to show, that we are ready to grant to Irishmen a participation in all our rights and privileges, and to treat them exactly as if they were inhabitants of the same island.  I, therefore, could never listen to, or agree with the assertion, that they ought to be considered as aliens.  Nor could I consent to any laws which were founded on this unjust presumption.”  These sentiments were received by his audience with repeated applause.  During the absorbing debate on the Irish Coercion Bill, in June, he not only opposed that measure, but, in some sense, became the apologist of those outrages, which the Government alleged had made it necessary.  After quoting, very fully, from the evidence given before the Devon Commission, he goes on to say:  “This, sir, differs from the account given by the noble lord, the Secretary for Ireland; and it is evidence which, I think, this House can hardly neglect or deny.  However ignorant many of us may be of the state of Ireland, we have the best evidence that can be produced—­the evidence of persons best acquainted with that country—­of magistrates for many years, of farmers, of those who have been employed by the Crown; and all tell you, that the possession of land is that which makes the difference between existing and starving amongst the peasantry, and that, therefore, ejections out of their holdings are the cause of violence and crime in Ireland.  In fact, it is no other than the cause which the great master of human nature describes, when he makes an oppressed nature violate the law:—­

               “Famine is in thy cheeks,
     Need and oppression starveth in thine eyes,
     Upon thy back hangs ragged misery;
     The world is not thy friend, nor the world’s law;
     The world affords no law to make thee rich;
     Then be not poor, but break it.”

This quotation was received by the House with a “hear, hear.”  “Such,” continued the noble Lord, “is the incentive which is given to the poor Irish peasant to break the law, which, he considers, deprives him of the means, not of being rich, but of the means of obtaining a subsistence.”  Having pointed out the difficulties of giving out-door relief under the Poor Law, he goes on to suggest what seemed to him to be, and what undoubtedly was, a far better remedy for Irish poverty and Irish famine:  “There is,” said he, “another source of benefit—­namely, the cultivation of the waste lands.  On that subject I do not see the difficulties which beset the propositions with regard to the Poor Laws.  It seems to me some great scheme, with regard to the cultivation, preparation, and tillage of the waste lands, would somewhat abate the severe competition for land, and diminish the cause of crime.”  Repeated cheers greeted these observations.