4 APRIL 1846, Page 11

POSTSCRIPT.

SATURDAY NIGHT.

In the House of Commons, last night, Mr. O'Comeara. stated his case against the "Assassination " Bill. He was supported with more or less effect by Mr. B. OSBORNE, Mr. H. BRIDGMAN, Mr. KELLY, Mr. P. BUTLER, and Mr. FITZGERALD. Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT maintained the Ministerial view of the question; Lord Joint RUSSELL is to vote for the first reading, but stipulates for liberty of action as regards the details; Mr. SEYMER gave an unqualified adhesion to the measure.

As yet the speaking has been conducted with remarkable decorum; so much so as to surprise the Members themselves, if an inference may be drawn from the many complimentary acknowledgments which have passed from the one side to the other. Of course there was nothing new, either in the statement of grievance or the suggestion of remedy.

Mr. O'CoNsiau. did not deny the existence of disturbance and crime in certain parts of Ireland; neither woul he palliate the atrocious attacks against life which had taken place; but he disputed the efficiency of the Ministenal remedy. Sir James Graham had failed to show that the measure would operate as a remedy: if this point had been made out, Mr. O'Connell would have given the bill a hearty aqpport. lie called upon the Government to look into the real condition of the people of Ireland, and to pass the only coercion act that was required—an act to coerce the landlord who would not do his duty, and to rescue the people from their present condition. Of course, the Government wished to see Ireland prospering; and they had given a strong proof of this desire. They had the power in their hands; and if they would take a manly tone, and adopt a temperate and dignified estimate of human nature with respect to Ireland, they might stand over her and wave the wand that would turn her misery and poverty to prosperity and happiness. He traced the outrages whose existence formed the pretext for the present coer- cive measure to the nature of land-tenure and the anomalous relations between landlord and tenant. He referred to the actspassed since the Union to show the many unjust advantages conferred upon the landlord, and the consequent helplessness of the tenant. These advantages had proved fertile sources of murder, especially that which related to the power to distrain upon growing crops. "There was in Ireland what was called a 'starving season,' for about six weeks before the new harvest; and, if the growing crops were distrained, the labourers were deprived of their means of subsistence. They were prevented from digging: if their wives or children came out in the evening to take a few potatoes, they were consigned toa gaol; the husbands were driven to madness; and could it be a matter of s

that this state of things was a fruitful source of crime?—of crime which did not exist in Ireland before the Union, but which was traceable directly to the legisla- tion of that House." The evils which had been fostered under the existing sys- tem would not be cured by a coercion bill. Similar experiments had been tried seventeen times, and every one of them had failed. This he showed in detail.

As to remedies, Mr. OConneil recommended measures for the adjustment of the tenure of land question, and for securing to tenants a fair compensation for improvements; a modification of the Ejectment Bill, to check the wholesale clearance system; the extension of the -Ulster tenant right; a modification of the Grand Jury law; a more adequate number of Representatives in Parliament; adequate Corporation reform; and a better distribution of the Church tempo- ralities.

In conclusion, Mr. O'Connell moved his amendment—that instead of passing an arbitrary and unconstitutional bill like the one proposed, they ought to adopt measures tending to eradicate the causes which produce crime.

Mr. BERNAL OSBORNE seconded the amendment. He thought the tendency of the bill was to inflame discontent. He insisted upon immediate measures to remove the causes which lead to murder.

Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT defended the bill. In particulardie endeavoured to show, that its care was more for the poor man than for the rich: the clause which made it penal for a man to be out of his residence between sunset and sun- rise, unless upon lawful cause, was specially intended for the protection of the helpless, inasmuch as the murders committed in broad day were committed on the rich, and the murders committed at night upon the poor. Lord Jolla RUSSETS. thought. that Sir James Graham had not made out his case, in so far as regarded the efficiencies of the measure to remedy the ad- mitted evil: he had not shown in what way the bill would prevent murder. In fact, the most important step of the whole deliberation, the connexion of the evil with the remedy, bad been lightly and briefly passed over. Lord John thought a milder measure would have been more effectual. If he agreed that the bill should be read a first time, he was bound to state, that in the future stages he should have objections to offer which would reach the foundations of some of the principal provisions. He did not think the House should now rest satisfied with copying the legislation of the last forty or fifty years in reference to Irish grievances. He complained that Government had neglected to bring forward remedial measures in conjunction with the coercion bill; and stated differences in the policy of the Whigs in Earl Grey's time when introducing their coercive measure. Lord John expressed satisfaction that the monstrous proposal ori- ginally made of making the bill permanent had been abandoned. He trusted, before the bill was read a second time, a measure would be introduced for adjusting arrengements between landlords and tenants. Mr. KELLY thought the inevitable consequences of this bill would be to drive his fellow-countrymen to Sydney. and Van Diemen's Land : indeed, he believed that' Sir Robert Peel was most anxious that the honourable and learned Member fer the county of Cork, the honourable Member for Limerick, and the honourable member for Meath, should be amongst the number!

The debate wee adjourned. The House broke up about one o'clock. There was no business of general interest in the House of Lords.