}

Proteftant parliament had been convened in the year 1692, fo little fatisfied with it was the parliament of England, that they continued their legislative encroachments upon Ireland, by enacting whatever laws they thought proper for regulating and fettling the legal, civil, military, and ecclefiaftical departments in Ireland, for checking their commerce and disposing of their property. The Roman Catholics being fhut out of parliament, either withdrew or were driven out of the field of politics. Their submissive forbearance under a moft fevere extenfion of the penal code during the present and fubfequent reign, is the fingle point relating to them which has arrested the notice of any hiftorian of that day. This bulk of the nation had a phyfical, not a political exiftence; nor were they ever brought under the confideration of the government, but as objects of fome new rigor or feverity.

In the higher orders, the progrefs of the Reformation had latterly been much more rapidly extended than formerly. And the English who were now domiciliated in Ireland, were, from plantations, forfeitures, and other caufes, furprizingly multiplied. These two defcriptions of perfons, whose ultimate aim in the former reigns had been to acquire an afcendancy over the old native Catholic intereft of the country, now began to confider themselves an independent Irish interest: and although the Revolution did not let in the Irish nation immediately to thofe civil rights and liberties which it imparted or fecured to England, yet it enkindled in those who gave into it, a fpirit of freedom, which difpofed them to infift upon the conftitutional rights of Irishmen.

In no fenfe whatever did the Revolution of 1688 open to Ireland any of thofe conftiutional bleffings which were fo ftrongly afferted by it in England. The fupporters of the Whig intereft in Ireland, differed from those who forwarded the Revolution in England, in principle, in action, and in views. The Irith Whigs of that day were the relics of the Oliverian party, avowing no other principle than that of retaining the monopoly of the power of the few, over the bulk of the nation; acting upon them with arbitrary severity, in order to rivet the whole native power of the country in difgraceful and everlasting thraldom. So deeply rooted was this pfeudo Whiggifm of 1649, implanted in most of the Irish Protestants of that day, that the lapse of more than a century has not eradicated it. It will be the candid duty of the hiftorian, to trace its progrefs and operation upon

the

the nation at large, and to difcriminate between their political conduct towards their country, and that of another Proteftant party, who have from time to time endeavoured to fet up the genuine principles of the English Revolution, against the fyftematic abuse of them by their Proteftant opponents in Ireland.* It has been obferved by a late refpectable hiftorian,† that "the perfons whom the king appointed lords juftices, difcovered an arbitrary spirit, and great partiality in the difpenfation of juftice: the trial of crimes was often conducted in a fummary way, and without regard to the "effential forms of law: evidence was fuppreffed with the connivance of the judges, the principal tranfgreffors were acquitted, whilft those who acted "under their direction and influence, fuffered the extreme vengeance of "the laws. But in no cafe did the management of the juftices appear more iniquitous and oppreffive than in regard to the Irish forfeitures. The "moft beneficial leafes were not only retained for themselves and their friends, but in the competition for eftates and farms, the lowest bidders were fometimes preferred, which unavoidably led to the fufpicion of "fecret compenfation being made them for flagrant breach of trust. These "misdemeanours and the grievances occafioned by them, produced complaints and difaffections, which were made the ground of fpecific charges, prefented to the legislature in both kingdoms. Enquiries were inftituted; important discoveries were made; but the extreme intricacy and tediouf"nefs of this bufinefs, the private concerns of the parties in England, and "the industry of powerful individuals, who were not themselves free from "all acceffion to the guilt alledged, prevented any effectual redrefs of public "abuses, and the punishment of ftate delinquents."

66

Lord Sydney having been created lord lieutenant, immediately iffued writs and convened a parliament; the primary object of which was to raise supplies to discharge the debts contracted during the war. There had been no parliament in Ireland, except that which fat under James, for the last twentyfix years and although the parliament of England had undertaken to

*This is the important clue that can alone lead the reader through the intricate mazes of hiftorical mifrepresentation, to a fair unbiaffed judgment and an unclouded view of the present state of Ireland. Out of this ground of difference arifes the modern diftinction between the true conftitutional Whig and Orangeman of Ireland, to which, in the proper time and order, I must draw the attention of my reader.

+ Sommers's Hiftory, 1 vol. p. 486.

legiflate

legiflate for Ireland on the most important matters of ftate, yet had it not proceeded to the extent of raifing money directly upon the people of Ireland. The Irish parliament could not be infenfible of the encroachments made on their independence; they felt their confequence, and manifested by their conduct their refentment of these measures of government. The commons confented to grant a fum not exceeding 70,000l. pleading the inability of the people from the calamities of the late wars to encrease the grant. They confidered it to be their indifputable right to determine in the first instance both the fum and the manner of raifing every fupply granted to the crown. In violation of this privilege, two money bills, which had not originated with them, were tranfmitted from England, and laid before the House of Commons. In refentment of this encroachment upon their privileges, they rejected one of them, and from the extreme urgency of the cafe alone they confented to pafs the other; but not without having entered very pointed refolutions upon their journals in fupport of their rights.* His excellency was highly enraged at these refolutions, and in his speech, upon proroguing the parliament, he feverely reprimanded them for having, in contravention of the design of their meeting, undutifully and ungratefully invaded their

* 2 Journ. 28. "21ft of October, 1692. Refolved, that it was, and is the fole and undoubted "right of the commons of Ireland, in parliament affembled, to prepare and refolve the ways and means of raising money. Refolved, that it was, and is the undoubted right of the commons to prepare heads of bills for raifing money. Refolved, that notwithstanding the aforefaid rights of "the commons, this houfe doth think fit, upon confideration of the present exigencies of affairs, "and the public neceflity of fpeedily raifing a fupply for their majefties, to order that a bill, tranf"mitted out of England, intituled, An Act for an additional Duty of Excise upon Beer, Ale, and "other Liquors, be now read: whereupon the said bill was read the first time, and ordered a fecond "reading to morrow morning at 10 o'clock. Refolved, nemine contradicente, that the receiving cr reading of the faid bill, fo tranfmitted as aforefaid, be not drawn into precedent hereafter. 28th " of October, 1692. A motion being made, and the queftion being put, that a bill now on the "table, intituled, An Act for granting to their Majefties certain Duties for one Year, might be "read, it paffed in the negative. Refolved, that the faid bill be rejected by this houfe. Refolved, "that it be entered in the Journal of this houfe, that the reason why the faid bill was rejected, is, "that the fame had not its rife in this houfe." On the 3d of November, 1692, the lord lieutenant, in a very angry speech, prorogued the parliament, in which he feverely reprobated these refolutions, and required the clerk to enter his proteft (quod vide in Appendix, No. L.) against them, that it might remain as a vindication of their majefties prerogatives and the right of the crown of England in these particulars to future ages. After two prorogations, this parliament was diffolved on the 5th of September, 1693.

majesties

majefties prerogative. The commons requested permiffion to fend commiffioners to England, in order to lay a full and impartial statement of their conduct before their majefties; when they were tauntingly affured by the lord lieutenant, that they might go to England to beg their majefties pardon for their feditious and riotous affemblies. The lord lieutenant in juftification of his conduct procured the opinion of the judges against the right, which the commons claimed of having money bills originate with them. This unexpected and ungracious prorogation created general difcontent: several bills of importance remained to be perfected, feveral grievances to be redreffed. Sydney became unpopular; and government found it prudent to recal him.

Upon the removal of Lord Sydney, the government was vested in three juftices, Lord Capel, Sir Cyril Wyche, and Mr. Duncombe. Difference of principle difunited their government, which thortly after was concentered in Lord Capel, as lord deputy. He beft knew the difpofition and wishes of the English cabinet, and warmly efpoufed the intereft of the English fettlers, and as eagerly oppofed the claims of the Irifh under the articles of Limerick. Sir Cyril Wyche and Mr. Duncombe, regardless of court favor, fought impartially to give the full effect to the articles of Limerick, upon which the court party and the Proteftants in general, looked with a jealous eye, as prejudicial to their intereft. The inflexibility of Wyche and Duncombe foon worked their removal: and the accommodating zeal of Capel enabled him to difplace all thofe, who thwarted his defigns. Several changes were made in the administration, and a new parliament was convened.

The bufinefs of this feffion was at firft undisturbed, and the fupplies which had been required, were quietly granted. Several new penal statutes were enacted against the Catholics;* fome of which were in direct contravention to the articles of Limerick. Yet a law was made in this parliament for the confirmation of these very articles;† but which in fact was an abridge

* Such were, An Act to restrain foreign Education, 4 William and Mary c. iv. An Act for the better Securing the Government by difarming Papists, 4 William and Mary c. v.-An Act for banishing all Papifts exercifing any Ecclefiaftical Jurifdiction, and all regulars of the Popish Clergy out of the Kingdom, 9 William III. c. i. An Act to prevent Protestants intermarrying with Papists, 9 William c. iii. An Act to prevent Papifts being Solicitors, 9 William c. xiii.

† An Act for the Confirmation of Articles, made at the Surrender of the City of Limerick, 9 William III. c. ii.

up

ment rather than a confirmation of them in feveral inftances.* Notwithftanding the tide of courtly prejudice against the tendency and obfervance of these articles, Sir Charles Porter, the chancellor, nobly dared to stand in fupport of them. This conduct of the chancellor brought upon him the whole vengeance of the caftle. The lord deputy is reported, with the affiftance of his friends and creatures, to have procured a charge to be fabricated against him, by which he was accufed of defigns hoftile to government. In fupport of the accufation, a motion was made in the Houfe of Commons, but on being heard in his own juftification, he was most honourably acquitted.

However glorious in the caufe of civil freedom were the exertions of our ancestors at the revolution, yet the unbiaffed mind muft neceffarily doubt the purity of their patriotifm, when it contemplates the English parliament and government oppofing that very liberty in Ireland, which they so zealously supported in England. The fermentation between England and Ireland became alarming. It was no longer a contest between a conqueror and an oppreffed people, reclaiming their natural, civil, or religious rights. The bulk of the nation was fo difpirited and reduced under their fufferings, that their feeble moans were fcarcely heard on their own fhores, much lefs across St. George's Channel: they exifted only as the paffive objects of perfecution. The conflict was with that very Proteftant afcendancy in Ireland, which it had been the primary policy of the English cabinet for the laft century to establish, and which now only had been effectually accomplished. It was impoffible that civil liberty fhould make the progrefs it did in England, and that Ireland should be more than infenfible of its bleffings. The Irish legiflature was called upon, to furrender and renounce those very rights, which the English parliament had fo glorioufly afferted. Mr. Molyneux, one of the members for the univerfity of Dublin, a very popular character, was the moft forward in the caufe of Irish patriotifm. In

* Whilst this bill was pending, a petition was prefented by Mr. Cufac and fome few, on behalf of themselves and others, comprised in the articles of Limerick, fetting forth that in the bill there were several clauses, that would fruftrate the petitioners of the benefit of the fame: and if passed into a law, would turn to the ruin of fome, and the prejudice of all perfons entitled to the benefit of the faid articles, and praying to be heard by counfel to the faid matters: which having been prefented and read, it was unanimously refolved, that the said petition fhould be rejected. 2 Journ. Com. p. 194.