Графични страници
PDF файл
ePub

We touch now upon the quick, the very life of the question. The claufe tranfmitted to England proposed that his Majesty, by his vicegerent and council in Ireland, might withdraw the required restriction, at any time within the term of the bill. The alteration returned to Ireland, propofed that his Majefty, by his council in England, might withdraw faid reftriction within faid term. Here the King in both cafes is the King of both kingdoms, and all the difference that can arife merely respects his council of Ireland, and his council of England. Little as this difference appears to be, we mutt fuppofe a defign, either falutary or injurious, apparent or latent, in the alteration.

The most natural and obvious prefumption is, that England, as well as Ireland, is greatly apprehenfive of an approaching carcity of bread. That as England had never fhut her ports or ftores against the neceffities of Ireland, it would be fevere and unjust that the ftores of Ireland thould be with-held from the neceffities of England. That, as his Majesty is the common father of both people, it was equally incumbent on him to be provident of fupplies for the one as for the other. That, as Ireland was the repository from whence the propofed benefit was expected to arife, it was but equitable that Ireland fhould be firft provided for. That his Majesty's British council, however, advised him that the exigencies of England might become preffing, might become speedy, might become extreme! That the English alone, in fuch a cafe, could be the natural and proper judges of their own exigencies,

Thirdly, though parliaments may repeal all former acts, but those which eftablished and guard the fundamental principles of our conftitution; Yet the reafon, the author himself ftrongly infifts on, when he fays, the crown has an abfolute negative on bills, agreed upon by both houfes of parliament. What can a fingle Seffion of fenfible and incorruptible members avail? Would Poynings's law ftand this day a reproach to every part of the Jegiflature of this kingdom could our late or prefent incorrupt members hope to repeal it, or even to correct and amend

it ?

And that neither the Iris, nor the council and vicegerent refident in Ireland, could be fufficiently fpeedy, intimate, or competent judges of the neceffities of England.

It is further obvious that his Majesty, on this emergency, had three options. First, of putting his negative on the whole of this restriction. Or fecondly, of inferting an exception in favour of England. Or thirdly of permitting the restriction to continue entire, till his English council should advise him that the exigencies of their country became clamorous and extreme.

That first, in confequence of such a negative, our ports must have continued open for the exportation of our corn to all parts of the globe, whereon a famine might have enfued, and both kingdoms have fuffered much beyond what our prefent fears and alarms could fuggeft. Secondly, that a claufe of exception, in favour of England, could not have been effectual for precluding the exportation of our corn to other countries, who, under the pretext and fanction of fuch a partial permiffion, would inevitably have crouded in at the one open gate. Thirdly, therefore that, in all lights, it was evidently most eligible to referve the faid ftores by a univerfal preclufion, till the neceffities of England should become fo urgent as loudly to call out upon Ireland for bread,

In fact the very utmost that his Majefty or (if you please) his ministers did, upon this occafion, was to leave it to our own election, whether (by rejecting the whole bill) we would keep our ports ftill open; or (by acceding to the alteration) permit

The ability of the two kingdoms can alas! in no inftance hold good; agriculture and the exportation of grain, is encouraged by bounties in England, Therefore they have rich granaries and corn-factors. We have neither, and therefore hardly ever have corn enough for home confumption. Yet the bill, as I have already fhewn in my former addrefs, left it in the power of the crown, by the advice of the privy council here, to fhare their grain with their brethren of England, as far as felfprefervation would admit. Who could ask for more? (fee p. 46, 1 col.)

our

our brothers of England to be the judges of their own neceffities *.

This, however, is very far from being the light in which your zealous reprefentative beholds this matter. His imagination, ever fearfully watchful for his country, has conjured up a groupe of Spectres, more affrighting and tremendous than Milton's fin and death, with all his Gorgons, Hydras, and chimeras dire t.

I will in no respect deceive or mislead you, my countrymen. I am confident that Mr. Lucas is, with me, fully affured that his Majefty, in all his measures ‡, can mean nothing less than impartial beneficence to all his people. What his minitters may machinate, what diftant views or fecret referves they may have in ftore, neither he nor I can pretend to fay; neither will I take upon me to answer. It may therefore be the more incumbent to enquire whether any, and what kind of meditated mifchief or poifon, may lurk behind the aspect of this fair-feeming alteration §.

As England and Ireland, by conftitution and compact, are two kingdoms distinct and independant of each other, fave fo far as they are united by one king or common head; I affirm with Mr. Lucas that, fhould the executive or legillative powers of Ireland be, in any

The Doctor's first addrefs, (p. 46) and the Analysis, (p. 55) have fet this matter in a very different light, to which we must refer.

+I do not conjure up groupes of spectres, &c. But I behold the minifters of political fin, which endangers the political death, or difeafe of my country, with horror, which the righteous cannot feel, and therefore cannot fear on the other fide the grave.

But why is his facred name and character to be hawled into this controverfy? Is it to be imagined, that he can look into matters of this nature? Are they not all left to his council? Does not the council refer them to one or two fervants of the crown, who alter, report or reject them at pleasure.

How far unfavourable fufpicions may be founded, we must refer to the two pieces before mentioned.

meafure, transferred to, or vefted in England, Ireland, from that time, is no more a kingdom, no longer a state. But as the executive power of Ireland is conftitutionally and exprefly vetted in the king of England*, this neceffarily implies that the difpenfer of fuch power must be refident in England; though it is folely as king of Ireland, and in no degree as king of England, that our conftitution has intruited him with the faid powers, or that the faid powers are by him to be difpenfed.

I wish to be the clearer and more particular on his head, as the transference of these powers, from Ireland to England, appears to be the only fountain from whence Mr. Lucas's fears have arisen.

Now, with refpect to any content which our parliament may have given, on the present occafion, for transferring the executive or any part or particle of the legislative power of Ireland to his Majefty's miniftry or privy-council of Great Britain, I know of no man who can better inform you than the Doctor hinself, that our conftitution knows of no fuch perfons, or powers, as his Majesty's miniftry or council in these kingdoms, faving his great councils in parliament affembled, and the customary civil minifters of his executive power, fuch as the governors, theriffs, conftables, and fo forth, refpectively and diftinctly appointed to each realm +. As fuch perfons therefore

are

*With equal truth and propriety he might have fayed, that this power is vefted in the elector of Hanover.-The diftinction is properly mentioned in the pieces published in our last.

† But what will the conceffion avail our author? It is certain the King ufually exercises or directs his executive power in England, by or in his council. As it alfo is, that he vefts his executive power in Ireland in his vicegerent and council here. Therefore the withdrawing or transferring, the power ufually velted in a perfon or perfons refident here, in one instance, and that by an act of parliament, is confeffing that it is lawful and right to do fo occafionally, in all inftances. And therefore the injury is the fame whether the privy-council be, or be

-not

are not conftitutional, nothing that is and hearts with their granaries ftill closed. conftitutional can have been transfer- Nothing is here to be done fave what Ireland itself, fhall do, or omit at plea fure.

red.

His majefty, indeed, has an indifputable right to call to him as many privy minifters and privy counsellors as he pleases; and thefe he may ufe as eyes and ears, throughout the land, in order to bring him faithful and fpeedy intelligence. In truth, this is the only ufe to which his Majefty could poffibly put them upon this occafion. Neither his private nor public ministers, refident in England, could take upon them any part of his executive pow. er in Ireland. And it is devoutly to be hoped that neither his great council of England, or great council of Ireland will ever transfer to any inferior council, or to his Majefty himself, any portion or pittance of their conftitutionally inherent, their legislative power.

Permit me to put a supplement to this Addrefs.

At the time that this bill first passed the Commons of Ireland, no Gentleman in the house supposed it would be remitted to us in any fhape*. England has favourably excepted Ireland, in all bills of a like restriction refpecting corn of Britih growth; and it has alío, on the other hand been hitherto quite unprecedented to limit the export of corn from Ireland to Great Britain. It was therefore a very signal inftance of his Majesty's goodnefs to us, to admit of any restriction on this head. Yet this he did, on the reprefentation of the great diftreffes to which this kingdom might, otherwise, be subjected. This alfo he did with most uncommon dispatch; the bill actually ftaid but three days in London. Here was no leisure allowed for state machinations, no time for digging pitfalls or laying diftant fnares, or weaving invifible nets to entangle an unwary people. His Majefty's miniftry, neither then nor hereafter, can propofe any scheme of circumvention by this bill, if our own injurious jealoufies do not urge them to the contrivancet. :

come then to enquire, to demand, to challenge any man to fhew in what inftance, in what light, the faid act, though interpreted into its utmost and most malignant extent, can in any degree tranffer, or in any degree affect either the executive or legislative powers of this kingdom*. Here is nothing to be done by any minifter or counsellor of or in Great Britain, fave to give his Majesty notice of the feafon or time when England fhall be in extremity for want of bread and further, though his Majefty contains in himself the whole executive power of both kingdoms, which he occafionally delegates to, or rather adminifters by his refpective officers, yet here he exerts no one act of his power by himself or by his minifters; he barely gives permiffion for others to act; he barely frees his fubjects of Ireland from that reftraint which they had requested him to lay upon them; he barely leaves them at liberty to open their ports and ftores, or to hold their hands

not a legal, as they are made an actual, part of the conftitution.

* I flatter myself, this is unanswerably fhewn in my first addrefs, and I find my fentiments confirmed, upon looking into the lord's journal, where a proteft is entered against the paffing this act. And therefore, however elegantly the gentle man argues to the contrary, I am perfuaded upon a review of his work, he will retract his opinion.

Indeed, this Bugbear of an alteration, fo formidable, fo much dreaded, is no more effential than other thadows in the glimmering of the night, it is become tremendous merely through our want of due difcernment. I may affirm that the alteration is merely verbal, that legally, conftitutionally, effentially speaking it

* This, I can no more conceive, than I can admit that it was fo very extraordinary an act of clemency, to permit a wretched people to keep their small ftock of grain at home, to prevent a famine.

But if this alteration be really no more than a Bugbear, or a shadow, and tremendous through our want of difcernment, to what end was it made? to what purpofe was it fo violently infisted on, so rapidly paffed? Or, if it was advantageous and honourable, how come it was not better received and countenanced by the great ones, who openly disavowed it to their friends?

is no alteration at all; fince his Majefty, in both councils, is the fame individual perfon*, invested with the fame conftitutional powers, powers unalterable, unalienable, undiminishable by any thing that his faid councils can do or dictate. Rightly speaking, these councils, fhould be confidered as trumpets merely, no matter whether of English or Irish fabric, they ferve equally to receive and convey his Majefty's conftitutional directions. If our parliament had propofed on this occafion, that his Majefty fhould speak his pleafure in bis Irish nightgown; and if his Majefty had anfwered that he would grant their defires, provided he might fpeak his pleasure in his English nightgown, as it happened to be nearest at hand t; the difference would have been neither more nor less than that between an Irish and an English privy-council.

A certain friend at my fide tells me, he is perfuaded that all this buftle has arifen, from the mistake of fome half drunken clerk of the hanaper, who, being accustomed to engrofs none but the copies of English bills, has inadvertently inferted the council of England, instead of the council of Ireland. For, as Mr. Lucas

What fhall I call this? I am too tender of the learned author to name it. Shall we fay, that because the natural perfon of the king of England and Ireland is one and the fame, and indivifible, that his fubjects are not to feparate, and diftinguish his political capacity? fhall his fubjects of Hanover, or of Ireland, obey him merely as king of England? Is not their allegiance due to him, merely as elector of Hanover or as king of Ireland? And is not the homage of the British fubjects. payed him, purely as king of Great Britain, not as king of Ireland, or France, or elector of Hanover?

How would the British parliament like to fee their King afcend the throne of England attired in his electoral habit and coronet, instead of the imperial crown and robes of Britain? How would the British fubjects like having orders conceived to rule them, in the council of Hanover, when fome of our kings refided in that part of their dominions? or by orders made in the council of Ireland, if his Majefty fhould refide there.

February 1766.

himself intimates, jocofely enough *, had his Majefty or his minifters any particular defigns in agitation, they needed not to go further a field; unless his Majesty meant to reproach his council of Ireland for fome uncommon want of attachment to his royal interefts, or to compliment them on their fingular attachment to this country.

Gentlemen! the utmost benefit required or propofed by this bill, was that our corn, for a season, should be univerfally fhut in. On the other hand, the utmolt admiffable evil was that his Majesty by his negative, fhould keep our ports univerfally open t. All between thefe two extremes was a real though partial advantage. But his Majefty, as it should feem, declined to indulge us in a certain minute article of our defires 1. Hereupon we are huffed, and, because we cannot get the whole loaf, we will accept of no part of the bread that is offered.

*But, if this alteration could arise only from the blunder of a clerk of the hanaper, as our author feems to believe, pray why all the expedition and violence in paffing it firft? and juftifying it now? And what is meaned by Mr. Lucas's jocofe intimation, I am too dull to discover, without taking a trouble, which is not worth while.

The first, I grant; but the fecond, I deny. Because I think the actual death of the greatest number, that could be fuppofed to die of the once imagined famine, (the fears of which were otherwife happily removed,) a much less evil than the political death of the whole kingdom for which the alteration layed a foundation.

The reverfe indeed is the truth, that we were granted infinitely more than we could ask or expect, or rather in the grant, were deprived of the benefit of the executive power, effentially inherent to us as a kingdom--And thus to fecure us our own pittance of bread, in time of need, we were put under the neceffity of accepting a precedent for a fatal innovation in our conftitution. If this be the cafe, which neither is, nor can be denied, the reft of our author's paragraph is a mere jingle of fophiftical expreffions, derogato ry from truth, and therefore inconfiftent with the dignity of the author and the fubject.

Because

Because his Majefty has not granted the whole of our bill, we are advised to reject the whole of what he has granted, and the only remedy propofed for this partial difappointment is to incur all the mifchiefs we meant to avoid; to embrace every evil, in its utmost extent, that the moft malignant minifters could poffibly

devife.

I. have turned this argument here and there, round and round, up and down. I have examined it on all fides, I have viewed it in all lights. And yet I cannot, for my foul, perceive that it is inductive of the fmallest or most distant detriment to our people or parliament, to our country or constitution. On the contrary, all the precedent that this act affords, is a precedent that declares that his Majefty, even in matters where his judgment is different, will never attempt any thing cut our concurrence; that he is pleafed to derive his authority from us; that he is defirous of acting under the appointment of our legislature; and that even the difpenfing power, confided to him by this bill, affumes nothing as a claim, arrogates nothing as a prerogative, but fubmits to borrow all its efficacy, to take all its force from the act and inftitution of our Irish parliament t.

Mr. Lucas feems to complain that, in compliance with Poyning's mifconftrued law, thefe heads of a bill were fent to

* I am hurt at the frequent mentioning the royal name, in this difpute. But as it feems to be but a word of office, very familiar in the mouths of minifters, under which they often skreen themselves, I beg he will in this inftance, give me leave to join with him, and in the word king or majefty, mean minifter or miniftry. And for thefe, I think the gentleman is fo zealous an advocate, that I begin to conceive fome fufpicion, that he is of the number.

+ Because no fuch affumption of a claim or prerogative can have any efficacy, weight, force, or authority, from any other quarter, while the Irish parliament continues faithful to their King and country-Does our learned author advance the cause of the miniftry by this kind of argument ?If he has any employment, I fear he may loofe it, for fo weak a defence, therefore in charity, I will not venture to expofe this further.

Great Britain. Surely, he cannot be to learn that, as well before as fince the time of Peyning, the King, as the first eftate, had a prerogatorial tho' undelegative negative upon every bill that could be framed by the fecond or third estate, as well in the Irish as English house of parliament; as alfo an inconclufive

right of propofing any amendment to any bill, fave bills for impofing a tax on the people, to which he can barely give his affent, without addition, deduction or alteration of any kind. The grievance that we lament is of a very different nature; it is that we have not, by our reprefentatives, our wonted accefs to our King; that we cannot, as formerly, immediately addrefs the throne, but are fubjected to the intervention of his council in Ireland, who, under colour of the the faid law (if it may be called a law) have heretofore affumed the privilege of intercepting, fecreting, or rejecting our addreffes at pleasure. It is therefore that we cry to them, as the philofopher did to the Grecian Alexander, take not that from us which ye cannot give unto us, ftand afide from between us and the light of our fun! a complaint as wholly foreign to the prefent cafe and question, as any matters now transacting in the parliament of Rennes or council of Genoa. If I am wrong, I request Mr. Lucas to let me right. I have at all times read and liftened to him with pleasure.

I have lived to fee very different and contrafted times, my countrymen. In fome, Gnats have been ftrained at ; in others, camels have been swallowed. At fome lethargic periods, the roaring of the British lion cannot awake us. At others, if a Calf bleats or a Grafhopper chirps †,

we

This I have already answered, (as in note p. 99.) And the reft of the paragraph is a pompous parade, made upon the infinuated complaint, which is offering an injuftice, at the fight of which, the author muft blush and be fet to rights: for, if he means to do me justice, he must confefs that my fpeeches and writings on this fubject, make the very fame complaint, which he fays I should have made.

+ I should be very glad to know what the learned gentleman means, in a controverfy with me, about an alteration in

a

« ПредишнаНапред »