returned the first parliament held after the Reform Bill, with the Honourable Cornelius O'Callaghan, the eldest son of Lord Lismore. The Coercion Bill was brought forward at the commencement of the first session. It was vehemently opposed by Mr. Sheil, by whom several of the ministers were more deeply galled than by any other of the antagonists of that odious mea sure. He quoted passages from the speeches of almost every one of them, reprobatory of the policy on which they were proceeding to govern Ireland. Great hostility was created by this course, and an incident occured which proved how much animosity was entertained towards Mr. Sheil. Mr. Matthew Devonshire Hill stated at Hull, that an Irish member who had denounced the Coercion Bill in the House of Commons, had himself recommended the government to bring it in. It was mentioned in several newspapers that it was to Mr. Sheil that Mr. Hill alluded. Suggestions were made to Mr. Sheil that he ought to send "a friend" to Mr. Hill, who had declared that he would answer the interrogatory of any Irish member to inquire whether it was to him that Mr. Hill referred. Mr. Sheil feeling that a formal encounter with Mr. Hill would not confute Mr. Hill, determined that the matter should be brought before the House of Commons, and to compel Mr. Hill to prefer and prove his charge. Mr. Hill did make the charge against Mr. Sheil in a very full and excited house, and Lord Althorp declared that Mr. Sheil spoke in one way in the house, and in another out of it, Mr. Sheil said, that he should make no observation on what Lord Althorp had said; but the Speaker having declared that he collected from Mr. Sheil's manner that he meant to send a challenge to Lord Althorp, Mr. Sheil and Lord Althorp were called on to promise that no hostile meeting would take place. With this requisition Lord Althorp and Mr. Sheil refused to comply, and both were committed to the custody of the Sergeantat-arms. Lord Althorp, after a few hours of imprisonment, being pressed by his friends, agreed to give the undertaking which had been demanded, and he and Mr. Sheil were discharged. Mr. Sheil insisted that he was entitled to a committee, to ascertain the truth of the accusation; and Sir Robert Peel strenuously contended that the greatest injustice would be done, if it were refused. A committee was moved-Sir Robert Peel and Sir Henry Hardinge attended the committee. Mr. Devonshire Hi was examined by Mr. O'Connell-after stating that his infor mant was Mr. Silk Buckingham, who now denied that he had ever meant to convey such an impression to Mr. Sheil, and an

other person whom he would not narao, he declared, în a state of great excitement, bursting into tears, that he not only coul not prove his charge, but that he was now convinced that it wa wholly unfounded. He begged Mr. Sheil to pardon him, and added that, if Mr. Sheil required it, he would make a public ape .ogy to him in the House of Commons, but hoped that such an tumiliation would not be inflicted upon him. Mr. Sheil said, that he freely pardoned him, and would not require anything beyond the report of the committee. The committee reported—

"Your committee, in entering on the delicate and embarrassing duty imposed upon them, ascertained from Mr. Hill, that hough he could not admit the entire accuracy of the above paragraph, as a report of what he had publicly spoken at Hull, he, nevertheless, recollected to have publicly charged an Irish member of parliament with conduct similar in substance to that which the paragraph describes. The Irish member, so alluded to, was Richard Lalor Sheil, Esq., member of parliament for the county of Tipperary; and Mr. Hill states the charge, to the best of his belief, to have been substantially as follows:-That Mr. Sheil made communications respecting the Irish Coercion Bil! to persons connected with the government and others, with the intention thereby of promoting the passing of the Coercion Bill, and having a direct tendency to produce that effect, whilst his speeches and votes in the house were directed to the defeat o the Coercion Bill ;—such was the substance of the allegation into which your committee proceeded to inquire. Two witnesses were called before them at the suggestion of Mr. Hill, and others were about to be examined, when Mr. Hill himself, finding the testimony already heard very different from what he had expected, freely and spontaneously made the following communication to the committee-that he had come to the conviction that his charge against Mr. Sheil of having directly or indirectly communicated, or intended to communicate, to the government, any private opinions in opposition to those which he expressed im the House of Commons, had no foundation in fact ;-that such charge was not merely incapable of formal proof, but was, in his present sincere belief, totally and absolutely unfounded—that he nad originally been induced to make mention of it in a hasty and unpremeditated speech, under a firm persuasion that he had received it on undeniable evidence; but that being now satisfied of the mistake into which he had fallen, and convinced that the charge was wholly untrue, he came forward to express his deep and unfeigned sorrow for having ever contributed to give it cir

culation. Mr. Hill added, that if there were any way, consistent with honour, by which he could make reparation to Mr. Sheil, he should deem no sacrifice too great to heal the wound which his erroneous statement had inflicted. It is with the highest gratification that your committee find themselves enabled thus to exonerate an accused member of parliament from imputations alike painful and undeserved. The voluntary avowal of an erroneous statement on the part of Mr. Hill, now puts it in their power to pronounce a decided opinion, and to close the present inquiry. Neither of the witnesses who appeared before the committee deposed to any facts calculated to bear out the allegation against Mr. Sheil; nor did their testimony go to impeach his character and honour in any way, or as to any matter whatever. The committee have no hesitation in declaring their deliberate conviction, that the innocence of Mr. Sheil, in respect of the whole matter of complaint referred to their investigation, is entire and unquestionable."

This report having been made,

Mr. SHEIL rose amidst loud cries of "hear" from all parts of the house, which were succeeded by profound silence. After a short pause, he said:"I stood a few nights ago before this house with no other sustainment than the consciousness of my innocence; I now stand before it with that innocence announced, in the clearest and most unequivocal language by a committee, composed of men themselves above all suspicion, to the world. I do feel my heart swell within me at this instant, and almost impede my utterance. Justice has been done me. It has been done not only by my judges but by my accuser—he preferre his charges in the house, he reiterated them before the committee, and having gone into his evidence and failed, he then offered me the only reparation in his power, and with a frankness of contrition, which mitigates the wrong he did me, he came forward and announced that not only could he not prove his charge, but believed it to be utterly destitute of foundation. That gentleman having made this acknowledgment, then turned, and addressing himself to me in the tone, and with the aspect of deep emotion, asked me to forgive him; I had, I own, much to forgive; he had wounded me, to my heart's core; he had injured me, and given agony to mine; he had committed a havoc of the feelings of those who are dearer to me than my life; and to whom my honour is more precious than my existence, he had furnished to the Secretary for the Colonies, the occasion of addressing me in the language, and with the gesture of solemn admonition, and of

pointing out the results of an inquiry, in the tone of prophetic warning. I had indeed much to forgive, and yet I forgive him; because as he protested his innocence of all malevolent intentions, and said that he had been deluded, and acknowledged me innocent of his accusation, I felt that he had done all in his power to repair the wrong, and heavy as it was, when he asked my pardon, I could not withhold it. It would have been unworthy of me, to have availed myself of the occasion thus presented to me, to have cast reproaches on my accuser, or to have been betrayed into vindictive emotion. I did not manifest it then-I shall not exhibit it now. I stood at the verge of a tremendous peril, of the depth of which I was conscious, without dismay-I have trodden the edge of the precipice, in calm security, and it remains that having passed it, I should indulge in no exultation as I betray no fear. The noble lord, for I turn to him, has tendered me an apology-I am to presume that it is not accompanied with any miserable inuendos, and that he cannot purpose to convey any injurious hint. He says that as I have denied his charge-he believes me, and tenders his recantation and his regret-whatever is offered in a fair and ingenuous spirit, I am bound in the same spirit to accept; but let the noble lord look back at the exact state of facts between us. The government having been charged with obtaining votes by alleging that an Irish member had been guilty of an act of perfidy, was interrogated on that head. We had a right to put him the question

we had a right to learn two things-first, whether the government had resorted to secret machinery-next whether any communication was made to the government by an Irish member. The noble lord answered the question in the negative, but did not stop there, he went on, and founded a charge of inconsistency, grounded on private conversations. We have heard much denunciation from ministers respecting the disclosures of private discourse, and yet the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the representative of the government, who entertains such a horror of a practice detested by all honourable men, is the very first to make reference to the babble of clubs, to declare his belief of information, to which he gratuitously attaches an injurious importance, and to announce that he would not give up his author. but would take upon himself the responsibility. This defiance having been given, the house interposed: no resource was left me, but to protest that I never expressed myself in favour of the Coercion Bill, and to demand inquiry. I insisted on it-the Secretary for the Colonies, out of regard no doubt for my repu

ation, pointed out the possible results. His suggestions had no sther effect than to confrm me in my purpose, and to make me call more loudly for trial; that trial has proceeded. My private conversation at a club-house has been given in evidence, and the committee declared me innocent of very charge, which has been preferred against me. Did I shrink from the ordeal? did I resort to chicane-did I make my honour a matter of casuistry and special pleading? No, Sir, I invited, I demanded investigation-and my private conversation at the Athenæum Club having been detailed, a conversation after dinner, never recollected even by the narrator for eight months, the accuser declared that his charge is totally destitute of foundation, and the committee at once resolve on my unqualified acquittal. One of the informants of the noble lord was produced-why were they not all brought forward? My accusers were welcome to have got together every loose phrase, every casual and giddy expression uttered in the moments of thoughtlessness and of exhilaration; they were welcome to have collected and collated every sentence uttered by me in convivial gatherings, and to have raked and gathered the sweepings of club-houses, in order to have made up a mass of sordid testimony, and to have cast it into the balance against me. They were welcome to have put me through an ordeal-such as not one of the ministers themselves could encounter which of you all would dare to stand the test? which of you would have the veil of his privacy rent to pieces, and all his thoughts uttered in the familiarity of common life divulged? But they were welcome to have got together all the whisperers and eavesdroppers of all their clubs against me; I should have defied them, I was prepared with proof to be given by my most intimate and confidential friends, the men with whom I have lived on terms of familiarity and of trust, for upwards of twenty years the companions of my early life, who knew me as I do myself, and to whom all my thoughts and feelings are almost as well known as their own. I should have been prepared with their evidence, and have established that wherever the Coercion Bill was glanced at, I condemned it in terms of unmitigated detestation, I denounced it as a violation of every one of those principles of liberty of which the Whigs were once the devoted, but not unalterable champions. I did not once, but one hundred times express my horror of the atrocities perpetrated, in parts of the North of Ireland. I did say that to put ruffianism down something ought to be done; I referred to the suggestions made by the committee which sat in 1832 in the Queen's County, and

D