1805.

Proceedings in Parliament on

Irish affairs.

strongest proofs of the wise and dignified sentiments, by which he was animated.

When the Parliament had been convened a week, Lord Suffolk called the attention of the Peers to a motion, which he had intended in the last session to submit to them respecting the situation of Ireland. He gave them that early notice, that he had not relinquished his intention : many circumstances had since happened, which encouraged him to persevere in his design. As however it would soon be known, whether the Irish Catholics would or would not petition Parliament, he should await the result of their determination, and of their petition, should they present it. He knew not how to anticipate its rejection, because he could not bring his mind to imagine, that it would be opposed by a minister, who had given a solemn pledge to use his best and incessant endeavours in support of the measure, which he was anxious should be submitted to their Lordships; more especially, when he recollected, as their Lordships would also recollect, that without the influence of that pledge and promise, that minister could never have succeeded in bringing about the Union. In the commons Mr. Foster presented petitions from the Protestant schools, and other similar institutions, for which several sums were voted as usual: he also gave in the estimates, which were afterwards granted under the Dublin paving bill. Several interesting debates passed in the commons upon Sir Evan Nepean's motion for suspending the habeas corpus act in Ireland, which he proposed to extend to six weeks after the commencement of the next session of

Parliament *. He and Mr. Pitt urged as the grounds for that harsh measure, that there were then at Paris committees of United Irishmen, who communicated with traitors in Ireland upon the most efficient means of effecting the invasion of that country and when the house considered the humane and just character of Lord Hardwicke, they would with plenitude of confidence deposit that extraordinary power in his hands. Mr. Fox on the other hand warmly replied, that the character of the Lord Lieutenant was immaterial. The constitution taught him to be jealous of granting extraordinary powers to any man; and if there were a possibility of their being abused, the mild character of the man, in whom they were to be vested was the worst of arguments. If the powers were not necessary, they ought not to be granted: and. if necessary, and the Lord Lieutenant were not fit to be entrusted with them, he ought to be removed. He never had heard even from Mr. Pitt in the whole progress of his hostility to freedom and the constitution of England more dangerous doctrines, than those, upon which he rested the necessity of that measure of extreme severity. He had alleged no other reason, than rumour and re

Sir John Newport warmly contended, that there was no necessity for that harsh measure, and proposed the following amendment, viz. "That a committee of 21 members of this "house to be chosen by ballot, be appointed to take into con"sideration such documents, as shall be laid before them, and ་་ report their opinion to this house, whether the measure now "proposed be rendered necessary by the circumstances of the " country."

་་

1805.

1805.

port of what was passing at Paris, for taking away the constitution of a country, which in the same breath he admitted to be generally tranquil and loyal. It had been admitted on all hands, that Ireland was at that time as peaceable as any county in England. Why not then as well suspend the constitution in England? If it were to be thus regularly suspended year after year in Ireland at the will of the minister, there was an end of the freedom of the country. He emphatically warned the house not tamely to surrender the liberty of the people into the hands of government without cause, without enquiry, and without hesitation. Fifty-four only out of 213 members opposed the measure *.

* In this debate, Mr. Fox alluded to the severe treatment of Mr. Todd Jones, who had been 16 months confined under the suspension of the habeas corpus act at Cork. Sir Evan Nepean officially assured Mr. Fox, that he had been misinformed. It was much the fashion for gentlemen connected with ministers to speak of Mr.Todd Jones as of a public delinquent, because he had fallen under the suspicion of government. He afterwards obtained a verdict for 2,5001. damages, in an action against Bernard Shaw, Esq. for having libelled him. He certainly ever was an active and staunch friend to catholic emancipation and parliamentary reform: sufficient reasons for becoming an object of suspicion and persecution. The three Irish members, who spoke most strenuously for the suspension, were Mr. Bagwell, who described the violent and outrageous proceedings of some turbulent men in Tipperary, who had persecuted, and even murdered persons, that paid advanced rents for farms to the prejudice of the old occupiers. Lord de Blaquiere urged as a reason for the suspension, the frequency of informers being assassinated: and instanced the case of one Healy, who had been sent to London by Government, after he had lodged his information, and was

1805.

of the Ca

Ireland in the mean time was loyal and tranquil in spite of the aspersions and calumnies of the Resolutions hired writers, and the unsupported charges of tholic meetsome of the ministerialists in Parliament. On the ing. 16th of February, according to adjournment, a numerous meeting of the Roman Catholic noblemen, gentlemen, and merchants was convened

murdered in Piccadilly the very night of his arrival; and Dr. Duigenan, who claimed credit from the house for the following general assertions: that the county of Tipperary was disturbed by nocturnal searches for arms; that the county of Carlow was the scene of frequent nocturnal meetings, as was Limerick; and the city of Dublin was under the necessity of being pa troled every night, from the multitude of dangerous conspiracies and assassination plots: centinels were shot dead and maimed on their stands, and committees were formed for systematizing assassination. The members for the respective places, in which the Doctor laid his charges, were present: and not one of them durst rise in support of his veracity. Lord Temple and Mr. Hytchinson deprecated the mischievous consequences of thus traducing and libelling the country. Lord Temple most judiciously complained, that if this bead-roll of iniquities were true, the learned Doctor should have given notice to the mover of the address on the King's speech, who had eminently displayed the tranquillity of Ireland, in order to have prevented him from carrying false statements to the foot of the throne. If half of what the learned Doctor had asserted were true, ministers were criminal indeed in permitting his Majesty to close the last and open the present session of Parliament without a word said upon the subject. If no evidence could be procured, a message at least from his Majesty might have laid a parliamentary ground for discussing the measure. Mr. Dawson in opposing the suspension, observed, that if there existed any necessity for so harsh a measure, it was impossible to believe, that there should not have been some official intimation or recommendation of it from the Lord Lieutenant.

1805.

in Dublin, at which they unanimously entered into the following resolutions. 1. That the Earl of Fingall, the honorable Sir Thomas (now Lord) French, Sir Edward Bellew, Counsellor Denys Scully, and Mr. Ryan should be appointed as a deputation, to carry into effect the undermentioned instructions; and that the other Roman Catholic Peers, (of whom Lords Gormanstown and Southwell were then present) should be requested to ac cede to the deputation. 2°. That the petition prepared by the Catholic committee, and reported by Lord Fingall to that meeting, should be then signed by Lord Fingall and the other Catholic gentlemen, and that the above-mentioned deputies should present it to Mr. Pitt, with a request, that he would bring it into Parliament; authorizing him, if he should feel himself precluded by strong reasons from supporting the petition at that moment, to state, that they would not press for the immediate adoption of the measure prayed for. And if Mr. Pitt should decline introducing it under such circumstances, that then they should procure its introduction by such other member, as should seem most eligible, with authority to such member to make the like declaration in the like case of his Majesty's Ministers declaring themselves precluded from affording their support at that moment.

Applications against

Powerful applications were made to Trinity Colthe catholic lege, Dublin, to procure a petition from that learnpetition. ed body against the prayer of the Catholic petition, to the two houses of Parliament. Their liberality prevailed over the intrigues and importunity of bi