PRIVILEGE OF COMMONS ON MONEY BILLS.

December 16th, 1783.

On this day Curran moved--“That it is the sole and undoubted privilege of the Commons of Ireland to originate all bills of supply and grants of public money, in such manner, and with such clauses as they shall think proper." This motion was called out by two resolutions of the House of Lords, stated in the speech itself:

While I reflect that the motion I am now going to make is of the utmost importance to the honour, and even existence of this house, and that I have given full notice of my intention, I am much surprised at the little regard that seems intended to be paid to it, as is manifest from the emptiness of those benches. This, sir, is not a question of party; I am no party man-I despise the principle; I never did, nor ever will attach myself to party, and, though I mean to move the resolution from this side of the house, yet it concerns both sides equally; it goes to assert the privileges of the people of Ireland, represented in this house of commons; and I say, every party, and every description of men in this house is equally concerned in supporting it. I say it is the sole and exclusive right of the commons of Ireland to originate and frame money bills in such manner as they shall think proper; and the resolution I intend to propose, is only to vindicate this privilege from the encroachments of a neighbouring assembly, which has lately, by certain resolutions, invaded this right, this palladium of the constitution, which I trust every man in the house will think himself bound to defend.

I am sorry to say that the constitution of Ireland is so young, that I need not go back to a very remote period, to prove that the exclusive right of originating and framing money bills, has always resided in this house; but, for thirty years back, it certainly has, and in England, from whence we derive our constitution, it always has been the practice. The peers and the crown possess an undoubted right of rejecting such bills in toto, but in the commons alone resides the power of originating or framing them; the very mode of giving the royal assent to such bills, demonstrates that the commons alone are the source from which they flow. His Majesty thanks his faithful commons, accepts their benevolence, and wills it to be so, and this mode obtains

both in Britain and here. To whom should the people of Ireland look for the redress of grievances, for the encouragement of arts, for the promotion of commerce, but to their representatives in this house? What powerful engine has this house, by which it can obtain the redress of grievances, the encouragement of arts, or the promotion of commerce, but by including those objects in the bill of supply? If the right be once given up, or wrested from the commons, they cease to be the patrons and representatives of the people; another assembly will assume that power; the people will learn to look for that encouragement and support from the aristocratic, which they now receive from the democratic branch of the state; this house will become a very cypher, and its members, instead of possessing the power of encouraging arts, rewarding merit, or, in a word, of serving the country, will become the humble solicitors of another assembly.

From the reign of Henry the Third, the power of annexing the redress of grievances to money bills, has been the constitutional privilege of the commons of England; the practice of inserting such clauses as the commons have deemed proper, has obtained in Ireland for more than thirty years, and, to any person acquainted with our constitution, must, at the slightest view, appear to be their inherent right. I cannot, therefore, suppose this house will be silent when this privilege is invaded by another assembly. No man entertains a higher opinion of that assembly than I do; and I am persuaded that so great is their lordships' wisdom, that when this matter is duly considered by them, they will see the impropriety of two resolutions which appear upon their journals of the fourth of the present month, to this effect: "That all grants for the encouragement of particular manufactures, arts, and inventions, or for the construction or carrying on of any public or other works, ought to be made in separate acts; and that the practice of annexing such grants to bills of aid or supply, for the support of his Majesty's government, is unparliamentary, and tends to the destruction of the constitution." "That this house will reject any bill of aid or supply to which such clauses shall be annexed." That the illustrious assembly to which I allude has passed such resolutions, is notorious, and cannot be denied; they are inserted in its journals, and have been seen by many members of this

house. The formality, therefore, of appointing a committee to inspect their lordships' journals is unnecessary, and all that remains for the commons is to vindicate their own privileges by a mild and temperate resolution, which I shall propose to the house; for, even admitting that sometimes a house of commons has erred in making improper grants, we should rather reform ourselves, and determine not to err again, than submit to have a monitor over us.

If I were addressing a house of commons, the most virtuous or the most corrupt, I should expect to be supported in this measure; for I would say to a virtuous house of commons,—the privilege of originating and framing money bills is the palladium of your liberty, the great engine to restrain oppression, to redress grievances, or to encourage merit: I would say to a corrupt house of commons,—it is the palladium of your corruption, the security of the wages of your venality, the means by which you may obtain the reward of your prostitution; or if I were addressing a house containing both descriptions, both kinds of argument would be applicable but to the house before which I stand, surely the arguments which I have first used, the arguments of virtue and of honour, will be sufficient; to them, therefore, I shall trust.

I lament that a learned and right honourable member,* with whom I once had the happiness of living on terms of friendship, is now absent; because I think I might rely upon his supporting the resolution I intend to propose; that support would, perhaps, renew the intercourse of our friendship, which has lately been interrupted. And I must beg the indulgence of the house to say, that that friendship was upon the footing of perfect equality, not imposed by obligation on the one side, or bound by gratitude on the other; for I thank God, when that friendship commenced, I was above receiving obligation from any man, and, therefore, our friendship, as it was more pure and disinterested, as it depended on a sympathy of minds and congeniality of sentiments, I trusted would have endured the longer. I think myself bound to make this public declaration, as it has gone forth from this house, that I am a man of ingratitude, and to declare, that for any difference of opinion with my learned and right honourable friend, I cannot

Barry Yelverton. The reference is thus interpreted by Leonard MacNally, in a note on the passage, in a copy of the 1811 edition of Curran's Speeches, now in my possession. This copy was a present to MacNally from Curran, and contains several notes by the former, which I shall use.

be taxed with ingratitude; for that I never received any obligation from him, but lived on a footing of perfect equality, save only so far as his great talents and erudition outwent mine.

I confess my obligation to the house for this indulgence of speaking a few words foreign to the debate, but which every man must think I owed to my own character; and that I may detain gentlemen no longer, I shall briefly move:

"That it is the sole and undoubted privilege of the commons of Ireland to originate all bills of supply and grants of public money, in such manner and with such clauses as they shall think proper." -Debates, vol. ii., pp. 333, 4, 5.

Mr. Parsons seconded the motion, and, after a short debate, it was negatived, by 68 to 11. Curran then moved that a Committee to examine the Lords' Journals be appointed, which motion was also rejected.

RETRENCHMENT.

February 14th, 1785.

ON the 14th of February, on the motion for a Committee of Supply, Flood, in an admirable debating speech, moved, as an amendment,-" That an immediate and effectual retrenchment of our expenses is nccessary." Curran supported the amendment, which was lost. The following fragment of his speech remains :-

I am surprised gentlemen will press the order of the day before they agree to a resolution which is to be directory to the committee of supply. The question is, in fact, is economy to take place or not? for I laugh at men who say it is for the order of the day. I hope ministers will not be found formidable only in numbers, and tremble at argument; the people cannot be easily satisfied that they have got great advantages by giving up the protection of their trade in hopes of an extension of it, unless the parliament, who are bound in honour to do so, declare that no new tax or heavy burthens are to be laid upon them. One gentleman says it is now too late to look for economy; the same gentleman says it is too early, and thus we are bandied about between too late and too early, and nothing effectual is to be done. I therefore hope ministers will not have their strength in numbers, but will advance some argument why economy should not take effect.-Debates, vol. iv., p. 217.

The amendment was lost.

MILITIA v. VOLUNTEERS.

On the same day Mr. Gardiner moved a grant of £20,000 for clothing the militia. This motion was levelled at The Volunteers, and was therefore violently debated. Curran opposed it, and we give his reported speech :

I would not, at first, have known that the question was undoubtedly ministerial, had I not perceived, on the first stir of it, the little advocate,* drawing out his brief from his pocket, prepared to support it. I am the more warranted in this expression of calling it a brief, as it is evident the instructions are false. The high character and honour of The Volunteers, is a reason why the right honourable gentleman should not persist in a motion which will not add to his honour; I wish him to consider, that what he may gain in splendour he may lose in respect; and I adjure him not to lose the favourable wish of the people. The honourable gentleman has been unsuccessful in a motion, in which he had my support; and I confess that I wish him to be unsuccessful on the present question, as it is one which is injurious to the nation, dishonourable to The Volunteers, these great saviours of their country, and increases the influence of the crown, which has been already much, too much, increased. It is probable that the right honourable gentleman undertook this ministerial business in hope of being rewarded, by being raised to a higher rank.—Debates, vol. iv., pp. 232, 3.

This last allusion caused a wrangle with Gardiner, and then Fitzgibbon, the Attorney-General, spoke a few words, which we print, as characteristic of his insolence :

"Sir, having heard such an unintelligible rhapsody of words, in which the honourable member has stated the danger of embodying a militia of gentlemen, in which he has applauded the zeal of the lowest order of the people, and called upon them to continue their noble exertions in which he has poured forth a studied panegyric on the volunteers and in which he has uttered a general miscellany of all sorts of things, I will pass by all that he has said, making the greatest allowance for his intemperance, because he is labouring in the cause of his constituents; and so constitutional a representative of the people ought to have the privilege of saying whatever he thinks fit. But as I feel myself in a very different situation from that honourable member, I shall even entrust the defence of the country to gentlemen, with the King's commission in their pockets, rather than to his friends, the beggars in the streets.”Debates, vol. iv., pp. 233, 4.

Unfortunately, Grattan went with the government, and the motion was carried by 139 to 63.

* The Right Honourable Luke Gardiner-Lord Mountjoy by the Union.