Life of William, Earl of Shelburne/Volume 1/Chapter 9

by Edmond George Petty-Fitzmaurice

 

CHAPTER IX

 

IRELAND IN 1767–1768

 

At the moment that the new division of the business of the Secretary of State's department was made, the affairs of Ireland, which remained under the Southern Secretary, were promising to give Shelburne as much employment as those of America.

By birth, by education, and by property, Shelburne was intimately connected with Ireland. In his own early years he had had abundant opportunities of becoming acquainted with the strange society of the County Kerry, where the gentry conspired with the peasantry to defeat the law which they both abhorred; where magistrates and clergy connived at robbery and murder; and throughout the whole district ignorance and prejudice reigned supreme. Nine years before his birth, the attack made at Ballyhige on the wrecked Danish treasure had taken place; it remained unpunished;^[1] when he was seventeen years of age John Puxley the Exciseman had been murdered at Glengariff for not assisting in the violation of the law, and his death had been avenged, but not by the arm of justice.^[2] There were indeed many peculiarities in the position of the County Kerry, which rendered the defiance of the law more easy within its limits than elsewhere. The coast indented with numerous bays, the inaccessible mountains running down to the sea, were the natural resort of smugglers, and had been from time immemorial a sure hiding-place for robbers and the best starting-point for conspirators. The first Earl of Kerry had spent his life in battling after a rude fashion for the security of life and property in that troublous region; his weaker son had rendered himself liable on at least one occasion to the imputation of preferring popularity to justice.^[3] Under the spendthrift rule of the possessor at this date there was little prospect of improvement. The adjoining Shelburne estates had for the most part been long since leased to middlemen.

If, however, the County Kerry might have been considered as affording an extreme example of lawlessness, the rest of Ireland was in this respect not much better situated.

The whole territory of the island had been confiscated at least once, after the successive invasions of English colonists under Henry II., James I., and Cromwell; but while the earlier settlers had for the most part become identified with the original population, the actual owners of the soil were still regarded in many districts by the great mass of the population as tenants under a wrongful title. The Government ever since the time of Henry VII. had been conducted on contradictory principles. A Parliament existed, but deprived of a truly representative character, owing to the existence of the political disabilities under which the Catholic population suffered, so that while possessed of some of the forms it lacked the substance of constitutional liberty. The industrial prosperity of the Protestant minority which possessed the franchise was crushed by the shortsighted commercial system of England. And yet, notwithstanding confiscations, political disabilities, penal laws, and commercial restrictions, some progress had been made, especially during the past twenty years. The recent rise in the price of meat had caused a great increase in the production of cattle, and wealth began to accumulate in consequence, while the trade in linen, the only manufacture not suffering from the evil effects of the English commercial system, was prospering. But with that strange tendency which improvement in Ireland has, according to a great statesman, to be accompanied in a peculiar degree with counterbalancing evils,^[4] the increased production of cattle, accompanied as it was by the enclosure of commons and the consolidation of small holdings, caused the terrible outbreak of the Whiteboys, in the same decade of the century which heard the first protests of the American Colonies against English misgovernment.

In many respects there was an analogy between the position of the American Colonies and that of Ireland. Both were governed by English colonists. In both there was a Royal Governor; in both there was an assembly with legislative powers more or less limited; and the Catholic population of Ireland was not, in theory at least, treated with much more political consideration than the Indian tribes which in the far West acknowledged the supremacy of George III. But there the analogy ceased, and nothing could afford a better proof of the difference between them than the forms which the resistance respectively took to the oppression under which they both conceived themselves to suffer. The citizens of Massachusetts, having the constitutional means of expressing their own discontent, only entered after many hesitations on a career of overt resistance, when every other weapon had failed: the Catholic peasantry of Ireland, trained to regard the law and the institutions of their country as a machine invented for the benefit of the Protestant minority, betook themselves at once to murder and outrage. Yet there was little to envy in the position of the Protestant minority. In the reign of Henry VII. the petty assembly which sat on the other side of St. George's Channel had begun to give signs of independent activity, and to prove the impossibility of two independent legislatures sitting, the one in Westminster, the other in Dublin. The first of many experiments was then made to adjust their conflicting jurisdictions, and the laws which took their name from the Lord-Deputy Poynings enacted that before any Parliament could be summoned, the Governor and Council of Ireland should certify to the King under the Great Seal of Ireland the causes thereof, and the articles of the Acts proposed to be passed, and that after the King and Council in England had approved or altered the said Acts and certified them back under the Great Seal of England, and should have given license to summon a Parliament, the same should be summoned, and therein the said Acts and no other should be proposed, received, or rejected.^[5] A subsequent Act provided that any new propositions might be certified to England in the usual forms even after the summons of Parliament.^[6] Under the latter Act a practice grew up by which heads of Bills were prepared, and after two readings and a committal were submitted to the Lord-Lieutenant in Council, who on approval transmitted them to England in conformity with Poynings' Act. This procedure and the assent of the Privy Council in England came gradually to be claimed as a matter of right with regard to money Bills. The advantages of it were obvious, for it gave the Lord-Lieutenant the means of ascertaining what measures the Parliament desired to see passed. The doctrine, however, still held good that when once a Bill had been certified back under the Great Seal of England no alteration could be made in it. Thus the Irish Parliament was deprived of all power of amendment. But the English Parliament was not satisfied with the measure of dependence secured by this procedure.

Another of Poynings' laws, based on the assumption, in itself doubtful, that English statutes did not run in Ireland, had enacted that all Acts of Parliament previously passed in England should for the future be of force in Ireland. As a deduction from the principle on which this statute rested, it was held that all English Acts passed since the time of Poynings' Act did not run in Ireland. At the same time it was held by some that if Ireland were expressly named in a statute of the English Parliament, then Ireland would be subject to that statute. The question, however, though raised in 1641, continued to be more speculative than practical till after the Revolution, when, in the same way that the paramount authority of Parliament was asserted in the controversy between England and the American Colonies, the paramount authority of England over Ireland was asserted in several statutes, more especially in the famous measure passed in 1699, which prohibited the export of Irish wool and so destroyed the chief industry of the country.^[7] But a doubt was held by some to exist as to whether the right of the English Parliament extended to Irish money Bills in the strict sense of the term.

The controversy was soon after widened. In 1719 the Irish House of Lords reversed a judgment of the Court of Exchequer. The defeated parties appealed to the House of Lords in England, and the judgment of the Court of Exchequer was affirmed. The Irish House of Lords thereupon resolved that no appeal lay from the Court of Exchequer to the House of Lords in England, and the Barons of the Exchequer were taken into the custody of the Black Rod for obeying the orders of the English Court. The English Parliament replied by passing an Act which declared the power of the Lords and Commons of Great Britain in Parliament to make laws to bind the people of Ireland, and further laid down that the Courts of King's Bench and Chancery in England were superior to the same Courts in Ireland and could hear appeals from them, and at the same time entirely abolished the appellate jurisdiction of the Irish House of Lords.

The most important results of the struggle were in Ireland the publication of Molyneux's Case of Ireland, a work which, burnt by the hands of the common hangman, became the legal text-book of Irish resistance; and in England the addresses adopted by the Houses of Parliament, in 1703 and 1707, in favour of a union with Ireland which in the previous century had been advocated by Sir William Petty. These addresses, however, received but little encouragement from the Crown. "The Parliament of England," to use the words of Lord Clare, "seem to have considered the permanent debility of Ireland as their best security for her connexion with the British Crown, and the Irish Parliament to have rested the security of the colony upon maintaining a perpetual and impassable barrier against the ancient inhabitants of the country. The executive government was committed nominally to a Viceroy, but essentially to Lords Justices, selected from the principal State Officers of the country, who were entrusted with the conduct of what was called the King's business, but might with more propriety have been called the business of the Lords Justices. The Viceroy came to Ireland for a few months only in two years, and returned to England perfectly satisfied with his mission, if he did not leave the concerns of the English government worse than he found them; and the Lords Justices in his absence were entrusted implicitly with the means of consolidating an aristocratic influence, which made them the necessary instruments of the English government."^[8] The administration of the country was also materially facilitated by the large amount of the hereditary revenue of the Crown, making a recourse to Votes of Supply only necessary in alternate years.

How Lord George Sackville did that which neither the legal lore of Molyneux nor in later years the satire of Swift had been able to accomplish, and first shook the machinery by which England compassed the objects of her policy, has been already described, in the words of Shelburne himself.^[9] The question at issue in the struggle which lasted from 1749 to 1753 was whether an unappropriated surplus should be regarded as Crown property or was still under the control of Parliament. The former was the contention of the party of the Primate Stone, the latter that of the Speaker Boyle and his supporters. If the surplus was Crown property, it clearly came within the rule that to a Bill affecting the interests of the Crown the previous consent of the Crown is necessary.^[10] Heads of a Bill for the appropriation of the surplus were, however, passed by the Commons, and rejected by the Crown. The surplus was then applied by the royal authority. A free distribution of favours among the friends of Boyle, and the temporary disgrace of Stone, averted further difficulties, "while the Commons," once more to quote Lord Clare, "took effectual care that the question should not occur a second time, by appropriating every future surplus to their private use, under the specious pretence of local public improvements. Windmills and watermills, and canals, and bridges, and spinning-jennies, were provided at the public expense, and the Parliamentary patrons of these great national objects were entrusted with full discretionary powers over the money granted to complete them. From this system of local improvement a double advantage arose to the Irish aristocracy, it kept their followers steady in the ranks, and reducing the Crown to the necessity of calling for supplies, made the political services of the leaders necessary for the support of the King's Government; but the precedent was fatal, and a system was gradually built upon it which would bear down the most powerful nation of the earth. The Government of England at length opened their eyes to the defect and dangers of it; they shook the power of the aristocracy, but were unable to break it down, and substituted a much more serious evil, by giving birth to a race of political adventurers possessed of an inexhaustible stock of noise and indecorum, always at the disposal of the best and highest bidder."^[11]

It is to the beginning of the period when the English Government "shook the power of the aristocracy, but were unable to break it down," that the present chapter relates.

The party of Boyle had triumphed in 1753. He was created Earl of Shannon, and became the most powerful man in Ireland. After a short disgrace, however, the Primate Stone was restored to favour. He patched up a treaty with Lord Shannon, and with the assistance of the Speaker Ponsonby, the successor of Boyle, carried on the Government through the Viceroyalties of Hartington and Bedford, of Halifax and Northumberland. In 1764 death removed both Shannon and Stone, but the former was succeeded by his equally talented son, who kept up the paternal alliance with the Speaker Ponsonby.

Meanwhile the patriotic party in the Irish Parliament, disgusted at their betrayal for honours and emoluments by their whilom friends in 1753, purged their ranks and defined their objects. In Dr. Lucas they found a leader of probity and perseverance whom persecution and physical infirmity could not daunt, nor bribes tempt; in Mr. Saxton Pery and Mr. John Fitzgibbon the elder they found eloquent expositors of their cause; their last and most valuable recruit was Henry Flood.

The first step necessary towards breaking the power of the oligarchy was to limit the duration of Parliament. This reform and a quam diu se bene gesserint tenure for the judges and the establishment of a national militia were the immediate objects which the patriotic party set before themselves, as not only desirable but attainable. At the general election which had followed the accession of George III., nearly all the candidates had been obliged to pledge themselves to vote for a Septennial Bill, and the adherents of the dominant Junto were forced with the rest to accept the pledge, though in their hearts they knew that by voting for it they would be sounding the knell of their own ascendancy. They hoped to get rid of the question indirectly, and as the patrons of boroughs who mostly belonged to the dominant party could nearly always count on a majority, they had abundant reasons to hope for success.^[12]

Such was the state of affairs when, after the brief Lord-Lieutenancies of Hertford, Weymouth, and Bristol, Townshend came over in 1767 as Viceroy of Ireland under the administration of Chatham.

It had been decided by the English Ministers, though of this Townshend does not seem to have been informed, that the Lord-Lieutenant should in future be a constant resident, an arrangement in itself fatal to the power of the Lords Justices, who in the absence of the Lord-Lieutenant had exercised all the power and patronage of Government. Townshend was at the same time instructed to take occasion in private conversation to acquaint the persons with whom he should judge it for His Majesty's service to communicate, of the intention of the English Ministers to support the Septennial Bill and the Judicature Bill, and thereby to encourage the heads of those measures being sent over. Further than this he was directed by Shelburne not to go, in order to avoid alike the appearance of dictation and the discredit of a possible defeat.^[13]

At the same time the Irish Parliament was to be induced if possible to pass a Bill for augmenting the army, an object of sovereign importance in the disturbed condition of the country, still heaving and shaking as it was with the disturbances of Oakboys and Whiteboys and Steelboys. Every effort was accordingly to be made to prevent the revenue being frittered away in useless grants and appropriations, and to render the support of the additional men voted possible without any increased taxation, beyond the absentee tax which it was tolerably certain would be sent over. To give a pledge of their own sincerity in the cause of economy, the English Government resolved to abandon the practice of facilitating the administration of affairs in Ireland, by the grants of pensions, reversions, and sinecure places, all of them secured under King's letters on the hereditary revenue.

A misunderstanding with the Cabinet led the Lord-Lieutenant to mention the tenure of the Judges in the speech from the Throne with which on the 20th October he opened the Parliament. The consequences of the mistake were serious. The mention of the tenure of the Judges was made by the patriots into a proof that the English Ministers were opposed to the Septennial Bill.

The party of Lucas and of Pery really believed in the new grievance. The oligarchy in fear of their constituents had to profess to believe in it. But they too had a grievance of their own. Finding that it was the fixed intention of the Ministers "to persevere in the resolution taken before the Lord-Lieutenant's departure, not to grant any pensions for life or years or any places in reversion, and that neither the Lord-Lieutenant nor any of the King's servants did intend to recommend any such grants,"^[14] the party of Shannon and Ponsonby resolved to repeat the manœuvres of 1753, and once again to figure as patriots. They pointed out—and not without some show of reason—that the great prizes of the professions and of politics were frequently the rewards of Englishmen, and now they said the lesser rewards were to be lost to Ireland as well. Their appeals found a ready response. Some delay had taken place in giving the Great Seal, vacant by the death of Chancellor Bowes. His successor it was now urged would be an incompetent Englishman. Such an opportunity was not to be missed. The fiery cross went out at once from Shannon and from Ponsonby to all their political connection, and the Lord-Lieutenant got an early proof of the wisdom of the doubts he had already once expressed as to the difficulty of governing without corruption.^[15] Almost at the moment that he was about once more to convey his apprehensions to the English Ministers and his own desire to yield, he was roused by a visit from the Attorney-General Tisdal, the organ of the Junto, who came to inform him that besides an address relative to the vacancy of the Chancellorship, which might perhaps be carried, he had certain intelligence that a motion would be made in the House of Commons to grant the supply from three months to three months, or, as they termed it, "a short Money Bill."^[16]

The grounds assigned for this step were discontent at the delay in the appointment of a Chancellor, and a determination not to grant any supplies which were to continue, until the utmost amount of the sums which might be wanted for the increase of the army and perhaps for a national militia was known. The Parliament was also of opinion that a short Money Bill was the only certain method of obtaining the popular Bills which had been so often demanded and so constantly refused. Lord Shannon, and the Speaker later in the day, waited on the Lord-Lieutenant and confirmed the statements of their agent, Tisdal. A Council was immediately summoned at the Castle, but the result of their deliberations was only to confirm the already gloomy forebodings of Townshend. Mr. Justice Hewett, one of the Judges of the Court of King's Bench, "a man of known attachment to Revolution principles, great knowledge and unspotted integrity,"^[17] had already been appointed Chancellor, and was on his way to Ireland, as Shelburne now informed Townshend, and he reiterated the intention of Government not to recede from their resolution with regard to places and pensions and reversions, the evident object of the attacks of the Junto. "As to the design," he continued, "of a short Money Bill, it is impossible for me to express to your Excellency the astonishment with which the account of such a measure having been even entertained in idea, was received by everybody here; a measure which strikes not only at the dignity of the King, but at the very being of Government. Could it be possible to suppose for a moment that it was to meet with success, great confusion in Ireland would not only be the inevitable consequence; but it would be the just occasion of rejecting the very Bills that were the pretended object of such an unprecedented conduct; in which case the contrivers of such a measure must have stood condemned in the sight both of God and men, and experienced the certain indignation of the public, who must soon see through the flimsy pretext of founding their unjustifiable jealousy upon a comparison of what happened in the administration of the late Lord-Lieutenant with the communication now made by your Excellency: the one, as I have always understood, being only the Lord -Lieutenant's personal approbation of a Bill, whereas your Excellency went out apprized of the unanimous determination of the King's servants to support two of the Bills in Council, and of their favourable disposition to hear whatever should be offered in regard to the two others.^[18] Nor is it to be supposed that the guarded manner of making this communication recommended to your Excellency could have produced any other effect than that of increasing the confidence of every intelligent person, by showing with what deliberation this measure had been adopted, as far as the King's servants could with safety or propriety go. Could it be meant as an alarm only, it cannot be looked upon in any other light than as one of the meanest stratagems which low, cunning, narrow parts, and interested motives, could suggest to any set of men in public affairs.

"I have, however, very great pleasure in informing your Excellency, that the King's servants persevere, notwithstanding, in the same resolution as to the several Bills when they shall come over, in the manner I have mentioned. …

"As to the augmentation of the army, I have already written so fully to your Excellency on that subject, that I have nothing to add. It will remain to be seen, after so many instances of His Majesty's inclination to gratify the wishes of his people, whether the principal persons in Ireland, in their conduct upon that head, as well as in the manner of carrying through the whole session, have had the public interest in view, or have been actuated by motives of a less honourable and disinterested nature.

"I will only observe in regard to a Militia, that could a well-digested and safe plan be offered, it must meet with the approbation of His Majesty's servants, who are too intent on the security of Ireland not to see with particular satisfaction every addition which can be made to it: but this, so far from rendering an augmentation of the army unnecessary, makes it a measure of essential utility to the safety of that Kingdom, till such a scheme can be brought to perfection, which must be a work of some time. Even then, the number of regular forces will, in time of danger, not be found too great, when they may be wanted to relieve the Militia from so continued a fatigue. I will only add, with deference to your Excellency, who will be better acquainted with the mode of proceeding of the Irish Parliament, that it appears that it was proposed to provide for this augmentation by a vote of credit, in which case there will be no hazard in letting the Money Bill pass, and the committee of supply be closed. Your Excellency must, however, be sensible, that if the Money Bill should come over loaded with a number of private grants, with what an ill appearance it can be afterwards urged, "that the state of the revenue of Ireland cannot bear" what is absolutely necessary for the public security.^[19]

On the receipt of the above letter Townshend sought another interview with the Junto. They were inexorable in their opposition,^[20] and not knowing where to turn, Townshend caught at some expressions in the recent despatches of Shelburne, and hoped that they might be understood "as meaning that should there come a time particularly critical in the course of his endeavours to carry on the King's business, he might then be permitted to lay before him what should appear to immediately interest the service." "Mankind," he added, "judge pretty well how to time their requests."^[21] With some assurances based on this despatch he appears to have been able for the moment to quiet the majority, who, satisfied with the formidable demonstration they had made, withdrew their opposition and waited. The heads of the Septennial Bill, of a tax on all pensions, salaries, and profits of employments payable to persons out of Ireland, and of the Judicature Bill and a Habeas Corpus Bill were next rapidly passed, and transmitted to England. The Parliament then adjourned till January.

In the interval the Junto informed Townshend of the terms on which they would undertake to carry the augmentation of the army through Parliament. "I found," wrote Townshend to Shelburne, "by the means of Mr. Prime-Serjeant,^[22] with whom they are most strongly united, and upon whom, as their man of business for conducting this matter through the House of Commons, they intend to rely, that this late transaction^[23] had made the political connection between Lord Shannon and Mr. Speaker much stronger than ever, and if certain points could be obtained for them, they would heartily support and carry through the ordinary business of Government, and even the augmentation itself, to the extent wished for by His Majesty, if certain persons could be brought to lend their names and co-operate with them: it being understood that they themselves should have their share in the disposal of His Majesty's other favours here, in proportion to the number of their friends and their weight in the country."

Lord Shannon wished, during the absence of the LordLieutenant, to be appointed one of the three Lords Justices. Mr. Ponsonby expected that the office of Examinator of the Customs, now in possession of his eldest son, should be given to him and his brother for their joint lives. The Prime-Serjeant expected that provision should be made for the lives of his two sons then mere boys, by a grant to them, or the survivors of them, of some office of at least the value of £500 a year; if no vacancy should happen before the rising of Parliament, that either a pension or a salary of that amount should be added to some office to be enjoyed by his two sons during their joint lives; that his wife should be created a Viscountess at the end of the session, and a sum of £4000, which he insisted upon as a debt due to him and acknowledged by Lord Hertford, should be at once paid.

"I am sorry to say," wrote Townshend, "these are the terms upon which they promise to support and carry on the King's business, because, from the situation in which they are at present, I think it is the duty at least of the two former to do so without any consideration whatever. Nor can I omit telling your Lordship that they expect to have some ostensible authority communicated to me on these points from your Lordship.

"Should His Majesty be advised to give way to these demands, I cannot doubt but that the business of the session would be carried through, in the way the King wishes, with the utmost ease."^[24]

To these bold demands thus categorically stated Shelburne replied:

"The terms your Excellency mentions falls within the rule His Majesty has laid down as not to be departed from, that his Ministers stand precluded from proposing to him the granting of places and pensions for life or years. It must therefore remain with the leading persons in Ireland to act in this matter in such a manner as they can answer to their own consciences, as servants to His Majesty, as men of property, and as representatives of the people, to whom they will be accountable for their conduct, and for the evil consequences which may be ascribed to the failure of this measure, which has been so strongly recommended to them by His Majesty. At the same time I may acquaint your Excellency that the King will certainly at the end of the session graciously take into his royal consideration the merits of those who shall have exerted themselves for the support of his Government and the good of Ireland; nor is it to be supposed that the conduct of those who shall have acted from motives of a less honourable nature can escape His Majesty's notice."^[25]

On receiving this communication, the Speaker, the Prime-Serjeant, and Lord Shannon declared that they could not support the Augmentation Bill; their friends thought it too late in the session; they were themselves averse to opening the Supplies again, and they demanded that security should be given by an Irish Act of Parliament—and not by an English Act as proposed by the Ministers—that the force to be kept up in Ireland should not fall short of 12,000 men.^[26] Not satisfied with these declarations and their frequent repetition, they at once proceeded to give practical proofs that they were in earnest.

In the financial position when properly understood, they knew that they would be able to find few or no arguments to support their position. The revenues of Ireland, though not at this moment in a prosperous condition, were rapidly recovering the effect of the war. The deficit of the biennial period ending Lady Day 1767 had been £73,000. The deficit for the period ending Lady Day 1769 had been estimated at the same amount, and a "confidential credit" for a loan of £100,000 obtained to cover it. The revenue, however, recovered so rapidly that the Lord-Lieutenant as the year went on felt himself justified in estimating the deficit at only £39,000. He even ventured to hope for a possible surplus. In any case there was the whole of the loan to fall back upon should any temporary difficulty arise from the preliminary expenses connected with the Army Bill. These facts, however, did not weigh with the Junto.^[27]

Immediately on the reassembling of Parliament, Mr. Saxton Pery moved for a Committee to inquire into the application of the money granted for the support of the military establishment since the 3ist of March 1751, and into the present state of the military establishment. The Shannon-Ponsonby party supported and carried the motion.^[28] Elated with their victory they proceeded to reopen every dormant question which could be made into a source of annoyance and difficulty. The House of Commons in 1764 had voted a sum for a bridge at St. Kennis. The sum was insufficient, and an application for a supplemental vote was to have been made in 1764. The persons who should have attended to laying this case before the Committee of Supply happened to be absent, and the sum was not voted. The completion of the bridge was a matter of urgent necessity, and the King at the advice of Lord Hertford granted £600 from the Hereditary Revenue for the purpose. The conduct of Lord Hertford was now made the object of a patriotic resolution. It was moved "That any application to His Majesty to grant money for any purpose which shall have been under the consideration of this House, and which shall have been refused to be provided by this House, will be considered as highly improper and deserving the censure of this House."^[29] This motion was no sooner carried than a motion was proposed by Mr. Poer: "That the several branches of the public revenue of this kingdom not appropriated by Parliament have been from time to time granted to the Crown for public uses."^[30] All the thorny points involved in the struggle of 1753 were thereby re-opened without the slightest necessity. It was at the same time industriously circulated that the Septennial Bill would not be returned by the English Privy Council,^[31] and a motion with regard to the Pension List was threatened.^[32] "My account," said Townshend summing up the situation, "will convince your Lordship that Lord Shannon and the three other gentlemen I have mentioned have now finally taken their part, which whether it is really to distress His Majesty's affairs, or only to alarm his Government so as the more effectually to carry their point, is more than I can tell, but I apprehend that the present temper of the House of Commons may in the meantime force them into such measures as must weaken, and perhaps make it impossible again to restore His Majesty's authority in this kingdom. … It is now therefore for your Lordship and the King's servants to consider to whom I am to resort, and whether it would be prudent for me to apply to those who are generally in opposition and are called the independent gentlemen of this country."^[33]

The party alluded to by the Lord-Lieutenant consisted mainly of the friends and followers of the Duke of Leinster and Lord Tyrone, whom the ancient jealousies between the FitzGeralds and the Ponsonbys carried naturally to the side of opposition. But there were a few who more really deserved the appellation of "independent gentlemen." "I am to acquaint your Excellency," Shelburne wrote in reply to the question of the Lord-Lieutenant, "that neither the King nor his servants have any predilection for any men or set of men whatever; that having nothing else in view than to conduct the King's affairs honourably and safely to the mutual satisfaction of the Crown and people, they must naturally choose to see the public business carried on without being obliged to make any changes whatsoever among his servants, as long as they are both able and willing to serve; but if they should prove deficient in one or other respect, so as to leave your Excellency no reason to expect any solid support from them, I am to acquaint your Excellency that His Majesty not only sees no objection but highly approves of your sending for such gentlemen under the description of 'independent gentlemen,' or any other description not inconsistent with that character of duty and affection which every good subject owes the King, whom your Excellency shall have reason to believe equal to the execution of what you may wish them to undertake. If the conduct of His Majesty's present servants should make such a course appear to your Excellency necessary and prudent, you will not fail to transmit the result of any such communication as early and as particularly as possible for His Majesty's consideration."^[34]

At the same time he announced the return of the Bill for limiting the duration of Parliament, with the Septennial term made Octennial, so as to prevent a general election being held simultaneously in both countries. So excellent was the effect thereby produced that the motion regarding pensions and the Committee for inquiry into the Army were easily got rid of with the help of the new allies of the Government,^[35] and the Earl of Carrick gave notice that he would move in the House of Lords "that this House will not read a second time any Bill of Aid or Supply to which any clause is added which is foreign to and different from the matter of the said Bill of Aid or Supply." The object of the motion was to restrain the grants attached to Money Bills so graphically described by Lord Clare, and to show the House of Commons that there were other sources of economy besides the pensions granted by King's letters.^[36]

Of the measures which besides the Septennial Bill had been sent over in the previous autumn to the Privy Council in England, the Habeas Corpus Bill was not returned, owing to the disturbed condition of the country which rendered it inapplicable at the moment.^[37] The absentee tax was returned, though Shelburne could not refrain from incidentally pointing out the injustice of treating the pensions of men like "Prince Ferdinand of Brunswick and of Sir Edward Hawke, whose intrepidity and good conduct had so very lately saved Ireland from the dreadful consequences of invasion"^[37] in the same manner as those of the courtiers and disreputable characters with which the first two Georges had crowded the list. The Judges' Tenure Bill was also returned, but with an important alteration. The heads of the Bill as sent over to England made the Judges removable on the address of the Privy Council and the two Houses of Parliament in Ireland. Shelburne, though himself averse to the principle of the alteration he recommended,^[38] had wished that a clause should be inserted giving the same weight to the Houses of Parliament in England, because if such a clause were not transmitted to the Privy Council in England, it would probably be inserted there.^[39] The Privy Council in Ireland, however, asked Shelburne not to insist upon his suggestion, as it would certainly be "rejected with indignation." The heads of the Bill were accordingly transmitted in their original shape, but the Privy Council in England at once added to the clause relating to the address for the removal of the Judges, the words "Certified by the Lord-Lieutenant and Council there under the Great Seal of Ireland in like manner as Bills are usually certified, or upon the address of both Houses of the Parliament of Great Britain": thereby making the alteration anticipated by Shelburne.

Finding his old supporters still inflexible, the Lord-Lieutenant invited the Chancellor, Lord Annaly, the Solicitor-General, the Lord Chief Baron Forster, Mr. Malone, and the Provost of Trinity College, to a confidential meeting. So alarming was the outlook in their opinion, that they recommended the postponement of the Augmentation Bill to another Session, more especially as at the general election, which it was intended to hold immediately after the passing of the Octennial Bill, members might be afraid to lose their seats if they voted for the Augmentation. The postponement did not appear to them liable to any inconvenience beyond that of requiring the presence of the Lord-Lieutenant somewhat sooner than the usual time.^[40] Townshend himself further reported, that "the country gentlemen on whose support he now entirely depended, were very earnest to go into their several counties to look after their elections, and yet would be sorry to have the King's service exposed to the enterprises of ambition. He believed they in general wished to carry through the augmentation upon the most honourable footing, when their elections were over, and many would even give it their best assistance, if they were assured that the weight of the Crown would not be exerted against them hereafter, by those whose designs they now defeated by their zealous support of His Majesty's Government."^[41] At the same time he despatched his Secretary Lord Frederick Campbell to England to lay before the Government more fully the exact character of the situation.^[42]

All suggestions of delay were absolutely refused by Shelburne. He announced the passage through the English Parliament of a Bill taking off the restriction imposed by the Act 10 William III. on the number of troops to be kept on the Irish establishment, and giving satisfactory security that the force kept in Ireland should amount to 12,000 men; and he further agreed that in order to obviate the difficulties which might arise from the immediate demand of a large sum for levy money, extra clothing, and arms, the execution of the plan should not be begun till the ist of December. This would enable money enough to accumulate to cover all these expenses. He also gave the assurance of protection required by the country members, pointing out that as it was by no means intended that the Lord-Lieutenant should be a non-resident, there was no danger of the Government of the country relapsing into the hands of the oligarchy.^[43]

The crisis had now arrived. The Augmentation Bill was made the subject of a message from the Crown to Parliament. An amendment was immediately carried to the address in reply by a majority of four. Here is the account of the debate sent by Barré then Vice-Treasurer of Ireland to Shelburne:

"Conoly and Dawson moved and seconded; Pery opposed mostly upon the ground that the augmentation was meant to enable Britain to keep more troops in America, in order to crush the spirit of her Colonies; the Attorney-General because it was too late in the session, and that such a measure should always be taken into consideration at the beginning of a session, when the members would have time to consider the state of the national finances; thus leaving himself at liberty to hand in the measure in a subsequent session, when such a conduct would be more reconcileable to his private interest. The Prime-Serjeant was not so prudent, and opposed it in a long languid speech, full of false calculations; among the rest this curious one; that adding 40,000l. per annum to the national expense was in fact adding a million to its debt, and that the nation in the next session would be 1,800,000l. in debt. If all this is true, how will he have the impudence to support this measure hereafter? But indeed he has contradicted himself three or four times in the course of the session upon this subject.

"He talks now of being dismissed. His profit by his employment is trifling, not above three or four hundred a year. He is personally disliked, a mean gambler, not one great point in him, and exceedingly unpopular in this country. I must tell you a short anecdote which put him very much out of temper. The day after the first division, he came to Council in a hackney chair, which happened unluckily to be No. 108 (the number of the majority). A young officer at the Castle wrote under the number of the chair, 'court' in large characters, and at the top a coronet was drawn. He denied positively in the beginning of his speech, any bargain or terms proposed by him at the Castle, but was not believed.

"Lucas tried to get the citizens to instruct him to oppose the augmentation, but not being able to succeed, he contented himself with giving a silent negative. All other attempts to make the measure unpopular were nearly as fruitless, and indeed some members were instructed to vote for it. Dennis did not speak but voted with Lord Shannon. The speakers for Government were, the Solicitor-General, Mason, Cunningham, Butler, French, Bagwell, Burke, Waite, Burton, FitzGerald, Gore brother to Lord Annaly, Gisborne, who spoke well, and Lord F. Campbell who, to do him justice, chose his ground well, proved that there was no more money wanted than what was already granted by the vote of credit, and showed himself better informed of the state of this kingdom than most of them. He also very properly corrected the Speaker for his strangely inattentive conduct in the Chair when he was speaking, a conduct at which the House took offence. Sir Lucius O'Brien was with the majority.

"The Lord-Lieutenant is hurt and seems low. Sir J. Caldwell is very bustling and has advised him to try the measure again, only dished up in another way; he assured him it would be carried. He did not ask my opinion, and only dropped in conversation what Sir James had recommended. I contented myself with saying that I thought it would be right to sound the first men in the kingdom that were friends, before he committed the dignity of Government in so loose a way. He has this day hurt the chiefs exceedingly, by joining Sir Robert Deane (a mortal enemy) to Lord Shannon in the Government of the county of Cork, and by disposing of some things which the Speaker had almost engaged to some of his followers.

"As far as I am able to judge, this country is manageable easily enough. The prevailing faction exists only by your want of system in England, and avows the hopes of a change in administration there. They have no abilities, and their present and only friend Hutchinson (for Tisdal is quite broke) cannot be depended on for a moment.

"But, my Lord, if a resident Governor is not appointed, the game which has been played will continue to be played in a greater or less degree, let you place the power in what hands you will.

"The resources of this country are greater than they are generally imagined, though I am not at present possessed of that full information which I hope to get before I leave Dublin, and which I shall certainly communicate to your Lordship."^[44]

Such was the fate of the Augmentation Bill. A like fate awaited the Judicature Bill, which on being transmitted to the House of Commons was immediately sent to a Committee of Comparison, and on the report of the alterations made by the English Privy Council at once thrown out.^[45]

This was the last proof of their supremacy which Shannon and Ponsonby were able to give, for the Administration, on hearing of the vote on the Augmentation Bill, directed the Lord-Lieutenant to prorogue the Parliament with a view to instant dissolution. Marked distinctions were simultaneously conferred on those who had been most conspicuous in the recent contest on the side of Government. But these distinctions were not in themselves sufficient to have much effect, and if frequently repeated would have become a fresh source of corruption. More was needed. Shelburne and Townshend both agreed that it was necessary to strike off the roll of the Irish Privy Council all those corrupt persons who had attempted to traffic on their Parliamentary influence, and to remove the exercise of the patronage of the Government entirely from the control of the Lords Justices, vesting it in a resident Governor subject to the control of the English Treasury.^[46] But before this change could be adequately discussed, and before the new Parliament assembled, Shelburne had ceased to have any but a private connection with the affairs of Ireland.

 

1. Froude, English in Ireland, i. 478.
2. Ibid. i. 460.
3. Froude, English in Ireland, i. 476.
4. Mr. Gladstone, "Speech on Introduction of the Irish Church Bill," 1869.
5. 10 Henry VII. c. 73 (Irish).
6. 3 and 4 Philip and Mary, c. 4.
7. See Stephens' Blackstone, 99; Hallam, Constitutional History, iii. 405.
8. Speech of Lord Clare, 1800.
9. Supra, p. 239.
10. Hallam, iii. 408. Sir Erskine May, Law of Parliament, pp. 423-425, ed. 1893.
11. Speech of Lord Clare, 1800.
12. The borough system had been developed to such an extent that out of the 300 members who composed the Parliament 216 were returned for boroughs or manors. Of these borough members 200 were elected by too individuals and nearly fifty by ten."—Lecky, Leaders of Public Opinion in Ireland, p. 65.
13. Shelburne to Townshend, October 27th, 1767.
14. Shelburne to Townshend, November 5th, 1767.
15. Townshend to Shelburne, October 27th, 1767. It is worth noticing that at the time of this controversy only one Judge was an Englishman. Camden to Grafton, September 27th, 1767.
16. Townshend to Shelburne, November 15th, 1767. Autobiography of Grafton, 157-165.
17. Shelburne to Townshend, November 1767.
18. The Habeas Corpus and the Militia Bills.
19. Shelburne to Townshend, November 24th, 1767.
20. Townshend to Shelburne, December 12th, 1767.
21. Townshend to Shelburne, November 15th, 1767.
22. Hely Hutchinson.
23. The affair of the short Money Bill.
24. Townshend to Shelburne, December 12th, 1767.
25. Shelburne to Townshend, December 19th, 1767.
26. Townshend to Shelburne, January 11th, 1768.
27. Townshend to Shelburne, November 5th, 1767. May loth, 1768, and the Journals of the Irish House of Commons, viii. Appendices xv. cxxv. cclxx. cclxxxii. ccclxvii.
28. Townshend to Shelburne, January 26th, 1768.
29. Townshend to Shelburne, January 28th, 1768.
30. Townshend to Shelburne, January 28th, 1768.
31. Townshend to Shelburne, February 6th, 1768.
32. Townshend to Shelburne, February 9th, 1768.
33. Townshend to Shelburne, January 28th, 1768
34. Shelburne to Towmhend, February 10th, 1768.
35. Townshend to Shelburne, February 9th and 16th, 1768.
36. Townshend to Shelburne, March 17th, 1768.
37. Shelburne to Townshend, April 23rd, 1768.
38. See his opinions on the Government of Ireland in Vol. II., Ch. III., and Shelburne to Chatham, January 8th, 1774.
39. Chatham Correspondence, iv. 317.
40. Townshend to Shelburne, March 5th, 1768.
41. Townshend to Shelburne, February 26th, 1768.
42. Townshend to Shelburne, February 16th, 1763.
43. Shelburne to Townshend, March 14th, 1768.
44. Barré to Shelburne, May 5th, 1767.
45. Commons Journals, viii. 270; Plowden, History of Ireland, i. 388.
46. Shelburne to Townshend. Townshend to Shelburne, July 1768.