Page images
PDF
EPUB

CHAPTER X.

Lord Moira's motion in the British Parliament in favour of Ireland (Nov. 1797)-His statement of the cruelties towards the Irish people Similar motion in the Irish parliament (February, 1798)-Lord Carhampton retires from the command of the troops in Ireland-His character-His conduct towards the Rev. Mr. Berwick-Humane disposition of the latter towards the peasantry-Cruelties practised on them-System of spies and informers decried by Lord Moira-Their confessions-Liberation of Neilson in consequence-The Press newspaper destroyed by the military-Curran's description of the informers Parliament meets-Complaints of the conduct of the militarySir Lawrence Parsons' motion for conciliation-Mr. (Lord) Plunket's speech-Sir Lawrence Parsons forced to resign the command of the militia-His letter to Lord Camden Mr. Grattan's reasons for seceding from Parliament-His remarks on the Government, and their conduct towards the people-Knowledge by the Government of the proceedings of the United Irishmen-Lord Clonmell's statements thereon-His singular remark-Arrest of the Leinster delegates, the 12th of March-Proclamation of rebellion-History of the United Irishmen-Views, objects, and errors-The Emmett family--Anecdote of Dr. Einmett-Mr. Grattan's remarks-Characters of Temple, Thomas Addis, and Robert Emmett-Mr. Peter Burrowes' and Mr. Grattan's remarks on them-T. A. Emmett's letter from America to Mr. Peter Burrowes-Character of Lord Edward Fitzgerald-A. O'Connor, Jackson, the Sheares, and Nelson--Curran's visit to the latter in prison.

On the 22nd of November, 1797, Lord Moira, with that feeling of humanity which, in the senate as in the field, always marked his character, and of which an instance has been mentioned already, brought forward the case of Ireland in the British Parliament, and called upon Ministers to change their system, and adopt measures of conciliation. He was replied to by Lord Grenville, who denied that the cases of inhumanity were as great as had been represented, and again pleaded the independence of the Irish Parliament as a bar to any

326

LORD MOIRA'S MOTION IN

[CHAP. X.

interference on the part of England that independence which in two years afterwards, in so flagitious a manner, he proposed to abolish! Nothing was done on the subject, and the question of adjournment was carried without a divi

sion.

Lord Moira, in observing on the state of Ireland, said, the first thing that struck him was the light in which it was now customary for the military to view an Irishman. The foreign troops that were sent to Ireland, went thither under an unfortunate prejudice which care had been taken to instil into them, that every man they met there was a rebel. Every species of insult, of menace, and oppression, was exercised upon this supposition. There was one circumstance which would give some idea of the insult to which every man was liable. He recollected, when he had read the history of this country, of the curfew, he had been accustomed to consider it as a degrading badge of servitude. This custom, however, was now established in Ireland in all its rigour. At nine o'clock every man was called upon to extinguish his candle and his fire, and the military enforced the regulation with the most insulting expressions. The hardship of this regulation was frequently felt in the most cruel manner. An instance had occurred within his knowledge, in which a party of soldiers had come to the house of a man by the road side; they insisted that he should extinguish his candle; the man entreated that he might be permitted to retain his light, because he was watching by the bedside of his child, which was subject to convulsion fits, and might every moment require assistance. The party, however, rigorously insisted that the light should be extinguished. It had been in former times the custom for the people of this country, and of their Lordships, to hold in detestation the infamous proceedings of the inquisition: one of the greatest horrors with which it was attended was, that the person on whom it seized was torn from his family, immured in prison, ignorant of the crime laid to his charge, and of his accuser, in the most cruel uncertainty as to the period of his confinement, and of the fate that awaited him. Yet to this injustice, so justly abhorred in the practice of the inquisition, were the people of Ireland exposed; a man was torn from his family, and exposed to the horrors of imprisonment, without know

CHAP. X.] THE BRITISH PARLIAMENT.

327

In

ing the crime of which he was accused, or being confronted with his accuser. Such proceedings were not solitary instances they were frequent; and the man who saw his neighbour hurried from his home, could not say but tomorrow he might experience the same fate; all confidence, all security, were taken away. In alluding to the inquisition, he had omitted to mention one of its characteristic features: if the supposed culprit refused to acknowledge the crime with which he was charged, he was put to the rack, in order to extort a confession of the supposed guilt. the same manner the proceedings of the inquisition had been introduced in Ireland; when a man was taken up, and was suspected of being guilty himself, or of concealing the guilt of others, he was put to the torture; the rack, indeed, was not applied, because, perhaps, it was not at hand; but torture of another species was employed. He had known, in repeated instances, men taken up on suspicion, subjected to the punishment of picqueting, a punishment now abolished in the cavalry as too severe. He had known a man, in order to extort confession of a supposed guilt, or of the guilt of some of his neighbours, picqueted till he actually fainted! picqueted again till he fainted! picqueted a third time till he fainted! upon mere suspicion! Nor was this the only species of torture: men had been taken and hung up till they were half hanged,* and then threatened with the repetition of this cruel torturé unless they made confession of the imputed guilt! Such proceedings were not merely particular acts of cruelty exercised by men abusing the power committed to them, but they formed a part of the system acted upon: they were notorious;-and no man could say but that he might be the next victim of the oppression and the cruelty which he saw others endure. This, however, was not all. Their Lordships, no doubt, would recollect the famous proclamation issued by a military commander in Ireland, requiring the people to give up their arms. It never was denied that this proclamation was illegal, though it might have been defended on some supposed necessity; this necessity, however, had never been established to his satisfaction. If, therefore, any reluctance was shown to comply with this demand, he confessed it was not matter of surprise to him. Men who conceived that the Constitution gave them a right to keep

*The case of a man of the name of Shaw. Lord Moira asserted it had been tried on this man more than once.

328 LD. MOIRA'S STATEMENT OF CRUELTIES: [CH. X.

arms in their houses for their own defence, might feel some indignation when called upon to give up this right. In the execution of the order, however, the greatest cruelties had been committed. If it was barely suspected that a person had not given up all the arms which he had, his house was burnt, and his furniture, and every other property it contained, committed to the flames. But a particular suspicion sometimes was not thought necessary if it was thought that any district had not given up all the arms it contained, a party was sent out to collect the number at which it was rated; and in the execution of this order, THIRTY houses were sometimes burnt down in a single night. Thus, an officer took upon him to decide the quantity of arms which were contained in a particular district; and upon the judgment thus formed, the consequences which he had described followed. These facts he could bring evidence to their Lordships to prove. Many cases of a similar nature he might enumerate, if it were necessary to show the nature of the system pursued. Many of the facts it was impossible that he could have seen, but many of them had come within his knowledge. He wished for nothing more sincerely than to be examined upon oath as to the state of Ireland, and to the facts which he had brought forward. He had stated them before God and his country, and was ready to strengthen them by any species of assertion by which they might be confirmed. These facts were notorious in Ireland; but they could not be made public through the newspapers, from a fear of attracting that summary method of punishment which had been practised in the case of the Northern Star, when a party of troops, in open day, where a general's head-quarters were, had destroyed the whole of the offices and property helonging to that paper. For this reason, the publisher of a newspaper often refused to publish authenticated accounts of such enormities, from a dread of experiencing a similar fate. It was not the legal course of proceeding which they feared-but an arbitrary interference of a military force, without the forms of justice or of law. Instead of removing the discontents which it attempted to suppress, it had increased the number of the discontented. The number of United Irishmen, from the latest information, was extending in every part of the country. He had been informed, and he firmly believed the information to be correct, that their numbers were now three times greater than before the Report of the Secret Committee. Such, then, had been

CHAP. X.] REPEATED IN IRISH PARLIAMENT.

329

the consequence of the system of severity. He believed that the moment of conciliation was not past; but if the present system was not changed, he was convinced, "that Ireland would not remain connected with this country five years longer." A change of system was the only chance left.

Not satisfied with his exertions in England, Lord Moira determined to renew them in Ireland, to which he was prompted not merely by a sense of duty, but by the taunts, almost the challenge, thrown out by Lord Clare, who, after the motion in the British House of Lords, had called on him, in a tone of defiance and arrogance, to make good his charges if he could in the Irish Parliament, where he would be met and answered. Accordingly, in the month of February, 1798, Lord Moira appeared in the Irish House of Lords, and reiterated his opinions and statements, said they were perfectly correct, and after a very able speech, and remonstrance with Government on their conduct, he added:

"The time, my Lords, is not yet lost for recovering the affections of your countrymen. Can you hope that you can restore Ireland to peace by those acts of cruelty and oppression? Conciliation may be deferred; but every day that it is deferred increases the difficulty of suppressing the views of the discontented, and allaying the evils of insurrection and revolt."

He also stated :

"That since his arrival in Ireland he had read the confession of the informers employed by Government ;confessions which were sufficient to shock every feeling of humanity, and sicken and disgust every feeling of the soul. These confessions were demonstrative of the false and aggravated statements which Government was in the habit of receiving. I shudder to think that such wretches could find employment or protection under any Government. Were not these things enough to urge administration to abandon its system, and by an immediate relinquishment of this intolerable severity, to exhibit contrition at its even having been introduced into this country."

« PreviousContinue »