Last night's debate on the conduct of the Irish Government—the fifth of the series—was opened by 1,-Ir. T. DENE03m1; ;who proposed the amend- ment of which he had given notice, with the desire, " in the scramble of parties, of getting something for the people." On the Irish question he hoped Ministers might obtain as large a majority as the state of parties would admit of. He insisted on the right of the Commons to pronounce an independent judgment, regardless of the Lords. The Ministerial resolution did not go far enough, and therefore he moved an addition to it. The Whigs would oppose him, but in so doing they acted on Principles very different from those that Mr. Fox, the god of their idolatry, illustrated. Was Mr. Fox a Finality man ? Would that great Whig leader have stopped short, saying, we have got a constitution which shall not be altered ? Mr. Duneombe had been told that he ought to specify the alterations he proposed—Lord John Russell had said so: but he preferred to follow Lord John Russell's own example in the case of the Corn-laws—thought. Lord John proposed a fixed duty, he refused to name the sum till in committee. So Mr. Dun- combe chose first to see the foundation laid—his principle recog- nized—before he began to raise the superstructure. The rules of the House did not permit him to move his amendment at that stage of the proceedings ; but he should move it at the proper time.
Sir CHARLES STYLE descanted on the merits of Lord Normanby's Administration.
Sir GEORGE SINCLAIR then delivered a very clever and by far the most amusing speech that the five nights' discussion has produced. We select a few passages. And first, on the public estimation of the House of Commons- " It is alleged that we display no energy, and despatch no business ; that we say little that is worth saying, and do little that is worth doing ; that country gentlemen were never summoned to so little purpose in the month of Fe- bruary from their families and their firesides ; that we are chiefly notorious for the intolerable length of our speeches, and the interminable adjournment of our debates ; that whilst the Ministers have kept back every thing impor- tant, the Conservatives have brought forward nothing aggressive m short, the relative position of the two great parties has been compared to that of the French and English Guards at one of the battles in the Seven Years' War, who, on that occasion, treated each other with a somewhat unseasonable ceremonious- ness, and began by interchanging bows instead of bullets, until the French exclaimed, in the exuberance of their national politeness, Gentlemen of flue English Guards, pray be pleased to take the first fire.' fhere appears to have been, during the early part of this session, a similar unwillingness to strike the first blow ; hut this tuez les premiers system is at last come to a close. * * * The whole country nauseates the very attune of Reformed Parliaments, and is loudly complaining of the lamentable and almost laughable inefficiency with which public business has been transacted in these assemblies. It is with great
truth asserted, that we have been inure lavish of public money, more indifferent to public opinion, more neglectful of the public interests, than our much-ca- lumniated predecessors. The general opinion is that her Majesty's Ministers do nothing, the Radicals help them, and the Conservatives look on. And why this evasive and temporizing policy ? Merely in order that Ministers may con- tinue, until the latest possible moment, at all hazards, and at any price, to en- joy the loaves of place and to distribute the fishes of patronag,e."
Why did not the Conservatives bring forward a motion for the re- moval of Ministers ?
" In the first place, there are boisterous and brawling declaimers against the
policy of the present Government, who, if the question were brought to a final issue, would screw up their consciences to vote that they had confidence in the very Administration which they are most given to ridicule, and the loudest to condemn ; and secondly, her Majesty's advisors remain in place by acting, in reference to Parliamentary support, upon the celebrated Imperial aphorism with regard to lucre, that lamas est olor ex TO Its. gentlemen, to your heart's content—don't be upon any ceremony in showing us up—drench us wl libitum, as you can well do, with the strongest acid of censure, and don't administer the neutralizing alkali of commendation —we shall suffer most patiently all your virulence so long as we can count upon your votes."This, Sir, was the best defence by which then at all suc- ceeded in parrying the attack made upon myself and my friends by a respect- able elderly Conservative frondenr, with whom I lately had the good fortune to find myself tate -ti-tete on Stepping into a Richmond omnibus near Ilyde Park Corner. I wonder, Sir,' exclaimed he, in a half angry half-pathetic, tone, what all the Conservatives in the House of Commons are about they seem to me to be sleeping at their posts, The only symptom of vitality they have shown was to get up tin adjourned debate as to the production of deeu- ments which the Government showed no disposition to reftt=e—a sort of abor- tive attempt to hatter down the walls of the Treasury with paper pellets. There was no use in discussing such a point at all ; they should have kept their powder dry until some actual conflict took place, and not have wasted the Congreve rockets of their eloquence by tiring fluent into empty space. I begin to think, Sir, that the energy of an opposition is inversely proportioned to its numbers. If I were in the House of Commons I would Derel• Mind being in a minority. I should, of course, always like it to be as large as possible; but were it ever so small I should console myself by exclaiming, if the cause were good, the Carer the men the greater the share of honour.' It is far Inure glorious for a powerful and gallant army to suffer a defeat than seem afraid to hazard an engagement. I dare say, Sir, you remember as well as I du the exploits and the prowess of my eloquent and accomplished friend Croker during the two Reform Bill campaigns, His premature retirement from public lite i a public misfortune. IIe is now become 'the recluse of West Moulsey,' and armis Herculis tug postern fixis, latet abditus agro."fhough never leader of the Opposition, he might well be called a thunderbolt of war,' and was, at all events, 'Lieutenant-General to the Earl of Mar.' I used to think, Sir, that he would never let them get through the letter A of schedule A. The rottenest borough had its Thermopylae. The ground was disputed street by street, where there were any streets, and inch by inch where there were none. I believe even Peterslield lied its barricades and its glorious days. Methinks I see Croker now defending the bridge of Appleby with all the ardour of lloratius Cocks, against a whole.
battalion of Reformers, and now leading on the forlorn hope n a fierce and fruitless onslaught upon Gateshead. How different were such feats as those from the dull drills and pacific parades of modern times! If I had a say in the matter, Sir, I'd bring the Government to their 'narrow bones Wore the end of April.' ( Great laughter.) Here, said Sir George, our con- rsatioo was suddenly brought to an end by my communicative friend arriving at his desti- nation. The omnibus stopped, my friend got out, and we never met again." (Continued laughter.) Mr. INGHAM, who has passed for a Conservative, declared his appro- bation of Lord Normanby's Adininistration, and determination to sup- port the motion.
Mr. T. B. HORHOUSE characterized Sir George Sinclair's speech as a " mixture of buffoonery and false assumption "—the " production of a diseased imagination and utter deficiency of judgment." For himself, he " most sincerely and strenuously " supported the Ministerial resolution. Mr. LEADER remarked, that Mr. 'Hu' house's ill-judged attack on Sir George Sinclair's very clever speech, probably proceeded from an ex- cess of fraternal affection, which led him to resent almost as a personal insult charges against a Cabinet in which his brother held a place. Mr. Leader proceeded to make some caustic observatiems on the posi- tion of the Whig Ministry- " The noble Secretary for Ireland declared last night that the Government was determined to exist no longer on sufferance.' I say they have remained in power these two years on so:G.:Mee. I say more—that they exist this mo- ment by the sufferance of ten or twcIve men ; and that if ten or twelve of those sitting on this side were to join the honourable gentlemen ii:jilositer they would cease to be a Government. say, moreover, that if a general vote of want of confidence were proposed, more titan ten or twelve on this side (void(' support that vote against the Government. In what position, then, is the Govermnent placed? Why, the right hionourable Member for Tamworth governs England. The honourable and learned Member flw Dublin governs Ireland. The Whigs govern nothing but Downing Street. The right honourable Member for Tam- worth is contented with power without place or patronage, and the Whigs are contented with place and patronage without pourer. Let any honourable man say which is the more honourable position." Witch chteering, especially from the Opposition.) Ile felt constrained to vote for the motion, as he considered the Lords had passed an unmerited censure on Lord Normauby ; and he found that support of the amendment would he misconstrued by the Irish people into an act of hostility against them, or at least of indifference to their feelings. He voted with. Ministers, but not for them.
Mr. Sergeant JACKSON went over the old ground about misused pa- tronage and abuse of the pardoning power.
Mr.- SnErL followed and replied to some of Sergeant Jackson's state- ments. He was severe upon Lord Roden, and reminded Lord Stanley of Earl Grey's project for swamping the ii'vers-
" The noble lord the Member for Stroud, who certainly ought to write the history of the Grey Cabinet, gave us some oilier information of incalculable value. He told its that the whole Cabinet in the year 14:11, with a sin le ex- ception, agreed to swamp—that is a nautical phrase—(Great laughter)—the House of -Lords. You say it is Greenwich language; I say it is the Admi- ralty ; and to-morrow I suppose you will remember it by the sinking of the Royal George."
In impressive language Mr. Sheil warned the Opposition to beware of a collision with the people of Ireland. [Mr. Shell's speech is im- perfectly reported. It is difficult to select any striking passages from what reads like a very disjointed, rambling harangue.] Lord STANLEY maintained that the speakers on the Ministerial side had not satisfactorily answered or explained many of the charges pre- ferred against the Irish Executive. It appeared from the returns on which Ministers relied, that crime and outrage prevailed to a frightful extent—that life and property were insecure in a great part of Ireland. When Ministers talked of their principle's. he looked to the principles of the chief supporters, and especially Mr. O'Connell ; and Lord Stan- ley read extracts from that gentleman's speeches to show how much further he went than Lord John RuSoell on Irish questions. The Government complained that the Lords' resolution had inflicted a severe wound, a deep gash. Honour was dearer than life, and vet their only remedy was this little bit of sticking-plaster resolution He did not know whether the honouralde Member for Finsbury was in his plate, but he was just considering, supposing the honourable :Member had to hold an inquest upon and direct a post inert ii examination of her Majesty's Government—(rauThter)—for if any uncoil to:ate accident should hetiill it, the case would be clearly within the jurisdiction of the Coroner for Middlesex— he should like to kuow how the Coroner woald charge the...fury as to the cause of the death. No doubt. he woitlil first think it his duty to expatiate on the great advantage of a a,. Cormier. r. '• Oh •• Q sties cad chic r$.) Ihmoturable M. mlicrs iti,uld that !hi, would tench the tilleStiOlL The honourable Coroner would tell then., that a short time ago the defunct had received a slight cut, which to a persm of ',unit habit of body. or healthy constitution, would not have caused a sing-le nionant's anaoyanee he would tell them that the patient being ta a weakly eenstituCon. and predisposed to at tack, hail taken it seriously. :1:,d had also suffered nmler had tr.:.nemit. For, instead at' probing the wound to the loft. on, they had Leen content. for a teat- porary advantage, to skim mar Owl:111litre. leaving the wound 1i: storing ;111(1 Iii underneath. (('h,rs.) Tic knew nut t hailer the Coroner would attribute the unfintonate event which, no doubt, would give him: great pain, in any degree to the amendment of his collea:me, Mr. Duneombe : but Lord Stanley felt assured, in chargiag an int.lI ge at jury, lie would not find the tai ht Let ground for advising a verdict it wilful nilinter On the grOillla of the rat: vote in the House of Li (rrh Qt"- (14 .( of Opposition els., es.) Lord Stanley said he w a< sorry to see that his honourable friends opposite did not like a joke at one o'clock in the Lord Joux 11 essele, sail—'• Nit a had joko."
Lord STANLEY thought Ministers WORM find it no joke at all. He entreated the House to pause, but he knew that they would not. Mi- nisters had secured a majority of their hard taskmasters. their unwil- ling friends.
Mr. O'CONNELL rose amidst cries of " Question." lie &fended the Irish Executive ; denied that the Administration ought to be controlled by the Lords ; dwelt upon the iujnries committed by Tory Govern- ments upon Ireland for centuries ; and described outrages committed by Orangemen on the Catholics, and the persecution the peasantry sus- tained from their landlords. Mr. O'Connell's speech seems to have been able ; he certainly went over a great deal of ground ; but the same remark applies to the report of it as to Mr. Shell's—it furnishes uo telling passages for quotation: Sir FRANCIS Brnmerr attempted to address the House. but the cries of " Divide I" and " Question t" were so loud that he sat down after de- livering a few inaudible sentences. Lord JOHN RUSSELL replied; but the report (probably defective at that late hour) ascribes to him nothing new or remarkable. The House divided—
For Sir Robert Peel's Amendment 296 Against it 318 Majority 22 The announcement of the numbers was received with loud cheers.
On the -readmission of the reporters to the gallery, LordJouN RUSSELL was found explaining, that Mr. Duncoinbe intended to move the addi- tion of the words of his resolution by way of amendment ; in which ease, it would be necessary to affirm the original motion by a third division. Mr. DUNCOMBE said, he had not changed his intention : he had always intended to move his addition immediately after Sir Robert Peel's amendment had been negatived.
As Sir ROBERT PEEL had declared on Monday his intention of say- ing " No" to the original motion if his amendment were negatived, it was expected that a division would take place on the " main question ;" but, at the critical time, Sir RonErer declared that he would not require the division; and it appears that many Members then left the House.
Sir STEPHEN LUSUSNOTON put it to Mr. Duneombe, whether he ought to divide the House on his motion, seeing there had been no discussion or statement of his views ? He spoke the sentiments of other Members as well as his own, which were favourable to the spirit of the amend- ment ; but if it were pressed, they must " vote against it, and take the responsibility."
The division was then taken on Mr. Duncombe's motion to add the following words to the Ministerial resolution - " And that it is also expedient to effect such further reforms in the Repre- sentation of the People in Parliament as shall conduce to their contentment, and to the security and welfitre of the kingdom at large."
For Mr. Duncombe's addition 81 Against it 299 Whig-Tory Majority against Reform 218 The House adjourned at a quarter past four this morning.
The Parliamentary Papers as well as the newspapers were delivered at a late hour this morning, and our time for examining the Division- lists has been brief; but we have endeavoured to make the best use of it, by printing, us accurately as the time allowed, in parallel columns, (see pages 370-3710 the names on both divisions, so as to slow at a glance the changes that occurred. Some of these are indeed curious. It will be seen that the O'CONNELL " Tail " mustered in force to support the original motion, and that with scarcely an exception the en- tire body of Radicals voted with the Government on this Irish question. There was a distinct understanding that the Irish Liberals would, in return, support Mr. DUNCOMBE'S Reform motion. But they deserted, with Mr. O'Connell at their head. Only thirteen Irish Liberal Members voted with Mr. DuNc•omnE, and twenty-nine AGAINST him! JOHN O'CONNELL, Member for Athlone, was in the minority ; but his vote was balanced by MORGAN JOHN O'CONNELL'S, given to the Anti-Reformers. Strenuous efforts had been made to induce Mr. DUNCOMBE to with- draw his motion ; failing in that, to prevent its being put before the " main question ;" or to adjourn without any division on the amending addition. Among the most active agents in this creditable manceuvre, the. names of Dr. LusinNoros and Mr. CLAY are mentioned. The former has earned another step in his professional career ; and Minis- ters will indeed be ungrateful if Mr. CLAY be not rewarded, like Sir Lyrros, with a literary Baronetcy. But the public will perceive how little of just cause for their officiousness existed. The Irish preliminary vote had been secured ; and Minist vs were no longer in danger from the vote on the "main question," for Sir ROBERT PEEL, ever watchful for his prot6g6s, had made assurance doubly sure by withdrawing his oppo- sition. The only effect, therefore, of the secession, was to prevent a strong demonstration in favour of the opinions which these men profess to hold, in order to shield the Ministers. Mr. Duscomne is entitled to the praise of firmness such as few Members under similar circumstances would have exerted.
The majority for the " original motion" was 22 ; but 34 placemen voted,besides 2 who were Tellers ; which shows a majority of 12 against Ministers, excluding their own votes. The Irish Members voting with Ministers were 70 against them 33.
It will be seen that 36 Members were absent. Of these, 16 were Libe- rals, and 20 Tories. Tyrone, Ayrshire, and Carlow are vacant.
Tellers on the first and second divisions on the Ministerial side— Mr. E. J. STANLEY and Mr. lioomt'r STEUART ; Tellers for the Tories OR the first division—Mr. H. 13. BARING and Sir Thomas FREMANTLE ; Tellers for the Liberals on the second division—Mr. Titomas DUN- CONDE and Mr. LEADER.