"Wales were not yet invested with the powers of regent in "Great Britain." On the division, 78 were for Mr. Fitzgibbon's amendment, and 119 against it.

The motion was opposed principally on the ground of its being considered as the foundation of a vote of censure on the lord lieutenant; and after a long debate, the house divided; for the question 130, against it 71.

Captain Burgh also proposed as an amendment, to add the following words to the original resolution, " inasmuch as the "said lords and commons had proceeded to appoint his royal "highness, &c. illegally and unconstitutionally," which amendment was negatived without a division.

On the 25th Mr. Monk Mason reported from the committee of supply, that on the 25th of March, 1788, the debt of the nation was 2,240,204/. 14s. 8d.; and when the resolution was read, that provided for the national debt, the annuities, and establishments, Mr. Grattan moved an amendment by inserting the words "two months, ending on the 25th of May, 1789. Upon this occasion, Mr. Brownlow, observed (as the fact was) that he was no party man, neither had he any ends to answer contrary to the welfare of the country, yet he thought it right to proceed with caution: and as it had been shewn that they had not time to investigate the accounts, that, in his mind, was sufficient ground for the amendment.

The lord lieutenant had thought proper to refuse transmitting the address of the two houses to the Prince of Wales; this had given cause for some difference and animadversion between his excellency and the two houses; the truth was, his excellency was at variance with the two houses, and it behoved them to take care of themselves. He should never forget the affair of Lord Townshend, who prorogued the parliament, and protested against their proceedings, for the commons exercising a right of originating bills of supply; a right in which lay the very essence of all their privileges. What Lord Townshend had done, Lord Buckingham might do, if they passed the supply for a year; nay he might, and perhaps would dissolve them, and then how could they look at their constituents, who would naturally say, you have deserved all this; for when we put our purse in your hands, you very foolishly let go the strings.

Mr. Griffith considered the two houses committed against, and in a state of warfare with the chief governor, and he could expect nothing less than a dissolution of parliament if the supplies were once granted for a year.

The attorney-general admitted, that (Mr. Brownlow) had fairly and openly avowed his reason for supporting a short money bill; it was to hinder the lord lieutenant from exercis

ing an undoubted right of proroguing or dissolving parliament. He recollected the event referred to by the right honourable gentleman. He recollected Lord Townshend's proroguing the parliament; and he recollected when next they met, they voted him an address of thanks, which address cost the nation half a million of money. He hoped to God he should never again see such effects from party. He hoped to God he should never again see half a million of the people's money employed to procure an address from their representatives; he had ever endeavoured to defend the people, and ever should oppose measures, which might lead to an address that would cost them half a million.*

This debate upon Mr. Grattan's motion for a short money bill, most intimately affects a point of modern Irish history beyond any other necessary for the annalist to ascertain. No man can be ignorant of the loud and frequent clamour that has been raised, particularly within these last 20 years, against the corruption and venality of the Irish government and parliament, to the account of which, many have laid an uniform system of oppression, coercion, and cruelty that have occasioned, rather than checked the late outrages and calamities of the nation. Whilst others have founded the necessity of union in the incorrigible inveteracy of these very evils. It will be impossible to form a right judgment upon this leading point, until certain facts are admitted or disproved. The author's duty is to supply his reader with the best evidence the nature of the case admits of. The singular coincidence of a falling and rising power acting at one time upon a body of 300 men, at no time famed for rigid inflexibility of principle, a majority made up chiefly of deserters from habits of ease and conveniency, to a promising standard of lucrative principle, a race of ingratitude for past and avidity for future favours, certainly produced an unprecedented opportunity for extracting truths, which might otherwise have lain for centuries smothered under the concordatum of interest, secrecy and combination. The Irish parliamentary debates taken, collected, and arranged by Mr. Giffard, are the chief resource a stranger has for matter upon the latter history of Ireland from the year 1781. If any bias can be supposed to have affected his pen, it will be concluded to have been on the part of govern ment. This gentleman in the outset of volunteering was so conspicuously prominent in the cause of freedom, as to have attracted the notice and acquir ed the confidence, esteem, and intimacy of the Duke of Leinster: at that time his family was larger than his means, and the favours of his grace were more flattering than lucrative. His talents which were above mediocrity were noticed by government, and he was engaged at a handsome salary to report. for the castle, and upon trial of his ability and fidelity to his employers was rewarded by a place in the customs. We have before remarked, that Lord Townshend had, at a very heavy expence to the nation, broken up an aristocraey, that before his time had monopolized the whole power of the commons and regularly bargained for terms with every new lieutenant for managing the House of Commons. Mr. Fitzgibbon (and no man knew better), now admitted, that this manœuvre cost the nation upwards of balf a million : that is, that he had paid or granted so much to purchase that majority in parliament, by which he governed to the end of his administration. We further learn from Mr. Giffard's report of this debate, that Mr. Bushe observed, from what his right honourable friend (Mr. Fitzgibbon), had said, he almost imagined he intended to vote on the other side: for when he had said, that one prorogation and address had cost the nation half a million, he did not suppose he would run the risk of another. That prorogation had taken place for want of a short money-bill, which was the best reason against granting a long one on the present occasion: and as that prorogation cost half a million, as every article had

The committee of the two houses of parliament arrived inLondon on the 25th of February, 1789, and the day following presented their address to the Prince of Wales at Carltonhouse. As the convalescent state of his majesty's health was at that time apparent, his royal highness, after returning his warmest thanks for the address, and expressing the satisfaction he received from the proof it afforded of their loyal and affectionate attachment to the person and government of the king, acquainted them with the fortunate change that had taken place. Within a few days, he hoped, that the joyful event of his majesty's resuming his government, would enable him to give them at final answer, and make it only necessary for him to repeat those sentiments of gratitude and affection to the loyal and generous people of Ireland, which he felt indelibly imprinted on his heart.*

"

risen, perhaps it would not be unreasonable to suppose a prorogation at the present day might cost a whole million, which expence might be cut off by a short money-bill. It is to be observed, that Mr. Bushe had some time before quitted the ranks of patriotism, and accepted a place under government. I And in another report of this debate," that Mr. George Ponsonby rose to express his indignation at the idea of placing parliament in the power of the viceroy: he said, that it had already been stated, that a similar measure had, on a former occasion, lost that country half a million of money, by which a corrupt parliament had been laid prostrate at the feet of the viceroy. Were "they that House of Commons? Would half a million, or a whole million, "tempt them to swerve from the duty to their country," (Dublin Evening Packet, 25th February, 1789). Of this avowal, or boast, or taunt, or threat of parliamentary venality from the mouth of the attorney-general, we have this further evidence from Mr. Grattan, (in his answer to Lord Clare's speech, Dub. 1800. p. 18). "Half a million, or more, was expended some years ago to "break an opposition; the same, or a greater sum may be necessary now: so "said the principal servant of the crown. The house heard him: I heard "him he said it standing on his legs to an astonished and an indignant nation; "and he said it in the most extensive sense of bribery and corruption. The "threat was proceeded on; the peerage was sold; the caitiffs of corruption "were every where; in the lobby, in the street, on the steps, and at the door of "every parliamentary leader, whose thresholds were worn by the members of "the then administration, offering titles to some, amnesty to others, and corruption to all."

:

The following was the answer of his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales.

"MY LORDS AND GENTLEMEN,

"The address from the lords spiritual and temporal, and commons of Ireland, which you have presented to me, demands my warmest and earliest thanks. If any thing could add to the esteem and affection I "have for the people of Ireland, it would be the loyal and affectionate attachment to the person and government of the king, my father, manifested in the "address of the two houses.

"What they have done, and their manner of doing it, is a new proof of "their undiminished duty to his majesty, of their uniform attachment to "the house of Brunswick, and their constant attention to maintain inviolate "the concord and connection between the kingdoms of Great Britain and Ireland, so indispensably necessary to the prosperity, the happiness, and the liberties of both.

On the 24th of February, his majesty's disorder had taken so favourable a turn, that the chancellor informed the British House of Peers, that he had on that day attended his majesty by his express command, and had found him perfectly recovered. On the 2d of March, the speaker of the House of Commons in Ireland communicated to the house the letter which he had received from the delegates, with the Prince's answer to their address, which were ordered to be entered on the journals. The happy turn in his majesty's health worked a very happy change in the marshalling of the House of Commons. As the late gloomy prospect of a change in the Irish administration, had driven many gentlemen to the opposition benches, Mr. Grattan was willing to avail himself of the earliest fruits of their conversion: accordingly, on the 3d of March, 1789, he offered to the house a resolution which he thought absolutely necessary, from a transaction that had lately taken place. He thought it necessary to call the attention of the house to certain principles, which the gentlemen, with whom he had generally the honour to coincide, considered as the indispensable condition, without which no government could expect their support, and which the present government had resisted.

The first was a reform of the police: at present the institution could only be considered as a scheme of patronage to the Castle, and corruption to the city; a scheme which had failed to answer the end of preserving public peace, but had fully succeeded in extending the influence of the Castle.*

It had been thrown out on a former occasion, when he had intimated his intention of reforming the police, that the bill to be proposed would be as bad as that at present existing; but that assertion was not founded in truth. The bill, which he

"If, in conveying my grateful sentiments on their conduct, in relation to the "king, my father, and to the inseparable interest of the two kingdoms, I find "it impossible to express adequately my feelings on what relates to myself, I "trust you will not be the less disposed to believe, that I have an understand"ing to comprehend the value of what they have done, a heart that must re"member, and principles that will not suffer me to abuse their confidence.

"But the fortunate change which has taken place in the circumstance, which gave occasion to the address agreed to by the lords and commons of Ireland, "induces me to delay, for a few days, giving a final answer; trusting, that the "joyful event of his majesty's resuming the personal exercise of his royal au"thority, may then render it only necessary for me to repeat those sentiments "of gratitude and affection to the loyal and generous people of Ireland, which "feel indelibly imprinted on my heart."

* In this debate, Mr. Curran, perceiving that the opposite side of the house regained their spirits and deserters, complimented the prime serjeant on the recovery of his tongue: what the distress and depression of his friend and patron had not been able to produce, his return to prosperity had effected: the learned member was no longer tongue tied: mute during his disgrace, he was clamorous on his elevation. 9 Parl. Debates, p. 265.

would introduce, was intended to rescue the corporation of the city out of the court, and to make them responsible to the public for their conduct; to restore the peace and liberty of the city; and to guard against any abuse of power in those, to whom the guardianship of that peace and liberty should be committed. This bill had in the last session been stated as necessary, but had been resisted by Lord Buckingham's government; but it should now be soon introduced.

Another principle much desired, was to restrain the abuse of pensions by a bill similar to that of Great Britain. That principle, he said, Lord Buckingham had resisted, and his resistance to it was one great cause of his opposing his government. To this hewould add another principle, the restraining revenue officers from voting at elections: this, he observed, was a principle of the British parliament, and it was certainly more necessary in Ireland, from what had lately taken place, where, by a certain union of family interests, countries had become boroughs, and those boroughs had become private property.

But the principle to which he begged to call the immediate attention of the house was, that of preventing the great offices of the state from being given to absentees: that was a principle admitted by all to be founded in national right, purchased by liberal compensation, and every departure from it must be considered as a slight to the nobility and gentry of Ireland, who certainly were better entitled to the places of honour and trust in their own country, than any absentee could possibly be; but besides the slight shewn to the nobility and gentry of Ireland, by bestowing places of honour, of profit, and of trust on absentees, the draft of money from this country, the institution of deputies (a second establishment unnecessary, were the principals to reside), the double influence arising from this raised the abuse into an enormous grievance.

He said, after the nation had recovered its liberty, one of the first objects was to bring home the great offices of the state: these had been taken away in an unjust manner, and in violation of native right, when the country was under oppression. He did not mean to enter into a question, whether too much was paid for bringing home great employments; he would not dispute the price, as it was the purchase of a principle; but the principle being once established, that it was wise and honoura ble in the nation to purchase home the great offices of the state: and this having been actually reduced to practice in instances of the chancellorship of the exchequer, the vice-treasurership, the clerk of the crown and hanaper, &c. it followed as a necessary consequence, that the granting away again great places to absentees, must be highly improper, and a gross violation of the * principle purchased by the nation.