The minds of the people of Ireland had fo long been prepared to expect a motion of this kind, and the difpofition of the house itself was fo favourable to it, that hardly any oppofition was made. Leave being given to bring in the bill, Mr. Grattan, Mr. Ponsonby, Mr. Forbes, and Mr. Knox, were appointed to prepare it. The joy and exultation expreffed by the Roman Catholics on this occalion, had never been equalled in Ireland: they were accompanied with effufions of loyalty and attachment to the British government and nation, that indicated how effectually religious animofities might fubfide through a mild and conciliatory conduct, and that religious, as well as political differences, are fooneft terminated by forbearance and lenity. But the univerfal fatisfaction arifing from the hopes conceived of an approaching emancipation from all reftrictions, was quickly damped by the intelligence that arrived two days only after the passing of the motion, that the British miniftry was averfe to the measure. Lord Fitzwilliam informed them of the great danger that would infallibly refult from retracting the aflent fo formally given to a motion of fuch importance, and explicitly refufed, by taking upon him that office, to be the perfon to raife a flame which nothing but the force of arms could keep down. Such were his own words. In confequence of this anfwer, he was difiniffed from his poft, which was conferred upon lord Cambden. The confequences of this difmill were immediately apparent in the proceedings of the Irish parliament. Sir Laurence Parfons, in the houfe of commons, proposed an addrefs to lord Fitzwilliam, to exprefs the confidence repofed in him by the Irish nation, and its reprefentatives, and the apprehenfions they felt on his premature removal from a station, wherein his conduct had been fo acceptable to them. Another member, Mr. Duguerry, not only feconded the motion, but propofed the impeachment of Mr. Pitt. Nough this addrefs was withdrawn at the request of those who wifhed to prevent farther acrimony on this occafion, it fufficiently manifefted the refentment excited by the meafures of the British miniftry. Another addrefs, however, was voted, highly approving of his conduct. The univerfal diffatisfaction of the Irish at the removal of lord Fitz william was soon after manifested in a more ferious manner: tumults arofe in feveral places, which were not quelled without the intervention of the military. From the moft moderate of the difaffected, addrefles to him were prefented, full of rancour at the treatment he had experienced, and of invectives against the authors of his difgrace. From this period may be dated the deep and fettled spirit of difcontent, which at once pervaded, and by degrees inflamed to the higheft pitch of violence, both Catholics and Diffenters, and was even felt by numbers of the Proteftants themfelves, who thought that the most aufpicious opportunity of reconciling all parties and interefts, had been arrogantly thrown afide by the unwarrantable and ambitious machinations of a felfifh faction, grafping at the exclufive enjoyment of all the places of power and profit, and at the fole management of all affairs of flate. The refentment of the public it was not difficult to trace to its was particularly marked on the 25th true fource, filled the people of of March, when lord Fitzwilliam Ireland with miftraft and jealoufies took his departure from Ireland. It that have never fubfided fince. was a day of general gloom: the fhops The language of the commonalty were fhut, no bufinefs of any kind became unufually explicit, in was tranfacted, and the whole city reprobating their abjectnels and put on mourning. His coach was fervility. No farther confidence, drawn to the water fide, by fome of it was openly faid, ought hencethe most respectable citizens, and forth to be placed in them, and the people feemed intent on every no epithets were fufficiently dedemonftration of grief. grading to accompany the names of thofe who had acted fo ignominiouly. When earl Cambden arrived at Dublin, five days after, his reception was far different. Every appearance of difpleasure was exhibited; and fuch was the violence of the populace, that it broke out in difturbances, which force became neceflary to fupprefs. But thefe were the mere ebullitions of popular fury, and proved how little dependence in matters of ftate, is to be placed on the difapprobation manifefted by the populace, in contradiction to the fenfe, or the interest of people in power. A ftriking proof of this was exhibited on the very firft meeting of parliament, after lord Cambden's arrival. Notwithstanding the fevere difappointment experienced by the Roman Catholics, they were not difheartened from the profecution of their object; and Mr. Grattan, their agent, made a motion for an inquiry into the ftate of the nation, and particularly the reafons for the recall of lord Fitzwilliam: but it was negatived by a great majority of thofe very members who had voted with fuch warmth and readinels in favour of Mr. Grattan's motion for a quite contrary purpose. On his prefenting the bill for the emancipation of the Roman Catholics, it met with the fan.e fate. This unfeadiness and tergivertion of their reprefentatives, which On the return of lord Fitzwilli am to England, an altercation arofe between him and the miniftry, cor cerning the inftructions he had received previously to his aluming the government of Ireland, and the motives for his recall. The duke of Norfolk took up this bufinels with great warmth. It had, he faid, long been underftood in that country, that the reftraints on the Roman Catholics were to be takeņ away. This opinion had been current in Ireland, ever fince the time of the American war, when the loyalty of the people of all perfuafions to the government of Great Britain, rendered it manifeft, that no diftinctions ought any longer to fubfift among them in point of civil rights and privileges. When lord Fitzwilliam was appointed to the office of lord lieutenant of Ireland, he accepted it in full expectation that he was to carry over with him a final deliverance from all difqualifications upon religious accounts. This was no lefs the opinion of Mr. Grattan, and of the Irish parliament itself: the members of which concurred almoft unanimoufly in a cordial readines to repel thofe reftrictions; and folely of that ground voted the moft ample fupplies ever granted in that king dom. döm. But contrarily to the beft founded hopes, the people of Ireland had been deceived in the moft infulting manner: their reafonable requests had been denied, and the man of their confidence recalled, for having fhewn an inclination to gratify them. A conduct fo haughty and domineering ought to undergo a ftrict examination, and parliament was bound in juftice to the public, to compel minifters to account for fo inconfiftent and myfterious a conduct. The duke, therefore, made a motion to this effect. The earls of Mansfield, Coventry, and Carnarvon, and lord Sydney, oppofed the duke's motion. Lord Fitzwilliam's character not having faffered by his removal, they maintained that no inquiry was needed to clear it up. The prerogative of the crown, empowered it to difmifs minifters at difcretion; it were unconftitutional to inftitute in quiries into the reafons for fuch difmillions; and parliamentary difcullions were the more improper, as they might difclofe matters that ought never to have been divulged The difmiffion of lord Fitzwilliam proved no more than a difference of opinion on his part, touching the affairs of Ireland, that made it improper he should act with ministers who were of another: neither was there fufficient evidence of the difcontents in Ireland, to require any particular invefligation. It was obferved by the carl of Guildford, in reply, that, as without encroaching on the royal prerogative, to declare war, or to conclude peace, the propriety of either the one or the other might be difcuffed in parliament, fo might the propriety of any other act of the crown. On this principle the removal of lord Fitzwilliam merited an inquiry, that the people of Ireland might know their friends in this country from their enemies. He was fpiritedly fupported by the duke of Leeds and lord Moira, who declared themfelves fatisfied that an inquiry, infiead of danger would ultimately be productive of fafety, by eluci dating a tranfaction, the motives for which were fo obfcure, that the people of Ireland were at a lofs to comprehend them, and might harbour refentments against thofe who had no participation in the measure. Lord Fitzwilliam was charged with imprudently forwarding a design to emancipate the Irish Catholics: but was it not fanctioned by every prudent motive? Did not three-fourths of that nation petition for it? Did the other fourth oppofe it? He had laboured with particular zeal to put a flop to the glaring abuses prevailing in the adminiftration of affairs in Ireland: thefe were arrived to fuch a height, that if not corrected, their confequences would fhortly prove fatal to the government of that country, however it might deem itfelf fecure. Was it not temerity in the extreme, amidst fo many caufes of diffatisfaction, to add fo material a one, as the depriving them at once of their hopes of obtaining what they were willing to confider as a redrefs of all griev ances. The earl of Weftmoreland decidedly condemned the introduction into the Irish parliament, of the bu finefs relating to the Catholics; which he alerted was contrary to the inftructions carried from England: their emancipation, he maintained, was repugnant to found policy, as well as to the king's oath, and the laws of the land. [Q2] Το To this lord Fitzwilliam replied, that the most neceffary policy had called upon him to act as he had done. Ireland was in a state of imminent danger from internal feuds and externa! foes: the Catholics were equally powerful and diffatisfied: the French were become mafters of Holland, and thirty-fix hoftile fail of the line were hovering on the western coaft of Ireland. In this perilous fituation he had the happinefs to unite all parties in a determination to act vigorously for the defence of the kingdom. But could he have effected this, had he not convinced the Irish of the liberal intentions of this country? He was anfwered by lord Grenville, who, after alleging much the fame reafons againfi an inquiry as thofe already adduced, remarked that were parliament to affume the right of inquiring into the motives for the difmiffion of minifters, they might, by the fame rule, proceed next to the examination whether thofe who were appointed to fuc ceed them, had been properly chofen. This would obviously lead to ftill more dangerous inquiries, tending ultimately to unhinge the conftitution. After other arguments on both fides of the queftion, the motion for an inquiry was rejected by one hundred against twenty-five. In the houfe of commons very fpirited debates alfo took place on this fubject. Mr. Jekyll introduced it by obferving, that the houfe had an unqueftionable right to examine the ufe made of the royal prerogatives, and to limit them if neceffary. He reminded the minifter of his folemn promife, that whenever the period came for investigation, he would undertake to 8 prove that no blame was imputable to the minifters of this country. Mr. Jekyll vindicated the conduct of lord Fitzwilliam from his letters. According to these he had acted in strict conformity to his inftructions, which went to the emancipation of the Catholics, a condition without which he would not have undertaken the commiffion entrusted to him. But the fact was, that the intereft of a particular family was primarily to be confulted; that of the Beresfords: their difmiffion from office was the real ground of dif fenfion between lord Fitzwilliam and the minifter, and the business of the emancipation was only the tence: it were abfurd, Mr. Jekyll faid, to mention the oaths taken by the king, as obftacles to fuch a meafure. In Canada, in Corfica, the Catholic religion was fettled by law, without violation of the royal oath. He concluded by moving for an inquiry into the conduct of minifters in difmiffing from his office the lord-lieutenant of Ireland. pre. It was stated, in reply, by Mr. Pitt, that no communication of the correfpondence between lord Fitzwilliam and the ministry, could be permitted without the king's affent; and miniftry were officially bound to the firicteft fecrecy in all cafes of this nature. He would not, for this reafon, enter into any verbal explanations of the bufinels in queftion, and neither fhould admit nor deny the facts or the inferences alleged. The king had clearly the right to nominate, and, to difmifs minifters without affigning his motives; cafes of an extraordinary nature excepted. He forcibly urged the indifpenfible neceflity of an entire agreement in fentiments between the king's miniftry, without which which it were impracticable to conduct the affairs of the nation with any regularity or fuccefs; and yet they might differ without any diminution of reciprocal friendfhip or efteem. He deprecated the difcuffion of fubjects now before the Irish parliament, as a manifeft violation of its independence; and warmly exhorted the houfe to leave the fettlement of affairs in that nation to its reprefentatives, who certainly were beft qualified for that purpose. Mr. Pitt was feconded by other members. The principal anfwer to miniftry was made by Mr. Gray: he contended, in forcible terms, for the propriety of an inquiry, in a cafe wherein the higheft interefts of the British and Irish nations were equally involved; the queftion before the houfe was incontrovertibly of this defcription. The people of both countries were fenfible of its importance, and it ill-became minilters to endeavour at the concealment of matters that ought to be held out to the fulleft confideration of all parties concerned. Both the English and the Irish had a right to know, whether the reftrictions, of which the Irish Catholics complained, were to be taken off, or to remain; and to be made acquainted, at the fame time, with the real caufes why they fhould either continue or fubfift no longer. The private intereft of a very minor part of the community fhould not, upon any pretence, be fuffered to fupercede the natural rights of the whole community at large, when every argument, founded upon equity, militated for them. Induced by the proofs which the Irifh had given of an unfeigned attachment to England, fo confpicuously displayed, at a time when the difficulties we were contending with afforded them a fair opportunity of throwing off their connection with us, we had come to a determination to break thofe fetters that were evidently no longer wanted to fecure them. We had excited the livelieft hopes of a total emancipation from all thofe reftraints, which the inimical difpolition of the Roman Catholics to the Proteflants had formerly rendered neceflary; and now, when on the point of extinguithing all religious feuds, and terminating happily all differences, a fudden. check was given to all thefe pleafing expectations: the man felected to put the finishing hand to thofe arrangements that were to conftitute the basis of everlasting concord, between the fifter nations, was recalled, in the midft of his exertions to bring them to a final iffe, and cenfured, as if he had been committing an act of difloyalty to his own country. Was this behaviour of the British miniftry to be borne with patience by the Irish? Was it to be fubmitted to by the English, whofe honour was, in a manner, folemnly pledged, and whofe intereft ought forcibly to lead them to gratify the people of Ireland in the reafonable demands they now were making, and had certainly a right to infift upon? Whence, therefore, could this unexpected denial proceed, but from private motives, too perfonal to intereft the public, and too bafe to be brought to light? A pretence was let up, that the independence of the Irif parliament would be violated by this country's interference in the fettlement of the affairs of Ireland: but who did not fee the futility of this pretence? Who did not know that the deli berations |