Sidor som bilder
PDF
ePub

XXII.

1784.

BOOK treaty of commerce with England on the foundation of these resolutions would deserve to be impeached for sacrificing the essential interests of Ireland. In the heat and passion of debate, it was affirmed to be fortunate for Mr. Orde that he was at present in a civilized country; had he brought forward his plan in a Polish diet, he would not have lived to carry back his answer.

Notwithstanding these reasonings and invectives, the good sense and moderation of the house were well satisfied with the concessions made by England, so far surpassing what the most sanguine expectation á few years since could have ventured to indulge. The propositions were received not only with approbation, but with joyful applause, and were ultimately ratified by a very decisive majority of the house. In the mean time the NATIONAL CONGRESS had continued its sittings almost unregarded. In a brief and final address to the people of Ireland, this assembly observed "that if the abuses of former parliaments did not inspire a distrust of those which were to come-if the venerable opinion of those illustrious men who were now no more, and the assistance of those whose present labours co-operated with them in the same pursuit, had no influence to awaken their fears, to animate their efforts, and to invi. gorate their hopes, this and every other endea vour must sink into oblivion; and they would

XXII.

shortly repose in indolent acquiescence, under BOOK such a representation as would gall themselves and their posterity with increasing taxes and oppressions."

1785.

of Mr. Flood's for tion of re

third mo

form.

After long delay, Mr. Flood, on the 12th May (1785), presented once more his bill effecting a reform in the representation, somewhat varied from that of the last year. A previous motion of the same senator, "that it be an instruction to the committee appointed to prepare the bill, that no borough in the province of Connaught having less than forty, or in the other provinces having less than seventy, electors, should be permitted to return more than one member to parliament," was negatived without a division. On the introduction of the bill, Mr. Brownlow observed, "that he greatly doubted indeed whether there was virtue enough in that house to pass the bill; but, whatever might be its fate, he would be bold to affirm, that sooner or later the reform so repeatedly denied woULD and MUST be given." Mr. Flood remarked, "that when his first Bill of Reform was presented to that house, the objection was, that it was presented on the point of a bayonet--the air-drawn dagger of Macbeth had appeared to the affrighted imagination and conscience of the house. These apprehensions had at length subsided; a more favorable treatment might now therefore be reasonably expected. At

[ocr errors]

XXII.

1785.

parliament.

BOOK least he called on the house to permit the printing of the bill, that the voice of the public might be heard respecting it; and not, like mutes in a seraglio, to strangle it on that day while in the act of challenging a fair and free trial and discussion." The bill was nevertheless with little ceremony rejected, on a division of 112 to 60 voices. Session of It is now proper to revert to the state of affairs in England. On the 24th of January (1785) the session was opened by a speech from the throne, the principal feature of which was the recommendation of the king to the two houses, of parliament," to apply their earnest attention to the adjustment of such points in the commercial, intercourse between Great Britain and Ireland as are not yet finally arranged." The first business which ings on the attracted the notice of the house of commons was ster return, the state of the Westminster scrutiny, which had

Further proceed

Westmin

now existed for a period of eight months. In this time two parishes only had been scrutinizedthe result was, that 105 votes had been struck off the poll of Mr. Fox, and 87 from that of sir Cecil Wray, the examination of which was not yet closed. Fifteen parishes more remained for future investigation; so that there existed but little apparent probability that the question relative to the return would be decided before the next general election. The miserable imbecility of what was now for the first time dignified by the appella

XXIL

tion of the COURT OF SCRUTINY was exposed in BOOK the most sarcastic and contemptuous terms.

high-bailiff had no power to summon witnesses, to impose an oath, or to commit for contumacy, The scrutiny was evidently a mere personal act of revision, and the high-bailiff himself declared that he acted under the sole authority of the resolu tion of that house.

Mr. Pitt, however, condescended to vindicate the proceedings of this mock judicature, and maintained, with unaltered countenance," that the expediency of the scrutiny was amply justified by the experiment." Mr. Fox, with generous and indignant warmth, replied, "that he well remembered the day when he congratulated the house on the acquisition of Mr. Pitt's splendid abilities; it had been his pride to fight in conjunction with him the battles of the constitution; he had been ever ready to recognize in the right honourable gentleman a formidable rival, who would leave him far behind in the pursuit of glory -but he had never expected that this rival would become his persecutor. He thought he had possessed an elevation of mind wholly incompatible with so low and grovelling a passion. He considered the present measure, with regard to Westminster, as a succedaneum to expulsion. The case of the Middlesex election, so much reprobated, had at least the merit of being more manly; for the

1785.

XXII.

BOOK procedure now adopted accomplished the same end of expulsion, without daring to exhibit any charge against the person expelled."

1785.

The motion of Mr. Welbore Ellis, "that the high-bailiff do attend at the bar of this house," was at length negatived, February 9 (1785), by a majority of 174 to 135 voices. This being such a majority as by no means discouraged future efforts, a similar motion was soon after made by colonel Fitzpatrick: this was negatived by a majority of nine voices only. And on the 3d of March, being a third time repeated by Mr. Alderman Sawbridge, it was carried in the affirmative, ayes 162, noes 124; leaving the minister, and the veteran phalanx of courtiers and king's friends, in one of the most disgraceful minorities ever known in the British house of commons.

Mr. Fox now, as member for Westminster, moved to expunge the resolutions of the 8th of June last, relative to this business, from the journals of the house; but the minister, now seriously alarmed, summoned all his strength to oppose this attempt to redeem the honour of the house thus wilfully and wantonly degraded: and on a division it was carried in the negative, ayes 139, noes 244. Fortunately for Mr. Pitt, the publie attention was quickly turned to another and higher subject of political discussion, in which he appeared in a light far different-such indeed as

« FöregåendeFortsätt »