Page images
PDF
EPUB

III.

CHAP. afterwards in both houses, that privilege was

not to be allowed against the king. Upon 1662.

a debate on the 26th of July this subject
occasioned a long remonftrance.

[ocr errors]

The house was informed on the 28th, that the duke of Ormond had landed at Howth, and they adjourned to the next day, when a deputation of eight members were fent to know when they might attend him with their speaker; and his grace appointed next morning at eleven o'clock for their reception in the presence chamber; when the speaker made a congratulatory speech, which was answered by the lord lieutenant. The parliament was continued under him, though it had commenced under the lords justices; and he gave the following day the royal assent to ten acts of parliament. On the 7th of August leave of absence for a fortnight was given to fir William Temple; and the next day a long debate took place about abolishing the court of wards, and substituting a tax of two shillings annually upon all hearths in Ireland

for

III.

for ever; according to a similar tax in Eng- CHAP. land, which was agreed to unanimously.

1662. The tax upon hearths in England was abolished at the Revolution.

Lord Ofsory being summoned to the lords by writ, took leave of the house in a very handsome speech ; and the house, taking into consideration the precedent of Walter earl of Ormond before mentioned in one thousand fix hundred and fifteen *, accompanied and presented him at the bar of the lords.

On the 14th of August fir Timothy Tyrrel, returned for the borough of Fore, not having appeared in the house since the beginning of the session, a writ was issued for a new election.

On the 30th of August fir William Temple reported a conference from the lords; and the same day the university was excepted from the hearth-money tax.

* Vol. i. p. 173.

CH AP. Sir William Temple on the 12th of Sep-
III.

tember informed the house, that as colonel 1662.

Trevor was created viscount Dungannon;
according to ancient precedent, as well as a
recent example, the house should accompany
him to the bar of the lords. This custom,
according to the opinion of the chancellor
West, in his admirable treatise upon this
subject, feems to be a remnant of what was
the ancient practice ; namely, that of mak-
ing peers with the consent of parliament.

[ocr errors]

On the 23d of September fir William Temple reported the result of a conference, in which the lords waved their former opinion, that the clergy could not be taxed without their own consent in convocation: they, however, recommended an exemption of the inferior clergy in the bill for raising thirty thousand pounds for the fole use of the duke of Ormond; which was complied with. The difficulties of assessing and levying this fum for the lord lieutenant must affect those with surprize who remember with what facility larger

fums

fums have been raised, and greater donations CHAP. bestowed in our own days.

166z.

III.

[ocr errors]

Sir William Temple, on the 26th of September, reported a proposition from a conference relative to a clause to be inserted in the act of settlement about the payment of the officers fees in both houses. This clause enjoined, that every person concerned should pay

for any proviso, as for a single private bill; but as there were difficulties in adjusting fees where so many were concerned, not only in the bill, but perhaps in one single clause, it was left to the lord lieutenant and council, to adjust their different proportions afterwards, with the advice of the two houses of parliament. As this proposition, which was delivered by fir William Temple, and inserted in the act of settlement, gave rise to a practice eventually of the greatest constitutional importance, in the following short detail I hope it will be excused if I should speak of myfelf, since if ever egotism be allowable VOL. II. K

it

CHAP. it is when it serves to clear up the origin of

an extraordinary custom, or to verify its 1662.

commencement.

III.

A practice had prevailed for near a century in the house of commons of Ireland, of tacking private grants to the bill of supply, or money bill, as it was emphatically called: this evidently deprived the king and the lords of their distinct negative, it being a maxim that a money bill could not be altered after it passed the house of commons; if there were fifty grants to private persons connected with it, though many of them should be objectionable, there was no other alternative left than to accept them, or throw out the general bill of supply ; a proposition which it is sufficient barely to name, to prove the absurdity and almost impossibility of such a rejection, since upon this bill the whole establishment, the pay of the army, &c. &c. depended.

In the year one thousand seven hundred and eighty-three a string of very strong re

solutions

« PreviousContinue »