eight days. Thus ignominiously ended a man, whose qualities 2nd talents, if rightly directed, would have graced the noblest

cause.

After Ireland had suffered so much from the violence and cruelty of both parties in that lamentable contest, Providence could scarcely have reserved for her a more healing blessing, than the appointment of a viceroy, whose military talent kept the rebels in awe, whose firmness checked the sanguinary ferociousness of the terrorists, and whose benevolence secured the affections of the people. Through the confidence and influence, which these qualities commanded throughout the kingdom, was that great measure of incorporate union at last carried; yet in defiance of the humane, pacific, and conciliating exertions of that chief governor, in many parts of the kingdom, and particularly in the county of Wexford, the Orange associations were multiplied, and disunion, hatred, and religious acrimony increased upon the suppression of the rebellion.* It is unques

Having before renounced the function of nauseating the reader by a minute selection of instances of cruelty and injustice, yet is it necessary to support every general assertion by some one piece of illustrative evidence at least. In B. R. Mich. 1800. Rex v. White and Goring. In this term an application was made to the court of King's Bench for an information against Messrs. White and Goring, two magistrates of the county of Tipperary. The application was grounded on an affidavit of Mr. O. another magistrate of the same county, and captain of a corps of yeomanry. His affidavit stated the loyalty and activity of the said magistrate and his corps, and that they were obstructed in their endeavours to preserve the peace of the most turbulent part of the country, and to prevent a tendency to rebellion, by these two gentlemen.

Exculpatory affidavits were made by these two gentlemen, to which the court so far attended as to refuse the information. These affidavits were sworn on the 23d of January, 1801: they remain of record in the court of King's Bench, and contain among many others the following curious particulars.

That timber was cut and shaped into pike handles by the members of said corps of yeomanry, and persons employed by them, which they afterwards pretended to discover in consequence of secret information, but really in order to keep up an appearance of disturbance in the country; these facts were brought to light in consequence of the repentance and voluntary confession of persons concerned in the conspiracy.

It was sworn by these gentlemen, that the corps of yeomanry, on whose behalf this application was made, consisted of the indigent tenantry of their captain, who paid a rack rent for lands holden of him, and had no other way of discharging their rent, but by their pay, which the captain usually received and retained in discharge of his rent due from these yeomen his tenants; and that they were kept on permanent duty for the purpose of procuring this permanent pay. That there was no appearance of tumult or insurrection in the country, but that these persons circulated false reports of the disturbed situation of the country, in order to answer their own purposes; that persons were taken up, detained in prison, and fined under the timber act for the concealment of these pike handles, which were afterwards discovered to have been hidden by the procurement of the persons, who found them. It was also asserted upon oath in the same affidavits, that the magistrate, who made the application, arrested persons and detained them in his own house, where he and another magistrate, after dinner taking a glass of wine, and pretending to hold a petty sessions under the insurrection act, sentenced the prisoners to transportation; that these

tionable, that the continuance and extension of Orangism must perpetuate religious difference, rivet disaffection, and sharpen rancour through the nation. The fatal experience, which Ireland had had of the reluctance of its own government and parliament to forward the union of affection and interest amidst Irishmen of all denominations, the long continued conviction of the neces ity of keeping up the English or Protestant ascendency upon the Machiavelian principle of division, the assimilation of the contrary maxim to the spirit of the United Irishmen, which now gave plausibility to the renovation and extension to the old system of divide & impera, and the too successful efforts of the terrorists to couple or identify the terms Papist, croppy, and rebel on one hand, and Protestant, loyalist, and Orangeman on the other, superadded to all the vindictive consequences of a cruel sentences were passed, and the parties sent to New Geneva, in order to be sent out of the country, without any examination of the prisoners, or confronting them with their accusers. That when these prisoners were afterwards, upon a representation made to government, and in consequence of an order from Lord Cornwallis, remanded back for a more regular investigation of their case, this corps pretending to act as an escort, took the prisoners, out of the route prescribed, to a different place from that ordered by the lord lieutenant, where it was more difficult for them to undertake their justification. The affidavits sworn in this case are very voluminous, and contain various instances of the like nature, tending to illustrate the oppressive conduct of country magistrates, and the means, by which rash or interested men irritated the people, and provoked a disposition to disturbance, where it otherwise would not have existed.

The actual perpetration of particular facts of outrageous provocation was perhaps the least part of the evil. The impunity, connivance, or countenance from the magistrates, and the acquittals of the guilty by Orange Juries and Orange Courts Martial (as in the case of Wollaghan) in the few instances in which the offenders have been brought to trial, indicate the depth and malig nancy of the wound, and loudly proclaim the necessity of a radical cure, ere the constitution can recover its native vigour and energy. In the spring assizes of 1801, at Clonmell, the case of Doyle v. Fitzgerald produced a degree of alarming provocation throughout that part of the country. The plaintiff in this cause was a respectable tradesman of Carrick upon Suyr, named Francis Doyle. The defendant was Mr. Fitzgerald (commonly called the flogging sheriff) of Tipperary, against whom a verdict of 5007, had before been found for a similar act of brutality. The action was brought for damages for the tort and injury done to the plaintiff in the following manner. The plaintiff, who was a young man of excellent character and untainted loyalty, was seized in the street by the defendant in order to be flagellated. In vain did he protest his innocence, which was also supported by some of the most respectable inhabitants of the place. He begged to have Captain Jephson sent for, the commander of the yeomanry, of which he was a member: that was refused. He offered to go to instant execution if the least trace of guilt appeared against him on enquiry: that was also refused. Bail was offered to any amount for his appearance: No, says the sheriff; I know by his face that he is a traitor...a Carmelite scoundrel. The plaintiff was tied to the whipping post : he received one hundred lashes till his ribs appeared: he then had his breeches let down, and received fifty more lashes on his posteriors. The young man's innocence was afterwards fully established. He applied to a court of law for redress: the action was tried at Clonmell assizes: these facts fully proved: an Orange jury acquitted the defendant.

conqueror, imperiously called upon the British cabinet to attempt that important measure of incorporate union, by means of which alone the Irish nation could be effectually, though perhaps not instantly, relieved from the tyranny of an Orange ascendency. From henceforth, the great object of the Marquis Cornwallis was to support, strengthen, and perpetuate the necessary plan of conciliation, by bringing about that great political measure of union with Great Bri

tain.

A more arduous undertaking was never attempted, than to bring this measure to bear. Never was there so strong an opposition of conviction to any proposal of government in that kingdom; never so transcendant a necessity for carrying it. The ferment of the public mind operated in different instances both for and against its adoption. In fact it was a question, which admitted so much sound reasoning upon both sides, that must at least deprive each of the advantage of charging their opponents with prostitution of their convictions to their interests. In some families of the highest respectability, the father and son voted on the opposite sides; and this political variance produced no domestic difference. It must however in truth be admitted, that the nerves of several of the members in both houses of parliament were from the shock of the late rebellion so much weakened, that they unconditionally surrendered the exercise of any discretion upon the subject: many of them too readily gave up the prepossessions and convictions of their whole lives to the momentary lure of advantages holden out to the supporters of the measure; and some, it cannot be denied, basely sold what they sincerely thought to be the interest of their country for their private gain. It must also be remarked, that for the last twenty years no political character on either side had ever touched upon the question of union but in terms of marked reprobation and horror. Were it feasible, it would still be invidious, and not useful to the welfare of the United kingdom, to hand down to posterity the particular motives and grounds of the votes on the opposite sides. Those of the leading characters may be traced from the foregoing pages, or their speeches in the debates upon the Union. The knowledge of silent votes given upon any unwarrantable or corrupt principle could but produce contempt or disgust for certain individuals, without any effect either useful or desirable to the nation at large.

Even before the fury of rebellion had subsided, had the British ministry recommended preparatory steps to enable the Irish government to introduce the proposal of a legislative union with plausibility and effect on the first favourable opening. In pursuance of this recommendation a pamphlet was written or

procured to be written by Mr. Edward Cooke, the under secre tary of the civil department. It was published anonymously, but was well understood to speak the sentiments of the British administration, and the chief governor, and those of the Irish administration who went with his excellency upon the question of union. It was circulated with incredible industry and profusion throughout every part of the nation, and certainly was productive of many conversations to the question, under the then existing circumstances of that nation; the most prominent of which were, the still unallayed horrors of blood and carnage, the excessive cruelty and vindictive ferocity of the Irish yeomanry towards their countrymen, compared with the pacific, orderly, and humane conduct of the English militia, of which about eighteen regiments were then in that country, and above all, the confidence which the conciliatory conduct of their chief governor inspired. This *pamphlet was considered as a kind of

*Mr. Cooke's pamphlet was entitled-" Arguments for and against an Union "between Great Britain and Ireland considered." It is written with correctness and moderation; and as the controversy commenced from the castle, it must be allowed to have been candid in government thus to have invited a public and unrestrained investigation. Before the end of December 1798, no fewer than thirty pamphlets were published in Ireland upon this momentous question, viz. “Arguments for and against an Union between Great Britain and Ireland con"sidered." "Thoughts on an Union, by Joshua Spencer, Esq." "Union; being an Appeal to Irishmen by, Mathew Weld, Esq." A Letter

"No

"An

to Joshua Spencer, Esq. occasioned by his Thoughts on an Union, by a "Barrister." "An Union neither necessary nor expedient for Ireland; being "an Answer to the Author of Arguments, &c.' by Charles Ball, Esq." answer to Arguments, &c. &c.' in a Letter to Edward Cook, Esq. "Secretary at War, by Pemberton Rudd, Esq." Second Letter, by "Pemberton Rudd, Esq." "An Address to the People of Ireland, "against an Union, by a friend to Ireland." "The Probability, Causes, "and Consequences of an Union, by Dennis Taffee." "Reasons against an "Union, by an Irishman." "Observations on Arguments for and against an • Union." "Strictures on Arguments for and against an Union." First "Letter to a noble Lord, on the Subject of the Union, by Giles S. Smith, Esq. "Cease your Funning, or the Rebel detected." "A Letter addressed to the "Gentlemen of England and Ireland on the Expediency of a fœderal Union "between the two Kingdoms, by Sir John Jervis, White Jervis, Bart." A "Reply to Arguments for and against an Union, by Richard Jebb, Esq.' "A Report of the Debate of the Irish Bar, on Sunday the 9th November, on "the Subject of an Union of the Legislatures of Great Britain and Ireland, "with the Speeches of Messrs. Saurin Spencer, St. George Daly, Jameson, "P. Burrows Barnes, T. Grandy, John Beresford Loyd, Driscoll, Goold, W. "Bellew, Orr, Stokes, Geraghty, M'Clelland, Leader, Plunket, Lynch, F. "Dobbs, and Webber." "Some Observations on the projected Union be"tween Great Britain and Ireland, and the inexpediency of agitating the mea"sure at this time, by J. H. C, Esq. Barrister at Law." "A Memoire "on some Questions respecting the projected Union of Great Britain and Ireland, by Theobold M'Kenna, Esq. Barrister at Law." "A Letter to his Excellency Marquis Cornwallis, on the proposed Union; in which his Ex"cellency's political situation is candidly discussed, by an Irishman." "Address to the Roman Catholics of Ireland, upon the Subject of an Union, by an Old Friend." "A Letter to Theo. M'Kenna, Esq. on the Subject of "his Memoire, by John Hamilton, Esq." (6 Reply to Theo. M'Kenna, Esq. Vaticination, or Pue's Occurrences Redivivus."

46

by Molyneux."

"An

"The

official proclamation of the sentiments of government upon the question, and had no sooner appeared, than it produced a general warfare of the press, and threw the whole nation into a new division of parties.

No sooner was the intention of government unequivocally known, than most of the leading characters took their ranks according to their respective views and sentiments, the Earl of Clare at the head of the Unionists, and the Right Honourable Mr. Foster, his late sanguine colleague in the extorted system of coercion and terror, put himself at the head of the Anti-unionists. Amongst the first dismissals for opposing the Union were those of Sir John Parnell, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and Mr. Fitzgerald, the prime serjeant. The most interesting public meeting upon the subject of the Union was that of the gentlemen of the Irish bar. It has before been

observed, that in Ireland the bar was the great road that led to preferment, and few were the families in the nation, which looked up to it, that did not furnish one gentleman or more to that calling. The bar consequently commanded a very powerful influence over the public mind, even independently of the weight of respectability attending the opinions of that learned body. In pursuance of a requisition signified by twenty-seven lawyers of the first respectability and character of the profession, a meeting of the Irish bar took place on the 9th of December at the Exhibition house in William Street, to deliberate on the question of a legislative union. The meeting was very numerous, and obliged to be adjourned from the courts to the above place.

Ambrose Smith, Esq. father of the bar, being called to the chair, Mr. Saurin opened the business, and after stating the question, as to the measure and period of proposing it, when the country was but just delivered from a rebellion, the most savage that had ever scourged a country, moved, "That the 66 measure of a legislative union of this kingdom and Great "Britain is an innovation, which it would be highly dangerous "and improper to propose at the present juncture to this coun"try."

Mr. Spencer (a gentleman who had taken a lead in opposing that measure, and wrote a pamphlet on the subject) seconded the resolution, and supported it in a speech of some length.

"Rights of the Imperial Crown of Ireland defended, by George Barnes, Esq." "Reply to Arguments for and against an Union, by J. B. Bethel, Esq." "Keep up your Spirits, or Huzza for the Empire, being a fair argumentative "Defence of an Union, by a citizen of the Isle of Man." "An Address to "the Electors of Ireland, on the present Situation of Affairs." "A Demon"stration of the Inevitability of a Legislative Union between Great Britain " and Ireland, involving a Refutation of every Argument, which has been, or "can be urged against that Measure, by a Philosopher." "A Review of the "Question of Union, as it involves Constitution and Commerce."