore hoped the Government would attend to the subject.

Mr. Frankland Lewis regretted that there was no member of the Government present to give the necessary explanation; he, therefore, entreated hon. Members to suspend their opinions until they heard from the proper authority what were the actual circumstances of the case. With respect to the general question, however, he was of opinion soldiers ought to perform whatever military duties were imposed on them by the proper authority: but if they were called upon to bear part in a religious ceremony, so as to express an opinion, they should most certainly be relieved from that necessity.

Petition to be printed.

REFORMPOPULAR EXCITEMENT.] Mr. Ruthven, in presenting a Petition from an aggregate meeting of the Freemen and Freeholders of the town of Galway for an extension of their elective franchise, took occasion to observe, that he believed that the petitioners would get all their prayer if the Reform Bill for Ireland were carried. He was most anxious that the English Reform Bill should have been carried, on account chiefly, that he hailed it as an omen of intended improvement in Ireland, for he was sure the people of England could not receive any benefits without being desirous that their brethren in the sister country should also have

their due share of the good. The rejection | benches Ministers who, upon the part of of such a Bill in another place had caused the Government, may explain why the universal indignation, and made it the more noble Secretary for the Home Department necessary that the House of Commons should did not interfere upon this occasion, yet I, attend to the complaints of the people. for myself, will take upon me to say, that He, therefore, fully agreed with those who the system of allowing immense masses of thought the conduct of the Bishops, in the people to advance in procession to voting against the Reform Bill, was utterly petition the Throne, must eventually lead indefensible. He must express his sur-to confusion and disorder. Sir, I should prise that men, whose whole lives ought to be dedicated not merely to the preaching, but also to the practice of peace, good-will, and charity to all mankind, should have so forgotten their sacred duties as to have given a vote, which, more than all others, was calculated to spread dissatisfaction and discontent throughout the country. He was convinced that, after the public-spirited decision to which the House of Commons had come two nights ago, and which had spread such great satisfaction throughout the country, the Reform Bill might now be considered as good as carried. He was convinced that that Bill must be passed, by the peaceable manner in which the people had conducted themselves that day, in a procession which, though its numbers rendered it formidable, was deprived of all terror by its quiet, and tranquil, and regular demeanour.

Sir Henry Hardinge said: Sir, I am astonished at the assertion that the people this day conducted themselves in a peaceable and orderly manner. Sir, I say I am utterly astonished at this assertion, when I know that a noble friend and relation of mine, in coming down to the House of Lords this day, in performance of his duty, was attacked in a most cowardly and dastardly manner, and struck off his horse by stones, and so severely wounded, that he was obliged to be conveyed to his residence in a hackney coach. When, therefore, an hon. Member thinks proper to talk of the peaceable conduct of the mob, I cannot refrain from expressing my amazement. I do not mean to deny that many respectable persons, feeling strongly in favour of this measure of Reform, may have accompanied the procession in its progress to St. James's. Though I must at the same time observe, that such a mode of proceeding such a mode of bearding the King in his palace -even if it should not be contrary to the strict letter' of the law, is decidedly contrary to its spirit and its principle. And though, Sir, there may be found on the opposite

not have troubled the House with any observations, if the hon. member for Downpatrick had not thought fit to talk of the peaceable conduct of the mob. But, Sir, what are we to expect? What are we to expect, save that which we are witnessing every day-when the windows and property of the Duke of Wellington are assailed? I need not speak of his services-I need not talk of the gratitude which is due to him from every Englishman. And then, if he be adverse to this Reform Bill-if my noble relative, the Marquis of Londonderry, who has also well and bravely served his country, be adverse to it-why should they not fearlessly and honestly express their opposition to it? What are we, I say, to expect when these individuals, their persons and property, together with those of other distinguished persons who happen to hold similar opinions, are exposed to the fury of a mob? What are we to expect when we find Ministers-and Ministers of the Cabinet too-corresponding with Political Unions? And as I see a noble Lord there who has rendered himself famous (I will not use the other word, for he does not deserve it) by the introduction of that Bill-having seen a correspondence between the noble Lord and the Birmingham Union, I am induced now to address myself to him. In reply to a communication from the Chairman of the Birmingham Union, conveying an account of a vote of thanks to him having been passed at a Meeting, the noble Lord says, 'I beg to acknowledge the undeserved honour done me, with heartfelt gratitude.' This undeserved honour was a vote of thanks of the Birmingham Political Union. And further, in alluding to the rejection of the Bill in his reply, what expressions did the noble Lord use? I hope our disappointment (or something to the same effect) will be only for a moment, for it is impossible the whisper of a faction can prevail against the voice of a nation.' Sir, I say that this language identifies the Cabinet Ministers with all the Political

6

Unions. I say that the Government are | had been cowardly enough to perpetrate thus identified with all the Unions-that it. He also thought it right to say, that they are leaguing with them-and that they are under the direct influence of Government. I I say that the words of the noble Lord do encourage all such meetings as that he has addressed. I had no intention of addressing the House; but, after the assertion of the hon. member for Downpatrick, I could not remain silent, when I was told, on the one hand, that the meeting this day in London was peaceably conducted; and when I remembered on the other, that the noble Lord had expressed his heartfelt thanks to an assembly of 150,000, as it was said, in Birmingham, at which according to the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack, language was used which amounted to sedition and to felony. For my own part, I trust I never shall be deterred from coming down to Parliament to discharge my duty, as my noble friend and relative was not, and will not be, by any base and dastardly attack. And as for his Majesty's Ministers, I shall only observe, that I am convinced that it is not the mode to allay the fermentation that prevails (as it is their sacred and bounden duty to do), by thanking and encouraging meetings at which such language is held as that to which I have alluded, and by designating a fair, and honest, and independent vote of a majority of the House of Lords-the second branch of the Legislature-as the whisper of a faction.

Lord John Russell begged to trespass for a short time upon the attention of the House, whilst he said a few words in reply to the extraordinary attack which the hon. and gallant Officer had just made upon him. He was not disposed to defend himself from that attack; because he made allowance - and he was sure that the House would do the same-for the irritated feelings under which the hon. and gallant Officer rose. He was sure that the hon. and gallant Officer must be hurt by the occurrence of that day-an occurrence which, he assured the hon. and gallant Officer, no man regretted more than he did he alluded to the attack which had been made on the Marquis of Londonderry, and to the severe injuries which he had received on his head from a shower of stones. He lamented the occurrence of such an outrage; and he agreed with the hon. and gallant Officer, that it was most disgraceful to those who

if there was a continuance of such outrages, they could not be looked upon in any other light than as acts of hostility against all good government, and that they must alienate the minds of all sober and respectable men from the cause of Reform. He also agreed with the hon. and gallant Officer, that the attack on the house of any noble Lord was base and disgraceful; but much more base, and much more disgraceful was it, when the attack was made on the house of the Duke of Wellington, to whom the country was so much indebted for past services. In defence of those outrages he would not say one word, either in palliation or excuse. As to the manner in which the hon. and gallant Officer had connected these outrages with his answer to Mr. Attwood, he would only observe, that the hon. and gallant Officer had not laid any substantial grounds to induce the House to think that the language which he had used in that letter had led to any breach of the public peace. The hon. and gallant Officer had charged him with having corresponded with the Political Union of Birmingham. He would not at that moment enter into the question of the propriety of engaging in such a correspondence; but in this case no such question could arise.

Mr. Attwood, the banker of Birmingham, had written to him stating that there had been a great meeting at Birmingham, at which he believed 150,000 persons were present. He would not say that the meeting was so large as Mr. Attwood had represented it, but still it was a large meeting, and that meeting had thanked his Majesty's Government for the manner in which they had conducted the Bill through the Commons House of Parliament. In such a resolution on the part of the meeting, he saw nothing unconstitutional, nothing inconsistent with the rights which as Englishmen they possessed, and more especially nothing inconsistent with that right which they had enjoyed from their ancestors-he meant the right of pronouncing an opinion upon the conduct either of Government or of Opposition. He had therefore thought, that it was a duty which he owed to the people of Birmingham and himself, to express his gratitude to them for the vote of thanks which they had given to his Majesty's Ministers generally, and to himself individually ;

Sir Henry Hardinge said, that he was not aware that he had used any language which the noble Lord could justly complain of. Certainly he had used none which he was disposed to retract. He had said, and he now deliberately repeated it, that the noble Lord had designated the legitimate decision of an independent majority of the House of Lords as the whisper of a faction.

and he had yet to learn that there had been anything in the conduct of that meeting which ought to lead him to refuse accepting a vote of thanks from it. He saw no reason why he should say to the thousands who had been awaiting with interest the result of this Bill," You are unfit to be in communication with the King's Government, and I therefore repudiate your praise." On the contrary, he thought that he might notice the loyalty Lord John Russell thought, that he had and good sense of the people of Birming- a right to complain of the conduct of the ham; and he imagined that, when he hon. and gallant Officer, who had coupled stated that the success of the Reform Bill his letter with the attack on the Marquis was only deferred for a time, but was still of Londonderry-an act which was not of certain, he was expressing a sentiment his commission, and for which he could which, so far from leading to tumult, would not be considered responsible. The hon. induce the people to wait with patience and gallant Officer had said, that he was for the reintroduction of that measure to not surprised at these outrages having been which they attached so much importance. committed after his (Lord John Russel!'s) He had undoubtedly said, and he now letter was published. He put it to the repeated the assertion, that it was im- House whether the language which he had possible that the whisper of faction used, when speaking of the Anti-reformers 'should prevail against the voice of a as a faction, was not much less strong 'nation.' It was a sentiment which he than that which was ordinarily used in had expressed on first receiving Mr. Att-political warfare, and than that which wood's letter, and he now saw no reason either to retract or to withdraw it. He thought that the number of those who supported the Reform Bill, compared with the small number of those who opposed it, justified him in stating that the Reformers were the nation. He thought, he repeated, that the Reformers did constitute the nation, and that the greater part of the opponents to the Bill did belong to, and might justly be denominated, a faction. Such being his sentiments, he could not think of retracting any expression in that letter.

He was

had been used by the opponents of all Reform, during the discussions on the Reform Bill.

Sir Henry Hardinge said, it was intolerable that the voice of a majority of the House of Lords should be called the mere whisper of faction. That expression the noble Lord had made use of; and from the use of that expression it was impossible for the noble Lord to escape. In using that expression the noble Lord had identified himself with the different Political Unions.

Lord John Russell said, that his expression did not mean to include all the Peers who voted in the majority: he only alluded to a small and self-interested portion of their Lordships.

sorry that it did not meet with the approbation of the hon. and gallant Officer; but he could not give up his opinions to please that hon. and gallant Member. It was his most earnest desire that the people Sir Richard Vyvyan said: I am not should conduct themselves in a peace- disposed directly to make any charge able and orderly manner at this crisis. If against his Majesty's Ministers, nor any they did so conduct themselves, and would direct attack upon either of them, on aconly avoid all violations of the peace, he count of their corresponding with Political felt confident that nothing could prevent Unions; neither is it the intention of my this great measure of Reform from being hon. and gallant friend to insinuate that passed speedily into a law. He was sure his Majesty's Ministers had in any manner that the country would soon have the wished to promote or sanction by their satisfaction of seeing the two Houses of letters the disturbances which had taken Parliament agree in the expediency of a place in the metropolis. I say, that when measure which he considered necessary the noble Earl at the head of the Governto the preservation of the Constitution, ment, and the noble Lord the leader of this and to the consolidation of its most im House (although the former, I allow, used portant interests. much more moderate language), correspond