DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.34827#0343
1831-33.
j%7772<?
327
** df^?'cA 4.— I went for four nights to hear the debates on
the first reading of the Irish Disturbance Bill. Great appre-
hensions were entertained about its reception ; and when Lord
Althorpe opened it in a dull, heavy, hesitating speech its recep-
tion was not very cheering. Several other members spoke for
and against with no decisive effect: but Mr. Stanley rose, and
in a clear, decided, confident, and earnest speech roused the
feelings and strengthened the courage of the House, and was
received with long and enthusiastic cheers, which showed that,
the feelings of all were on the Government side, however they
might have been suppressed by prudence or want of zeal. His
facts and arguments differed little from Lord Althorpe's, but
the effect was as different as ice and fire. I had no idea of the
power of eloquence, or rather of confidence and earnestness of
manner. The last part of his speech was a severe attack on
O'Connell, managed with great skill, with no appearance of
study, and heightened by readiness in turning occurrences of
the moment to account, making O'Connell's cheers the occasion
of some of the most murderous thrusts at him. Among other
things O'Connell was reproached with having called the House
600 scoundrels, which he called out he would explain. The
House would scarcely wait till Stanley was done, but called for
an immediate explanation. When Stanley had done, and all
was expectation, Sheil moved the adjournment of the House,
but the cry for O'Connell was too persevering. He rose at last,
and first tried conciliation, to little purpose ; then manly frank-
ness with more success, until his lame and shuffling explanation
came, which was received with a burst of laughter. O'Connell
was completely disconcerted, made bad worse by further at-
tempts at explanation, and sat down amid the strongest marks
of reprobation from almost every side. The other speakers of
note were Tennyson, clear, fluent enough, but with too much
and too undignified action, in both which defects he is far sur-
passed by Lytton Bulwer, who has even more fluency, but with
a lisp and a weak voice. His brother is better in those respects,
but seems a still greater coxcomb. Grote was well in manner,
voice, and language, but brought forth his Bentham notions as
j%7772<?
327
** df^?'cA 4.— I went for four nights to hear the debates on
the first reading of the Irish Disturbance Bill. Great appre-
hensions were entertained about its reception ; and when Lord
Althorpe opened it in a dull, heavy, hesitating speech its recep-
tion was not very cheering. Several other members spoke for
and against with no decisive effect: but Mr. Stanley rose, and
in a clear, decided, confident, and earnest speech roused the
feelings and strengthened the courage of the House, and was
received with long and enthusiastic cheers, which showed that,
the feelings of all were on the Government side, however they
might have been suppressed by prudence or want of zeal. His
facts and arguments differed little from Lord Althorpe's, but
the effect was as different as ice and fire. I had no idea of the
power of eloquence, or rather of confidence and earnestness of
manner. The last part of his speech was a severe attack on
O'Connell, managed with great skill, with no appearance of
study, and heightened by readiness in turning occurrences of
the moment to account, making O'Connell's cheers the occasion
of some of the most murderous thrusts at him. Among other
things O'Connell was reproached with having called the House
600 scoundrels, which he called out he would explain. The
House would scarcely wait till Stanley was done, but called for
an immediate explanation. When Stanley had done, and all
was expectation, Sheil moved the adjournment of the House,
but the cry for O'Connell was too persevering. He rose at last,
and first tried conciliation, to little purpose ; then manly frank-
ness with more success, until his lame and shuffling explanation
came, which was received with a burst of laughter. O'Connell
was completely disconcerted, made bad worse by further at-
tempts at explanation, and sat down amid the strongest marks
of reprobation from almost every side. The other speakers of
note were Tennyson, clear, fluent enough, but with too much
and too undignified action, in both which defects he is far sur-
passed by Lytton Bulwer, who has even more fluency, but with
a lisp and a weak voice. His brother is better in those respects,
but seems a still greater coxcomb. Grote was well in manner,
voice, and language, but brought forth his Bentham notions as