CHAPTER III.

rions from

tior.

Administration of the Duke of Rutland.

1784. With this governor commenced the system of Mr. ExpectaPitt's administration, which ended in incorporated union the new ad

ministraof Ireland with Great Britain. This period of Irish history is peculiarly interesting, inasmuch as it discloses the means, by which England exercised its influence over that kingdom with more effect and less disguise, than before she had acquired a constitution and legislative independence. The opponents of the Rockingham administration were extravagantly elated upon the new appointments, for in the names of Pitt, Richmond, and Rutland, they read three of the staunchest friends of parliamentary reform : laying their immediate failure to carry this favourite measure, as well as those of a reduction in the army establishment, retrenchment of the expenditures in the civil departments, and protecting duties *, to the insincerity of the shortlived administration of the Whigs, they anticipated the instantaneous and zealous co-operation of their opponents and successors, in completing the civil liberty of Ireland.

* i. e. For protecting their own manufactures and enforcing the consumption of them at home, by laying heavy and prohi. bitory duties on the like manufactures imported from foreiga countries.

Duke of Rutland addressed.

1784. When the house met, according to adjournment,

a congratulatory address was unanimously voted to the Duke of Rutland. On one day thirteen petitions from counties and populous boroughs were presented to the house of commons by their respective representatives, praying a reform in the state of the representation of the people in parliament. The nation was now in the height of a political fever: elated with what they had obtained ; soured by disappointment at being refused what they were taught to believe was still wanting to complete their freedom. The undisguised attempts both of parliament and government to discredit and dissolve the volunteers; the failure of the opposition to procure a reduction of the military establishment at the return of peace, all tended to foment jealousies between the citizen and the

soldier*. Bill for par

Mr. Flood had no sooner returned from England, liamentary reform lost. than he moved for leave to bring in a bill for a

more equal representation of the people in parliament. It was vehemently urged by Mr. Flood, and supported, though less warmly, by Mr. Grattan. The numbers

Every circumstance tending to alienate the minds of the citizens from the soldiery is, in our constitution, of more than ordinary consequence. A riot had lately happened at Island Bridge, where the outrages of the soldiery bad exceeded the rules of military discipline, or even common humanity. This exasperated the populace. In retaliation, they had recourse to the barbarous practice of houghing the soldiers, whenever they found them straggling and off their guard. This induced General Luttrell to bring in a bill to give better protection to soldiers, and others, against the barbarous practice of houghing.

sion were 85 for reform, and 159 against it. Thus 1784. was the spirit of the new administration soon discover. ed to be hostile to the popular wish for reform. The rejection of this and some other popular measures sharpened the animosity of the people even to outrage Several of the members in the house of commons. The severity, with which the house of comnions Causes of

popular censured the publishers of some popular newspapers, discontent. and the lord mayor of Dublin, for not preventing their circulation and calling in the military, added fuel to the discontents of the populace, which at last amounted to a tumultuous rising in Dublin. This unruly spirit of discontent was further fomented by the unpopularity of Sir John Blaquiere's paving bill*, against which the house would neither hear counsel at their bar nor receive the petition from the inhabitants at large. In this licentious disposition of the public mind, Mr. Foster who had been marked as an object of obloquy in the newspapers, brought in a bill for restraining the liberty of the press, which was the only remaining subject of importance, agitated in parliament during the session. It met with some opposition, though the provisions of it went no further, than to make known the

1794. real name of the printer or proprietor of every news

paper. It was however disrelished by the people. Their irritation was also increased by the house of commons having ordered their Serjeant at Arms to take the publishers and printers of the offensive newspapers out of the custody of the civil power, and commit them over to military escorts, under which they were more severely treated, than they could have been by the civil power. These illegal stretches of power were censured in parliament, and produced in that ferment of the public mind the worst of consequences. The proposal of a vote of thanks to the new lorda lieutenant, occasioned heated debates in the commons; and the failure of Mr. Flood's reform bill, and other popular measures did not ingratiate him with the peo

ple out of doors. Parliament The first time the Duke of Rutland personally ad, and popular dressed the parliament was in proroguing it on the 4th

of May, 1784. The difficulties of the session were greater without, than within the walls of the senate. Appeals were made by some of the members to the armed associations when the session was over, upon the questions lost in parliament. The discontent and violence of the people increased. The populace frequently assembled, and committed outrages, even to the American fashion of “ tarring and feathering." More serious consequences were prevented by calling

out the military. Proceed- A principal objection to the introduction of Mr.

Flood's bill for a parliamentary reform was, that it orimentary

ginated with an armed body. The sheriffs and chief

Prorogued,

discontents increased.

ings for parlia

1784.

*

magistrates were therefore called upon to convene the inhabitants of their respective counties, fully to discuss that measure ; and a meeting was convened at Dublin on the 7th of June, 1784, where the high sheriffs pre. sided, and at which strong resolutions * were agreed to, A very animated address from the committee to the people of Ireland was published, and a petition or remonstrance from the freemen, freeholders, and inhabitants of the city of Dublin to the throne, to forward parliamentary reform, and correct many other abuses, was presented to the lord-lieutenant by the high sheriffs, with an address to his excellency requesting it might be transmitted ; to which his excellency answered, that in complying with their request, he should not fail to convey his entire disapprobation of it, as casting unjust reflections upon the laws and parliament of Ireland, and tending to weaken the authority of both. These proceedings of the city of Dublin were seconded by other parts of the kingdom ; but their object was frustrated by the interposition of government. Prosecutions by information were commenced against different persons, by whom such aggre. gate meetings had been assembled, and Mr. Reily, the high sheriff of the county of Dublin, was sentenced to fine and imprisonment by the Court of King's Bench. Notwithstanding their repeated defeats, such was the credulous enthusiasm of the majority of these advo