for the commons, to vindicate their own privileges by a mild and temperate resolution, which he should propose to the house; for even admitting, that sometimes a House of Commons had erred in making improper grants, they should rather reform themselves, and determine not to err again, than submit to have a monitor over them.

Were he addressing a House of Commons, the most virtuous or the most corrupt, he should expect to be supported in the measure; he would say to a virtuous house, the privilege of originating and framing money bills is the palladium of your liberty, the great engine to restrain oppression, to redress grievances, or to encourage merit. He would say to a corrupt house, it is the palladium of your corruption, the security of the wages of your venality, the means, by which you may obtain the reward of your prostitution. But to the house before which he stood, the arguments of virtue and of honour would be sufficient. He then entered into a personal apology for the discontinuance of his intimacy with Mr. Flood, who if present he had no doubt would support the motion; he spoke very handsomely of Mr. Flood, notwithstanding the late difference on some political opinions. He then moved,

"That it is the sole and undoubted privilege of the commons "of Ireland to originate all bills of supply and grants of public money, in such manner and with such clauses as they shall "think proper."

Mr. Parsons seconded the motion, which was only supported by 11 against 58.

Under the late rapid changes in the British cabinet, and the still fluctuating state of the administrations of both countries, it was no wonder, that the Irish House of Commons should not have settled into a regular system of opposition: the subdivisions of that general patriotism, in which Messrs. Flood and Grattan had formerly agreed, had been productive of the only opposition, which then existed: Mr. Flood having long acted in opposition to the Whig or Rockingham party, appeared less disposed to coalesce with them than Mr. Grattan who had ever adhered to their principles. Mr. Grattan gave them full credit for every measure and every profession : Mr. Flood diffided in their promises, and arraigned their conduct. It appears to have been the system of the Rockingham administration to leave almost unlimited discretion to the Irish government to settle their political ferment in their own way. The generality even of the more thinking people confidently looked up to the new ministry for some efficient steps towards the attainment of protecting duties, a reduction in the army estab

i. e. For protecting their own manufactures, and enforcing the consumption of them at home by laying heavy duties on similar manufactures imported from other countries.

lishment, economy in the civil department, and a reform in the popular representation in parliament. The last of these objects in particular had not unreasonably raised the expectations of the friends of reform to the highest pitch of confidence: they expected that the weight of government would have been thrown into their scale, as the first minister in each country, Mr. Pitt and the Duke of Rutland, had so recently been amongst the most eager and loud in support of that measure in Great Britain.

On the 20th of December, 1782, his majesty's answer to the joint address of both houses, presented on the 1st instant, was communicated to both houses of parliament, and was to the following effect:

"His majesty returns his hearty thanks to the lords spiritual "and temporal, and commons, in parliament assembled, for "their dutiful and loyal address. His majesty receives with "the highest satisfaction, the sentiments expressed by his "parliament respecting his majesty's government; and his "majesty's faithful parliament may rest assured of his majesty's "determined resolution to concur with them at all times in the "maintenance and preservation of that free and excellent con"stitution, on which the happiness and interests of his people "of Ireland so essentially depend."

*The extraordinary movements in the cabinet and the senate

A more important moment to the fate of the British empire certainly never existed than that under our present consideration. For to the changes in the administration of that day are to be attributed the wonderful effects that have distinguished the eventful period of nearly twenty years, which will close the subject of these sheets. The advantages or disadvantages resulting from that extraordinary revolution in the British cabinet will be estimated by every man reflecting on the effects of it by the political bias, interest, or judgment of the individual. Political differences are at all times, and particularly in the present, of too sensitive a quality for the annalist to touch.

(A. R. 69.) On the 8th of December, 1783, Mr. Fox's India Bill had passed the House of Commons on a division of 208 to 202, and the next day was carried up to the House of Lords. Hitherto no symptoms had appeared, at least to the public eye, that indicated the approaching fate both of the bill and its authors. Great pains indeed were taken, and with considerable success, by an almost incredible circulation of pamphlets and political engravings, to inflame the nation against the measures and the persons of adminis tration; and it was also remarked, that in the House of Commons, several of that description of members, well known by the name of king's friends, gave their votes on the side of opposition. But it was generally imagined, that the coalition ministry was then too strong to be shaken by the breath of popular clamour, and wholly improbable, that they should have adopted a measure of such infinite importance, either without knowing, or contrary to the wishes of the king. It went up to the lords on the first reading on the 11th of December. Lord Temple, Lord Thurlow, and the Duke of Richmond, expressed their abhorrence of the measure in the strongest and most unqualified terms. After a short debate, the second reading was fixed for Monday, December 15.

VOL. III.

of Great Britain occasioned a long adjournment in the Irish parliament, in order to give time for the necessary arrangements

In the mean time various rumours began to circulate, relative to some extraordinary motions in the interior of the court. It was confidently affirmed, that on the 11th of December the king signified to Lord Temple in a closet audience, his disapprobation of the India Bill, and authorized him to declare the same to such persons as he might think fit; that a written note was put into his hands, in which his majesty declared, "That he should deem those "who should vote for it not only not his friends, but his enemies; and that "if he (Lord Temple) could put this in stronger words, he had full authority "to do so." And lastly, that in consequence of this authority, communications had been made to the same purport to several peers in the upper house; and particularly to those whose offices obliged them to attend the king's person.

The circumstances, which happened on the second reading of the bill, confirmed the probability of the truth of these reports. On the division upon a question of adjournment, the ministers were left in a minority of 79 to 87.

The same day the House of Commons, on the motion of Mr. Baker, took into consideration the reports above alluded to. He stated shortly, that the public notoriety, both of the fact itself and of the effects it had produced, called on the house, which was the natural guardian of the constitution, for their immediate interference. He divided the criminality of the subject matter of the report into two parts; first the giving secret advice to the crown; and, secondly, the use, that had been made of his majesty's name, for the purpose of influencing the vote of members of parliament in a matter depending before them. The first he contended was a direct and dangerous attack upon the constitution. The law declared, that the king could do no wrong; and therefore had wisely made his ministers amenable for all the measures of his government. This was of the very essence of the constitution, which could no longer subsist, if persons unknown, and upon whom, consequently no responsibility could attach, were allowed to give secret advice to the crown. With regard to the second, Mr. Baker proved, from the Journals, that to make any reference to the opinion of the king, on a bill depending in either house, had always been judged a high breach of the privileges of parliament; he therefore concluded with moving, "That it is now necessary to "declare, that to report any opinion, or pretended opinion, of his majesty, upon any bill or other proceeding depending in either house of parliament, "with a view to influence the votes of the members, is a high crime and "misdemeanor, derogatory to the honour of the crown, a breach of the funda"mental privileges of parliament, and subversive to the constitution."

The motion was seconded by Lord Maitland, and strongly opposed by Mr. W. Pitt, who urged the impropriety of proceeding on mere unauthenticated rumours; he concluded his speech with reproaching the ministers for their base attachment to their offices, though, upon their own state of the case, they had lost their power, and no longer possessed the confidence of their prince.

In answer to these observations, it was said to be a strong presumption of the truth of the reports, that though several members, nearly allied to the noble earl, whose name had been mentioned on this occasion, had spoken in the debate, none of them had ventured to assert they were false. After a long and warm debate the house divided, and there appeared for the motion 153, against it 80. It was then resolved, "that on Monday next the house would "resolve itself into a committee of the whole house, to take into consideration "the present state of the nation."

As a change of ministers appeared to be a measure determined upon by the king, and the dissolution of parliament an immediate and necessary conse quence, the majority of the house thought no time was to be lost in endeavouring to render the attempt as difficult as possible. With this view, immediately after the above resolutions were agreed to, Mr. Erskine made the following motion," That it is necessary to the most essential interests of this kingdom,

for the new ministry. But on the 22d of December,* 1782, the speaker, on presenting the money bills, expressed himself as follows:

“MAY IT PLEASE YOUR EXCELlency,

"HISTORY cannot furnish many instances "of such remarkable events, as have happened in the course of "the last seven years; of these none are more worthy of obser"vation, than the changes in the human mind, and the more so, "because they have been produced by causes, from which they were the least to have been expected. New tenets more conso

" and peculiarly incumbent on this house, to pursue with unremitting attention "the consideration of a suitable remedy for the abuses, which have prevailed "in the government of the British dominions in the East Indies; and that "this house will consider as an enemy to his country any person who shall I presume to advise his majesty to prevent, or in any manner interrupt the dis "charge of this important duty."

The motion was opposed, as manifestly factious, and as interfering with the executive part of government, and trenching on the undoubted prerogative of the crown without any justifiable cause. The motion was however carried by the same majority with the former.

On Wednesday the 17th of December the India Bill was rejected by the lords, on a division of 95 to 76. It was remarked, that the Prince of Wales, who was in the minority in the former division, having learned in the interim, that the measure was offensive to the king, was absent on this occasion. At twelve o'clock on the following night a messenger delivered to the two secretaries of state his majesty's orders, "that they should deliver up the seals of “their offices, and send them by the under secretaries, Mr. Frazier and Mr. Nepean, as a personal interview on the occasion would be disagreeable to him.” The seals were immediately given by the king to Lord Temple, who sent letters of dismission the day following to the rest of the cabinet council: at the same time Mr. William Pitt was appointed First Lord of the Treasury, and Chancellor of the Exchequer, and Earl Gower, President of the Council. On the 22d, Lord Temple resigned the seals of his office, and they were delivered to Lord Sydney, as Secretary of State for the home department, and to the Marquis of Carmarthen for the foreign. Lord Thurlow was appointed High Chancellor of Great Britain, the Duke of Rutland Lord Privy Seal, Lord Viscount Howe First Lord of the Admiralty, and the Duke of Richmond Master General of the Ordnance; Mr. William Grenville and Lord Mulgrave succeeded Mr. Burke in the Pay-Office, and Mr. Henry Dundas was appointed to the office of Treasurer of the Navy.

On the 22d of December Mr. William Grenville begged leave to inform the house, that the noble earl to whom such frequent allusions had been lately made, had authorized him to declare, that he was ready to meet any charge that should be made against him; and that he had thought fit to resign the seals of his office, in order to avoid the smallest suspicion of seeking for protection or shelter in the power and influence of a minister. In answer to this extraordinary notification, Mr. Fox observed, that, with respect to the propriety of the noble earl's relinquishing an office, which he had held but for three days, he was doubtless himself the fittest judge; that as to the facts alluded to, facts of public notoriety, and which materially affected the honour of parliament, and the safety of the constitution, he trusted the house would see the necessity of taking them into their most serious consideration: but that the secret nature of those transactions almost precluded the possibility of bringing a personal charge against any one.

⚫ 11 Journ. Com. p. 182.

"nant to the principles of humanity and justice, have been universally adopted in civil and religious policy; these are the "happy but unexpected fruits of the calamities of war. In "other countries national benefits may have compensated for "national misfortunes: but it has been the peculiar felicity of "this kingdom to acquire the former, without feeling the seve"rities of the latter; to her steady virtue she owes these attain66 ments, and by her virtue I am confident she will preserve "them, and transmit to posterity unimpaired the British constitution, the very essence of which is liberty and order. Good "government and liberty are inseparable; they are necessary to and mutually support each other, and neither can exist "without the other. The commons since the commencement "of this session have directed their attention to these important "objects, which were so wisely recommended to them by your "excellency, to improve and secure those advantages, which "had been acquired in the last parliament; they have also made provision, without laying new burthens on the people, for the "honourable support of his majesty's government, and for the "discharge of the arrears upon the establishments; and they "have the fullest confidence, that your excellency will represent "them to his majesty as loyal, dutiful, and affectionate sub'jects."

The revenue still continued to be unequal to the expences, and 300,000% were ordered to be borrowed towards supplying the deficiencies; also 50,000l. were to be advanced as a loan to the undertakers of the grand canal, upon security given; and 25,000l. as a loan to Captain Brooke, to support and employ the manufacturers by him established in the cotton line at Prosperous, in the county Kildare, upon his giving security for paying the interest half yearly into the treasury, and the principal at Lady-Day, 1794. These sums were to be raised upon debentures, or treasury bills, aided by one or more lotteries, at the discretion of the chief governor.

Immediately upon the change of ministry in England, Lord Northington sent in his resignation; it was accepted on the 7th of January, and yet his successor, the Duke of Rutland, was only appointed on the 24th of February, 1784. The House of Commons had adjourned to the 20th of January, on which day they met according to adjournment, and then adjourned to the 9th of February, which was the day, to which the House of Lords had adjourned from the 22d of December. During this species of interregnum, one lord lieutenant having resigned, and his successor not having been appointed, the House of Commons met on the 9th of February, when the attorney general moved the house to adjourn to the 18th, which was opposed by Sir Lucius O'Bryen, who saw no reason, why they should