any case, where the country was to be benefited: he should be always happy to give him the way; let the country receive the benefit, and his be the applause.

On the 3d of February Mr. George Ponsonby made his promised motion, which was seconded by Mr. Grattan to the following effect: that a select committee be appointed, consist ing of members of that house not holding any employment, or enjoying any pension under the crown, to examine whether any, or what advantages have arisen to this kingdom from the appointment of two additional commissioners of the revenue; from the separation of the board of stamps and accounts; from the granting 5004. a year, additional salary to the surveyor of the ordnance; 250l. a year additional salary to the principal storekeeper of the ordnance; 250l. a year to the clerk of the ordnance; 200l. a year additional salary to the clerk of the delivery of the ordnance; 600l. a year pension to General Hale, in lieu of his resigning his employment of lieutenant general of the ordnance, in order to facilitate the succession of the present possessor: 400l. a year additional salary to the clerk of the pipe; 400. a year additional salary to the customer of Kinsale; and 150l. a year additional salary to the barrack master of Dublin; and that they do report their opinion thereon to the house.

This was met by a motion for adjournment; and after a long and warm contest, ended in the first division of the session; in which there were 72 against, and 132 for the adjournment. Immediately before the division, Mr. G. Ponsonby remarked, that it was evident, the administration did not mean to meet the questions of difference between them by reasoning and agreement, but by that very corruption and influence the minority were warring against, namely, dead majorities. On the 7th of February, Mr. Grattan moved a string of resolutions relative to the revenue, out of which he concluded, that upon a fair average since the year 1785, when the new taxes were granted, the increase of the revenue had given' to government the annual increase of 153,000l. and that government had exceeded her own estimates, on the faith of which the new taxes had been granted, in the annual sum of 115,000l.; from whence he established these deductions; that the people had kept faith with government, and that government had broken faith with the people. The chancellor of the exchequer and Mr. Monk Mason, contended, that the statements were unfairly made by Mr. Grattan: and that whatever increases had been made in the annual expenditure, were occasioned by parliament, and not by government. The resolutions were negatived without a division.

*On the next day Mr. Grattan moved the following resolutions...." That a select committee be appointed to enquire in "the most solemn manner, whether the late or present admi“nistration have entered into any corrupt agreement with any 66 person or persons, to recommend such person or persons to "his majesty, for the purpose of being created peers of this "kingdom, in consideration of their paying certain sums of "money, to be laid out in the purchase of seats for members 66 to serve in parliament, contrary to the rights of the people, "inconsistent with the independence of parliament, and in direct "violation of the fundamental laws of the land."

It was seconded by Mr. Curran : much strength of oratory was employed in support of the motion; but it shared the usual fate of rejection by a majority of 135 to 85. And in order to give all possible eclat to this charge of selling the peerage, and prostituting the price thereof to the purchase of seats in the House of Commons, Mr. Curran moved the following resolution, in which he was seconded by Mr. Grattan, viz. “That "a committee be appointed, consisting of members of both "houses of parliament, who do not hold any employment, or "enjoy any pension under the crown, to enquire in the most "solein manner, whether the late or present administration "have directly or indirectly, entered into any corrupt agree"ment with any person or persons, to recommend such per"son or persons to his majesty, for the purpose of being created peers of this kingdom, in consideration of their paying "certain sums of money, to be laid out in the purchase of seats "for members to serve in parliament, contrary to the rights "of the people, inconsistent with the independence of par"liament, and in direct violation of the fundamental laws of "the land."

The ministerial members on all these occasions loudly complained of the reiteration of the old charges even without new arguments to support them; they strongly insisted that no particular facts were alleged, much less proved; and that general fame, surmise and assertion, were no grounds for parliamentary impeachments, or any other solemn proceedings in that house. Mr. Grattan, before answering the objections advanced against

In this debate, Mr. Denis Brown, a very staunch supporter of the administration, amongst other matters observed, (and no answer was attempted to be given to the observation) that when the gentlemen on the opposite side of the house were in confidence and acted with government under Lord Northington, a certain person was ennobled, and returned two Castle secretaries into that house in part payment of his honour. How could those virtuous gentlemen know of such a transaction, and not follow it up with an impeachment ? He defied contradiction: but wondered, that any men representing peers in that house, or set in purchased seats, should be so forward to agitate that question. 11 Parl. Debates, p. 162.

the motion, adverted to the general dull and empty declamation uttered by the advocates of a corrupt government against the defenders of an injured people.

Four times had those advocates told them, they had brought this grievance forth, as if grievances were only to be matter of public debate when they were matters of novelty; or as if grievances were trading questions for a party or a person to press, to sell and to abandon; or as if they came thither to act farces to please the appetite of the public, and did not sit there to persevere in the redress of grievances, pledged as they were, and covenanted to the people on these important subjects. They had been told their political budget of grievances was small. But the creation of divers peers for money to be laid out in the purchase of divers seats for ministerial dependants, and the appointment of fifteen new parliamentary places or salaries admitted to be for the purpose of buying a majority, even if they were the only crimes of the government, composed no scanty political budget of corruption and iniquity. Generally in these debates, the same arguments on both sides were repeated with increased acrimony, and determined by the same divisions.

Scarcely was any question more vehemently debated during the session, than Mr. Grattan's motion for an Irish East-India trade, which was, that the committee of trade should enquire, whether any legislative provisions were then existing, the continuance of which might prevent that country from receiving the full benefit of her free trade beyond the Cape of Good Hope and the Straits of Magellan. The motion was seconded by Mr. W. Brabazon Ponsonby. This was a favourite object of speculation at this time with the most opulent of the Irish merchants but government, it seems, wished not to be drawn into a dispute or contest with the English East-India Company. The whole question was, whether, after having obtained a free trade, Ireland were to be restrained from the exercise of it in the Eastern hemisphere, out of tenderness, deference, or fear of the East-India Company: for whom, Mr. Grattan observed, the Irish cabinet was then an agent. At three o'clock the question was put, and lost by a majority of 147 against 86.*

:

* In this debate, Mr. Cook had complained of some illiberal reflections made upon him as an Englishman, which brought up Mr. Conolly. He was sorry, he said, such illiberality could be supposed to prevail in that house, having experienced the greatest attention and civility in the English House of Commons, where he had sat above 22 years, whenever be troubled it upon Irish affairs, although he spoke in a very awkward and unintelligible manner. He said, that there was no danger from the eloquence of an Irishman, a Burke, a Barry, or a Sheridan, that in the English House of Commons any thing could be accomplished that could militate against the constitution or trade of

The police bill had been petitioned against by several public bodies; and on the 4th of March Mr. Grattan again introduced it to the consideration of the house. After having proved by the experience of a number of years, that no institution was more obnoxious to the citizens; that no institution could be more extravagant; and that no institution could be less productive of advantages to the public; it remained for the wisdom of the house to correct the system, which had neither answered the ends of public peace, of private protection, or of any necessary economy. He would therefore propose a resolution, carrying on it no edge that could injure, no severity that could offend any man; but which, without imposing any humiliation, might be adopted, even by those, who had originally voted for the police, or who had since supported it. He then moved, "That the establishment of the police in the city of Dublin, "had been an experiment attended with considerable expence, "without producing adequate advantages: and that it was then necessary to establish a guard under the direction of the dif"ferent parishes, and subject to the superintendance of the lord "mayor."

If that motion were not resisted, he should follow it up with another, for leave to bring in a bill to give it effect. Mr. Mason said, he for one would certainly oppose it, as he thought it utterly unfounded. Immediately Mr. Grattan entered upon a most vehement invective against the measure.* The moEngland: nor could he suppose the eloquence of any Englishman there could injure that kingdom; it was of the Irish, and not of the Englishmen that he was afraid in that house. In the latter end of last parliament, a place bill, a pension bill, a responsibility bill, had been refused to that kingdom, by a majority of Irishmen, although the kingdom of Great Britain had shewn by experience the necessity and use of such laws: and he had in that house declared himself ashamed of having his name enrolled in such a society. That if he could guess, by the complexion of the house that night, it would soon be guilty of a self-denying ordinance in respect to its foreign trade, although the sister country did not pretend to deny the right of that kingdom to trade uncontrolled to those parts, where no British settlements were established. If that were the case, as there was no other mode established, by which a member could quit that house, he must wish to be called to its bar, and expelled. The British House of Commons consisted of 558 members, 67 only of which were placemen, and no pensioners could sit, nor placemen, unless originally chosen as such, or upon getting a place, on being re-chosen. In their house, consisting of 300 members, 110 were placemen or pensioners. They had adopted the whole power of the privy council before the repeal of Poynings' law, and literally appeared to be determined not to let any law pass that was not agreeable to the English minister or to the English merchant; and that therefore he was seriously in earnest in his wish to be expelled from a society that he conceived to be acting in direct contradiction to the constitution and trade of Ireland.

* 11 Parl. Debates, p. 263. Ministers had, he said, resorted to a place army and a pensional magistracy: the one was to give boldness to corruption in parliament, and the other to give the minister's influence patronage in the city. Their means were, this police establishment: the plan they did not

VOL. III.

tion met with its former fate, having been rejected by 135 against 87.

The 15th of March was the day appointed for the second reading of the bill "to disable any person who shall have in his "own name, or in the name of any person or persons in trust "for him, or for his benefit, any office or place of profit whatsoever under the crown, created after a certain time, [the year 1788] from being chosen a member of, or from sitting or voting in the present, or any future House of Com

66

mons."

And when Mr. Forbes rose to second it, Mr. Mason said, that having opposed this bill every session for thirty years he would not weary the house with fresh arguments against it: his decided opinion was, that the influence of the crown was barely sufficient to preserve the constitution, and to prevent it from degenerating into the worst of all possible governments, a democracy. Another gentleman on the same side of the house, thought government must have a majority to support them in their necessary measures, and to extinguish the squibs that were thrown against them; and the cheaper that majority was procured, so much the better for the country: and being arraigned by Mr. G. Ponsonby for using such unconstitutional language, he repeated it, and added, if they had not, they must cease to govern. The bill was lost by a similar majority. The division of the Irish House of Commons was not precisely formed upon the principles which divided the parliament of Great Britain: for on this night, Mr. C. O'Neile, who was one of the most forward in the opposition in Ireland, paid many handsome compliments to Mr. Pitt, whom he believed to be as honest a minister as ever governed England: but he must say, that he prescribed a very different mode of conduct to his deputies in that kingdom. Equally violent and equally unsuccessful were the four remaining attacks made by the gentlemen of the opposition: viz. Mr. Grattan's motion for the encouragement of the reclaiming of barren land: on the first reading of the pension bill: the second reading of the responsibility bill; and Mr. G. Ponsonby's motion respecting fiats for levying unassessed damages upon the parties affidavits of their own imaginary losses.*

entirely frame: they found it. A bill had shewn its face in the British House of Commons for a moment, and had been turned out of the doors immediately: a scavenger would have found it in the streets of London; the groping hands of the Irish ministry picked it up, and made it the law of the land.

* 11 Parl. Debates, p. 359. This motion was, "That it is the opinion of "this committee, that the Chief Justice of the Court of King's Bench, in "ordering a capias ad respondendum to issue against John Magee, on the affida"vit of Richard Daly, marked 40001. acted illegally."

Mr. G. Ponsonby entered into an able disquisition of the law of actions on tort, liquidated, and uncertain damages, which rest with a jury, and special