national fund the district, not the state, is to be taxed for their maintenance; is it not monstrous, then, that in those localities where these Dissenters constitute a majority, they should be made the object of this wanton legislative affront? You don't pursue this course in Ireland— why? Because the majority of the people are Catholic. But in the districts where local schools are to be supported with local imposts, the majority are, in many instances, Dissenters. The church, therefore, cannot insist that in right of their general tutelage of the national mind, they are entitled to the control which is given them by this bill; and I am at a loss to discover what they conceive it will profit them to exer eise a power so invidious as that which they are now seeking to obtain. What have they to dread from the imaginary influence of dissent in the schools which it is proposed to establish? Let them consider the bul warks by which the church, in reference to national instruction, is already sustained, and let them dismiss their fears of any evil effect which these schools can have on its stability. Is not Cambridge, is not Oxford theirs? In Durham have they not gained an university? Are not all the great seminaries in which the gentry of this aristocratic country are educated, in their keeping? Have they not a direct masterdom over almost every place of public instruction, where the men, who are to will the destinies of England receive the elements of instruction? Do not a vast body of the middle classes draw their first intellectual nutriment from the bosom of the church, and can you turn your eyes to any part of this great kingdom, in which you do not find the church already exercising an influence over education, which it is impossible to distrust? With these vast advantages is not the church contented, but must she needs, after having herself most reprehensibly neglected the education of the poor, when a measure is proposed to rescue the infant operative from the degradation and the depravity of ignorance, is she to come forward with her pretensions, and claim, as a matter of ecclesiastical prerogative, the instruction of the factory infants, on whom she never cast a thought away before? What has the church to dread? Has she reason to tremble at the influence of dissent among the lower classes of the manufacturing population? If in the posses sion of the truth, wherefore does she not manifest the security which the consciousness of its possession should inspire? If built upon a rock, why should she dread that the gates of Gehenna shall prevail against her, and as she has retained so much of the old religion (the Americans call England the old country, you should call the Catholic, the old religion), as she has retained so much of its doctrines, and prefers the title of Anglo-Catholic to any other designation, why does she not copy her great predecessor in that attribute, which a convert from your establishment, and one of the greatest ornaments of your literature, so well ascribed to her?— "Without unspotted, innocent within, If there be any danger which she has cause to apprehend, it is that which must result from the hostility which she will produce among all classes of Dissenters by the unjust assumption of authority, who will, beyond all question, be arrayed against her, if she has the misfortune to succeed in her unjustifiable pretensions. She will embody and array together all those sects which have now no common bond of union, and even among the Wesleyans, who are supposed to adhere to her by some sort of ligament or other, she will produce an antipathy which it is most unwise to create. I have often heard the Wesleyan Methodists made the theme of Conservative panegyric. The most distinguished Tories, especially at the eve of a general election, have been lavish in their encomiums on this powerful body: what a mistake it is to enter into a quarrel with them upon what is a mere point of punctilio with the church? Instead of trespassing upon their rights, why does not the church follow their example, and become their honourable competitor in the work of education? If it be of importance that the lower orders should cling to the church, has not the church some better expedient for the retention of its adherents than the invasion of religious freedom? Monopolies in religion are like all other monopolies they retard improvement. It will do no harm to put the Church upon the necessity of exertion, and teach her that instead of relying on any unjust predominance, she should resort to more legitimate endeavours, to secure an honourable influence among the humbler classes of the people. It is by piety, by benevolence, by zeal, by meekness, and by humility, by the association in the primitive doctrine of primitive practice, that an influence most useful to the country and most honourable to the establishment will be extended. Let the church herself with the opportunities, incalculably great, which her affluence affords her let her prelates-be distinguished for munificence: let them look on the noble structures which the bishops of the olden time have left as monuments of their pious disinterestedness through the length and width of all the land; let them in raising many a great moral edifice emulate that generous example; let her priests become the associates, the friends, the auxiliaries, the protectors, the consolers of the afflicted, the humble, and the poor; let them not only by their persuasiveness, allure to brighter worlds, but let them by their example "lead the way." Let religion be recommended by the practice of the church, and in the Christian assemblage of persuasive virtues let the Protestant Propaganda be found; but let not the church, from a sacerdotal passion for ascendancy, from a love of clerical predominance, thwart the great work of education, and incur the awful responsibility of becoming instrumental in the propagation of all the vices, which ignorance has spawned upon the country. At the conclusion of the very remarkable speech in which the Secretary for the Home Department introduced the measure which was so ably propounded by him, he called on us to "raise up our hearts," and to rise above all lowly prejudice in the achievement of a great moral purpose. It is to the church itself that this "sursum corda," this invo cation, taken from the ancient ritual of Catholicism, should be addressed; he should abjure the body over which he exercises so great and natural an influence, and for which he has made great sacrifices, to asrend above every inferior consideration, and to regard the instruction of the people as paramount to every other object. The right honourable baronet has again and again protested his strong anxiety to render his measure acceptable to the great mass of the community, and to intr duce such modifications as should meet all just objections. I trust that his professions may be realized, and as he told us that he would send forth his bill in the hope that it would receive the public sanction and dicate that the "waters of strife had subsided," let me be permitted to hope that he will associate with that image another incident connected with the primeval history of mankind, and bear in mind that every colour was united in distinctness without predominance, that token of peace which God set in the cloud, as a covenant of his reconciliation with the world. IRISH ARMS BILL. SPEECH IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, MAY 19, 1843 If I were convinced that the Arms Bill, even in its present most obnoxious shape, was necessary for the repression of crime, I should relucantly indeed, but strenuously, sustain it; but of its utter inefficiency for the attainment of that legitimate purpose, in which it is obligatory upon us all to concur, I am thoroughly persuaded. It is not to the want of an Arms Bill, such as this, it is to the imperfect, I am almost justified in calling it the impotent administration of justice, that the atrocities, by which certain districts in Ireland are unfortunately characterized, are to be ascribed. In the county of Tipperary the prosecutions at the assizes are begun, conducted, and terminated in such a manner as to secure impunity to crime. How has it come to pass, that the offences which fall within the jurisdiction of the assistant-barrister, and are prosecuted by the local solicitor, have so signally diminished? I attribute that remarkable decrease to two causes; first, to the high judicial qualities, the talent, the firmness, the impartiality which has won the confidence of all parties, by which Mr. Howley, the assistant-barrister, is distinguished; and in the next place, to the signal usefulness of the local solicitor for the crown (Mr. Cahill), who unites with great ability a perfect knowledge of the country; has the best opportunities of ascertaining every incident connected with the cases in which he is concerned; is well acquainted with the character of every witness for the prosecution and the defence; never puts innocence in peril; and never permits ruffianism to escape. But while minor violations of the law are prosecuted with so much effect, what course is taken at the assizes? I beg most distinctly to state that nothing can be more remote from my intention than to speak in the language of personal depreciation of Mr. Kemmis, the crown solicitor for the Leinster circuit, or to suggest that a local solicitor should be employed in his place, without adding, that he should receive for any loss he may sustain the most ample compensation. But granting him to possess the highest professional qualifications, I have no hesitation at the same time in stating that the business of the crown cannot be efficiently carried on by a legal absentee, who knows nothing of the county, is utterly ignorant of the witnesses produced for or against the crown, is utterly unable, not from any want of capacity, but from his position, to suggest or advise the means by which truth can be substantiated, and falsehood can be confuted, is hurried from one assize town to another, and must get up his briefs with inevitable precipitation, for the information of counsel, who are opposed by the most skilful advocates, aided by a local solicitor for the defence, by whom every imaginable expedient for the frustration of the crown is employed. It is obvious that, under this system, you give to crime advantages incalculably great. Another suggestion I shall, from a sense of duty-from my solicitude for the public tranquillity-venture to make. You resort to nformers, and you pay them largely for their corrupt contribution to the enforcement of the law, but to honest witnesses adequate protection is not given. Some years ago the house of a person of the name of Crawford was attacked, and he was beaten almost to death. He was afraid to prosecute. He lived in my neighbourhood. I obtained from the government an undertaking that he and his family should be sent tr one of the colonies, and should be provided for. He was prevailed on to prosecute, and justice was done, and a most useful example made. If you will pledge yourselves to protect the witnesses for the crown, by enabling them to emigrate, and by compensating them for the loss of their country, you will effect much more than by the unconstitutional proceeding which I am aware your high partisans invite you to adopt. It would be far more befitting in the landed proprietors to attend at the assizes, and perform their duty on criminal trials, than to call for a violation of a great public right. If there is a special commission got up with parade, and attended by the Attorney-General, with a retinue of counsel, the chief gentlemen of the county do not think it inconsistent with their dignity to act on the petty jury; but at the assizes, though the crimes to be prosecuted are of the same class, the juries are wholly different. The petty jury is considered an ungenteel and low concern; the balance in which human life is trembling is committed to coarser and less aristocratic sustainments, and complaints are afterwards made of the constituion of juries by the very men who vote it, what they call, in their familiar parlance, "a bore" to attend. There is nothing which 1 more strongly deprecate than the setting aside of juries by the crown, except for the clearest and most indisputable reasons, but, on the other hand, I do think that the attendance of Roman Catholics and Protestants, of station and influence, on the criminal jury, should be enforced, and that, if necessary, fines of £500 or £600 should be imposed upon them. The utmost care should of course be taken that the juries should not be exclusive, and that no ground for imputation should be afforded; but that precaution being adopted, it is clear that the verdicts found by that class of men, whether of acquittal or of condemnation, would meet the general sanction. I am very well aware that the gentry of the country will be very adverse to this proposition; but they should bear in mind how large a stake they have in the tranquillity of the country, which will be far better promoted by these means than by an Arms Bill, which will take from honest men the means of defence, and will not deprive the turbulent and the lawless of the means of aggres sion. When murder becomes lucrative, it is not easy to deprive the assassin of the tools of his profitable trade. If you could succeed in depriving him of his more noisy implements of death, you would but teach him to substitute a more silent but not less efficacious weapon: but you cannot frame a law which he will not readily evade. The wretch who is not appalled at murder, will not tremble at an Arms Bill --your penalties of ten or twenty pounds will be scorned by men who put existence into habitual peril. These are among my reasons for thinking that the Arms Bill will not be in any degree conducive to the purpose it has ostensibly in view, while by its enactment, without obtaining any countervailing benefit, you commit a manifest trespass upon one |