6

earth, to the character of the Irish people. I love the Irish 'nation,' said Mr Fox. 'I know a good deal of that people. I 'know much of Ireland from having seen it; I know more from ⚫ private friendship with individuals. The Irish may have their 'faults like others. They may have a quick feeling of injury, and not be very patient under it; but I do affirm, that, in all 'their characteristics, there is not one feature more predominant, in every class of the country, from the highest to the lowest order, than gratitude for benefactions, and sensibility to kind'ness. Change your system towards that country and you will find them another sort of men. Let impartiality, justice, and clemency take place of prejudice, oppression, and vengeance, and you will not want the aid of martial law, or the terror of 'military execution.' For years the English people contemned the advice of this illustrious statesman. Every succeeding year saw new measures of 'prejudice, oppression, and vengeance' let loose upon Ireland, producing a temporary quiet, hut sowing fresh causes of national demoralization and disturbance. At last the change wished for by Mr Fox came over the spirit of their councils; Lord Mulgrave was sent to Ireland; and in his train were found, not the old and haggard attendants of Irish viceroys, prejudice, oppression, and vengeance,' but the young and blooming pages, 'impartiality, justice, and clemency."

At the vast obstructions which the Government has had to contend with, and in the face of which it has accomplished so much for the welfare of Ireland, we can only afford a glance. They may be divided into two classes,-one resulting from the protracted opposition of the House of Lords to necessary reforms; the other arising from the incessant efforts of the resident Tory aristocracy to counteract the policy of a liberal Administration. With reference to the state of destitution, which so unfortunately characterises the mass of the Irish peasantry, and the effect of that deplorable condition upon the public tranquillity, Lord Mulgrave expresses himself as follows:

But, my Lords, whilst in connexion with political tranquillity thus produced, there is this desire, on the part of the Government, to give to every moral feeling a proper direction, we cannot expect that this feeling, on the part of the Irish people, will be complete whilst there exists in full force one vicious ingredient in the social system, which has reduced the mass of the population to the lowest level, I may almost say, of destitution; and allow me to add, that there is one measure recommended in that portion of the Speech just read from the table, which your Lordships must take up in connexion with the state of Ireland, as of the most vital importance;-bring to its consideration a cool head, but be prepared to act with a bold hand, for no country can be in a healthy state

where there is not security for industry as well as security for property : -indeed I hold that one cannot exist without the other, and we can never expect that Ireland will be in a perfectly tranquil state whilst on this point she furnishes a lamentable exception to the rest of the civilized world.'

We have never seen the difference which unhappily exists between the relations of landlord and tenant in England and Ireland, more luminously stated than in the following passage:

Your Lordships must be well aware, the fact having been so frequently mentioned in this House, that much of the disturbance of Ireland depends upon, and has its origin out of the tenure of land in that country, and you must also be well aware how wide is the difference in the relative situations of landlord and tenant in the neighbouring kingdom, as compared with the situation of the same classes in England. In Ireland there is no security for industry. Land becomes a necessary of life; necessity drives hard bargains, and hard bargains beget no good or kindly feelings in the minds of those who are parties to them either on the one side or the other. But I will not pursue that part of the subject further. I will not enter into a discussion of those social relations which make so marked a distinction between the relative position of landlord and tenant in Ireland, as contrasted with the position of the same parties in happier England; it is enough to say that the general good feeling that exists in the latter is unknown or rarely to be found in the former, and that whilst, in most cases, the relation of landlord and tenant in England is one of sympathy without dependence, in Ireland it is one, too often, of entire dependence without a shadow of sympathy. Out of this unfortunate state of things arise many of the disturbances of Ireland.'

There is nothing more commendable in the speech before us, than the spirit of manly sympathy with the wrongs and sufferings of the Irish people which pervades it. The 'parental sentiment' which has been well said to be the true principle of Govern'ment,' impregnates it throughout. The extent to which the peasantry of Ireland were harassed in 1836, by the cruel execution of the Writs of Rebellion, is fresh in our memories. In the year which has just expired, another mode of exasperating the population put the controlling power and healing influence of the Government to the severest test. The wearied pluralist, retiring from his avocations in the Exchequer, resigned the goad and the lash into the hands of the Tory landlord; and the persecution of the people assumed the still more appalling form of wholesale expulsion from their ancient holdings. Against this ruthless system, less the dictate of sordid interest than the gratification of religious rancour, Lord Mulgrave reclaims in a strain at once indignant and fervid. After portraying with painful fidelity the manifold sufferings of the unhappy people against

whom the sentence of extermination has in too many instances been carried into execution, the noble Lord goes on to depict the results to which these oppressions tend :

Such, I am told, is the condition of some of the tenantry in that part of the country to which I have alluded. My Lords, let those only who think that such things are right for such causes, let them, and them only, talk merely of the crime, and think nothing of the misery of Ireland. Nay, I will say more if any such system is pursued-if any general depopulation of the country on the ground of religion is attempted in Ireland -I will still labour on; I will still endeavour, as long as I am honoured with the confidence of my Sovereign, to secure the tranquillity and preserve the peace of that distressed country. The greater the difficulty, the more time will I devote; the more numerous the obstacles, the greater the energy I will exert to surmount them, towards the attainment of that end. But I tell the persons who take such steps, that I consider them more powerful for evil than I can be for good, in the honest and unshrinking discharge of my duties. I tell them there are depths of despair which no friendly voice can reach, but if the people thus provoked should be deaf to my admonitions, and escape from my control, on the heads of those who have provoked them be the painful responsibility of the consequences.'

Having established the success of his government by a chain of evidence the most complete-having shown in what quarters the true and only impediments exist to the thorough pacification of Ireland--having shattered and demolished all the charges of his enemies, either impeaching the exercise of the powers and prerogatives delegated to him by the crown, or gainsaying the beneficial consequences that have flowed from his measures, there remained but one calumny to be exposed and silenced,— the allegation of subjection to Mr O'Connell's influence. The reply of the Noble Earl to this hackneyed charge, swept away the last falsehood that remained to be dealt with

'It has been stated by persons, who must know better, that Mr O'Connell has all the patronage of the Government of Ireland. I utterly and indignantly deny the truth of that statement. Mr O'Connell, like any other Member of Parliament, requiring information from the Government, has, I admit, had occasional communications with it; but I can confidently state that his applications have been fewer than those of any other Member of Parliament. The taunt against me is, that I have treated Mr O'Connell in the same way that I would have treated any other Member of Parliament. So I have, my Lords, and so I will always continue to do. But I fearlessly and utterly deny that the Government has been controlled by Mr O'Connell, or has consulted with him as to any of the appointments that have been made; and as to the charge of his having uniformly given the Government his support, I honestly confess that is a circumstance, considering how much he carries with him the hearts and affections of the Irish people, that I can regard only as a

great advantage, and as one that ought not to be made a matter of reproach.'

In conclusion, we earnestly recommend the perusal of this Speech to all who honestly wish to make themselves acquainted with what has, of late years, been done towards improving and tranquillizing the unhappy country which Britain has so long and so cruelly misgoverned.

ART. IX. Practical Evils of Dissent. 12mo. London: 1837.

IT

T is impossible to express more uneasiness than we feel at being compelled to blame the proceedings of some very worthy persons, who, actuated by the best intentions towards the cause of religious liberty, have lately been exerting themselves in its behalf certainly, but in a direction such as all its best friends deeply lament. The doctrine of those who hold that all great legislative measures should either originate with the Government, or be adopted by it, in order that there may be adequate responsibility for whatever is recommended to Parliament, appears wholly untenable; indeed it is inconsistent with the nature of an independent representative system. But it derives occasionally some sort of recommendation from the kind of proceedings on the part of individuals to which we are now adverting. Ill considered measures are from time to time brought forward, which receive support, in consequence of the temporary position of parties, or other accidental circumstances; and laws are made which frequently produce serious inconvenience, or are nearly inoperative, but lend a sanction to very unsound principles.

The reader will at once perceive that we are alluding to the late act for relieving persons who have conscientious scruples about making the Declaration required of all who hold certain Offices in Municipal Corporations. The declaration is intended for the protection of the Established Church; and it binds the party not to use the influence of his office against that EstablishThe whole matter of the declaration was a great blot upon the measure of 1828, which the Liberal party, then in Opposition, forced upon the Tory Government, for the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts. It left a Test, though of a less repulsive nature, at the time that it professed to abolish all tests; and as there is much difficulty in ascertaining whether the Establishment may or may not be injured by the tendency of many

ment.

proceedings, the promise to do nothing injurious to it becomes a snare for conscientious men, and an encouragement to casuistry, if not to hypocrisy. Every friend of religious liberty must, therefore, desire to see this Declaration altogether done away with. But that is not the object of the late act, which only alters the form of the declaration, so as to enable those to make it who have no objection to bind themselves against offering injury to the Establishment, but who, having conscientious scruples about oaths, and considering the declarations of 1828 to be in the nature of an oath, object to make it, and wish to make another instead of it. Now this is the professed object of the new act; and therefore, in all consistency, and in all justice, its operation ought to have been general, so as to comprehend every class of persons, who, without objecting to the promise of neutrality (that is, official neutrality) towards the Church Establishment, do object to the terms in which that promise was corrected by the act of 1828. But such is not at all the frame of the new act: it singles out three descriptions of persons, and professes to relieve them alone. It leaves all the rest where they were left in 1828. The comprehended sects are Quakers, Moravians, and Separatists. The excluded are Jews, and all other sects having conscientious scruples about taking oaths. The Jew is excluded by the words which exclude all the others. The words of the declaration or test of 1828, 'on the true faith of a Christian,' excluded him; but these words were objected to by the Quakers and others, as partaking of the nature of an oath; which they certainly do; whilst the Jew, who does not object to any oath, however formal, was of course excluded by the substance, though not by the form of the words. The new test or declaration substituted by the late act leaves out these words; but contains a declaration that the party making it is either a Quaker, a Moravian, or a Separatist; and this necessarily excludes all, whether Christian, or Jew, or Gentile, who belong not to these three excepted sects. Upon this we are at issue with the framers of the act; and we agree with the Peers who solemnly protested against it, especially with Lord Holland,-on all occasions, the prompt, steady, and enlightened friend of toleration, in its largest acceptation, and who, regardless of all official trammels, and all party connexions, and all the little tribe of their personal delicacies and paltry etiquette, never fails, it may be remarked, to lift his voice for those sacred principles of religious, as well as civil liberty, to which his illustrious kinsman's life was devoted.

Our first objection, and our chief, to this new declaration is, that it is neither more nor less than a test, and it is a test in the most intolerable shape. It is a test. Its language is no one