Page images
PDF
EPUB

mentioned, against such persons who were liable to the same; and to explain and amend an act made in the twenty-seventh year of his majesty's reign, intitled, "An act to enable all ec"clesiastical persons and bodies, rectors, vicars and curates, "and impropriators, and those deriving by, from, or under "them, to recover a just compensation for the tithes withheld "from them in the year 1786, in the several counties therein "mentioned, against such persons who were liable to the same." The subject of tithes took up the principal attention of the nation, both within and without the parliament, during the first months of the year 1787. The speech, which Mr. Grattan delivered upon this delicate and important subject, in the House of Commons, on the 14th of February, 1787, made such a sensa tion in the country, that it was published with a very spirited preface, and ran through four editions in less than a month: upon a division, however, in the house, 49 only voted for Mr. Grattan's motion against 121, which was for this reasonable proposition, viz. that a committee should be appointed to enquire, whether any just cause of discontent existed amongst the people of the province of Munster, or of the counties of Kilkenny or Carlow, on account of tithe, or the collection of tithes ; and if any, to report the same, together with their opinion thereupon.*

The new viceroy had not been inactive in strengthening the ministerial party in parliament. In several instances he had been successful. What communications he made to his converts is not to be now known: but it was a general complaint, that his excellency would not condescend to make known, even to his friends, the plan or even principles of his administration.† As far indeed, as could be collected from some of his measures,

* 8 Par. Deb. p. 192. As no alteration in the system of tithes in Ireland has taken place since Mr. Grattan delivered his wonderful speech upon that subject, it will be found in the Appendix, No. LXXVIII for the instruction of those who interest themselves about it. It is a master-piece of eloquence and reasoning on that interesting subject.

Amongst other proselytes, that went over to the new viceroy was Mr. Longfield, who had considerable parliamentary interest; he and the friends he introduced had uniformly opposed the late administration: amongst these was Mr. Curran, who having been brought into parliament by Mr. Longfield, could not bend his principles to the pliancy of his friend, or take a subordinate part in supporting an administration, whose intended measures were made a secret of: he therefore purchased a seat in a vacant borough, and offered it to Mr. Longfield for any person, whose principles were at his command. Thus did Mr. Curran rteain his seat and parliamentary independence: and Mr. Longfield was enabled to fulfil his engagements with the minister, for his own and his dependant's votes in parliament. Two exceptions from the system of the late administration were prominently conspicuous, in that of the Marquis of Buckingham, neither of which went far in encreasing his popula rity. The first was a rigid inspection into all the subaltern offices of the fiscal departments of government: and the other a rigorous economical reform throughout the culinary and other household departments of the castle.

it was generally concluded, that the whole system of the late administration was intended to be followed up: consequently the same system of opposition was adhered to. Notwithstand

ing, therefore, the new lord lieutenant's œconomical attack upon the subaltern officers of the revenue, the gentlemen of the opposition did not give his excellency credit for any economical reform in the original dispensation of the public money. Mr. Forbes, on the 29th of January 1788 desired, that a list of the pensions granted since the last session of parliament might be read. He then objected to a pension of 1000l. to James Brown, Esq. the late prime serjeant, on the principle only of its being granted to a member of the house during pleasure. He remarked, that by the English act for further securing the liberties of the subject, it was provided, that after the accession of the present family to the throne, no pensioner during pleasure, should sit or vote in the House of Commons. The people of Ireland had a right to participate with the inhabitants of Great Britain, in all the benefits and privileges of that act, and the Bill of Rights. He moved, "that this pension was a misapplication of the revenue." He also on the same day moved, that the pension of 640l. to Thomas Higinbotham for life, adding, that he was astonished that so large a portion of the public money should be disposed of without the knowledge or privity of the chancellor of the exchequer; and that for such a transaction all the servants of the crown should deny any responsibility; he then objected to a pension of 1200l. per annum to Robert Ashwood, for the life of his son, and also two other pensions of 300%. each, and one of 2004. to the same person, for the lives of his other children. He stated, that a pension of 2000. per annum had been granted in the year 1755, for the life of Frederick Robinson; that the family of Robinson had lately sold that pension to Mr. Ashworth, and had influence with government sufficient to prevail on the minister to change the life in the grant, and to insert the lives of the young children of Mr. Ashworth, in the place of Mr. Robinson: that this management was now become a frequent practice, and if not restrained, must tend to perpetuate the burdens on the establishment, and thereby a grant of a pension for life, would operate as a lease for lives, with a covenant for perpetual renewal. He therefore moved, "that the above pension was an improvident disposition of the "revenue." He then expressed his concern, that measures in their nature so highly exceptionable should receive the sanction of the new administration. However, all his motions were negatived without a division.

Mr. Forbes made also several unsuccessful motions for reducing the public expence by discontinuing the government allowances of country houses for some of their officers, and.town

houses for most servants of the crown. On this occasion he observed, without being contradicted, that there were few members upon or in the vicinity of the treasury bench, the rents of whose houses were not charged on the public accounts. This gentleman on making these several motions had very pointedly remarked, that as he had in common with most persons, in and out of parliament, conceived strong expectations of great reform in point of public expence, to be effected by the new administration, it was the duty of every member of that house to lend his assistance to the minister, to enable him to attain that desirable object. Nothing could check the unabating ardour and perseverance of Mr. Forbes. He had early in the session given the minister notice of his intention to bring in a bill to disable any person from being chosen a member of, or from sitting or voting in the house of commons, who had any pension during pleasure, or for any number of years, from, or held any office or place of profit created after a certain time, under the crown, and to limit the amount of pensions: but having received no encouragement from him, he brought in his bill unsupported by the secretary, which having been received and read a first time, the chancellor of the exchequer moved, that it should be read a second time on the 1st of August, alleging, that the subject had often been before the house and uniformly rejected.

Mr. Conolly said, neither the situation of the country, nor that of the pension list, were the same they were when this bill had formerly been rejected; since that time the pensions had increased, were increasing, and ought to be diminished; if government were in earnest in their professions of economy, they would let the bill go fairly forward to discussion; if they resisted the bill, he never would believe their professions sincere. They had a numerous and rising royal family; to their support the country would be proud to contribute. England had many worthy old servants, both civil and military; to those men they should not grudge a subsistence, but to have 100,000/ a year squandered on the unworthy, or bestowed as the reward of corruption, was a grievance the country could not bear; and if the minister would agree with parliament to set limits to that profusion, he should find himself sit much easier in the seat of government, than if he should resist it.

Mr. secretary Fitzherbert said, he had declined taking a part in support of the bill for many reasons; one was, that he thought it in much abler hands: another, that the present time did not demand it. The house lad, he observed, given credit to the present government for their intentions of economy, intentions to which they would most rigidly adhere. Suppose then, said he, the bill should pass, what construction would such a measure bear? Would it not be as if the house should say, we have great

confidence in the present government, we are convinced of their integrity, and we believe they will pursue the interest of the kingdom; we therefore lay them under restrictions, which we never imposed on any other government. Then supposing his concurrence in the bill, what construction would his conduct wear? Would it not be saying this, you have expressed great confidence in government, but I who know them better, desire you not to trust them.

Sir, the prerogative of the crown to bestow marks of approbation upon such subjects as have distinguished themselves by their merits, was one of its dearest rights.*

The question, upon the adjournment, was carried by a majority of 103 against 40.

The discontent of the people out of doors, was great: yet the ministry appeared to set it at defiance. Mr. Hartley presented a petition from the inhabitants of Dublin and the liberties thereof paying taxes, to be heard by council against the police bill, which was signed by 7000 and upwards. But the attorney general said, he should be extremely sorry, that there should be 7000 seditious persons existing in the kingdom any where, but on paper. It was he said, admitted by all, that the police bill wanted amendment; and a bill was then before parliament to explain and amend that act. Did the petitioners mean to petition against the bill for amending that act, of which they so much complained.

The most violent attack upon the minister, during this session of parliament, was made on the 29th of February, when Mr. Forbes moved his address to the crown, in order, at least, to leave to posterity, on the face of their journals the grievances, under which the people laboured in the year 1788. He prefaced his motion by a very interesting speech founded on facts, to be collected from the journals of the house, or from authentic documents then lying on the table. He travelled over much of his former arguments against the prodigality of the late administration, which had encreased the pension list by 26,000l. He took that opportunity of giving notice, that he meant next ses

In this debate Mr. Dennis Browne, rather against order, referred to an assertion of the lord lieutenant in conversation, that he had rather put his right hand into the fire, than grant a pension to any person, which every honest man should not approve of. Sir Henry Cavendish, though he declared his unqualified devotion to that administration, yet remarked, that doubling the pensions of members might be avoided, "for," said he, " suppose it ap "pears, that 4001. a year are annexed to the name of a member of this house, "and that no particular cause could be assigned for the grant, may it not be "conjectured, that it was made for his service in that house, and if so, an ad"ditional pension is unneccssry, for he that has 4007. a year for his vote, will "not refuse voting though he were to be refused 400/. a year more." 8 Par. Deb. p. 355.

sion to offer a bill to that house for the purpose of creating a responsibility in the ministers of Ireland, for the application of the revenue of that kingdom: The only authority, under which the vice treasurer then paid any money, was a king's letter, countersigned by the commissioners of the English treasury. He adverted with marked censure, to the addition of 2,000l. to the salary of the secretary in the late administration, and to the large sums expended in the purchase and embellishment of his house in the Phenix Park, and to the present intent of granting a pension of 2,000l. to that very secretary for life :* which was establishing a most mischievous precedent for such grants to every future secretary. He was sorry to hear the ostensible minister avail himself of the same argument, which his predecessors had successfully used for the last ten years in resisting every attack upon the pension list. He then enlarged upon the pernicious consequences of placing implicit confidence in administration; and supported his thesis by the following historical illustrations.

From the year 1773 to 1776, confidence in the administra tion of that day had cost this nation 100,000/. in new taxes, and 440,000 raised by life annuities. In 1778, confidence in the administration cost 300,000l. in life annuities; a sum granted for the purpose of defence, and which produced on an alarm of invasion, one troop of horse, and half a company of invalids. In 1779 the then secretary, for the purpose of opposing a measure, for relief against the abuses of the pension list, read in this house an extract of a letter from the secretary of state in England, expressive of the determination of the then English ministry, not to increase the pension list; confidence was placed in the administration of the day, and it cost the country 13,000%. in new pensions, granted by the same secretary. In April 1782, on the arrival of the principal of the new administration, confidence, in the first instance, was neither asked nor granted; certain measures were proposed by the commons and the people, they were granted, and the country was emancipated. In 1785, confidence in the administration of that day, cost Ireland 140,000 new taxes to equalize the income and expenditure; but the grant produced 180,000l. excess of expences. The same confidence cost 20,000l. per annum for a police establishment, which it had been proved at their bar contributed to the violation, instead of the preservation of the peace of the metropolis.

This was intended to be given for the life of the Duke of Bolton. For the secretary having married a lady, to whom the bulk of the Bolton estate had been left in default of issue male of that Duke, he would cease, upon the accession of her fortune, to stand in need of that pension. He has for some years been in that possession, and was created Baron Bolton in 1797.

† 8 Par. Deb. p. 357.

« PreviousContinue »