, to proceed to
the election of some other persons, and not, as in the case of Dublin,
re-elect the same person. All the other provisions were similar to those
comprised in the English bill. The bill was allowed to be read a second
time on the 29th of February without opposition; but Sir Robert Peel
took occasion to state the views taken of this particular mode of
reforming Irish corporations by himself and the party to which he
adhered. He avowed that it was not possible to defend the corporation
system which existed in Ireland; but he contended that the bill would
not be a remedy for the evils. Although the views of the Conservatives,
as explained by Sir Robert Peel, did not allow them to oppose the second
reading of the bill, yet when the motion was made that the house should
go into committee, Lord Francis Egerton moved that the committee should
be empowered to make provision for the abolition of corporations in
Ireland, and for such arrangements as might be necessary on their
abolition, for securing the efficient and impartial administration
of justice, and the peace and good government of cities and towns in
Ireland. His lordship said, that in substituting abolition for the
process of restoration proposed by ministers, he was not withholding
from Ireland any of the benefits intended to be conferred on the other
parts of the kingdom by their new municipal institutions; and lie argued
generally that there was much in the situation of that country, and in
the state of its society, which distinguished it from England and other
nations, and which might render it, in certain cases, an unfit recipient
for institutions not essential in themselves to good government, and
only valuable as being machinery for that purpose. His motion was
seconded by Mr. Lefroy. The bill was defended by Lords John Russell,
Morpeth, and Hawick, Mr. O'Connell, and other members; and was attacked
by Lord Stanley, Mr. Sergeant Jackson, and Sirs Henry Hardinge and
James Graham. Mr. O'Connell insisted that Ireland must have justice; and
she would not have it if she was not treated as England and Scotland
had been treated. Lord Stanley said, that he felt some hesitation in
receiving Mr. O'Connell as the plenipotentiary of the people of Ireland
to treat with the British parliament. Lord John Russell closed the
debate on Lord Francis Egerton's motion. On a division the motion was
lost by a majority of three hundred and seven against two hundred
and for