Sir Lawrence Parsons, on the 13th of May, moved a resolution of which he had long given notice, which was debated with more personal acrimony than any question throughout the session. The resolution was, that "John earl of Westmoreland, by "authorizing such a number of regular troops to be sent out of "this country, as left the remainder considerably less than the "number appointed by law for the defence thereof, had been " guilty of a violation of the compact entered into with the crown, "and of dispensing with the law of the land."

Mr. Conolly said, that if that motion had not been made by the honourable baronet, he should have felt himself called upon as the mover of the augmentation in 1769, to make it. When he had made that motion, a member, whom very few that he addressed could remember, (doctor Lucas) prophesied that those troops would be maintained and paid by the country during peace, and never suffered to remain there in time of war. The honourable baronet had been properly restrained last session from making the motion, by the state of the country, but now between militia and army, they were able to meet any enemy.

Mr. Grattan observed, that the question was not whether lord Westmoreland had dispensed with acts of parliament, but being by papers on their table convicted of having exercised a dispensing power, the question was, whether the house should proceed to impeach him. It was however met by the question for adjournment, which after midnight was carried by a majority of 83 against 23. The only question of notice that occurred dur ing the remainder of the session, was Mr. Curran's motion

"O'Connor. The lowest societies of the union conversed freely of the cor"ruption, the usurpation, and the venality of parliament. While I was a mem"ber of the House of Commons, you know the frequent conversation "amongst the members was, how much has such an one given for his seat? "From whom did he purchase? Has not such an one sold his borough? Has "not such a lord bought it? Has not such a peer so many members in "this house? Was not such a member with the lord lieutenant's secretary, "to insist on some greater place or pension? Did not the secretary refuse it? "Has he not gone into the opposition? These, and such like facts, are as well "known to the lowest classes of the union as to yourselves.

"A member of the committee. Mr. O'Connor is perfectly right; I have "heard the lowest classes of the people talk in that style.

"O'Connor. The people are conscious you are self constituted, and not "their delegates; men who have no other object in view but to advance your "own individual interest.

"A member of the committee. That we are a parcel of placemen and pen❝sioners ?

"O'Connor. Exactly so.

"Committee. What is the object the people have in view at present?

"O'Connor. I believe they have laid by for the instant all idea of speculative "politics, and think only how they shall annihilate the insupportable usurpation "and cruelty of the British and Irish government, and how they shall best avenge the blood which has been shed, and the tortures which have been "inflicted, to support a government they detest."

66

15 Par. Deb. p. 370.

for an address to the crown, seconded by Mr. Grattan: this was also defeated by the question of adjournment without a debate. Mr. Curran prefaced the motion by a very eloquent and impressive speech upon the existing circumstances of the country. The chancellor of the exchequer gave for reason in moving the adjournment, that the time was improper, and the charges in the address were so various and multifarious, that it was impossible to debate them altogether. The address was intended as a recorded publication of the sentiments, and justification to posterity, of the conduct of the gentlemen of the opposition during that session of parliament. The motion was,

That an humble address be presented to his majesty, to "assure his majesty of our attachment to his person and family, " of our inviolable regard for the monarchical form of govern66 ment, and of our determination to support the connexion with "Great Britain for ever.

"That we humbly presume to hope we have, on all occasions, "manifested those sentiments abundantly;

"That we are the more inclined to do so, from a conscious of the value of Ireland in the present critical situation of "the empire;

sense

"That, in consequence of the part taken by Great Britain, "under the advice of his majesty's ministers, Ireland is involved "in the present most eventful war;

"That in consequence of this war, we have greatly added to our annual taxes, and increased, near three-fold the debt of "the nation;

"That we have also assisted the army and navy of the em"pire with vast numbers of our people, who have in different quarters of the globe asserted, that his majesty must ever "command the courage and loyalty of their country;

"That in this year we continued to increase the annual taxes, "voted a loan of near two millions, granted a greater force than 66 ever was paid by Ireland, and made these unexampled exer"tions with the unanimity of the parliament and the approba"tion of the people. That we were the more induced to this, "from a zeal for his majesty's service, and an attachment to "Great Britain, but accompanied with an expectation that our "extraordinary grants would be justified to our constituents by a "reform, under a patriot viceroy, of the various and manifold “abuses that had taken place in the administration of the Irish government, a reformation which we conceived, in the pre66 sent times, and under such an increase of debt and taxes, indispensable, and which we do, therefore, most humbly persist to implore and expect;

15 Par. Deb. p. 396.

* That after the supply was granted, and the force voted, and "whilst the chief governor, possessing the entire confidence of "both houses of parliament, and the approbation of all the people,

was reforming abuses, and putting the country in a state of de"fence, he was suddenly and prematurely recalled, and our un "paralleled efforts for the support of his majesty, answered by "the strongest marks of the resentment of his ministers;

"That in consequence of such a proceeding, the business of government was interrupted, the defence of the country sus "pended, the unanimity, which had under the then lord lieuten"ant existed, converted into just complaint and remonstrance, " and the energy, confidence, and zeal of the nation, so loudly "called for by his majesty's ministers, were, by the conduct of "those very ministers themselves, materially affected:

"That these, their late proceedings, aggravated their past sys"tem; in complaining of which we particularly refer to the noto "rious traffic of honours, to the removal of the troops, contrary

to law, and in total disregard of the solemn compact with the "nation, and safety of the realm, to the criminal conduct of go66 vernment respecting the Irish army, to the disbursement of sums of money without account or authority, to the improvi"dent grant of reversions at the expense of his majesty's inte" rest, sacrificed for the emolument of his servants to the conduct "of his majesty's ministers in both countries, towards his Catho "lic and Protestant subjects of Ireland, alternately practising of "their passions, exciting their hope and procuring their disap"pointment;

"That convinced by the benefits which we have received un"der his majesty's reign, that the grievances of which we complain are as unknown to his majesty as abhorrent from his paaternal and royal disposition;

46

"We, his commons of Ireland, beg leave to lay ourselves at << his feet, and with all humility to his majesty, to prefer, on our part, and on the part of our constituents, this our just and ne"cessary remonstrance against the conduct of his ministers; and to implore his majesty, that he may be graciously pleased to " lay his commands upon his minister to second the zeal of his "Irish parliament in his majesty's services, by manifesting in future, to the people of Ireland, due regard and attention."

a

On the 5th of June, 1795, the parliament was prorogued with the usual formalities. The lord lieutenant's speech from the throne expressed his majesty's acknowledgments for the very li beral supplies, and commended the benevolent relief of the poor from the tax of hearth-money; the wise foundation of a college for the education of the Catholic clergy; and the satisfactory arrangement of issuing money from the treasury.

Upon lord Fitzwilliam's arrival in England, the misunderstanding between him and the ministry upon the subject of his、 instructions, became very serious: and in the result, he was not only condemned by Mr. Pitt, and that part of the cabinet which consisted of the old administration, but was wholly abandoned by those, whom he had reason to call his own friends, the duke of Portland, earl Mansfield, earl Spencer, and Mr. Wyndham. The charge made by the noble lord, who insisted that he followed his instructions in every measure which he had proposed in Ireland, was met by the plea of official secrecy, which equally bound the cabinet, who gave, as the viceroy, who received the instructions. A majority in the cabinet had carried the question of his recal; and, in fact, no one could be more implicated in their common act than the other. On the 8th day of May, 1795, the duke of Norfolk, after having enlarged upon the impolicy, danger, and injustice of recalling earl Fitzwilliam under the existing circumstances, and having offered to the house a most just and candid representation of the state of Ireland, concluded with the following motion:-" That an humble address be presented to his majesty, that he will be graciously pleased to direct, that there be "laid before this house, such part of the correspondence between "his majesty's ministers and earl Fitzwilliam, late lord lieuten"ant of Ireland, as related to the motives and grounds of his re"cal from the government of the said kingdom, during a session "of parliament, in which the two houses of parliament had voted "their confidence in him, and their approbation of his conduct, "and with a munificence unexampled, had granted supplies for "the general exigencies of the state."*

The earls of Mansfield, Coventry, and Carnarvon, and lord Sydney, opposed the duke's motion. Lord Fitzwilliam's character not having suffered by his removal, they maintained that no inquiry was needed to clear it up. The prerogative of the crown empowered it to dismiss ministers at discretion: it were unconstitutional to institute inquiries into the reasons for such dismis sions; and parliamentary discussions were the more improper, as they might disclose matters that ought never to have been divulged. The dismission 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 any longer act with ministers who were of another: neither was there sufficient evidence of the discontents in Ireland, to require any particular investigation.

The earl of Westmoreland decidedly condemned the introduction into the Irish parliament, of the business relating to the Catholics, which he asserted was contrary to the instructions carried

Par. Deb. p. 468.

from England: their emancipation, he maintained, was repugnant to sound policy, as well as to the king's oath, and the laws of the land.

To this lord Fitzwilliam replied, that the most necessary policy had called upon him to act as he had done. Ireland was in a state of imminent danger from internal feuds and external foes: the Catholics were equally powerful and dissatisfied: the French were become masters of Holland; and thirty-six hostile sail of the line. were hovering on the western coast of Ireland. In this perilous situation he had the happiness 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 answered by lord Grenville, who, after alleging the very same reasons against an inquiry as had been adduced, remarked, that were parliament to assume the right of inquiring into the motives for the dismission of ministers, they might, by the same rule, proceed next to the examination, whether those who were appointed to succeed them, had been properly chosen. would obviously lead to still more dangerous inquiries, tending ultimately to unhinge the constitution.

This

After many warm arguments on both sides of the question, the motion for an inquiry was rejected by one hundred against twenty-five.

In the House of Commons very spirited debates also took place on this subject. Mr. Jekyll proposed the same motion that had been in the House of Lords, and supported it by similar arguments. It was stated in reply by Mr. Pitt, that no communication of the correspondence between lord Fitzwilliam and the ministry could be permitted without the king's assent; and ministers were officially bounden to the strictest secrecy in all cases of this nature. He would not for that reason, enter into any verbal explanations of the business in question, and neither should admit nor deny the facts or the inferences alleged. The king had clearly the right to nominate and to dismiss ministers without assigning his motives, cases of an extraordinary nature excepted. He forcibly urged the indispensable necessity of an entire agreement in sentiments between the king's ministry, without which it were impracticable to conduct the affairs of the nation with any regularity or success; and yet they might differ without any diminution of reciprocal friendship or esteem. He deprecated the discussion of subjects now before the Irish parliament, as a manifest violation of its independence; and warmly exhorted the house to leave the settlement of affairs in that nation to its representatives, who certainly were best qualified for that purpose. Mr. Pitt was seconded by other members. Messrs. Fox and Grey spoke very