so oppressive that Government thought it right to abandon any special or exclusive measure, and to postpone till the next sitting the consideration of what means were most advisable for the general protection of all residents against the attacks of those local banditti, who, under various names, exercised terrorism in defiance of law. The postponement gave new strength to White-Boyism. Riot and disorder held high revel, notwithstanding all efforts for their repression. This necessitated the introduction of repressive measures. Recourse to Parliament was the safest means at the disposal of the Viceroy. Biennial Sessions often rendered delays most dangerous. The Viceroy determined to break through the rule, and to summon Parliament at the beginning of the year 1787. The House accordingly assembled on the 13th February. The Attorney-General introduced a Bill to prevent " tumultuous risings," which led to an animated discussion. As originally proposed it gave power to pull down any Roman Catholic chapel in which meetings of disaffected people might be held, and to prevent any chapel so pulled down from being rebuilt for three years. This clause was abandoned, and the Bill became law from the 25th day of March, 1787,* by which, if persons to the number of twelve met in an unlawful and riotous manner, and did not disperse within one hour, when required by a Justice of the Peace so to do, their offence was felony punishable by death. Pulling down religious houses, or obstructing clergy, was a like offence. Administering an unlawful oath received transportation for life, with other penalties proportionately severe for minor crimes. Mr. Grattan recognised the fact that to legislate for grievances, and leave the cause of the grievances unredressed, was to give legal support to oppression. On the 13th day of March, he brought forward a motion as a precursor to an intended Bill, “that if at the commencement of the next Session of Parliament it shall appear that public tranquility has been restored in those parts of the Kingdom that have been lately disturbed, and due obedience be paid to the laws, this House will take into consideration the

* 27 Geo, III. c. 15.

subject of tithes, and endeavour to form some plan for the honourable support of the clergy and the ease of the people." The motion was strongly opposed by the Government, who argued that the time was improper; that passing such a resolution would be to capitulate with insurrection, and to offer a reward for that obedience to the laws on which they had a right to insist. Yielding to the arguments advanced, the resolution was not pressed to a division.

The effects of the Attorney-General's Act were what might have been anticipated. Assemblies in force were discontinued, and comparative quiet restored. The Duke of Rutland determined to try what had never previously failed-the Vice-Regal presence. He visited Munster, the most disaffected of all the counties, and was, in all directions, well received. Comparative quiet followed and with its restoration trade revived. Both countries seemed weary of contention. Their commercial relations passively settled down into mutual concessions, no vexatious questions being raised on either side ; so much so, that there was an opportunity for directing the attention of the Legislature to other wants than those satisfied by repressive Acts.

The Navigation Act was declared to be in force in Ireland in a Bill* for Improving the Navigation, which led to an amendment on the part of Mr. Grattan, the purport of which was "that the Navigation Act, 12 Ch. 2, should bind His Majesty's subjects of Ireland, so long as it shall have the effect of conferring the same benefits, and imposing the same restrictions on both Kingdoms." This was lost by 127-52. Its terms contrast strangely with the provision in the fourth commercial resolution, and seem to be identical in principle; and yet, to this latter, Mr. Grattan offered most uncompromising opposition, which was the chief means of preventing “the final adjustment.”

It may be a relief, for a time, to turn from the grave cares of State, and consider the great Sedan question, if only as an illustration of the tone of the petitions, and the preponderance of sentiment entering into Irish grievances. Sedan chairs, when

E

* 27 Geo. III. c. 23.

privately licensed, paid duty of £1 158 6d a year, which formed part of the funds of the Lying-in Hospital. Public chairs were under the control of the police. An order was made by the Police Commissioners "That no person should ply or carry any Hackney Sedan Chair defective in any part or particular; that they should be carried by able men, decent in apparel and of good and civil behaviour; that they should not be carried on the flagged way; that the chairmen should have numbered badges on their breasts, and, in addition to the number on the chair, the number and name of the proprietor stamped or painted on the inner side of the poles."* This was made the subject of a petition, and seriously occupied the attention of a Committee of Parliament. The Chairmen alleged "the order was a grievance; that theirs was a peculiar trade, that defects might exist without their knowledge, that the owners of chairs employed by nobility and gentry could not be answerable for men acting in their absence; that 'able men' were vague terms, and 'decent apparel' a question rather of means than the opinion of the wearer; that not to carry a chair on the flagged way was an encroachment on the rights of humanity;' that to wear a badge on the breast was an act of wanton oppression, and the having the names inside the poles altogether unnecessary." A select Committee was for days occupied on these weighty questions, and reported on the 11th March, 1778,† "1st. That the Petitioners have fully proved the allegations of their Petition ; 2nd. That in the opinion of this Committee three numbers on each side, and another on back are sufficient to identify owners of the chair, the numbers and the owners being registered with the Commissioners of Police. 3rd. That it is the opinion of the Committee that the chairmen of the City of Dublin are an honest, laborious, and decent body of men, and highly deserving the protection and relief of Parliament." The said Report was ordered to lie on table for perusal of Members. It must have been gratifying to the chairmen of Dublin to know that the interests and rights of their brother professionals occupied almost the last clause in the last act of the Irish Parliament. [App. 16.]‡

6

*Com. Jour. 24 Dec. 1787.

† Com. Jour., 11 March, 1778. +40 Geo. III, c. 100. §. 63.

The close of the Session of 1787 brought with it much personal sorrow to the Irish people in the death of their Viceroy. The Duke of Rutland was attacked by the Irish scourge-Typhus fever, and after a few days' illness expired, to the generally expressed regrets of all classes. A word in his behalf may be permitted.

Profuse in his expenditure, agreeable in his bearing, strong in his resolves, and confident in his advisers, the Duke of Rutland won the kind feeling, and commanded the confidence of the Irish people. He was popular with the crowd; he knew their weaknesses, -appreciated, and when he could do so, gratified them. He understood the temper of the Irish House of Commons, and on impending divisions neglected no means to conciliate opponents and to further secure friends. During a period requiring tact, discretion, and boldness, with promptitude in action, he proved equal to the occasion; and under circumstances of great pressure, in dealing with venal senators, he neither heavily encumbered the exchequer, nor unduly strained the prerogative of the Crown. A less-gifted diplomatist, in stemming popular disturbance, might have incited to open rebellion, or, in controlling the House of Commons, have invited to revolution. He skilfully avoided either extreme; and it is something to his credit that his highest eulogy came from many to whom he was politically opposed. He died in office, and may be fairly said to have accomplished the duty he had specially undertaken.

It was no easy matter to select a suitable successor to a Viceroy who, in times of difficulty and peril, had guided the State through dangers impossible to be too gravely estimated. The appointment of Earl Temple was considered appropriate. The Irish had already had experience of his administration. He had, since leaving Ireland, progressed in the Peerage, and it was hoped that as Marquis of Buckingham, with large Irish estates, he would bring the landed gentry of the country to his side. The active steps taken for the vindication of the law having restored comparative quiet, it was anticipated that time and opportunity would be found for the redress of those social grievances complained of. The arrival of their old acquaintance was to the inhabitants of Dublin an occasion for the display of popular enthusiasm ; the

It

horses were taken from his carriage, and the people, with every demonstration of satisfaction, drew it through the streets. would not have been very difficult to have maintained the popularity then aroused, but the Marquis of Buckingham entirely failed to do so. The Irish admire firmness; they respect, even when they fear, the exercise of a resolute will; they love liberality, and glory in extravagance; but,—they despise sham! The Duke of Rutland in the former respects had satisfied their ideas of a Viceroy. So long as the ends of public justice were accomplished, he did not too curiously investigate the means. The additional burden of

£20,000 a-year imposed on the revenue of the country during his administration may have been the cheapest and best compromise under the circumstances. The expenditure on the Court was lavish; there had been no desire to discourage similar outlay elsewhere. The Marquis of Buckingham was of a very different disposition. The Castle festivities were diminished, the household expenses curtailed, the official accounts scrutinized. It is but fair to say that many of the inquiries instituted were forced on the Viceroy, and did not result from any captious spirit. When formerly in office certain ordnance returns had been submitted to him; it had been his duty to examine them, and when, on his re-arrival, reports from the same department were again submitted, the glaring differences left no alternative but their investigation and an exposure of the frauds practised. The heads and clerks in many public departments took the alarm; many resigned and were permitted to pass unpunished; by those less implicated a cry was raised, that meanness under the name of thrift was but a pretext to induce officials to retire, that personal friends or dependants might fill their places. This insinuation received apparent support from certain alterations in the Board of Revenue, whereby the Commissioners were increased in number, and Englishmen introduced. Official corruption was on its trial! The friends of Reform believed the Augean stable would be cleared, and the public expenses proportionately diminished; and so they might have been, had not evil fortune in the shape of temptation ordered otherwise. One of the most valuable sinecures in Ireland, the office of Chief Remembrancer, became vacant. The pay was