ought to be put down by the law; and although in a free country an effervescence of that nature could not be so speedily subdued as in a despotic country, it would be more effectually so in the end.

LORD CASTLEREAGH. He was fully persuaded that the people of Ireland might be made a well-informed and moral people. Even at present their minds were much better cultivated than those who did not know them appeared disposed to admit; for it was most untrue that the Irish were in such a state of utter ignorance as that in which they had been frequently represented to be. He concurred with the right honourable gentleman opposite in thinking those were wrong who considered the people of Ireland to be generally uneducated. It was not true that they were remarkably deficient in intellectual knowledge. He could take upon himself to say, this was by no means a correct character of them. So far as his experience went, they were rather the reverse of this. He spoke principally of the north of Ireland, where the population, far from being such as had been supposed, was such, that he knew no country in which the inhabitants were more intelligent. The knowledge which he spoke of was not confined to the higher or midding ranks of society, but absolutely pervaded all classes; extending even to the lowest.

IRISH AND SCOTCH DISTILLERIES.

SIR JOHN NEWPORT. The right honourable gentleman opposite, (Mr. Peel) had formerly drawn a very faithful picture of the state of Ireland; but there could be no doubt whatever that a

great part of the disorganization of the people was occasioned by the immoderate use of spirits. At least one fifth of the country was excited to tumult and disorder from this cause; and he would then ask the house, whether they would consent to surrender up the other four-fifths to drunkenness, by reducing the price of spirits. The petitioners complained of illicit distillation, but not in the district of Dublin. In those parts of the country where the use of beer prevailed instead of spirits, the morals, habits, and health of the people had been most materially improved. It had been shown to the house, by several medical reports from the most eminent practitioners, that since the use of beer had become more general, the mortality in those great districts had decreased in a degree that was almost incredible. The remedy for illicit distillation was not to be ' sought by these means, but by calling on the nobility and gentry to aid the legislature in giving effect to the established laws. At present they found that they could not collect of their tenants the large rents which they imposed on them, unless they assisted those persons in evading the laws: this, and this only, was the character of their opposition to the existing laws of the country. He must acknowledge, however, that the house had in a great degree to thank themselves for the progress of illicit distillation in Ireland. Some counties had transgressed to an enormous extent; because they made that a plea for remitting the penalties, the house had yielded to their petitions, and hereby encouraged hopes that, by transgressing again, they would procure a remission of the penalties. It was impossible to expect good

order, sobriety, or obedience to the laws, so long as the people were kept in a state of intoxication.

GENERAL MATHEW.

General Mathew said, as he knew very little about the north of Ireland, he could not assert that the gentlemen in that quarter encouraged illicit distillation: but he was very sure, that those in the south, with which he was well acquainted, gave that system every assistance. There was not a gentleman residing on the banks of the Shannon who did not encourage it, by purchasing what was called, in that country, putteen. That was whiskey made in a little iron pot, the Irish for which was putteen, and thence the liquor derived its name. The gentlemen purchased this spirit-they placed it regularly in their cellars—and there was not one of them who did not re

gularly ask his guests, "Will you have the putteen, or the legal spirit?" As he (General Mathew) preferred good claret to bad port, he always answered, on such occasions, "give me the putteen instead of the inferior whiskey." (A laugh.) It was almost impossible for them to discover those who were engaged in this trade. They could easily conceal the iron pot which was used in distillation. And what was the consequence? Why, the persons who were sent to destroy this trade, assisted in supporting it: for they could get nothing but putteen to drink. Besides, those who infringed the law, were protected by their landlords. He did not mean to say that it was so in the north; but such was the case in the south, and such was the case in the west. The chancellor of the exchequer for Ireland knew full well that the practice existed in the county of Clare.

The evil was supported even by the government. Lords-Lieutenant, particularly one nobleman, whom it was not necessary for him to name, preferred this putteen, as every other man of honour did, to the common whiskey During the last summer, the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, Lord Manners, would drink nothing but putteen; and the Marquis of Abercorn pursued the same course. He did not blame them for making use of good spirits, instead of bad. The Irish chancellor, he understood, refused every other spirit, except putteen, for these reasons-he found it extremely useful to his constitution, and the finest diuretic in the world. (A laugh.) Neither the lord chancellor of Ireland, nor the secretary for Ireland, could deny that this illicit spirit was thus generally used. He believed that almost every man in the county of Limerick supported illicit distillation. There was but one way to destroy this evil; and that was by revising the magistracy of Ireland, which was at present intoler able. The magistrates of the south were intolerable. They connived at this infraction of the law; they took money as a bribe to suffer it to go on. (No, no!) He could prove it. The guager took a guinea from this person, and guinea from that person, that he might overlook those town-lands which had incurred penalties, and place them on those on which no offence had been committed. The gallant ge neral then contended, that the only effectual remedy for this monstrous evil, was a purification of the magistracy of Ireland, which the government did not seem anxious to commence. The Irish chancellor was not singular in his taste. Other noble lords had shown an equal love for putteen. No man

ever liked it better than the Duke of Rutland. The gallant general concluded by again pointing out the necessity of revising the magistracy of Ireland.

MR. WINDHAM QUIN. Under the present system of high duties, this evil of illicit distillation had greatly increased. He would give one instance: in Limerick, not more than two years ago, there were one still of 1500 gallons, and two of 500; there was now but one of 500, the others had ceased. The increase of fines for illicit distillation had gone to such an extent, that in the town lands they were so great, that it was impossible to levy them. No persons would take land in those districts, lest they should be liable to those imposts, and the houses most notorious for the sale of this liquor were those in which disorders of every kind had grown to a great extent.

MR. W. SMITH.

In England the great distilleries had decreased from ten to four. In Scotland a similar reduction was found. The fact was that be the liquor wholesome or or not, the cheaper it was, the greater was its consumption, and the more insubordination generally followed the facility of getting it in society. Any body who had seen Hogarth's picture of Gin Alley, had seen this growth of vice admirably depicted.

MR. FRENCH.

He complained that, under the present system, the innocent as well as the guilty were punished by the levying of fines: 93,000l. had been levied in one year-of which half went to the guager, and half to the crown. The act had VOL. II.

been in force only twelve or thirteen years, and yet not less than 6000 persons had been prosecuted, so that the prisons were absolutely crowded. It often happened that the person guilty could not pay above ten shillings, and the collector went to those in the townships who could best bear the fine. He would ask whether any man, conscious of his innocence, could bear to be thus unjustly stripped of his property? It was utterly in vain that government made grants for the encouragement of religion in Ireland, when the people were brought up to systematic perjury, in order to save the stills and their produce. Thus the expense of prosecutions was enormous: in 1802 it had been 4027. 128. 5d.; in 1857, 3007.; but in 1814 there was disbursed for boards of council, 14,050, while the expenses of the local solicitorgeneral were 53,8007., and those of the second solicitor 30,5051. The bill of costs for the prosecution of the 6000 individuals he had mentioned was 30,8077., and the expenses of one province in fines amounted to 105,057. How could people be patient who had these enormous sums drawn from them for crimes of which they were not guilty?

SCOTCH DISTILLERIES.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, that illicit distillation had, of late years, been carried to a most mischievous extent, and that this was very much to be attributed to the bad quality of the spirit produced from the regular distilleries. The plan which he intended to submit to the committee. consisted of regulation and reduction of duty. For this purpose he intended to encourage the use of 3 I

house is instituted, not to follow | the example, but to watch over the proceedings of inferior courts. The House of Commons is composed chiefly of those who are not lawyers, in order that they may act on the plain and broad principles of reason and the constitution. It is their duty to inquire whether the result of legal subtilties be the furtherance of the ends of justice; and above all, to determine whether there be any reasonings or precedents received by other tribunals which may be dangerous to liberty. These are questions of far more importance than any discussions of mere law; and on them this house may decide with as much discernment as lawyers, and - with much less prejudice. There are even occasions in which law itself, in order to be preserved, must be overruled by the great principles of justice and liberty, for which and by which it can alone exist.

Whatever may have been said of late, I shall always consider that, to prove the tendency of a claim to be unconstitutional, it is in the House of Commons the strongest of all legal arguments against it. It has been said, that "unconstitutional" can have no meaning, if it be not synonymous with "illegal." But the assertion is false and pernicious. Every single statute has a general object and intention which may be defeated by acts which do not offend against the letter of any of its clauses. Every class of statutes relating to one subject has a more general scope and spirit against which there may be many offences not prohibited in so many words in any one statute of the class. The most subordinate part of law, besides its literal provisions, has a spirit, an object, general principles, which extend be

yond the letter, and without which the letter cannot be rightly understood. Shall not the same be said of that grand body of written and unwritten law relating to the powers of government, and the rights of the subject, called the constitution? As that which defeats the purpose without infringing the words of an act of paliament is justly said to be inconsistent with its spirit and principles, so acts are with equal propriety termed unconstitutional which resemble in their mischief acts already condemned as contrary to the constitution, which obstruct the attainment of its universally acknowledged ends, weaken the authority of its most useful principles, and of which the example, if consistently followed in all like cases, would leave no constitution remaining. It is by the condemnation of practices and pretensions which are unconstitutional without being, in the strict and narrow sense of the word, illegal, that the House of Commons has most often performed its high function of preserving liberty. Illegal practices may be checked by courts of law

unconstitutional claims can be resisted only by parliament. This house may, indeed, animadvert on a breach of law, but only where that breach of law is in effect, or example, dangerous to the constitution.

This constitution has provided various means of check on that most unmanageable instrument of power-a standing army. Whether the union of all of them be an adequate security, may be doubted; but no man ever thought that all we were more than enough. One of these controls is, the annual mutiny bill, which renders the means of maintaining discipline annually dependent on the pleasure of parliament. This check is held by the