HISTORY OF EUROPE. 



Mr. Burrows approved of the sus- 

 pending the habeas corpus in Ire- 

 land, but did not at present sec the 

 necessity of continuing the martial 

 law, at a time when parliament was 

 sitting. 



Lord Castlcreagh asserted, that 

 no measure had contributed so 

 much to prevent the mischiefs of 

 rebellion from extending, as that 

 measure which was now objected 

 to: There was a considerable body 

 of loyalty existing in Iceland, but in 

 order to attack and suppress rebel- 

 lion, it was necessary that govern- 

 ment should have extraordinary 

 powers. There was no reason to 

 suppose this power would be abused, 

 as, notwithstanding its existence 

 last year, the civil tribunals were 

 resorted to in almost every instance. 

 He considered the bills not only as 

 due to the loyal subjects foT their 

 security, but even an act of mercy 

 to the rebels themselves ; for there 

 was no other way of convincing 

 them how utterly hopeless all their 

 projects were, than to shew, that it 

 was in the power of government to 

 blast them in a moment. When 

 they were convinced their schemes 

 were hopeless, and must be destruc- 

 tive to themselves, they might be in- 

 duced to return to habits of peace- 

 ful allegiance. To refuse to arm 

 government with such power, when 

 ^ there was no reason to suppose 

 it would be exercised with harsh. 

 ncss, would be tu raise the spirits 

 and hopes of the disalfefted : but it 

 would paralize the exertions, and 

 augment the fears of the loyal friends 

 of their country. 



The bill for suspending the ha- 

 beas corpus aft in Ireland was 

 brought in, and read a first time; 

 and, after some opjiosition, leave 

 •waa also given to bring in a bill for 



the continuance of martial law in 

 that kingdom, which was also read a 

 first time. 



On the question being put, on the 

 5th of December, for the second 

 reading, 



JNlr. V\'. Elliot said, that he felt 

 utterly unable, from want of infor- 

 mation, to form a corredl opinion, 

 whether this bill ought or ought not 

 to pass. When the bill was first in- 

 troduced in the Irish parliament, 

 there were the most authentic docu- 

 ments of an actually existing rebel- 

 lion. When it was renewed in 

 1800 and 1801, the act was found- 

 ed on the report of a secret com- 

 mittee of the house of commons. 

 When it was passed last year, it was 

 immediately after the atrocious mur- 

 der of lord Kilwarden, when it 

 appeared probable that the conspi- 

 racy was most extensive. But when 

 it is noAV proposed to pass, there 

 was nothing of that sort appeared, 

 to justify the measure. There was 

 neither any actual rebellion, nor 

 was there any report of a commit- 

 tee, nor any authentic information, 

 to make it appear that such a mea- 

 sure was now necessary. 



The only thing like official infor- 

 mation, which parliament had to 

 guide them, was the speech from 

 the throne, which expressed a hope 

 of tranquillity being perfe6tly re- 

 stored, and the deluded returning 

 to their allegiance. Such informa. 

 tion as this did not appear to require 

 measures of such severity. As to 

 the mere general assertions of mi- 

 nisters, he could not place much 

 confidence in them. It was only a 

 week before the breaking out of the 

 insurrection at Dublin, that the 

 chancellor of the exchequer had con- 

 gratulated the house on the tranquil 

 state of Ireland, when no martiaU 

 B 4 law 



