The Irish Parliament from the year 1782 to 1800 : being the Cressingham prize essay, 1878

II _

THE IRISH PARLIAMENT

F ROM

THE YEAR i782 TO 1800.

KEING THE

CRESSINGHAM PRIZE ESSAY

W. ELLIS HUME

WILLIAMS,

UN’DKRORADIATK. TRINITY IIAM.

NOTHING EXTENUATE NOR SET DOWN AUGHT IN MALICE."

London, Paris & New York.

LONDON :

PRINTED BY THE ARTISTIC COLOUR-PRINTING COMPANY PLAYHOUSE YARD, BARBICAN, E.C.

LIMITED,

THE RIGHT HONOURABLE

Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain.

THIS ESSAY

RESPECTFULLY DEDICATED.

Preface

The Author lias thought it desirable to preface this essay on the Irish Parliament from the years 1782 to 1800, by a brief review of its antecedent condition, and by special quotation of the corres¬ pondence between the Irish Viceroy and the English Premier at the close of 1 782.

It is difficult to estimate the utterances and action of the Irish or English Parliaments during that period, apart from the Social and Political influences coincident with them. These the Author has endeavoured to treat of with as much brevity as their importance permitted.

The present cry. of Home Rule and agitation for Irish Volunteer organisation, lend fresh interest to past Irish history. The advocates of both may And their best response in its study.

Trinity Hall,

Cambridge,

“ Irish Policy is Irish History, and I have no faith in any Statesman who attempts to remedy the evils of Ireland who is either ignorant of the past or will not take lessons from it.” — Disraeli , 1868.

SN attempting an impartial consideration of the most eventful period of Irish history, it is essential to commence by examining the social and political condition of the country at the time. By tracing events both at home and abroad, we shall be enabled to form a just estimate of that combination of circumstances which was the precursor, if not the direct cause, of the crisis resulting in Irish Parliamentary Independence.

To begin with England. In the Spring of 1782, the Ministry of Lord North was brought to an abrupt termination. The position of the country at the close of his twelve years’ administration was without precedent. Impolicy and injustice had borne full fruits in blunders and disasters. Political disappointments and military reverses afforded to a powerful Opposition ample justification for continual assaults. Ministerial majorities decreased in number and in quality. Fox and Burke, unceasing in their attacks, not only on the measures of the Government, but also on the capacity and personal character of its leader, at length forced his resignation. Much of the calamity which attended Lord North’s administration must be attributed to the conflict between principles and measures, marking the efforts of the Premier to reconcile the caprices and prejudices of his Sovereign with the interests and requirements of the State. Friends were thereby alienated, foes wrere not conciliated. The favour of the King proved powerless against the dissatisfaction of the people. The Royal threats of abdication in March, 1778,

“ rather than submit to be trampled on by his enemies,” which in reality meant “ rather than loosen his failing grasp on America,” repeated four years after when a Whig coalition was proposed, were far from bearing their expected fruits. Popular feeling and personal loyalty had been strained to their uttermost. It was felt that the prerogative of the Crown had overridden the responsibility of the Minister. The writings of Junius were still fresh in the public mind ; he had taught them that “ the ruin or prosperity of a State depends so much upon the administration of its Government, that, to be acquainted with the merits of a Ministry, we need only observe the condition of the people.” By this standard wras Lord North judged. In our American colonies open discontent had ripened into revolt, the disasters of which culminated in the submission of Cornwallis, and ended in the declaration of Independence. Our Empire in the East was threatened with destruction, as the arms of Coote had not yet prevailed. Hyder Ali, twice defeated, was still a formidable foe. The triumphs of Warren Hastings were also incomplete. Britain stood alone against the united powrers of France, Spain and Holland. France was eager for revenge for her expulsion from Canada and India ; Spain was snatching at Gibraltar, where destruction was awaiting her fleet ; while Holland was content to make her islands the storehouse for our foes. Our West Indian Islands were ravaged, and our trade in these seas swept away by the enemy’s marine, for the gallant Howe or Rodney had not yet given our foes their lesson and re-assumed for England the sovereignty of _ the sea. The few ships that could be spared for the purpose were not sufficient to prevent English coasts and harbours from being insulted, as privateers hovered about the Channel and made easy prey of passing merchandise. On the Continent dissatisfaction was fast ripening into absolute revolution ; the air was heavy with rumours, and the hearts of many failed them for fear. English social feeling was not more re-assuring. It is unnecessary to dilate on the occurrences of 1774, when Wilkes was elected Lord Mayor and returned for Middlesex, to illustrate the then temper or tone of political parties. Dissatisfaction thereby aroused had become chronic. The Gordon

Riots of 1780 declare the later state of the public mind. Tn the provinces an universal outcry against Arkwrights’ machinery had led to most formidable combinations of the working classes, who believed labour would cease if such facilities for production were permitted. In this condition of the public mind we have one important explanation of England’s deficient energy when the necessity for action on Irish matters arose. There was another reason even more significant. England was in want both of money and of men. The American declaration demanded prompt action on the part of the Crown. The Irish establishment was ordinarily 12,000 strong. A requisition of 4,000 troops was made from Ireland, with a proposal that “ for the better protection of that country, it was His Majesty’s intention, if desired, to replace them by an equal number of Hessians (Protestants,)” adding that “their charge should be defrayed without expense to Ireland.” The requisition was granted, but the protection of the foreign troops refused. It thus happened that when the Irish coast towns were threatened, their means of defence were not equal to the occasion. The requisition for Irish troops spoke in language which could not be misunderstood. Events progressed ; “ England’s difficulty,” as modern agitators are wont to assert, proved “ Ireland’s opportunity.” It occurred thus : France by entering into a treaty of friendship and of commerce (4th July 177G), had assumed and recognised American Independence ; ships of both nations together infested the Irish Channel ; vessels trading between English and Irish ports were seized ; a descent on the northern coast was apprehended.

The inhabitants of Belfast appealed to England for help, but the Government was powerless for any such purpose. Permission was given to raise a volunteer corps for protection. Belfast at once did so, the Government providing the arms, and her example was followed by most of the northern towns. The command of Armagh was entrusted to the Earl of Charlemont, a nobleman who had established special claims to popularity by his successful advocacy of the rights of Irish Peeresses to be. present at the Coronation. The Volunteer movement spread with astonishing rapidity and exercised an electric influence on all classes of the people. If may be safely affirmed B 2 that its progress and organization has no parallel in the history oi nations. Armed associations sprang up in all directions, formidable alike from their number and their discipline. By their calm and determined attitude they commanded the respect without as yet awakening the apprehensions of England. Their presence nevertheless gave unmistakeable force to Irish remonstrance, and could not but exercise due influence on the deliberations of the British Cabinet. The Government, even if they so desired it, were without means of controlling the popular feeling. They had permitted the military power to pass out of the hands of the constituted authorities, and an armed force to spring into existence with wrhich the regular troops were unable to cope. The natural and trusted leaders of the people were thereby placed in possession of the real power in the State. With its sense of strength, the nation was aroused to a desire for liberty, and insensibly assumed the high prerogative of demanding redress for grievances against which remonstrance had hitherto proved vain.

It is essential to inquire what those grievances were. In 1780, the political position of Ireland was one of complete dependence on Great Britain. Her Parliament at no time possessed real power, being in truth but the mouthpiece of the English minister. This condition was referable to the year 1495, when Henry VII., desirous to prevent a repetition of possible grievances from rival measures in dual Parliaments, sent Sir Edward Poynings to compose the distracted state of the English pale, and settle those differences which the contests of the Houses of York and Lancaster had occasioned. As King’s deputy, he summoned a Parliament in Drogheda in the year stated, and passed the act known as “ Poyning’s Act,” [App. 1.] which placed the initiation in the King’s Lieutenant in Council, and required the sanction of the King in Council to all laws to be submitted to the Irish Parliament. In the third year of Philip and Mary its provisions were further extended by empowering “ the Governor and Council to certify such other causes requiring legislation as were not foreseen at the beginning of the Session.” It is unnecessary to elaborate the subsequent dependency of the Irish Parliament which, according to Campbell the historian of 1789, was little better

I than the registry of Royal edicts ; nor is there occasion to follow it through the varying fortunes of its political existence, suspended or transferred as expediency or the whim of their rulers might suggest. It never was deprived of the privilege of the weak, to refuse to ratify that which it was powerless to resist ; not that acceptance or refusal materially affected the ultimate result, and this for reasons which will be abundantly evident.

There had been some who ventured to think, that however Independent legislation was prevented, the laws of Ireland were free from control in their Irish administration. In this they were in error. It wTill be sufficient to quote the wrell-known statute 6 Geo. I, c. 5, [App. 2.] the very title of w’hich — “ An Act for better securing the dependency of Ireland upon the Crown of Great Britain,” sufficiently illustrates the respective positions of their Parliaments, and the relations of their Courts of law. The facts which were considered to necessitate its enactment were simple. The Irish House of Lords reversed the decision of the Court of Exchequer. The plaintiff, one Sherlock, however, appealed further to the English House of Lords, which set aside the judgment of the Irish House. A conflict between both Houses ensued, which resulted in the Act under consideration. It declared that the Kingdom of Ireland was wholly subordinate to, and dependent on, the Crown of Great Britain ; that the British Parliament had full power to enact laws to bind it ; that all claim of appellate jurisdiction by the Irish House of Lords was unfounded, and all proceedings thereon null and void to all intents and purposes whatever. Thus doubly bound, first, in their incapacity to initiate laws which de facto they could carry to ultimate legislation, and secondly, in their inability to determine de ure legal appeals, the form of legislation was preserved, whilst the spirit of legislation w'as crushed. Matters of routine were unnoticed, on all others the English veto admitted of no appeal.

At intervals attempts had been made to exercise independent authority. Thus, in 1729, a majority succeeded against the Crown in limiting to yearly grants the Irish payments of national interest. Again, in 1751, the Commons asserted the principle ot their right to dispose of the surplus of the hereditary revenue without the previous consent of the Crown. In 1769, they •rejected money bills originated in the Privy Council. These, however, were occasions in which, without their action,- the proceedings would have been incomplete. There is no instance where the Irish Parliament initiated and carried to completion any measure in opposition to the English Government. The student of history naturally seeks for some explanation as to the constitution of a Parliament that so represented a not inconsiderable nation.

The explanation rests on the surface — the vices of conquest had survived its memory. The Irish Parliament at no time represented the Irish people. The House of Peers was either dependent or expectant on the favour of the Crown, and powerless in the .active business of the State. The House of Commons in its Borough representations, still, in 1780, fulfilled the purposes of their original formation : — to supply seats for creatures of the Crown. Of the 300 members, who at the time of the Union constituted the House of Commons, 200 were the nominees of individuals under the influence of the Government ; forty, if not fifty, were returned by constituencies of ten persons, and several boroughs had no resident electors, some only one. It may be stated, on the authority of Henry Grattan, that two-thirds of the Representatives were returned by less than one hundred electors. Their election was also octennial. Unless influenced by a spirit of patriotism, the personal interests of members lay in inaction. Two-thirds of the intelligent life of Ireland were, because of their creed, without a voice in, or the means of influencing, her Councils. The penal acts were maintained in full rigour. It may be well to mention some of the principal disabilities under which the Roman Catholics rested at the commencement of these agitations. They could not hold leases for more than thirty-one years, could not purchase land, nor possess a horse of more than £5 value. They could not carry arms ; they could not hold commissions in the army ; they were specially excluded from the exercise of the franchise, and could not become barristers, six-clerks or. attorneys, without taking the oaths of allegiance and supremacy. They could not hold any office under the Crown, or be created magistrates without taking the Sacrament as prescribed by the English Test Act, according to the usage of the Church of England. They could not inherit from Protestants by descent, nor bequest or devise. Upon death, their property divided. They could not intermarry without incurring penalties. Their educational privileges were restricted, and their business capacity also subject to rules, by which they were seriously fettered in the exercise of all civil or religious liberties.

The social condition of Ireland was what might have been expected from the constitution of its legislature. In a debate in the English House of Commons on the 10th of May 1776, the Hon. Temple Luttrell, speaking of the Irish, said that “a people so wretched, so oppressed, were scarcely to be found in any part of the civilised globe,” Two years later, on the 1 Gth of December, Lord Nugent in the British House of Commons described the people of Ireland “ as suffering every species of misery and distress human nature was capable of bearing, — a people, nine-tenths of whom laboured for fourpence a day ; whose food in summer was potatoes and buttermilk, and in winter potatoes and water.”*

Lord Beauchamp declared, in 1779, “that good estates in Ireland were offered for sale at sixteen and fourteen years’ purchase, yet no buyers appeared at that low price.” The only class that seemed indifferent was the Irish absentee, who drained his estate to its uttermost, and against whom law and remonstrance seemed equally unavailing. Then, as now, the Irish peasant adopted the aphorism of Bacon, that “ revenge is a kind of wild justice.” Certain it is, that he acted on that view. “ The Right Boys ” employed themselves in assailing the property of the Church ; “ The Levellors ” in Munster resisted the enclosing of Commons by the levelling of fences and the houghing of cattle ; “ The Hearts of Oak ” in Ulster were banded against the levying of land cess, and provisions for repair of roads ; “ The Hearts of Steel ” in Leinster resisted the imposition of fines on the renewal of leases, and other, as they termed them, ‘ landlord exactions,’ set forth in a petition to the Viceroy and published to the nation. f “ The

Rockites ” had Munster as their stronghold, though their members] were generally diffused throughout the country. Captain Rock, their presumed leader, addressed his letters to the King, contending that no private rights should constitute or were consistent with public wrongs. To these might be added “ Defenders ” and “ Peep o’ day Boys,” as illustrative of the pre-disposition of the Irish to combinations against the law, as well as in corroboration of the assertion that many social grievances demanding redress existed.

The condition of the manufacturing community was scarcely better. The journals of the Irish Commons abound with petitions from all kinds of Industries praying for State aid. The people were willing to transfer any faults which rested in themselves to their rulers. The writings of Molyneux, Swift and Lucas were the text books of an Irishman’s political creed ; these attributed any shortcomings to his inability to make the laws. The memories of such writers survived in their teachings, which bore fruit in the alacrity with which the Irish peasant ever entered into combinations promising successful resistance to English rule.

The year 1780 must ever be memorable in the history of Ireland. At its commencement the Volunteers were computed to number 80,000 men, self-equipped and strictly disciplined. To this force wealthy Roman Catholics had largely contributed, and in its ranks, notwithstanding laws to the contrary, were to be found not a few whose patriotism was for the time their highest creed and whose faith was complacently judged by that standard. In the Spring of the year a more extensive organisation of the force took place. The Earl of Charlemont, with Mr. Grattan as his aide-de-camp, assumed the position of leaders. Officers of Divisions were appointed. “ Thus,” says Plowden, “ the foundation of u the Irish Union was laid.” With the confidence of authority''

which the support of an armed people gave, Mr. Grattan and his friends grew loud in their denunciations of what were conceived to be their country’s wrong. The closer association of the rival .sects, and the loyalty which Roman Catholics displayed, caused their grievances to be first considered. The Government did not deem' it prudent to steadfastly resist their claims, and to Mr. Luke Gardiner was entrusted the introduction of Bills for their relief.

In the Session of 1778, the disabilities imposed by 2 Anne c. 6 and

8 Anne c. 3, were so far removed as to permit Papists to take

i

leases for a term of 999 years, determinable on five lives, and to dispose by will or otherwise of land. Their estates were also rendered descendible, divisible and transferable, as if in seisin of any other. Conformity of eldest son was no longer to alter Papist parents’ estate.* In Session of 1781-2, having taken the oath of allegiance, they were further entitled to take, hold, and dispose of lands in the same manner as Protestants, except Advowsons, Manors or Boroughs returning members to Parliament. f A third Act allowed persons professing the Popish religion to teach in schools, and repealed laws relating to the guardianship of their children, at the same time providing for their education.}: Roman Catholics were thus restored to their rights of person, property and religion, and yet the distinction drawn by Flood, between the rights of property and the rights of power, had been carefully preserved. Nor were these the only indications of advancing toleration. Protestant dissenters were relieved from the Sacramental test before holding civil or military offices. || Marriages between Protestant dissenters were permitted to be solemnized by dissenting clergymen. § Many other vexatious observances were also dispensed with.

Having so far conciliated sects, the Volunteers took up the question of commerce. In consequence of numerous addresses from Ireland, a Committee had been appointed by the English Commons in 1778, to consider the Acts relating to Irish trade. It had reported thereon, and proposed to allow the exportation from Ireland to British plantations of all goods, wares and merchandise, with the exception of wool and woollens, and also a free import to Ireland of all merchandise from America, Africa and the West Indies. The measures were opposed by manufacturers in England, and the proposed Bills were abandoned. A motion by Lord Shelburne on the subject was negatived by a

* 17 and 18 Geo. III. c. 24. f 21 and 22 Geo. III. c. 24.

X 21 and 22 Geo. III. c. 62. || 19 and 20 Geo. III. c. 6.

majority of 61 — 30. The people of Ireland resented such policy. They formed associations against the import of British commodities, and resolved to encourage and consume native manufactures only. When the House of Commons met in October, 1779, Mr. Grattan moved an amendment to the address, which was agreed to as follows : — “ That we beg leave, however humbly, to represent to His Majesty that it is not by temporary expedients, but by a free trade alone that this nation is now to be saved from impending ruin.” They at the same time resolved, by a majority of 170 — 47, that it would be inexpedient to grant new taxes, and they determined to pass but a six months’ money Bill. The manner in which these resolutions were carried was significant. Care was taken that the Volunteers should be associated with the measures. Thanks were voted to them for their spirited defence of the Kingdom, the Prime Sergeant, Mr. Hussey Burgh, observing,1, “ The British Ministers had lost one empire by their ignorance 1 and weakness, and had here almost lost another;” adding, “a short money Bill and a resolute people would make them insist on free trade and concluding, “ The English have sowed their laws like serpents’ teeth, and they have sprung up in armed men.” The Minister had no alternative but to accept what was offered. The resolutions induced Lord North to bring in his Bill for free trade to the British plantations, and it received the Royal assent before the recess.

Encouraged by such success, the Volunteers became loud in their demands for further concessions. The newspapers, their organs, declared “that Ireland was an Independent Kingdom, entitled to all the uncontrolled rights and immunities attaching thereto.” These sentiments found an echo throughout the land, and Mr. Grattan, on the meeting of Parliament, moved in a full House, that “ The King’s most excellent Majesty and the Lords and Commons of Ireland, are the only power competent to make laws to bind Ireland.” * The debate on his motion rivalled those of the present day ; the division took place at six o’clock in the morning, when the motion was lost by 133 — 99. In no wise dismayed by defeat,

Mr. Grattan continued to declaim on the wrongs of Ireland. A want of appreciation of the situation was evident on the part of the Crown. A Mutiny Bill sent over, was returned by the English Privy Council altered, by being made perpetual. A Bill relating to sugar was also changed by imposing duty on lump, so as seriously to affect the Irish trade. They were, notwithstanding, passed by the Irish Commons, with many of wffiom, even then, the inspirations of freedom were giving w*ay to the corruptions of place. When the facts became known, petitions to Parliament against their provisions grew and multiplied, and the expressions of popular disapproval became loud and unceasing. Against the manifestation of public feeling the Government was powerless. Lord North had been advised of impending dangers. Lord Weymouth had written the Earl of Buckinghamshire to “ prevent the people arming or assembling he w'as informed in reply, “ It was too late.” To interfere, there must be a British army, and there was not in the country 3,000 soldiers. Buckingham applied for money to arm the militia, and was told “ there was none.” Happy for both countries it wras so ; for in the then temper of the two nations, a conflict must have been inevitable. Be this as it may, between want of Ministerial resolution and want of money, the opportunity was lost, and henceforth the Government was entirely at the mercy of the Volunteers. The Session shortly afterwards terminated. The Earl of Buckinghamshire, in his speech at its close, expressed “ his satisfaction at the conduct of Great Britain in removing restrictions of trade, and at the free and equal intercourse of Ireland in her trade with the Colonies.” During the prorogation, the Earl of Carlisle was appointed Lord Lieutenant, with Mr. Eden as Secretary. Why they were selected it is difficult to conjecture ; they had been the unsuccessful Commissioners to America, to try and arrange the existing grievances, wherein they not only most egregiously failed, but gave rise to much public scandal by their assumed sanction of the attempt of their colleague Johnstone to bribe Reed, aide-de-camp to Washington. They entered on their new duties at a period full of difficulty.

There is a class of questions “which cannot retrograde, cannot remain stationary, but which must needs go on.’* The Volunteer movement afforded an illustration. When Parliament met on the 9th of October, 1781, it did so in the presence of an armed nation. The demands of the Commons were not likely, under such circumstances, to be refused. On the 10th of October, Sir S. Bradstreet, the Recorder of Dublin, moved for leave to bring in the heads of a Habeas Corpus Act. In 1774, a similar motion had been held irreconcilable with the idea of a dependency, and notice was sent to the Irish Council to “transmit the bills no more.’’ Mr. Eden,* the Secretary, now supported it and expressed his approval of a clause which provided for its suspension during rebellion or invasion. The Bill founded on this motion became law.f Though due to the efforts of Parliament before its Independence, it is worthy of remark that the second clause runs thus : — “ To the end that no sheriff*, gaoler, or other officer may pretend ignorance of the import of any such writ, be it enacted by the authority aforesaid That all such writs shall be marked in this manner — ‘ by the Statute of the Twenty-second year of the reign of King George the Third,’ and shall be signed by the person that awards the same.”

On the same day leave was given “ to bring in heads of a Bill for making the Commissions of the Judges of this Kingdom to continue “ quam dm se lene gesserint ,” and that Mr. Forbes, Mr. George Ponsonby, Mr. Yelverton and Sir Samuel Bradstreet do prepare and bring in the same.” On the 80th October, Mr. Forbes brought in the Bill, which was received, read, and committed, and on the 5th of November, a Committee of the whole House considered it. When Mr. Speaker resumed the chair, Mr. Forbes reported “ That they had gone through the heads of the said Bill, paragraph by paragraph, without any amendment,” and it was ordered “ that Mr. Forbes do attend his Excellency the

Lord Lieutenant with the said heads of a Bill, and desire that the same may be transmitted to Great Britain in due form.” The Bill was transmitted. On the 4th February following, the Recorder moved “ that the present salaries of the Judges are inadequate to

*

1 Par. Deb. p. 10. f 21 and 22 Geo. III. c. 11.

the dignity of their station." Mr. Grattan then complained “ that the Bill which had passed the House and was sent over to England, to render Judges independent of the Crown during good behaviour, had not been returned.” On the 16th of April, when speaking to the House, Mr. Grattan observed, “ A Judges’ Bill he refrained from mentioning, as he had found it was returned.'

The reason why it had not become law was given by the Chief Secretary on the 30th of May, when Mr. Forbes again moved for leave to introduce the Bill.* “ A Bill had already been sent over to England for the purpose, but was altered, though he had an assurance from the noble Lord now at head of Council not done by him, but he found it altered, and afterwards, by the unaccountable mistake of the Clerk in confounding the transcript with report, it came over in that altered condition." This is sufficient to show that while the Parliament was yet dependent, this important concession had practically been obtained. It afterwards became law,t but not before the Independence was acknowledged.

The difference in the reception given to these measures, which had hitherto been rejected, was obvious.’ On the 11th of December, Mr. Flood moved that Poyning’s Law be considered. The question was discussed, and leave refused by 139 — 67. Thereupon the influence of the Volunteer movement became more fully understood. On the 28th of December, 1781, a meeting was held

« I

at Armagh, of the Southern battalion of the Ulster Regiment of Volunteers, who passed resolutions expressive of their concern at the desertion of the Constitutional rights of the Kingdom by the Irish Parliament. They convened a general meeting of delegates from all the Volunteer Corps of Ulster to take place at Dungannon on the 15th of February following, “ then and there to deliberate on the alarming state of public affairs, and to determine on and publish to their country what may be the result of said meeting." It was intimated that bold steps would be proposed. The concluding resolution was, “ that as it is highly probable the idea of forming brigades will be agitated and considered, the several corps of Volunteers who send delegates to said meeting are requested to vest in them a power to associate with some one of such brigades as may be there formed.” This circular caused dismay at the Castle. The Viceroy consulted Lord Hillsborough as to how such a difficulty was to be overcome. He advised the use of secret service money. Eden replied “ he could take no more from the Irish Treasury without accounting for it.” There was therefore no course open but to submit.