NEWS OF THE WEEK.
EIGHT nights have been consumed by the great party debate on Ireland in the House of Commons, and it is not closed at the time we write these lines. Though exceedingly tedious, full of repeti- tions, jarrings, irrelevancies, and the tangible practical results infi- nitesimally small, the discourse has perhaps had more purpose and influence than is usual with such lengthy palavers. As the debate proceeded this week, it grew more irregular than at the start with the set indictment of Ministers and their set defence : the speakers fell more to battling specialities and particular points ; views be- came as various as styles. Mr. MACAULAY delivered a capital "article "—a rapid historical survey of the conflict of race in Ire- land, kept alive by religious distinctions, and not to be overcome until religious equality remove the greatest surviving cause of ir- ritation. Sir Tnomas WILDE acted as counsel for Lord JonN Rus- SEI.L, and painted the law-case against Ministers and their profes- sional officers as black as possible. Mr. Attorney-General SMITH, who enjoyed an evening to himself, gave an account of his conduct as prosecuting counsel, and of the difficulties in his way, which constitutes a remarkable essay towards the history of an Malt State trial. Mr. SHEIL, " brilliant " as ever, exposed the barrenness of some technical points relied on by the opposite counsel. Mr. JOHN O'CoNEELL appeared as one of the heroes of the tale; preserving his equanimity, filial piety, and patriotism in adversity. Others, as Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN, gave life to the long talk with witty sallies and smart party-hits ; others, as the O'Cosioa DON, or Mr.
• SIDNEY HERBERT, rose above the baser restraints of faction, and interested us by the force of their benevolence and sincerity. The topics glanced at were various ; but attention was mainly directed to two branches of the multifarious subject started by Lord JOHN RussELL—the State trial, and the question of the two great Irish Churches.
The charges against Government on account of the trial were urged with different degrees of obstinacy by the several Opposition speakers: some of the charges seemed at times almost abandoned; but the whole string is to be found in the strongest shape in the speeches of Sir THOMAS WILDE and Mr. Smut.. And in truth, they put a few points with great force. The delay to prosecute, argued Sir THOMAS, after the illegal purbuit of the Repealers had once been ascertained, was a " trap for the unwary "; as many persons must have gone to the last meetings who never would have committed themselves had the meetings sooner been stopped; while the Judges decided that those who attended the later meet- ings became responsib!e for previous acts in the series. The Reverend Mr. TIERNEY was obviously in this predicament. The learned Sergeant, quondam Solicitor-General, pronounced the form of the indictment a disgrace to the law : he sought to prove "fraud" in the omission of names from the Jury-list ; he accused the Crown-lawyers of resorting to a Special instead of a Common Jury, because they would not have " dared" in open court to tell Catholic jurors to "stand by"; he asserted that among the actual jurors was a strenuous political opponent of Mr. O'CoNEELL's, a person who had waged war with him in the Town-Council ; not questioning the law laid down by the Judges, he insisted that it was so applied in the prosecution, and so set before the Jury, as to confuse their minds and prevent their seeing the real issue ; and in fine, he roundly asserted that Mr. O'CoNNELL had "no fair trial." Others made the same assertion : Mr. MACAULAY brought out the moral flaw in the verdict, showing that Mr. O'CoNEELL had, whether by design or by accident, been deprived of any favourable chance which would have accrued from admitting a Roman Catholic to the Jury ; and Mr. SHEIL, besides working up the "lottery" argument effectively, went a good way to make out that there was no imperative necessity for taking a Jury from the vitiated list. The reply is stated with most com- pleteness by Mr. SMITH, the Attorney-General for Ireland : he allowed, that to have prosecuted before the case was ripe, would
have been to court defeat ; that the "fraud," if any, lay not with the Crown-lawyers, while there were suspicious circumstances in the singular intimacy between the Registrar whose blunder caused the omission of the names and the traversers' attornies ; and gave very strong if not satisfying reasons for proceeding at once with the trial after it had gone so far. His clear, plausible, and intrepid de- fence, coupled with the proper feeling of his allusion to the error of his personal deportment, contributed to raise him greatly in the
estitnation of the House, where he appears to have been under- rated. The general result of the disputation on the law-points seems to be, that on merely technical considerations the Govern- ment-officers are absolved from blame ; but that their management of the prosecution, as a stroke of policy and a vindication of Go- vernment, was wanting in Imperial statesmanship—they seem to stand confessed provincial lawyers, though very able ones. It is almost to be hoped that such is really the fact ; for if the case were not entangled with many doubts as to its right management, and embarrassed by untoward accidents, it would almost go to show that the state of society in Ireland is not fit for the administration of justice by means of Juries. The larger question of the Church has reached no such determi- nate result. The discussion may be said to have developed four parties—two subdivisions of each great party. The first consists of the mere Whigs, represented by Lord JOHN RUSSELL; who, with mighty professions, proposed a minimum of deeds. The Whig agita- tion began months ago ; it attained a shape in the very able paper of the Edinburgh Review on the general redress of Irish grievances ; Lord JOHN'S speech seemed to harbinger the actual measure, when, lo ! out comes a little list of grants that might first have been named in the Estimates, and little permissive plans of endowment and amended franchise that might have formed minor clauses in Continuance-bills ! No sooner is the great Whig measure dis- played, than a Ministerial counterpart is produced, like a rival shop in a pantomime ; and the Tory manufactory of liberal measures proves quite equal to the Whig—in littleness as well as greatness. There is no avowed "split" in the Ministry, probably none in reality ; yet is there a wide distance between the opinions avowed by some, or even involved in their measures, and Lord STANLEY'S loud and obstinate cry of "No surrender." Some Miuisterialists desire to see the Catholics elevated, some are not satisfied that tite Establishment should be maintained ; Sir JAMES Gaanant will not meddle with it ; but Lord STANLEY assails the Catholics, and strives to beat them down if they attempt to rise. He insists that parties are pledged by the Act of Union, and all the declarations that pre- ceded Emancipation, to maintain the Establishment ; and solemnly calls on the Catholics to remember their oath. The case which he makes out for compliance with recorded obligations would be a strong one, if compliance could be enforced—if the maintenance of the Establishment were not impossible. The Catholics may have promised to waive a part of the legislative abilities which they acquired ; but such waivers are always un- tenable. And in justice to them it should be observed, that it is not they who set up this claim of ecclesiastical reform in Ireland, but English Protestants; who urge it less as a boon to a sect, than as a measure expedient for the welfare of the empire at large. The fourth party is represented by Lord HowtteK ; whose boldly- avowed policy, of thoroughly remodelling the ecclesiastical in- stitutions of Ireland, has surprised the Whigs more than the Con- servatives. The Whigs, who were so to "get the start of this majestic world," find the Tories flush up with them in the race of intellect, and see Lord HOWICK miles ahead. As a sign of the acknowledged insignificancy of the great Whig scheme—Lord STANLEY'S position is assailed, the Ministers' projects are decried by Whigs as "inadequate," Lord HOWICK'S scheme is discussed as the real antagonist of the Conservative plan, but Lord Jons's proposals are forgotten. The policy talked of is that of any other statesman—of STANLEY, PEEL, or HOWICK ; the "leader of the Opposition" is only spoken of as the mover for a party-division. The mere Whigs are said to be in high dudgeon at the "march stolen upon them" by Lord.11owtc& : and no wonder, for hence- forward his position marks the point of advance for Liberals— his measure is the standard ; Lord Joins being a proclaimed laggard. The great talk, we have said, has not beeil altogether fruitless. It has sounded a totally new tone in discussing the claims of Ire- land—an incalculable improvement on the old insolence and neg- lect. Even hostile Lord STANLEY is respectful in his demeanour. But the general moral of the debate is " Something must be done "—Parliament acknowledges the necessity. And there are signs of a disposition to assent to "something." The PEEL sec- tion of Conservatives are reserved, but not hostile. A party com- prising " Young England," but more numerous, are for a liberal concession of prejudices : Mr. DISRAELI, Mr. MONCKTON MILERS, Sir WALTER JAMES, Mr. STAFFORD O'BatEN, and others, avow kindly sentiments, anxious to soothe, and, if we way Ulie bOalair but appropriate phrase to accommodate Ireland ; Mr. Lescaeess insists upon justice; Mr. SIDNEY Hemmer, a Minister, earnestly pleads for a generous policy. This debate has given a serious shake to mere party predilections, to mere party reputations, and has henceforth raised the common level of opinion on Irish subjects. It must be confessed, however, that it also forms a singular excuse for Mr. O'Comsece. Should we have had this debate, these dis- plays of fine feeling, but for the monster-meetings, the threats, the sedition, the semi-rebellion, the prosecution ? It may be doubted. Government propose measures ; but why were they not proposed last yeerf There is not one of them but was just as necessary last year as now—not one necessity but was just as well known ; yet nothing was done. English gentlemen, of course, have not been " frightened" into their considerateness; but it is a vice of these " practical" days to attend to nothing but an "emergency,"—just as if a man could not pay his bills till arrested, cr go to breakfast until he felt the pangs of starvation. The measures for the mate- rial, the physical benefit of Ireland—which were, indeed, almost wholly passed over in the long debate on government and on the comparative merits of party-rule—especially are not matters of party politics or theological dogma, but are matters of fact or calculation, long acknowledged or easily ascertained; and if there are " diSculties " in the way of execution, " difficulty " is no excuse whatever for breach of duty. It really is a plea that con- demns itself: for what is only "difficult" is not impossible; and nothing but impossibility should arrest the progress of relief for ills so grievous as those which afflict Ireland. To suffer this debate to be followed up by more years of inert procrastination would indeed degrade English statesmen. The " difficulties " of the work may be valid reasons to indispose them from incurring the troubles of office; but, in office, there can be no excuse for evading the duties. Those duties are not to be performed as a mere privilege of party- trade—something to be undertaken in the competition for the sweets of office : there exists no party that has not shown itself incapable of the task. That task will remain unfulfilled, until some statesman has the courageous heart to improve the nascent spirit of concord, and to avail himself of the best disposition that ani- mates all parties. There must be men capable of the effort, if they did but know it—and each other.
