446

Rejection of a money bill.

seats, either for their own lives or the life of the sovereign, conscious that a retrospect of their political existence could afford little satisfaction to themselves or their electors, shuddered at the idea of meeting those beloved constituents once more. Altogether there was not a little patriotism, much dread of the people, and abundant selfishness.

The return of this octennial bill was followed by a grateful address to the throne, and when the royal assent was given, the people took the horses from the lord-lieutenant's coach, and drew him to the castle with enthusiastic exultation.

Sixteen months elapsed before the new parliament met, and when it did assemble in October, 1769, a warm dispute arose between the viceroy and the commons. A money-bill, planned by the British cabinet, certified into England by the lordlieutenant and privy council, and returned under the king's great seal, was by the commons rejected after the first reading, because it had not originated in their house. On this occasion the patriots were aided by some placemen and pensioners, who had reserved to themselves a right of opposing the court in questions of great importance. The viceroy was incensed at this defeat, and a protest, which he in vain attempted to enter on the journals of the commons, was with difficulty entered by him on those of the lords, five of whom protested against his claim of protesting. Resolving still further to display a resolution

Parliament successively prorogued. 447

of supporting their privileges, the commons caused an English newspaper, Woodfall's Advertiser, in which reflections were thrown against their conduct with respect to the money-bill, to be publicly burned by the hands of the common hangman before the gate of the house. In another question concerning their privileges, a majority appeared against the court in the house of commons, and the parliament was prorogued on the 26th of December, after a session of little longer than two months. It continued prorogued by five successive proclamations till the 26th February, 1771.

This measure of depriving the nation of the benefit of their parliament, because among the representatives of the people a few had patriotism and firmness enough to resist encroachments upon their rights, threw the whole nation into a ferment, which was not confined to Ireland, but extended also to England; for in the commous there, a motion was made by the Hon. Boyle Walsingham on the late extraordinary prorogation of the Irish parliament, which had for its object "An address to his majesty to give directions to lay before that house a copy of all instructions to the lord-lieutenant relating to the late sudden prorogation of the Irish parliament at a time when affairs of the greatest national importance to that kingdom were depending, together with the papers on which the instructions were founded, and his answers; and likewise a copy of a message relative to the augmentation of the forces." The

448 Edmund Sexton Pery elected speaker.

motion was seconded by the Right Hon. George Grenville, who maintained, that the late prorogation was most unconstitutional; Lord North defended the measure, and the question was lost by a majority of 112.

This interval, however, thus displeasing to the nation, was suitably and opportunely employed by the lord-lieutenant in strengthing his plan of government, and securing a party favourable to his views. When, in their usual address to the king, the commons gave their humble thanks for his majesty's continuance of Lord Townshend in the government, their speaker, John Ponsonby, wrote a spirited letter, which was communicated to the house by the clerk, intimating that as the chief governor had, at the end of the last session, passed a censure on the commons, he could not perform the office of conveying such thanks as night imply a relinquishment of their proceedings; he therefore requested them to elect another speaker, who might not think such conduct inconsistent with his honour. They accordingly proceeded to elect Edmund Sexton Pery, Esq. who from a patriot had become a courtier, and who was accompanied to his new office by the indignation of the whole country. He was elected by a majority of four only.

The remainder of Lord Townshend's administration passed over without any further violent opposition. The national debt of Ireland had heavily accumulated during his viceroyalty. Strong

Lord Townshend resigns the viceroyalty. 449 objections were made, both in and out of parliament, to its unconstitutional character. His new plan of keeping up the English interest he perse. vered in without much regard as to the means; and he had so completed his system of managing the house of commons that he could, on all occasions, secure a majority of one-third; and by such majority did he carry the question on seventeen different divisions on the first two days of the session. He abdicated the viceroyalty in 1772, and was succeeded by the Earl of Harcourt, a man of very different character and fitted to follow quietly the directions of the British ministry, and to leave to his secretary the whole active labour of administration.

Towards the close of Lord Townshend's government died Charles Lucas, member for Dublin, a person too much distinguished in the infant struggles of Irish liberty to be passed over without some notice.

Lucas was a man of bold and ardent nature *. In the year 1743 he first distinguished himself in the corporation of Dublin, which at that time la boured under gross mismanagement. He particularly exclaimed against the board of aldermen; and in this opposition he met a coadjutor in Mr. Digges Latouche, a most intelligent and respectable merchant, but of a temper totally distinct from that of Lucas. During their opposition in

*See Hardy's Life of Charlemont

VOL. I.

G g

450

Character of Dr. Lucas.

the common council a vacancy happened in the representation of the city of Dublin by the death of Sir James Somerville. Latouche first, and Lucas afterwards, declared themselves candidates. This created a distinct interest between them. In fact, they had never been cordially united, and Lucas attacked Mr. Latouche with much intemperate abuse. In less than a year afterwards, the death of Alderman Pearson, the other representive of Dublin, closed their contests, and both would in all probability have been elected, although Sir Samuel Cooke and Mr. Charles Burton were opposed to them by the board of aldermen and the castle interest, had not the court thought proper to get rid of Lucas at all events. Accordingly, on the second day of the session, 1749, complaint was made to the house of commons of certain seditious writings by Lucas, which were, after some fruitless opposition, unanimously voted highly criminal, the attorney-general desired to prosecute him, and he himself ordered to Newgate. However, he withdrew to England, which was all that was wanted; and to prevent his return to Ireland he was voted an enemy to his country. The perfidy of the castle, the profligacy of the house of commons, and the spirit of the people, which was only hushed. into silence, not subdued, deserve on this occasion to be recorded. Lucas had been induced, by some vague but flattering terms of support, to go to the castle, and was there so cordially listened to that he left with

.