nation of ment. And while the internal polity of Ireland was exclusive, Subordiilliberal, and corrupt: the country, in its relations to Ireland England, still bore the marks of a conquered province. English The Parliament was not a free legislature, with ample governjurisdiction in making laws and voting taxes. By one of "Poynings' Acts," in the reign of Henry VII., the Irish Parliament was not summoned until the Acts it was called upon to pass had already been approved and certified, under the great seal, in England. Such Acts it might discuss and reject, but could not amend. This restriction, however, was afterwards relaxed; and laws were certified, in the same manner, after the opening of Parliament.2 Parliament could say "aye" or "no" to the edicts of the crown: but could originate nothing itself. Even money bills were transmitted to the Commons in the same imperial form. Soon after the revolution, the Commons had vainly contended for the privilege of originating grants to the crown, like their English prototypes: but their presumption was rebuked by the chief governor, and the claim pronounced unfounded by the judges of both countries. The rejection of a money bill was also visited with rebuke and protest.4 The Irish Parliament, however, released itself from this close thraldom by a procedure more consonant with English usage, and less openly obnoxious to their independence. Heads of bills were prepared by either House, and submitted to the Privy Council in Ireland, by whom they were transmitted to the king, or withheld at their pleasure. If approved by His 1 10 Henry VII. c. 4 (Irish). 23 & 4 Philip and Mary, c. 4 (Irish); Lord Mountmorres' Hist. of Irish Parl., i. 48-50; Blackstone's Comm. (Kerr), 1, 84. 3 Lord Mountmorres' Hist., i. 47; ii. 142, 184. 4 In 1692.-Com. Journ. (Ireland), ii. 35; Lord Mountmorres' Hist., i. 54; Hardy's Life of Lord Charlemont, i. 246. Supremacy of the Par England. Majesty, with or without amendments, they were returned to the House in which they had been proposed, where they were read three times, but could not be amended. The crown, however, relinquished no part of its prerogative; and money bills continued to be transmitted from the Privy Council, and were accepted by the Commons.2 These restrictions were marks of the dependence of liament of the legislature upon the crown : other laws and customs proclaimed its subordination to the Parliament of England. That imperial senate asserted and exercised the right of passing laws " to bind the people and kingdom of Ireland;" and in the sixth of George I. passed an Act explicitly affirming this right, in derogation of the legis lative authority of the national council sitting in Dublin. Its judicature was equally overborne. The appel Commer cial restrictions. late jurisdiction of the Irish House of Lords was first adjudged to be subordinate to that of the highest court of appeal in England, and then expressly superseded and annulled by a statute of the English Parliament. The legislature of Ireland was that of a British dependency. Whether such a Parliament were free or not, may have little concerned the true interests of the people of Ireland, who owed it nothing but bondage: but the national pride was stung by a sense of inferiority and dependence. The subordination of Ireland was further testified in another form, at once galling to her pride, and injurious to her prosperity. 1 Lord Mountmorres' Hist., i. 58, 63; Plowden's Hist., i. 395, n. 2 In 1760 a Bill was so transmitted and passed.-Grattan's Life, i. 57. $ 10 Henry VII. c. 22 (Irish); Carte's Life of Ormond, iii. 55; Lord Mountmorres' Hist., i. 360; Comm. To satisfy the jealous Journ. (England), June 27th and 46 Geo. I. c. 5.-Parl. Hist., vii. 642; Lord Mountmorres' Hist., i. 339. instincts of English traders, her commerce had been crippled with intolerable prohibitions and restraints. The export of her produce and manufactures to England was nearly interdicted: all direct trade with foreign countries and British possessions prohibited. Every device of protective and prohibitory duties had been resorted to, for ensuring a monopoly to English commerce and manufactures. Ireland was impoverished, that English traders should be enriched.1 III. Such were the laws and government of Ireland when New era opened George III. succeeded to its crown; and for many under years afterwards. Already a "patriot" party had arisen George to expose the wrongs of their country, and advocate her claims to equality: but hitherto their efforts had been vain. A new era, however, was now about to open; and a century of remedial legislation to be commenced, for repairing the evils of past misgovernment. of lord One of the first improvements in the administration Residence of Ireland was a more constant residence of the lord lieutenant. lieutenant. The mischievous rule of the lords justices was thus abated, and even the influence of the Parliamentary undertakers impaired: but the viceroy was still fettered by his exclusive cabinet." Attempts were made so early as 1761 to obtain a sep- Octennial tennial Act for Ireland, which resulted in the passing of Act, 1768. an octennial bill, in 1768.3 Without popular rights of election, this new law was no great security for freedom, 132 Charles II. c. 2, prohibited the export of cattle, sheep, and live stock; 10 & 11 Will. III. c. 10, interdicted the export of wool; and other statutes imposed similar restraints. See Parl. Hist., xix. 1100, et seq.; Swift's Tract on Irish Manufactures, 1720; Works, vii. 15; Short View of the State of Ireland, 1727.—Ibid., 324. 2 Adolphus' Hist., i. 331. 3 This difference between the law of the two countries was introduced to prevent the confusion of a general election, on both sides of the channel, at the same time.-Walpole's Mem., iii. 155; Lord Chesterfield's Letters, iv. 468; Plowden's Hist., i. 352, 387; Hardy's Life of Lord Charlemont, i. 248–261. Conflict between the Execu tive and the Com mons, 1769. Claim to originate money but it disturbed, carly in the reign of a young king, the indefinite lease of power, hitherto enjoyed by a corrupt confederacy; while discussion and popular sentiments were beginning to exercise greater influence over the legislature. A new Parliament was called, after the passing of the Act, in which the country party gained ground. The government vainly attempted to supplant the undertakers in the management of the Commons, and were soon brought into conflict with that assembly. The Commons rejected a money bill "because it did not take its rise in that House;" and in order to prove that they had no bills, 1769. desire to withhold supplies from the crown, they made a more liberal provision than had been demanded. The lord lieutenant, however, Lord Townshend, marked his displeasure at this proceeding, by proroguing Parliament as soon as the supplies were voted; and protesting against the vote and resolution of the Commons, as a violation of the law, and an invasion of the just rights of the crown.1 So grave was this difference, that the lord lieutenant suspended the further sitting of Parliament, by repeated prorogations, for fourteen months 2,a proceeding which did not escape severe animadversion in the English Parliament.3 Parliament, when at length reassembled, proved not more tractable than before. In December 1771, the Commons rejected a money bill because it had been altered in England; and again in Repeated prorogations. Dec. 21, 1771. 1 Lords' Journ. (Ireland), iv. 538. The lord lieutenant, not contented with this speech on the prorogation, further entered a separate protest in the Lords' Journal.Commons' Journal (Ireland), viii. 323; Debates of Parliament of Ireland, ix. 181; Plowden's Hist. of Ireland, i. 396; ii. 251; Grattan's Mem.,1.98-101; Lord Mountmorres' Hist., i. 54; Hardy's Life of Lord Charlemont, i. 290. 2 From Dec. 26th, 1769, till Feb. 26th, 1771; Comm. Journ. (Ireland), viii. 354; Plowden's Hist., i. 401. 3 Mr. G. M. Walsingham, May 3rd, 1770; Parl. Hist., v. 309. 4 Comm. Journ. (Ireland), viii. 467; Adolphus, ii. 14; Life of Grattan, i. 174 – 185. Nov. 1773, pursued the same course, for the like reason, in Oct. and regard to two other money bills. In 1775, having con- 1775. sented to the withdrawal of four thousand troops from the Irish establishment, it refused to allow them to be replaced by Protestant troops from England2,-a resolution which evinced the growing spirit of national independence. And in the same year, having agreed upon the heads of two money bills, which were returned by the British cabinet with amendments, they resented this interference by rejecting the bills and initiating others, not without public inconvenience and loss to the revenue. This first octennial Parliament exhibited other signs of an intractable temper, and was dissolved in 1776.5 Nor did government venture to meet the new Parliament for nearly eighteen months.6 of the war. In the meantime, causes superior to the acts of a Effect government, the efforts of patriots, and the combina- American tions of parties, were rapidly advancing the independence of Ireland. The American colonies had resented restrictions upon their trade, and the imposition of taxes by the mother country; and were now in revolt against the rule of England. Who could fail to detect the parallel between the cases of Ireland and America? The patriots accepted it as an encouragement, and their rulers as a warning. The painful condition of Condition the people was also betraying the consequences of a selfish and illiberal policy. The population had increased with astonishing fecundity. Their cheap and 1 Dec. 27th, 1773: Comm. Journ. i. 435. (Ireland), ix. 74. 2 Comm. Journ. (Ireland), ix. 223; Grattan's Life, i. 268. 3 Viz., a Bill for additional duties on beer, tobacco, &c.; and another, imposing stamp duties. 4 Dec. 21, 1775; Comm. Journ., Ireland, ix. 244; Plowden's Hist., 5 Plowden's Hist., i. 441. The old Parliament was prorogued in June, 1776, and afterwards dissolved: the new Parliament did not meet till October 14th, 1777.-Comm. Journ., ix. 289, &c. Plowden's Hist., i. 441. of the people. |