t
declaration. With respect to the principle of the appropriation
resolutions, his opinion was unaltered: it was a wise and just
principle, and he could not consent to its reversal: it would imply
a stigma upon ministers which he could not endure. Sir Thomas Acland,
however, rose to move that the resolutions of the 7th and 8th of April,
1835, should be read; and after addressing the house at considerable
length, he further moved that they should be rescinded. The motion was
seconded by Sir Eardley Wilmot. After a long speech from Lord Stanley,
and a few words from Lord Morpeth in defence of government, the house
was adjourned till the following day, when Mr. Litton renewed the
discussion by delivering a speech in favour of Sir T. Acland's
amendment. Messrs. Young, Laseelles, Bennett, and Lord Sandon also
supported it; while Messrs. Redington and Townley opposed it. Mr.
O'Connell remarked that the real question before the house was, how
should Ireland be governed? This was the question that had been under
discussion for seven hundred years. Should Ireland, he asked, be
governed by a section? A loud shout interrupted the speaker, and in the
midst of continued uproar, he continued thus:--"I thank you for that
shriek. Many a shout of insolent domination, despicable and contemptible
as it is, have I heard against my country."--[Here the speaker
interfered]--"Let them shout; it is a senseless yell--the spirit of a
party. Ireland will hear their shrieks. They may want us again. What
would Waterloo have been if we had not been there? I ask not that
question for the renowned commander-in-chief, who is himself an
Irishman, but for the hardy soldiery of Ireland, who fought the battle
for him. I say again, that is the question." In conclusion, Mr. O'Connell
admitted that the ministerial plan did not go far enough, but he was
ready to accede to it for the sake of an amicable arrangement. Sir
Robert Peel and other members addressed the house, a discussion ensued,
when Sir Thomas Acland's motion was lost by a majority of three hundred
and seventeen against two hundred and ninety-eight. On the following day
Lord John Russell gave the house distinctly to understand that the tithe
measure would solely consist of a proposition to the effect that the
composition then existing should be converted into a rent-charge.

COMMITTEE OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS UPON THE IRISH MUNICIPAL BILL--THE
BILL REJECTED, ETC.

On the 29th of May Lord Joh