Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

wants and claims of the population. Mr. Sheil urged that if Reform were granted to England and denied to Ireland, the effect would be to raise the price of Irish boroughs. They would become doubly valuable. They alone would then be in the market; and the competition for them would be most animated. Dundalk would then be enhanced in value; happy Tralee would be inestimable. The question was not whether they would concede Irish Reform, but whether or not they should permit the Irish boroughs to send in nominees to that House, to mingle with the genuine representatives of the people, and to exercise for all practical purposes the same privileges as would be exercised by members for places in England. It was one advantage derived from the Union, that England could not inflict wrong upon them without injury to herself. The two nations were united by the Siamese knot, and so long as it remained uncut, together they must thrive and together they must die. That the whole of the boroughs would be thrown into the hands of the Roman Catholic democracy by the proposed bill was an assertion without a shadow of proof; and he challenged those who made the assertion to confirm it. On this head the grossest exag

geration had been indulged in.* He proceeded to urge that the bill for Ireland should be made identical with that for England, as the surest way of healing national distrust and animosity.

His advice, and that of all who thought and felt as he did on the momentous question, was treated however with disregard. The Irish Reform Bill was retained in the abortive shape in which it had been conceived. The votes of the Irish liberals were no longer needed to secure the English bill, and their remonstrances as to the inadequacy of the measure doled out to their country by Mr. Stanley and his colleagues, were treated with contempt. On going into committee Mr. George Lamb, who then sat for Dungarvan, called attention to the fact, that by the provisions of the bill the 57. household franchise would be abolished in boroughs in Ireland, whereby the constituency of Dungarvan would be reduced from 860 to 200 voters. Mr. Sheil asked "whether the policy of the English Reform Bill was not, to have a constituency of at least three hundred in each borough? Why in the name of justice and common sense should not the same principle be extended to Ireland? In England the boroughs were to be

* Hansard, 1832; vol. xiii., p. 160.

thrown open; in Ireland hot-beds of corruption were to be preserved. He implored the House to listen to the complaints of the Irish people, in whose heart it would be very easy to plant a thorn, but it would not be so easy to pluck it out."*

On going into committee, Mr. O'Connell moved an instruction that the 40s. franchise which had been abrogated in Ireland in 1829, should be restored. It was shown by Mr. N. P. Leader that 190,000 persons had been thus divested of the right of voting; and it was urged by Mr. Sheil that if there was any sincerity in the desire professed, to assimilate the privileges of the two nations, the opportunity ought to be taken for restoring on the other side of the Channel what had always existed on this. The amendment, however, was lost by 122 against 73.

Of five new members given to Ireland, one was to be added to the University of Dublin. Avowedly this provision was intended as one for strengthening the defences of the church. It was opposed by many English as well as Irish members; and an amendment was moved by Sir Robert Heron, that the new seat should be conferred upon the county of Cork, the city * Hansard, 1832; vol. xiii., p. 569.

of Londonderry, or the city of Kilkenny. This was supported by Mr. O'Connell and several others. Mr. Sheil reminded the House that while of eight new members for Scotland, not one had been given to her universities; out of five additional representatives for Ireland one was to be conferred on Trinity College. There were 2000 students on the books of the University of Edinburgh; while there were but 1500 on those of Dublin University. The first was without a member, and the second requires two. "Did the interests of literature or of the country require that Dublin College should transmit to Parliament a second edition, or rather a duplicate, of the learned gentleman (Mr. Lefroy) by whom the feelings of his constituents were represented with so indisputable a fidelity? The constituency was to consist of three classes, the fellows, the scholars, and the ex-scholars. What benefit to science could be obtained by enabling any one of these to return two members to Parliament? The senior fellows had no pupils; their principal duty was to receive about 2000l. a-year from the funds of the College. But it was to be presumed, although the University press did not corroborate the suggestion, that in return they were engaged in accumulating large masses of

erudition, enriching themselves with literary treasure, and in opening new veins of intellectual wealth in their moral, mental, and physical investigations. Their fortunate repose, so auspicious to their noble and disinterested pursuits, ought not to be distracted by a multifarious canvass; and it was not desirable that they should be molested by two candidates for Parliament whispering bishoprics in their ears. The junior fellows earn their livelihood by their pupils, and some of them earned their pupils by their politics." The amendment, however, was lost upon a division, by 147 to 97. Another amendment was moved by Mr. Sheil, having for its object the omission of the clause requiring payment of rates in cities and boroughs, which he argued would prove a fertile source of corruption and fraud; but like the rest, this also was rejected.

When the tidings reached England of the suppression of the Polish insurrection, and the cruelties perpetrated in cold blood by the conqueror, deep and bitter, though unavailing regret was felt by the people at large that nothing had been done while yet there was time, by either England or France, to save a gallant nation from extinction. Mr. Cutlar

*Hansard, 1832; vol. xiii., p. 599.

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »