Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760-1805, Volume 4: 1791-1797 [1 ed.] 9780429348723, 042934872X, 9781000741810, 1000741818

Citation preview

IRELAND IN THE AGE OF REVOLUTION, 1760–1805

CONTENTS OF THE EDITION

Part I: Ireland and the American Revolution volume 1 General Introduction Introduction to Part I 1760–1779 volume 2 1779–1782 volume 3 1783–1789

Part II: Ireland and the French Revolution volume 4 Introduction to Part II 1791–1797 volume 5 1797–1800 volume 6 1798–1805 Index

IRELAND IN THE AGE OF REVOLUTION, 1760–1805

Volume 4 1791–1797 Edited by Harry T. Dickinson

First published 2013 by Pickering & Chatto (Publishers) Limited Published 2016 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN 711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017, USA Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business Copyright © Taylor & Francis 2013 Copyright © Editorial material Harry T. Dickinson 2013 To the best of the Publisher’s knowledge every efort has been made to contact relevant copyright holders and to clear any relevant copyright issues. Any omissions that come to their attention will be remedied in future editions. All rights reserved, including those of translation into foreign languages. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. british library cataloguing in publication data Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805. Part II. 1. Ireland – History – 1760–1820 – Sources. 2. Ireland – Politics and government – 1760–1820 – Sources. 3. United States – History – Revolution, 1775–1783 – Infuence – Sources. 4. France – History – Revolution, 1789–1799 – Infuence – Sources. I. Dickinson, H. T. 941.5’07-dc23 ISBN-13: 978-1-84893-301-9 (set) Typeset by Pickering & Chatto (Publishers) Limited

CONTENTS

Preface Introduction to Part II Declaration of the Catholic Society of Dublin ([1791]) Strictures on the Declaration of the Society Instituted for the Purpose of Promoting Unanimity amongst Irishmen, and Removing Religious Prejudices (1791) General Committee of Roman Catholics (1792) A Report of the Debate … for the Purpose of Considering the Propriety of Adopting the Declaration of the General Committee of the Roman Catholics of Ireland (1792) A Candid Enquiry, Whether the Roman Catholics of Ireland, Ought or Ought Not to be Admitted to the Rights of Subjects (1792) Te Address of the Association of the Friends of the Constitution, Liberty and Peace, in Ireland ([1793]) Te Petition of the Catholics of Ireland, to the King’s Most Excellent Majesty (1793) Defence of the Sub-Committee of the Catholics of Ireland (1793) An Irishman’s Letter to the People called Defenders ([c. 1793]) Proceedings of the Society of United Irishmen of Dublin ([1793]) An Act for the Relief of His Majesty’s Popish, or Roman Catholic Subjects of Ireland (1793), in Te Statutes at Large [Ireland] An Act to Prevent the Election or Appointment of Unlawful Assemblies (1793), in Te Statutes at Large [Ireland] Te Address of the Poor People of Munster, to their Fellows in Ireland, with their Bill of Grievances Annexed ([c. 1794]) Address fom the Society of United Irishmen of Dublin, to the People of Ireland (1794) Society of United Irishmen of Dublin (1794), excerpts [William Bruce and Henry Joy (eds)], Belfast Politics (1794), excerpts

vii ix 1

9 29

37 61 75 83 91 101 107 135 143 147 155 165 191

vi

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

Henry Grattan’s Proposal for a Bill for the Relief of His Majesty’s Roman Catholic Subjects (4 May 1795), in Te Speeches of the Right Honourable Henry Grattan (1822), excerpt Speech of Arthur O’Connor Esq. in the House of Commons of Ireland, Monday, May 4th, 1795, on the Catholic Bill (1795) A Fair Statement, of the Administration of Earl Fitzwilliam (1795) An Irishman’s Second Letter to the People called Defenders ([1795]) An Act More Efectually to Suppress Insurrections (1796), in Te Statutes at Large [Ireland] An Act to Prevent and Punish Tumultuous Risings (1976), in Te Statutes at Large [Ireland] Tomas Russell, A Letter to the People of Ireland, on the Present Situation of the Country (1796) Arthur O’Connor, A Letter to the Electors of Antrim (1797) G. Lake, Proclamation to the People of the Province of Ulster (1797) Te Appeal of the People of Ulster to their Countrymen, and to the Empire at Large (1797) Address of the Inhabitants of the County of Armagh, to such of their Roman Catholic Brethren as have been Driven fom their Country by the Late Persecution ([c. 1797]) An Act to Explain an Act More Efectually to Suppress Insurrections, and Prevent the Disturbance of the Public Peace (1797), in Te Statutes at Large [Ireland] ‘Te Declarations, Resolutions and Constitution of the United Irishmen’, Journals of the House of Commons of the Kingdom of Ireland (1797) Editorial Notes

229 241 261 275 285 297 301 319 329 333

339

343 349 365

PREFACE

Ireland in the Age of the French Revolution experienced in just over a decade some of the most dramatic developments in its long history. Te 1790s witnessed a major war, deepening sectarian tensions, the appearance of a radical political movement which eventually enlisted massive popular support, a bloody revolution and a French invasion. Tese developments resulted in an Act of Union, which destroyed the centuries-old Irish Parliament, reversed all the constitutional gains made during the American Revolution, and incorporated the Irish legislature into the Westminster Parliament, thus creating the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. Despite the great hopes vested in this major constitutional revolution, the Union was fatally fawed from the start because of the failure to allow any of the Catholic majority in Ireland to elect representatives to the Westminster Parliament or to serve in any high ofce in the state. Te Catholic problem developed into the Irish problem as a religious injustice became a national grievance. Te consequences remain with Great Britain and Ireland to the present day. Te selections reproduced in the following volumes illuminate and explicate all of these dramatic developments in Irish politics during the era of the French Revolution. Te editorial apparatus in the Introduction to Part II, the headnotes and the editorial notes make it easier for any reader to fully understand the arguments and signifcance of the texts included. Te editorial apparatus points to biographies of all the main personages who wrote or who appear in these texts. Some of the more famous have attracted major modern biographies. Biographical details of the rest can be found in three major sources. Most of the leading fgures have biographies in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, 60 vols (2004) (hereafer ODNB), available in hard copy and online (at www.oxforddnb.com). Tere are brief political biographies of all Irish MPs in the History of the Irish Parliament 1692–1800: Commons, Constituencies and Statutes, ed. M. Johnston-Liik, 6 vols (2002) (hereafer HoIP 1692–1800). Tis material is also available online (at www.historyofheirishparliament.com). Tere are brief biographies of every British MP during these years in Te History of Parliament: Te House of Commons 1754–1790, ed. L. B. Namier and J. Brooke, 3 vols (1964) and, in the same series, Te House of Com– vii –

viii

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

mons 1790–1820, ed. R. G. Torne, 5 vols (1986). Te material in these volumes is also available online (at www.historyofparliamentonline.org/research). Work on these volumes has taken me longer than I had expected. It would have taken even longer, but for the help ofered and kindness shown by a number of friends, colleagues and fellow scholars. I wish to thank, in alphabetical order: Pascal Dupuy, Pawel Hanczewski, Alvin Jackson, Irene Lowe, Shin Matsuzono, Yvan Nadeau, Qian Cheng-dan and Bill Speck. I owe a particular debt to Frances Dow CBE, who ofered much expert advice and assistance with all parts of the editorial work. Harry T. Dickinson University of Edinburgh

INTRODUCTION TO PART II

Irish Politics in the Age of the French Revolution Te American Revolution raised profound ideological issues which inspired Irish Patriots to demand from Britain major constitutional changes and signifcant commercial concessions that attracted widespread support across the country. Te American War of Independence placed such enormous burdens on the British government that it could not aford to alienate powerful interests in Ireland and risk a second war of independence. Tese pressures persuaded the British government and Parliament to concede in the early 1780s a large measure of legislative independence to the Irish Parliament and to grant important commercial concessions to strengthen the Irish economy. Most of the political elite in Ireland, and not just the Irish Patriots (who had led the campaign for these concessions), were ready to welcome these changes. As men of property they were gratifed by economic improvements which saw an increase in Ireland’s overseas trade, a growth in the country’s manufactures (particularly linen and other textiles) and rises in agrarian production and rental income. Tey appreciated the increase in their own political status and infuence because the Irish Parliament could now initiate its own legislation and the British Privy Council was not disposed to advise the King to veto measures supported by a majority in both Houses of the Dublin Parliament. Only four Irish bills out of over one thousand that were forwarded to Britain before the Irish Parliament ceased to exist at the end of 1800 were not approved when they reached Britain. Over 90 per cent of all Irish laws were now initiated in the Dublin House of Commons and the Irish Parliament was much more active in passing laws afer 1782 than it had ever been before. An average of sixty public and private bills were passed in each session up to 1800 and, in order to cope with such a legislative burden, the Irish Parliament began to meet annually from 1785.1 What gradually became apparent to the Irish Patriots, however, was the recognition that the Lord Lieutenant, the head of the Irish executive, was a British minister rather than an Irish minister. He was invariably a British and not an Irish peer and he was very conscious of the need to satisfy the government at Westminster rather than the – ix –

x

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

Parliament or people of Ireland. He was appointed and removed by decisions taken in Britain and the Executive he headed was expected to put the wider strategic and economic interests of Britain ahead of those of Ireland. He and his leading ministers were accountable to whatever government was in power at Westminster. Moreover, because of his high status and the very extensive crown patronage at his disposal, the Lord Lieutenant could continue to exercise considerable infuence over the political behaviour of a majority of members of both Houses of the Irish Parliament. Te Irish Parliament was not as independent afer 1782 as the leading Patriots had expected it to be.2 Disputes and tensions between the Irish Executive and the Irish Parliament remained common afer 1782 and these inhibited the growth of political stability. Tese difculties were exacerbated by major internal and external problems that were not satisfactorily addressed. Irish politics remained dangerously disturbed by three major problems that were not solved by the constitutional and commercial gains achieved by the Irish Patriots in the early 1780s. First, the achievement of legislative independence did nothing to prevent the deep socio-economic problems and sharp ethnic divisions in Irish society from continuing to foment sectarian violence with political overtones. Second, although the penal code had been partly dismantled between 1778 and 1782, the Catholic question remained a source of deep bitterness because a substantial majority of the Irish population was still denied equal civil liberties and political rights no matter how wealthy they might be. Tird, the failure to follow up legislative independence with parliamentary reform lef the Irish Parliament representing only a tiny minority of the Anglo-Irish propertied elite in communion with the established Protestant Church of Ireland. Most seats in the Irish House of Commons were held by Protestant men elected by a miniscule number of electors in the many small rotten boroughs, which, in turn, were controlled by a small number of very prosperous landowners. Both Houses of the Irish Parliament were therefore controlled by crown patronage or by the patronage wielded by a small number of wealthy landowners. Tese three major issues – bitter sectarian strife, the exclusion of Catholics from the political life of the nation and the grossly unrepresentative nature of the Irish Parliament – made it extremely difcult to achieve social harmony and political stability. Eforts to solve these problems proved enormously contentious; unresolved, they lef Ireland unstable and open to deep political dissatisfaction and endemic rural violence. What made the situation worse was the subordination of Irish interests to the economic and strategic needs of her much more powerful sister kingdom, Great Britain. Relations between Ireland and Britain were always likely to be strained. What made them so very fraught in the 1790s was the outbreak of a dramatic revolution in France in 1789, followed quite soon thereafer by a major war, which threatened Britain with terrible consequences. Te inspiration provided by the spread of

Introduction to Part II

xi

radical French principles to Ireland, and the opportunities to undermine British power and infuence that French military successes provided, exacerbated the three profound internal problems facing Ireland to such an extent that the country exploded into a bitter and bloody rebellion in 1798. Tereafer, it was the determination of British ministers to prevent the French taking advantage of the disturbed situation in Ireland that led to the decisions to end the separate existence of the Irish Parliament in Dublin and to press for an incorporating union of Great Britain and Ireland. Tis constitutional change, achieved by the end of 1800 largely by British eforts, destroyed the legislative independence so recently gained by the Irish Parliament and brought Ireland more frmly than ever under British control. When the new Imperial Parliament failed, in its turn, to address the three profound internal problems disrupting Irish life, the Union proved no more efective than the reforms of the early 1780s in bringing political stability to Ireland.

I. Sectarian Tensions Te Irish economy, though it remained underdeveloped in comparison with the British economy, did show signs of improvement in the late eighteenth century. Tese benefts, however, were not equally shared by the three major social groups in Ireland: the Anglo-Irish members of the Church of Ireland, the Scots-Irish Presbyterians and the Gaelic Catholic majority. A tiny minority of the population – less than 1 per cent – made up the ruling class and dominated the Irish economy, especially Irish agriculture. Te Irish middle classes, making up around 12 per cent of the population, were far smaller than the middle classes in Britain. Close to 90 per cent of the population remained poor and the overwhelming majority of these were Catholics. Even when the relaxation of the penal laws enabled Catholics to purchase or rent more land, they could still face difculties with absentee landlords, rapacious middlemen and competition from more successful Protestants. Even resident Protestant Anglo-Irish landowners might show little sympathy for the poor Catholic masses, who surrounded them, while absentee landlords (living in Britain or spending much of their time in Dublin), were content to let middlemen rent their lands and then sub-let them to small Catholic farmers who might be denied security of tenure. Catholic farmers, merchants and manufacturers who were successful could fnd that their achievements provoked the resentment of Protestant competitors and neighbours. Even when careers in the law and the military were opened to Catholics in the early 1790s, they were denied advancement to the higher ranks of these professions. When small Catholic farmers or labourers competed for rents or employment with Protestant neighbours, they could fnd themselves accused of pushing up

xii

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

rents or driving down wages to the disadvantage of the Protestants. A great many Irish people lived close to the margin of subsistence and it took only a single bad harvest to push many into destitution. In such a crisis the Irish poor could not count upon the kind of parish relief system that had long existed in Britain. Agrarian discontent was widespread across Ireland, violence was endemic and secret agrarian societies were a marked feature of rural Ireland.3 Protests were frequent and widespread against enclosures, high rents, insecure tenancies, church tithes and other church dues. Both rent levels, especially for small potato patches, and tithe rates rose sharply in the 1790s. Protests against both brought the Catholic poor in particular into confict with the Anglo-Irish landowning elite and the clergy of the established Church of Ireland. When the landowners were absentees or the clergy were guilty of pluralism and non-residence, resentment could be greater. If the landowners or clergy were resident, but abused their powers as local magistrates, then they could become highly unpopular and the potential victims of violent reactions. Te economic grievances of the poor were compounded by the taxation policies of the Irish government and Parliament. Te Irish poor were eventually relieved of the hearth tax, though not until 1795, but other tax decisions afected the Catholic poor disproportionately. Tere was no direct tax on land or incomes and hence most of the government’s revenue came from indirect taxes on such products as salt, sugar, tea, malt, leather, tobacco and alcohol, which fell disproportionately on poor consumers, particularly urban wage-earners. Several of these taxes were new in the 1790s as were the decisions to withdraw all bounties (that is, subsidies) on the inland and coastal carriage of grain to Dublin and to introduce new restrictions on the licensing of maltings.4 Tese acts adversely afected Catholic grain merchants and the poor consumers of grain. Te Irish poor had always resented the county cess, raised to repair roads, and they disliked new local taxes raised to meet the costs of raising the Irish militia from 1793 onwards. Tese taxes frequently provoked violent reactions, especially when they were accompanied by harsh, arbitrary or corrupt behaviour by local ofcials or by eforts to curb illicit distilling of alcohol.5 To add to this context, the Irish poor faced other problems which made the 1790s a difcult decade. Population grew faster than the growth in employment opportunities and several bad harvests were experienced. Tere was a bad harvest of both grain and potatoes in 1792, for example. More resented was the man-made distress caused by the costly war against France, which began in early 1793. Te war disrupted many established trade routes and made communications with sources of imports and markets for exports much more difcult. Tis created some temporary business recession and reduced employment opportunities. Te heavy costs of the war increased the fnancial needs of the Irish Treasury and the obligations of the Irish Exchequer. Urban industrial employment was badly dislocated by the recession of 1792–3. Rents and food prices

Introduction to Part II

xiii

rose and wages fell in real value. By 1797, Ireland faced a severe fnancial crisis and it was compelled to follow Britain in ending the convertibility of bank notes into gold. Tis led to a rapid fall in the amount of specie in circulation and to a reduction in the volume of commercial transactions.6 Popular disturbances occurred in both rural and urban areas when economic difculties, fnancial exactions and government policies adversely afected the poorer sectors of society. Disturbances took on a sectarian tone and then a political aspect when they led to stif competition between Catholics and Protestants. In county Wexford, for example, sectarian tensions increased in the 1790s, when there was a rise in the socio-economic status of Catholic farmers and a decline in the status of some of their middling Protestant neighbours. Tese tensions were compounded when the Protestant gentry were divided in their response to these developments, with some adopting a liberal stance and others a more reactionary attitude.7 County Wicklow had the largest Protestant community in southern Ireland and, faced with the rebellion of 1798, some of these Protestants became among the most oppressive administrators of a harsh law and order policy against their Catholic neighbours and they established the most powerful rural outpost of the Orange Order.8 Before the Irish rebellion of 1798, the most serious sectarian disturbances in the 1790s occurred in county Armagh. Tis was the most densely populated county in Ireland and possessed the most complex social and economic structure. Catholics, Presbyterians and Church of Ireland Protestants were represented in the county in almost equal numbers, but they predominated in the south, centre and north of the county respectively. A number of recent developments led to increased competition between these three groups. When the Irish Catholics were enfranchised in 1793 they became more valuable to Protestant landlords as tenants and, since they were ofen more ready to pay a higher rent to acquire a tenancy, they were able to undercut Protestants seeking tenancies themselves. Te rapid extension of the linen industry in the county, run by both Protestant and Catholic masters, provided employment for out-work, independent weavers. Young Catholic and Protestant men competed for this work, which enabled them to become more independent of both their masters and their fathers. Te young men in this kind of employment and with this level of independence appear to have been more willing to engage in violence. And as rivalry grew between these young men of diferent religious backgrounds, the Protestants came to resent the way the formation of Volunteer corps in the 1780s and the creation of the militia from 1793 gave Catholics access to arms and training in arms, in a society that regarded the bearing of arms as a right of citizenship. As competition and rivalry grew between Catholics and Protestants, clashes occurred and violence spread. Protestant bands were formed, particularly the Peep of Day Boys (so-called because they attacked Catholics at daybreak), which sought to disarm the Catholics. In

xiv

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

response, the Catholics formed groups known as Defenders, who tried to gain arms legitimately through service in the Volunteers and the militia, or took to raiding Protestant households to steal arms.9 As large numbers were recruited into mutually hostile Peep of Day Boys and Defenders, the number and scale of disturbances increased. Afer a clash known as the battle of the Diamond, on 21 September 1795, the successful Peep of Day Boys set about expelling hundreds of Catholics from the region. Tey also established a new organization, the Orange Order (named afer the Protestant hero, William III, Prince of Orange), to defend their economic status, religious superiority and political privileges. Te fedgling Orange Order borrowed many masonic terms such as ‘lodges’, ‘masters’ and ‘grandmaster’ and masonic rituals, such as ‘oaths’, ‘signs’ and distinctive dress. Many Peep of Day Boys joined this new organization, but the Orange Order was not just the Peep of Day Boys by a diferent name. Te membership was initially made up mainly of relatively humble men such as tailors, weavers, innkeepers and artisans of various kinds. In order to retain their dominance of local society, substantial merchants, manufacturers and landed gentry started to take a leading role in the Orange Order. Tey quickly recognized the potential of the Orange Order as a means of enlisting a disciplined Protestant force that would help defend the existing political, religious and social order in the county and so the movement grew quickly. On 12 July 1796 some 2,000 Orangemen took part in commemorating William of Orange’s victory at the battle of the Boyne in 1690. By 1797 General Lake was reviewing a march several times as large. By 1798 the membership of Orange lodges nationwide may have totalled 80,000 and by 1800 there may have been twice as many Orangemen. Te Orange lodges formed a federation under the Grand Lodge with a leading fgure chosen as the Grand Master. Te movement denied that it was attacking the religious beliefs of the Catholics. Rather, its members insisted that their purposes were political: to defend a Protestant monarchy, a Protestant constitution and a Protestant state church. Tey did, however, associate Catholicism with tyranny, slavery and disloyalty.10 As a Catholic rising became more threatening, Orangemen were very active in disarming potential Catholic rebels. Signifcant numbers of Orangemen joined the newly formed Yeomanry, a largely Protestant force created in 1796 and numbering over 50,000 men by 1800. As the Irish rebellion of 1798 became increasingly sectarian, many thousands of Orangemen were active in launching sectarian attacks on any Catholic they believed to be a rebel or sympathetic towards the rebellion.

Introduction to Part II

xv

II. Te Catholic Question Te Irish Patriots and the Irish Volunteers had debated in the early 1780s how far to accept the substantial Catholic majority in Ireland as loyal subjects deserving equal civil liberties and political rights. Tey had supported the repeal of parts of the penal code, but they had been very divided on whether to make any political concessions to the Catholics. Te Catholic elite, dominated by a handful of substantial landowners and the Catholic bishops, were convinced that the best means of campaigning for further relief measures was by discreet lobbying of leading Irish ministers and by stressing how loyal and peaceful the Catholic population was prepared to be. Tey did this through the Catholic Committee, which met intermittently throughout the 1780s. Tis state of afairs was transformed by the intense political excitement generated by the outbreak of the French Revolution in 1789. Te French Revolution was seen as a triumph for enlightened views, which promoted religious toleration, anti-clericalism and secular solutions to social problems. Early in the revolution the wealth and power of the Catholic Church, the infuence of the clergy and the authority of the Pope were all sharply curtailed, indicating that not all Catholics were permanently enslaved by their clergy. Later, French forces actually invaded the Papal States in Italy and brought back Pope Pius VI as a prisoner to France. Te French Revolution had positive as well as negative consequences. It promoted a political ideology which claimed that all men had the right to be regarded as full citizens and to exercise political infuence. Whereas, in the past, Protestants had associated Catholicism with tyranny and royal absolutism, it was now possible to see Catholic France as a beacon of liberty extending political rights even further than did Protestant Britain. Early in 1791, Edward Byrne and John Keogh, middle-class men inspired by events in France, began to challenge Viscount Kenmare and Archbishop John Troy for control of the Catholic Committee in order to advance a more radical strategy to achieve political concessions for the Irish Catholics.11 In February, they urged the election of a new and more widely-based Committee, which soon demonstrated that there was signifcant lay Catholic support for a more public and proactive campaign to secure Catholic relief. Meanwhile, a young Dublin lawyer, Teobald Wolfe Tone, himself a Protestant, produced an anonymous pamphlet, An Argument on behalf of the Catholics of Ireland, in August 1791.12 He advanced an eloquent and powerful case urging Irish Protestants to end their distrust of Catholics and he decided the union of Irishmen of all religious denominations was the best way of securing political reforms. Infuenced by the natural rights ideology of the French Revolution, Tone did not have a great deal of respect for the religious tenets or the ecclesiastical structure of the Catholic Church and he hoped to see papal authority seriously weakened. He was, in fact, opposed to all

xvi

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

religious enthusiasm and hoped to end all religious animosities. While prepared to give Irish Catholics the parliamentary franchise, he was willing to see the property qualifcation attached to it signifcantly increased so that only the more prosperous Catholics would be able to vote in parliamentary elections in future. Despite these reservations, Tone’s pamphlet was widely read and well received. It helped secure him appointment as an assistant secretary to the Catholic Committee. Shortly afer his pamphlet appeared, some of the more reform-minded Catholics, including members of the Catholic Committee, set up the Catholic Society, which caused a sensation by publishing a forthright and uncompromising demand for the speedy repeal of the surviving parts of the penal code.13 Te Earl of Westmorland, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, and his Chief Secretary, Robert Hobart, were opposed to any further concessions to the Catholics. Tey hoped to exploit the divisions within the Catholic Committee by persuading a majority of its members to disavow the Catholic Society’s demand for an immediate end to all surviving penal laws. Te Catholic Committee refused to accept this advice and refused to adopt a submissive stance in its meetings with the Chief Secretary. Fearing an angry response from the Lord Lieutenant, Kenmare and his supporters seceded from the Catholic Committee in December 1791, leaving it more not less formidable as more radical and determined men took over control. While the Irish government continued to oppose further measures of Catholic relief, the British government was becoming more willing to make such concessions in the belief that this would actually strengthen not weaken the Protestant ascendancy in Ireland. An independent Irish MP, Hercules Langrishe, was encouraged to introduce a modest Catholic relief bill into the Irish House of Commons on 25 January 1792. Tis moderate measure, giving Catholics access to minor state positions, passed easily enough, but a petition in support of granting the parliamentary franchise was rejected by the House of Commons by a huge majority. Te modest gains made in early 1792 did not satisfy the leaders of the Catholic Committee. It decided to mount a more aggressive campaign to secure the parliamentary franchise for Catholics. A decision was taken to make the Catholic Committee more obviously representative of the Catholic population as a whole by promoting the election of delegates from across Ireland to a convention to meet in Dublin to devise means of promoting Catholic emancipation more efectively. Although many Protestants were alarmed, some grand juries made formal protests, and other Protestants tried to belittle the Catholic Convention by describing it as the ‘Back-lane Parliament’ (because of where it met in Dublin), nearly three hundred delegates were elected from most of the counties and main towns of the country. John Keogh, Tomas Braughal and Wolfe Tone toured the country encouraging popular participation in the election of these delegates. Teir eforts alarmed many Protestants and provoked sectarian

Introduction to Part II

xvii

disturbances in County Down. When the Convention met, in December 1792, Edward Byrne was elected its President and a decision was taken to appoint fve leading delegates to take a petition14 directly to the King, rather than have it transmitted through the Lord Lieutenant, which was the usual procedure. Te King received this delegation graciously on 2 January 1793. Prime Minister William Pitt and his leading ministerial colleagues, fearing that a war with revolutionary France was imminent, were now willing to advise the Irish executive to support enfranchising Irish Catholics if the leading members of the Catholic Committee would promote internal peace and avoid any connection with any political radicals in Ireland. Such assurances were given. Lord Westmorland and Robert Hobart in Dublin were now advised from London that they should promote a Catholic Relief Bill, which would give Irish Catholics the franchise on the same terms as Protestants. Te proposed measure was also to allow Catholics to become barristers and to be educated abroad, to serve on grand and petty juries, and on borough corporations, to serve as junior army and navy ofcers, and to bear arms (provided they met a substantial property qualifcation).15 Although there was no mention of Irish Catholics being allowed to sit in either House of Parliament or to hold high ofce in the Irish state, this was still a major concession. Westmorland and Hobart reluctantly supported the measure in the 1793 parliamentary session, but, to sweeten the pill for Protestants, it was also decided to approve a Militia Bill, a Gunpowder Bill and a Convention Bill,16 which strengthened the forces of internal defence, made illicit arming more difcult and declared radical political societies, associations and conventions illegal. Te last act threatened the survival of the Catholic Convention and the Catholic Committee. Tey were wound up, but not before they expressed their support for the Catholic Enfranchisement Bill. Irish Catholics were undoubtedly pleased to secure the parliamentary franchise on the same terms as Protestants because this gave them considerable infuence over the voting in several counties, but they were still anxious to secure further concessions. Tey could not regard themselves as equal citizens in the Irish state, while they were excluded from both Houses of Parliament and all senior positions in the Irish executive, judiciary and military. Tere was no way, however, that the Irish Parliament would be willing to promote such concessions in the present political climate. Yet, quite suddenly, the political situation changed, frst in Britain and then in Ireland. Faced with threats from revolutionary France abroad and a signifcant radical movement in Britain, the Portland Whigs, long in opposition, agreed to form a grand coalition with William Pitt’s supporters in order to combat these serious threats. Te Portland Whigs had long forged close connections with leading Irish Whigs and former Irish Patriots, including Henry Grattan. Portland was made Home Secretary in Britain, a position that gave him formal responsibility for Britain’s relations with Ireland,

xviii

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

and he pressed hard to have Earl Fitzwilliam chosen to replace Westmorland as Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. Fitzwilliam was a friend of Edmund Burke, who favoured Catholic relief in Ireland, and his sister was married to George Ponsonby (the leader of the Whigs in the Irish House of Commons); he naively and optimistically believed that he could negotiate a settlement to the Catholic question in Ireland. Neither Pitt nor Portland held such ambitious views or wished to test the loyalty of the leading Irish supporters of the Protestant ascendancy. Tey hoped to maintain the status quo and not heighten religious tensions within Ireland, whereas Fitzwilliam hoped to end the current impasse by taking proactive steps to secure Catholic emancipation. Fitzwilliam did hold discussions with Pitt and Portland in October and November 1794, before embarking for Ireland. Tese discussions failed to result in absolutely explicit instructions being given to the new Lord Lieutenant. It seems clear, at least in retrospect, that Pitt wished Fitzwilliam to make any new concessions only if it became absolutely the only way to maintain stability in Ireland. Fitzwilliam either failed to understand exactly what political strategy Pitt was advising him to pursue or he convinced himself that a proactive policy towards Catholic emancipation was, in fact, the best way of securing political stability in Ireland. When he arrived in Ireland, early in January 1795, Fitzwilliam promptly dismissed leading and efective ministers of the Irish Executive, including the Solicitor General ( John Toler), the Attorney General (Arthur Wolfe), the Chief Revenue Commissioner ( John Beresford), the Under-Secretary of State (Sackville Hamilton) and his able assistant (Edward Cooke). All of these men protested bitterly and John Beresford even took his complaints directly to London, where Prime Minister Pitt was a personal friend. Alarm bells began to ring in Whitehall, but Fitzwilliam still went further. He was determined that the question of Catholic emancipation should be debated in Parliament and he did nothing to defect Catholic petitions being sent to Parliament or to oppose Henry Grattan’s motion in support of a Catholic Relief Bill on 12 February 1795. Portland urged caution and delay, but Fitzwilliam demanded that a clear decision on the measure should be taken in London, but allowed no time for a considered reply before pressing on. On 20 February, he was ordered to oppose the introduction of a Catholic emancipation bill and a few days later he was ordered to resign. He was rapidly recalled from Dublin.17 Although all sides in this debacle denied that the Catholic question was the real cause of Fitzwilliam’s recall, it seems clear that this was in fact the case. Pitt was irritated at the sudden changes made in the Irish executive, but he was more concerned at the Protestant reaction in Ireland to Fitzwilliam’s drive for full Catholic emancipation. He believed it was unwise, in the midst of a major war, to risk alienating the most powerful interests in Ireland. Moreover, while resisting radical demands in Britain, it seemed perverse to support Catholic emancipation

Introduction to Part II

xix

in Ireland that would almost certainly be followed by demands for parliamentary reform to remove the many Protestant controlled rotten boroughs in Ireland. It might even prove difcult to defend the Protestant established Church of Ireland, if Catholics became a substantial force in the Irish Parliament. Indeed, the whole Protestant constitution in Ireland might be put at risk. Without backing from the Irish Executive, the Catholic emancipation bill was defeated in the Irish House of Commons, despite Grattan’s major speech in its support.18 Te Catholic middle class was now more alienated from the Irish executive and Parliament than ever before, having seen its hopes suddenly raised and as suddenly crushed. Fitzwilliam’s recall was met with near despair. Te Catholic Committee reassembled in Dublin in February 1795 to protest at Fitzwilliam’s recall, but to no avail. A delegation from the Catholic Committee carried its protests to London, but this time its members met a cold reception from George III. When Earl Camden was appointed as the new Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, he was urged by the British government to rally support from the Protestant interest. Camden promptly reinstated many of the men whom Fitzwilliam had so recently removed from ofce and dismissed those few ofce holders who had supported the bill in support of Catholic emancipation. Te conservative Catholic bishops, ably led by John Troy, Archbishop of Dublin, let the Lord Lieutenant know that they were ready to proceed with slower and more cautious steps in promoting Catholic interests. Tey were able to use the argument that it was to the advantage of the Irish government to have an educated and disciplined Catholic clergy in Ireland advising their congregations to keep the peace. Tis allowed them to achieve a useful concession, despite the Fitzwilliam debacle. Te French Revolution had resulted in the closure of many Catholic seminaries in France and the Low Countries, where so many Irish Catholic priests had been trained in the past. A seminary in Ireland was clearly needed if the supply of a well-trained priesthood was not to dry up. On 24 April 1795, within three weeks of his arrival in Dublin, the new Chief Secretary, Tomas Pelham, introduced a bill into the Irish House of Commons to establish a Catholic seminary at Maynooth. His bill received a swif and easy passage through the Irish Parliament. However, there was more opposition outside Parliament. Te bill establishing St Patrick’s College also pleased the Catholic hierarchy because it gave Catholic bishops and leading Catholic laymen a clear majority on the board of trustees that appointed the president and teaching staf of the college. Public funding was necessary to sustain and expand the seminary, but this money was not provided for the college by any substantial government or parliamentary endowment. Instead, the college had to approach the Irish government and Parliament on an annual basis to secure the funds to keep the seminary afoat.19 In return for receiving these concessions, the Irish Catholic bishops, more united than ever before, ofered no protests

xx

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

when Camden’s administration pursued harsh law-and-order policies from 1795 onwards. Te Catholic hierarchy and a large majority of the Catholic priesthood proved ready to advise the Catholic population to keep the peace and to oppose the demands of radical political activists. Tey were not prepared to endorse the policies and actions of either the United Irishmen or the Defenders.20 While the Catholic hierarchy succeeded in replacing the Catholic Committee as the most infuential Catholic voice so far as the Irish Executive was concerned, the bishops could not entirely escape the charge that the Maynooth seminary bill was a sop accepted in place of Catholic emancipation.

III. Te United Irishmen and Political Reform Te greatest threat to political stability, one which subsumed sectarian disputes and the Catholic question, was the grossly unrepresentative nature of the electoral and parliamentary systems. Te two Houses of the Irish Parliament represented the interests of only one small group of Irishmen – the propertied elite of the Anglo-Irish adherents of the established Church of Ireland. Te Scots-Irish Presbyterians, strong in local politics in Ulster, had no representatives in the Irish House of Lords and only a handful of representatives in the Irish House of Commons. Te Catholic majority had no representation at all in either chamber, even afer they had been granted the vote on the same terms as Protestants in 1793. Because so many Irish constituencies were small boroughs with tiny electorates, a small number of borough proprietors controlled a surprising number of seats in the House of Commons. Tey could easily return themselves or a relative or friend to Parliament or sell a seat which they controlled to the highest bidder. Irish Patriots and those of a liberal disposition had long recognized the unjustness and inequalities of the Irish electoral system. Henry Flood had attempted in the mid-1780s to achieve a measure of parliamentary reform, but his eforts failed largely because any fair system of representation would give the Catholic Irish majority signifcant infuence over a large number of Irish MPs. Te fear then was that this electoral system would soon be followed by Catholic demands to sit in both Houses of the Irish Parliament and, most alarming of all, Catholic pressure to reverse the large-scale confscation of Catholic lands that had occurred in the seventeenth century. It was these profound and understandable fears that made the question of parliamentary reform such a difcult problem to address. Even Henry Grattan was opposed to the principle of universal manhood sufrage. And yet, so long as no attempt was made to address this question, then so long would political stability prove elusive. Interest in parliamentary reform received a remarkable stimulus with the outbreak of the French Revolution in 1789 and the prolonged and intense

Introduction to Part II

xxi

discussions of natural rights, which followed this event. Within weeks of the opening of the States-General in Paris, Irish newspapers, especially in Dublin and Belfast, showed a deep interest in the political issues and principles being discussed in France. Men previously in favour of political reform drew inspiration from the remarkable events and discussions taking place in France. Even some of the propertied elite recognized that some measure of political reform might be unavoidable. Te Irish Whig party, founded in 1789 by Henry Grattan, George Ponsonby, John Forbes and the Earl of Charlemont, committed itself to a reform programme designed to strengthen the Irish Parliament and to weaken the political infuence of the Irish Executive over the legislature. Te Irish Whigs wished to reduce the extent of crown patronage that the Irish government could use to infuence the votes of men in both Houses of the Irish Parliament, to reduce government expenditure and to disfranchise revenue ofcers. Tey founded the Friends of the Constitution as a political club for moderate reformers and debated how best to reform the electoral system.21 In doing so, they recognized the danger to their own position that would be posed by any attempt to increase the size of the electorate or to abolish many of the small rotten boroughs. Fears of how large numbers of enfranchised Catholics might vote led them to propose reducing the number of enfranchised Catholics by increasing the qualifcation for the vote from the possession of a two-pounds to a twenty-pounds freehold.22 Tis kind of moderation, in an era of intense debate about universal natural rights, meant that the Irish Whigs could attract little support outside Parliament. Tey failed to prevent a more generous electoral franchise being granted to Irish Catholics in 1793, while their own modest proposal for further parliamentary reform was defeated in 1794 by 142 to 44 votes. Meanwhile, outside the political elite, much more radical ideas were being debated and far more support for them was being enlisted. By 1790, middle-class reformers in Belfast were celebrating the achievements of the French revolutionaries and were beginning to agitate for an extension of electoral reform that would acknowledge the political claims of the Catholic majority. Radicals such as William Drennan in Belfast and Teobald Wolfe Tone in Dublin, neither of whom showed much respect for Catholicism as a religion, were now accepting that a signifcant extension of the franchise would have to mean giving the vote to large numbers of Irish Catholics. Tone’s famous pamphlet, An Argument on behalf of the Catholics of Ireland (mentioned above), helped convert many reformers to the need to enfranchise a great many Irishmen, no matter to what religious denomination they adhered. Invited to Belfast by Drennan, Tone and a handful of other radicals, including Samuel Neilson and Tomas Russell, established the Belfast Society of United Irishmen on 18 October 1791. Tis society called for the destruction of English infuence over the Irish government, an objective, which they knew could only be achieved by a thoroughgoing reform

xxii

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

of the electoral system, including the enfranchisement of a great many Irish Catholics. Less than a month later, on 9 November 1791, James Napper Tandy,23 a veteran of popular radical campaigns in the capital, persuaded a few fellow reformers to set up the Dublin Society of United Irishmen. Branches were soon set up in other large towns, but these two societies dominated the movement for radical parliamentary reform in the early 1790s.24 Much more specifc information on the composition and activities of the Dublin Society of United Irishmen is available than for the Belfast Society.25 In its early years it attracted about four hundred members, about half of whom were regular attenders, though many meetings had attendance fgures of around one hundred. Te society attracted both Protestant and Catholic members, but in its early years all the leading ofcers were Protestants. In these years the society was undoubtedly dominated by men from the middling ranks of society – barristers, attorneys, doctors, schoolteachers, printers, booksellers, merchants, manufacturers and owners of luxury trades – but its most prominent members were men of even higher social status, including gentlemen such as Simon Butler, Archibald Hamilton Rowan and Tomas Addis Emmet. Few if any of the members were working men and none was from the lowest ranks in society. From the outset, however, there was some tension between what might be called bourgeois reformers and artisan radicals represented by men such as Napper Tandy.26 Tis was more obviously the case in Belfast. Although professional men and moderately prosperous merchants and manufacturers were prominent, the Belfast Society of United Irishmen was beginning to attract men from lower down the social scale, men such as innkeepers, shopkeepers, tradesmen with small businesses, and skilled artisans in the textile industries.27 Both the Dublin and the Belfast societies engaged in similar activities to the radical societies springing up in London and large provincial cities across Britain. Tey held regular meetings, debated political issues, corresponded with radical societies in Britain and France, drew up addresses and petitions, and drafed proposals for reform.28 Te Belfast Society established the most efective radical newspaper, the Northern Star, as early as 4 January 1792. Edited by Samuel Neilson, four pages in length, and initially costing two pence, it kept its readers informed about events in France and about the United Irishmen’s ideas and activities. It was widely distributed, well beyond Belfast, and regularly sold about 4,000 copies. It had to struggle against the hostility of the authorities however. Its printer was arrested, put on trial, but acquitted in 1794. Te frst editor, Samuel Neilson, was arrested, convicted and imprisoned for seventeen months in September 1796 and his two replacement editors were arrested in February 1797. Te Northern Star did not cease publication until May 1797, when elements of the Monaghan militia, unrestrained by their superior ofcers, ransacked the newspaper’s ofces and smashed its printing press.29 In the capital,

Introduction to Part II

xxiii

William Carey publicized the ideas, aims and activities of the Dublin Society of United Irishmen in his newspaper, the Rights of Irishmen, or National Evening Star, from late 1791. Tis newspaper also ran into difculties with the authorities when it printed the United Irishmen’s ‘Address to the Volunteers of Ireland’, calling upon them on 18 December 1792 to arm immediately. In May 1793, the National Evening Star closed down.30 Te Dublin United Irishmen, by then a very diferent organization, had to wait until 1797 before there was another efective newspaper promoting their cause in the capital. In that year, Arthur O’Connor established the Press as a radical newspaper, while Watty Cox31 published a radical news-sheet, the Union Star, which kept the populace aware of the names and activities of Orangemen, spies, informers and agents provocateurs. Tey too were soon closed down.32 Te societies of United Irishmen alarmed the authorities at national and local levels during their early years, even though they were not numerically strong, unifed or particularly radical. Tey failed to forge efective alliances with either the Volunteers or the Catholic Committee. Tey struggled to devise a reform programme, which would unite large numbers of men across socio-economic, ethnic or religious lines. Despite the intense interest, which their members showed in the French Revolution and the two volumes of Tomas Paine’s Te Rights of Man (1791–2),33 neither of the two major societies of United Irishmen clearly advocated a political programme based on French principles or a Paineite ideology. In their early years the leading members of both societies were more infuenced by ideas that can be characterized as Classical Republican or Real Whig rather than by the natural rights ideology or the social welfare reforms of Paine. Members of the Dublin Society explicitly denied that they were levellers, who wished to overturn the existing social hierarchy or redistribute wealth from the rich to the poor. Tere are, however, some indications even in its early years that the Belfast Society showed a greater concern for the welfare of the poor. Tis can be noted in some of the observations made by Tomas Russell and Henry Joy McCracken. Te Northern Star also assured its readers that it expected a reformed legislature to abolish tithes and the hearth tax, and reduce the county cess levied to repair roads.34 When the Dublin Society of United Irishmen discussed proposals for parliamentary reform in January 1793, it only narrowly agreed to support universal manhood sufrage and it never even considered votes for women of any social rank. No demand was made for the secret ballot. It seems clear that its Protestant members still wished to retain open voting because they recognized that this would make it easier for wealthy landowners and employers to exert pressure on how their tenants and their workers would vote. It was, of course, for this very reason that Catholics wished to see the secret ballot adopted. It was not until February 1794 that the Dublin United Irishmen published their reform pro-

xxiv

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

gramme. Tis advocated universal manhood sufrage, equal sized constituencies, annual parliaments, the payment of MPs and the exclusion of government placemen and pensioners from sitting in the Irish House of Commons.35 Tese aims were not particularly innovative, though they did strike fear into the propertied elite. Yet again, however, there was no demand for the secret ballot. While the existence of very large estates was criticized, no attack was made on property rights and no mention at all was made of the kind of social welfare reforms so prominent in part two of Tom Paine’s Te Rights of Man. Te United Irishmen had so far operated in the open and had advocated changes by constitutional means. Tis did not prevent the Irish government and Parliament from deciding that these dangerously radical societies should be suppressed. Leading individual United Irishmen were harassed, arrested, persecuted and, whenever possible, imprisoned. In March 1793, Oliver Bond and Simon Butler were sentenced to six months in prison and fned £500 for publishing radical United Irishmen addresses. Hamilton Rowan was fnally brought to trial in January 1794 and was sentenced to two years imprisonment, though he escaped in May and went into exile. William Drennan was prosecuted, but acquitted in early 1794, but he was sufciently frightened by the experience that he abandoned radical politics. When the French sent a British agent, the Reverend William Jackson, to Ireland to make contact with the United Irishmen, he was arrested on 28 April 1794, convicted of treason, but avoided a terrible execution by committing suicide in the dock. Wolfe Tone, who knew about Jackson’s activities, feared that he might be charged with treason, but, in fact, he was allowed to enter into an agreement with the authorities to leave the country in return for immunity from prosecution. Before he lef for exile to the United States of America, Tone and a few other United Irishmen, including Tomas Russell, Henry Joy McCracken and Samuel Neilson swore an oath to continue their radical eforts until they had ended England’s pernicious infuence in Ireland and had secured the country’s independence. Tone did leave for the United States, in June 1795, but, by February 1796, he was in France, where he engaged in eforts to secure a French invasion of Ireland.36 Not satisfed with prosecuting leading United Irishmen, the Irish government determined to destroy the whole movement. Te Militia Act led to the disbanding of the Volunteers, whose support the United Irishmen had tried to enlist. Te Convention Act of 179337 made it illegal to establish political associations other than Parliament itself. Tis made the societies of United Irishmen illegal. In May 1794, the Dublin police forcibly disbanded the Dublin Society and seized its papers. Te recall of Earl Fitzwilliam in early 1795 and his replacement by Earl Camden led to determined eforts to destroy the whole United Irishmen movement by all means possible, some of them barely legal. Te Irish government portrayed the United Irishmen as members of a treasonable organi-

Introduction to Part II

xxv

zation, which was determined to excite a French-style violent revolution. While this was undoubtedly unjust, the United Irishmen were put in the position of abandoning all their hopes and activities or converting themselves into a secret, oath-bound, mass-based conspiracy ready to pursue its objectives by violent means and with the military assistance of the French. Tose leaders still at large, especially those in Belfast, chose the latter strategy. Between 1794 and 1795 the United Irishmen were transformed from an open reform movement primarily dedicated to employing constitutional means into a mass-based, secret organization ready to resort to violent revolution.38 With surprising rapidity, the United Irishmen managed to harness politically discontented middle-class reformers, radical tradesmen and artisans, and oppressed peasants, loosely allied with the militant Catholic Defenders, into a potentially revolutionary if never entirely coherent force. Although this revolutionary conspiracy eventually enlisted tens of thousands of supporters, sympathizers and fellow-travellers (estimates on the size of the conspiracy range from 200,000 to 500,000), it never entirely combined the political aims of the United Irishmen with the social and economic aims of the Defenders.39 Instead, it tried to gloss over these profound diferences in ideology and objectives, while uniting to overthrow the existing political system. Te United Irishmen sought equal civil liberties and political rights, irrespective of a man’s social status or religious afliation. Te Defenders wished to see Catholics admitted to the legislature and the government, but they were more interested in such objectives as the abolition of tithes and church dues, reduction in rents and taxes, and greater access to land ownership. Some even harboured the ultimate goal of restoring lands confscated in the seventeenth century to their previous Catholic owners. Tey had long memories and harboured a deep sense of injustice. Nevertheless, although there were clear diferences between the United Irishmen and the Defenders, there was also some overlap in their objectives. Te Belfast United Irishmen, in particular, paid considerable attention to economic issues, such as tithes, rents and taxes. Tomas Russell not only emphasized the political rights of the common man, but also expressed concern about the exploitation of women and children in the workplace and supported the setting up of a combination of artisans in Belfast to protect their interests.40 Both the Dublin and the Belfast societies of United Irishmen continued to meet, sometimes under diferent names and now in secret. Activities were coordinated by a nationwide organization in a pyramid structure from local branches to baronial, county, provincial and then up to a national body, with delegates being sent up from one level to the next to discuss policies and coordinate activities.41 Members were now expected to proclaim their support for ‘an equal, full and adequate representation for all the people in Ireland’.42 Emerging leaders, such as Tomas Addis Emmet, Lord Edward Fitzgerald, Arthur O’Connor and William James MacNeven, were more prepared than earlier leaders of the

xxvi

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

United Irishmen to recruit lower-class Protestants in urban areas and commercial centres. Radical employers built up political alliances with their workers. It was generally recognized, however, that only an alliance with the far more numerous Catholic Defenders would provide the numbers and the militancy to threaten a rebellion. With such allies it seemed possible to negotiate with the French for military assistance. Te United Irishmen had some misgivings about allying with the Defenders, but they were confdent that they could curb the sectarian tendencies of these allies and channel their activities towards the achievement of their own political objectives. Te Defenders, in turn, appear to have accepted the need for United Irishmen leadership because of their superior social status and expertise, and their established links with the French. Te alliance of the United Irishmen and the Defenders was undoubtedly assisted and promoted by the actions of the Irish government, the armed forces and the Orangemen. Te Irish government enlisted spies, informers and agents provocateurs to infltrate both movements.43 Earl Camden sent Lord Carhampton and the army into Connacht in 1795, with unlimited authority.44 Hundreds of small farmers and agricultural labourers suspected of being Defenders were arrested and, without being brought to trial, were sent to serve in the Royal Navy. Tis fagrant violation of due legal process caused intense and widespread resentment, but Camden responded by securing an indemnity act in early 1796 to protect Carhampton from any criminal charge. In Ulster, sectarian warfare spread as the newly created Orange Order launched a series of vicious attacks on the Catholic peasantry in the counties of Armagh and Down. Over one thousand Catholics were driven out of Armagh alone. When the authorities turned a blind eye to such conduct, it is hardly surprising that Orangeism helped to strengthen the emerging alliance between the Defenders and the United Irishmen. In 1796, Camden secured legislation to create a new armed defence force, the Irish yeomanry, a largely Protestant force, that could be trusted to be more ruthless towards the United Irishmen and the Defenders than the militia, which included far more Catholics and which had been infltrated by both United Irishmen and Defenders. Both United Irishmen and Defenders responded to attacks on them by seeking arms and responded in kind against Orangemen, yeomanry troops and active magistrates. Te Irish authorities were soon alarmed at the astonishing growth, at least in nominal membership, of both the United Irishmen and the Defenders. Teir alarm approached panic as they discovered the extent of the connections between the United Irishmen and the French. Tey soon discovered that the United Irishmen had agents such as Wolfe Tone in France and that they sent several others across to France to encourage French interest in an invasion of Ireland. Despite this information, there was astonishment when the French actually attempted a major invasion of Ireland at the end of 1796. A large French

Introduction to Part II

xxvii

feet, with nearly 15,000 troops led by General Lazare Hoche set out for Ireland. With insufcient defence forces to cope with such a force, the Irish authorities were fortunate that a winter storm scattered this feet. When about a third of this force landed at Bantry Bay in late December 1796, they were disillusioned to fnd that no rebellion had actually broken out in Ireland and no rebel force was there to welcome these French troops. Tey were glad to retreat to France.45 Te near panic created by this attempted French invasion provoked an even harsher response from the Irish government, its armed forces and militant Orangemen. In early 1797 General Lake, with a mixed force of militia, yeomanry and fencibles, was given orders to pacify Ulster by disarming all potential rebels, using all methods necessary. Te Lord Lieutenant and Irish Privy Council issued a Proclamation in May 1797, directing the military to act without waiting for the authority or sanction of a civil magistrate. Lake accomplished his task with ruthless efciency, resorting to unrestrained attacks on persons and property. Little efort was made to keep his troops under frm control, with small units unaccompanied by ofcers allowed to take the law into their own hands. Many innocent people sufered in the process, but large quantities of arms were seized and destroyed, and serious damage was done to the preparations being made by the United Irishmen for a mass, coordinated rebellion. Lake’s actions led to protests from moderate voices, such as those of Lord Moira, who raised his complaints in both England and Ireland.46 When General Ralph Abercromby, who had previously spent some years serving in Ireland, was appointed Commander-in-Chief in Ireland in late 1797, he felt compelled to indicate frm disapproval of the policy being pursued by the Irish government. He was shocked by the ill-discipline of the troops under his command and lamented the myriad injustices, which they had perpetrated. On 26 February 1798, he issued a general order condemning the behaviour of the country’s armed forces, particularly the militia. He condemned the irregular behaviour of the troops, which ‘unfortunately proved the army to be in a state of licentiousness which must render it formidable to everyone but the enemy’. Tis action angered leading members of the Protestant ascendancy, including John Foster, Speaker of the Irish House of Commons. Protests were made to the Lord Lieutenant and to the British government. Camden ordered the arrest of known leaders of the United Irishmen in Leinster and directed Abercromby to disarm the disafected counties around Dublin. Abercromby obeyed instructions, but kept his troops on a tight rein. He decided, however, that his position had become intolerable and untenable. His decision to resign was reinforced by another Proclamation from the Lord Lieutenant and Irish Privy Council on 30 March 1798, authorizing the military throughout the kingdom to act independently of the civil power and to treat any disturbance as an act of rebellion. Abercromby resigned on 2 April 1798 and tried to restrain his troops during

xxviii

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

his last days in command. General Lake succeeded him on 25 April, in time to respond to the rebellion, which broke out a month later. His appointment marked the triumph of the hardliners in the Irish government and Parliament. Tese hardliners were actually relieved that the boil had burst when the rebellion broke out in late May. Tey believed that it made it easier to respond to the challenge with unrestrained force.47

IV. Te Irish Rebellion of 1798 Te leaders of the United Irishmen had been planning a rebellion ever since the abortive French invasion of December 1796 because they recognized that another French attempt would not be made until a serious rising had frst broken out in Ireland.48 Tey had supporters in France, such as Wolfe Tone, and leading United Irishmen, such as Arthur O’Connor, William James MacNeven and Tomas Addis Emmet, visited France in 1796 and 1797. Unfortunately for the United Irishmen, the Irish authorities acted with determination and ruthlessness to ensure a rebellion was very difcult to organize. Troops were given free rein to terrorize and disarm large numbers of potential rebels, especially in Ulster. Martial law was proclaimed and habeas corpus was suspended, allowing imprisonment without trial. Tomas Russell was arrested in Belfast as early as September 1796 and remained in prison until 1802. Samuel Neilson was arrested the same month and spent seventeen months in prison without being brought to trial. Te Irish government also employed spies and informers, who efectively infltrated both the United Irishmen and the Defenders. Te United Irishmen had hoped to create a mass-based yet secret organization, but this proved impossible despite the sophisticated cell-like structure that was adopted by the movement. Te more recruits were enlisted the more difcult it was to hide from the authorities what the United Irishmen were planning. Te information gained by the authorities from spies and informers allowed them to disrupt the plans of the United Irishmen before they could be brought to fruition. William Orr was executed as early as October 1797. Arthur O’Connor, John Binns and James Coigley were arrested in England, while on their way to France, in February 1798. Charged with treason, O’Connor was acquitted, but was still sent back to Ireland to face trial and imprisonment there.49 Firmer evidence of plotting was found in Coigley’s possession and this Catholic priest was executed for treason.50 On 12 March 1798, the authorities seriously disrupted the United Irishmen’s plans for a rebellion by arresting many members of the Leinster Directory (including Emmet and MacNeven) at Oliver Bond’s house in Dublin. Te authorities had acted on information supplied by Tomas Reynolds, one of their most valuable informers. Lord Edward Fitzgerald evaded capture on that occasion, but he was hunted down and arrested on 19 May; mortally wounded, he

Introduction to Part II

xxix

died in captivity. Te brothers, John and Henry Sheares, were arrested on 21 May, charged with treason and executed on 14 July. Fearing an imminent rising, the authorities fooded Dublin with troops, arresting Samuel Neilson again on 23 May, the very day that the rebellion was planned to start. Te United Irishmen had planned a rising for 23 May. Te plan involved seizing control of important buildings in Dublin and, as a signal to supporters outside the capital, stopping mail coaches leaving the city for the provinces. Tis was to be the signal for rebels to rise up in the surrounding counties, and then the rebellion was planned to radiate north to Ulster and south to Wexford. A French invasion force was then expected to arrive to prevent any successful government counterattack. In the event, the rebellion lacked focus and coordination, and proved disorganized and incoherent, though for a time it proved alarmingly dangerous. Te rebels lacked the strength and organization to seize control of the centre of Dublin, as planned, and the rebels in the capital soon faded away, but not before preventing some mail coaches leaving the capital and thus indicating to other rebels that the planned rising had begun. Some rebels mobilized in the crescent of counties around Dublin, but they were relatively quickly dispersed though not eliminated. Guerrilla warfare continued in the mountains of Kildare and Wicklow for some time. Te most serious risings took place further away from Dublin. Many thousands of United Irishmen and Defenders (with Father John Murphy of Boolavogue prominent among them)51 took up arms (mainly the pike) in County Wexford. Te rebels defeated the Cork militia at Oulart Hill on 27 May and went on to capture Enniscorthy on 29 May and Wexford the next day. A kind of provisional government was set up in Wexford town. Te rebels appeared disciplined at frst and appear to have massacred their enemies at Scullabogue and on Wexford bridge only afer terrible loyalist vengeance had been inficted upon them. Repulsed in their eforts to capture New Ross on 5 June and at Arklow on 19 June, the Wexford rebels were heavily defeated by a superior force under General Lake at Vinegar Hill (near Enniscorthy) on 21 June and lost control of Wexford by the next day. Tereafer, the Wexford rebels resorted to small-scale banditry and guerrilla warfare for a few more months.52 Meanwhile, rebellion had broken out in Ulster. On 7 June Henry Joy McCracken raised several thousand United Irishmen in County Antrim and established a base at Ballymena. He was repulsed trying to capture Antrim town on 7–8 June, however, and his forces quickly melted away. McCracken himself was arrested and executed in July. Despite this reverse, a rising began in County Down on 9 June. Afer initial success this rebel force was defeated by General Nugent’s troops at Ballynahinch on 13 June.53 Te rebellion, as a serious threat to the survival of the Irish government, had all but collapsed by the end of June, though vicious small-scale encounters continued to occur and savage brutality was meted out indiscriminately by both scattered rebel bands and enraged regular and irregular loyalist forces.

xxx

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

Te start of the Irish rebellion took the French by surprise and it found them unprepared to intervene swifly. Far too late to save the rebels from defeat, small expeditionary forces lef France for Ireland. Te main force under General Humbert, with just over one thousand men, arrived on 22 August in County Mayo, on the west coast of Ireland and far away from any important rebel area. Although Humbert was joined by some local rebels and he enjoyed initial success, his force was soon surrounded in County Longford by a vastly superior force commanded by Charles Cornwalllis, the recently appointed Lord Lieutenant and Commander-in-Chief. Afer a short engagement, Humbert wisely surrendered at Ballinamuck on 8 September.54 Tis reverse did not prevent James Napper Tandy arriving of the coast of Donegal on 16 September. Realizing that nothing could now be done, he wisely retreated back to France. Despite these failures, Wolfe Tone still arrived in Ireland in October with a tiny force that was soon attacked and defeated at Lough Swilly. Tone was captured, convicted of treason and, when denied execution by fring squad, he committed suicide. Te rebellion of 1798 resulted in a very large number of casualties and vast material damage. Estimate casualty fgures vary between 10,000 to 30,000, with the overwhelming majority being sufered by the defeated rebels or by those simply suspected of being rebels.55 Cornwallis ofered a general pardon to those rebels who would surrender and who had not committed deliberate murder.56 Large numbers of rebels did surrender and signifcant numbers of them were acquitted, pardoned or simply released. Cornwallis also tried to keep a tight rein on the troops under his direct command, but was scathing in his criticism of the indiscipline of the Yeomanry. His criticisms and eforts at leniency, however, were much resented by terrifed and enraged loyalists and he could not prevent numerous acts of terrible vengeance and murderous reprisals being inficted on rebels or suspected rebels. Even Cornwallis had to put about 1,500 rebels on trial. Close to a third of these was executed and over six hundred were transported. Vast amounts of material damage were done to churches, chapels, public buildings and private property during the rebellion. Large numbers of claims for compensation fooded into the Irish government. Te leading United Irishmen, who had been arrested before the rebellion broke out, were still aware that they faced possible execution for treason, especially afer the execution of the Sheares brothers on 16 July. In order to save the lives of other leading United Irishmen, including Arthur O’Connor, Tomas Addis Emmet and William James MacNeven, it was agreed between them that they would reveal details of the activities of United Irishmen before the outbreak of the rebellion, including contacts with the French, provided they were not required to incriminate anyone by name. Te authorities welcomed this approach, in order to discover more about the conspiracy without having to rely solely on some of their unreliable and discredited spies and informers. A treaty signed with the leading United

Introduction to Part II

xxxi

Irishmen in Kilmainham gaol57 provided the committees of secrecy established by both Houses of the Irish Parliament with a wealth of useful evidence to justify in retrospect the harsh government repression before and during the rebellion.58 Aware that this might be a government motive, in their detailed Memoir, O’Connor, Emmet and MacNeven, stressed that the violence provoked by the military, the Orange Order and the Catholic Defenders had spiralled out of the control which the United Irishmen had hoped to exercise over the rebels. Tey stressed that the United Irishmen had been reasonable reformers caught in the crossfre between an intransigent government, a lawless military, and an enraged peasantry. Tey themselves had been drawn into rebellion as the reluctant leaders of reluctant rebels. Tis claim actually suited the government as it could be used in future to dissuade staunch Protestant radicals from combining with aggrieved and ignorant Catholic peasants. Having acquired valuable evidence which it could put to use, the Irish government agreed to spare the lives of several dozen leading United Irishmen, who had not taken part in armed rebellion. Tey were, however, imprisoned, mainly in Fort George in Scotland, until the war with revolutionary France ended in 1802. Tey were then released, but banished from the British Isles. Te question that has puzzled historians ever since the 1798 rebellion is whether it should best be described as an agrarian revolt by an oppressed peasantry, a sectarian confict between Catholic rebels and Protestant loyalists, or a political revolution largely planned, led and conducted by educated, democratic and non-sectarian United Irishmen.59 Tere is still no agreement on what caused the rebellion, what it set out to achieve, and how it was conducted. Some scholars – starting with J. A. Froude and William Lecky in the nineteenth century – have stressed the deep structural fssures in Irish society that had existed for many decades.60 Tey have concluded that the deep divisions and severe tensions in Irish society, as well as the entrenched attitudes of the governing elites in Britain and Ireland, made armed rebellion very likely, even inevitable. Other scholars, such as J. C. Beckett and R. B. McDowell believe that there were important positive developments in eighteenth-century Ireland, such as demographic changes, economic progress, cultural improvements, more enlightened religious attitudes, and the beginnings of political reforms, that might have healed the deep divisions in Irish society had the French Revolution and the French war not re-opened these wounds and poisoned the political, religious and social climate in Ireland.61 Other historians believe that these developments were merely papering over the deep fssures in Irish society, while the dramatic events in France in the 1790s succeeded in tearing away this thin façade.62 One of the most substantial modern studies of the Irish rebellion – Tomas Pakenham’s Te Year of Liberty (frst published in 1969 and ofen reissued since) – lays considerable stress on the agrarian aspects of the Irish rebellion. Pakenham

xxxii

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

describes the rebellion as ‘the old agrarian war under a new name’ and ‘a noisy jacquerie of the local peasantry’. He refers to the rebels ‘as a half disciplined mob with little idea beyond plunder’ and as ‘the primitive force of the countryside’. He claims that ‘the disafected had no serious political aims’ and were ‘aimless and leaderless men’.63 Even before this, McDowell had claimed that ‘the great bulk of the people were restricted by poverty and persecution to political speculations of the simplest kind’.64 Later, he insisted that the Defenders, who were so active in the rebellion, were ‘rural rioters’, whose ‘aims were agrarian’ and he has described the rebellion in Wexford as ‘a rural riot on an enormous scale’.65 Tere are obvious reasons why these and other historians have interpreted the 1798 rebellion as an agrarian revolt. A large proportion of the population were poor Catholics living near the margin of subsistence and it did not take much to plunge them into abject destitution. A sudden collapse in grain prices in 1797 devastated Wexford farming and provided the sudden depressed economic circumstances that could have provoked the desperate into an armed rebellion.66 Moreover, given that Ireland, and especially County Wexford, was largely rural, it was inevitable that any large-scale rebellion would draw in a high preponderance of peasants and agricultural labourers. While there were certainly agrarian aspects to the rebellion of 1798, no recent historian of the rising (and there are many of them) has fully endorsed Pakenham’s view that it was essentially a peasants’ revolt. Tere are strong grounds for rejecting his interpretation of the 1798 rebellion. Many of the leaders of the United Irishmen and of the armed rebels were not peasants and there is clear evidence that the rebellion was a planned rising and not a spontaneous eruption. Moreover, all recent research on the Catholic Defenders, who were so active in the rebellion, has stressed that they were not simply members of a peasant secret society interested solely in agrarian issues. Many of the Defenders were neither farmers nor agricultural workers, but were publicans, shopkeepers, schoolteachers, blacksmiths, transport workers, and artisans in a wide range of textile industries. While many Defenders protested against tithes and rents, others opposed a whole range of innovations and defended many customary rights. While never entirely absorbed into the ranks of the United Irishmen, they did adopt some of the latter’s political aims. Tey shared with the United Irishmen bitter resentment against the draconian tactics of the Irish authorities and they also opposed British interference in Irish afairs. Te main locations of rebel activity also suggest that the rebellion was not primarily an agrarian revolt. Te rebellion occurred very largely in the eastern counties of Ireland, which were the most economically advanced, outward-looking and Anglophone areas, where there were many small towns and where most of Ireland’s commerce and manufacturing were based. Tere was very little rebel activity in the west and south, where the most agrarian and backward counties

Introduction to Part II

xxxiii

were located. Tipperary was perhaps the most class-ridden county in Ireland and it had experienced more agrarian disturbances than any other county before 1798, but it remained quiet throughout the rebellion. Wexford had experienced few agrarian outrages before 1798, but it put more rebels into the feld than any other county in Ireland.67 Tere is stronger evidence for regarding the Irish rebellion as a sectarian confict between Protestants and Catholics. William Lecky did not dismiss the political aims of the United Irishmen to end religious divisions, but he still regarded the rebellion in Wexford as largely a Catholic rising.68 He believed that the Catholic rebels there had been provoked into armed resistance by the eforts of ill-disciplined troops to disarm them. In sharp contrast, however, many recent studies of the rebellion have denied that it was essentially or mainly a religious confict. While these studies have accepted that the catastrophe of 1798 was provoked to some extent by the oppressive policies of the Irish authorities, aided by vindictive Orangemen and terrifed Protestant loyalists, their authors have been reluctant to go further than this and they have endeavoured to play down the sectarian nature of the 1798 rebellion. Tey have stressed that the rebels did not take up arms solely or even mainly in pursuit of religious objectives or to wreck sectarian revenge on Protestants, but to support a revolutionary political campaign led by United Irishmen, many of whose leaders were Protestants. Recent research has much reduced the role of Catholic priests in the rebellion. It has been claimed, for example, that, while eleven Catholic priests – most notably John Murphy, Philip Roche and Mogus Kearns – were involved in the Wexford rebellion, none was an accredited parish priest and six of these priests had been suspended or were unemployed at the this time.69 James Caulfeld, the Catholic Bishop of Ferns, who was in Wexford town throughout the rebellion, was bitterly critical of those Catholic priests who joined the rebels.70 Moreover, these eleven priests were a small minority of the 85 Catholic priests in the county.71 In County Mayo, only sixteen out of 314 Catholic priests supported the rebellion when the French landed.72 In Ireland as a whole there were about 1,800 Catholic priests, but only about seventy had any connection with the rebellion and many of these were related to United Irishmen.73 On 24 May, John Troy, the Catholic Archbishop of Dublin, denounced the rebellion in a pastoral letter sent to every Catholic priest.74 Much resent research has emphasized the involvement of both Protestants and Catholics in the rebellion. A signifcant number of the leading United Irishmen involved in some way with the rebellion were Protestants and the movement was explicitly non-sectarian. In preparing for the rebellion in Dublin, however, seven of the active conspirators were Catholics.75 In Ulster some seventy-one Presbyterian ministers, six Church of Ireland ministers, and twelve Catholic priests were involved with the United Irishmen prior to the outbreak of the rebellion.76 When the rebellion in Ulster did occur, it was primarily, though not

xxxiv

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

exclusively, a Presbyterian rising.77 Even in Wexford, where the Catholics were in a clear majority, many Protestants played a signifcant part in the rebellion. Te Wexford provisional council, which sought to control the rebellion in that area, was made up of four Protestants and four Catholics. Beauchamp Bagenal Harvey, a member of the council and the rebel commander in the attack on New Ross on 5 June, was a member of the established Church of Ireland. Matthew Keugh, the governor of Wexford town during the rebellion, was another Protestant. Tere were only a few rebel attacks on Protestant churches in Wexford and, when sectarian outrages did occur, the rebel leadership never sanctioned and sometimes condemned these attacks on Protestants. Several Catholic priests tried to prevent the murder of Protestant prisoners in Wexford.78 Tere was no rebellion in south Ulster or North Leinster where sectarian divisions were as great as in Wexford. Armagh witnessed the worst sectarian clashes prior to the rebellion, but remained quiet during it. Te most heavily Catholic counties in Ireland lay in the province of Munster and yet the rebellion did not spread there. Finally, it must not be forgotten that large numbers of Catholics served with the government forces, especially the militia, and helped suppress the rebellion. Catholics and Protestants fought heroically on both sides in the clashes at Oulart Hill and at New Ross. In the battle of Ballynahinch on 13 June many Catholics served in the loyal Monaghan militia, while most of the rebels were Protestants.79 Tese examples must not be taken too far however. Religious tensions had existed for over two hundred years in Ireland and sectarian violence had occurred in many areas of the country prior to the rebellion. It is hardly surprising that the chaotic circumstances created by the rebellion allowed oppressed religious groups to settle longstanding grievances. Te leaders of the United Irishmen may have been explicitly non-sectarian, but many of these men had been arrested prior to the rebellion or were in exile. Tey were in no position to ensure that sectarian hatred never raised its ugly head. Ireland remained a deeply divided sectarian state in the 1790s. Te Protestant minority still regarded itself as a beleaguered minority and its members made determined eforts to retain their ascendancy. Te North Cork militia, led by Lord Kingsborough, marched into Wexford in April 1798 and used very violent methods to disarm potential rebels.80 On 24 May, more than thirty Catholic yeomen were summarily executed in Dunlavin, in west Wicklow, by regular British troops convinced that they were United Irishmen. Te next day some twenty-eight prisoners, suspected of being rebels, were shot on the Wexford-Wicklow border. Such events undoubtedly helped to spark of a sectarian response from the majority Catholic population, especially once the rebellion began to fail. Te sectarian desire for revenge led to the murder of 300–400 Protestants in the rebel camp at Vinegar Hill, the burning to death of over one hundred Protestants in a barn at Scullabogue, and the piking to death of Protestant prisoners on Wexford Bridge on 20 June. Sectarian revenge was exacted by both sides in a chaotic and terrifying situation. It was probably not the initial objective of many rebels at the outset of the rebellion.81

Introduction to Part II

xxxv

While many Protestant contemporaries sought to make political capital by denouncing the 1798 rebellion as a Catholic revolt against a beleaguered state, others believed that the rebellion was essentially a political revolt. Lord Lieutenant Cornwallis informed the British Home Secretary in London of ‘the folly which has been too prevalent in this quarter of substituting the word Catholicism for Jacobinism as the foundation of the present rebellion’.82 Lord Castlereagh, his Chief Secretary, claimed that the rebellion was a ‘jacobinical’ or French-inspired rising, pursuing its political objectives with ‘Popish instruments’.83 Te imprisoned leaders of the United Irishmen confessed through the Kilmainham treaty that their objectives in planning a rebellion and in seeking French support had been political, not agrarian or sectarian. Over recent years a growing number of historians has stressed the role played by the United Irishmen in planning and conducting the rebellion. Troughout their existence the United Irishmen had tried to unite men of all religious denominations and had tried to politicize the Irish people by printed propaganda, debates, addresses, ceremonies, rituals, and festivities. By 1795 they had begun to aim at severing the connection with Britain and about the same time they had begun serious negotiations to encourage a French invasion in order to create an independent Irish republic. Many active rebels fought to achieve these objectives in the 1798 rebellion. Teir eforts have inspired much recent research on the rebellion. Nevertheless, it seems clear that the United Irishmen were never in full control of the rebellion and it is not at all clear how many of the rank-and-fle rebels had fully absorbed the political ideology, which the leading United Irishmen had sought to propagate. Were all the rebels or even a clear majority of them willing to risk their lives to efect the political changes, which the United Irishmen wished to accomplish? Te Defenders undoubtedly had their own organization and their own objectives. Tey were never fully absorbed into the United Irishmen movement. In the rebellion in County Down, for example, the Presbyterian United Irishmen did not share the same aims as the Catholic Defenders and these differences weakened the efectiveness of their military alliance.84 Even the United Irishmen were not all in full agreement about what objectives they wished to accomplish. Some had wider social and economic objectives than others. Te more prosperous, better-educated and highly-politicized leaders had diferent objectives from many of their more humble followers. Te United Irishmen were in disarray through arrests and disarming campaigns before the rebellion began in late May 1798. Te rebellion lacked cohesion and direction. With dozens of engagements by diferent groups across several counties, and with no reliable communications between them, discipline broke down and objectives became blurred. Te Irish rebellion may largely have been planned as a political revolution, but it is difcult to see it in exclusively political terms. It is going too far to assert the absolute primacy of the political dimensions of the 1798 rebellion.

xxxvi

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

V. Te Road to Union Te Irish rebellion of 1798 was crushed within six months, although widespread disturbances continued long afer that. It had resulted in a shocking level of casualties and material damage. It had created great alarm across Ireland and in Britain too. Te extent and severity of the violence were clear proof to many that Ireland was a dysfunctional society that seemed entirely unable to produce a stable system of government and reasonably harmonious social relations. Te rebellion had actually intensifed the major problems, which had long disturbed Ireland. Sectarian relations were worse afer 1798 than before because of the terrible and unrestrained violence inficted by Protestants upon Catholics and vice-versa. Te frst major study of the rebellion – Sir Richard Musgrave’s Memoirs of the Diferent Rebellions in Ireland (Dublin, 1801)85 – paid far more attention to the rebellion in Wexford than to the rebellion in Ulster and hence wrote far more about the violence initiated by Catholic rebels. His account of events in Wexford had a clear polemical purpose. He dwelled on the most murderous incidents, stressed the leadership role of Catholic priests, and insisted that Irish Catholics could never be loyal subjects of a Protestant king and a Protestant Parliament because they owed a higher allegiance to the pope. He linked the events of 1798 to the earlier Catholic risings of 1641 and 1689. In his view, the Irish Catholics in 1798 had engaged in a popish plot to extirpate or expel the Protestant Irish, to take control of the whole country for themselves, and to sever all political links with Britain. Te Irish Catholics were the enemies of the Irish state from within, while French Catholics were the enemy from without.86 An alternative narrative of the events of 1798, written by Bishop Stock, a liberal Protestant clergyman, perhaps inadvertently stoked up sectarian hatred by maintaining a very diferent point of view, that the rebellion had been provoked by the unjust sectarian attacks on the Catholics launched by ill-disciplined troops and militant Orangemen.87 Te rebellion undoubtedly increased the determination of many Irish Protestants to maintain their ascendancy and to resist any further political concessions to the Catholics. If the Irish Parliament was to be lef to decide the issue, then Catholic emancipation was further away than ever. Parliamentary reform was also much harder to justify to most Protestants, when, so they claimed, the enfranchisement of Catholics in 1793 had not prevented a bloody rebellion in 1798. Since it was believed that the Catholics would never be satisfed until they had reversed the land settlements made in the seventeenth century, it seemed reasonable to prevent them sitting in the legislature or occupying high ofce in the executive. Since the Irish Protestants were in a clear minority, the Protestant ascendancy, in terms of political power, social status and economic strength, could be maintained only by excluding Irish Catholics from the legislature and

Introduction to Part II

xxxvii

the government of Ireland. Tus, the belief in the need to maintain and even strengthen the Protestant ascendancy was stronger afer 1798 than before. Irish politics had therefore reached an impasse. Te Catholic majority desperately desired economic improvements, political emancipation and parliamentary reform. Protestant loyalists were more resistant to ofering these concessions than before. Te Protestants were also better armed and better organized than before through their strength in the Yeomanry and the Orange lodges. Liberalminded Irish politicians, such as Henry Grattan and other Irish Whigs, were put on the defensive and held fewer parliamentary seats than before because they were tainted by previously showing some sympathy for the United Irishmen and for Catholic emancipation. Henry Grattan had actually withdrawn from the Irish House of Commons, in May 1797, because of his despair at shifing the attitudes of the government and the legislature on the questions of Catholic emancipation and moderate parliamentary reform. He was then subjected to many attacks, accusing him of being too sympathetic to those who then became involved in the rebellion of 1798.88 A harsher attitude undoubtedly prevailed among the supporters of the Protestant ascendancy afer 1798. British ministers, faced with a continuing war with France, feared that the Catholic majority in Ireland would not remain peaceful for long under such a regime. Te British Prime Minister, William Pitt, recognized the intractability of the present political system in Ireland and wished to do something to alleviate the situation. Since 1793 he had been leading an administration fghting a difcult war with France. To strengthen the country in this immense struggle, he acknowledged the need to bring the combined resources of the whole of the British Iseles to bear against France. He had tried and failed in 1785 to bring about closer commercial links with Ireland. In 1793 he had pressed the Irish government to promote the enfranchisement of Catholics so that they would more willingly enlist in the regular forces and the new Irish militia. By 1797–8, the war was going badly, peace negotiations had failed, and Britain itself was facing a serious fnancial crisis. Te last thing Pitt needed in 1798 was an Irish rebellion and a French landing in that country, which had forced him to send reinforcements to Ireland. He was well aware that Britain’s strategic needs required a stable internal situation in Ireland and greater British control over Irish afairs. Every efort needed to be taken to prevent Ireland becoming a potential backdoor for a French invasion force that could lead to Britain facing attacks by French forces from both the west and south-east. Pitt was not prepared to back radical reform in Ireland, when he had recently done so much to suppress political radicalism in Britain, and he feared another political rebellion in Ireland based on French principles. In the present situation, he knew that the Irish Parliament could not be persuaded to support Catholic emancipation, which might give the Irish Catholics a majority in the Irish legislature. He believed that there was

Introduction to Part II

xxxix

ics93 stressed that Ireland had always been a separate kingdom and not simply a province. It had long possessed a separate executive and a separate legislature and the commercial and constitutional gains made in the early 1780s had proved both popular and efective. Some critics insisted that Scotland had not benefted from its Union with England and that Ireland too would sufer adversely from any Union with Britain. Ireland would be bound to end up with a smaller number of MPs and peers in a United Parliament than England would retain and, hence, Irish interests would always be sacrifced in any confict with English interests. Ireland would be dragged into any war initiated by England or England’s enemies and, to meet any challenge posed, Ireland would have to contribute higher taxes and raise more recruits for the armed forces. In addition to these general fears, particular groups in Ireland were concerned about the impact of Union on their vested interests. Dublin corporation and the capital’s freeholders and freemen were very worried at the consequences for the city’s economy when there was no longer an Irish Parliament.94 Te city’s economy undoubtedly benefted from attracting many prosperous MPs and peers to live there for several months each year while the Irish Parliament was in session. If Union were agreed, then they would spend their money in Britain instead. Absentee landowners had always been a problem for the Irish economy. Many more prosperous Irishmen would become absentees if they wished to pursue a political career at Westminster. Tis would impact adversely on Dublin shopkeepers, tradesmen, innkeepers, etc. Irish manufactures and artisans, especially in the textile industries, also feared that the economic and commercial consequences of Union would be adverse because they might face higher taxes and would certainly face tougher competition from the more technologically advanced and more heavily capitalized British industries. Lawyers also feared the loss of the employment and the fees that parliamentary business brought them.95 Irish critics of Union did not advocate a total breach with Britain because, as members of the Protestant ascendancy, they knew how much they depended on British power to protect them from both internal and external enemies. Tey did not argue that they were ethnically distinct from the British. Teir arguments were based on history, precedent, politics and economic considerations, not on racial or nationalist grounds. Te Irish administration grossly underestimated the force and infuence of the arguments quickly produced against Union. It did not therefore take enough care to put its case before the Irish MPs, whom they believed would naturally follow the government’s lead. To Castlereagh’s shock and surprise, the Union ran into difculties as soon as the subject was broached in the Irish House of Commons. On 25 January 1799, the anti-unionists narrowly won a vote, by 111 to 106, to remove a clause on the subject of Union from the address of the House of Commons to the throne. Tis technical victory was received with enthusiasm in Dublin, which was illuminated in celebration. A crestfallen Castlereagh

xl

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

informed the house that Union would not in fact be debated in that parliamentary session. He knew that much greater eforts would be needed to manage opinion in and out of the Irish Parliament. He recognized that he would have to take note of Edward Cooke’s observation, that Union would be passed only if it were ‘written up, spoken up, intrigued up, drunk up, sung up, and bribed up’.96 It took a year in fact to ensure victory in the Irish Parliament. Te Irish government engaged in a major propaganda war with the anti-unionists, stressing the security benefts from closer union with Britain and the commercial benefts from freer trade with Britain and the British Empire. Te patronage system was used to its maximum efect in order to dismiss the irreconcilable, to frighten potential anti-unionists with the loss of posts and honours, and to recruit waverers. Critics of the Union, who held ofce, including Sir John Parnell, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and James Fitzgerald, the Prime Sergeant, were dismissed, and others were threatened with the same fate. Forty promotions or new creations in the peerage were made at once or promised very quickly if Union was passed. Twenty-seven MPs received small sinecures and others received various honours. Some MPs were ofered inducements to resign their seats or were compelled by their patrons to do so, and pro-Unionists were selected to fll the vacancies. Castlereagh persuaded some sixty Irish MPs to retire before the 1800 parliamentary session and sought out pro-Unionists to replace them. In the event, some eighty-eight new MPs sat in the Irish House of Commons in its last session in 1800. About £30,000 of secret service money was used in a highly unusual way to induce men to change their views on Union.97 Most lavish of all was the decision to ofer substantial compensation to borough patrons whose rotten boroughs would be abolished if Union was in fact agreed. Borough proprietors were promised £15,000 per borough seat abolished afer the Irish House of Commons was dissolved. Te Marquess of Downshire, for example, received compensation totalling £52,000. John Foster, the Speaker of the Irish House of Commons, who was one of the fercest critics of Union, received £7,500 compensation for his half-share in the borough of Dunleer and John Parnell, the dismissed Chancellor of the Exchequer, received the same for his half-share of Maryborough. Te total amount paid in compensation reached a staggering £1,260,000.98 Determined eforts were also made by the Irish government to win over Irish opinion outside Parliament. In 1799, Lord Cornwallis made tours of both Munster and Ulster in an efort to enlist support for Union and he met with some success. While Dublin remained adamantly opposed to Union, other large towns remained neutral and Cork even voiced some support for Union. Public opinion on the Union was clearly divided, but anti-union sentiment was not sufciently strong to persuade pro-unionists or neutrals to join the opposition to Union.99 Particular eforts were made by the government to win over Catholic opinion.100 Even though they had no direct representation in the Irish

Introduction to Part II

xli

Parliament, the Catholics were very useful allies if they supported Union and signifcant opponents if they turned strongly against it because of the number of Catholic voters in the counties and their substantial numerical majority in the population at large. Fortunately for the Irish government, some ferce critics of the Union, such as Speaker John Foster and George Ogle, were also ferce opponents of Catholic emancipation and could not easily forge an alliance with the Catholics. Some leading members of both the British and Irish governments, on the other hand, were clearly sympathetic to Catholic emancipation. Tey were prepared to ofer strong hints, but not frm promises, to infuential Catholics that Union might well lead to Catholic emancipation. Firm or open promises would have turned supporters of Union, such as John FitzGibbon, the Lord Chancellor, into a strong opponents. At frst, leading clerical and lay Catholics adopted a neutral stance, but they gradually moved in the direction of supporting Union as the best security for Ireland’s Catholic population. When petitions on the Union fooded into the Irish Parliament during 1799, Catholics were shown to be much more disposed to support those in favour of Union.101 Tere was certainly no coordinated Catholic efort to defeat Union. Nor was there a surviving radical movement strong enough to oppose Union efectively. Te debates on the Union in early 1800 showed how successful the Irish government’s eforts had been over the past year. Although Henry Grattan returned to the House of Commons at the beginning of 1800 and he and others, such as John Foster, spoke out forcefully and eloquently against Union, they could not garner sufcient support to kill the Bill.102 When the fnal reading of the Bill took place, on 7 June 1800, two-thirds of the opposition MPs walked out of the chamber. Te Bill was fnally passed by 158 to 115 votes in the Irish House of Commons and by 53 to 19 votes in the Irish House of Lords. Cornwallis announced the royal assent on 1August. Te Union, not surprisingly, had an easier passage through the British Parliament. Between them, Pitt, Dundas and Grenville combined in managing the Bill through the two chambers. Pitt’s administration had a very large majority in both chambers, and the opposition Foxite Whigs had not yet all abandoned their decision of 1797 to secede from the House of Commons. It was easy to persuade a majority in both houses of the benefts of Union for Britain. Union would end disputes between the two parliaments. It would increase the population under Parliament’s control, it would strengthen Britain’s fnances and economy, and it would unite both Britain and Ireland more efectively in the war against France. It was also argued that Union would beneft Ireland. It would reduce sectarian tensions, end disputes between the Irish Executive and the Irish Parliament, and give Ireland greater markets for its products, Tere was also the suggestion that Ireland would beneft from British investments into its manufacturing industries. With the war continuing to go badly, there were strong grounds for wishing to see a sin-

xlii

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

gle strategic policy adopted for the whole of the British Isles. Outside Parliament, most printed propaganda supported the government’s stance on Union. Even newspapers generally critical of Union admitted that Ireland was badly governed and the political situation there needed to be addressed. Tere was considerable criticism of the Protestant ascendancy and the Orange Order.103 Te Act of Union had very little impact on the British constitution or on its executive and legislative procedures. Ireland’s political position was subjected to very considerable change. Te Irish Parliament was abolished and a new Imperial Parliament was established from 1 January 1801, the frst day of the nineteenth century. Ireland was granted one hundred seats (out of 658) in the new Imperial Parliament: two for each of the country’s thirty-two counties, two for Dublin City and two for Cork City, one for Trinity College Dublin, and one for each of the thirty-one most important boroughs (based on the taxes contributed, not on size of population). Although the number of Ireland’s parliamentary seats was severely cut from three hundred to one hundred, the Union did produce a certain measure of parliamentary reform. Te vast majority of seats that were abolished were small rotten boroughs, which had been controlled by a very small number of rich and powerful landowners. Te number of voters in most boroughs increased and hence the Irish Catholics were better represented in both the counties and the boroughs than ever before. Te Irish lay peers were to be represented by twenty-eight of their number and these men were to be elected for life not for a single parliament as with the sixteen Scottish representative peers. Tose peers not elected to the House of Lords were permitted to stand as candidates in British (not Irish) constituencies and so seek election to the House of Commons. One archbishop and three bishops of the established Church of Ireland were to be chosen, by rotation, to sit in the House of Lords for a single parliament. Te Church of Ireland was to remain as the state church and it was to be united with the Church of England, but no new institutional links were in fact forged and hence no signifcant changes occurred. Te economic and fnancial terms in the Act of Union were extremely complex. In general, the commercial objective was to create complete freedom of trade throughout the new United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. All customs duties between the two countries were abolished except for the bounties on the export of Irish grain to Britain (a decision which benefted both countries), Each country was to service its present National Debt, but new revenue raised by taxes passed by the new Imperial Parliament was to be divided in the proportion of ffeen units from Britain to two from Ireland. Ireland was to retain its own exchequer until 1816 and was to retain its own separate executive and legal system. Tus, a Lord Lieutenant, Chief Secretary, Lord Chancellor, Attorney General, Solicitor General, Chief Justices, Master of the Rolls, etc. were still appointed to serve in Ireland. Dublin Castle retained its complex machinery of patronage, which could continue to be used to infuence Irish MPs and peers at Westminster.

Introduction to Part II

xliii

VI. Afermath For those, like Pitt, who had supported Union between Ireland and Great Britain, the major constitutional changes proposed promised much. Unfortunately, the Union was fatally fawed from the start. Te key leading members of both the British and the Irish governments had pinned their hopes on achieving Catholic emancipation very soon afer the Union had begun. Cornwallis and Castlereagh in Dublin and Pitt, Dundas, and Grenville in London all believed that Catholic emancipation was essential if the Union was to bring political stability to Ireland. Tese ministers had advanced this objective together in private and informal discussions and had hinted to leading Irish Catholics that it was their ambition to achieve this change. No frm promise or public declaration had been made, however, because these ministers knew that some of their closest colleagues in Dublin and London were not in favour of Catholic emancipation. In Ireland, the Lord Chancellor, John FitzGibbon, had been persuaded to support Union because he understood that it would not be followed by Catholic emancipation. When, in January 1801, he discovered that he had been misled, he felt betrayed and may well have expressed his dismay in person to the king. In Britain, Lord Chancellor Loughborough and Home Secretary Portland had long expressed opposition to emancipation and the former may well have indicated to George III that he had sworn an oath at his coronation to uphold the country’s Protestant constitution. Neither Pitt nor Cornwallis had kept the king informed of their frm conviction that Catholic emancipation was an essential follow-up to Union. No doubt they hoped that the king would bow to what they regarded as the wisest policy and the inevitable outcome of Union. Instead, when the British cabinet met to discuss recommending Catholic emancipation, in January 1801, some British and some Irish ministers opposed the suggestion. As soon as George III heard that Catholic emancipation was the preferred policy of some of his principal ministers in both countries, he reacted with fury. Believing that he had been kept in the dark about the clear intention of some of his leading ministers, he expressed his outright opposition to the policy. He informed Henry Dundas, ‘I will tell you, that I shall look on every man as my personal enemy who proposes that question to me’.104 When the king almost immediately fell ill, reviving the fears that had so alarmed his ministers during the Regency crisis of 1788–9, Prime Minister Pitt pledged never to raise the Catholic question again. Despite giving this assurance, Pitt recognized that his position had become untenable and he resigned.105 His decision was endorsed by Dundas, Grenville, Cornwallis and Castlereagh; they all resigned ofce. Te new ministry, led by Henry Addington, was adamantly opposed to Catholic emancipation. Te opponents of Catholic emancipation had triumphed.

xliv

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

From the outset, therefore, the Union was incomplete and fatally fawed. Te large Catholic majority in Ireland understandably felt betrayed and their hostility to Union grew the longer emancipation was delayed. Moderate Catholics, such as Teobald McKenna,106 kept up the demand for emancipation with reasoned arguments and several early-nineteenth-century Lords Lieutenant of Ireland came to the conclusion that emancipation was necessary to placate Catholic anger, but without being able to persuade the Imperial Parliament to pass this reform. It took until 1829 before the reform was conceded under heavy pressure from a very well-organized Catholic campaign throughout Ireland. By then, however, Catholic opinion was becoming strongly opposed to continuing the Union. Without any Catholic representation at Westminster all future legislation directly afecting the Catholic population in Ireland could be regarded as lacking any legitimacy. Tis applied particularly to the repressive legislation that ofen had to be passed at Westminster in order to try to maintain law and order in Ireland. Te Union also failed to bring several other benefts that its most committed supporters had expected. Te Protestant ascendancy, including many Orangemen, remained frmly in control not only of Irish representation at Westminster, but also of the civil, judicial and military administrations that remained in Ireland. A very narrow elite still dominated the internal afairs of Ireland and sectarian divisions remained entrenched.107 Committed radicals, such as Robert Emmet, remained convinced that political change could only be achieved by violent revolution. His attempted rising in 1803 proved abortive, but his execution and his emotional defence of his principles produced another Irish martyr to be added to an increasing roll of radicals, who had sacrifced much to reform Irish politics and to reduce British infuence in Ireland.108 Other benefts that some of its supporters had expected from Union also failed to materialize. Te Protestant Church of Ireland still collected tithes and church dues from Catholics and Presbyterians. Land was still overwhelmingly in the hands of Protestant owners, more of whom became absentee landlords afer Union, and the tenancies of many Catholic farmers ofen remained insecure. Te Irish economy did not immediately improve because its manufacturers (except those producing linen) could not easily compete with the more advanced producers in Britain. Te renewal of an even more expensive war with Napoleonic France put heavy strains on the Irish economy and increased government taxation and recruitment drives. Sectarian tensions and poverty remained widespread across much of Ireland, and agrarian secret societies continued to attract many recruits. By 1815 Ireland was a by-word for lawlessness with large numbers of poor Catholics deeply hostile to the narrow Protestant elite, which governed so many aspects of their lives.109 A very diferent future awaited some of the fercest Protestant critics of Union afer 1800. John Foster, the Speaker of the Irish House of Commons, who had spoken out against it to the bitter end of the debates on Union received £7,500

Introduction to Part II

xlv

in compensation for the abolition of the borough constituency of Dunleer and a life pension of £5,000 for the loss of the Speakership. He was reappointed to the Irish Board of Trade in February 1802 and became Chancellor of the Irish Exchequer in 1804. George Ponsonby entered the Imperial Parliament as MP for Wicklow in 1801 and became Lord Chancellor of Ireland in 1806. William Ponsonby entered the Imperial Parliament in 1801 as MP for County Kilkenny and was made a peer in 1806. William Conyngham Plunket became Solicitor General for Ireland in 1803 and Attorney General in 1805. William Saurin, the leading anti-Union barrister, was appointed Attorney General for Ireland in 1807 and held the post until 1822. Lawrence Parsons became an MP in the Imperial Parliament, served as a lord of the Irish Treasury and then as Postmaster General of Ireland, before becoming one of Ireland’s representative peers in 1809. Henry Grattan, who had shown the greatest emotional attachment to preserving an independent Irish Parliament, entered the Imperial Parliament in 1804 for the English borough of Malton. He owed his seat to the patronage of Earl Fitzwilliam, who had been very briefy Lord Lieutenant of Ireland in 1794–5 and an advocate of Catholic emancipation.110

Editorial Principles Every efort has been made to reproduce these texts as closely to the originals as possible without actually replicating the original typography. Original capitalization and punctuation has been retained and only the most signifcant typographical errors have been amended where they undermine the understanding of the text. Te original pagination of the text is indicated by the inclusion of / within the text at the exact point of the page break. Any sections omitted from the text are indicated by […]. Any other editorial interventions are also contained within square brackets. Notes 1. 2. 3. 4.

5. 6. 7.

J. Kelly, Poynings’ Law and the Making of Law in Ireland, 1660–1800 (Dublin: Four Courts Press, 2007), pp. 342–5. D. Mansergh, Grattan’s Failure: Parliamentary Opposition and the People in Ireland, 1779–1800 (Dublin: Irish Academic Press, 2005). See, for example, G. E. Christianson, ‘Secret Societies and Agrarian Violence in Ireland, 1790–1840’, Agricultural History, 46 (1972), pp. 369–84. D. Dickson, ‘Taxation and Disafection in Late Eighteenth-Century Ireland’, in Irish Peasants: Violence and Political Unrest 1780–1914, ed. S. Clark and J. S. Donnelly Jr (Dublin: Gill and Macmillan, 1983), pp. 37–63. T. Bartlett, ‘An End to Moral Economy: Te Irish Militia Disturbances of 1793’, Past and Present, 99 (1983), pp. 41–64. See note 4 above. K. Whelan, ‘Te Religious Factor in the 1798 Rebellion in County Wexford’, in Rural Ireland 1600–1900: Modernisation and Change, ed. P. O’Flanagan et al. (Cork: Cork

xlvi

8.

9.

10.

11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17.

18. 19.

20. 21. 22. 23. 24.

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4 University Press, 1987), p. 685; K. Whelan, ‘Te Role of the Catholic Priest in the 1798 Rebellion in County Wexford’, in Wexford: History and Society, ed. K. Whelan and W. Nolan (Dublin: Geography Publications, 1987), pp. 296–315; and L. M. Cullen, Te Emergence of Modern Ireland, 1600–1900 (London: Batsford, 1981), pp. 210–33. L. M. Cullen, ‘Politics and Rebellion: Wicklow in the 1790s’, in Wicklow: History and Society, ed. K. Hannigan and W. Nolan (Dublin: Geography Publications, 1994), pp. 415–501. D. W. Miller, ‘Te Armagh Troubles, 1784–95’, in Irish Peasants: Violence and Political Unrest 1780–1914, ed. Clark and Donnelly, Jr, pp. 155–91; B. McEvoy, ‘Te Peep of Day Boys and Defenders in the County Armagh’, Seanchas Ardmhacha: Journal of the Armagh Diocesan Historical Society, 12:1 (1986), pp. 122–63 and 12:2 (1987), pp. 60–127; T. Bartlett, ‘Defenders and Defenderism in 1795’, Irish Historical Studies, 24 (1985), pp. 373–94. J. Smyth, ‘Te Men of No Popery: Te Origins of the Orange Order’ History Ireland, 3:3 (1995), pp. 48–53; D. W. Miller, ‘Te Origins of the Orange Order in County Armagh’, in Armagh: History and Society, ed. A. J. Hughes and W. Nolan (Dublin: Geography Publications, 2001), pp. 583–608; Te Formation of the Orange Order 1795–1798 (Belfast: Te Grand Orange Lodge of Ireland, 1994); J. Wilson, ‘Orangeism in 1798’, in 1798: A Bicentenary Perspective, ed. T. Bartlett et al. (Dublin: Four Courts Press, 2003), pp. 345–62; and H. Senior, Orangeism in Ireland and Britain 1795–1836 (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1966), pp. 1–137. For the Catholic eforts to achieve relief measures in the 1790s, see T. Bartlett, Te Fall and Rise of the Irish Nation: Te Catholic Question 1690–1830 (Gill and Macmillan, 1992). On Wolfe Tone’s ideas and career, see M. Ellliott, Wolfe Tone, 2nd rev. edn (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2012). See this volume, pp. 3–7. Tis petition is printed on pp. 85–9 below. Te text of this Act of the Irish Parliament is reproduced on pp. 137–42 below. Tis Convention Act is reproduced on pp. 145–6 below. On the Fitzwilliam episode, see E. A. Smith, Whig Principles and Party Politics: Earl Fitzwilliam and the Whig Party 1748–1833 (Manchester: Manchester University Press), pp. 175–218; R .B. McDowell, ‘Te Fitzwilliam Episode’, Irish Historical Studies, 15 (1966), pp. 115–30; and D. Wilkinson, ‘Te Fitzwilliam Episode, 1795: A Reinterpretation of the Role of the Duke of Portland’, Irish Historical Studies, 29 (1995), pp. 315–39. Tis speech is reproduced on pp. 231–9 below. D. Keogh, ‘Maynooth: A Catholic Seminary in a Protestant State’, History Ireland, 3:3 (1995), pp. 4–47; and V. J. McNally, ‘John Tomas Troy, Archbishop of Dublin, and the Establishment of Saint Patrick’s College, Maynooth, 1791–1795’, Catholic Historical Review, 67 (1981), pp. 565–88. D. Keogh, ‘Te French Disease’: Te Catholic Church and Irish Radicalism 1790–1800 (Dublin: Four Courts Press, 1993). A text on this society is reproduced on pp. 77–81 below. D. Kennedy, ‘Te Irish Opposition, Parliamentary Reform and Public Opinion, 1793– 1794’, Eighteenth-Century Ireland, 7 (1992), pp. 95–114. See, R. J. Coughlan, Napper Tandy (Dublin: Anvil Books, 1976). Tere are many studies of the United Irishmen. Te best is N. J. Curtin, Te United Irishmen: Popular Politics in Ulster and Dublin, 1791–1798 (Oxford: Clarendon Press,

Introduction to Part II

25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38.

39.

40. 41. 42. 43. 44.

45.

xlvii

1994), but see also, K. Whelan, Te Tree of Liberty: Radicalism, Catholicism and the Construction of Irish Identity 1760–1830 (Cork: Cork University Press, 1996), pp. 59–132. R. B. McDowell, ‘Te Personnel of the Dublin Society of United Irishmen, 1791–4’, Irish Historical Studies, 2 (1940), 12–53. M. Durey, ‘Te Dublin Society of United Irishmen and the Politics of the Carey-Drennan Dispute, 1792–94’, Historical Journal, 37 (1994), pp. 99–111. N. J. Curtin, ‘Te Transformation of the Society of United Irishmen into a Mass-Based Revolutionary Organisation, 1794–6’, Irish Historical Studies, 24 (1985), p. 468. Several texts on the United Irishmen are printed in the present volume, below, See also, J. S. Donnelly, ‘Propagating the Cause of the United Irishmen’, Studies, 69 (1980), pp. 5–23. G. O’Brien, ‘”Spirit, Impartiality and Independence”: Te Northern Star, 1792–1797’, Eighteenth-Century Ireland, 13 (1998), pp. 7–23. Durey, ‘Te Dublin Society of United Irishmen’, pp. 104–5. Tere is a useful entry on Cox in the ODNB. C. D. Conner, Arthur O’Connor (New York: iUniverse, Inc, 2009), pp. 95–9, 103. D. Dickson, ‘Paine and Ireland’, in Te United Irishmen: Republicanism, Radicalism and Rebellion, ed. D. Dickson et al. (Dublin: Lilliput Press, 1993), pp. 135–50. J. Smyth, Te Men of No Property: Irish Radicals and Popular Politics in the Late Eighteenth Century (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1992), p. 165. R. B. McDowell, Ireland in the Age of Imperialism and Revolution (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1979), pp. 364–8. Tese details can be found in the entries on these leading United Irishmen in the ODNB. Tis Act is printed on pp. 145–6 below. On this transformation, see Curtin, ‘Te Transformation of the Society of United Irishmen into a Mass-Based Revolutionary Organisation, 1794–6’; and T. Graham, ‘Te Transformation of the Dublin Society of United Irishmen into a Mass-Based Revolutionary Organization, 1791–6’, in 1798: A Bicentenary Perspective, ed. Bartlett et al., pp. 136–46. On the Catholic Defenders, see D. Lindsay, ‘Te Defenders: Te Other Great Movement of the Late Eighteenth Century’, in 1798: 200 Years of Resonance, ed. M. Cullen (Dublin: Irish Reporter Publications, 1998), pp. 15–25; M. Elliott, ‘Te Defenders in Ulster’, in Te United Irishmen, ed. Dickson et al., pp. 222–33; Smyth, Te Men of No Property, pp. 26, 112–15; L. M. Cullen, ‘Te Political Structures of the Defenders’, in Ireland and the French Revolution, ed. H. Gough and D. Dickson (Dublin: Irish Academic Press, 1990), pp. 117–38; and T. Bartlett, “Select Documents XXXVIII: Defenders and Defenderism in 1795’, Irish Historical Studies, 24 (1985), pp. 373–94. J. Quinn, ‘Te United Irishmen and Social Reform’, Irish Historical Studies, 31 (1998), pp. 188–201. McDowell, Ireland in the Age of Imperialism and Revolution, pp. 471–73. Curtin, ‘Te Transformation of the Society of United Irishmen into a Mass-Based Revolutionary Organisation, 1794–6’, p. 475. T. Bartlett, ‘Informers, Informants and Information: Te Secret History of the 1790s Re-Considered’, in 1798: A Bicentenary Perspective, ed. Bartlett et al., pp. 406–22. On insurgency and counter-insurgency, see T. Bartlett, ‘Defence, Counter-Insurgency and Rebellion: Ireland, 1793–1803’, in A Military History of Ireland, ed. T. Bartlett and K. Jefrey (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), pp. 247–93. J. A. Murphy, Te French are in the Bay: Te Expedition to Bantry Bay, 1796 (Cork: Mercier Press, 1997).

xlviii

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

46. Lord Moira’s complaints are reproduced in Volume 5, below, at pp. 5–13, 33–64. 47. T. Gaynor, ‘Te Abercromby Afair’, in 1798: A Bicentenary Perspective, ed. Bartlett et al., pp. 394–405. 48. M. Elliott, Partners in Revolution: Te United Irishmen and France (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1982). 49. Conner, Arthur O’Connor, pp. 112–19. 50. A Patriot Priest: Te Life of Father James Coigly, 1761–1798, ed. D. Keogh (Cork: Cork University Press, 1998). 51. N. Furlong, Fr. John Murphy of Boolavogue, 1753–98 (Dublin: Geography Publications, 1991). 52. For the Wexford rebellion, see C. Dickson, Te Wexford Rising in 1798: Its Causes and Course (1955; London: Constable, 1997); and D. Gahan, Te People’s Rising: Wexford 1798 (Dublin: Gill and Macmillan, 1995). On the rising in nearby Wicklow, see R. O’Donnell, Te Rebellion in Wicklow 1798 (Dublin: Irish Academic Press, 1998). 53. For the rebellion in Ulster, see C. Dickson, Te Revolt in the North: Antrim and Down in 1798 (1960; London: Constable, 1997). 54. H. Murtagh, ‘General Humbert’s Campaign in the West’, in Te Great Irish Rebellion of 1798, ed. C. Poirteir (Cork: Mercier Press, 1998), pp. 115–24; and J.-P. Bertaud, ‘Forgotten Soldiers: Te Expedition of General Humbert to Ireland in 1798’, in Ireland and the French Revolution, ed. H. Gough and D. Dickson (Dublin: Irish Academic Press, 1990)), pp. 220–8. 55. On the debate on casualties, damage and compensation claims, see, T. Bartlett, ‘Why the History of the 1798 Rebellion has Yet to be Written’, Eighteenth-Century Ireland, 15 (2000), pp. 181–90; and T. Bartlett, ‘Clemency and Compensation: Te Treatment of Defeated Rebels and Sufering Loyalists afer the 1798 Rebellion’, in Revolution, Counter-Revolution and Union, ed. J. Smyth (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), pp. 99–127. 56. W. N. Osborough, ‘Legal Aspects of the 1798 Rising, its Suppression and the Afermath’, in 1798: Bicentenary Perspectives, ed. Bartlett et al., pp. 437–68. 57. J. Quinn, ‘Te Kilmainham Treaty of 1798’, in 1798: A Bicentenary Perspective, ed. Bartlett et al., pp. 423–36. 58. Te reports of these two committees of secrecy are reproduced in Volume 5 of this collection, pp. 163–81, 185–98. 59. I have explored this debate in ‘Te Irish Rebellion of 1798: History and Memory’ in Reactions to Revolutions: Te 1790s and their Afermath, ed. U. Broich et al. (Berlin: Lit Verlag, 2007), pp. 31–60. 60. J. A. Froude, Te English in Ireland in the Eighteenth Century, 3 vols, 1872–74; new impression (London: Longmans, Green, 1906), and W. E .H. Lecky, A History of Ireland in the Eighteenth Century, 5 vols (London: Longmans, Green, 1892). 61. J. C. Beckett, Te Anglo-Irish Tradition (London: Faber, 1976), pp. 82–3; and McDowell, Ireland in the Age of Imperialism and Revolution. 62. ‘Introduction’ to Revolution, Counter-Revolution and Union, ed. J. Smyth, pp. 1–9. 63. T. Pakenham, Te Year of Liberty: Te Great Irish Rebellion of 1798 (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1969), pp. 66, 87, 101, 130, 150. 64. R. B. McDowell, Irish Public Opinion, 1750–1800 (London: Faber & Faber, 1944), p. 4. 65. McDowell, Ireland in the Age of Imperialism and Revolution, pp. 462, 473. 66. T. Powell, ‘An Economic Factor in the Wexford Rebellion of 1798’, Studia Hibernica, 16 (1976), pp. 140–57.

xxxviii

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

only one solution that would allow the Catholics to enjoy political emancipation, while preventing them ever becoming a majority in the Irish Parliament or government. Tat solution was to abolish the separate Irish Parliament, give the Irish representation in the Westminster Parliament, and then grant the Irish Catholics political emancipation. Tis could be safely granted afer Union between Great Britain and Ireland, because, whereas the Catholics were clearly in a majority within Ireland, they would become a minority within the population of the whole United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and could not secure a majority in the new Imperial Parliament. Pitt hoped therefore that Union would ease Protestant fears of Catholic emancipation, while pleasing the Catholic majority by granting them this desired concession. He would not need to pressurize the Irish Parliament into granting Catholic emancipation. Instead, he could wait until Union was achieved and could then be much more confdent of persuading the Imperial Parliament to grant Catholic emancipation because anti-Catholic prejudices were weaker in Britain than in Ireland. It was not, however, going to be easy to persuade the Irish Parliament to vote itself out of existence, when riots had occurred in Dublin in December 1759 at the mere rumours of a possible Union and a major campaign had been waged in Ireland in the early 1780s to secure the legislative independence of the Irish Parliament.89 When Pitt had tried to persuade the Irish Parliament to accept his Commercial Propositions in 1785, Henry Grattan had characterized his proposals as ‘an incipient and creeping union’90 and they had been rejected. Despite this response, Pitt and his two closest colleagues in the British government, Henry Dundas and William Grenville, decided that the outbreak of the Irish rebellion had made it necessary to propose Union again once order had been restored. Eforts were made to persuade some leading Irish political fgures, including John FitzGibbon, John Beresford, John Toler, Isaac Corry and Barry Yelverton, to support Union, but they were not informed that Pitt and his British colleagues hoped that Union would soon be followed by Catholic emancipation. When Cornwallis assumed ofce as Lord Lieutenant in June 1798 it was on the understanding that, once he had subdued the rebellion, Union would be promoted in the Irish Parliament. Cornwallis approved of such a strategy.91 Te Irish debate on Union began as early as 1 December 1798, when Edward Cooke, the able and experienced Under-Secretary of State in the civil division of the Irish government, published anonymously his Arguments For and Against an Union, between Great Britain and Ireland, Considered.92 Adopting an apparently non-partisan stance, Cooke actually advanced arguments agreed in advance with Cornwallis and Castlereagh. He was undoubtedly expressing the Irish government’s ofcial views on Union. His authorship was soon discovered and his arguments produced many critical responses by men committed to the idea of retaining the Irish constitutional settlement of 1782. Cooke’s crit-

Introduction to Part II

xlix

67. D. Dickson, ‘Te State of Ireland before 1798’, in Te Great Irish Rebellion of 1798, ed. Poirteir, p. 16; and K. Whelan, ‘Reinterpreting the 1798 Rebellion in County Wexford’, in Te Mighty Wave, ed. Keogh and Furlong, pp. 30, 33. 68. Lecky, Ireland in the Eighteenth Century, vol. 5, pp. 55–56. 69. K. Whelan, ‘Te Wexford Priests in 1798’, in Protestant, Catholic and Dissenter: Te Clergy and 1798, ed. L. Swords (Dublin: Columba Press, 1997), pp. 65–85. 70. Keogh, ‘Te French Disease’, p. 205. 71. K. Whelan, ‘Te Role of the Catholic Priest in the 1798 Rebellion in Wexford’, in Wexford: History and Society, ed. Whelan and Noble, pp. 296–315. 72. Keogh, ‘Te French Disease’, p. 186. 73. Ibid., p. 199. 74. Ibid., pp. 136–7, 152. Tis is printed in Volume 5 of this collection, pp. 113–20. 75. T. Graham, ‘United Irish Leadership, 1796–1798’, in Revolution, Counter-Revolution and Union, ed. Smyth, p. 64. 76. I. R. McBride, ‘“When Ulster Joined Ireland”: Anti-Popery, Presbyterian Radicalism and Irish Republicanism in the 1790s’, Past & Present, 157 (1997), p. 66; and Curtin, Te United Irishmen, p. 127. 77. W. McMillan, ‘Presbyterian Ministers and the Ulster Rising’, in Protestant, Catholic and Dissenter, ed. L. Swords, pp. 81–117; and 1798: Rebellion in County Down, ed. M. Hill et al. (Newtownards: Colourpoint, 1998), pp. 162–86. 78. Whelan, ‘Reinterpreting the 1798 Rebellion in County Wexford’, p. 25; B. Cleary, ‘Wexford in 1798: A Republic Before its Time’, in Te Great Irish Rebellion of 1798, ed. Poirteir, pp. 101–4; and P. Comerford, ‘Church of Ireland Clergy and the 1798 Rising’, in Protestant, Catholic and Dissenter, ed. L. Swords, p. 240. 79. A Military History of Ireland, ed. Bartlett and Jefrey, pp. 247–9; Gahan, Te People’s Rising, pp. 121–35; and Lecky, Ireland in the Eighteenth Century, vol. 4, p. 423. 80. Whelan, in Te Mighty Wave, ed. Keogh and Furlong, pp. 20–1. 81. J. S. Donnelly Jr, ‘Sectarianism in 1798 and in Catholic Nationalist Memory’, in Rebellion and Remembrance in Modern Ireland, ed. L. M. Geary (Dublin: Four Courts Press, 2001), pp. 18–25; and D. Keogh, ‘Sectarianism in the Rebellion of 1798’, in Te Mighty Wave, ed. Keogh and Furlong, p. 45. 82. Keogh, ‘Te French Disease’, p. 202. 83. Bartlett, Te Fall and Rise of the Irish Nation, p. 237. 84. M. Elliott, ‘Religious Polarization and Sectarianism in the Ulster Rebellion’, in 1798: A Bicentenary Perspective, ed. Bartlett et al., pp, 279–97. 85. Tere is a modern 4th edition of the material from this work on the 1798 rebellion. See, Sir Richard Musgrave’s Memoirs of the Irish Rebellion of 1798, ed. S. W. Myers and D.E. McKnight (Fort Wayne, IND, Round Tower Books, 1995). 86. J. Smyth, ‘Anti-Catholicism, Conservatism, and Conspiracy: Sir Richard Musgrave’s Memoirs of the Diferent Rebellions in Ireland’, Eighteenth-Century Life, 22 (November 1998), pp. 62–73. 87. Bishop Stock’s Narrative of the Year of the French: 1798, ed. G. Freyer (Ballin: Irish Humanities Centre, 1982). 88. R. Mahony, ‘Te Pamphlet Campaign Against Henry Grattan in 1797–99’, EighteenthCentury Ireland, 2 (1987), pp. 149–66. 89. J. Kelly, ‘Te Origins of the Act of Union: An Examination of Unionist Opinion in Britain and Ireland, 1650–1800’, Irish Historical Studies, 25 (1987), pp. 236–63. 90. Ibid., p. 258.

l

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

91. Te two best monographs on the passing of the Act of Union are: G. C. Bolton, Te Passing of the Irish Act of Union: A Study in Parliamentary Politics (London: Oxford University Press, 1966); and P. M. Geoghegan, Te Irish Act of Union: A Study in High Politics 1798–1801 (Dublin: Gill and Macmillan, 1999). 92. Tis text is reproduced in Volume 6 of this collection, pp. 15–39. 93. Several of the texts in Volume 6 of this collection are a reply to Cooke’s pamphlet. All these authors knew that Cooke was the author of the pamphlet, which they were attacking. 94. J. Kelly, ‘Popular Politics and the Act of Union’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 6th series, 10 (2000), pp. 267–8. 95. Te arguments of barristers and artisans can be found printed in texts in Volume 6 of this collection, pp. 43–87, 242–53. 96. See Cooke’s letter to Castlereagh, 9 November 1798, in Memoirs and Correspondence of Viscount Castlereagh, ed. C. Vane, 4 vols (London: Henry Colburn, 1848–54), vol. 1, p. 432. 97. D. Wilkinson, ‘How Did Tey Pass the Union?: Secret Service Expenditure in Ireland 1799–1804’, History, 80 (1997), pp. 223–51. 98. Geoghegan, Te Irish Act of Union, p. 121. 99. Kelly, ‘Popular Politics and the Act of Union’; and D. Mansergh, ‘Te Union and the Importance of Public Opinion’, in Acts of Union: Te Causes, Contexts, and Consequences of the Act of Union, ed. D. Keogh and K. Whelan (Dublin: Four Courts Press, 2001), pp. 126–39. 100. P. M. Geoghegan, ‘Te Catholics and the Union’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 6th series, 10 (2000), pp. 243–58; and D. Keogh, ‘Catholic Responses to the Act of Union’, in Acts of Union, ed. Keogh and Whelan, pp. 159–70. 101. Bartlett, Te Fall and Rise of the Irish Nation, p. 257. 102. J. Kelly, ‘Te Failure of Opposition’, in Te Irish Act of Union 1800: Bicentennial Essays, ed. M. Brown et al. (Dublin: Irish Academic Press, 2003), pp. 108–28. 103. P. Jupp, ‘Britain and the Union, 1797–1801’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 6th series, 10 (2000), pp. 197–10. 104. Bartlett, Te Fall and Rise of the Irish Nation, p. 264. 105. For a discussion on the reasons for Pitt’s resignation, see Geoghegan, Te Irish Act of Union, pp. 208–26. 106. Tis last text is reproduced in Volume 6 of this collection, pp. 297–310. 107. J. Hill, ‘Dublin afer the Union: Te Age of the Ultra Protestants, 1801–22’, in Te Irish Act of Union, 1800: Bicentennial Essays, ed. Brown et al., pp. 144–56. 108. See Emmet’s speech from the dock, printed in Volume 6, pp. 282–7. For his rising, see R. O’Donnell, Robert Emmet and the Rising of 1803 (Dublin: Irish Academic Press, 2003). For his infuence during and afer his life, see M. Elliott, Robert Emmet: Te Making of a Legend (London: Profle, 2003); and Reinterpreting Emmet: Essays on the Life and Legacy of Robert Emmet, ed. A. Dolan et al. (Dublin: University College Dublin Press, 2007). 109. Christianson, ‘Secret Societies and Agrarian Violence in Ireland, 1790–1840’. 110. For their post-Union careers, see the entries on these individuals in the ODNB.

DECLARATION OF THE CATHOLIC SOCIETY OF DUBLIN

Declaration of the Catholic Society of Dublin (Dublin: Printed by Peter Hoey, [1791]).

Te frst formal organization to protect the interests of the Roman Catholics of Ireland and to press for the repeal of the penal laws was the Catholic Association established in Dublin in 1756. Tis association, and its executive Committee, was ofen inactive and ofen divided when it did seek to promote the Catholic cause, and hence it achieved very little before 1790. By that date, however, the Catholic Committee was making greater eforts to achieve Catholic relief, but it was the more radical members of this Committee, such as John Keogh and Edward Byrne, who formed the Catholic Society in Dublin in October 1791 and who issued the Declaration printed here that made forthright and uncompromising demands for the speedy repeal of what remained of the penal laws. Te Irish Lord Lieutenant, the tenth Earl of Westmorland, and his Chief Secretary, Robert Hobart, wished to thwart these demands and so they endeavoured to exploit the divisions within the Catholic leadership between radicals and moderates. Tey succeeded so far as to persuade the moderates, led by Viscount Kenmare, to secede from the Catholic Committee because these moderates feared the radicals were falling under the democratic infuence of French revolutionary principles. Ironically, the secretary of the Catholic Committee and also of the Catholic Society, the barrister Teobald McKenna (1765–1808), who issued this Declaration in his name, was a frm adherent of further Catholic relief and even moderate parliamentary reform, but he too feared that the radical members of the Catholic Society, some of whom were also members of the recently created Society of United Irishmen, were going too far, too fast. He therefore seceded from the Catholic Committee along with Kenmare. He was replaced in the spring of 1792 by the much more radical Teobald Wolfe Tone (1763–93), a leading United Irishman. A majority of members remained loyal to the Catholic Committee, however, and its radical leaders determined to petition and lobby the London government in favour of further Catholic relief. Tey achieved greater success with government ministers in London than

–1–

2

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

they had previously achieved with the Irish government in Dublin Castle. Tey succeeded in securing a Catholic Relief Act in 1792 and the granting of the parliamentary franchise to the Roman Catholics in Ireland in 1793. For the political context to this Declaration, see T. Bartlett, Te Fall and Rise of the Irish Nation: Te Catholic Question 1690–1830 (Dublin: Gill &Macmillan, 1992), pp. 121–72.

Declaration of the Catholic Society of Dublin (Dublin: Printed by Peter Hoey, 1 [1791]).

IN the present enlightened and improving period of Society, it is not for the Irish Roman Catholics alone to continue silent. – Not accused of any crime; not conscious of any delinquency, they sufer a privation of rights and conveniencies, the penalty reserved, in wise states, for ofences of atrocious magnitude. – It does not become them, whilst with liberality ever / to be gratefully remembered, many descriptions of their Fellow-citizens compassionate their situation, to seem indiferent to the desirable, and, they hope, not distant event of their emancipation. – Tey wish to ascertain upon what terms they may venture to settle in a Country, which they love with the rational preference of Men, not the simplicity of puerile acquiescence. – It is not for the Irish Catholics, armed as their cause is with reason and justice, like public foes to seek advantage from public calamity. – Tey ought to advance their claim at a time most favourable to discussion, when the condition of the Empire is fourishing and tranquil. – Tey might seem culpable to their Country, if, afecting to dissemble what it were unmanly not to feel, they reserved their pretensions in ambuscade to augment the perplexities of some critical emergency. – Tey should be culpable to posterity, if they omitted to proft of the general inclination of public sentiment. – Tey should be culpable to themselves, if they sufered an imputation to subsist, that in the extent of the British territory they alone submit, without repining, to a mortifying and oppressive bondage, degrading to themselves, and pernicious to their Country. – Tey conceive that in the present state of things, their silence might be received as evidence of such dispositions. Influenced by these considerations, and instructed by a recent transaction, that although laws may be shameful and preposterous, there is no security that they shall not be enforced, – for even in a philosophic age there will be bigots, and tyrants where the votaries of freedom are most sanguine – A number of Roman Catholics, resident in Dublin, have formed themselves into a Society which they invite their Fellow – suferers throughout the Nation to unite with, which shall have for its object to consider, and, individually, to support with all their zeal, and personal infuence, such measures not inconsistent with –3–

4

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

their duty to the civil Magistrate, as shall appear likely to relieve them from the oppressions and disqualifcations, imposed in this Country on persons professing the Roman Catholic Religion. – We therefore, do unanimously resolve, / That we will, to the utmost of our power, endeavour by all legal and constitutional means to procure the repeal of the laws by which we are aggrieved, as Roman Catholics. – Tat we will promote repeated applications to every branch of the legislature for that purpose; and assist such applications by all means of legal infuence, which it shall at any time be possible for us to exert. It would be tedious, it might prove disgusting, to recount each individual grievance under which we sufer. – Te Roman Catholics seem preserved in this Land but as a source of Revenue – Te whole legislative, the whole executive, the whole judicial power of the State, is in the Hands of Men, over whom they have no controul, and with whom they can have little intercourse – Tey are prohibited to engage in any mode of industry, from which it is possible to debar them, or which is worth the monopoly. – Tey are restricted in the education of their children, – as conscientious men we cannot lightly abandon our Religion, – as prudent men we hesitate to engage in controversial study; the wisest have been bewildered in such pursuits, and they are for the most part incompatible with our necessary occupations. – Nor is there any moral advantage held out as an inducement to change our Creed – It is not pretended that we should become better men, or more dutiful Subjects, but merely, experimentalists in Religion seek to gratify their caprice by forcing us from our habits of education, into the perplexing labyrinth of theology. The liberty of Ireland to those of our communion is a calamity, and their misfortunes seem likely to increase, as the country shall improve in prosperity and freedom. – Tey may look with envy to the subjects of an arbitrary Monarch,2 and contrast that government, in which one great tyrant ravages the Land, with the thousand inferior despots, whom at every instant they must encounter. – Tey have the bustle and cumbersome forms, without the advantages, of Liberty. – Te octennial period,3 at which the delegated trust of legislation is revoked, and his importance restored to the constituent, returns but to disturb their tranquility, / and revive the recollection of their debasement. – All the activity, all the popular arts of electioneering canvas, enforce the idea of their insignifcance; they exemplify it too; witness the various preferences given by persons of rank to, not always the most deserving among our Protestant Countrymen, – a preference nearly as detrimental to the independant Protestants, as to us. There exists not on their behalf any controul over power. – Tey have felt the truth of this assertion, when in this age of toleration, even within the last eight years, several new penal statutes have been enacted against them. – Tey experience it daily, not alone in the great deliberations of the nation, but in the little concerns of minute districts. – Not alone in the levy of public money for the

Declaration of the Catholic Society of Dublin

5

service of the state, but in the local imposition of County and parochial taxes. – We appeal to our rulers, we appeal to Ireland, we appeal to Europe, if we deserve a place in Society, should we seem willing to insinuate that such a situation is not severely unacceptable. We are satisfed that the mere repeal of the laws against us will prove but feebly benefcial, unless the act be sanctioned by the concurrence of our Protestant brethren, and those jealousies removed by which the social intercourse of private life is interrupted. – It is time we should cease to be distinct nations, forcibly enclosed within the limits of one island. – It shall be a capital object of our institution to encourage the spirit of harmony, and sentiments of afection, which the ties of common interest, and common country, ought, ere now, to have inspired. – Countrymen! too long have we sufered ourselves to be opposed in rival factions to each other, the sport of those who felt no tenderness for either. Why should a diversity of sentiment, so usual, where the matter in debate is abstruse or important, separate those whom Heaven placed together for mutual beneft and consolation? Objects material in their day produced hostility between our ancestors. – Te causes of that discord have ceased to exist; let the enmity too / perish. – Let it be the duty of the present and of future ages, to prevent the recurrence of such unnatural and calamitous dissension, – except in the actual discharge of the religious duties, which conscience renders inevitable, we wish there never shall be found a trace of diference, which may possibly divide us into distinct communities. The ill efects of these restrictions are not confned to those of our Religion; – they extend to every individual, and every public body in the nation, – under the weight of them, industry is depressed; under their infuence, public spirit is enervated. – IT IS THE INTEREST OF EVERY MAN IN IRELAND, THAT THE ENTIRE CODE SHOULD BE ABOLISHED. – It is the interest of the Crown, as it must promote the general happiness of the subjects. – It is the interest of the great, as it will serve to tranquilize the Country, and to encourage industry; – It is the additional interest of the middle and inferior ranks, as it must impart new importance to their sentiments, and to the expression of their sentiments: we call upon every order in the state, not alone by their benevolence and justice, but by their patriotism and self-interest, to cooperate with our exertions. It adds the insult of mockery to the misfortune of the Irish Catholics, that the number of persons aggrieved, in every other instance an inducement to redress, is a reason alledged to procrastinate their relief, and an argument used to impose silence on their murmurs. – Is it their act, that a multitude of Irishmen are aggregated by common grievance, and classed in one great community of fellow-suferers? Why accuse them of hostility to the constitution? Tey earnestly sollicit to participate in its advantages. – Why suspect them of enmity to their

6

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

Country? – Tey desire entirely to incorporate themselves with it to contract closer ties, which shall decide them to consign their posterity irrevocably to its bosom. – We envy not its endowments to the established Church; adversity has instructed us, that all the consolations, which our religion promises, are most faithfully and tenderly administered by Pastors, with moderate appointments, / a free gif of gratitude to the kindest benefactors, – fastidiously excluded from the constitution, we can pronounce on it, but as aliens, by speculation. – We discern in it the means of much happiness; we regret that its symmetry is not complete, a chasm remains which might be flled with advantage by the Roman Catholics; – we have neither passion, nor interest at variance with the order of things it professes to establish. – We desire only that property in our hands, may have its natural weight, and merit in our children its rational encouragement. We have sworn Allegiance to our Sovereign, and the very evils we complain of, prove how inviolable is our attachment to such obligations. – We respect the peerage, the ornament of the state and bulwark of the people; interposing, as we hope the Irish Catholics will experience, mediatory good ofces between authority, and the objects of it. – We sollicit a share of interest in the existence of the commons, – do you require an additional test? We ofer one more unequivocal than a volume of abjurations, – we hope to be fee, and will endeavour to be united. – Do you require new proofs of our sincerity? We stood by you in the exigencies of our country. – We extend our hands the pledge of cordiality. – Who is he that calls himself a fiend to Ireland, and will refuse us? We feel ourselves justifed in this association: Te period draws near when it will beft the Irish Catholics to approach the legislature with respectful sollicitation; it is meet that those who sufer should confer, in order to ascertain the means and matter of redress likely to prove at once satisfactory and successful. – It is insinuated that some of our Protestant Brethren are adverse to our emancipation; it is meet we should investigate the grounds of this strange assertion: Te laws that have separated us from our Countrymen, destroying our intercourse with bodies constituted by authority, leave us no other manner, to collect, or to convey the general sense of our grievances, than this of a self-created Society. We mean not to interfere with the harmony now happily subsisting through the nation: if the applications on our behalf are complied with, we can never / have an occasion, – if rejected, we cannot have an interest to interrupt it. – Engaged for the most part in the various departments of commerce, we are concerned not less than any other class of citizens, to cultivate the blessings of tranquility; individually we have more at stake than some, who presume to falsify our motives, and calumniate our actions. – Te Roman Catholic body measured strength with the power of the state and was vanquished; when it possessed a force, that never more can be exerted, and was opposed to enemies far less numerous, than now it should encounter. – Te confscations of that period are confrmed to the present occupiers by immemorial possession, by the utter impossibility of

Declaration of the Catholic Society of Dublin

7

ascertaining the original proprietors, by the personal and pecuniary interest, of almost every Roman Catholic in the land, to maintain the settlement. – Many of our communion already have, and still more are likely to expend their property on titles derived under these forfeitures. It is not from the wealthy, attached to their present enjoyment, that commotion is to be apprehended. – It is not from the industrious, a single year of anarchy must prove fatal to their competence. – It is not from the poor, a wretched band of slaves, mouldering under these bad laws, and only made use of to degrade the Irish Catholics to a rabble, when it is convenient to despise them. We are willing to forget, that any besides the present race, ever existed in this island. – We long have been willing to forget it; if our recollection were not kept alive by what we sufer, and by the celebration of festivals memorable only, as they denote the æra, and the events, from whence we date our bondage. We will endeavour by temperate, but unremitting assiduity to procure the beneft of that constitution which, of all our fellow subjects, is denied alone to those of our persuasion. – We are amenable to all the decrees of the state, we contribute to all its exigencies; we are still to be informed upon what grounds its advantages are made a monopoly to our exclusion. – We challenge an investigation of our principles and conduct, – we feel not in ourselves, we know not that there is in our brethren, / a defciency of manly spirit, of capacity or virtue, which ought to assign to the Irish Roman Catholic an inferior rank among the creatures of our common father. – If we have a crime it is to have slept over our chains, – our cause is the cause of justice, and our country. – We solicit counsel and assistance from all to whom these sacred names do not present themselves unheeded. To the patronage of the lettered we peculiarly recommend ourselves, – where talents have arisen among us, they have been compelled to seek refuge in a foreign country, or they have perished in their infancy, robbed of the hope that animates, curtailed of the education that invigorates them. – We claim as of right the beneft of open trial and candid discussion; when overpowered by the administration of an extensive Empire, the British Senate did not refuse its attention to the unfortunate exiles of Afica.4 – If in this enlightened age, it is still our doom to sufer, we submit, – but at least let us learn what imputation of crimes can instigate, or what motives of expediency can account for the denunciation of that heavy judgment. – Tat, if loyalty, which strong temptations could never alienate, if exemplary good conduct under the most trying circumstances; if reverence to a constitution which in our native land we are forbidden to approach, be insufcient to remove unjust aspersions, and entitle us to the kindness and confdence of our brethren; we may be at least instructed how we should attone for what we cannot deem inexpiable, – Te political errors or misfortunes of our ancestors. By Order of the Society, Theobald M’Kenna, Secretary.5

STRICTURES ON THE DECLARATION OF THE SOCIETY

Strictures on the Declaration of the Society Instituted for the Purpose of Promoting Unanimity amongst Irishmen, and Removing Religious Prejudices (Dublin: Printed for R. White, 1791).

Tis pamphlet was published in response to the second edition of the Declaration of the Catholic Society, reproduced in this volume, pp. 3–7 above. Te anonymous author accuses McKenna of duplicity in removing his name and the word ‘Catholic’ from it. He also condemns the Catholic Society for distributing it freely and widely. McKenna is accused of grossly exaggerating the oppressions and punishments which Irish Catholics experience at this time. Contrary to McKenna’s assertions, the author of this pamphlet asserts that the Roman Catholics of Ireland are freer than even before any penal laws were passed and that they enjoy many civil liberties, such as equal taxes, equality before the law, freedom of the press, toleration of their forms of religious worship and equal opportunities of economic advancement. Clearly, in this author’s opinion, what the Irish Catholics are seeking to achieve is political domination over the Protestants by having a political system that refects their numerical superiority. While the Declaration maintains that the present age is enlightened and tranquil, Strictures argues that a democrat frenzy, inspired by events in France, is threatening Britain, Ireland and the whole of Europe with violent revolution. Te Declaration rashly encouraged Irish Catholics to be continually dissatisfed and constantly seeking further concessions until they are masters of the Irish state. In this text, the author argues that the Declaration might claim to be advocating reform by constitutional means, but it is, in fact, encouraging violent revolution to overthrow the present constitution and even to confscate the estates formerly owned by Catholics, but at present in Protestant hands. Tis author clearly suspects McKenna of being a radical United Irishman and an advocate of all that society’s political demands. It is argued that the Irish government and parliament should listen to reasonable complaints from loyal subjects, but that it should reject the concessions demanded by radical men of violence.

–9–

Strictures on the Declaration of the Society Instituted for the Purpose of Promoting Unanimity amongst Irishmen, and Removing Religious Prejudices (Dublin: Printed for R. White, 1791).

THIS Declaration was frst published with the name of one Teo. McKenna subscribed to it: it has since been republished without a signature. Te author probably conceived, that consideration might thus be given to his work, which, if supposed to be the sentiments of respectable, though unknown characters, would be formidable; connected with its author, would sink into contempt. It was also at frst entitled, A Declaration of the Catholic Society. – Te writer, however, soon perceived that his pamphlet would not be much relished, were it imagined to be authorized by Catholics only; he therefore artfully drops the word Catholics in the title-page of a second edition, and imposes it on the world as if it were sanctioned by a body of Protestants. / Tis original subscription, and subsequent concealment, of the author’s name, and frst the insertion, and then the omission, of the word Catholics in the title-page, prove unequivocally what were his own feelings at least respecting his work; and speak more signifcantly than a volume of evidence, the self-conviction of his ill designs. Tis Declaration was meant as a touchstone of the Catholic sentiment, and of the general disposition of the kingdom. It was therefore industriously circulated through the country, lef under the knockers of houses, and delivered gratis in the streets. Te efect, however, has not answered the intent, as the Protestant mind has been disgusted by its rashness, and the sober part of the Catholics ofended by its imputations. To rescue the latter from the aspersions which this man’s calumnies would fx upon them, is the design of the following strictures. Te frst artifce of McKenna is to infame the minds of the Roman Catholics, by a false and exaggerated statement of their situation. – He represents them as labouring under punishment for ofences of an atrocious magnitude, that they are groaning under a mortifying and oppressive bondage, degrading to themselves and pernicious to their country: He then insinuates, that the Protestants are Bigots

– 11 –

12

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

and Tyrants, and that there is no security that they will not / enforce against the Catholics, the most preposterous and shameful laws, &c. &c. Te whole of the declaration is indeed of the same tissue, a high-coloured and infamed description of constructive grievances. He considers the mere negation of power as the entire demolition of liberty, and laws of disqualifcation as instruments of torture. He states the poor as a wretched band of slaves mouldring under the Popery Laws, when he knows in the malice of his heart that their situation is not afected by them at all, and asserts, that the only crime of Catholics is their not being Rebels, or in the Author’s words, that they have slept in their chains. One would imagine from this exaggerated picture, that the Roman Catholics were not living under the blessings of a free Constitution; that they were not equally and impartially taxed with the rest of the community; that there were no trial by Jury for the defence of their characters, their properties and lives; no independent Judges sworn to administer justice to them freely and indiferently; no Habeas Corpus Act for the security of their persons; no freedom of press for the communication of their sentiments; no legal permission for the exercise of their religion; no legal mode for the acquisition of land in fee; no system of encouragement for their enrichment by agriculture, by manufacture, by commerce; that from the oppression of Protestant Tyrants, their numbers were daily dwindling, their landed property hourly decreasing, / and their personal riches continually on the decline. One would suppose, that the present age had been forging new maxims for their oppression, had doubled the weight of their fetters, and that the wounds inficted in times of ancient hostility, had had been torn open, and exulcerated by the cruelty of modern persecutors. One would think that it was a new and unheard of doctrine; that those have no right to be intrusted with the power of a state who refuse to give complete security for the maintenance of its whole constitution with sincerity and zeal. By the representations of this McKenna, it appears, that the Catholics will not admit any situation to be a state of liberty which does not give them dominion: that they are totally unmindful of the late relaxations made in their favour, or entirely unthankful for the beneft. – Tey also seem to forget that by the tenets of the Religion they prefer, they must necessarily acknowledge a supreme power without the state, which nominally confned to spirituals acts essentially, and of course in temporal cases, which makes them zealots for the cause of their own Hierarchy, and allows them merely to endure the constitutional predilection given to Protestantism. / Having falsely and calumniously misrepresented the inconveniences of the situation of his brethren, the Author is pleased to proceed to intimidation, in case his demands in the name of the Catholics shall be refused. If he does not mean to threaten, what occasion was there to alledge, that it is not for the

Strictures

13

Catholics to seek advantage fom public calamity, or to keep their pretensions in ambuscade to augment the perplexities of some critical moment. If he did not intend to intimidate by these expressions, what was the necessity of resorting to such a mischievous and revolting topic? Is an insinuation less felt when slily couched in a negative, than when boldly displayed in a broad afrmative? Or is the dagger of the assassin less dangerous, when lurking in the scabbard than when glittering in the hand? Tese indecent allusions vex me to the soul. An insignifcant individual has no right to assume to himself the title of secretary to a Catholic Society, and to blast the fame and honour, and loyalty and hopes of his brethren, by so foul and blasphemous an inuendo: in the name of the honest, the sincere, and calumniated Catholics, I disavow and reprobate his black and malicious insinuation. Te Catholics of Ireland, as they would abhor the Act, so they disdain the argument. Tey will not avail themselves of an insinuation, which, if true, carries with it their condemnation. Tey will not plead for benefts in a tone which calls for / chastisement: nor petition for the rewards of a loyalist in the language of a Rebel. Te third argument, adduced by this declaration, for enforcing the claims of the Catholics, is equally hypocritical and daring. It asserts, that the Catholics ought to advance their claim at a time most favourable to discussion, when the condition of the Empire is fourishing and tranquil: they would be culpable to posterity if they omitted to proft of the general turn of public sentiment. Let me translate these subtle and knavish sentences into honest English. – A wild democratical spirit has burst forth and is pervading Europe: – It has been particularly propagated with much industry and some efect in Ireland. Te people have been told that Monarchy is a grievance, that all Church Establishments are nuisances, and that every nation in which every individual is not particularly represented in its legislature is in a state of downright slavery. Doctrines of this nature have infected the ignorant and the factious, the needy and the profigate, and have naturally coalesced with the principles of those sectaries in whom the hatred of establishments and a zeal for democracy is habitual and hereditary. Such is the real situation of afairs: and this the Author artfully represents as a time most favourable to discussion, and as a general inclination of the public sentiment. Men being bent on change and innovation, he seizes / rapidly on the moment: takes up the cant of the day; falls in with the public agitation, engages in factious clubs, speculates on a Revolution, associates, publishes, swears to efect it; well knowing, that, on the overthrow of system and order, when the force of authority is lost, when the habit of obedience is at an end, when the wholesome infuence of custom, and prejudice, and public faith, and public principle are vanished, and the whole State is foating on the chaos of conficting and jarring elements, that body has the greatest chance of ultimate preponderancy which is the most numerous.

14

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

When Roman Catholics, in repugnance to all their education and habits, and in direct opposition to the principles of subordination, and that exact system of graduated order, which constitute and adorn their hierarchy, associate and combine with levellers, mix with the dregs of republicanism, and risk a Democratical Revolution with a view to political power, they are either Roman Catholics no longer, as having renounced their principles, or they are playing a game of the darkest fraud by appearing to renounce them; and they must be resisted as declared republicans or convicted hypocrites. Let us now review the grounds upon which this Teo. McKenna comes forward to the Nation, in behalf of the Catholic Society – I. An aggravated statement of supposed grievances, calculated to infame the passions of his sect. – 2. A / negative menace, intended for the intimidation of Government. – 3. An insidious compliment to the spirit of the times, in the hope of engaging the support of the factious. – Tese are the three premises on which he rests his conclusion; the three pillars on which the main and defnitive Resolution of his Society is centered and supported. And I must need admit that the supports he has selected are essential to his end. Before this capital Resolution can be crowned with complete success, the Catholics must indeed be roused; the Government must indeed be intimidated; and the factious indeed be duped, even to madness. For what is the real spirit and meaning of this Resolution, however artfully concealed and guardedly expressed? It is plainly this, – Tat the Roman Catholics of Ireland ought for ever to be dissatisfed, until they obtain the complete possession and dominion of Ireland. – “Tey will to the utmost of their power endeavour, by all legal and constitutional means, to procure the repeal of the laws by which they are aggrieved as Roman Catholics; – they will promote repeated applications to every branch of the Legislature for that purpose, and assist such applications by all means of legal infuence, which it shall at any time be possible for them to exert.” Tis is the Resolution to which all Catholics, under the endearing title of fellow-suferers, are / called upon to accede. – Tey are thus invited to declare, that they will not be any longer contented with the complete toleration of their religion: they must have the solemn ceremonies, the decorations, the processions which attend their Church where the Roman Catholic religion is triumphant. Tey are exhorted to declare, that no concession of benefts, however liberal, can be received with satisfaction or gratitude, or ought to relieve the State from their growing importunity. Te Law, the Army, the Navy, the Revenue, the Civil Ofces of the State, will in vain be ofered for their participation; the right of voting for representatives, the privilege of sitting in the Legislature, will in vain be added to these indulgences. – Tere will still be laws, by which, under this Resolution, the Roman Catholics may fnd themselves aggrieved; and it will be easy to make a grievance, when their power to redress it shall be increased. – Let us recollect then that there is a Protestant Church established by law, and that

Strictures

15

the Catholics are taxed for its support. Will not this remain a grievance? will not this be a law to be repealed, according to their Resolution? and under the disguise of its artful terms, does not McKenna and his Society pledge themselves as forcibly to destroy the Protestant Church, as to repeal the Acts of Toleration. McKenna may possibly accuse me of unfairness, he may assert, that I industriously torture and pervert / the meaning of his resolution by false interpretation. My answer to him is, that I do not exceed the Letter of his resolution, and I will soon convince the nation from another publication, that he not only means to act up the Letter of his resolution, but to go beyond it. He will probably rely on those saying phrases – constitutional means – legal infuence – as if they could have any other efect than to save him from the pillory: but I will allow his claim, he shall save himself by the protecting energy of these expressions, if I do not satisfactorily prove, that he has already resorted to unconstitutional means, and to illegal infuence. Having stated his main proposition, viz. “that nothing will ever satisfy the Roman Catholics, but the whole power of the state and the destruction of the Protestant Church;” McKenna recurs to their grievances and details them. – In pursuing my strictures, I shall regularly quote his own words, and accompany them by short comments. Te Roman Catholics of Ireland seem, says he, preserved in this land but as a source of revenue. Tere might have been some colour for such a complaint in Great-Britain, where Papists were double taxed: but such an assertion in the mouth of an Irish Catholic is mere falsehood and malice. In what article is a Papist taxed in this country, / where a Protestant bears not an equal burthen? Or what attempt has been made to distinguish between the sectaries of Ireland in matters of import and revenue? But the executive, the legislative, the judicial powers are in the hands of them over whom the Catholics have no controul. He represents then as a grievance, that Ireland is a Protestant state, and that the government is not Roman Catholic. Te Roman Catholics are prohibited to engage in any mode of industry fom which it is possible to debar them, or which is worth the monopoly. Te possession then of land, the profts of agriculture, of manufacture and of commerce, in all their various branches and departments, are so contemptible, that no one would condescend, were it in his power, to monopolize the produce. Will McKenna ask Mr. Troy,1 whether he thinks that the culture of land is so really unproftable? Will he enquire of Messrs. Comerford2 and O’Brien,3 whether it may not be possible to scrape up some small pittance by carrying on extensive manufactures? and possibly Mr. Byrne4 and Mr. Roche5 would inform him, that the fortunes to be made by trade are not to be rejected? I have heard also, that in pharmacy, in surgery, in physic, the greater proportion of successful practitioners is of the Catholic persuasion. /

16

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

Te Catholics are restricted in the education of their Children. – Tey cannot, indeed, give them Protestant degrees, or make them Protestant professors: but in what other regard they are restricted in the branch of education, it remains for McKenna to demonstrate. Te following sentence is curious for its sentiment and its logic: – As conscientious men, says McKenna, we cannot lightly abandon our religion – as prudent men, we hesitate to engage in controversial study. – It is then prudent for the Catholics to be ignorant, and conscientious to be bigots. Conscience can alone attach men to their religion from their belief of its truth: belief can only arise from rational conviction; and conviction in controverted points can merely be procured by knowledge of the controversy. Te Catholics then, according to this, McKenna’s casuistry, make it a point of prudence to avoid the means of knowledge, and a point of conscience, to believe without it. But he adds, it is not pretended that by changing their Creed, the Catholics would become better men, or more dutiful subjects. Tat men may be virtuous under the Roman Catholic system, no man will dispute: that it teaches them in general to be good subjects, few will deny. But certainly were the Catholics to become converts, they could not fail of being better subjects to a Protestant Monarch under a Protestant establishment in Church / and State. Tey could then give a full and adequate pledge not only of their conscientious submission to the reigning system, but of their cordial and zealous attachment to it; unless McKenna can persuade us that persons can be equally interested and equally anxious in supporting what they think to be false, as what they believe to be true: or that a sectary can be as solicitous to promote the prosperity of an establishment, the advantages of which he cannot participate, as those who exclusively enjoy its benefts. But if McKenna imagines that the Roman Catholics would not become better subjects by conformity to the established Church, he takes abundant pains to prove that in their present condition no subjects can possibly be worse. He is pleased to state in the name of the Catholics, that they consider the freedom and prosperity of Ireland as a curse, that they hate the landed gentry, that they are oppressed by the forms of the constitution, and that they detest the Octennial Bill. Such is the representation made by this McKenna of the sentiments of the Roman Catholics. Tus does he injuriously represent them as enemies to the Protestant Government, in whose friendly disposition and loyal demeanor, no reasonable man can possibly place the smallest reliance. Te liberty, says he, of Ireland to those of our Communion is a calamity, and their misfortunes seem likely / to increase as the country shall improve in prosperity and feedom. Does McKenna then forget that the frst dawn of Irish freedom lighted upon the Roman Catholics, and that the Protestant Parliament of the land frst efectuated their emancipation, before they thought of their own. Let him recollect the situation of his brethren antecedent to the relaxation of the

Strictures

17

Popery Laws, and the liberation of our commerce and constitution, and compare with it their present fourishing condition. It is not by the profts of an establishment, by the ofces or the pensions of a Government, that the condition of a whole people can be changed and meliorated. Tose advantages extend but to a few, and even to those few are of a casual and fuctuating nature. It is by more copious and certain sources of general opulence and comfort that universal improvement is derived to a nation. Te infnite excitements to industry and ingenuity which are aforded by the objects of rural œconomy, of machinery and merchandize, can alone afect the great mass of a community. Where these can be freely pursued and their advantages securely enjoyed, there is freedom. Where they are pursued and enjoyed by growing numbers and with increasing proft, there is prosperity. Have not then the Roman Catholics fully participated in all the advantages of the enlarged commerce, the encreased agriculture, and augmented wealth of Ireland? or from what article of proft are they specifcally excluded? Has not also the freedom of the constitution operated / to their beneft? Te independency of our Judges for their impartial trial? Te Habeas Corpus Act for the security of their persons? Te free trade for the advancement of their opulence? Have these accessions to the liberty of Ireland been calamities to the Catholics or blessings? And if the increasing prosperity of the kingdom has hitherto tended to their happiness, upon what principle does this Libeller insinuate that the future increase of our prosperity must aggravate their misfortunes, when upon every ground of just and candid reasoning the inference is directly the reverse. Tey may look with envy to the subjects of an arbitrary Monarch, and contrast that Government in which one great tyrant ravages the land with the thousand inferior despots whom at every instant they must encounter: such is the language of a man who professes that conciliation and public harmony, are the objects of his work. Every Protestant in the land he represents as a despot tyrannizing over his Catholic brother, with all the severity of the most arbitrary tyrant: and describes their connection with each other, not as a reciprocation of friendly intercourse, but of continual and hostile encounter. If then McKenna’s statement be true, the Catholics must universally detest their Protestant neighbours as their cruel and vexatious oppressors. – Catholics feel like men; this tyranny therefore and oppression must naturally generate in their minds sentiments of hatred, of resentment, of vengeance. Te Protestants / then are frst to believe, that from their own tyranny they have driven the Catholics into a determination of revenging their wrongs, and are then to be duped into a grant of that power which should enable the Catholics to efect their vengeance. Tey have the bustle and cumbersome forms without the advantages of liberty. I have only to remark on this sentence, that it is entirely void of any foundation in truth. Not being admitted into the powers of our constitution, the Catholics cannot, in my conception, be much afected with the forms of it: they may view with

18

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

passive indiference what passes in the state, perfectly secure in their properties and persons, and if they could be satisfed with their business and their pleasures, the movements of government would to them be almost imperceptible. When they are agitated and tormented with bustle, it is always, I believe, of their own creation; and they have no right to complain of the dust themselves have raised. Te octennial period, at which the delegated trust of legislation is revoked, and his importance restored to the constituent, returns but to disturb the tranquillity of the Catholics, and revive the recollection of their debasement. – If the writer means to lament the profigacy difused through the kingdom by general election, it redounds to his credit, it is a sore evil, and requires a strong remedy; but if we / are to understand by him that the lower classes of the Roman Catholics are so destitute of morals as not to be proof against a bribe to perjury, when they have only the allurement of a paltry gain to work against their consciences, I see not that the grievance would be redressed, when by the accession of power, and consequence arising from the privilege of sufrage, they shall be enabled to raise the price of their ignominious trafc, and have additional temptation to pursue it. Te mere want of the right of sufrage can never be considered as debasement. If a man from a conscientious motive debars himself any gratifcation or pleasure, does he debase himself by the self-denial? If a citizen divests himself of a certain exercise of power by not conforming to the rules of the society, to which he belongs, is his nature dishonoured by a scrupulous preference to a superior duty? in exacting a necessary adherence to its forms and ceremonies in the principle of self-defence, a state may be possibly severe to some classes of its subjects, but the penalty which subjects sufer in these cases is spontaneous and voluntary; it arises from internal impulse, not the coercion of exterior force, and may leave in their bosom a sentiment of superiority and conscious pride, but can by no means brand them with ignominy or disgrace. / All the activity, all the popular arts of electioneering canvas enforce the idea of their insignifcance: they exemplify it too: witness the various preferences given by persons of rank, not always to the most deserving among our Protestant countrymen, a preference nearly as detrimental to the independant Protestants as to us. – Should it be meant by this paragraph, that the county members are not Papists, the complaint is indeed curious; if, however, it alludes to an unfair preference given to Protestant tenants, in setting them freeholds previously held by Papists, I will admit the hardship of such a practice, if it prevails; but I shall not believe it on McKenna’s assertion. Te next paragraph contains McKenna’s complaint, that the Catholics have not the power of the state, or, as he terms it, the controul over power; for between the actual enjoyment of power, and the ability to controul it, my logic can with diffculty discriminate. Tis certainly is the grievance, the capital, the only grievance under which the Catholics sufer: all their other complaints are idle and fctitious,

Strictures

19

and mere pretences for murmur and discontent. Let then McKenna come boldly forward and state his real proposition in direct terms – Let him advance “Tat the Protestant establishment ought no longer to be sufered, and that a Catholic establishment ought of right to be erected in its stead.” We shall then fairly have before / us the point at issue, and be properly prepared to begin the controversy. Afer such an infammatory description of suferings and persecution, and a libellous attack upon the Protestant constitution and Protestant gentry of the land; it is pleasant to hear this McKenna attempt the language of conciliation and afection. He thinks that by the persuasive force of his rhetoric, he shall charm the raven to drop his food for the Papists to run away with. – Let us then for a moment consider what is the true spirit of his Address to the Protestant community. – “We consider you as oppressors and tyrants, who keep us in vassalage and slavery, who debar us from every beneft of existence of which you can possibly deprive us, we are of course jealous of you in the social intercourse of private life; and as to public concerns, we are separated from you as if we were a distinct nation. It is time for us to be friends and to unite; there is one circumstance which will extinguish the memory of all former contests, one healing panaca for soothing all our complaints, one powerful menstruum to melt down all our diferences into an uniform system of cordiality and love: Only resign your present ascendancy: overturn the legislature, and give us the power of the state.” Such from the whole tenor of this declaration is McKenna’s plan for the union of Irishmen, and if / it were otherwise, what could be the meaning of the following pathetic exclamation! “Countrymen, too long have we sufered ourselves to be opposed in rival factions to each other, the sport of those who felt no tenderness for either.” Here is an invocation to the Dissenters against the members of the Church Establishment, or to our connexion with Great Britain. If it means the former, the Protestants are much obliged and fattered by this charitable insinuation; if the latter is intended, they are equally obliged and fattered by the compliment to their understandings. Tey are fully aware and sensible that the existence of Ireland, as a Protestant country, both in point of right and in point of power, depends upon its connexion with Great Britain; and they are not to be insidiously duped by artifce or faction into a sacrifce of that protection and alliance, which, next to their own frmness and virtue, is the surest guarantee of their monarchy, their laws, their property, and their religion. But McKenna proceeds – Why should a diversity of sentiments, where the matter in debate is abstruse, or unimportant, separate those whom Heaven has placed together for mutual beneft and consolation? Is it then an abstruse and unimportant matter that the Popish Hierarchy should be governed by a power foreign to the realm, and by maxims unacknowledged by the constitution? that the Catholic religion, (and religion is a practical thing, / connected with every moral action, and the only true basis of conduct), forbids the Catholics to give that assurance

20

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

to the State which it has a right to require; viz. that they will uphold with zeal all her establishments. And if an honest Catholic will not, and dare not, disavow foreign authority in ecclesiastical matters, and if he be obliged in conscience to endeavour, with all his infuence, to further the interests of his communion, to increase its proselytes, to aggrandize its power, then the matter in question is not abstruse nor unimportant: And the admission of Catholics to all the liberty, and the exclusion of them from some of the power of the State, is not unreasonable. Te same conscience which prevents a Catholic from taking the National Test, justifes the State in imposing it. By refusing to give the pledge required by the State, he confesses his opinions and interests to be diferent from those she has adopted, and therefore he cannot claim the power, which he could not, in every case, exert for her general service, and in many cases must direct against it. Lest he should fail in his imposing Address to the afections and passions of the Protestants, McKenna next endeavours to entrap them by the allurements of self-interest. – Te ill efect of Restrictions, says he, are not confned to our religion, they extend to every individual, and every public body in the nation. Under the weight of them industry is oppressed; under their infuence public spirit is enervated. It is the interest of every man in Ireland that the entire could be abolished. As he has not condescended to accompany these assertions with any proofs, I conclude the author imagines that they are in their nature self-evident, and would be merely obscured by elucidation. Perhaps, however, there are some persons who are not gifed with so clear a sight as McKenna, and may think themselves entitled to a formal demonstration of the benefts which must accrue to the island by a transfer of the power of Government to the Papists, before they will consent to such an extraordinary surrender. Possibly, also, public bodies may be equally unenlightened on this subject; even the loyal and chartered citizens of Dublin may not be entirely persuaded of the blessings which will be derived to their Corporation from the Aldermen and Common Council becoming Catholics. As within a few years the national exertions, and the consequences of those exertions, the wealth and prosperity of the nation, have exceeded the expectations and hopes of the sanguine, it will require some art in addressing our credulity, to convince us that Industry is depressed by the Popery Laws. And as, within a short period, we have liberated our commerce, and unshackled our Legislature, and are at present teeming with numerous projects of reform and patriotism, I cannot precisely make out that, by / excluding Catholics from political ofces, Public Spirit is enervated. It may be, however, the author’s meaning, that it will be extremely difcult for any desperate set of levellers to destroy our establishments, and overthrow the constitution, without the assistance of Roman Catholics; and that whatever tends to those great objects is alone Public Spirit. Under this construction, I will indeed confess his observation to be just: Teir numbers and strength would be certainly a formidable accession to the

Strictures

21

Agitators and Republicans of the day. Tere is also no doubt that McKenna’s co-operation with their designs may be depended upon. – But it is presumed the lips of McKenna do not utter the voice of the Catholic Body, and that, if he alludes to a conduct which would become a traitor, he alludes only to himself. But it is the interest of the Crown, as it must promote the general happiness of his subjects. Alas! his Majesty being somewhat bound by the ties of his coronation oath,6 may also think it a hazardous measure, as it may afect the public tranquillity, to put in danger the Protestant Establishment. His English subjects have recently displayed a fery zeal in support of the present system,7 and he may be justly afraid of the burning spirit of his Irish subjects, should innovations in this country be too far countenanced. / It is the interest of the Great, as it will serve to tranquillize the country, and to encourage industry. It has been always imagined, that the establishment of Laws of Toleration originated from Religious Dissentions, which rendered it necessary to terminate the disputes between the contending parties, by giving a Legal preference and sanction to one of them. I am afraid, therefore, that by removing the barrier which has shut out from the State religious contest, and by reviving the rivalship of Sectaries, which was the cause that produced it, we should take but an unsuccessful method to tranquillize Ireland. Tranquillize! What does this McKenna insinuate? Is the country, then, disafected and turbulent? Are the Catholics in a state of insurrection and revolt, and will nothing tranquillize their spirits, but a sacrifce of the Protestant Ascendancy? As to encouraging Industry by a total repeal of the Popery Laws, what pretext can be more ridiculous? Te only possible accession of constitutional advantage which the lower and industrious classes of the Catholics can receive from the abolition of the Restrictive Laws, is the privilege of sufrage. Tis is, indeed, an admirable project of his political speculation, to encourage the industry of our inhabitants by engaging them in electioneering contests, and making them the objects of canvas and corruption. It is the additional interest of the middle and inferior ranks, as it must impart new importance to their sentiments, / and to the expression of their sentiments. Are we to understand McKenna, that he points in this sentence to the Catholics alone, or to the Protestants of the Church of Ireland? if to the former, nothing can be more true; if to the latter, there cannot be a greater falsehood. We are not so blind and ignorant as not to perceive that, were the Catholics in possession of the State, they would immediately rise into consequence; that they would assume a more lofy sentiment and manner, and assume a more authoritative and dictatorial tone; that the middling and inferior classes would govern the elections, and domineer in the corporations, and soon give law to the kingdom. Te Protestants in the country, fnding their inferior number unprotected by privilege, afer a few inglorious struggles, would sink into impotence and contempt. Tis would be the natural course of afairs; this the Protestants foresee, and will

22

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

therefore prevent. – McKenna treats the Protestants as arrant fools. He would strip them of their privilege, by way of raising their consequence; he would give importance to their sentiments, by rendering them insignifcant; and give weight to the expression of their sentiments, by casting them into a perpetual minority. Te next ground of McKenna’s complaint arises from the number of the Catholics, which, he says, is alledged as a reason to procrastinate relief. His statement of this circumstance is not so destitute of / foundation as the motive he invidiously assigns for it. Te power in any State must be directly as the numbers, if their force be not counteracted by political arrangement. Consider then for a moment the singular situation of Ireland. Te Protestants are in possession of almost the whole landed property of the Kingdom: unfortunately they acquired it under questionable Titles, and in point of numbers they are inferior to the Catholics; having however exclusively the power of the State, they are enabled to enjoy their possessions in security. Were the power which now just supports the Protestant communion transferred to the more numerous body, the balance would be destroyed, and every thing would fall into the Catholic scale: it is therefore the peculiar and critical situation of afairs, the principle of self-defence, and the pressure of necessity, that determine the Protestants to preserve to themselves that power, which by pretending to participate they should entirely lose. Far from their thoughts is insult and mockery, which McKenna conciliatingly asserts to be the instigators of their conduct: in general they regret the causes which force them to maintain a system of jealousy and caution, and to compensate by superior privileges their numerical inferiority. Let this be the answer, an answer of common honesty and common reason, to all the fourish and / panegyric which McKenna lavishes on our Constitution, and to all the hopes and all the wishes he expresses for a communication of its powers. Could we be assured that possession would extinguish desire, that participation would produce content, that the thirst of Dominion were not like immoderate love, and that increase of appetite would not grow by what it fed on; in short, that that the laws of nature would be changed with respect to the Catholics, and there were a divine prophecy that the Protestants should be secure in their situations when the Catholics should be enabled to dispossess them, there would be then a plausible excuse and justifcation for complying with McKenna’s demands. But if a similar grant to the dissenters, far from working satisfaction and content, has merely aforded them a vantage ground for attacking the constitution with new force and additional hopes, upon what reasoning shall we infer that the accession of dominion to the Catholics will restrain their views and moderate their ambition? Neither professions, nor promises, nor engagements, nor oaths, will change the nature of man, nor eradicate from his breast his native love of power. It is the origin of all his motions, the main spring of his activity and energies, whether he move in his individual or collective capacity, and it is the extremity of folly to think of chaining down its force by the cobweb of sentiment. /

Strictures

23

But McKenna ofers a test more unequivocal than a volume of abjurations, “We hope to be fee and will endeavour to be united.” I cannot endure the canting hypocrisy of the word “Free;” let him be honest for a moment and substitute his real meaning, and then we can fairly consider the sentence: “We hope to be powerful, and will endeavour to be united.” If he could now demonstrate that the attainment of his hope would accomplish his endeavours, M’Kenna might soon make me his convert and partizan; but while the history of mankind, the constitution of human nature, common sense and common reason convince me of the contrary, I never can engage in so ridiculous a project, as an attempt to unite my countrymen by a measure which would undoubtedly involve them in all the miseries of internal struggle and commotion. He concludes the paragraph by this insulting exclamation, “Who is he that calls himself a fiend to Ireland and will refuse us?” I answer, every conscientious Roman Catholic. My reply may possibly stagger the gentleman: but as there is no honest man of his communion, who upon the principles of that communion would think a Roman Catholic government either called upon in justice, or warranted in point of faith, to grant more privilege to sectaries than unequivocal toleration; the same measure of indulgence, and the same alone will he reasonably expect or demand under a Protestant / monarchy; and what only he has a right to demand, with that will he be contented. Having completely awakened the fears and jealousies of the Protestants, McKenna next attempts to ally them by an assurance, that neither the adoption nor rejection of their applications can interrupt the public harmony. From the latter certainly there is no reason to fear, unless the Catholic mind be changed like McKenna’s from loyalty to sedition, from gratitude to resentment, and from a patient acquiescence in their present state of toleration and liberty to an unconquerable lust of supremacy and dominion; from the former there would indeed be much ground of apprehension, tho’ McKenna may dwell upon their ancient defeats as an argument against their future success. For when they shall be possessed of the legislature, and have the whole political force of the island at their discretion, there will be no need of arms and conquest. A popish parliament may restore what a Protestant parliament confscated, and it will soon be found a solecism, that those should have the power who have not the property of the Country. McKenna had before represented his brethren as debarred from every channel of industry, and excluded from every lucrative source of employment; but here his argument unfortunately drives him to a contrary statement. He represents it to / be the personal and pecuniary interest of every Catholic to maintain the present settlement; that part are wealthy and attached to their present enjoyments; part industrious, to whom a year of anarchy would prove fatal; that they are engaged for the most part in the lucrative branches of commerce; that individually they have more at stake than some who presume to falsify their motives and calumniate their actions, and that they are concerned no less than any other class of citizens to

24

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

preserve the blessings of tranquillity. – Such afer all are McKenna’s real sentiments with regard to the situation of his brethren, when unawares and unintentionally he is entrapped by his own cunning to speak the language of truth. Tus this unfortunate sect, this aggrieved, mortifed, degraded, debased, oppressed, sufering, punished, enchained and enslaved race, turns out to be a well treated, contented, industrious and wealthy people, who are acquiring large personal fortunes in trade, and making large purchases of land, or lolling at their ease in pleasure and enjoyment, not a man of whom but is interested to maintain the public peace and uphold the present settlement; so kindly are they treated by the government. McKenna adverts also to the poor, and certainly there is no compassionate heart which does not bleed for their situation, and would not embrace with alacrity the means which could relieve their misery. – But when he represents their situation as the efect of the present Popery Laws, and that they are / mouldring under their bad infuence, he wilfully asserts the thing is not. – He knows in his heart that neither the continuance of those laws can encrease their wretchedness, nor the repeal of them relieve it. Could he demonstrate, that a removal of the restrictive code would essentially meliorate the condition of the poor, he would have an argument in his quiver which policy could ill resist afer the loss of humanity. Let McKenna meditate on plans for the improvement and comfort of the poor, his labour will then deserve attention and encouragement. But I must be indiferent to men who being dissatisfed with freedom, and importunate for power, overlook the suferings of the unfortunate, or advert to them only for the purposes of sedition: Who attribute their distresses to a false cause, and point their exertions to an object which cannot relieve them, in hopes that they themselves and their own faction may proft by crimes perpetrated by ignorance, and prompted by treachery. McKenna had endeavoured to interest the compassion, to engage the afections, to attract the selfshness, and disarm the fears of his Protestant brethren; but possibly thinking this kind of eloquence unsuccessful, he rises in his tone and soars up to expostulation and menace. – “Our cause,” says he, “is the cause of justice – we are men of capacity and manly spirit – our only crime is to have slept over our chains.” Tus does he / assume the language and sauciness of the sturdy beggar, and applies for relief with a petition in one hand and a bludgeon in the other. – When Judas betrayed his master with a kiss he was attended by a great multitude, with swords and staves, from the high priests and elders of the people. – If the Protestant body are to consider McKenna’s production as the general sentiment of the Catholics, they can no longer concede to their brethren without the imputation of a forced surrender. Te principles of confdence and union he has annihilated; every generous motive he has extinguished, the liberality of the Protestants will be construed into fear, and the Catholics may plead intimidation as an apology for ingratitude.

Strictures

25

In the paragraph I am examining, McKenna boldly breaks out: “We challenge an investigation of our principles and conduct,” no one can be more ready than the author of these strictures, to give the fullest credit to the respectable body of the Catholics, for their constitutional obedience and loyal submission, and for their exemplary and steady conduct in the hour of temptation and trial. But if McKenna means to vindicate his own principles and conduct, and make them a plea of merit, let him beware lest he soon repent his ill-timed temerity. McKenna sums up his declaration with a high wrought appeal to the literate, to the parliament, / to the world, and then afer pathetically asking the motive for excluding the Catholics from the State, he assigns himself a false one, and concludes. It is not for the political errors or misfortunes of their ancestors, that the present race of Roman Catholics are not admitted into the powers of the state: Nor does McKenna, whatever he may afect, want information upon this subject. Teir exclusion arises not from ancient error or misfortune, but from their present attachment to a communion, which acknowledges supremacy to reside in foreign power. It arises, as I have before stated, from their refusal to disclaim the authority of that power, and from their inability to give that pledge of their zeal for the support of all her establishments which the state has a right to demand; it arises from the nature of the constitution of Great Britain and Ireland, as settled at the Revolution in 1688, when Protestantism was made a fundamental principle in church and state: it arises further from an obvious and self-evident position, that those cannot conscientiously claim employment of trust and power in a government who are conscientiously averse to its principles and tenets. Hence it follows, that the Catholics have only claim to a toleration, not to an establishment; and to the enjoyment of civil liberty, not to the exercise of political Power. / What I have here laid down, cannot be contraverted by any man, who does not hold that Religion is a matter in itself indiferent, and the concern of individuals only; that it neither does, nor from its nature can, interfere and meddle with secular concerns: that, in particular, the Roman Catholic religion is so constituted, as to have political power and infuence less for its object, than any other communion; that it has invariably, wherever an opportunity presented itself, declined to engage in temporal concerns; and that it has never controuled, never usurped, never embroiled, never overthrown the Government of States. I have said, that I would convince the Nation, that McKenna was prepared, not only to act up to the spirit of the main resolution contained in his declaration, but even to go beyond it; and that I would soon cause him to repent of his ill timed appeal to his character and conduct. Having rid myself of his pamphlet, I will make good my promise.

26

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

Is then McKenna, or is he not, a member of the society of United Irishmen in Dublin. Has he, or has he not, agreed to the resolutions of that Society, passed at the Eagle in Eustace-street on the 9th of November last, when the Hon. Simon Butler8 was in the chair, and Napper Tandy9 acted as Secretary? wherein, afer venting the most libellous abuse against the Legislature and the Administration, / the resolutions of a similar Society, said to be established at Belfast, are adopted; the two great objects of which are to efect a separation from Great Britain, and to overthrow our Protestant Legislature. – Tese measures are not to be efected by argument, but by force. – Te Societies exhort their countrymen to form similar Societies in every quarter of the kingdom, that they may learn to correspond and co-operate, and their resolutions terminate in a marked sentence, little short of direct treason. “Te People, when thus collected, will feel their own weight, and secure that power which theory has admitted to be their portion, to which, if they be not aroused by their present provocations to vindicate it, they deserve to forfeit their pretensions for ever.” I know not what construction may be put upon this sentence by his Majesty’s Attorney General;10 but in the understanding of a man who has mere common sense to guide him, it contains a direct instigation to revolt. It speaks to my mind the following language: – “Catholics of Ireland, theory admits the power of the State to be your portion of right; the oppressions of Government are at present so iniquitous, as to arouse you to vindicate that power; form yourselves, therefore, into Clubs and Corresponding Societies, that you may learn to think alike and to co-operate; you will then feel your own weight; you will then be able to act with unanimity, spirit, and decision; and you will then secure to yourselves / that power, or deserve, to forfeit your pretensions for ever.” – Is not this an exhortation to overturn the Protestant Establishment of the Legislature by conspiracy and by force, and is it not a publication almost tantamount to High Treason? But what McKenna has resolved, that also has he sworn to efect: the forcible reform of Parliament, and demolition of the Protestant Establishment. Tis Society of United Irishmen have individually sworn and published their oath, by which they pledge themselves to their country, in presence of God, that they will use all their abilities and infuence in efecting a Reform of Parliament, wherein the Catholics are to have the power. Tese are McKenna’s principles, this is his conduct, to which he appeals as the ground for engaging the confdence of his countrymen and the favour of the crown. He publishes a declaration, exciting the Roman Catholics to perpetual dissatisfaction and discontent, until every law that efects them be repealed: and he then joins a society of Levellers, Difenters and Republicans, plans a separation of the kingdom from Great-Britain, determines to annihilate the Protestant Parliament, and invokes his brethren to form clubs and conspiracies for accomplishing his designs by force.

Strictures

27

But McKenna might have caballed and written, and subscribed and sworn, and rebelled if he pleased, without my notice, if he had not styled himself / secretary to the Catholic Society, and had not endeavoured to involve his brethren in the guilt of his writings and practices. – He incorporates them with the Levellers, embodies them with the factious. He represents them as men who in their pursuit of power, are willing to adopt every wild principle of democratic fanaticism, to engage with all the outcasts of sectarism, and every desperate adventurer in politics for the overthrow of the Protestant establishment. It is therefore the object of the writer of these strictures, not to let his calumny prevail, not to confound the innocent with the guilty, nor permit the mildew’d ear to blast his wholesome brethren – By exposing the charges and imputations which McKenna, is fxing upon the Roman Catholics, he trusts they will purify and exercise their body, and by separating from the infected part, come forth in the unsullied garb of their spotless loyalty, avow their unshaken reliance in the justice of their legislature, and their unalterable confdence in the benevolence of their Monarch. Tey will look back with gratitude to the favors they have received in 1779 and 1781,11 and will be happy in considering them as the free gif of enlightened liberality, not as the extorted concessions of importunate faction. If they should deem the present an expedient occasion for renewing their petitions for additional relief, they will not sully their request with the smallest breath of faction, nor clothe the / humility of application with the insolence of intimidation. Tey will shew that the late relaxations have been advantageous to the public order, and the established system, and they will convince the Parliament, that whatever they further request can by no means endanger our happy establishment: – they will disclaim M’Kenna’s seditious resolution, that the legislature can do nothing for their service, unless they admit them to the whole power of the state: and that any partial repeal of restrictive laws, however important and benefcial, can only continue dissatisfaction, and augment their importunity. Tey will be studious to avoid afecting any league and confederacy with those whose principles are the contrast of their own, and with whom an union can hardly be sincere without being dangerous. Tey will lastly disclaim all connection with McKenna and his associates, his principles, his declarations, his clubs, his oaths, and his conspiracies. – Tey will not present themselves with the olive in one hand and the sword in the other: nor will they combine the relief of the Roman Catholics with the downfal of Protestantism. Te legislature must be ever disposed to listen to the reasonable complaints and wishes of a loyal community: they never can make the slightest concession to faction, menace and conspiracy.

FINIS.

GENERAL COMMITTEE OF ROMAN CATHOLICS

General Committee of Roman Catholics (Dublin, 1792).

Te eforts of the Catholic Sub-Committee to secure further measures of relief from the penal laws, which had been justifed by Teobald McKenna in the frst pamphlet printed above, led to a split within the Catholic Committee. Te more conservative elements, led by Tomas Browne, fourth Viscount Kenmare and supported by most of the Catholic bishops, wished to retreat from the determined eforts at securing further relief that were being advocated by a majority of the Sub-Committee and were being resisted in Dublin by Lord Lieutenant Westmorland and Chief Secretary Hobart. Kenmare had recently led a secession from the Catholic Committee, but the more determined members of it, recruiting support from across Ireland and from many of the ordinary Catholic clergy, were determined to press the Irish government to support further Catholic Relief and had enlisted John Keogh and Richard Burke to apply to the King and the British cabinet in London for some further concessions. Tis publication explains how and why this situation had developed. While it admits that Teobald McKenna’s pamphlet had not been authorized by the Catholic Sub-Committee, it does recognize that McKenna’s views were supported by a majority of that body. Tis text indicates that resolutions had been passed by a majority of the Catholic Committee that approved of the petitioning and lobbying campaign being mounted by Keogh and Burke in London in order to secure further Catholic relief in the forthcoming parliamentary session.

– 29 –

General Committee of Roman Catholics (Dublin, 1792).

Dublin, 14th January, 1792. Te following Account of our Proceedings was Reported, approved of, and ordered to be printed. THE Catholic Committee, sensible of the great Advantages of Unanimity in the Prosecution of Interests, to which Obstacles were apprehended from the Prejudice of some, and the narrow Policy of others, have uniformly endeavoured, by every conciliatory Means, which would not betray the Trust reposed in them by their Constituents, to accede to the Opinions and Wishes of a Nobleman1 and a few Gentlemen, who had formerly stood forward as the Advocates of the Roman Catholics; but the Spirit of domineering, which they wished to conciliate, and the same Tardiness of Attention to the pressing Wants of the Roman Catholics, which they endeavoured to quicken, continued to operate, notwithstanding in accustomed Channels of Opposition and Delay. Not to mention Instances of a more ancient Date, the Persons alluded to, gave, early in February last, a melancholy Example of their Dispositions, and the Committe [sic] a no less signal Proof of their accommodating Temper. At that Time, was appointed a Sub-Committee of Twelve, to carry more conveniently into Execution the Determination of the General Committee of the Catholics of Ireland, to petition the Legislature for a Redress of Grievances. Why this salutary Measure was not pursued, and what Opposition it received, will fully appear from the annexed Report. Tis will also manifest those Symptoms of Disrespect for our Body, and Disregard of our Interests, which have since more particularly marked Lord Kenmare, and shewn him to be much less the Friend than the Opponent of the Catholics. Te subsequent Part of the Season was miserably lost in well meant, but fruitless Endeavours to reconcile those who, it seems, were determined to difer, if they did not dictate; and who, feeling comparitively but little for themselves, were ill qualifed, as all their former Conduct shews, to become the Leaders of a disfranchised and sufering People. Instructed by this Misfortune, the Committee determined to have in Readiness every necessary Preparation against the ensuing Session of Parliament. A – 31 –

32

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

Sub-Committee was accordingly struck, empowered to take such Steps, during the Summer Recess, as the Knowledge of our Afairs would point out to be useful. In Consequence of which, Mr. Byrne,2 Chairman of that Sub-Committee,3 waited on Mr. Secretary Hobart,4 shewed him a Copy of the Petition we intended to present, and requested the Support of Government. Mr. Hobart replied, that the British Cabinet must be consulted, before he could give a defnitive Answer. It then became necessary to appoint an Agent in London, as had been formerly done upon a similar Occasion; and Mr. Keogh,5 who was going there, ofered, with that Zeal which distinguishes him, to exert himself in our Behalf, and to carry the Request of the Catholics to Mr. Richard Burke,6 whose local Information and Abilities, joined to an hereditary Regard for the Victims of Oppression, as well as the established Constitution in Church and State, pointed him out as an unexceptionable Person to be employed. Tus authorized by the Representative Body of the Catholics of Ireland, Mr. Burke began his Negociation; he was attended to throughout with that Consideration due to their Agent, and had fattering Prospects of substantial Relief being given to a People so meritorious and so long oppressed. While Matters were in this favourable Train, we were suddenly called upon by Mr. Secretary Hobart to disavow a Publication not made by our Authority, or even with our Knowledge. It is impossible we should be answerable for the Acts or Writings of any Individual, in so numerous a Body. Tis Publication, however, contains only a Statement of melancholy Facts, and we defy our Adversaries to prove, that it contains one Word inconsistent with the strictest Principles of Religion and of Loyalty. It was, however, assumed by Mr. H.7 and the Promoters of the late Address, as a Pretext for insinuating that the Tranquillity of the Country was endangered, and by whom may it be asked? Is it by a People, who approved themselves steady under the most trying Circumstances, always faithful to their Engagements, and whose unexampled Patience under Oppression will form an Epoch in History? “But Government seemed to be alarmed, and ought to receive entire Satisfaction.” We have, however, unquestionable Proof, that Government entertained no Distrust of our Loyalty; for the Secretary declared to four of our Sub-Committee, who waited on him by his own Desire, that it was neither suspected nor impeached. Tis, too, at a Time when he pressed them to disavow the Declaration of the Catholic Society, and when they properly refused to disavow what contained no Falsehood, but at the same Time assured him of our Attachment to his Majesty’s Person and Government. Under all these Circumstances, it appeared to us, beyond the Possibility of a Doubt, that the real Object of those, who called upon us to address the Crown, was not, that we should make a Profession of Loyalty, but to make Use of that Profession as a Means of persuading his Majesty and the Public, that we did not feel a deep Sense of our degraded Situation, and that it was a Matter of perfect Indiference whether we were relieved or not. Tis we saw, and, there-

General Committee of Roman Catholics

33

fore, refused to agree to the Address, which was in Fact intended to counteract that successful Negotiation, which, on the soundest Principles, and in the most unexceptionable Mode, we had set on Foot, not to perfect our common Emancipation, but to lay the frst Stone of it. We are persuaded you will approve our Motives, and feel a just Indignation at the Conduct of some of our People who have studiously endeavoured to obstruct our Negotiation. For this Purpose they have not scrupled to throw Imputations on our Loyalty; and for this Purpose the Resolutions were prepared, of which we now proceed to give you an Account, and which were a Part of the same System. It does not appear to us improbable, that Alarms may be spread to our Disadvantage, with a View of prejudicing the Public against us, at a Time, when it is known, we look up to such Relief as shall beneft the Catholics at large. Te Men who contribute to raise such Alarms are certainly not wise, nor by any Means the Persons to be entrusted with the Management of our Afairs, much less should they be supported when they injure them. When these Resolutions were frst spoken of, some Gentlemen of our SubCommittee, acting with that Spirit of Moderation which has always been the Rule of our Conduct, and less desirous of the certain Triumph of Reason, than of real or even apparent Unanimity, requested the Promoter of them to postpone Discussion, and assured him, that it should be recommended to the General Committee to adjourn. With similar Views to Concord and Peace, the Objections to which said Resolutions were liable, were anticipated, and the Amendments, which it was intended to propose, in case he persisted, were shewn to him. At the same Time it was declared, that every Support should be given to any Declaration of Loyalty, not involving such Insinuations as should, upon the Principles and Conduct of the Committee, necessarily occasion Division among ourselves, take the Stewardship of our Afairs out of our own Hands, and, by Implication, counteract the Negotiation which we had already set on Foot. We must inform our Constituents, that the frst Resolution which was submitted to our Consideration was absolutely nugatory, as it had been long since entered into, and as our Sub-Committee had already taken the Steps we have stated above to accomplish the Object which it proposed. Te second Resolution we considered to be of a very insidious Nature: it implied the possible Inexpediency of giving Relief to loyal and good Subjects. If the Legislature think with the Mover, we will certainly submit; but we will positively never consent to justify such an idea by any Acknowledgement on our own Part. / “But what is most remarkable in the second Resolution, and what might possibly escape your Attention, is the following Sentence:

34

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

We do not presume to point out the Measure and Extent to which such Repeal could be carried.” As Nobody had talked of prescribing to the Legislature, and as it would be absurd to do so, these Words must have no Meaning at all, or a latent Meaning (and they certainly had) of a Tendency most injurious to the Committee, treacherous to your Cause, and destructive to your Interests. Te Committee, as we have informed you, commenced, and carried nearly to an Issue, a Negociation most desirable and advantageous to the Roman Catholics. Tis Negociation (as any other Negociation and Business whatsoever must enter into Particulars) did enter into “Te Measure and Extent to which the Repeal ought to be carried.” Tese Expressions were, therefore, intended to disavow our Negociation all together, and to cut it up by the Roots. You will, therefore, not be surprised we did not accept of it; but you will be much surprised, that any Roman Catholic, and much more, that any Member of this Committee, should choose publicly to put their Names to Resolutions negatived by this Committee – to Resolutions disavowing the Acts of the Committee – and much more, that they should send to his Majesty, as Resolutions, “A String of Propositions, which had never passed at our Meeting. Tis Proceeding, fallacious in its very Form, could only be intended most criminally to deceive the Mind of our most gracious Sovereign, and to defeat our just Representations to him, by enabling others to hold out (as has since been practised) that the Subscribers to these pretended Resolutions were, indeed, the Roman Catholics, and that your Committee were unworthy of any Regard. Te third Resolution carries on this Idea: – By coupling a Dissent from us with a disclaiming of seditious Proceedings, infammatory Writings, &c. &c. It charges us, by Implication, as acting or countenancing such Proceeding, a Charge notoriously false and calumnious. But besides this, as it comes afer the Resolution, constructively condemning our Negociation, it throws these Imputations upon our Negociation. We are to inform you, that this is the most daring Outrage of all Truth and Decency; for that the Negociation (on Account of which we are traduced to our Sovereign) is itself the most unequivocal Proof, not of our Obedience to the Laws, for that is beyond Dispute, but of our Disposition, in every Way, to accommodate, instead of impeding the Public Service; – and we conceive we could do nothing more grateful to our Sovereign, than to ofer to concert “the Measure and Extent of our Relief,” with his confdential Servants. If this our Design should fail, those who are the Cause of that Failure will answer to his Majesty, and to their own Consciences. It may be likewise necessary to inform those who live at a Distance from Dublin, that on the 17th December, the Meeting was unusually great, and composed of Men from most Parts of Ireland, many of them of as much Wisdom and Information as the Catholic Body possesses. When the Sense of the People has been thus fairly collected, and explicitly declared by their own

General Committee of Roman Catholics

35

deputed Representatives, we cannot help thinking it at best very indecent to oppose its Determination, which is attempted by the most industrious Canvass of Signatures to the Resolutions; and, we hear, that Names of high Authority are employed to biass the Public. Tese Gentlemen, who only represent themselves, wish to be considered as the Catholics of Ireland, and if they cannot put a dangerous Negative upon the Deliberations of the Committee, endeavour to overthrow it. Tis may answer their Ends, but the Interests of the Catholics at large will be best consulted by Men, whom they have appointed, and who hold themselves accountable for their Conduct. But amongst all these Efects of erroneous Judgment, nothing more deeply aficts us than the injudicious Interference of some of our Prelates, in Defance of your Representatives, and in Tings that are not directly of their Competency. By their Mildness, their Reserve, and their Attention to the sacred Functions of their own Department, and by taking a true Interest in the Welfare of the People, they obtained our Veneration and Esteem; but by abetting, with Acrimony, Opinions in which the Mass of the people, difer from them, we fear they will ultimately lose much of that useful Infuence they ought to husband for its proper Object; – and we are convinced, that, in Opposition to our Interests, they difer also from the Mass of our Clergy; to whom, and to all other Roman Catholics, our Constituents especially, we earnestly address ourselves, to take our Conduct into Consideration, and for which Conduct, we fatter ourselves, that, instead of incurring Censure, we shall be animated with the cheering Testimony of Approbation and Applause.

RESOLUTIONS Proposed by Mr. William Bellew,8 on the 17th December, 1791, and the Amendments adopted in Place thereof. Resolved, 1st, “Tat Application be made to the Legislature during the next Session of Parliament, for a further Repeal of the Laws afecting the Roman Catholics of Ireland.” Resolved, 2dly, “Tat grateful for former Concessions, we do not presume to point out the Measure or Extent to which such Repeal should be carried, but leave the same to the Wisdom and Discretion of the Legislature, fully confding in their Liberality and Benevolence, that it will be as extensive as the Circumstances of the Times and the general Welfare of the Empire shall, in their Consideration, render prudent and expedient.” Resolved, 3dly, “Tat frmly attached to oar most gracious Sovereign and the Constitution of the Kingdom, and anxiously desirous to promote Tranquility and Subjection to the Laws, we will studiously avoid all Measures which can either directly or indirectly tend to disturb or impede the same, and will rely on the Wisdom and Benevolence of the Legislature, as the Source from which we desire to obtain a further Relaxation of the abovementioned Laws.”

36

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

On the frst of these Resolutions the following Amendment was proposed and carried, viz. “Resolved, Tat we approve of the past Conduct of our Sub-Committee, and confde in their future Diligence and Zeal for making such Applications to the Legislature as may be deemed expedient for obtaining a further Relaxation of the Penal Laws. On the second of these Resolutions the following Amendment was proposed, “Resolved, Tat we refer to the Petition, intended to be presented in the last Session, as a Criterion of our Sentiments, and that we are ready to renew our Declarations of Loyalty to the King, Attachment to the Constitution, and Obedience to the Laws, whenever the Legislature shall require it.” And a Division being demanded, on counting the Numbers, there were Ayes, for the Amendment, - - - - - - - - - - Noes, against it, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

90 17

Teller for the Ayes, Randal McDonnell, Esq.9 Teller for the Noes, William Bellew, Esq. Te third Resolution was intended to hav been proposed by Mr. Bellow on that Night, but he declined bringing it forward afer the Division on the second.

A REPORT OF THE DEBATE … FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSIDERING THE PROPRIETY OF ADOPTING THE DECLARATION OF THE GENERAL COMMITTEE OF THE ROMAN CATHOLICS OF IRELAND

A Report of the Debate which took place at a General Meeting of the Roman Catholics of the City of Dublin, held at the Music-Hall, Fishamble Street, Friday, March 23, 1792, for the Purpose of Considering the Propriety of Adopting the Declaration of the General Committee of the Roman Catholics of Ireland (Dublin: Printed by P. Byrne, 1792).

Tis publication reports the debate held by leading Dublin Catholics who were seeking support for further Catholic relief – particularly the right to the parliamentary franchise and the right to enter all levels of the legal profession and the judiciary – but recognized the need to support a public Declaration that would prove that the Catholics of Ireland rejected the kind of slanders advanced in Strictures on the Declaration reproduced on pp. 11–27 above. Tis Declaration denied that Irish Roman Catholics held dangerous religious views, such as the right of the Pope to depose Protestant rulers, the right of the Pope to advise Catholics not to keep faith with heretics and to absolve Catholics from their oath of allegiance to a Protestant ruler, and the notion of papal infallibility. In seeking signatures for this Declaration, leading middle-class Catholics in Dublin debate here why they deserve further Catholic relief and how such concessions will promote stability and prosperity across the country. Tey utterly deny the suggestion that they pose any threat to the present constitution in church and state, that they wish to recover the lands confscated from Catholics in the seventeenth century or wish to separate Ireland from Great Britain. Tey maintain that the Catholics have long been loyal and peaceful subjects and they simply wish to possess the franchise on the same terms as Protestants – that is, they are campaigning for a franchise that will be possessed by propertied Catholics only. Some speakers criticize Lord Kenmare for dividing and so weakening the Catholic cause and others attack Chief Secretary Hobart for opposing Catholic relief, while yet others pay tribute to Henry Grattan for his support in the Irish Parliament and John Keogh and Richard Burke for their recent lobbying eforts in London. – 37 –

A Report of the Debate which took place at a General Meeting of the Roman Catholics … for the Purpose of Considering the Propriety of Adopting the Declaration of the General Committee of the Roman Catholics of Ireland (Dublin: Printed by P. Byrne,1 1792).

The principal Roman Catholic inhabitants of the several parishes of the city of Dublin, having been individually summoned to attend this day at the Music-hall, for the purpose of taking into consideration the DECLARATION established by the Roman Catholic Committee, a very numerous body assembled at twelve o’clock: – Bernard O’Neil, Esq.2 was by unanimous consent called to the chair, and several hundred copies of the Declaration were lef on the table, for the perusal of individuals. – Te original Declaration was also laid on the table, to which every man present afxed his signature. An hour having been taken up in this business. At one o’clock, Mr. Edward Byrne3 rose, and stated that this Declaration had been unanimously adopted by the General Committee, to which he had the honour to be Chairman, and that he had by their order, waited on Dr. Troy4 with the Declaration now submitted; and that Dr. Troy, and the clergy of Dublin had approved, and in consequence signed it: He then expressed his conviction that the general adoption of the Declaration throughout the kingdom, must tend strongly to dispel the unjust prejudices so long entertained against the Catholics; and to restore them to those rights which their long sufering, their loyalty, their wealth, and their numbers must, in the judgment of every reasonable man, entitle them to. Mr. Keogh5 rose, and in a speech, to which we sincerely regret our limits will not permit us to do adequate justice, urged the necessity of this Declaration at this time – vindicated the Catholics from the imputations which had been thrown on them, and refuted the many objections that had been made to their emancipation, from the degraded state in which they fnd themselves. Te Roman Catholics of Ireland, he said, had been called on by their fellow-subjects to declare themselves, and either to avow or disclaim the principles which had been attributed to them. It was not, he was convinced, from a supposition that – 39 –

40

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

they really entertained those diabolical tenets, with which they were charged, that they had been thus called on, but from a desire that their Declaration might aford an opportunity of restoring to them those unalienable rights of citizens of which they had been so long unjustly deprived. He felt, indeed, how painful it must be to honest men, to men not lost to every sense of religion and virtue, that they should be reduced to the dishonourable necessity, of disavowing, / that they are not villains by principle; and that murder, perjury and the blackest crimes, by which the human character can be degraded, are not justifed, and prescribed by the religion they profess. To this dishonourable and painful necessity, however, the Catholics found themselves reduced; he hoped their conduct on that day would, once for all, extricate them, and restore them in the opinion of their fellow-subjects, to the character of honest men. It had been the peculiar misfortune of the Catholics, that the malice of their enemies, had deprived them of the only means of rescuing themselves from the malicious and ill-founded charges, by denying the credibility of their oaths. But the patience with which they had acquiesced in a total exclusion from the Army – the Navy – the Revenue – the House of Commons – the House of Peers – the Bar – from Juries, and from the right of Sufrage; when the violation of an oath might at once, invest them with every privilege that any subject in the kingdom could enjoy, would vindicate them from the malicious insinuation in the mind of every rational man. Could the Catholics be charged with lightly regarding the solemn obligation of an oath, when nine-tenths of them continued, for near a century, without murmur, in a state of the most deplorable wretchedness, deprived of not only all the honours, and privileges, but of the comforts and necessaries of life – liable to be turned forth to batten on the mountain, or to wander houseless, naked and hungry, to make place for the Protestant freeholder? and all this rather than take an oath to which their conscience could not consent. Afer proofs like these of their profound reverence for the sacred nature of an oath, he hoped – he was convinced, there would not be found a man in the kingdom to doubt their sincerity and truth, in the Declaration now before the assembly, which every man of honour or religion would as readily swear to as subscribe. He then adverted to that grand objection made by the enemies of the Catholics against their emancipation, that if they were admitted to the elective franchise – they would abuse that and every other privilege they might be granted, to subvert the present establishment of property, and to restore the forfeited lands to the descendants of the old possessors. Tis objection he refuted as being at once impossible to be executed, and even if possible, such as the Roman Catholics of Ireland were bound by interest, the strongest motive to action among men, to oppose. It was impossible that any such subversion of present establishment of property should be attempted, because the descendants of the antient possessors were mostly sunk into the dregs of the people, they were the labourers in the felds, or porters on the quays, or beggars in the streets, unable to read or write,

A Report of the Debate

41

to trace a pedigree, or to prove their legitimacy: It would be impolitic in the Catholics to countenance such an attempt at a revolution of property, as many of them were now possessed by purchase, of those forfeited lands, and derived title only, from the authority of the Act of Settlement.6 If it were not presumptuous to name so humble an individual as himself, he could produce an instance precisely in point. – Of the little property which he had realized by his industry, he had laid out the greater part in three purchases; one in this county, the other two in Connaught, and two of those purchases were forfeited property; his interest in these, then, would naturally induce him to exert all the infuence he was possessed of, to arrange his friends, his family, his four sons, and his tenants, at least a numerous body, for they amounted to 2000, in support of the establishment on which the validity of his / title to this property was founded. – His case was not a singular one[.] Of the many Catholics who had purchased lands in Ireland since they were permitted to do so, far the greater number, he was convinced, had purchased more or less under the present establishments. – At least, no purchaser had made any distinction or preference between lands descended from a Milesian stock,7 and from one invested with forfeited property. – Te fear, then, that Catholics would endeavour to efect a subversion of title in landed property was ridiculous, as it would, in fact, be a subversion of their own title, to most of what they possessed. Te prevalence of this fear put him in mind of the period when Catholics were frst permitted to purchase. – At that time several worthy Gentleman, as well in as out of Parliament, were wonderously fearful of the dreadful consequences that they foresaw would follow from this bold and daring measure. – Some were so terrifed that they were afraid to sleep in their beds, lest they should have their throats cut, because Catholics were permitted to purchase lands, and some threatened to leave a country where there could be no security, as Catholics were allowed to purchase lands, and yet none of those Gentlemen have had their throats cut; nor have any of them found reason to emigrate, though Catholics have now for some years been allowed to purchase lands. Another objection to investing the Catholics with that frst privilege of a free Citizen; that privilege, which constitutes the distinction between freedom and slavery – the elective franchise, was, that they were a set of ignorant and uneducated men. – It was true, he acknowledged, that too many of them were of that description, and how could it be otherwise, when they were deprived of every means by which instruction could be acquired? – Or how could they, who were destitute in a great measure of the means of life, possess or avail themselves of the means of knowledge? – Yet he would contend for it that Roman Catholics of that rank which should be admitted to the right of sufrage, were as well, it not better informed, than the Protestant 40 shilling freeholder. – But granting the allegation of their antagonists in its fullest extent it could have no weight against the right of the Catholic, until it should have become a principle of the constitution, that it was knowledge, not property, that ought to be represented.

42

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

If, when these circumstances were well considered, and the solemn disavowal of the Catholic body contained in this Declaration, by which every fear that they would attempt to unsettle the property of the kingdom must be removed from the breast of every rational man – if, when all these things were well weighed, the elective franchise should still be refused to them, it would follow that this franchise was withheld on the principle of POWER – not – right: – For every thing had been done that could tend to prove there was no danger to be apprehended from restoring the Catholics to the rights of citizenship, and to evince that they only wished to share, not subvert the constitution – but he professed himself certain that in the present progressive state of reason and philosophy, the mist of religious prejudice would quickly be dissolved, and the loyalty and patience of the Catholics would be rewarded by equal participation of all the blessings of of [sic] freedom. He concluded by moving, Tat the Declaration should be read at the table, and the question put on it, whether the Meeting should adopt it as their own, and that aferwards it might be referred to the Delegates of the respective parishes, in order to receive the signatures of such as could not attend at this day’s meeting. / Te Declaration was then read at the table: – [Which see at the end.] Resolved, Tat this Declaration is received and approved as the solemn Declaration of the Catholics of Dublin, and that we recommend it to our Catholic Brethren throughout Ireland to adopt. And on the question being put: – It was unanimously agreed to. Mr. Hamill8 congratulated the meeting on the approach of Catholic emancipation. – Much had been done in former sessions of Parliament, and something in the present, towards the accomplishment of that great national object, for such he confessed he considered it. – From his acquaintance with the sentiments entertained by the Roman Catholics of Ireland, and his intimate knowledge of their principles, he had not a doubt but they would be grateful for the favours they had received. – He knew they were so – and no one among them more sensible of them than himself. – But, though much had been done for their relief, yet still something remained to be done to complete their happiness; to give efcacy to those laws lately passed in their favour, and, without which, all the benefts which had been granted to them by the legislature, or that might be granted, short of that one, must, in his opinion, fail of afording them complete relief – he meant the right of Elective Franchise, the privation of which he considered as the prime source of their misfortunes. – When he recollected the spirit of former times, and compared them with the present. – When he saw these Brazen Walls,9 once deemed eternal, the Penal laws of Ireland, which, debarred the Roman Catholics of this country from all participation of advantage in the Community, to the exigencies of which they contributed their full quota, and, with the aid of the prejudices which naturally arose from such a system, almost completely debarred

A Report of the Debate

43

them from the society of their countrymen and fellow-subjects. – When he saw that the monstrous fabric daily mouldering away before the strong and collected force of Reason, he had little doubt but before we entered on another century, we should see it completely eradicated, and hurried down the stream of Time with the general execrations of mankind. Fortunately for the Roman Catholics, the attainment of this object was so closely interwoven with the general prosperity of this country, that, in the opinion of some of the frst authorities which this or any other country can boast, the one cannot take place whilst the other remains unaccomplished. He confessed, he thought it so appeared to reason and common sense. – Happily too for them, the means of attainment were such as the principle and good understanding not only of every man in that meeting, but of every Roman Catholic in Ireland, must accord with – a prompt and cheerful obedience to the laws, a ready and benevolent discharge of their social duties to every class and description of their fellow-subjects, and at all proper seasons, and in the most constitutional and respectful manner, to bring their Cause before the Legislature of the country. Tese appeared to him the means by which their purpose must be efected. Te frst, he said, would deprive monopoly of the support of reason; the second would rub away whatever rust of prejudice remained on the minds of individuals, and no doubt remained but when the Legislature found the people were united in their wishes to lay down antiquated prejudices, and co-operate one and all to promote the interests and prosperity of this their common country, but their loyal and dutiful applications will have due weight. / Having so long occupied the attention of the meeting, he said he should not trespass further than to observe, that the Roman Catholics had many and very weighty obligations to some of the most distinguished members of both houses of parliament, for the great zeal and splendid abilities with which they had supported their application during the present session of parliament, and as he knew that gratitude for benefts received was a leading characteristic of the body he had the honour to address, he had little doubt of obtaining their unanimous concurrence to the resolutions he held in his hand. He then proposed two resolutions: Resolved, Tat the most sincere and grateful thanks of this Meeting be, and are hereby respectfully ofered to those distinguished Members of the Legislature, who asserted the Right of the Subject to petition, and supported the late Application of the Catholics of Ireland to be admitted to a Participation in the Constitution of their native country. Resolved, Tat the frm reliance, which it is no less the duty than the inclination of the Catholics to place in the justice and generosity of the Legislature, and of their Protestant Fellow Subjects, determines them to persevere in the same loyal and constitutional course, which has hitherto been pursued for the removal of prejudices, and the attainment of that inestimable privilege, without which all others are precarious and delusive – the Right of Elective Franchise.

44

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

Mr. Macdonnell10 – I am happy in the opportunity which is aforded to me, in seconding the motion of my respectable friend, to express my own lively and strong sense of the gratitude so justly due to, and so highly merited by our able and liberal supporters in both houses of parliament – the supporters not of the Catholics alone, but of the true interests of Ireland; and I am persuaded that the gratitude of the Catholics is accompanied by the approbation of every disinterested, unprejudiced, and informed Protestant of this kingdom. I remember, and it must be in the recollection of every person in this meeting, when we scarce knew a Member of Parliament who would dare to oppose himself to the prejudices of the times, and stand forward as an advocate; how much the greater should we feel our obligations to the great and liberal men we are now about to thank – who have nobly broke the spell, in contempt of prejudices, and of the undignifed irritation produced by our daring even to think of, or to ambition a participation in the constitution of our country. Did we not feel it before, we must in this instance be sensible of the consequences of being unrepresented in Parliament. – What difculties have we not had in coming before it, and what treatment have we not received there – but this should not dishearten us – the blow intended for us has recoiled on those who aimed it – on the wise, liberal, and disinterested men who stood up, before their country as the advocates of an oppressive and partial system – We have, however, gained one great point, in despite of our opposers. – We have brought our cause before our countrymen at large – We will shew an attachment to the Constitution, by our perseverance to obtain a share in it – our love of freedom, by our eforts to become free – and I trust the day is not distant when we shall be successful. Te general interest of the nation; reason, good policy, justice must prevail, and restore the Roman Catholics to their due place in society, and in their country. Te Declaration we have all, this day, so solemnly made and acknowledged, / will confute the erroneous opinions entertained of us – and remove from the minds of our Protestant brethern [sic] those early instilled prejudices, kept up by art, design, and selfinterest, for the disunion of Irishmen – our own conduct will do the rest – we will look for our political freedom as it becomes good subjects; tho’ depressed and degraded – but we will never be wanting in loyalty to our Sovereign, or respect for the laws of our country. Tese sentiments are characteristic of our people, and congenial to our principles. Tat we must obtain our political rights, I have already said – it is the true interest of every individual in the nation to restore them to us. It is the interest of the proprietors of the soil. – Give freedom to the Roman Catholics, and they will become a numerous and prosperous tenantry; the value of lands must rise in consequence, rents will be well paid, and the landlord’s humanity will cease to be outraged twice a year; and the constable will no longer be employed to hunt and persecute the insolvent tenant. – A yeomanry will be raised up in the country;

A Report of the Debate

45

and who does not see the want of it? Te trade and manufactures of the country will be benefted in a degree beyond calculation. With what industry do manufacturing nations, with what industry does England look to increase the number of consumers of its manufactures abroad? – We have at home a great feld for the increase of ours. – Unchain the Roman Catholics, put no bars to their eforts, share with them the general protection now confned to Protestants. See what a number of consumers here break at once upon you. You have been elated when you sent a few pair of shoes to America. Don’t we all know that the majority of our Roman Catholic peasantry go bare-footed and bare-legged all the year; they are naked I may say; permit them to take part in the general prosperity; they will be able to cloath themselves and their families. Who can calculate the extent of national advantage to be derived from the addition of three millions of consumers, and who will contribute not only to the consumption, but to the production, and to the increase of our trade and manufactures. I may be asked, why do I expect these consequences from the repeal of the penal laws? – Te answer is easy; because I see them in the Protestant, and I know the Catholic is endowed with as great a share of natural ability and faculties, as any other description of his countrymen, if brought forth, as they ought to be, by a wise government. We have seen it ofen in situations, in professions, where the partiality of the laws did not operate to favour the one, or depress the other. Look to the profession that has been open to us, look to our trade, and look to our manufactures, to instance, that, if not equal to a competition, we have at least ambition enough to emulate those who have been more favoured. But the Roman Catholics are ignorant! What made the bulk of them so? Te laws that prevent their prosperity; and yet the supporters of those laws complain and upbraid them for being so. Give means of prosperity, ignorance will vanish before it. But even at this day, is there no line of qualifcation which could be drawn, from which, upwards, you would fnd Roman Catholics as informed, and as competent to exercise the right of franchise, as the forty shilling freeholder? Is it however the faculties of the mind, or is it property, which is represented in Parliament? If it is the former, what must we think of the mental powers of some constituents, if we estimate those powers by the wisdom and genius of their representatives? But this is all evasion: Who does not know, that the majority of electors, as they now stand, do not, need not think at all, need not enquire, nor understand the principles or abilities of the man the vote for; / the will of the lord of the manor, of their landlords, leads them in shoals to the hustings or the court house, and their numbers determine what their judgments had nothing to do with. I shall not trouble this meeting longer, but conclude with my hearty concurrence to the motions before you. Mr. Sweetman.11 – I rise, Sir, with the greatest respect, to contribute my humble mite of approbation to the Resolutions which are now before you. In

46

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

doing so, I feel within myself an awful impression in attempting to address you. I am much agitated. I feel myself in a new situation. Can it be wondered then that I feel within my breast new sensations? I congratulate my brethren on this meeting, and on the important measure they have just now adopted – the Declaration; and I rejoice that the day is arrived, when we are come forward to remove and throw of from our shoulders that load of obloquy and misrepresentation which has been unjustly fxed upon us. We come now for the frst time to stand erect before our country, unincumbered with the weight of calumny and aspersion. We come to declare ourselves, what we really are, loyal, faithful, though injured subjects. In fne, we come this day in the language of the scriptures, “to give a testimony to our brethren of the truth which is within us.”12 Te Resolutions which are submitted to you, are so pregnant with good sense, that it is impossible any man can for an instant refuse his assent to them. Tey are becoming the dignity of this meeting, and evince a just sense of those obligations which the Catholic body has happily contracted with those illustrious characters which are the objects of them. To do justice to their exertions in your cause, is a talk infnitely beyond the sphere of my humble capacity, and yet my gratitude would prompt me even to encounter my natural imbecility. though the attempt should mar and defeat my own intentions. But on refection it is needness. You beheld with the most grateful emotions their virtuous struggles in your behalf; you beheld them taking the feld, and opposing by their distinguished and many eloquence the batteries of bigotry, monopoly and self-interest. Tey pleaded your afecting cause in terms the most pathetic, “though proud oppression would not hear them;”13 the organs of the nation have a quicker sense. For my part, I feel within my breast a double sensation of gratitude and confdence in the recollection, that among that virtuous band, that illustrious, unequalled man14 came forward to restore you to your rights, who restored his country to its constitution. With regard to the frst Resolution, I am persuaded, Sir, that this meeting is bound to the adoption of it, not only in point of gratitude, but in point of justice. If there can be any hesitation it will proceed from a wish that the measure should go the whole way, to prove the sense of your obligations – but that is impossible, it is not in the power of language. With respect to the second, I take it for granted, to be nothing more than a transcript of those principles which are already established in the mind of every man present, and of every Roman Catholic throughout the kingdom. Te elective franchise, Sir, in my mind, would operate as food and raiment to the lower order of our distressed and degraded brethren. In saying so, I do not wish by any means to be understood as speaking in a metaphor, because I am convinced that the possession of that inestimable right is the only means of obtaining for them those comforts beyond that miserable portion which they experience / of mere existence. If I add, Sir, that it would be

A Report of the Debate

47

the means of procuring them even a permanent shelter from the inclemency of the elements, I trust it will not be considered any deviation from the truth, when it is known that numberless instances constantly occur of their being turned out of their habitations and their little holdings, to make room for Protestant voters. But it is not alone to that numerous class of our brethren that the blessings of this invaluable right would be confned, every other order of our persuasion would feel its benign infuence. It is, Sir, that inestimable right that may be justly called the true political salt, which seasons and preserves every other right. Upon the whole, Sir, it is that measure alone which can make the situation of our people tolerable, or that can raise this growing country to its true level of prosperity and greatness. – While three millions of its inhabitants are enslaved, it is idle to expect it. But it remains with ourselves to obtain this grand desideratum. Our conduct has been uniformly marked by a peaceful demeanour, and a due submission to the laws. Let us then refer to it as our model but by no means let us forget to add prudence to unanimity – frmness of perseverance. I could willingly dwell longer on the interesting subject, but, from a fear that I have trespassed too long on your patience; I sit down with giving the Resolutions, which have been proposed to you, my most hearty and decided concurrence. Mr. Thompson.15 – Te consistent, dutiful and sensible manner, in which this Declaration is brought forward, must meet with the approbation of every Catholic, and every Protestant in this country. To promulge [sic] our civil, and religious creed, at an æra, when both are so little known, or so little understood, becomes an indispensible obligation. Te unshaken and immutable loyalty of our principles, were ever uniformly proved, by the most undeviating deference, and obedience to the law – our love for our sovereign – our attachment to his family and government, and our afections for our country and fellow-subjects, under the pressure of the most fagitious penal code that ever disgraced the name of laws. Such conduct form the verdicts of our highest honour, and it is our perpetual letter of credit – a full, strong and complete refutation of the innumerous and unmeritted imputations, so wickedly charged upon us. – Tat penal code which militated against all divine and natural laws, was, and is submitted to, with a religious fortitude and resignation, unprecedented in any people, in any age, or in any country. Te imputations so unjustly made on us, excite not in our minds the remotest resentment of jealousy; our Protestant brethren in the metropolis, and elsewhere, spoke from the belief that they spoke truth; rocked in a cradle of prejudices as they have been, nurtured with ideas generated more than a century since, they spoke the language of their childhood – they spoke what they heard, not what they read; had they courted just, and impartial information, they could as freely express and difuse it; to a want of knowledge then of the subject of Catholic principles, not to any intolerantly innate sentiments, are we to attribute, as I am

48

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

persuaded we all do, the mistaken opinions that have so lately been declared against us. – Heretofore it was customary, nay unhappily it was fashionable, to traduce Catholic sentiments, and load them with every opprobrious epithet. Men unacquainted with, and ignorant of our tenets, made creeds for them, and for our conduct; creeds that were as opposite to the truth, as light is to darkness. To the face of placid, and sufering humanity (because the Penal Code was insufcient) were afxed features of the most hideous political / form, spectres created by religious frenzy, and interested phrenities, afrighted and alarmed, weak and uninformed minds. – We became hobgoblins in the state; as wax in the hands of an artist, they mould our principles as they fancied, and believed in the monstrousness of the exhibition. But this Declaration displays the sentiments of our civil and religious belief, in so just, clear, and concentred a view, as will I trust, remove for ever from the minds of our Protestant brethren, the severities conceived against us; their liberality will delight, in the instructions it conveys; an enlightened people will receive its gladdened hearts, and disseminate its information through every part of the nation; they will rejoice in its religious, moral, and civil truths; cause for disunion will cease in the land; Irishmen will unite in fraternal fellowship. – Rational prosperity, and mutual love, and reciprocal good ofces will combine to form a connecting principle, that must permanently constitute, those essential requisites to Ireland’s glory. – Religion will extend her benignent virtues to all, and be from thence employed, as a bond of union, not as a machinery for politics. Te barbarous appellations of idolator, and heretic, the horrid ofspring of the ribaldry and billingsgate of contentious times, will die away, and like the departing colours of the rainbow, fade before the eye of the beholder, and leave not trace behind. It has been said of us, that we are not grateful, proportioned to the emancipations conferred on us; this is an ungenerous and unfounded aspersion; no people are more sensible to gratitude than we are, to our sovereign, our hearts beat high, with the most pure and unfeigned loyalty; to our country, and to our fellow-subjects, we bear the tenderest afections; to the legislature, our hearts and minds are full of the most lively gratitude, the favours conferred are in their manner, as honourable to the relieving power, as to the relieved subject – not a dissentient voice in either house, forbad the boon. – It is true, we hoped our merits would induce more, but the authority which gave so much, and the conduct which entitle us to it, will grant more, because we shall continue to deserve it, in faithful and steady loyalty we are inferior to no description of subjects in the realm – a comparison would place us on a high eminence; if the other descriptions of subjects sufered the goading malignities of the Penal Code, our fathers and ourselves labored under, would they have behaved obediently as we have done? our merits then are the more transcendent and conspicuous.

A Report of the Debate

49

Many entertained fears for the safety of the Protestant religion, if Roman Catholics were emancipated. – Were the whole code of Penal laws obliterated from the statute books, it could not endanger the Protestant religion; involving all the principles, and teaching all the virtues, and excellencies of Christianity, as it does, it need not for its safety, to be insulated, by restraining the freedom of others; the base of the Protestant religion is solid, compact, extensive, perspicuous, and liberal; completely and sufciently so in its center and angles, to sustain and perpetuate itself, and they but poorly know it, and as poorly compliment it, who disrepute it by asserting, that its ascendancy is maintainable, only, by enchaining or repressing, the freedom of their Catholic brethren. We desire not incorporation with our countrymen, to disturb, or weaken our country – a share of its privileges to injure its liberties, a participation of the subject’s right, for the purpose, or with the view of subverting it – No! No! – they who thus arraign know little of our principles, we disavow such savage baseness, we behold liberty in its fullest extent, as the subjects right, / the tribute of his civic worth, and the just, and decorous remuneration of his allegiance and loyalty. Tis Declaration will be productive of other good efects; the angry day of disunion which so long, and so shamefully subsisted among Irishmen, on principles which none understood, will happily give way to social intercourse, to friendly and sentimental interchange; confdence will take place of difdence, men will unite in harmony, and in friendship, all will beneft, but more especially the Roman Catholic, more than the limits of my description can convey. He was ofen, nay is at this day, precluded enjoying the delectable pleasures of illumined Protestant society, in whose matter and manner, benifcence is issued with benevolence, the enviable and inimitable charms of the mind are met, the perfection of truth, goodness, honour, and kindred afection. Mr. O’Sullivan16 adverted to what had been said by Mr. M’Donnell in an early stage of the debate, when he had lamented the absence of the landholders. – Mr. O’Sullivan said he would be sorry that any consideration of this kind should depress the spirit of the Assembly – for his part he should be sorry to see any of those landed Gentlemen there till they had confessed and repented of their political sins. If they were present, the Assembly would be contaminated by a set of self-interested hypocrites, who preferred their private advantage to the good of the community to which they belonged; hypocrites, who had not courage to act aright, and who were afraid to speak the truth. Mr. J. Byrne.17 – Mr. Chairman, I rise under the impression of that difdence, which belongs to me in my present situation, who now for the frst time attempt to deliver my sentiments in public, and I am the more oppressed by timidity, as I feel not only how little equal I am to do justice to the cause for which we are here met, and which I would wish to assist; but even to do justice to my own ideas on the subject – but, Sir, I am unwilling to give a silent vote on

50

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

this occasion, where I see the interest of my country in general, and the particular happiness of my sufering sect are concerned; I speak too, Sir, in the hope that some gentlemen, equally timid as myself, but much more able, may pursue my humble example, and bestow their aid to our glorious cause. It was my intention to enter more at large into the history of the Roman Catholic afairs, than I am now resolved to do. Te gentlemen who have preceded me in this discourse, have treated these matters so fully as to leave me no room for further illustration; and as I respect the time of this assembly, I shall be cautious not to occupy it in pressing arguments and stating facts already ofered – Facts selfevident, and arguments conclusive, and ably argued. But permit me, Sir, before I sit down, to congratulate this meeting, and the representatives of the Roman Catholics, every individual of that oppressed body, upon the point of eminence on which they are now placed – compared to what their situation was not long since. Our cause, Sir, is the cause of Virtue, Truth, and Justice – it is therefore the cause of God – unerring wisdom presided over it – it needed but discussion to fash conviction of its merits upon the minds of men well disposed to truth, and to cover with confusion the enemies of toleration, the petty Visirs [sic]18 of this land, the calumniators of our brethren, it has obtained this discussion with its deserved success. Te frst abilities and the most glowing virtues of this country were exerted in our support, and we / had an advocate in a Right Honourable Member of the British House of Commons,19 whose virtues, and whose talents had they fourished in an earlier period of the world, would have ranked him not only among the Gods of his country, but the Gods of all nations and people who respected the feelings of mankind, and condoled with the miseries of his fellowcreatures. By the aid of such men as these, Sir, prejudice that minister of tyranny in this country, has relaxed of its severity: Our Protestant Brethren have been taught to see that the emancipation of the Roman Catholics, far from injuring the establishments and prosperity of this country, must serve to strengthen them. I am consoled, Sir, in my want of capacity to treat the subjects as I wish, on the recollection that the merits of our cause tell themselves on the face of it, and that every man who hears me, feels as I feel, and sees perhaps the business under discussion in a juster point of view than I do. Our cause needs no abstract argument; we have not, Sir, (as a late most illustrious body of city poets assembled in this room had) to soar upon leaden pinions into the regions of city fction, in quest of arguments to support an assertion so preposterous, as that King George the Tird shall be dragged from his throne by the powerful grasp of an emancipated Catholic, in despite of the nine millions of beef-eaters,20 who surround and guard him. We have not, to outrage all feeling in voting thanks with the majority of common council-men, to the virtuous majority who rejected the Petition of the People, and recommending to that virtuous majority to pursue, in their humane eforts of trampling still lower, those who are already prone. –

A Report of the Debate

51

We have not, with the charity of a pawnbroker, and the impertinent vigilance, and courage too, of a cabin cur, barking without motive, and guarding without authority, the constitution of this country, to recommend the continuation of an oppressive system, and then support the necessity of such procedure on the grounds of specious city reasoners. We are not come here to view with sickened fancy, the humiliation of our Sovereign, whom we love as well as the common council-men do, nor do behold with horrid anticipation, as majority of them perhaps did, common council-men exalted to a certain distinguished eminence, to which their humility, I suppose, not their merits on that day, would prevent them to lay claim. No, Sir, our cause speaks its own merits, and needs no words to enforce them. Te Declaration before you, goes immediately to remove the prejudices of our Protestant brethren, and therefore has my heartiest approbation and support. Tis, and your Resolutions, are such as become the dignity of this Assembly to adopt, and, in my humble opinion, are strongly marked with that characteristic wisdom, which has governed the counsels of those able and zealous Gentlemen, who have stood foremost in the cause of our oppressed body, and who are entitled to the thanks of all descriptions of good citizens. Mr. Keogh – I cannot withhold my approbation of the resolutions before you – they are conveyed in clear, modest, and proper terms – such as might be expected from the respectable gentleman who moved them. It has been moved by another gentleman to extend your thanks to the entire House of Commons. Our obligations, and our gratitude was confessed by the voice of every Catholic in Ireland, worthy of freedom, to those illustrious men who wished to restore to you the elective franchise – but it would be premature to thank the Legislature for a bill not yet fnally passed, exclusive of the uncommon situation in which we stand, from the mode of introducing that business. I / should regret as much as any man any reluctance to acknowledge a favour conferred; ingratitude has never marked the Catholic’s character in this country – I confess for one, I did hope for such a relief as would have aforded protection (not power) to our unfortunate peasantry. – Severe as my disappointment might be, yet if this bill was of less importance, if it only gave the liberty of encreasing the number of apprentices, and was given in the manner, or with the appearance of a favour – I would have no doubt in my mind as to the propriety of returning thanks for the concession. But it certainly must reduce us to some doubt with regard to the intent of the donation, when we refect that it has been so ofen asserted (as we learn by the public papers) that the bill was given to sixty-eight addressing Gentlemen, not to three millions of oppressed people. – If so, how can we presume to intrude an expression of our gratitude, until we have some further information on that subject? – We are in possession of the proceedings previous to the bill – we know that the Catholics from almost every part of Ireland directed the General

52

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

Committee to make application for redress, and to conduct those applications humbly and constitutionally. – We know that every attempt of that Committee was delayed, opposed, or frustrated, by the imbecility or the treachery of those of our body, in whom, before their defection from our cause, it was natural for us to consider. You recollect that when you presented a most humble Petition to Parliament; these men, inadequate to the great and honourable situation of being the advocates and leaders of three millions and an half of an oppressed and loyal people, meanly deserted their place. – Tey, and their groupe, made it the subject of their ridicule, their boast, that the deputation of the people would be treated with contempt at the castle,21 or not received at all. – What baseness! – What idiotism! – What treachery! – If we were so fallen, was it for them to triumph in our disgrace? It would be tedious to relate the various struggles of the Catholics of Ireland to present to Parliament their petition; that numerous and distressed body could not fnd access, and this too was a new triumph to those in whom we used to confde. – What shall we think of that man who might be adored by three millions and a half of people, who might be of the utmost importance in the state, and even to our gracious Monarch, by the confdence of the people, yet was contented to descend from that station, in order to strut at a levee, the contempt of every spirited man, to live despised and die neglected, and to have his name only known to posterity as the enemy and traitor to the Catholics of Ireland. – Te state of the Catholics was indeed melancholy – no ray of hope from any quarter. – Te loyal and respectable and spirited Catholics of Cork, those men who, though borne down by the Penal Code, when hostile feets were on the coast, came forward to expose their lives in defence of their country, disdaining then to speak of relief – these men ofered an humble Address to the present Lord Lieutenant,22 in which they expressed a hope that their past conduct might procure them some relaxation of that dreadful code of the laws – his Majesty’s representative in this kingdom declined to receive this humble expression of loyalty, because it was accompanied with a hope of relief. – A second application was made – a deputation waited on the Secretary23 with the Penal Laws, and humbly entreated some relaxation from any part of that dreadful code; this application never was honoured with any answer whatsover. Speaking of the Penal Code, I must digress to say, it was a sketch was presented to the Secretary, and we now fnd a very imperfect one. – For a late publication, / “Te Digest of the Popery Laws,”24 the United Irishmen, and their respectable Chairman, the Honourable Simon Butler,25 demand our warmest gratitude. – I own, feeling as I did, restraint and disability on every side, our rich degraded, and our poor oppressed, yet my idea of that dreadful system was imperfect, until I saw that publication. But to return to the subject; every application failing here, the Catholics prostrate, without hope; the General Committee thought it a duty they owed their

A Report of the Debate

53

Sovereign to endeavour, through his confdential servants, to make known their situation; to try that last efort before they should resign their trust; and tell the Catholics of Ireland that the result of all their loyalty and exertions to obtain a restoration to the common advantages of the social condition, was despair, total and unqualifed despair. – Accordingly, one of their body was deputed to go to London in September last; there an application commenced, and continued till Christmas, in which the person deputed received the exertions and able assistance of a respectable gentleman well known to them, (Mr. R. Burke.) From the appearance of this negociation, there was every reason to expect that, although a great and vast catalogue of restrictions would be retained, yet sufcient would be removed to aford protection to all the classes of our people; to our houseless peasantry, to give a pledge of future benefts, and to render it unanimously and sincerely grateful. Te objects were the bar,26 without restriction; High-sherifs and Magistracy in counties, and Grand Juries27 – and a share in the Elective Franchise. Our applications were favourably attended to, and we had fattered ourselves all decided in our favour. In this stage of the business, when the negociation was carried on three months – when it was just closed – a certain noble Lord,28 who had used every efort for four years to keep us back – dreading, lest the people should be relieved, notwithstanding his conduct, then came forward to promote that famous address – and to induce the sixty-eight to subscribe29 – many of whom were totally ignorant of the negociation going on at the foot of the Trone. Tus stands our obligation to these gentlemen, and to the bill with which the promptitude and obsequiousness of their loyalty has been rewarded. It must be said, indeed, on their behalf, that they were promised a bill to contain much greater benefts. How were they treated? – An outcry was set on foot, by men under infuence of the Castle, against our relief. Tese sixty-eight dupes were told, “Gentlemen, you see there is a great outcry, we cannot do what we promised – we can only now open the law, and that with many, and degrading restrictions.” – I believe the other objects, contained in the bill, will not be much insisted on. Having stated some past transactions – I now come to what is more pleasing – that is to state my opinion, that the time is not remote, when we shall meet to join with heart and voice, in the sincerest gratitude to Parliament and to Government. However unfavourable some things appear, I am persuaded it is not intended to doom you to slavery, and that a wise Government will adopt the patriotic measure of restoring you to the constitution of your country. When that day arrives, and it will soon arrive, you will then prove your just and unfeigned gratitude to your Deliverers, to Government, to the Legislature, to the Illustrious Men who espoused your cause in Parliament – to the virtuous, patriotic, and enlightened Citizens of Belfast – the frst (let it never be forgotten) who came forward in a bodv, to apply to Parliament for our relief. /

54

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

While we pretend to honour, gratitude, or virtue, or have any claim to freedom, let this live in our memory, and be imprinted on the memories of our children. To Derry30 we owe much – their decisions, though more limited, yet were honourable testimonies of their good-will, and expressions of their sentiments in the previous debate breathed liberal and manly principles. My reason for thinking the time of deliverance approaches is, that it is impossible on any other principle to account for the conduct observed towards us. Te proceedings of those who made the Penal Code was consistent and systematic – they might be unjust and cruel, but they acted like men who had a plan. – When they deprived us of liberty, they also doomed us to ignorance, and prevented our receiving education at home, or daring to receive it abroad. Indeed they went a little farther, or rather laid the foundation for our disfranchisement by the surrender of their own liberties. Te plan was but the more systematic. But, as things stand at present, unless our emancipation is intended, all is incongruous. Why, in God’s name, year afer year, were the eloquence and abilities of Ireland exerted in giving lectures, in College – Green,31 (reduced into practice by the establishment of an independent Legislature,) – to prove the blessings of Liberty, and the curse of Slavery. And, lest we should mistake, both are defned: We are told that slavery consists in being governed by laws to which we do not consent by ourselves or representatives. We look to ourselves and our expiring peasantry – and see the truth verifed. Tey tell us taxation and representation should be inseparable – We feel the efects of the contrary. – We are told, that every man is born free, and that wealth, nay life itself, is not worth possessing without liberty – we see indeed, the gentleman who used these very words (one of the frst in talents and connections of this country) vote for rejecting our petition for the right of Franchise. But the truth is, if his conduct be inconsistent, his doctrine is unquestionable, and though instilled with less ability, would work conviction. – Every Catholic in Ireland, whose library only extends to a magazine or an old newspaper – reads their beautiful orations – We are, to a man, convinced. We look to America – to France – to the Netherlands – to all Europe – and ask each other – why it is that we, who are as faithful subjects as any king in Europe can boast – why are we thus reduced to Slavery? – for Slavery it is – as defned to us by high authority, and that without crime. – Why have our equals, our inferiors, our tenants, and even our servants, privileges which are denied to us? Is it that we disagree about the Elements in the Sacrament? – With equal justice might the Copernican system be set up, and sworn to, as a test for civil or political liberty. – From those considerations I am convinced, that it is not their

A Report of the Debate

55

intention, nor can it be, to doom you to a perpetual deprivation of elective franchise; were it so, another and a very diferent mode would govern the conduct of our rulers. – Tey continue indeed, to talk of something which we are told is to exclude us from the constitution for ever, and which they call the Protestant ascendancy – which they asserted, was founded on the principles of the Revolution of 1688, though the word was never heard of till 1792.32 / I will leave them in possession of a vague term of party rage, and consider the period to which it alludes. Tat consideration will prove that when the Roman Catholics were in power, they were not hostile to the liberties of this country. Te Parliament of that day, encouraged navigation – unshackled commerce – repealed Poyning’s Laws33 – and vindicated the Independent Legislature of Ireland. – Tough excesses were committed, they passed no penal statutes against the Protestant religion. Tey lost their power by treaty,34 not by subjection. Te Catholics possessed many fortifed towns – Limerick was besieged by General Ginckle,35 and defended by Earl Lucan,36 and Viscount Gallmoy;37 – they were promised succour from France, which arrived at Dingle, 6th of October 1691, under Monsieur Chateau Renault,38 with 20 ships of war; notwithstanding, to put an end to the troubles of their country, they listened to the ofers made them, and a solemn treaty was entered into, under which they surrendered the town, 3d October, 1691, and all the other garrisons then held by the Catholics for James,39 surrendered according to those articles, which were signed by General Ginckle, confrmed by the Lords Justices – aferwards by King William40 and Queen Mary,41 under the Great Seal of England; and fnally, four years afer in 1695, confrmed by an act of the Irish Parliament – by which they became the public faith of the nation; plighted and engaged, in as full, frm, and solemn manner as ever public faith was pledged. Under these articles, not only the inhabitants, but the ofcers and soldiers in arms, and their heirs, are to enjoy all the interests, privileges, and immunities, which the Catholics possessed or enjoyed in the reign of Charles II.42 – Now, Sir, no man has more confdence in the humanity, or the generosity and patriotism of our Protestant brethren, than myself; – but it is not a bad compliment, to have a superior one of their integrity and justice. As the period of 1688 is echoed, surely, we say we join issue; we do not desire to destroy Protestant ascendancy; we implore, we require in justice, to be restored to Catholic dependency of the principles of 1688. I have no doubt of these facts making their impression on every fair and honest Protestant. – Let them establish the principles, we will then with them rejoice in that revolution, and celebrate it in common. I cannot leave untouched a fatal calumny insinuated against us – that the Catholics have views to separate Ireland from the empire, if they had power.

56

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

Our request was – admission to the constitution; we would then be interested to defend, not to overthrow it. – We wish for Liberty, united with the empire. – If I do not speak your sentiments, correct me. – Have you heard in public or in private any idea of separation from England? – (cry “no – no – no!”) It is the slander of your enemies, to misrepresent you for base and selfsh purposes. It has been said that we of late have held high and menacing language: – We have not. – Tere is, however, an idea, which some men may call a menace, that I will now mention. – What is our present alternative? – Slavery or Emigration! – Can it be believed that, when France is settled, we will reject Liberty, and a better clime, to hug those chains, from which even Despotism would be a relief. America, in its wildest state, was peopled by intolerance; France sent her manufacturers to enrich her neighbour, by intolerance – when France is settled, we have not to break up our situations – that country is at our door – we may pay a visit, have settlements prepared there, before we quit our establishments in Ireland. / Idle men, and weak bigots may say, let them go, we can fourish without them – and it may be echoed by the Balderdash Bufoon, or the Slavish Courtier! – But will wise men, who look at it in all its consequences argue thus? – Will those who immediately approach the throne (to say nothing of ministers in this country) – Will a Pitt,43 a Fox,44 a Burke,45 a Grenville,46 a Dundas,47 be indiferent? It cannot be. – Suppose it was granted that our numbers or our wealth could be spared from Ireland – and admit it could be sunk in the sea – does no diference arise between even that and transplanting them into France; adding your commercial talents, your knowledge, your industry; – but above all, your manufactures to France – with property to carry them on, and connexious to obtain every new improvement from England. God forbid, our monopolists should bring this to pass! – but if they do – what reception will you meet in France? Every respect, every honour, every encouragement – what a day of triumph to their constitution in the face of all Europe, to see the wealthy, the industrious, and perhaps the best subjects in Europe, forced by exclusion from privileges, to take asylum with them. What a day of humiliation and dishonour to our own country, and their idle attempts to call their system, Toleration – taxing us without representation, giving away our money profusely, and then taking credit for their generous donations, of our prosperity! We have a cause of justice and honour, in which our Protestant brethren are equally interested with ourselves; the nation droops under our calamity; it is nonsense to talk of a country’s prosperity, and its inhabitants wretched – three millions of peasantry unprotected, and who have no claim to protection, because they want that shield of the poor, Elective Franchise. – Living in miserable hovels, half graves, half cabbins, naked and unfed. – Tose of a little better circumstances, as their leases expire, have before them and their children the prospect of being reduced to the same misery; the wretched father of a family thus turned adrif.

A Report of the Debate

57

Ask “What ofence have you committed, to incur or draw down this dreadful sentence?” How have you ofended your landlord – what is the answer? Alas! he is not ofended with us, he even wishes us well, and pities our fate, but he must have votes to support himself and his connexion at the next election, and we cannot take the oaths; we would swear to be ever true to our king and country, but we cannot swear against our faith. Tus our poor ill-fated countrymen, are punished for their virtue, and life itself is a calamity if it exceeds their lease. A gentleman of high rank told me two day since, that he was obliged with great regret to transplant whole villages, to prevent his losing his election. He did not, it is true, expel them the country, he only drove them up to the mountains. Tus Elective Franchise, is not a struggle for power; it is necessary, to protect the poor from utter misery, from worse than death. If a rage for conversion was the object, it had not succeeded, for persecution is not the means. God will not encourage such means, for since Charles the Second’s time, the miserable Catholics have encreased 2,700,000 – they were then 800,000 – they are at present 3,500,000. Although I never omit recommending to my fellow-suferers to continue that peaceable conduct, for which you are so justly praised; and although I am sensible how unnecessary it is to give such advice to any gentleman present, yet I beg to extend the idea, and to entreat that you will be attentive to stop by your authority, or infuence, / every appearance of quarrel among the people, any thing that could be deemed or magnifed into a riot, for miserable as we are, we have enemies, and if a few persons at a market, quarrelled about the weight of butter, there are those who would misrepresent it as a Catholic mob. Be frm – you are not dismayed – but be guarded, be peaceable – the virtue and the genius of the nation is with you, and your gratitude will soon be called forth to thank your deliverers. Te Resolutions passed una voce.48 Mr. M’Loughlin.49 – Mr. Chairman – It is with the greatest difdence I rise to ofer my sentiments before this assembly; conscious, as I must be, that any thing which could fall from so inexperienced an individual as I am, must have very little if any infuence on the minds of those who hear me. – But Sir, I thought it my duty to endeavour to direct your attention to the actions of those gentlemen, by whose exertions you have obtained that Declaration which lies on your table. I have, Sir, for a long time viewed with admiration, the steady, wise, persevering, and constitutional eforts of your General Committee, in promoting the political interests of the Catholics of this country, and in no one instance, in my humble opinion, Sir, is their conduct more to be applauded than in bringing forward the Declaration now before you. – By this Declaration, Sir, sanctioned by our most respectable Prelate, will our Protestant brethren be rescued from fears and superstitious prejudices, which however ill-founded, must

58

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

have made but too deep an impression on their minds, as having imbibed them from their earliest education. Te efects, Sir, of such prejudices, are too obvious, for me to attempt to descant upon them. Were it necessary to illustrate the fact I might repeat in the words of the poet – “Quo semel est imbuta recentes servavit odorem, testa diu.”50 – But Sir, at this happy day, when philosophy has made such vast strides in dissipating the gloomy horrors of bigotry and intolerance, when the minds of men are illumined, as it were, not by a refected but native light, when the essential distinction is so evidently demonstrated between religion and politics, I am confdent, nay, Sir, I am convinced that our Protestant fellow-subjects will be proud, will feel a secret pleasure in anticipating our wishes, and restoring to us a participation of that glorious constitution from which the unwise policy of former times has secluded us. – I fear, Sir, I have trespassed too long on your indulgence, but as I conceive the pleasing prospect of our emancipation, to depend at least in a great measure on the steady, uniform, and constitutional exertions of that truly respectable Committee; I shall Sir, take the liberty of moving you to come to the following resolution:– Resolved, Tat the thanks of this Meeting be, and are hereby given to the General Committee of the Catholics of Ireland, for the judicious, spirited, and constitutional conduct which they have constantly observed, and which had been more eminently conspicuous in the trying and critical season of the parliamentary and public discussion of their afairs – which Resolution was unanimously adopted. Bernard O’Neil, Esq. having quit the chair, and John Sweetman, Esq. having taken it: It was resolved, Tat the thanks of this Meeting be returned to Bernard O’Neil, Esq. for his proper and spirited conduct in the chair. /

GENERAL COMMITTEE, Dublin, March 16th, 1792. DECLARATION OF THE ROMAN CATHOLICS OF IRELAND. Whereas certain Opinions and Principles, inimical to good Order and Government, have been attributed to the Catholics, the Existence of which we utterly deny; and, whereas, it is at this Time peculiarly necessary to renounce such Imputations, and to give the most full and ample Satisfaction to our Protestant Brethren, that we hold no Principle, whatsoever, incompatible with our Duty as Men or as Subjects, or repugnant, to Liberty, whether political, civil, or religious.

A Report of the Debate

59

Now, we, the Catholics of Ireland, for the Removal of all such Imputations, and in Deference to the Opinion of many respectable Bodies of Men, and Individuals among our Protestant Brethren, do hereby, in the Face of our Country, of all Europe, and before God, make this our deliberate and solemn Declaration:– 1st. We abjure, disavow, and condemn the Opinion, that Princes, excommunicated by the Pope and Council, or by any Ecclesiastical Authority whatsoever, may therefore be deposed or murdered by their Subjects, or any other Persons. We hold such Doctrine in Detestation, as wicked and impious; and we declare we do not believe, that either the Pope, with or without a general Council, or any Prelate or Priest, or any Ecclesiastical Power whatsoever, can absolve the Subjects, of this Kingdom, or any of them, from their Allegiance to his Majesty King George the Tird, who is, by Authority of Parliament, the lawful King of this Realm. 2d. We abjure, condemn, and detest, as unchristian and impious, the Principle, that it is lawful to murder, destroy, or any Ways injure any Person whatsoever, for or under the Pretence of their being Hereticks; – and we declare solemnly before God, that we believe that no Act, in itself unjust, immoral, or wicked, can ever be justifed or excused by, or under Pretence or Colour, that it was done either for the Good of the Church, or in Obedience to any Ecclesiastical Power whatsoever. / 3d. We further declare, that we hold it as an unchristian and impious Principle, that “that no Faith is to be kept with Hereticks.” Tis Doctrine we detest and reprobate, not only as contrary to our Religion, but as destructive of Morality, of Society, and even of common Honesty; and it is our frm Belief, that an Oath made to any Person, not of the Catholic Religion, is equally binding, as if it were made to any Catholic whatsoever. 4th. We have been charged with holding as an Article of our Belief, that the Pope, with or without the Authority of a general Council, or that certain Ecclesiastical Powers, can acquit and absolve us, before God, from our Oath of Allegiance, or even from the just Oaths and Contracts entered into between Man and Man: Now, we do utterly renounce, abjure and deny that we hold or maintain any such Belief, as being contrary to the Peace and Happiness of Society inconsistent with Morality, and above all, repugnant to the true Spirit of the Catholic Religion. 5th. We do further declare, that we do not believe that the Pope of Rome, or any other foreign Prince, Prelate, State, or Potentate, hath, or ought to have, any temporal or civil Jurisdiction, Power, Superiority, or Pre-eminence, directly or indirectly, within this Realm. 6th. Afer what we have renounced, it is immaterial, in a political Light, what may be our Opinion or Faith in other points respecting the Pope:– However, for greater Satisfaction, we declare, that it is not an Article of the Catholic

60

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

Faith, neither are we thereby required to believe or profess “that the Pope is infallible,”51 or that we are bound to obey any Order, in its own Nature immoral, though the Pope, or any Ecclesiastical Power, should issue or direct such Order; but, on the contrary, we hold, that it would be sinful in us to pay any Respect or Obedience thereto. 7th. We further declare, that we do not believe that any Sin whatsoever committed by us can be forgiven at the mere Will of any Pope, or of any Priest, or of any Person or Persons whatsoever; but, that sincere Sorrow for past Sins, a frm and sincere Resolution, as far as may be in our Power, to restore our Neighbour’s Property or Character, if we have trespassed on, or unjustly injured either; a frm and sincere Resolution to avoid future Guilt, and to atone to God, are previous and indispensable Requisites to establish a well-founded Expectation of Forgiveness; and that any Person who receives Absolution without these previous Requisites, so far from obtaining thereby any Remission of his Sins, incurs the additional Guilt of violating a Sacrament. 8th. We do hereby solemnly disclaim, and for ever renounce all Interest in, and Title to, all forfeited Lands, resulting from any Rights, or supposed Rights, of our Ancestors, or any Claim, Title, or Interest therein; nor do we admit any Title, as a Foundation of Right, which is not established and acknowledged by the Laws of the Realm, as they now stand. We desire, further, that whenever the Patriotism, Liberality, and Justice of our Countrymen, shall restore to us a Participation in the Elective Franchise, no Catholic shall be permitted to vote at any Election for Members, to serve in Parliament, unless he shall previously take an Oath to defend, to the utmost of his Power, the Arrangement of Property in this Country, as established by the diferent Acts of Attainder and Settlement. / 9th. It has been objected to us, that we wish to subvert the present Church establishment, for the Purpose of substituting a Catholic Establishment in its stead; Now, we do hereby, disclaim, disavow, and solemnly abjure any such Intention; and further, if we shall be admitted into any Share of the Constitution, by our being restored to the Right of Elective Franchise, we are ready, in the most solemn Manner, to declare, that we will not exercise that Privilege to disturb and weaken the Establishment of the Protestant Religion, or Protestant Government in this Country. Signed by Order, and on Behalf of the General Committee of the Catholics of Ireland, EDWARD BYRNE, Chairman.52 RICHARD M’CORMICK, Secretary.53  Te foregoing Declaration is also subscribed by Dr. Troy, the Catholic Archbishop, and by the other Catholic Clergy of Dublin.

FINIS.

A CANDID ENQUIRY

A Candid Enquiry, Whether the Roman Catholics of Ireland, Ought or Ought Not to be Admitted to the Rights of Subjects; With Observations on their Political and Religious Conduct (Dublin: Printed for J. Boyce, 1792).

Tis publication comments on the ongoing dispute as to whether, and with what justice, the Roman Catholics of Ireland ought to petition for further political concessions. In this dispute each side frequently harks back to the previous hundred years or more of history to justify the position being taken. Te author of this pamphlet seeks to strike a middle course by looking at the present situation in a rational way. He insists that the true test of whether or not to grant further Catholic relief should be whether or not such a change will endanger the safety of the state. Taking this point of view into consideration, the author maintains that the beliefs and principles of the Catholics ofer no political threat to the existing constitution. To lessen Protestant fears, however, he advises the Catholic population to be guided and directed by the Catholic Committee and this committee should seek the guidance of the Catholic bishops and other learned Catholic clergy. Te political claims being made by Catholic petitioners should not run counter to the spirit and principles of the Catholic religion. Much as the Catholics deserve the concessions they are seeking, they should not seek them at the expense of their religious principles and practices. It is argued that the greatest evils that can befall a man are to be dominated by his passions and to become a free-thinker. He argues that attention to the duties of religion is the surest means of promoting a man’s temporal welfare. According to this author, Revolutionary France is at present providing an awful example of the dangerous excesses of free-thinking and libertinism. He maintains that this example should be avoided at all costs.

– 61 –

A Candid Enquiry, Whether the Roman Catholics of Ireland, Ought or Ought Not to be Admitted to the Rights of Subjects; With Observations on their Political and Religious Conduct (Dublin: Printed for J. Boyce, 1792).

A CANDID ENQUIRY, &c. ON a subject which regards the welfare of the Country and the happiness of the Constitution, every man should write and speak with the greatest caution, the greatest simplicity and moderation. It should be supposed that all descriptions, every sect and denomination of people wish well to the Country and Constitution; otherwise they would not deserve the countenance or protection of the State; therefore, when men or parties dispute, the / welfare of the Country and the happiness of the Constitution should be the grand object and term of their disputes. A great body of the people (the Roman Catholics of this kingdom) are about to petition for a share of those rights and privileges that qualifed subjects are entitled to. Another great body are preparing to oppose the petition. Te one urges that the Country will be improved, the Constitution receive strength by an extension of those rights. Te other insists that the Country will be injured, and the constitution ruined by such an extension. On the one side an hundred years suferings, the severity of Penal Statutes, loyalty tried by oppression, with a display of other arguments, are produced to shew the propriety of their petition. On the other side, the treasons, rebellions, plots and conspiracies; the cruelties, barbarities, and outrages of long past years, with various similar objections, are brought forward to establish the justice / of their opposition: but I conceive such arguments on both sides are insufcient to prove who is, or is not in the right. If the safety of the Constitution requires that these penal statutes should continue in force, they ought not to be repealed, notwithstanding their severity, notwithstanding the loyalty and suferings of an hundred years; if the safety of the Constitution does not require that they should continue in force, they

– 63 –

64

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

ought to be repealed, notwithstanding the treasons, plots, conspiracies, &c. of past years. To go an hundred years back for instructions for the present time, is the same as to be in dread of the ghosts of our enemies that were slain. When a revolution happens in any empire, kingdom or nation, the conquerors have every thing to apprehend from the vanquished: treasons, plots conspiracies, &c. must exist; hence the necessity of severity; hence the necessity of penal laws. As yet there is, as it were, no certain rule to go by. Conscience itself may be perplexed, and want a guide: / as yet, the lawful heir of the crown may not be universally acknowledged; property is not ascertained; the Constitution unsettled; the laws have not their due force: but when the storm is over, and a calm succeeds; when peace is restored, the Constitution confrmed in all its branches, and the laws duly executed; when the subjects are loved by their king, and the king has every assurance of allegiance, loyalty and fdelity from his subjects; when property is no more a subject of contention, when peace, harmony and mutual confdence subsist throughout the kingdom; then to be guided by the history of those troublesome times, is as absurd and chimerical as the transmigration of souls. Shall a man perfectly recovered from a fever still let blood, and abstain from solid food? Shall a man efectually restored to his senses from a state of madness, still be kept chained in bedlam? Shall subjects be still loaded with political chains, though they have efectually and long since recovered from / a state of political madness? I do not make use of those comparisons to prove that Roman Catholics should be relieved; I make use of them only to prove, that it is not right to maintain they should be now oppressed, merely because it was necessary they should be oppressed an hundred years ago. Give me leave then to draw the curtain over these melancholy scenes; and examine, whether the admitting the Roman Catholics to the rights of subjects, be hurtful to the Constitution; if it be, they certainly ought not to be admitted: if it be not, I shall leave it to the wisdom of the Legislature, whether it is just or prudent to admit them. Te Resolutions of County Meetings1 (if a few individuals may compose such meetings) express an apprehension, that the admission of Roman Catholics to the rights of subjects must ruin the Constitution; it were to be wished they would shew on what grounds they entertain their / apprehensions. Every assembly that opposes their admission, ought to ground their opposition on a clear, solid, rational foundation. I could wish all their objections were now before me, as the solving them would fully answer my design. I shall, then, suppose every thing that I can conceive could render them inadmissible; and if any man will turn the suppositions into facts, I will give up the point. Tat any person, persons or people should be considered disqualifed from enjoying any privilege, flling any station, holding any place of trust, there ought to be some grounds of suspicion afecting them; there ought to exist inabilities, dispositions, principles injurious to the Constitution, and imputable to them:

A Candid Enquiry

65

now such inabilities, and dispositions must spring from nature, or the want of education; such principles must proceed from the corruption of the heart, or must have been received from the religion they profess. / 1st. Roman Catholics can inherit no inabilities, no dispositions from nature, but those that are common to all Irishmen indiscriminately; unless their being descended from Roman Catholic parents can be considered to produce those dispositions and inabilities; and in that case, the Protestant is afected as much as the Roman Catholic, since there are many of that persuasion, who are even in power and confdence, whose grandfathers, fathers, and who themselves have been Roman Catholics. 2ndly, I will not, nor is it necessary to prove, that the Roman Catholics labour under no inabilities from the want of education; because the remedy is very easy; that is to proportion their share in the Constitution to their education: for the Roman Catholic will not presume to ask any thing above his Protestant neighbour of the same description in every respect: and whilst inabilities of this kind exist, the Legislature should make every reasonable allowance for them, since they were occasioned by decrees / of the Legislature. 3dly, In proving that such principles cannot proceed from the corruption of their hearts, I will not pretend that Roman Catholics are less corrupt, or more perfect than others; but I will request their adversaries to read over the penal laws, and consider all the hardships they sufered: they had it in their power to rise from disgrace and misery, to respect and opulence, but because the means (in their opinion) were unlawful; they bore all the distresses and misfortunes of their situation rather than take an oath against their conscience. Is it fair then, to suppose them eager to wound the Constitution, whom no consideration could move to wound their own conscience? Or, if you suppose them enemies to the Constitution, how can it be imagined that men so wicked would stop at a perjury, which was to procure them admission to a share in the Constitution, had they no other advantage, than a hope of having it in their power to hurt the Constitution? 4thly, / Tey could not have received such principles from the religion they profess. Tis is so evident from the Test Oath and the Declaration signed by all the Roman Catholics in this kingdom, that it is unnecessary to undertake a proof: but a simple, yet a stronger proof than all this will appear from this refection. If the Roman Catholic religion supported any principle injurious to the Constitution, something of this nature would be found in the writings of some among the Roman Catholics: but search and examine, from the halfpenny Catechism to the volumes of Belarmin,2 and if you fnd any such principle or proposition (approved by the church) I will give myself up to be burned at a stake:3 on the contrary, the Roman Catholic religion teaches her children that if they live in a country where the King is an infdel, the same allegiance, the same loyalty and fdelity is due to him, as if he were a Roman Catholic; the government must be supported, / the Constitution protected in the same manner as if the King and Subjects were of their

66

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

own persuasion. Tis is the universal doctrine of the Roman Catholic church; what mischief to the Constitution, that they believe the Pope is head of the Church; they acknowledge also George the III. King of Great-Britain and Ireland;4 and the same religion that assures them they should rather die than deny this article of their faith, assures them also they should rather lose their lives than withdraw their allegiance from King George III. If they do not frequent your places of worship, are they not with you whereever the dignity of the Crown, the support of government, the safety of the Constitution may require them? Tough you do not see them in your churches, do you not fnd them with you in all dangers and perils by sea and land? Do they ever shrink from the point of the bayonet or the mouth of / the cannon? How wretched the condition of those who venture their lives for their king and country, yet are not allowed the exercise of their religion! It is well known, that of Irishmen who engage in land or sea service, ninety-nine of every hundred are Roman Catholics: yet, living or dying, they are denied those helps they hold necessary for their eternal salvation! But to return to the subject: what injury to the Constitution, that Roman Catholics believe in Confession, Purgatory, the Invocation of Saints, &c.? Tis diference of of [sic] opinion has no more relation to politics, than the thoughts that are never expressed or known; thus, though they difer with you in other principles, they agree with you in this; that we must love our neighbour as ourselves; and I think this general principle of the Christian religion is as much reduced to practice by Roman Catholics, as by those of any other persuasion. Are they not as / ready to promote the interest of the Protestant, as that of the Roman Catholic? Are they not as willing to deal with, to do good ofces to the one, as to the other? I believe they are seldom known even to give a preference; yet if they united, and resolved to deal only with each other, they would do more injury to the Constitution, than if they were admitted to the right of Elective Franchise. Suppose, for example, that in the city of Dublin, from one to an hundred who depend on the public, were pointed out, and that it was resolved, no Roman Catholic should deal with them, they would soon become bankrupts; if the same resolutions became general, the same consequent evils would also become general. Roman Catholics being in some respect, considered a body separate from the State, inasmuch as they are denied a share in many advantages allowed the other subjects of the State; I am not lawyer enough to determine, / whether in such case, they might not confne their interests and endeavours to those of their own persuasion. Were such a measure allowable, and practised, I shall leave Protestants to judge the consequence; but I trust it will be acknowledged that Roman Catholics always supported such an intercourse with their neighbours of every persuasion, as becomes good Subjects, good Men, and good Christians; so that, though they difer from Protestants in belief, they agree with them in practice, as far as practice regards allegiance to the King, as far as it regards the good of the

A Candid Enquiry

67

Country, the support of Government and the safety of the Constitution. If I have not proved that Roman Catholics hold no principles inimical to the welfare of the Constitution, I request them who think they do, to point out those principles: let them be proposed, and if Catholics do not disavow them, and confrm their disavowal / by oath, let them not be heard; or if that is not sufcient, (what more is required to qualify them) it may be said perhaps; to renounce the Religion of their fathers: but does that Religion support any principle hurtful to the Constitution? It certainly does not: how then can the renouncing it be considered a condition necessary for qualifcation? or how can he be considered an enemy to the Constitution for professing a Religion friendly to the Constitution? yet it seems to be the fact, that though a thousand Oaths disavowing every principle injurious to the Constitution are insufcient, one Oath renouncing their Religion is sufcient to render them qualifed: I leave it to the understanding of any man, of what persuasion soever; if there is not in this a strange inconsistency? Suppose the body of Roman Catholics, actuated by motives of interest, took the Oath; certainly they would take it against their Consciences; / yet the perjury would qualify them, and then the prosperity of the Constitution would depend on perjurers, and not on honest men. Is not their attachment to their Religion a proof of their honesty? at least it proves they are not what they are represented; enemies to the Constitution; for men of that description, would make little scruple of a perjury which was the only obstruction to their admission to a share in the Constitution: yet notwithstanding all the hardships they have sufered, they never could be prevailed on to take an Oath against their Conscience; which ought before now, to have engaged their adversaries to entertain a more favourable opinion of them than they seem to do; certainly the character of Roman Catholics is not sufciently known. Government must be in error with regard to their principles. ’Tis impossible so much justice, and so much wisdom should remain inactive and unmoved, / if their character and principles appeared in their proper colours: but here is a grievance: they cannot assemble without being suspected: their meetings spread the alarm; and it is proclaimed that the Constitution is threatened, Church and State are in danger, and the Catholic Committee is compared to the National Assembly of France.5 It would seem as if the sole object of County Meetings was opposition, without any regard to truth and justice. Is this a fair way of arguing, reasoning or disapproving? Does the Catholic Committee question the conduct of their Sovereign? Do they fnd fault with the present Government or the present Constitution? Do they meddle in the afairs of Church and State? No; conscious to themselves of no crime, they assemble only to declare their innocence. Finding within them nothing but honesty and truth, they unite to manifest the sincerity of their hearts. Must not / the refection convey the highest satisfaction to the breast of our most gracious Sovereign; that three millions of Subjects who have been sus-

68

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

pected, make a profession of their Loyalty in a most solemn manner, and bind themselves to Allegiance by the most sacred engagements that it is possible for man to make; and perhaps time will prove, that the Irish Roman Catholics, are one of the most valuable jewels that adorn his crown. Must it not give equal satisfaction to the guardians of the Constitution, that so many thousands engage to defend it with their property and with their lives. Let it be known to the world then, that the Catholics of this kingdom, assemble for no other end or purpose, but to profess their Loyalty to their King, attachment to Government, fdelity to the Constitution, love to their Country, and sincere friendship and afection to their Fellow-subjects: and to declare, that / these being their genuine characteristics; it is their opinion, they deserve to be reckoned in the number of good and faithful Subjects. Let therefore, men and meetings cease to revile their proceedings: let them lay aside their senseless declamation, their vain terrors and groundless apprehensions. Let them speak to the point. Let them prove by sound argument, that the principles of Roman Catholics are inimical to the Constitution. Unless they say this, they say nothing, unless they prove this, they prove nothing. If they do not respect the Catholic body; let them respect the frst abilities, the most learned in the Kingdom of their own persuasion, Members of Parliament and lovers of the Constitution. Tose great men like the ancient philosophers, who penetrated through clouds of Paganism, even to the Divinity, have discovered truth, though obscured by prejudice and misrepresentation. Under their auspices / Roman Catholics are labouring; these are the body, those are the soul: it is their benign infuence gives it animation and strength; from them they have derived their political birth; they have learned to write and speak; they are their security from calumny and imputation, since whatever they sanction, must be held to be constitutional and legal. Tey are the mediators between the King and his subjects, between the legislature and the people: through this medium their petitions will be heard. Among the inconsistencies of human nature, this is not the least; – that men, fully, if not equally competent to judge, argue on the same question, in direct contradiction to each other, as in the case of the Roman Catholics: among Protestants individually and collectively there are opinions on the subject of emancipation diametrically opposite to each other. But this diference / does not arise from a superiority of genius; it arises from the diferent objects in view – from the diferent actuating motives. In the one, the object is philanthrophy [sic] – the motive truth: in the other, the object is interest – the motive opposition; and here there is an extreme of weakness; for the interest of the whole collective body of Irishmen is the interest of every individual; and a union of sentiment and opinion is the real source of happiness and prosperity: the union is easy; for the wall of separation is a shadow – not a substance. Subjects are not to be acknowledged by their religion, but by their allegiance; not by the Church

A Candid Enquiry

69

to which they belong, but by the King whom they serve. Religion should be lef to its proper concerns – Catholic and Protestant ought to be forgotten. Subjects are not to be known by these appellations, which with regard to society, are but empty / sounds; they should know each other only by the endearing titles of brothers, countrymen, and fellow-subjects. – Te diferent persuasions should unite in one policy, and have for one object – the interest of each other. Having delivered the opinion of a simple individual in favour of the Catholic cause, I shall beg leave of the Roman Catholics to ofer a few observations respecting their political and religious conduct. Te Catholic Committee being generally considered the true representative, and speaking the sense of the whole Catholic body, the Roman Catholics ought to be guided, governed and directed, as to politics, by their judgments and exertions; and as they must now be responsible for the political conduct and opinion of the Catholic body, every individual should submit their opinion to the judgment and decision of the Committee; / therefore, any person who writes on the subject of emancipation, should ofer his work to be read and examined by the Committee: and if any anonymous work should appear, in which was contained ofensive principles, the Committee ought to publish their disapprobation of such principles. If the Committee should themselves set forth any publication; in this, as well as in revising the publication of others, they ought to request the assistance of the bishops and the more learned among the clergy; I mean such as could be consulted without much inconvenience; for though it be a just observation, that the clergy ought not to meddle in temporals; yet if it is considered to take place in the present juncture, it is not properly understood, nor properly applied. It is not meddling in temporals, for the clergy to advise their people in matters which regard as well their spirituals, as their temporals; / as much their religious, as their political conduct. It is not meddling in temporals, for the clergy to advise their people how to think, speak, and act, as well like christians, as like men and subjects. In all cases like the present, and in all circumstances, clergy and laity should unite in sentiment and opinion; otherwise, there appears something like irregularity in either, or in both: hence arise confusion and disorder, and their consequent misfortunes. (Tere are in circulation publications, some of them anonymous, written by advocates of the Catholic cause, which nevertheless convey an approbation of facts and proceedings wholly incompatible with the spirit and principles of the Catholic religion: hence the necessity of submitting similar productions to the joint inspection of the clergy.) Always be careful in avoiding and correcting any conduct or expression that / might be construed into a tendency to opposition; or that might be considered an inclination of recurring ultimately to your own strength and abilities. I must humbly beg your pardon, when I throw out any such insinuation; no man more persuaded, than I am, of your pacifc dispositions: and I earnestly entreat you,

70

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

let no time, circumstance or difculty make you change your minds. Were your strength never so great, all you could efect by opposition would be, like Sampson,6 to pull down the pillars of the nation, and perish in its ruins! Tough I sincerely wish to see you happy subjects, (happy you are) but I mean happy in the obtaining your petition: yet I more sincerely wish to see you good christians, for what avails a man to gain the whole world, and lose his own soul.7 All other blessings, are but curses without religion; as they / will become such, either here or hereafer: and the profession alone is but hypocrisy. A man is really nothing more or less than he is with regard to religion: if obedient, though poor and despised, he is rich and great, if otherwise, though rich and great, he is poor and miserable. Tis observation seems folly, while we are engaged in the pursuits of this life; but shif the scene to the next, and it will appear true wisdom, yet strange the inconsistency of man, even where reason is entirely free and unembarrassed; the conduct of the Roman Catholics is a perfect picture of this inconsistency; they contend for those advantages which their religion disqualifes them from enjoying; yet they throw away infnitely more precious advantages by violating the precepts of that religion to which they seem so much attached, they forfeit temporal happiness in honor of religion; they forfeit eternal happiness to the dishonor and disgrace of religion. I do not allude to / crimes committed under the infuence of passion, which to day we may obey, and tomorrow resist, I mean those transgressions in which reason is uninfuenced. I never consider a man altogether unfortunate though enslaved by his passions, provided he be inclined to resist them; for the violence of passion, like a storm will subside, and then the sinner may convert, but when a man has brought himself to cherish bad habits, and rank them with cool approbation among the lawful actions of his life, then he is supremely miserable, this contemptous [sic] kind of ofence brings on a blindness of soul, and a hardness of heart, which renders the conversion almost impossible. Of such people our Redeemer speaks in those terrible words, you shall seek me and you shall not fnd me, but you shall die in your sins;8 give me leave to ask the Roman Catholic did he not learn the precepts of the church, the precept of annual confession and annual communion, the / precept of abstaining from fesh meat on Fridays and Saturdays, and all other days of abstinence; the precept of taking only one complete refection on every day in lent, and all other fast days; the precept of hearing mass on Sundays and Holidays? was he not bred up in the persuasion, that a breach of any of those several precepts was a grievous sin? yet to many the idea of observing them is in a manner become contemptible, and beneath the notice of an opulent sensible Roman Catholic; insomuch, that they transgress those precepts, with the same ease, with the same degree of approbation, as they walk, ride, sleep, eat or drink; they are Catholics within the limits of ease and convenience; but attempt to bring them any farther, and they are what you please. Tey accompany religion

A Candid Enquiry

71

in all her outward forms and ceremonies, but they desert her in her rigours and austerities: in short, they live in habits of breaking those very precepts, which they must / believe they are bound to observe, or reject the whole system of the Catholic religion; is not this cherishing bad habits, and ranking them with cool approbation, among the lawful actions of their lives; is not this exposing themselves to a hardness of heart and a blindness of soul, which may draw on them the greatest of all misfortunes predicted by our Redeemer? to seek him and not fnd him, but die in their sins. A man struggling with, or even yielding to his passions (provided he condemns his conduct on refection) is an object of compassion; but when he goes on, without respect to command, rule, or order; when he nourishes a fatal indiference to the dangers of his situation, when reason and passion unite, when spirit and fesh combine, when the entire man approves of the prevarication; then he becomes hateful and detestable in the sight of God. Tis fatal indiference is the forerunner of a much greater evil, / or rather the greatest of all evils that can befal us: I mean free-thinking. A man who is accustomed to sin with freedom, will soon begin to think with freedom, as the only means of blunting the stings of conscience. Oh the consequence, I shudder at the thought! no experience can equal it; all other vices, apostasies and heresies are the natural produce of corruption; but free-thinking is a monstrous conception, a monstrous birth. All other prevarications are like nets and snares, which a sinner may break through, and get loose; but this labyrinth is composed of windings without end; all other heresies are attacks upon faith and morals, but this destroys faith; efaces the rule of our actions, exposes us to all the extravagance of a wild imagination in point of belief, to all the excesses of unbounded passions in point of morality. Tus, whimsical opinion is substituted for unchangeable divine revelation; and vice / and immorality, for gospel purity. Till those days the rebellion of Lucifer was unequalled; this haughty spirit wanted to usurp the dignity of God, and sit in the throne of the most high; what less does the freethinker attempt? Is it not a kind of usurpation to establish self-sufciency as to faith and morals. Who but God can be the security of our faith? Who but God can regulate our actions? Does he not then make a sort of deity of himself, who believes without any regard to divine revelation? who acts without any respect to those commands and precepts delivered to us, to that rule, order and discipline communicated to us by the mediums of God’s appointment? All other heretics forsake the truth on some certain limitted plan, formed either by themselves or others; but the freethinker forms no plan, observes no limits, but such as may seem at any time conformable to his own opinion. Tus he is not this day, what he was yesterday; / he begins perhaps with thinking away this or that kind of discipline; this or that precept; and by a gradual wicked progression he thinks away discipline, rule, order, precept, command, authority, church, revelation, and perhaps at length God himself. Be on your guard; the seeds of corruption are sown;

72

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

a gross neglect, a fatal indiference, an apparent infdelity prevails, sufer not the seeds to take root, but check the growth in its bud. Be frm in all the articles of faith – be exact in observing all the precepts of the Church. I am not afraid of your passions, for though you might unfortunately submit to them; yet while you adhere to God, by a rational love and afection, he will not fail by his grace to restore, assist and protect you. I have here subjoined those observations; as an attention to the duties of Religion is considered the sure means / of promoting even our temporal welfare; for experience, old as religion itself, informs us, that piety is the foundation of happiness; wherefore it would be folly to seek it; and neglect the means of securing it. Almighty God insured prosperity to the professors of the Old Law on this express condition; that they continued faithful and obedient; and accordingly, whenever they rebelled, they were surely punished. Tough this condition was proposed to Jews, it was certainly intended to be a warning and a lesson to Christians; for we fnd in whatever nation the gospel has been planted; as long as the people remain faithful and obedient, they were happy and prosperous; and when they prevaricated, they were chastised. Our own Kingdoms will aford examples to justify the observation; but a living melancholy proof can be found in a neighbouring Kingdom.9 How long was that / nation famous for piety? How long consequently were the people happy? But it is evident to the world, that these ffy years and upwards, they have been degenerating into all the excesses of free-thinking and libertinism: at length the time is come when they must feel the weight of God’s vengeance. Whatever turn things may take, even though they become victorious, they cannot escape punishment; for victory will only make them more insolent, and more hardened in their crimes: and probably will give the fatal blow to religion; and what greater misfortune or curse can fall on a nation, than the loss of Religion, so long the foundation and security of her happiness! Language of this kind would be unintelligible to this people; all that has happened, and that may happen, will not be considered the punishment of national guilt: but such blindness is / the peculiar curse, the necessary consequence of infdelity, that the arm which rises to strike, may fall to punish the deed! that the traitor in the very act of treason, may without knowing it, become the avenger of his own crime. Tis remark is sufciently established by an example that can never be forgotten. Te chosen people of God, afer ofen rebelling and ofen repenting, at length degenerated ino [sic] a monstrous pride, an excessive hypocrisy; and totally corrupted the purity of the written law; yet such was their blindness, that neither the sermons confrmed by miracles, nor the menaces of our Redeemer could open their eyes. Teir pride and wickedness encreased, till they perpetrated that horrid deed, which brought on that dreadful revolution, and entailed on their descendants a heavy curse. Tis example ought to be a lesson to every nation that has been blessed with the light of the Gospel.

A Candid Enquiry

73

Tese / were my thoughts from apprehensions I have long entertained; these are my words from the same apprehensions, but much encreased by a late seeming general conduct of the City of Dublin; I mean the illumination of Monday, Oct. 29th, would you, my Countrymen, by this conduct approve of the Revolution with all its horrible consequences; would you by this, tell our gracious Sovereign he must lay down his crown; would you by this turn his palace into a dungeon, tear from his bosom his royal Consort, and drag from Royal parents their amiable children; would you by this despoil his nobles of their honour and dignity; would you threaten them with confscation of Estates, proscription and banishment; would you by this tell the House of Commons there shall be no more Speakers, no more Honourable or Right Honourables, would you by this destroy every institution civil, political and religious; would you by this tell the / whole body of the Clergy, that they shall be massacred and butchered if they do not by perjury sanction your decrees; would you by this, spread terror and dismay through the land, and by a cruel anticipation deluge our streets with human blood! What, my Countrymen, what madness! Liberty and Equality! are these the charms that have bewitched you? shame! to be deluded by the spurious ofspring of deisms and hypocrisy. Rivers of delight fow from these imaginary sources; but it is like the devil when he promised our Redeemer all the kingdoms of the Earth if he would fall down and adore him. You are deceived, and it is your own fault; prudence has lef you means of instruction; all that unthought-of cruelty, all that unheard-of barbarity, all that unexampled impiety was permitted to discover to the world the wickedness of the system which gave them birth; all those shocking scenes that have been / exhibited, prove at once that they are a people too impious, too blinded, too barbarous to establish any institution either civil, political or religious, worthy of imitation, or worthy of remembrance. It may be said, all this was the efects of popular rage and fury; but it is too, too evident that the popular rage and fury were connived at, permitted and countenanced by what you call the Legislature: yet they are victorious; they will continue victorious; then the evil must spread; then I say the world must soon have an end, for no partial chastisement, nothing less than a total extirpation of mankind will be sufcient to punish their crimes.

FINIS.

THE ADDRESS OF THE ASSOCIATION OF THE FRIENDS OF THE CONSTITUTION, LIBERTY AND PEACE

Te Address of the Association of the Friends of the Constitution, Liberty and Peace, in Ireland. Held at the King’s Arms Tavern, Fownes’s Street, Dublin, December 21, 1792. His Grace the Duke of Leinster in the Chair (Dublin: Printed for James Ridgway, [1793]).

Tis address was drawn up by Whiggish and liberal-minded men of property in Ireland, rather like the members of the Association of the Friends of the People in England, who believed that moderate reforms rather than reactionary responses were the best means of averting a violent revolution on the French model. Tese men recognized the dangerous appeal to the masses of the astonishing events in France, but believed that it was not sufcient to urge the Irish people to ignore such an example while they were denied justice or any active role in the political life of their own country. Te address points to the corruption in Irish politics that needs redressing, but advises that such abuses need to be treated in a spirit of moderation. It is argued that the constitution is not so corrupted that reforms had become impossible, hence abuses might be corrected by a determined, united and calm people. Sedition and violent revolution must be avoided at all costs. Te text respects the basic features of the Ireland’s mixed and balanced constitution, but favours some measures of Catholic relief and moderate parliamentary reform. It does not, however, advocate a specifc programme of reforms. Like the Association of the Friends of the People in England, this attempt at moderate reform led from above proved short-lived. Te increasingly revolutionary events in France and France’s declaration of war on Great Britain in February 1793 made it very difcult for men of moderation to retain much political infuence when most activists chose revolution or reaction.

– 75 –

Te Address of the Association of the Friends of the Constitution, Liberty and Peace, in Ireland. Held at the King’s Arms Tavern, Fownes’s Street, Dublin, December 21, 1792. His Grace the Duke of Leinster1 in the Chair (Dublin: Printed for James Ridgway,2 [1793]).

ASSOCIATION OF THE FRIENDS OF THE CONSTITUTION, LIBERTY, AND PEACE. At a meeting of the above Association, at the King’s Arms Tavern, in Fownes’sstreet, on the 21st December, 1792, His Grace the Duke of Leinster in the Chair, Te following Address and Declaration were unanimously agreed upon:

ADDRESS. Experience has taught the reasoning part of mankind the following simple truths; – Tat in Political Institutions, nothing is stable, that is not just; – that gross and increasing abuses lead necessarily to violence and revolution – timely and efectual reform to peace and security; – that as violence / therefore, and revolution, are but desperate remedies for desperate evils, and as, once applied, it is not in human wisdom to foresee, or prescribe limits to their course, it is the extreme, either of human folly or depravity, in governors to make such remedies seem generally necessary, or in the people, without evident and palpable necessity, to resort to them. Tat truths, which the history of past ages has impressed on the conviction of mankind, and to which the experience of the present times adds new force, should yet be apparently overlooked both by the Government and the People of this country, we lament, nor do we less lament, that while obvious and salutary maxims are slighted on the one side, visionary and impracticable schemes are indulged on the other.

– 77 –

78

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

Te extraordinary, and almost miraculous revolutions in Government, and in sentiment, which have lately astonished the earth,3 and still confound speculation, have produced this / efect, among many others, on the minds both of actors and spectators, both of those who applauded, and those who execrate the scene, that, at this present moment, they have more infamed enthusiasm and resentment, than they have informed or regulated the understanding. Te magnitude of the subject, not yet fully comprehended perhaps by any man, everpowers [sic] and distracts. Te yet dazzled eye, neither accurately distinguishes colours, nor duly estimates proportions. Te mind in ferment may exert energy, but seldom deliberation or wisdom. Tat the discussions and speculations occasioned by those transactions, should operate with peculiar energy on the People of this country, is not to be wondered at; circumstanced as they are, they must be callous indeed, if they did not feel with ardour, and pursue with vehemence, every sentiment embracing the interests of freedom, and crushing the insolence of power. To repress this / generous and natural feeling is not the object of our Association. We are not wicked enough to wish, or foolish enough to expect, that we could persuade three-fourths of our countrymen to remain contented with total exclusion from even the name of a Constitution, or the remainder to be amused with the mockery of that name, while they are robbed of its essence. Is any man the friend of peace and public order? We call on him, as he values these blessings, to come forward and subdue that corruption of Government which is the bane of both. – Does he revere that original obligation of society, connecting the husbandman who tills the land, with the Sovereign who reigns over it; by which industry is bound to sustain power, and power to protect industry, that equal liberty and happiness may fow from both? Let him correct and humble the profigate Administration which wrings from the labour of the peasant, what may corrupt / the virtue of the Senator, and which drains the sources of national wealth that it may pollute the sources of national honour. Does he love that beautiful gradation of society, which gives to toil, and talents, and virtue, their stations and their forms, which kindles them where they were not, and rewards them where they are? – Let him join us, in publicly reprobating and efectually destroying that disgraceful trafc in which the plunder that has been earned by past infamy, is allowed to become the purchase of future honours, in which men are enriched by the sale of their consciences, and enobled by the application of their riches. Does any man wish to uphold that deference to public sentiment, which preserves a chance for the reform of abuse, by deterring men from avowing its exercise? Let him shame and terrify that public delinquency, which openly boasts of corrupting the people’s representatives, with the money of the people. When the pretence / to virtue is thrown away, as an useless incumbrance, and the foulest acts, avowed by their foulest names, are held forth to the people as the regular system of Government – when wicked acts challenge

Te Address of the Association of the Friends of the Constitution, Liberty and Peace

79

the public vengeance by insolent promulgation – the measure of vice and folly is full – and the citizen who does not join in reformation becomes an accomplice in the guilt of his rulers. But, in pursuing that reform, the abuses of our Constitution should not make us forget that we have one. Nor should our disgust at Corruption render us insensible to the evils of Faction. Circumstanced as we are, it would not perhaps be surprizing, if the many real blessings still enjoyed by the people, and the many more, which the admirable principles of the Constitution place within their reach, should seem likely to be generally undervalued or forgotten; or if some spirits infammable and inconsiderate, or others, less benignant / and disinterested, should thence be tempted to overlook the horrors attendant on commotion, and to pursue theories yet unproved by experience. Against such delusions we warn the people. Living under a Constitution, one of whose peculiar excellencies is, that its abuses may be corrected without violating its essence, or even slighting its forms, we can have no rational temptation to encourage or encounter the evils which have fowed from a total want of constitution in a neighbouring country. It is not necessary for us to tear down our constitution, and eface its ancient landmarks and foundations. Nor need we rush voluntarily and wantonly into those miseries into which France has been precipitated, by a perhaps inevitable necessity. No! – Arms are the last resource of misery driven to despair. – A reform, and that a radical and efectual one, there will be. Tere is no human power that can lawfully or successfully, / resist this reasonable, constitutional, and now indispensible object, if the people with an united, solemn, and determined voice shall pronounce – “WE WILL IT.” We exult to live in a country where the voice of the people once plainly and decidedly uttered, is a thunder which no government dares resist, and before which all corruption must disperse. Te tumult of intemperance may be derided and subdued by the feeblest Minister, but it is not within the limits of Ministerial daring to resist the frm and temperate demands of the Irish People. In order, however, to render this demand irresistible, it is necessary to declare the public sentiment should be explicitly and generally understood. A disgust at the profigacy of Government may instigate warm men to sedition. An abhorrence of sedition may induce even good men to support a system of Government which they cannot approve, or which would be equally fatal to the well-being / of the country; the suspence arising from the opposite impulses may reduce moderate and timid man to a state of inaction, and thus leave the nation unprotected, to groan beneath the oppressions of the corrupt, or to tremble at the violence of the seditious. At such a moment, to be silent is to be criminal. It becomes the duty of every good Citizen, and honest man, to make his voice heard, and his sentiments known. We, therefore,

80

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

“Te Friends of the Constitution, Liberty, and Peace,” thus publicly declare these our political sentiments. 1st. Tat the principles of the British Constitution, are founded in wisdom and justice, equally providing for the liberty and happiness of the people. 2dly. Tat an Hereditary Monarch, the sole executive power, an Assembly of Nobles, / emanating from the Crown, and a body of Representatives, derived from the people by free and general election, are each of them integral, vital and essential parts of our Constitution, insomuch that the decay or corruption of any of them will taint or destroy the whole system. 3dly. Tat the representative part of our Legislature is not derived from the people by the free and general election which the fundamental principles of our Constitution require, and the state and condition of this nation would warrant. 4thly. Tat the permanent peace and welfare of Ireland can only be established by the abolition of all civil and political distinctions arising from diference in religious opinions, and by a radical and efectual reform in the Commons House of Parliament; and that these essential objects once obtained, the people ought to remain content and grateful. With such a Constitution, and not with less, will we be / satisfed. We therefore call upon every man whether he prefer liberty to peace, or peace to liberty, to support the honest and avowed principles upon which this society is founded, as, at the present alarming crisis, neither liberty nor peace can be established, unless by the united frmness and moderation of the friends of both. Resolved, Tat every person on becoming a Member of this Society, do subcribe the following

DECLARATION: “I solemnly promise and declare, that I will, by all lawful means, promote a radical and efectual Reform in the Representation of the People in Parliament, including persons of all religious persuasions; and that I will unceasingly pursue that object until it shall have been unequivocally obtained. And, seriously apprehending the dangerous consequences of certain levelling tenets, and seditious principles, which have lately been / disseminated, I do further declare, that I will resist all attempts to introduce any new form of Government into this country, or in any manner to subvert or impair our Constitution, consisting of King, Lords and Commons. Resolved, Tat this Society, conscious of its good intentions, but difdent of its ability to judge of the best means of attaining an object of such magnitude and difculty, as that which it has proposed, deems it essential to that object, and therefore respectfully recommends, that similar associations should be formed in every country and principal town throughout the kingdom. With such asso-

Te Address of the Association of the Friends of the Constitution, Liberty and Peace

81

ciations, and with every individual friend to the constitution, liberty, and peace in these kingdoms, this Society will be happy to communicate, and will thankfully receive every species of information concerning facts, or even hints, concerning plans and principles, which may assist in deciding on matters either of propriety or expediency. Such materials / the Society will deem it a duty to arrange and digest, and, as soon as it shall be enabled to select or to form a plan of representation which may appear worthy the attention of the public, it will, with the utmost deference, lay such plan before the People of Ireland, for their consideration and correction, previous to its being submitted to the wisdom of the Legislature. Signed, by Order of the Society, Richard Griffith, Secretary.4 It is requested, that all communications and letters may be addressed to the Secretary at this place.

THE PETITION OF THE CATHOLICS OF IRELAND, TO THE KING’S MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTY

Te Petition of the Catholics of Ireland, to the King’s Most Excellent Majesty: Presented at St. James’, on Wednesday Jan. 2, 1793, by Messrs. Edward Byrne, John Keogh, James Edward Devereaux, Christopher Bellew, and Sir Tomas French, Bart. (Dublin: Printed by Appointment, by H. Fitzpatrick, 1793).

In the spring of 1792 the Catholic Committee accepted the suggestion that delegates should be elected to represent Catholics throughout Ireland at a Convention to be called in Dublin. By November 1792 nearly all the counties and important towns had chosen delegates and Archbishop Troy also gave the Convention his active support. Te Convention speedily drew up the petition reproduced here, which was to be presented to George III, if possible in person, by fve leading delegates at the Convention rather than seeking to transmit it through the Lord Lieutenant as was the usual practice. Tis was a clear sign that the Catholic leadership had lost all confdence in Lord Lieutenant Westmorland and his Chief Secretary, Robert Hobart. For their part, Westmorland and Hobart, supported by many leading Protestants, grew alarmed at what they perceived to be a serious threat to the ‘Protestant Ascendancy’. Te petition emphasized that Irish Catholics had clearly demonstrated their loyalty over many years and listed all the places of proft, honour and infuence from which all Catholics were excluded. It clearly sought the total abolition of all such exclusions and all distinctions between Catholics and Protestants in the civil and military afairs of Ireland. Preoccupied with events in France and the prospect of war, Prime Minister William Pitt and the British cabinet accepted that some concessions would have to be ofered to the Irish Catholics in order to secure their future loyalty. Te Irish government tried to resist such a policy. Leading members of it even refused to go to London to discuss the issue with their British counterparts, but this opposition was overborne by the British government. Henry Dundas persuaded George III to receive the petition in person on 2 January 1793 and the British government expressed a willingness to see the

– 83 –

84

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

Irish Catholics granted the parliamentary franchise and given access to the army, navy, grand juries and non-political ofces of proft. In return the Irish Catholics were strongly advised to avoid all connection with political radicals in Ireland or in Britain. Lord Westmorland was reluctant to give way, but he was instructed from London to advise the Irish Parliament at its ofcial opening that it ought to treat the Catholic majority with wisdom and liberality. Te concessions that Pitt and Dundas had in mind were conceded in the parliamentary session of 1793, including giving the Catholics the right to vote so long as they possessed the requisite property qualifcations. Nothing was done, however, to grant Catholics the right to sit in the Irish Parliament or to hold any political ofce in the Irish government. For this petition and its impact, see Bartlett, Te Fall and Rise of the Irish Nation, pp. 146–72.

The Petition of the Catholics of Ireland, to the King’s Most Excellent Majesty: Presented at St. James’, on Wednesday Jan. 2, 1793, by Messrs. Edward Byrne,1 John Keogh,2 James Edward Devereaux,3 Christopher Bellew,4 and Sir Thomas French, Bart.5 (Dublin: Printed by Appointment, by H. Fitzpatrick,6 1793).

TO THE KING’S MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTY. Te humble PETITION of the undersigned CATHOLICS, on behalf of themselves, and the rest of the Catholic Subjects of the Kingdom of Ireland.

MOST GRACIOUS SOVEREIGN, WE your Majesty’s most dutiful and loyal Subjects of your Kingdom of Ireland, professing the Catholic Religion, presume to approach your Majesty, who are the common Father of all your People, and humbly to submit to your consideration, the manifold incapacities, and oppressive disqualifcations, under which we labour. For, may it please your Majesty, afer a century of uninterrupted loyalty, in which time, fve foreign wars, and two domestic rebellions have occurred; afer having taken every oath of allegiance and fdelity to your Majesty, and given, and being still ready to give every pledge, which / can be devised for their peaceable demeanour, and unconditional submission to the laws; the Catholics of Ireland stand obnoxious to a long Catalogue of Statutes, inficting on dutiful and meritorious subjects, pains and penalties, of an extent and severity, which scarce any degree of delinquency can warrant; and prolonged to a period when no necessity can be alleged to justify such continuance. In the frst place, we beg leave, with all humility, to represent to your Majesty, that, notwithstanding the lowest departments in your Majesty’s feets and armies are largely supplied by our numbers, and your Revenue in this country to a great degree supported by our contributions, we are disabled from serving your

– 85 –

86

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

Majesty in any ofce of trust and emolument whatsoever, civil or military. – A proscription which disregards capacity or merit, admits of neither qualifcation nor degree, and rests as an universal stigma of distrust upon the whole body of your Catholic subjects. We are interdicted from all municipal stations, and the franchise of all guilds and corporations. And our exclusion from the benefts annexed to those situations is not an evil terminating in itself. For, by giving an advantage over us to those in whom they are exclusively vested, they establish throughout the kingdom a species of qualifed monopoly, uniformly operating in our disfavour, contrary to the spirit, and highly detrimental to the freedom of trade. / We may not found, nor endow, any university, college, or school, for the education of our children; and we are interdicted from obtaining degrees in the university of Dublin, by the several charters and statutes now in force therein. We are totally prohibited from keeping or using weapons for the defence of our houses, families or persons, whereby we are exposed to the violence of burglary, robbery, or assassination. And to enforce this prohibition, contravening that great original law of nature which enjoins self-defence, a variety of statutes exist, not less grievous and oppressive in their provisions, than unjust in their object: by one of which, enacted so lately as within these sixteen years,7 every of your Majesty’s Catholic Subjects, of whatever rank or degree, peer, or peasant, is compellable by any magistrate to come forward and convict himself of (what may be thought a singular ofence in a country professing to be free) keeping arms for his defence; or, if he shall refuse so to do, may incur not only fne and imprisonment, but the vile and ignominious punishment of pillory and whipping; penalties appropriated to the most infamous malefactors, and more terrible to a liberal mind than even death itself. No Catholic whatsoever, as we apprehend, has his personal property secure: the law8 allows and encourages the disobedient and unnatural child to conform, and deprive him of it. Te unhappy father does not, even by the surrender of his all, purchase his repose: he may be attacked by new bills, if / his future industry be successful, and again be plundered by due process of law. We are excluded, or may be excluded, from all Petit-juries in civil actions, where one of the parties is a Protestant; and we are further excluded from all Petit-juries, in trials by information or indictment, founded on any of the Popery laws; by which law, we most humbly submit to your Majesty that your loyal subjects, the Catholics of Ireland, in this their native land, are in a worse situation than that of aliens; for they may demand an equitable privilege denied to us, of having half their jury aliens, like themselves. We may not serve on Grand-juries, unless, which it is scarcely possible ever can happen, there should not be found a sufciency of Protestants to compleat the pannel; contrary to that humane and equitable principle of the law, which says, that no man shall be convicted of any capital ofence, unless by the concur-

Te Petition of the Catholics of Ireland

87

ring verdict of two juries of his neighbours, and equals; whereby (and to this we humbly presume more particularly to implore your royal attention, we are deprived) of the great palladium of the constitution, trial by our peers; independent of the manifest injustice of our property being taxed, in assessments, by a body from which we are formally excluded. We avoid a further enumeration of inferior grievances: But, may it please your Majesty, there remains one incapacity, which your loyal subjects, the Catholics of Ireland, feel with the most poignant / anguish of mind; as being the badge of unmerited disgrace and ignominy; and the cause and bitter aggravation of all our other calamities: – We are deprived of the Elective Franchise; to the manifest perversion of the spirit of the constitution: inasmuch as your faithful subjects are taxed where they are not represented, actually or virtually; and bound by laws, in the framing of which they have no power to give, or withhold their assent: And we most humbly implore your Majesty to believe, that this our prime and heavy grievance, is not an evil merely speculative, but is attended with great distress to all ranks; and, in many instances, with the total ruin and destruction of the lower orders of your Majesty’s faithful and loyal subjects, the Catholics of Ireland: For, may it please your Majesty, not to mention the infnite variety of advantages, in point of protection and otherwise, which the enjoyment of the Elective Franchise gives to those who possess it; nor the consequent inconveniencies, to which those who are deprived thereof are liable; not to mention the disgrace to three-fourths of your loyal subjects of Ireland, of being the only body of men incapable of Franchise, in a nation possessing a free constitution, it continually happens, and of necessity, from the malignant nature of the law, must happen, that multitudes of the Catholic tenantry, in divers counties in this kingdom, are, at the expiration of their leases, expelled from their tenements and farms, to make room for Protestant freeholders, who, by their votes, may contribute to / the weight and importance of their landlords; a circumstance which renders the recurrence of a general election, that period which is the boast and laudable triumph of our Protestant brethren, a visitation and heavy curse to us, your Majesty’s dutiful and loyal subjects; and, may it please your Majesty, this uncertainty of possession to your Majesty’s Catholic subjects, operates as a perpetual restraint and discouragement on industry and the spirit of cultivation; whereby it happens, that this your Majesty’s kingdom of Ireland, possessing many and great natural advantages of soil and climate, so as to be exceeded therein by few, if any, countries on the earth, is yet prevented from availing herself thereof so fully as she otherwise might; to the furtherance of your Majesty’s honour, and the more efectual support of your service. And, may it please your Majesty, the evil does not rest even here; for many of your Majesty’s Catholic subjects, to preserve their families from total destruction, submit to a nominal conformity against their conviction and their conscience; and, preferring perjury to famine, take oaths which they utterly disbelieve; a

88

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

circumstance which, we doubt not, will shock your Majesty’s well known and exemplary piety, not less than the misery, which drives those unhappy wretches to so desperate a measure, must distress and wound your Royal clemency and commisseration. / And, may it please your Majesty, though we might here rest our case on its own merits, justice and expediency; yet we further presume, humbly to submit to your Majesty, that the Right of Franchise was, with divers other rights, enjoyed by the Catholics in this kingdom, from the frst adoption of the English constitution by our forefathers; was secured, at least to a great part of our body, by the treaty of Limerick, in 1691; guaranteed by your Majesty’s Royal predecessors, King William and Queen Mary, and fnally confrmed and ratifed by Parliament; notwithstanding which, and in direct breach of the public faith of the nation thus solemnly pledged, for which our ancestors paid a valuable consideration in the surrender of their arms and a great part of this kingdom; and notwithstanding the most scrupulous adherence, on our part, to the terms of the said treaty, and our unremitting loyalty from that day to the present, the said right of Elective Franchise was fnally and universally taken away from the Catholics of Ireland, so late as the frst year of his Majesty King George the II.9 And, when we thus presume to submit this infraction of the treaty of Limerick to your Majesty’s Royal notice, it is not that we ourselves consider it to be the strong part of our case; for though our rights were recognized, they were by no means created by that treaty; and we do with all humility conceive, that if no such event as the said treaty had ever taken place, your Majesty’s Catholic subjects, from their unvarying / loyalty, and dutiful submission to the laws, and from the great support aforded by them to your Majesty’s government in this country, as well in their personal service in your Majesty’s feets and armies, as from the taxes and revenues levied on their property, are fully competent, and justly entitled to participate in, and enjoy the blessings of the constitution of their country. And now that we have, with all humility, submitted our grievances to your Majesty, permit us, Most Gracious Sovereign, again to represent our sincere attachment to the constitution, as established in the three estates, of King, Lords, and Commons; our uninterrupted loyalty, peaceable demeanour and submission to the laws, for one hundred years; and our determination to persevere in the same dutiful conduct, which has, under your Majesty’s happy auspices, procured us those relaxations of the penal statutes, which the wisdom of the legislature has from time to time thought proper to grant. – We humbly presume to hope that your Majesty, in your paternal goodness and afection towards a numerous and oppressed body of your loyal subjects, may be graciously pleased to recommend to your Parliament of Ireland, to take into their consideration the whole of our situation – our numbers, our merits, and our suferings; and, as we do not give place to any of your Majesty’s subjects in loyalty and attachment to

Te Petition of the Catholics of Ireland

89

your Majesty’s sacred person, we cannot suppress our wishes of being restored / to the rights and privileges of the Constitution of our Country; and thereby becoming more worthy, as well as more capable, of rendering your Majesty that service, which it is not less our duty than our inclination to aford: So may your Majesty transmit to your latest posterity a Crown, secured by public advantage and public afection; and so may your Royal Person become more dear, if possible, to your grateful people.

DEFENCE OF THE SUB-COMMITTEE OF THE CATHOLICS OF IRELAND

Defence of the Sub-Committee of the Catholics of Ireland, fom the Imputations Attempted to be Trown on that Body, Particularly fom the Charge of Supporting the Defenders (Dublin: Printed by H. Fitzpatrick, 1793).

Te Catholic Committee and its Sub-Committee were ofen charged by their Protestant enemies of adopting intimidatory tactics and also of associating with poor militant Catholics who were involved in a shadowy movement known as the Defenders that resorted to violence in response to attacks on them by such militant Protestants as the Peep O’Day Boys. Teir alarm grew when the Irish House of Lords held a secret committee of inquiry into recent disturbances across Ireland which implied that the Catholic Sub-Committee was encouraging the violent activities of the Defenders. Te result was this Defence, as well as John Sweetman’s A Refutation of the Charges … Against the Secretary of the Sub-Committee of the Catholics of Ireland of Abetting the Defenders (Dublin, 1793). Tis Defence is generally assumed to have been written or at least heavily infuenced by Teobald Wolfe Tone, the secretary to the Catholic Committee and also a founding member of the Society of United Irishmen. It insists that the Catholic Committee and Sub-Committee have always eschewed violence, operated within the law and acted constitutionally in pursuit of its own political and religious objectives. Indeed, these Catholic bodies have gone further in that they have advised the Catholics of Ireland not to parade in large numbers or to appear in arms. Tey have sought to cooperate with Protestant groups to ensure that all Irish people, Protestants and Catholics, can enjoy the protection of the law and can live in peace and harmony. Te Sub-Committee has raised funds to help poor Catholics to seek legal redress or compensation when they have been attacked by militant Protestants, but it has never encouraged or assisted the Defenders in their resort to violence. Te Defence refers to recent actions by the Sub-Committee that prove that it favours peaceful lobbying tactics to achieve its objectives.1

– 91 –

92

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

Notes 1.

For more on Tone and this Defence, see Te Writings of Teobald Wolfe Tone, 1763–98, ed. T. W. Moody, R. B. McDowell and C. J. Woods, 3 vols (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998-2007), vol. 1, pp. 422–30; and Life of Teobald Wolfe Tone, ed. T. Bartlett (Dublin: Lilliput Press, 1998), pp. 380–7. For the Defenders, see, M. Elliott, ‘Te Defenders in Ulster’, in Te United Irishmen: Republicanism, Radicalism and Rebellion, ed. D. Dickson, et al. (Dublin: Lilliput Press, 1993), pp. 222–33; T. Garvin, ‘Defenders, Ribbonmen and Others: Underground Political Networks in Pre-Famine Ireland’, Past and Present, 96 (1982), pp. 133–55; B. McEvoy, ‘Te Peep of Day Boys and Defenders in the County Armagh’, Seanchas Ardmhaca: Journal of the Armagh Diocesan Historical Society, 12:1 (1986), pp. 122–63 and ibid., 12:2 (1987), pp. 60–127; and Peep O’Day Boys and Defenders: Select Documents on the County Armagh Disturbances 1784–96, ed. D. W. Miller (Belfast: PRONI, 1990).

Defence of the Sub-Committee of the Catholics of Ireland, from the Imputations Attempted to be Thrown on that Body, Particularly from the Charge of Supporting the Defenders (Dublin: Printed by H. Fitzpatrick, 1793).

DEFENCE, &c. &c. REPORTS having been propagated with great zeal and diligence, and assertions directly made, that the GENERAL-COMMITTEE or their SUB-COMMITTEE have held communication with the insurgents commonly called “Defenders,” and supplied them with money;1 and it being insinuated that a collection lately instituted, for the purpose of defraying the expences incurred by the Committee in the pursuit of Catholic emancipation, was intended to be, in part, applied to the support of the said insurgents; it becomes the duty of the Sub-Committee, whatever reluctance they may, at this time, feel at obtruding themselves on public notice, to submit to the nation a plain statement of facts as they really are. Before entering, however, into the intended investigation, the Sub-Committee appeal to the candour and good sense of their countrymen, whether the conduct imputed to them by those groundless rumours be probable or likely, or in the smallest degree consonant to the general tenor of their views and their conduct? – Tey have not so ill managed the trust reposed in them, and the event has proved it, as lightly to incur the imputation of a total want of common sense or common honesty; they have faithfully and diligently devoted themselves to the Catholic / cause; and they have the satisfaction to see that cause brought from the lowest state of contempt to its present elevation, whether in a great degree by their attention and their labours, the public will decide; they were not so blind or so ignorant as not to know what a pretext for evading a restitution of their rights, any thing like violence on the part of Catholics, however disconnected from the Committee, would hold out to the enemies of their fair and constitutional pursuits; and therefore, common justice and candor should induce their country-

– 93 –

94

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

men to believe that they would be the most anxious men in the community to guard against any thing like tumult or disturbance, as far as lay in their power; satisfed as they were, that nothing could be so fatal to their hopes of emancipation, to the pursuit of which they had for a series of years devoted their time, their attention and their property. But it is not merely on the reason or probability of the case that they rely; they appeal with confdence to their general character as men and citizens, and to every publication put forth by their authority; there is not one of those numerous papers that does not impress the most loyal and dutiful conduct, and the most profound respect and most implicit obedience to the laws of the land. Te charge endeavoured to be attached upon the Sub-Committee resolves itself into two heads: – First, a connexion with the people called Defenders; – and secondly, a levying of money for improper purposes, and among others for the purpose of assisting the insurgents. With regard to the frst: – Te Defenders, as has been truly observed at this time, are very diferent from those who originally assumed that appellation. Te frst Defenders, properly so called, were associations of Catholics for the purpose of protecting themselves from the violent depredations of a party known by the name of “Peep-o’Day Boys,”2 into which associations they were forced, by the difculty, or as they stated it, the impossibility of obtaining justice against the aggressors – they originated several years back, and were confned to the counties of Armagh / and Down. Te present insurgents who, with very diferent principles, have adopted the same name, commenced in April last, and have extended through the counties of Louth, Meath, Cavan, Monaghan, and other parts adjacent. In July 1792, in consequence of repeated calls to that efect in the Northern Papers, and of personal application from several Protestant gentlemen, three of the Committee had an interview at Rathfiland in the County Down, with above twenty respectable Protestant gentlemen of that neighbourhood; when, afer much conversation, wherein it was admitted that in no one instance had the Catholics been the aggressors, but on the contrary had been repeatedly attacked, even in the solemn ofces of their religion, and the burial of their dead, it was agreed that the Committee should use all its infuence with the lower orders of Catholics, to induce them to desist from their meetings; and that the Volunteers should adopt resolutions, stating their determination to protect every man equally, without distinction of party or religion. In consequence of this meeting, the General-Committee framed the following Address to that district: –

Defence of the Sub-Committee of the Catholics of Ireland

95

“Dublin, July 25, 1792.

AT a MEETING of the GENERAL COMMITTEE of the CATHOLICS of IRELAND, BERNARD O’NEIL, Esq.3 in the Chair; Te following ADDRESS was unanimously agreed to: – To the CATHOLICS of the PARISH of THE General Committee of the Catholics of Ireland has heard, with the greatest anxiety, that Dissturbances have some time since broken out, and are still continued in your neighbourhood. From an earnest desire to restore peace and good order, three of their body had a meeting, on the 18th instant, with several / Protestant gentlemen, at Rathfriland, when they learned that, on the one hand, the Protestants were much alarmed at the Catholics meeting in large bodies with arms, and in regular order; and on the other, that the Catholics were induced to those meetings from an apprehension that their houses might be again broken open, and their persons attacked, as had happened on several occasions for a considerable time back. Under these circumstances it was agreed by the gentlemen then assembled, that the General Committee should exert all its infuence to prevent the Catholics parading in large bodies, and with arms; and that the Volunteers of the county, as well those which were newly raised, as the old Corps which were revived, should declare their determination to protect every man equally, in his house, property, and person; and to bring to justice all ofenders against the public peace, be their party, or religion, what it might, without favour, affection or distinction. In pursuance to that agreement, the General Committee does now most earnestly entreat you to abstain from all such parades, and meetings, and from every other measure that may tend to give any alarm to your Protestant brethren. Te Magistrates of your county have already said, Tat people of all religions and persuasions may rest assured of having a fair and equal attention given their Informations and Complaints, and have equal protection from the laws. Te Volunteers and respectable Protestants of your county engage to support the Magistrates in their determination. Tere is no longer a necessity for your assembling in bodies under the idea of protecting yourselves. Te law of the land, when fairly and impartially administered, will protect you far better than you can be protected by any force of your own. Te General Committee is now engaged in the pursuit of measures which will raise you and themselves / from the abject condition of slaves in your native country, to the dignity of Freemen. Tey are labouring to procure for you two great objects; the right of voting for members to represent you in parliament,

96

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

which will procure you the protection of your landlords; and an equal share of the privileges of the trial by jury, which will give you the protection of the laws, equally with your Protestant brethren. It is only from the peaceable and orderly demeanour of the Catholic Body, that the General Committee can hope for success. All riot, all tumult and disorder, must throw embarrassment and difculty in the way of our emancipation, and continue you and us longer in the degraded state from which we have every reason to expect that we may speedily arise, if these unfortunate disturbances in your county do not furnish to our enemies a pretext for delay. If you observe the peaceable demeanour which we now reçommend, the General Committee will endeavour to secure for you all possible protection, as well by applications to government, as by supporting, at the common expence, the cause of those who, if attacked in their houses, property or persons, shall dutifully appeal to the law of the land for redress, and whose circumstances may not enable them to seek that protection themselves. But the General Committee will in no case undertake the defence of any man, who shall assist in any riotous or disorderly meeting, or who shall not behave himself soberly, peaceably and honestly. If, afer this address, and the assurances of the Volunteers and Magistrates of your county, your [sic] continue to assemble in large bodies, and with arms, the consequence will be that the whole force of government will be called out to punish you, and the General Committee will be compelled to give up all idea of interfering in your behalf. We trust, however, that you will avoid this grievous extremity; that the exhortations of your clergy, and the advice and intreaties of the General Committee, who have no view but your interest, advancement and safety, will have / due weight with you; that you will desist from those tumultuous meetings, which may lead you into such dreadful consequences, and conduct yourselves as dutiful subjects, as orderly citizens, and good men.” Signed by Order, RICH. M’CORMICK,4 SEC. GEN. COM. In consequence of the distribution of a very large impression of this Address through the county Down, and of the Volunteers publishing corresponding Resolutions, peace and harmony were immediately and efectually restored to a part of the country, which had been harassed with tumults, disturbances and civil warfare for several years antecedent: And this is the single instance wherein the Committee directly or indirectly interfered in the afairs of those who were originally called “Defenders.” Had they wished, as cautious men, to evade a troublesome duty, they might have remained inert, and refused to intermeddle in a business that might eventually attach on them a vexatious and unfounded responsibility; but so anxious were they for the restoration of peace, and so satisfed of the danger arising to their cause, from tumult and disturbance, that they sent down two gentlemen expressly

Defence of the Sub-Committee of the Catholics of Ireland

97

for the purpose of distributing their Address, and, if necessary, of enforcing it by personal advice and exhortation. Teir interference was for the sole purpose of restoring peace, and they were fortunate enough to efectuate their wish. About this time, Mr. Tomas Patrick Coleman,5 of Dundalk, wrote to his correspondent in Dublin, Mr. John Sweetman,6 with whom he had a previous commercial intercourse of some years standing, requesting to know whether the ofence for which certain persons stood committed, was bailable or not; and also recommending one Nugent,7 who came up to Dublin to solicit the advice and assistance of the Sub-Committee, on behalf of his brother, then a prisoner in Dundalk gaol. Mr. Sweetman, being then secretary, / accordingly brought the man and the letter to several gentlemen of the Sub-Committee, who happened to be assembled: – With regard to the question of bail, he was informed by a professional gentleman present, that it was impossible to give any opinion, the examinations in which the ofence was specifed, not appearing; and with regard to Nugent himself, on examining him closely, good reason was found to doubt his being a person of the description mentioned in the Address of the General Committee dated July 25th, that is, “one who, if attacked in his house, property or person, should dutifully appeal to the law of the land for redress, and who had never assisted in any riotous and disorderly meeting,” to which class alone protection had been promised; in consequence of which he was dismissed, without advice or assistance, or promise of either; and returned, as is expressed in Mr. Sweetman’s letter on that occasion, dated 9th. August, 1792, “truly disconsolate at not being able to efect something towards the liberation of his kinsman.”8 And this Committee do solemnly pledge the whole of their veracity and credit with the public, collectively and individually, that this is the single instance in which they or any of them, with the knowledge of this Committee, had communication with any of the people at present called “Defenders,” or any person on their behalf; and in this instance they refused to interfere; neither did they ever directly or indirectly, authorize or impower, any member of their own body, or any other person whatsoever, to correspond on their behalf with the Defenders, or any of their agents or friends, nor did they assist them with advice, counsel, or money; nor did they ever fee, retain or employ any barrister, attorney or agent for the purpose of defending the said insurgents. With regard to the second imputation attempted to be thrown on this Committee – that of levying money to be applied to illegal and improper purposes, and especially to that of supporting the Defenders, this Committee does assert that such charge is utterly unfounded and groundless, and evidently calculated for the purpose of destroying that confdence, harmony and union amongst Catholics, from which such great and benefcial consequences have resulted; / and that this is the case, a plain statement of the facts will evince. Te General Committee was founded in 1773, and their frst object was to prevent an unjust and oppressive levying of money, under the denomination of Quarterage; – a tax imposed by the Corporation of Dublin, and other towns-

98

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

corporate, upon Catholic tradesmen and artizans, almost exclusively; for this purpose they employed several eminent counsel, among whom were two who are now on the Bench, to plead on their behalf, as well at the Bar of the House of Commons as before the Privy Council; and at length they succeeded in the removal of this odious badge of inferiority; the expence of their various applications was defrayed by a voluntary subscription of the Catholics.9 Previous to this time, it had been thought necessary that a Catholic nobleman10 of this country should go to England, for the purpose of making personal application there, on behalf of the Catholics; his exertions proved unsuccessful, but his lordship’s expences, amounting to 1500l. were defrayed by a voluntary subscription. Some years afer, it being thought adviseable to revive their applications for relief, and that in consequence an Agent should be employed in England,11 to bring forward to the notice of Ministers there, on all occasions, the loyalty and claims of the Catholics of this kingdom, a professional gentleman of great respectability12 was employed by the Committee [for] that purpose; and it being thought ft that his exertions should be rewarded in a manner worthy of the cause which he was engaged to support, and of the dignity of the body who employed him, sums were at diferent times remitted to him, amounting in the gross to upwards of £.2000; the whole of which was, as in the former case, made good by voluntary subscriptions; and this expenditure happened with the knowledge of a noble lord high in legal situation,13 and a member of the present Committee of Secresy [sic]. Previous to the last session, another professional gentleman,14 to whose family the Catholic cause had been indebted for the most generous, and the most disinterested exertions of / great and splendid talents, was employed as agent in England, and his presence being rendered necessary here, he attended through the whole of that session. At the rising of Parliament it became necessary to reward his services, and therefore, rather as a token of their gratitude than as an equivalent for the benefts rendered to the Catholic cause, he was presented by the Committee with the sum of Two thousand guineas, raised as before, by a voluntary subscription. When an Address was presented in 1791, striking at the existence of the General-Committee, the great body of the Catholics stepped forward to vindicate their Delegates, and poured in Addresses and Resolutions from every quarter of the kingdom; the General-Committee felt it their duty to insert those in the public prints, at an enormous expence, as must be obvious to every man who is at all acquainted with the rates of advertising; by this a sum of nearly 1000l. has been exhausted, independent of which a considerable arrear yet remains to be liquidated.

Defence of the Sub-Committee of the Catholics of Ireland

99

In the progress of the business, attacks in the public prints were made on the Catholic cause by a variety of bodies of men, and individuals; it was necessary to repel those attacks on the ground where they were made; and this produced further publications on the part of the Committee, and of course additional expence, great part of which also remains still undischarged. A deputation of fve gentlemen15 was appointed by the General-Committee, for the purpose of presenting to his Majesty in person, the Petition of the Catholics of Ireland, which has produced his most gracious interposition in their behalf, and the consequent benefts which they have received. Te expences of that deputation, which have been very heavy, it is not equitable that the gentlemen appointed should sustain; in devoting their time to the public cause, they have sufciently discharged the duty which they owed. – Tese expences therefore, remain a charge on the justice and honor of the Catholic body. / Te Sub-Committee has in this enumeration stated, as instances, but a few of the heaviest expenditures of the body, there are a great many others, inferior but unavoidable, which they have passed over. – Tey have frequently had occasion to fee counsel: but it is not their intention to go into detail; what they have said will, they trust, evince two facts, material for their vindication from the charges invidiously endeavoured to be attached to them: frst, that the expences of the General-Committee are, and have been very heavy; and secondly, that it has been the uniform practice, from the foundation of their body to this hour, to defray those expences by voluntary subscription; and of course, that the one now instituted is no innovation, but a sequel of a string of precedents for the last twenty years. When the Catholics of England, who, like their brethren of Ireland, were compelled by penal and restrictive laws to act as a separate body, applied to the Legislature of their country for relief, they found it necessary to raise a fund by subscription, which was accordingly efected: Te General Committee in Ireland have done no more: – It is presumed that what was carried on, immediately under the inspection of the British Minister,16 with all possible notoriety, cannot be in its nature very unconstitutional or alarming; the present subscription is therefore sanctioned by the acquiescence of the Minister of England, and by the practice of the Catholics of both countries. With regard to the application of the money, which it is insinuated has been, and may be misapplied to the use and support of the Defenders, the Sub-Committee beg leave to repeat what they cannot too ofen recur to – that nothing could be so fatal to that cause which they have so long laboured to raise, and, at last, with success, as any thing like tumult or disturbance; of course nothing is so monstrous and incredible, as that they should be the fomenters and supporters of either. But not to rest on the reason of the case, if they were so foolish or so wicked as to endeavour to misapply this money, they have not the power. – No /

100

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

man, nor body of men has dominion over the funds of the General-Committee but the General-Committee itself; not a shilling can be drawn from the treasurer but by their order, except in particular cases, when they authorize the Sub-Committee to a limited amount, and for a special purpose; the treasurer has always been one of the most respectable mercantile characters in the kingdom; the last person who bore the ofce was the late Mr. Dermott;17 the present is Mr. John Comerford,18 of the house of O’Brien and Comerfords, men whose names it is sufcient barely to mention, to satisfy the nation that they would not be concerned in so base a misapplication of the public contribution as that which is afected to be at present apprehended. Te Sub-Committee trust they have now exonerated themselves of the two imputations thrown out against them; and they pledge their whole credit, as men of veracity and honor, for the truth of every fact advanced in the foregoing statement. – Tey are ready to submit the whole of their conduct to the most solemn investigation that can be devised; for, as they have no secret, they have no fear: and they solicit the inspection of every member of the legislature, and of every respectable gentleman in the kingdom, to their accounts, which lie open at the treasurer’s; from which will appear at once, the sums collected, and the mode and object of their application. With regard to the present subscription, the General-Committee is probably drawing to a close: they owe many debts; they have incurred many obligations; it is necessary that those debts and obligations be discharged; the expences incurred in the pursuit of emancipation have been hitherto principally defrayed by the Catholics of Dublin, who, of 3000l. collected within three years, which is the whole sum that has been subscribed, have paid above 2500l. – the body at large are now called upon to furnish their quota, to enable the General Committee to terminate their labours in a manner worthy of the object they have pursued, of the cause which they have supported, and the people whom they have represented; – a people who, the / Sub-Committee rely with confdence, will, in the manifestation of their sense of the services which have been rendered them, support in their elevation that dignity, which they have maintained unimpaired through a century of unexampled slavery and oppression; and shew, that the same spirit which in adversity preserved them loyal and obedient, in prosperity will make them magnanimous and grateful. Te Sub-Committee consists of the following Gentlemen: EDWARD BYRNE,19 THOMAS WARREN,20 DENIS THOS. O’BRIEN, JOHN SWEETMAN, JOHN KEOGH, RICHARD M’CORMICK, THOMAS BRAUGHALL,21 THOMAS RYAN, M.D.22 HUGH HAMILL, M. F. LYNCH,23 24 THOMAS FITZGERALD, RANDAL M’DONNELL, ESQRS.

and of every Country Gentleman delegated to the General Committee.

AN IRISHMAN’S LETTER TO THE PEOPLE CALLED DEFENDERS

An Irishman’s Letter to the People called Defenders ([Dublin?, c. 1793]).

Tis short, very cheap tract was probably written by a conservative, propertied Protestant. Written in a style that the author believes will convince poor Catholic readers to follow the advice given, it seeks to dissuade poor Catholics from being seduced into supporting the violent tactics of the militant Defenders at home and into accepting the political principles of French revolutionaries abroad. It warns its readers that the Defenders can never accrue sufcient arms to defeat all those powerful interests who oppose their demands. If they join the Defenders their actions will be counter-productive and will lead to the gallows. Te author argues that force can never increase wages, reduce rents, abolish the tithes paid to the clergy of the established Protestant Church of Ireland or recover the Catholic estates forfeited in the seventeenth century. Appeals for military support from France are also bound to fail because of the present difculties facing French forces in Europe. It is argued that the French Revolution has done nothing to beneft the poor people of France and that French revolutionary principles can never be fulflled in practice. Tey are a snare and a delusion. According to the author the poor in Ireland should reject violence and return to their families and their work in order to live in peace and safety. For modern research on the Defenders, see the works cited in the previous headnote.

– 101 –

An Irishman’s Letter to the People called Defenders ([Dublin?, c. 1793]).

My Countrymen, LET me address you in a few words before it be too late. Te powers of the law and the powers of the sword are called forth against you. You must fall victims. Many of you have fallen already. Consider for a moment whether it be a good cause that you maintain, or a probable relief that you seek. I address myself only to such of you as have been deluded by promises from your wicked seducers of obtaining what they call your rights. I do not condescend to reason with those among you who have joined your brotherhood for the sake of plunder and robbery under pretence of seeking arms; the gallows, their sure and certain fate, must be their teacher. / You complain of grievances; and you say that you have taken arms to obtain redress of those grievances. – Te means of redress by arms must be either by intimidating or by overpowering; – and the grievances of which you complain are high Rents, low Wages and Tithes. Suppose you had got possession of all the arms in the houses of every protestant inhabitant in the province of Ulster, you must travel through the other provinces where you are strangers, in order to dispossess in like manner their several inhabitants. Do you think the persons whom you plunder will not purchase more arms? do you think they will tamely submit and not associate to resist you? if they should be unable to resist you, do you suppose the military will not support them? will you be able to encounter both the civil and military powers, and to compel government to grant you what you demand? if you were able to intimidate government here, do you think the King of England will not send over more forces? what have you therefore to hope? you can do nothing by compulsion unless you can overcome the armed force of both countries, and you see that is impossible. You say you do not intend to make war against the military power, because undisciplined as you are you could not withstand them; but you will harrass and vex the protestant inhabitants until they shall consent to raise your wages and to lower your rents. Fools that you are! can any man compel you to work if you do not chuse to work? if you / can live without labour do not work until your wages are raised. – 103 –

104

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

But your Rents are too high – do you intend to keep the arms in your hands until your landlords shall promise to lower your rents? when that promise is made do you intend to give up your arms or do you mean to return to your labour, your spade in one hand and your frelock in the other? If you give up your arms you are in the same situation as before, and at the mercy of your landlords, and can you expect they will treat you with more clemency because you have committed acts of outrage against them? as to rents and wages therefore the means of relief you take will certainly multiply your distresses. But your greatest grievance is Tithes – I will suppose tithes, for a moment, abolished, and that you are no longer to pay the parson or his proctor. – What will be the consequence? will the Tithes go into your pockets? Suppose you pay 20s. an acre for your land, and 5s. an acre for your tithes of barley or wheat or oats; when tithes are no longer payable will these 5s. an acre remain with you? No. Your landlord charged but 20s. an acre for your land because subject to 5s. an acre for tithe; when the land is no longer subject to tithe he will demand 25s. an acre at the least, so that you will continue to pay tithes in the name of rent to the landlord in place of paying the parson. What do you gain by this but a change of masters? and what diference does it make to you whether you pay 20s. a year to / one person and 5s. to another, or 25s. a year to the same person? if any one therefore has a right to complain of tithes it is your landlords, because tithes are so much rent taken out of their pockets and given to the clergy; and being taken from the clergy again, the rent is not yours but your landlords. Your seducers tell you that you shall recover the forfeited estates.1 If you mean to keep possession of them your object is open war, and you must frst subdue the armed forces of both countries. If you mean to give them to the persons you call the owners you must in like manner support their possession; consider also that a great number of those forfeited estates are now in the possession of catholics who will unite with the civil and military powers against you. You are persuaded that you will be able to resist the united powers of the country civil and military, to abolish taxes, tithes and cesses,2 and to possess yourselves of the forfeited estates, and yet you have not been able at any time to stand against the military though you were ten to one in number; how do you expect then to resist them when you will not be one to ten. Were the Oak Boys, the White Boys, the Hearts of Steel, or the Hearts of Oak3 ever able to oppose the military? You promised assistance lately to your friends at Trim and Dundalk, the frst oath you take is to support each other, were you able to defend at his trial or to rescue from the gallows one of your brotherhood? / But you expect assistance from France – What! are ye men! are ye Irishmen! are you of the same country with those brave fellows who have so ofen fought and conquered the enemies of their King! and do ye now desire to join these enemies of your King who have barbarously murdered their own, against a King

An Irishman’s Letter to the People called Defenders

105

who loves you, who has done more for you than all the kings that ever sat on the throne of England, who has advised his Parliament here these very sessions to relieve your reasonable wants and to gratify your wishes? is this the return of grateful, loyal, true-hearted Irishmen to the best of Kings. I cannot believe it of you – No – it is the wish no doubt of some of your wicked deceivers who want to overturn the government in order to get power into their own hands, and who would make instruments of you. But the French are unable to assist you if they were willing; assistance from France must be by a feet, but France has no feet, and England the most powerful one that even England ever boasted of. Besides look at the distresses of France at home, they have been lately defeated with great slaughter;4 the armies of all nations are pouring in upon them, and their forces are not sufcient for their own defence, – in this situation even if they had a feet do you think they would give you that succour which is necessary for themselves? You are told by your paymasters that you shall have a new Constitution if you will assist them in pulling down the old; and in this new constitution which / they will frame, there shall be no such thing as poverty or distress in the country because there shall be no tithes nor taxes; – in England the people pay three times the taxes that you pay and they are happy and fourishing; in France the people pay no taxes or tithes and they are starving. Have you not heard of the state of France, – the seducers of the people there have got all power and property into their hands, but are the people the better for it? Tousands and tens of thousands have fallen by the sword, and those that are lef are perishing by famine; “when we had only one king (they cry) we never wanted bread, but now that we have seven hundred and ffy kings we are oppressed with misery;” you promised us a constitution, all that we ask is bread; give us a morsel of bread to save us, our wives and our children! Deluded men! was there ever a country in which there were no poor? the road to wealth is through the abodes of Industry, and that is a good constitution which protects honest Industry in her progress from poverty to riches. Your leaders tell you they want Liberty and Equality; – do you know what they mean by Equality? it is not that you shall be raised to a level with them, but that they shall be raised to level with those now above them. It is not that the low shall be high, and the high shall be low, but it is that you shall remain low and that they shall rise upon your shoulders. Suppose for a moment that all men were made equal; – if there were any talents, any virtue, any industry they would immediately begin to struggle / who should frst rise above his equals, that is, equality would soon be destroyed, and afer much disturbance of public peace, public prosperity and private happiness inequality of rank and fortune would be restored again. If all men were to remain equal no man would plow or sow or reap; there would be no arts, no manufacturers, no commerce, no credit: mankind would be compelled to live by plunder and robberies and all those public disorders which make life miserable.

106

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

I adjure you in the name of all those brave fellows, your countrymen, who have fought and bled and died, not in violation of the laws but in defence of their king and their country. Consider what ye are about, there are many of you brave fellows; – is it a life for a brave, a loyal, a true-hearted Irishman to sculk in holes and hiding places all the Day, or hunted down like wild beasts thro marshes and bogs by the military or the magistrate, – at night to wander about the country in search of arms in company with thieves and robbers who could not be true if the cause was a good one; – is it a death for a brave, a loyal, a true-hearted Irishman, afer having been arraigned in the dock, for fghting against the laws of his country, afer having produced his brothers, his sisters, his parents, his relations and friends to swear to an alibi, or some other fabricated defence, adding the heinous crime of perjury to his other misdeeds, to perish miserably at last deserted by his false supporters and brought to an untimely end, a spectacle of shame and disgrace at / the gallows. – Is this the Life, is this the Death of a man who has a good cause to defend. Return then to your homes, return to your wives and to your children, return to your honest industry and labours. Your hands were made to hold the plough and the shuttle not the sword. – Desert your wicked leaders before they desert you at the gallows. – If ye will not follow this advice your blood be on the heads of those deceivers who have misled you, and may the good Genius of this country, (if she has not lef you and fed across the Atlantic,) pursue them to destruction. AN IRISHMAN.

PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY OF UNITED IRISHMEN OF DUBLIN

Proceedings of the Society of United Irishmen of Dublin (Dublin: Printed by order of the Society, [1793]).

Te French Revolution galvanized reform-minded Irishmen, both Protestants and Catholics, to campaign for religious equality and parliamentary reform in the early 1790s. Te Catholic Committee campaigned for these objectives in 1791–2 and so did Protestant reformers. In October 1791 a handful of leading Protestant activists founded the Society of United Irishmen in Belfast to campaign for these two principal objectives. Less than a month later a similar society was established in Dublin. Tis society was also dominated by Protestants in its early months, though it soon sought to enlist more Catholics. Tis publication reveals some of the society’s major decisions in the frst year or so of its existence. It attacked the abuses in the Irish system of representation that restricted the parliamentary franchise to a minority of propertied Protestants. It asserted the need to treat all Irishmen as political equals and sought to have the franchise extended to all adult Irishmen, irrespective of their religious beliefs or their personal wealth. Te society was careful, however, to stress that it did not wish to abolish all subordination or to level all property. Nevertheless, it believed that England’s domination of Irish afairs would not end and the many grievances of Irishmen would not be addressed, unless and until an equal system of representation was achieved. Tese United Irishmen hoped to enlist the support of reformers in the Irish Parliament, such as Henry Grattan, and tried to establish close links with reformers in both England and Scotland.1 Tey also spread their political principles through the press and encouraged the setting up of similar societies across Ireland. When their activities aroused the suspicion and even alarm of the Irish authorities, leading to the arrest of some leading activists, these United Irishmen held their nerve and redoubled their eforts to enlist Catholic and popular support across the country.

– 107 –

108

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

Notes 1.

Tere is a wealth of scholarly studies of the United Irishmen. For very useful works on the early stages of the movement, see A. T. Q. Stewart, A Deeper Silence: Te Hidden Origins of the United Irishmen (Belfast: Blackstaf Press, 1998); N. J. Curtin, Te United Irishmen: Popular Politics in Ulster and Dublin, 1791–1798 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994); Proceedings of the Dublin Society of United Irishmen, ed. R. B. McDowell (Dublin: Irish Manuscripts Commission, 1998); R. B. McDowell, ‘Te Personnel of the Dublin Society of United Irishmen’, Irish Historical Studies, 2 (1940), pp. 12–53; and R. Jacob, Te Rise of the United Irishmen 1791–94 (London: G. G. Harrap & Co. Ltd, 1937).

Proceedings of the Society of United Irishmen of Dublin (Dublin: Printed by order of the Society, [1793]).

Te Hon. SIMON BUTLER1 in the Chair, Te following was agreed to: When we refect how ofen the Freemen and Freeholders of Dublin have been convened, humbly to express their Grievances to Parliament – how ofen they have solicited the enaction of good, and the repeal of bad Laws – how ofen, for successive years, they have petitioned against the obnoxious and unconstitutional Police Act,2 and how ofen all these applications have been treated with the most perfect contumacy and contempt. – When these facts are brought to recollection, is there an Honest Man will say, that the House of Commons have the smallest respect for the People, or believe themselves their Legitimate Representatives? – Te fact is, that the great Majority of that House, consider themselves as the Representatives of their own Money, or the hired servants of the English Government, whose Minister here, is appointed for the sole purpose of dealing out Corruption to them – at the expence of / Irish Liberty, Irish Commerce, and Irish Improvement. – Tis being the case, it naturally follows, that such Minister is not only the representative of the English Views against this Country, but is also Te sole Representative of the People of Ireland. To elucidate which assertion, it is only necessary to ask, whether a single question in favour of this oppressed Nation can be carried without his Consent? – and whether any measure, however inimical, may not through his infuence be efected? In this state of abject Slavery, no hope remains for us, but in the sincere and hearty Union of All the People, for a compleat and radical reform of Parliament; because it is obvious, that one Party alone have been ever unable to obtain a single Blessing for their Country; and the Policy of our Rulers has been always such, as to keep the diferent Sects at variance, in which they have been but too well seconded by our own folly.

– 109 –

110

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

For the attainment then of this great and important object – for the removal of absurd and ruinous distinctions – and for promoting a complete Coalition of the People – a Club has been formed, composed of all Religious Persuasions, who have adopted for their Name, – THE SOCIETY OF UNITED IRISHMEN OF DUBLIN, – and have taken as their

DECLARATION, Tat of a similar Society in Belfast, which is as follows: “In the present great æra of reform, when unjust Governments are falling in every quarter of Europe; when religious persecution is compelled to abjure her tyranny over conscience; when the Rights of Men are ascertained in theory, and that theory substantiated by practice; when antiquity can no longer defend absurd and oppressive forms against the common sense and common interests of mankind; when all Government is acknowledged to originate from the People, and to be so far only obligatory as it protects their rights and promotes their welfare; we think it our duty, as Irishmen, to come forward, and state what we feel to be our heavy grievance, and what we know to be its efectual remedy. We have no National Government – We are ruled by Englishmen, and the servants of Englishmen; whose / object is the interest of another country; whose instrument is corruption; whose strength is the weakness of Ireland; and these men have the whole of the power and patronage of the Country, as means to seduce and subdue the honesty and the spirit of her Representatives in the Legislature. Such an extrinsic power, acting with uniform force in a direction too frequently opposite to the true line of our obvious interests, can be resisted with efect solely by unanimity, decision, and spirit in the People; qualities which may be exerted most legally, constitutionally and efcaciously, by that great measure essential to the prosperity and freedom of Ireland, AN EQUAL REPRESENTATION OF ALL THE PEOPLE IN PARLIAMENT. We do not here mention as grievances the rejection of a Place-Bill, of a Pension Bill, of a Responsibility Bill; the sale of Peerages in one House; the corruption publickly avowed in the other; nor the notorious infamy of Borough trafc between both; not that we are insensible of their enormity, but that we consider them as but symptoms of that mortal disease, which corrodes the vitals of our Constitution, and leaves to the People in their own Government but the shadow of a name. Impressed with these sentiments we have agreed to form an Association, to be called, THE SOCIETY OF UNITED IRISHMEN: and we do pledge ourselves to our Country, and mutually to each other, that we will steadily support and endeavour by all due means to carry into efect the following resolutions:

Proceedings of the Society of United Irishmen of Dublin

111

I. Resolved, Tat the weight of English Infuence, in the Government of this Country, is so great as to require a Cordial Union among ALL THE PEOPLE OF IRELAND, to maintain that balance which is essential to the preservation of our Liberties, and the extension of our Commerce. II. That the sole constitutional mode by which this infuence can be opposed, is by a compleat and radical reform of the Representation of the People in Parliament. That no Reform is practicable, efcacious, or just, which shall not include Irishmen of every Religious Persuasion. / Satisfied as we are, that the intestine divisions among Irishmen, have too ofen given encouragement and impunity to audacious and corrupt administrations, in measures, which, but for these divisions they durst not have attempted, we submit our Resolutions to the Nation, as the basis of our Political Faith. We have gone to what we conceive to be the root of the evil; we have stated what we conceive to be the remedy. – With a Parliament thus reformed, every thing is easy; without it, nothing can be done. And we do call on, and most earnestly exhort our Countrymen in general to follow our example, and form similar societies in every quarter of the Kingdom for the promotion of constitutional knowledge, the abolition of bigotry in religion and politics, and the equal distribution of the Rights of Man through all Sects and Denominations of Irishmen. The People when thus collected will feel their own weight, and secure that power which theory has already admitted as their portion, and to which if they be not aroused by their present provocations to vindicate it, they deserve to forfeit their pretensions FOR EVER.” JAMES NAPPER TANDY,3 Secretary.

-----------------I a. b. in the presence of God, do pledge myself to my country, that I will use all my abilities and infuence in the attainment of an impartial and adequate representation of the Irish Nation in Parliament – And as a means of absolute and immediate necessity in the establishment of this Chief Good of Ireland, I will endeavour, as much as lies in my ability, to forward a brotherhood of afection, an identity of interests, a communion of rights, and an union of power among Irishmen of all religious persuasions; without which every reform in parliament must be partial, not national, inadequate to the wants, delusive to the wishes, and insufcient for the feedom and happiness of this Country.

----------------- /

112

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

SOCIETY OF UNITED IRISHMEN OF DUBLIN. FEBRUARY 25, 1792.

ARCHIBALD HAMILTON ROWAN, Esq.4 in the Chair; (Te Honourable Simon Butler having been, fom motives of personal delicacy, requested to leave it.) RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY, I. That the exercise of undefned privilege is as dangerous to the Liberty of the Subject, as the exercise of unlimited prerogative, and equally unrecognized by the true spirit of the Laws and Constitution. II. That having associated for the attainment of great national objects, and to promote union among Irishmen of all religious persuasions, this Society is entitled to the respect, which objects of such importance naturally claim. III. That an insolent menace having been publicly thrown out, respecting this Society, We think it incumbent on us to declare that we do not shrink from, but anxiously desire to meet any constitutional inquiry into our principles and conduct; and reserving for that occasion the justifcation of our actions, we resign to merited contempt, the scorn of ofcial station, or the scof of unprincipled venality. IV. That Five Tousand Copies of our Declaration and Circular Letter, with these Resolutions, be printed and distributed by our Committee of Correspondence. By order of the Society, THEOBALD WOLFE TONE,5 Pro Sec.

------------------ / SOCIETY OF UNITED IRISHMEN. FRIDAY, MARCH 30, 1792.

Te Hon. SIMON BUTLER in the Chair. Te following Letter was read from the Chair. My dear Sir, I have to request that you will be so good as to lay the following Circumstances before the Society of United Irishmen, as the Cause of my Absence from that most respectable Body:

Proceedings of the Society of United Irishmen of Dublin

113

On the 22d Day of Feb. last, a Complaint having been made to the House of Commons by one of its Members, of a Breach of Privilege committed by me, the House, without summoning me to answer the Complaint, ordered that I should be immediately taken into Custody of the Serjeant at Arms, and brought forthwith to the Bar of the House. Te Serjeant at Arms informed the House, that he had dispatched three of the Messengers attending the House to execute the Order for taking me into his Custody; one of whom being brought to the Bar, informed the House, that he went to the House of Mr. James Tandy, in Chancery-lane, where he arrested me, and shewed me the Warrant and his Authority; that I went into a Parlour, as if for my Hat, but shut the Door, and made my Escape, as he supposed, through a Window. Te House then resolved, that I, having been arrested by a Warrant from Mr. Speaker,6 issued by the Order of the House, and having made my Escape from the Ofcer of the House who arrested me, was guilty of a gross Violation of the Privileges of the House, and resolved, that an humble Address be presented to the Lord Lieutenant,7 that he would be graciously pleased to direct, that a Proclamation might issue for apprehending me, with a Promise of Reward for the same, and that said Address be forthwith presented to the Lord Lieutenant by such Members of the House as were of his Majesty’s Most Hon. Privy Council. Te Address having been accordingly presented by the House to the Lord / Lieutenant, a Proclamation was instantly issued by the Lord Lieutenant and Council for apprehending me, with a Promise of Reward for the same. Te Proclamation recites the Information given to the House by the Serjeant at Arms and Messenger, and the Resolution of the House, subsequent to the same, but does not set forth the original Complaint, or the immediate Order in Consequence thereof; but directs the Person who should apprehend me, to carry me before some of the Justices of the Peace, or Chief Magistrates of the County, Town, or Place where I should be apprehended, who are respectively required to secure me, and thereof give speedy Notice to the Speaker of the House, the Serjeant at Arms attending said House, and to the Clerk of the Council, to the End that I might be forthcoming to be dealt with or proceeded against according to Law; and for Prevention of my Escape into Parts beyond Seas, it commands all Ofcers of the Customs, and other Ofcers and Subjects, of and in the respective Ports and maritime Towns and Places within the Kingdom, to be careful and diligent in the Examination of all Persons that shall pass or endeavour to pass beyond the Seas; and it also strictly commands all Persons, as they will answer the contrary at their Perils, not any ways to conceal, but to discover me, to the End that I may be secured. I have the Honour to be, Dear Sir, Very truly and sincerely yours, March 26, 1792. JAMES NAPPER TANDY.

114

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

P.S. I enclose you the Proclamation and Votes. To the Hon. Simon Butler, President Society of United Irishmen. Te foregoing Letter was ordered to be entered on the Journals of the Society. Resolved, unanimously, Tat the Power assumed by the House of Commons to order the Serjeant at Arms to take into Custody a Subject of this Realm, not a Member of that House, upon a Complaint made by one of its Members of a Breach of / Privilege, without summoning the Party complained of, to answer the Complaint, is unwarranted by the Laws of the Land.

------------------Resolved, unanimously, Tat the Proclamation issued in this Case is not warranted by Law. Resolved, unanimously, Tat the Liberty of the Subject is violated in the Person of Mr. Tandy, that his Cause must now be considered as that of the Public, and brought forward to receive a judicial Decision. Resolved, unanimously, Tat a Committee of Secrecy be appointed to carry the last mentioned Resolution into Efect, and impowered to draw upon the Treasurer for such Sums as it may require for that Purpose. Signed by Order, THEO. WOLFE TONE, Pro Sec.

------------------Friday, 30th December, 1791.

SOCIETY OF UNITED IRISHMEN OF DUBLIN. THE HON. Simon Butler in the chair. Resolved, unanimously, Tat the following Circular Letter, reported by our Committee of Correspondence, be adopted and printed. This Letter is addressed to you from the Corresponding Committee of the Society of United Irishmen in Dublin. We annex the Declaration of Political Principles which we have subscribed, and the Test which we have taken, as a social and sacred compact to bind us more closely together. Te object of this Institution is to make an United Society of the Irish Nation; to make all Irishmen – Citizens; – all Citizens – Irishmen; nothing appearing to us more natural at all times, and at this crisis of Europe more seasonable, than that those who have common interests, and common enemies, who sufer com-

Proceedings of the Society of United Irishmen of Dublin

115

mon wrongs, and lay claim to common rights, should know each other, and should act / together. In our opinion ignorance has been the demon of discord, which has so long deprived Irishmen, not only of the blessings of well regulated government, but even the common benefts of civil society. Peace in this Island has hitherto been a peace on the principles and with the consequences of civil war. For a century past there has indeed been tranquility, but to most of our dear countrymen it has been the tranquility of a dungeon; and if the land has lately prospered, it has been owing to the goodness of Providence, and the strong eforts of Human Nature resisting and overcoming the malignant infuence of a miserable administration. To resist this infuence, which rules by discord, and embroils by system, it is vain to act as individuals or as parties; – It becomes necessary by an union of minds, and a knowledge of each other, to will and to act as a nation. To know each other is to know ourselves – the weakness of one and the strength of many. Union, therefore, is power – it is wisdom – it must prove liberty. Our design, therefore, in forming this Society, is to give an example, which, when well followed, must collect the public will, and concentrate the public power, into one solid mass; the efects of which once put in motion, must be rapid, momentous, and consequential. In thus associating we have thought little about our ancestors – much of our posterity. Are we for ever to walk like beasts of prey, over felds which these ancestors stained with blood? In looking back, we see nothing on the one part but savage force succeeded by savage policy; on the other, an unfortunate nation “scattered and peeled, meted out and trodden down!”8 We see a mutual intolerance, and a common carnage of the frst moral emotions of the heart, which lead us to esteem and place confdence in our fellow creatures. We see this, and are silent. But we gladly look forward to brighter prospects – to a People united in the fellowship of freedom – to a Parliament the express image of that People – to a prosperity established on civil, political, and religious Liberty – to a peace – not the gloomy and precarious stillness of men brooding over their wrongs, but that stable tranquility which rests on the rights of human nature, and leans on the arms by which these rights are to be maintained. Our principal rule of conduct has been, to attend to those things in which we agree, to exclude from our thoughts those in which we difer. We agree in knowing what are our rights, and in daring to assert them. If the rights of men be duties to God, we are in this respect of one religion. / Our creed of civil faith is the same. We agree in thinking that there is not an individual among our millions, whose happiness can be established on any foundation so rational and so solid, as on the happiness of the whole community – We agree, therefore, in the necessity of giving political value and station to the great majority of the people; and we think that whoever desires an amended Constitution, without including

116

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

the great body of the people, must on his own principles be convicted of political persecution, and political monopoly. If the present electors be themselves a morbid part of our constitution, where are we to recur for redress but to the whole community? “A more unjust and absurd constitution cannot be devised, than that which condemns the natives of a country to perpetual servitude, under the arbitrary dominion of strangers and slaves.” We agree in thinking, that the frst and most indispensible condition of the laws in a free state, is the assent of those whose obedience they require, and for whose beneft only they are designed. Without, therefore, an impartial and adequate Representation of the community, we agree in declaring, We can have no Constitution – no Country – no Ireland. Without this, our late revolution9 we declare to be fallacious and ideal; a thing much talked of, but neither felt nor seen. Te act of Irish Sovereignty has been merely tossed out of the English Houses into the Cabinet of the Minister; and nothing remains to the People, who of right are every thing, but a servile Majesty and a ragged Independence. We call most earnestly on every great and good Man, who at the late æra spoke or acted for his Country, to consider less of what was done than of what there remains to do. We call upon their senatorial wisdom to consider the monstrous and immeasurable distance which separates, in this island, the ranks of social life, makes labour inefectual, taxation unproductive, and divides the nation into petty despotism and public misery. We call upon their tutelar genius, to remember, that government is instituted to remedy, not to render more grievous the natural inequality of mankind, and that unless the rights of the whole community be asserted, anarchy (we cannot call it government) must continue to prevail, where the strong tyrannize, the rich oppress, and the mass are brayed in a mortar. We call upon them, therefore, to build their arguments and their actions on the broad platform of general good, which must ever exclaim against the rights of nature being enjoyed merely by connivance, and the rights of conscience merely by toleration. / If you raise up a prone people, let it not be merely to their knees. Let the nation stand. Ten will it cast away the bad habit of servitude, which has brought with it indolence, ignorance, an extinction of our faculties, an abandonment of our very nature. Ten will every right obtained, every franchise exercised, prove a seed of sobriety, industry, and regard to character, and the manners of the people will be formed on the model of their free constitution. Tis rapid exposition of our principles, our object, and our rule of conduct, must naturally suggest the wish of multiplying similar Societies, and the propriety of addressing such a desire to you. Is it necessary for us to request, that you will hold out your Hand, and open your heart to your Countryman, Townsman, Neighbour? – Can you form a hope for political redemption, and by political penalties, or civil excommunications, withhold the Rights of Nature from your Brother? We beseech you to rally all the Friends of Liberty within your circle

Proceedings of the Society of United Irishmen of Dublin

117

round a Society of this kind as a centre. Draw together your best and bravest thoughts, your best and bravest men. You will experience, as we have done, that these Points of Union will quickly attract numbers, while the assemblage of such Societies, acting in concert, moving as one body, with one impulse and one direction, will, in no long time, become not parts of the nation, but the nation itself; speaking with its voice, expressing its will, resistless in its power. We again entreat you to look around for Men ft to form those stable Supports on which Ireland may rest the Lever of Liberty. If there be but Ten, take those Ten. If there be but Two, take those Two; and trust with confdence to the sincerity of your intention, the justice of your cause, and the support of your Country. Two objects interest the Nation – A Plan of Representation, – and the means of accomplishing it. – Tese Societies will be a most powerful means. But a popular Plan would itself be a means for its own accomplishment. We have, therefore, to request, that you will favour us with your ideas respecting the Plan which appears to you most eligible and practicable, on the present more enlarged and liberal principles which actuate the People; at the same time giving your sentiments upon our National Coalition, on the means of promoting it, and on the political state and disposition of the county or town where you reside. We know what resistance will be made to your patriotic eforts by those who triumph in the disunion and degradation of their Country. Te greater the necessity for reform, the greater probably / will be the resistance. We know that there is much spirit that requires being brought into mass, as well as much massy body that must be refned into spirit. We have many enemies, and no enemy is contemptible. We do not despise the enemies of the Union, the Liberty and the Peace of Ireland, but we are not of a nature, nor have we encouraged the habit of fearing any Man, or any Body of Men, in an honest and honourable cause. In great undertakings, like the present, we declare, that we have found it always more difcult to attempt, than to accomplish. Te People of Ireland must perform all that they wish, if they attempt all that they can. Signed by Order, JAMES NAPPER TANDY, Secretary, To whom Letters on this subject are to be addressed.

--------------------

118

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

September 14th. 1792.

SOCIETY OF UNITED IRISHMEN OF DUBLIN. THE HON. SIMON BUTLER IN THE CHAIR. THE FOLLOWING

ADDRESS WAS UNANIMOUSLY AGREED TO FROM THIS SOCIETY

TO THE NATION. We observe with concern and indignation the insidious means employed to stife the Catholic Voice in its humble representation of the Grievances which afict the people, and of the remedy specifed to redress them. We lament that men of any pretentions to common sense and public spirit should have been blindly seduced into the publication of the most fagrant absurdities, calumnies, and libels, against the most oppressed, patient, and numerous description of our Fellow Citizens. Tat such publications should have issued from the Grand-JuryRoom cannot be matter of surprize. Since the nomination of Sherifs has been transferred from the people to the Crown, Grand Juries, which are returnable by these ofcers, have lost their original character of Independence, and are now notoriously subordinate to Aristocratic Intrigue and Ministerial Corruption. As therefore these ancient bodies, which should be the sacred Organs of Truth, as well as the Guardians of the Constitution, have in this instance degenerated into instruments of prejudice and civil dissention, we feel it a duty which we owe to public / justice as well as to our country, to appeal from the unjust sentence of a few infuenced men to the Tribunal of a rational Nation. It appears that a small dispersed number of Individuals of the Catholic persuasion, without authority from the body at large, were, in the course of last Session, cajoled into the measure of presenting an eleemosynary Address to Government, and this was crafily made the vehicle of some obscure and ill-founded censure upon the constitutional conduct of the Catholic Committee. Te embarrassment occasioned by this stale artifce determined the Committee to obtain an unequivocal expression of the Catholic sentiment; and with this view they printed, published, and circulated throughout Ireland several thousand copies of a Letter, submitting to the Catholic people a Plan for electing Delegates to the General Committee: a Plan at once the most simple, orderly, and the best calculated for framing an unquestionable organ of public opinion. Te Letter solicits the attendance of Delegates appointed for the express purpose and with the express instruction of IMPLORING and SUPPLICATING from the Legislature and the Sovereign a participation in the Elective Franchise and

Proceedings of the Society of United Irishmen of Dublin

119

the beneft of the Trial by Jury. – It is worthy of remark, that this Letter is utterly silent upon the ground of constitutional right, and never states this application as intended to be made upon any other principle than as a necessary means of securing to the Catholics an equal access to Leasehold Property and a fair Distribution of Justice. – Upon this proceeding, so simple, and so obviously conformable to the fundamental principles of Law and Constitution, Pettifogging Chicane, sitting in council with Bigotry and Nonsense, having ingeniously discovered that the Letter was circulated with great secrecy, pronounces the publication to be of a most dangerous, seditious, and infammatory tendency – the phantom of a Popish Congress10 is raised – the scare-crow image of a French National Assembly is conjured up – the vision of a Gun-powder plot appears – and the suppliant Committee of an enslaved people is identifed with Sovereign Legislative Bodies. We say “enslaved”, for it will not be denied that a people are enslaved, who being excluded from all share in the Legislature of their country, are nevertheless subject to Laws and Taxes imposed on them without their consent. – “Law to bind all must be assented to by all.” – It is not in a system of extirpation by penal laws – it is in the free agency of the people that we are to seek for the true and permanent / principle of a free and prosperous government. – Te man who says that a political constitution can be upheld by penal laws, may say that the human constitution can be nourished by the use of slow poison. Where so small a portion of so large a mass exercises the Elective Franchise, and a decided majority of that small portion forms the notorious property of a venal Aristocracy, we consider the Elective Body of the people as nothing more than the semblance of a larger Species of Corporation. – Hence, that political Ignorance, that selfsh spirit of monopoly, that jealous hostility to the general happiness, which must ever characterise these avaricious retailers of freedom, have also infected a great number of the Elective Body of the nation. Hirelings, whom we have at all prices, cry out, that the Catholics prefer their complaints in a stile of demand – Such language could not have been uttered in a free land; it is the insolent dictation of despotism; its authors may wish for fellow-slaves, but we wish for fellow-citizens. Te Catholics have ever addressed the Legislature with due respect; their submissive conduct is too unquestionable: but in our mind they only shew themselves worthy of their rights, when they reclaim them. Is it meant to deny them the right of petitioning? – To question their right of meeting peaceably for that purpose amounts to such a denial. Tis would be a false as well as a most mischievous doctrine; for it would necessarily throw the subject upon the alternative of violence – He must either sufer or resist; – and of course he must silently sink under Despotism or break out into Anarchy. – When the Innocent are punished by law, the severity of Negro-servitude alone could preclude them from the right of petitioning.

120

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

If the charges made against the Catholic Committee were founded in truth, Grand Juries, under the obligations of their oath and public station, should have presented them – if false, then have Grand Juries been guilty of defamatory libels. What security do we require of our Catholic brethren? – Political mistrust has not yet devised a test, which they have not cheerfully taken. Tey disclaim all those abominable principles inconsistent with good government which have been falsely imputed to them by those whose monopoly was sustained by the divisions of their country. Tey avow their support of the church establishment. Tey are even willing to worship that new born chimera, “the Protestant Ascendancy,”11 provided the jealous Idol may be appeased / without the sacrifce of the Elective Franchise and the Trial by Jury. Popery is no longer to be met with, but in the statute book. Te Catholics stand before us as political protestants, for they protest against the errors of the State, and endeavour to establish the reformation of the Constitution. Will the men who suborn this upstart zeal for the integrity of the Constitution, submit their labours for its preservation during some years past to a candid and critical examination? – Short is the catalogue of their services – what has signalized their political career? What, but an uniform exertion to stife all eforts for the establishment of Irish freedom. – Indignant at the odious review, and the treacherous consistency of their present conduct, we gladly turn away to acknowledge with pride, that the virtuous founder of the Revolution of 178212 is also the leader in the great patriotic work of this day. As for our part, associated for the attainment of universal emancipation and representative Legislature, we cannot separate our duty to our country from our duty to our countrymen. Te grievances they sufer are the grievances of the nation; the relief they solicit is the relief of the nation; and as the only true policy of states as well as of individuals is Justice, we cherish the grateful hope that the rising spirit of Union in a liberal age is the harbinger of its triumph. SIGNED BY ORDER, THOMAS WRIGHT,13 Sec.

---------------------

Proceedings of the Society of United Irishmen of Dublin

121

UNITED IRISHMEN OF DUBLIN. HON. SIMON BUTLER IN THE CHAIR.

THE SOCIETY OF UNITED IRISHMEN IN DUBLIN ADDRESS THE

FRIENDS OF THE PEOPLE AT LONDON.14 Impressed with the resemblance in the title, nature and destination of their respective institutions; and acting under that fraternity of feeling, which such a co-incidence naturally inspires: Te title which you bear is a glorious one, and we too are Friends of the People. If we be asked “who are the People?” we turn not our eyes here and there, to this party, or to that persuasion, and cry, “Lo! the people;” but we look around us without partiality or predilection, and we answer, the multitude of human beings, the living mass of humanity associated to exist, to subsist, and to / be happy. In them and them only we fnd the original of social authority, the measure of political value, and the pedestal of legitimate power. As friends of the People, upholding their rights, and deploring their suferings, the great object of this Society is a real representation of the Irish Nation in an Irish Parliament; and as friends of the whole people, we support the necessity of Catholic emancipation as a means of making representation what is ought to be, Free, Equal, and Entire. If the people of one country be not obliged to obey the laws of another, on the same principle when the people resident in a country, have no sort of infuence over the legislature, that legislature will receive rather a discretional acquiescence than legitimate obedience; and as this discretional state is dangerous, because precarious, a change becomes necessary for the peace and happiness of the nation, violence being the last measure to which rational beings will resort. Te present state of Ireland with regard to population is upwards of four millions, three of which are of the Catholic Religion; and with regard to political freedom, 1. Te State of Protestant representation is as follows: 17 Boroughs have no resident elector; 16 have but one; 16 have from 2 to 5; 90 have 13 electors each; 90 persons return for 106 venal boroughs, that is 212 members out of 300, the whole number. 54 Members are returned by fve noblemen and four bishops, and borough infuence has given landlords such power in the counties as makes them boroughs also – In short, representation, which in its nature is only a deposit, has been converted into a property, and that constitution which is founded on equal liberty, and which declares that no tax shall be levied without the “good will” of the people, is totally perverted in its principles and corrupted in its practice; yet the majesty of the people is still quoted with afected veneration; and if the

122

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

crown be ostensibly placed on a part of the Protestant portion, it is placed in mockery, for it is encircled with thorns. 2. With regard to the Catholics, the following is the simple and sorrowful fact: Tree millions, every one of whom has an interest in the state, and collectively give it its value, are taxed without being represented, and bound by laws to which they have not given consent. Tey now require a share of political liberty, in the participation of the elective franchise, and of civil liberty in the privilege of serving on Grand Juries. Tere can be no civil without political liberty, and in requiring the right of sufrage they, in reality, / demand only a safeguard for their religion, their property and their lives. Te code of penal Laws against the Catholics reduced oppression into a system: Te action and pressure of this system continually accumulating without any re-action on the part of the suferers, sunk in the lethargy of servitude, has confrmed the governing portion of the people in a habit of domination. Tis Habit, mixing with the antipathies of past times, and the irritations of the moment, has impressed a strange persuasion, that the rights of the plurality are Protestant property, and that the birth-right of millions, born and to be born, continue the spoils of war and booty of conquest. Te perversion of the understanding perverts the heart, and this Protestant ascendancy, as it calls itself, uniting power with passion, and hating the Catholics because it has injured them, on a bare inquisitorial suspicion insufcient to criminate an individual, would erase a whole people from the roll of citizenship, and for the sins (if they were sins) of remote ancestors would attaint their remotest posterity. We have read, and read with horror, that Louis 11th,15 ordered the children to be placed under the scafold where the father was beheaded, that they might be sprinkled with his blood. It is, we think, by this unequal distribution of popular privilege, that its very nature has, in this kingdom, been corrupted, and from the moment that equality of rights was overturned, and general liberty became particular power, the public mind has been split into a confict of factions. General distribution of the elective franchise would make corruption impracticable, but when common right becomes the property of person, party or persuasion, it acquires a value equally unnatural and unconstitutional; is bought and sold; rises or falls, like any marketable commodity. Te deprivation of the elective franchise, on the one hand, robs a great majority of the nation of an invaluable blessing; and its accumulation in the hands of the Protestant portion, operates on that very portion as a curse. Te right of all, heaped up and hoarded by the few, becomes a public pest, and the nutriment of the constitution is changed into its poison. Te iniquitous monopoly rots in boroughs, spreads its contagion through counties; taints morals and manners; makes elections mere fairs for the trafc of franchise and the sale of men; in place of that nationality of mind which spreads its parental embrace around a whole people, substitutes the envious excluding spirit of selfsh

Proceedings of the Society of United Irishmen of Dublin

123

corporations; and swelling, at length, / into monstrous and gigantic ascendancy, holds forth a hundred thousand hands to bribe and betray, and tramples with a hundred thousand feet on those miserable millions who have lost their only guarantee against injustice and oppression. Instructed by the Genius of the Constitution, and the genuine Spirit of the Laws; instructed, of late, by all that has been spoken, or written, or acted, or suffered in the cause of freedom; instructed by the late revolution in America, by the late revolution in Ireland, by the late revolution in France; hearing of all that has been done over the face of the globe for Liberty, and feeling all that can be sufered from the want of it, reading the charter of independence to Ireland, and listening to the spirit-stirring voice of her great deliverer;16 actuated, in fne, by that imperishable spark in the bosom of man which the servitude of a century may smother, but cannot extinguish, the Catholics of this country have been lessened into liberty, have learned to know their rights, to be sensible of their wrongs, and to detail by peaceful delegation, their grievances, rather than endure without obedience. You! – in either kingdoms, who reproach the Catholics of Ireland for asserting the rights of nature, burn your books, tear your charters, break down your free press, and crumble to pieces those moulds which have cast liberty in so fair a form, as to make Catholics feel what Protestants have felt, and join their admiration and love with those of a worshipping world. Tis Society and many other Societies have associated to create that union of power, and that brotherhood of afection among all the inhabitants of this Island, which is the interest as well as duty of all. We are all Irishmen, and our object is to unite the diferent descriptions of religion in the cause of our common country. From the most opposite points in the wide circumference of religions we tend with increasing velocity to the same centre of political union. A reform in parliament preceding Catholic enfranchisement would be in its nature partial and exclusive, and unless a reform immediately follows that emancipation (which it will certainly do) the extension of elective franchise, would only add to the mass of corruption. Te centre of our union is fxed and immoveable. Te Presbyterian wishes for national freedom. Te Catholic aspires to nothing more; nor can either of them be brought to believe that those varieties of religious faiths, which may be deemed the pleasures of the Creator, should be made the engines of political torture to any of his creatures. Too long have our people been set in array of battle against each other; too long have the rancour and revenge of our ancestors been lef as a legacy of blood to their / posterity; too long has one limb of the social body been tied down, until it had nearly lost all feeling, life and energy. It is our wish, it is our hope, to give Ireland the full and free possession of both her arms, her Catholic arm as well as her Protestant arm, that she may the better embrace her Friends or grapple with her Foes.

124

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

Such are the principles and practice of our Institution, which having neither power nor patronage, but merely the energy of honesty, has not only been distinguished by the calumnies of those who are born only to bite the heel, and be crushed under foot, but has been honoured by the obloquy of men who fll the frst ofces in the state. From them we appeal to natural right and eternal justice, which ought ever to be established without compromise or reservation. From them we appeal to those who call themselves Friends of the People. Look not upon Ireland with an eye of indiference. Te period of Irish insignifcance is passing fast away. If the nation ever appeared contemptible, it was because the nation did not act; but no sooner in the late war was it abandoned by Government, than it rose to distinction as a People. As to any union between the Islands, believe us when we assert that our union rests upon our mutual Independence. We shall love each other, if we be lef to ourselves. It is the union of minds which ought to bind these nations together. Reciprocal interests and mutual wants will ever secure mutual afection; but were any other union to be forced, and force only could efect it, you would endanger your liberties, and we should lose our rights; you would feel the infuence of the crown increase beyond all suferance, and we should lose the name and energies of a people, with every hope of raising to its merited station in the map of mankind this noble and neglected Island “for which God has done so much and Man so little.” Signed by Order, THOMAS WRIGHT, Secretary. Dublin, October 26th, 1792.

-----------------November 23d, 1792.

ADDRESS from the SOCIETY OF UNITED IRISHMEN in Dublin, to the DELEGATES for promoting a REFORM in Scotland.17 WILLIAM DRENNAN,18 Chairman. ARCHIBALD HAMILTON ROWAN, Sec. We take the liberty of addressing you, in the spirit of civil union, in the fellowship of a just and a common cause. We / greatly rejoice that the spirit of freedom moves over the surface of Scotland; that light seems to break from the chaos of her internal government; and that a country so respectable for her attainments in science, in arts, and in arms; for men of literary eminence; for the intelligence and morality of her people, now acts from a conviction of the union between virtue, letters, and liberty: and, now rises to distinction, not by a calm, contented,

Proceedings of the Society of United Irishmen of Dublin

125

secret wish for a Reform in Parliament, but by openly, actively, and urgently willing it, with the unity and energy of an embodied nation. We rejoice that you do not consider yourselves as merged and melted down into another country, but that in this great national question, you are still – Scotland – the land where Buchanan19 wrote, and Fletcher20 spoke, and Wallace21 fought. Away from us and from our children those puerile antipathies so unworthy of the manhood of nations, which insulate individuals as well as countries, and drive the citizen back to the savage. We esteem and we respect you. We pay merited honour to a nation in general well educated, and well informed, because we know that the ignorance of the people is the cause and efect of all civil and religious despotism. We honour a nation regular in their lives, and strict in their manners, because we conceive private morality to be the only secure foundation of public policy. We honour a nation eminent for men of genius, and we trust that they will now exert themselves not so much in perusing and penning the histories of other countries, as in making their own a subject for the historian. May we venture to observe to them that mankind have been too retrospective; canonized antiquity, and undervalued themselves. Man has reposed on ruins, and rested his head on some fragments of the temple of liberty, or at most amused himself in pacing the measurement of the edifce, and nicely limiting its proportions; not refecting that this temple is truly Catholic, the ample earth its area, and the arch of heaven, its dome. We will lay open to you our hearts. Our cause is your cause – If there is to be a struggle between us, let it be which nation shall be foremost in the race of mind: let this be the noble animosity kindled between us, who shall frst attain that free constitution from which both are equidistant, who shall frst be the saviour of the empire. Te sense of both countries with respect to the intolerable abuses of the constitution has been clearly manifested, and proves that our political situations are not dissimilar; that our wrights [sic] and wrongs are the same. Out of 32 counties in Ireland, 29 petitioned for a Reform in Parliament: and / out of 56 of the royal Burghs in Scotland, 50 petitioned for a Reform in their internal structure and Government. If we be rightly informed, there is no such thing as popular election in Scotland. Te people who ought to possess that weight in the popular scale, which might bind them to the soil, and make them cling to the constitution, are now as dust in the ballance, blown abroad by the least impulse, and scattered through other countries, merely because they hang so loosely to their own. Tey have no share in the national Firm, and are aggrieved not only by irregular and illegal exaction of taxes; by misrule and mismanagement of corporations; by misconduct of self-elected and irresponsible magistrates; by waste of public property; and by want of competent judicatures; but, in our opinion, most of all, by an inadequate Parliamentary representation – for, we assert, that 45 Commoners

126

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

and 16 Peers,22 are a pitiful representation for two millions and a half of people; particularly as your Commoners consider themselves not as the representatives of that people, but of the Councils of the Burghs by whom they are elected. Exclusive charters in favour of Boroughs, monopolize the general rights of the people, and that act must be absurd which precludes all other towns from the power of being restored to their ancient freedom. We remember that heretable jurisdictions and feudal privileges, though expressly reserved by the act of union (20th art.) were set aside by Act of Parliament in 1746,23 and we think that there is much stronger ground at present, for restoring to the mass of the people, their alienated rights, and to the Constitution its spirit and its integrity. Look now we pray you upon Ireland: Long was this unfortunate Island the prey of prejudiced factions and ferocious parties. Te rights or rather duties of conquest were dreadfully abused, and the Catholic religion was made the perpetual pretext for subjecting the state by annihilating the citizen, and destroying not the religious persuasion but the man; not popery, but the people. It was not till very lately that the part of the nation which is truly colonial, refected that though their ancestors had been victorious, they themselves were now included in the general subjection; subduing only to be subdued, and trampled upon by Britain as a servile dependancy. When therefore the Protestants began to sufer what the Catholics had sufered and were sufering; when from serving as the instruments they were made themselves the objects of foreign domination, then they became / conscious they had a country: and they felt – an Ireland. Tey resisted British dominion, renounced colonial subserviency, and following the example of a Catholic Parliament just a century before,24 they asserted the exclusive jurisdiction and legislative competency of this Island. A sudden light from America shone through our prison. Our Volunteers arose. Te chains fall from our hands. We followed Grattan, the angel of our deliverance, and in 1782 Ireland ceased to be a province and became a nation. But, with reason, should we despise and renounce this Revolution as merely a transient burst through a bad habit; the sudden grasp of necessity in despair, from tyranny in distress, did we not believe that the Revolution is still in train; that it is less the single and shining act of 82, than a series of national improvements which that act ushers in and announces; that it is only the herald of liberty and glory, of Catholic emancipation, as well as Protestant independence; that, in short, this Revolution indicates new principles, foreruns new practice, and lays a foundation for advancing the whole people higher in the scale of being, and difusing equal and permanent happiness. British supremacy changed its aspect, but its essence remained the same. First it was force, and on the event of the late Revolution, it became infuence; direct hostility shifed into systematic corruption, silently drawing of the virtue and vigour of the island, without shock or explosion. Corruption that glides

Proceedings of the Society of United Irishmen of Dublin

127

into every place, tempts every person, taints every principle, infects the political mind through all its relations and dependencies; so regardless of public character as to set the highest honours to sale, and to purchase Boroughs with the price of such prostitution; so regardless of private morality, as to legalize the licentiousness of the lowest and most pernicious gambling, and to extract a calamitous revenue from the infatuation and intoxication of the people. Te Protestants of Ireland were now sensible that nothing could counteract this plan of debilitating policy, but a radical reform in the House of the People, and that without such reform, the Revolution itself was nominal and delusive. Te wheel merely turned round, but it did not move forward, and they were as distant as ever from the goal. Tey resolved. – Tey convened. – Tey met with arms. – Tey met without them. – Tey petitioned. But all in vain – for, they were but a portion of the people. Ten they looked around and beheld their Catholic countrymen. Tree million – we repeat it – three million taxed without being represented, / bound by laws to which they had not given consent, and politically dead in their native land. Te apathy of the Catholic mind changed into sympathy, and that begot an energy of sentiment and action. Tey had eyes, and they read. Tey had ears and they listened. Tey had hearts, and they felt. Tey said – “Give us our rights as you value your own. Give us a share of civil and political liberty, the elective franchise, and the trial by jury. Treat us as men and we shall treat you as brothers. Is taxation without representation a grievance to three millions across the Atlantic, and no grievance to three millions at your doors? Trow down that pale of persecution which still keeps up civil war in Ireland, and make us one people. We shall then stand, supporting and supported, in the assertion of that liberty which is due to all, and which all should unite to attain.” It was just – and immediately a principle of adhesion took place for the frst time, among the inhabitants of Ireland. All religious persuasions found in a political union their common duty and their common salvation. In this Society and its afliated societies, the Catholic and the Presbyterian are at this instant holding out their hands and opening their hearts to each other, agreeing in principles, concurring in practice. We unite for immediate, ample, and substantial justice to the Catholics, and when that is attained, a combined exertion for a reform in Parliament is the condition of our compact, and the sale of our communion. British supremacy takes alarm. Te haughty monopolists of national power and common right, who crouch abroad, to domineer at home, now look with more surprise and less contempt on this “besotted” people. A new artifce is adopted, and that restless domination which, at frst, ruled as open war, by the length of the sword; then, as covert corruption, by the strength of the poison; now assumes the stile and title of Protestant Ascendancy; calls down the name of religion from heaven to sow discord on earth; to rule by anarchy; to keep up distrust and antipathy among parties, among persuasions, among families, nay

128

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

to make the passions of the individuals struggle, like Cain and Abel,25 in the very home of the heart, and to convert every little paltry necessity that accident, indolence, or extravagance bring upon a man, into a pandar [sic] for the purchase of his honesty and the murder of his reputation. We will not be the dupes of such ignoble artifces. We see this scheme of strengthening political persecution and state inquisition, by a fresh infusion of religious fanaticism – but / we will unite and we will be Free. Universal Emancipation with Representative Legislature is the polar principle which guides our Society and shall guide it through all the tumult of factions and fuctuations of parties. It is not upon a coalition of opposition with ministry that we depend, but upon a coalition of Irishmen with Irishmen, and in that coalition alone we fnd an object worthy of reform, and at the same time the strength and sinew both to attain and secure it. It is not upon external circumstances, upon the pledge of man or minister, we depend, but upon the internal energy of the Irish Nation. We will not buy or borrow liberty from America or from France, but manufacture it ourselves, and work it up with those materials which the hearts of Irishmen furnish them with at home. We do not worship the British, far less the Irish Constitution, as sent down from heaven, but we consider at as human workmanship, which man has made and man can mend. An inalterable Constitution whatever be its nature, must be despotism. It is not the constitution but the People which ought to be inviolable, and it is time to recognize and renovate the rights of the English, the Scotch, and the Irish Nations. – Rights which can neither be bought nor sold, granted by charter, or forestalled by monopoly, but which nature dictates as the birth-right of all, and which it is the business of a constitution to defne, to enforce, and to establish. If Government has a sincere regard for the safety of the constitution, let them coincide with the people in the speedy reform of its abuses, and not by an obstinate adherence to them, drive that people into Republicanism. We have told you what our situation was, what it is, what it ought to be: our end, a National Legislature; our means, an union of the whole people. Let this union extend throughout the Empire. Let all unite for all, or each man sufer for all. In each country let the people assemble in peaceful and constitutional Convention. Let delegates from each country digest a plan of reform, best adapted to the situation and circumstances of their respective nations, and let the Legislatures be petitioned at once by the urgent and unanimous voice of England, Scotland, and Ireland. You have our ideas. Answer us, and that quickly. Tis is not a time to procrastinate. Your illustrious Fletcher has said, that the liberties of a people are not to be secured, without passing through great difculties, and no toil or labours ought to be declined to preserve a nation from slavery.26 He spoke well: and we add, that it is incumbent on every nation who adventures into a confict for freedom, to remember it is on the event (however absurdly) depends the / esti-

Proceedings of the Society of United Irishmen of Dublin

129

mation of public opinion; honour and immortality, if fortunate; if otherwise, infamy and oblivion. Let this check the rashness that rushes unadvisedly into the committal of national character, or if that be already made, let the same consideration impel us all to advance with active not passive perseverance, with manly confdence and calm determination, smiling with equal scorn at the bluster of ofcial arrogance, and the whisper of private malevolence, until we have planted the fag of Freedom on the summit, and are at once victorious and secure.

------------------UNITED IRISHMEN OF DUBLIN, Nov. 30, 1792. WILLIAM DRENNAN IN THE CHAIR.

To the Chairman of the Society of United Irishmen of Sir, This Society has passed a resolution, “that we do proceed immediately to efect a better organized and a more intimate union with the diferent Societies of United Irishmen than has hitherto subsisted. We are also enjoined by a subsequent order to communicate all the publications of this Body to the Confederated Societies. We shall accordingly now and henceforward transmit to you all such papers of any consequence; and we solicit the satisfaction of your concurrence to carry these resolutions into efect. Our general principles and motives of association are amply detailed in our circular letter and declaration: but as our objects are of the frst moment in life, the particular conduct of those Societies who co-operate with us, is of correspondent importance. It appears to us, at this interesting crisis, incumbent on patriotic associations of virtuous and independent men to establish frequent meetings, and a mutual communication of all their proceedings. Well assured that a fund of good sense and patriotism still exists latent among us, it is our common duty to call forth this valuable mass into life. Silence now becomes criminal, and neutrality treasonable. Te private advocate of Catholic emancipation and representative legislature will be reckoned among our Enemies, and employed as the passive instrument of their artifces. We should therefore hold a strict inquest of all public measures, labour to give unison to the public sentiment, and fx its Standard. It becomes us to interfere, when Grand Juries follow the example of the House of Commons and misrepresent the People. We must not sufer Falsehood to stalk over the Land in Right Honourable Solemnity, to invade the National Credit, and arraign the National Character – we must arrest its progress, and arraign its Authors at the Bar of the Nation. /

130

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

We cannot too strongly impress upon the public mind, that the repeal of this or that obnoxious Law out of the multitude, – that the removal from power of this or that party, can only shif our position upon the Wheel of Political Torture. Parties have changed, and Palliatives have been administered; but the Trafc of Irish Freedom, and the Plunder of Irish Property have been uniform and permanent. It becomes therefore our essential duty to direct the Eye of the People to the Polar Star of their political salvation, a Representative Legislature, while the Echo of that Watchword of Discord, that Motto of Prostitution, the Protestant Ascendancy, dies away through reptile Corporations. Finally, in reliance that you have adopted the Letter of our Test, we recommend it to your zeal to difuse its Spirit; because it engrafs the frst duty of a good Citizen upon the frst duty of a good Christian; because it is a practice subversive of our Constitution, that the King and the Lords should vote in the Commons House of Parliament, that the Mass of the People should be excluded from their inalienable Share in the Legislature, not by the insensible abuses of time, but by an express Law; and because this exclusion establishes, under the mask of Freedom, a System of Practical Despotism over the whole People. Prescribing these Duties to ourselves, we submit them to our consideration, and request the favour of your correspondence. I am, Sir, with great Respect, Your obedient humble Servant, A. HAMILTON ROWAN, Secretary.

---------------------The SOCIETY of UNITED IRISHMEN, at Dublin, TO THE VOLUNTEERS OF IRELAND. William Drennan, Chairman. Arch. Hamilton Rowan, Sec. CITIZEN SOLDIERS, You frst took up arms to protect your Country from foreign enemies, and from domestic disturbance. For the same purposes, it now becomes necessary that you should resume them. A Proclamation has been issued in England for embodying the Militia, and a Proclamation has been issued by the Lord Lieutenant and Council in Ireland,27 for repressing all seditious associations. In consequence of both these Proclamations, it is reasonable to apprehend danger from abroad, and danger at home. For whence but from apprehended danger are those menacing preparations for war drawn through the Streets of this Capital, or whence, if not to create that internal commotion which was not found, to shake that credit which was not afected, to blast that Volunteer honour / which

Proceedings of the Society of United Irishmen of Dublin

131

was hitherto inviolate, are those terrible suggestions and rumours and whispers, that meet us at every corner and agitate at least our old men, our women and children. Whatever be the motive, or from whatever quarter it arises, alarm has arisen; and you, VOLUNTEERS OF IRELAND, are therefore summoned To Arms at the instance of Government, as well as by the responsibility attached to your character, and the permanent obligations of your institution. We will not at this day, condescend to quote authorities for the right of having and of using arms, but we will cry aloud, even amidst the storm raised by the Witchcraf of a proclamation, Tat to your formation was owing the peace and protection of this Island, to your relaxation has been owing its relapse into impotence and insignifcance, to your renovation must be owing its future freedom and its present tranquillity. You are therefore summoned to Arms, in order to preserve your country in that guarded quiet, which may secure it from external hostility, and to maintain that internal regimen throughout the land, which superseding a notorious Police or a suspected Militia, may preserve the blessings of peace by a vigilant preparation for war. Citizen Soldiers, to arms! Take up the shield of Freedom, and the pledges of Peace, – Peace, the motive and end of your virtuous institution. – War, an occasional duty, ought never to be made an occupation. Every man should become a Soldier in the defence of his rights; no man ought to continue a soldier for ofending the rights of others. Te sacrifce of life in the service of our country is a duty much too honourable to be intrusted to mercenaries, and at this time, when your country has by public authority been declared in danger, we conjure you by your interest, your duty and your glory, to stand to your arms, and in spite of a Police, in spite of a Fencible Militia, in virtue of two Proclamations, to maintain good order in your vicinage and tranquility in Ireland. – It is only by the military array of men in whom they confde, whom they have been accustomed to revere as the guardians of domestic peace, the protectors of their liberties and lives, that the present agitation of the people can be stilled, that tumult and licentiousness can be repressed, obedience secured to existing law, and a calm confdence, difused through the public mind, in the speedy resurrection of a free constitution – of Liberty and of Equality, – words which we use for an opportunity of repelling calumny and of saying, that, By Liberty we never understood unlimited freedom, nor by Equality the levelling of property, or the destruction of subordination. – Tis is a calumny invented by that faction / or that gang which misrepresents the King to the People, and the People to the King, traduces one half of the nation to cajole the other, and by keeping up distrust and division wishes to continue the proud arbitrators of the fortune and fate of Ireland. – Liberty is the exercise of all our rights natural and political, secured to us and our posterity by a real representation of the people; – and equality is the extension of the constituent, to the fullest

132

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

dimensions of the constitution, of the elective franchise to the whole body of the people, to the end that government which is collective power, may be guided by collective will, and that legislation may originate from public reason, keep peace with public improvement, and terminate in public happiness. If our constitution be imperfect, nothing but a reform in representation will rectify its abuses; if it be perfect, nothing but the same Reform will perpetuate its blessings. We now address you as Citizens, for to be Citizens you became Soldiers, nor can we help wishing that all Soldiers, partaking the passions, and interest of the people would remember that they were once Citizens, that seduction made them Soldiers, – “but nature made them Men.” We address you without any authority save that of reason, and if we obtain the coincidence of public opinion it is neither by force nor stratagem, for we have no power to terrify, no artifce to cajole, no fund to seduce – Here we sit, – without mace or beadle, neither a mystery nor a craf, nor a corporation. – In four words lies all our Power, UNIVERSAL EMANCIPATION and REPRESENTATIVE LEGISLATURE; yet we are confdent that on the pivot of this principle, a convention, – still less, – a society, – less still, – a single man, will be able, frst to move and then to raise the world. We, therefore, wish for Catholic emancipation without any modifcation, but still we consider this necessary enfranchisement as merely the portal to the Temple of National Freedom. Wide as this entrance is, wide enough to admit three millions, – it is narrow, when compared to the capacity and comprehension of our beloved principle, which takes in every individual of the Irish nation, casts an equal eye over the whole Island, embraces all that think and feels for all that sufer. Te Catholic cause is subordinate to our cause, and included in it, for as UNITED IRISHMEN, we adhere to no sect, but to society, to no creed but Christianity, to no party, but the whole people. – In the sincerity of our souls, do we desire Catholic emancipation, but were it obtained, to-morrow, to-morrow would we go on, as we do to-day in the pursuit of that reform which would still be wanting to ratify their liberties as well as our own. For both these purposes, it appears necessary that provincial / conventions should assemble preparatory to the convention of the Protestant People. Te Delegates of the Catholic body are not justifed in communicating with individuals, or even bodies of inferior authority, and therefore an Assembly of a similar nature and organization is necessary to establish an intercourse of sentiment, an uniformity of conduct, an united cause, and an united nation. If a convention on the one part does not soon follow, and is not soon connected with that on the other, the common cause will split into the partial interest; the people will relax into inattention and inertness; the union of afection and exertion will dissolve, and too probably some local insurrection, instigated by the malignity of our common enemy, may commit the character, and risque the tranquility of the Island, which can be obviated only by the infuence of an assembly arising from, assimilated with

Proceedings of the Society of United Irishmen of Dublin

133

the people, and whose spirit may be as it were knit with the soul of the nation, – unless the sense of the Protestant People, be, on their part, as fairly collected and as judiciously directed, unless individual exertion consolidates into collective strength, unless the particles unite into mass, we may perhaps serve some person, or some party for a little, but the public not at all: Te nation is neither insolent nor rebellious nor seditious; while it knows its rights it is unwilling to manifest its powers; it would rather supplicate administration to anticipate revolution by a well timed reform, and to save their country in mercy to themselves. Te 15th of February28 approaches, a day ever memorable in the annals of this country as the birth-day of new Ireland – Let parochial meetings be held as soon as possible. Let each Parish return delegates. Let the sense of Ulster be again declared from Dungannon on a day auspicious to union, peace and freedom, and the spirit of the North will again become the spirit of the Nation. Te civil assembly ought to claim the attendance of the military associations and we have addressed you, Citizen Soldiers – on this subject, from the belief that your body, uniting conviction with zeal and zeal with activity, may have much infuence over your countrymen, your relations and friends. We ofer only a general outline to the public, and meaning to address Ireland, we presume not at present to fll up the plan or preoccupy the mode of its execution. We have thought it our duty to speak: answer us by actions; you have taken time for consideration. Fourteen long years are elapsed since the rise of your associations and in1782, did you imagine that in 1792 this nation would still remain unrepresented? How many Nations in this interval have gotten the start of Ireland! How many of our Countrymen have sunk into the Grave! /

------------------Dec. 23, 1792.

UNITED IRISHMEN OF DUBLIN. William Drennan, Chairman. Arch. Ham. Rowen, Sec. Resolved. Tat it appears to this Society, from the Evidence laid before it, that the printed Hand Bills which Archibald Hamilton Rowan29 and James Napper Tandy30 are charged, in the Information sworn against them, with having distributed, are Copies of the Address of this Society to the Volunteers of Ireland, falsely called in the said Information “A seditious Libel.” Resolved, Tat it is the Duty of every Member to distribute the public Resolutions of the Society, and if A. H. Rowan and J. N. Tandy really distributed that Address, they, in so doing, acted agreeable to the Sentiments, and therefore, merit the Approbation of this Society.

134

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

Resolved, Tat if A. H. Rowan and J. N. Tandy are prosecuted on Account of the Discharge of their Duty to the Society, they must be supported, and the Prosecution be legally and constitutionally resisted by the Society in every Stage. Resolved, Tat this Society, in supporting its Rights, will not confne itself merely to defensive Measures, but as the Sale of the Peerage, and of Seats in the representative House of Parliament, and other Corruptions are openly and notoriously practised by a shameless and profigate Administration, this Society will, without Delay, prepare Meterials for Prosecutions against such Members of the Administration as have been guilty of such Enormities. Resolved, Tat although we despise the paltry Trick by which those, interested in the present unconstitutional Representation of the People, endeavour to fx, as a Stigma, the Character of Republican and Leveller on every active Promoter of Reform, – yet, as we see with Concern, that some well-intentioned and sincere Friends of that Measure have been afected with a Fear artfully and groundlessly excited for corrupt Purposes, we think it our Duty to declare, on our own behalf, that the Object of our Institution is an impartial and adequate Representation of the Irish Nation in Parliament; – and, in order to prove, that our Views are, and always have been, directed to that End, we hereunto subjoin the Test, which was adopted on the Establishment of this Society, and which has been uniformly taken by every Member on his Admission. I A.B. in the presence of God, do pledge myself to my country, that I will use all my abilities and infuence in the attainment of an impartial and adequate representation of the Irish Nation in Parliament – And as a means of absolute and immediate necessity in the establishment of this Chief Good of Ireland, I will endeavour, as much as lies in my ability, to forward a brotherhood of afection, an identity of interests, a communion of rights, and an union of power among Irishmen of all religious persuasions; without which every reform in parliament must be partial, not national, inadequate to the wants, delusive to the wishes, and insufcient for the feedom and happiness of this Country.

AN ACT FOR THE RELIEF OF HIS MAJESTY’S POPISH, OR ROMAN CATHOLICK SUBJECTS OF IRELAND

An Act for the Relief of His Majesty’s Popish, or Roman Catholick Subjects of Ireland (1793), in Te Statutes at Large, Passed in the Parliaments held in Ireland, Vol. XVI (Dublin: Printed by George Grierson, Print to the King’s Most Excellent Majesty, 1796), pp. 685–92.

Tis famous Act, passed afer a major campaign by the Catholic Committee and its Protestant allies that eventually persuaded the British government to press the Irish government and parliament to support this measure, at last granted the Roman Catholics the parliamentary franchise on the same terms as adult Protestant Irishmen, provided they took the oaths of allegiance and abjuration, fully recognizing the monarch’s legitimate authority in political afairs.1 Catholic Irishmen were also allowed to hold lesser civil or military ofces of trust or proft under the crown, provided they also took an oath denying the political authority of the Pope in Irish afairs. Catholics were still denied the right to keep arms, unless they were men of substantial property or were lesser men of property who had taken the oaths of allegiance, supremacy and abjuration. Despite these signifcant concessions, all Catholic men were still excluded from sitting in either house of the Irish Parliament and were unable to hold a host of senior appointments in the civil and military administrations in Ireland. Notes 1.

For more on the passing and signifcance of this Act, see Bartlett, Te Fall and Rise of the Irish Nation, pp. 146–72.

– 135 –

An Act for the Relief of His Majesty’s Popish, or Roman Catholick Subjects of Ireland (1793), in The Statutes at Large, Passed in the Parliaments held in Ireland, Vol. XVI (Dublin: Printed by George Grierson, Printer to the King’s Most Excellent Majesty, 1796), pp. 685–92.

[33 George III, cap. 21 (1793)] WHEREAS various acts of parliament have been passed, imposing on his Majesty’s subjects professing the popish or Roman catholick religion, many restraints and disabilities, to which other subjects of this realm are not liable; and from the peaceable and loyal demeanor of his Majesty’s popish, or Roman Catholick subjects, it is ft that such restraints and disabilities shall be discontinued: Be it therefore enacted by the King’s most excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the lords spiritual and temporal, and commons in this present parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, Tat his Majesty’s subjects being papists, or persons professing the popish or Roman catholick religion, or married to papists, or persons professing the popish or Roman catholick religion, or educating any of their children in that religion, shall not be liable or subject to any penalties, forfeitures, disabilities, or incapacities, or to any laws for the limitation, charging, or discovering of their estates and property, real or personal, or touching the acquiring of property, or securities afecting property, save such as his Majesty’s subjects of the protestant religion are liable and subject to; and that such parts of all oaths as are required to be taken by persons in order to qualify themselves for voting at elections of members to serve in parliament; and also such parts of all oaths required to be taken by persons voting at elections for members to serve in parliament, as import to deny that the person taking the same is a papist or married to a papist, or educates his children in the popish religion, shall not hereafer be required to be taken by any voter, but shall be omitted by the person administering the same; and that it shall not be necessary, in order to entitle a papist, or person professing the popish or Roman – 137 –

138

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

catholick religion to vote at an election of members to serve in parliament, that he should at, or previous to his voting, take the oaths of allegiance and abjuration, any statute now in force to the contrary of any of the said matters in any wise notwithstanding. / II. Provided always, and be it further enacted, Tat all papists, or persons professing the popish, or Roman catholick religion, who may claim to have a right of voting for members to serve in parliament, or of voting for magistrates in any city, town-corporate, or borough, within this kingdom, be hereby required to perform all qualifcations, registries, and other requisites, which are now required of his Majesty’s protestant subjects, in like cases, by any law or laws now of force in this kingdom, save and except such oaths and parts of oaths as are herein before excepted. III. And provided always, Tat nothing herein before contained shall extend, or be construed to extend to repeal, or alter any law or act of parliament now in force, by which certain qualifcations are required to be performed by persons enjoying any ofces or places of trust under his Majesty, his heirs and successors, other than as herein afer is enacted. IV. Provided also, Tat nothing herein contained, shall extend, or be construed to extend, to give papists, or persons professing the popish religion, a right to vote at any parish vestry, for levying of money to rebuild or repair any parish church, or respecting the demising or disposal of the income of any estate belonging to any church or parish, or for the salary of the parish clerk, or at the election of any church warden. V. Provided always, Tat nothing contained in this act, shall extend to, or be construed to afect any action, or suit now depending, which shall have been brought or instituted previous to the commencement of this session of parliament. VI. Provided also, Tat nothing herein contained, shall extend to authorize any papist, or person professing the popish or Roman catholick religion, to have or keep in his hands or possession, any arms, armour, ammunition, or any warlike stores, sword-blades, barrels, locks, or stocks of guns, or fre arms, or to exempt such person from any forfeiture, or penalty inficted by any act respecting arms, armour, or ammunition, in the hands or possession of any papist, or respecting papists having or keeping such warlike stores, save and except papists, or persons of the popish or Roman catholick religion, seized of a freehold estate of one hundred pounds a year, or possessed of a personal estate of one thousand pounds or upwards, who are hereby authorized to keep arms and ammunition as protestants now by law may; and / also save and except papists or Roman catholicks, possessing a freehold estate of ten pounds yearly value, and less than one hundred pounds, or a personal estate of three hundred, and less than one thousand pounds, who shall have at the session of the peace in the county in which they reside, taken the oath of allegiance prescribed to be taken by an act passed in the

Act for the Relief of His Majesty’s Popish, or Roman Catholic Subjects of Ireland

139

thirteenth and fourteenth years of his present Majesty’s reign, entitled, An act to enable his Majesty’s subjects, of whatever persuasion, to testify their allegiance to him; and also in open court, swear and subscribe an afdavit, that they are possessed of a freehold estate, yielding a clear yearly proft to the person making the same of ten pounds, or a personal property of three hundred pounds above his just debts, specifying therein the name and nature of such freehold, and nature of such personal property, which afdavits shall be carefully preserved by the clerk of the peace, who shall have for his trouble a fee of six pence, and no more, for every such afdavit; and the person making such afdavits, and possessing such property, may keep and use arms and ammunition as protestants may, so long as they shall respectively possess a property of the annual value of ten pounds, and upwards, if freehold, or the value of three hundred pounds, if personal, any statute to the contrary notwithstanding. VII. And be it enacted, Tat it shall and may be lawful for papists, or persons professing the popish or Roman catholick religion, to hold, exercise, and enjoy all civil and military ofces, or places of trust or proft under his Majesty, his heirs, and successors, in this kingdom; and to hold or take degrees, or any professorship in, or be masters, or fellows of any college, to be hereafer founded in this kingdom, provided that such college shall be a member of the university of Dublin, and shall not be founded exclusively for the education of papists, or persons professing the popish or Roman catholick religion, nor consist exclusively of masters, fellows, or other persons to be named or elected on the foundation of such college, being persons professing the popish or Roman catholick religion, or to hold any ofce or place of trust, in, and to be a member of any lay-body corporate, except the college of the holy and undivided Trinity of queen Elizabeth, near Dublin,1 without taking and subscribing the oaths of allegiance, supremacy, or abjuration, or making or subscribing the declaration required to be taken, made, and subscribed, / to enable any person to hold and enjoy any of such places, and without receiving the sacrament of the Lord’s supper, according to the rights and ceremonies of the church of Ireland, any law, statute, or bye-law of any corporation to the contrary notwithstanding; provided that every such person shall take and subscribe the oath appointed by the said act passed in the thirteenth and fourteenth years of his Majesty’s reign, entitled, An act to enable his Majesty’s subjects of whatever persuasion, to testify their allegiance to him; and also the oath and declaration following, that is to say, I A.B. do hereby declare, that I do profess the Roman catholick religion. I A.B. do swear, that I do abjure, condemn, and detest, as unchristian and impious, the principle that it is lawful to murder, destroy, or any ways injure any person whatsoever, for, or under the pretence of being an heretick; and I do declare solemnly before God, that I believe, that no act in itself unjust, immoral, or wicked, can ever be justifed or excused by, or under pretence, or colour, that it was done either for

140

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

the good of the church, or in obedience to any ecclesiastical power whatsoever. I also declare, that it is not an article of the catholick faith, neither am I thereby required to believe or profess that the pope is infallible, or that I am bound to obey any order in its own nature immoral, though the pope or any ecclesiastical power should issue or direct such order, but on the contrary, I hold, that it would be sinful in me to pay any respect or obedience thereto; I further declare, that I do not believe that any sin whatsoever, committed by me, can be forgiven at the mere will of any pope, or of any priest, or of any person or persons whatsoever; but that sincere sorrow for past sins, a frm and sincere resolution to avoid future guilt, and to atone to God, are previous and indispensable requisites to establish a well-founded expectation of forgiveness; and that any person who receives absolution without these previous requisites, so far fom obtaining thereby any remission of his sins, incurs the additional guilt of violating a sacrament; and I do swear that I will defend to the utmost of my power, the settlement and arrangement of property in this country as established by the laws now in being; I do hereby disclaim, disavow, and solemnly abjure any intention to subvert the present church establishment, for the purpose of substituting a catholick establishment in its stead; and I do solemnly swear, that I will not exercise any privilege to which I am or may become entitled, to disturb and weaken / the protestant religion and protestant government in this kingdom. So help me God. VIII. And be it enacted, Tat papists, or persons professing the popish or Roman catholick religion, may be capable of being elected professors of medicine, upon the foundation of sir Patrick Dunn, any law or statute to the contrary notwithstanding. IX. Provided always, and be it enacted, Tat nothing herein contained shall extend, or be construed to extend to enable any person to sit or vote in either house of parliament, or to hold, exercise, or enjoy the ofce of lord lieutenant, lord deputy, or other chief governor or governors of this kingdom, lord high chancellor or keeper, or commissioner of the great seal of this kingdom, lord high treasurer, chancellor of the exchequer, chief justice of the court of king’sbench, or common pleas, lord chief baron of the court of exchequer, justice of the court of king’s-bench or commonpleas, or baron of the court of exchequer, judge of the high court of admiralty, master or keeper of the rolls, secretary of state, keeper of the privy seal, vice-treasurer, or deputy vice-treasurer, teller and cashier of the exchequer, or auditor-general, lieutenant or governor, or custos rotulorum of counties, secretary to the lord lieutenant, lord deputy, or other chief governor or governors of this kingdom, member of his Majesty’s most honourable privy council, prime serjeant, attorney-general, solicitor-general, second and third serjeants at law, or king’s council, masters in chancery, provost, or fellow of the college of the holy and undivided Trinity of queen Elizabeth, near Dublin; postmaster-general, master and lieutenant-general of his Majesty’s

Act for the Relief of His Majesty’s Popish, or Roman Catholic Subjects of Ireland

141

ordnance, commander in chief of his Majesty’s forces, generals on the staf, and sherifs, and sub-sherifs of any county in this kingdom; or any ofce contrary to the rules, orders and directions made and established by the lord lieutenant and council, in pursuance of the act passed in the seventeenth and eighteenth years of the reign of king Charles the second, entitled, An act for the explaining of some doubts arising upon an act, entitled, An act for the better execution of his Majesty’s gracious declaration for the settlement of his kingdom of Ireland, and satisfaction of the several interests of adventurers, soldiers, and other / his subjects there, and for making some alterations of, and additions unto the said act, for the more speedy and efectual settlement of this kingdom, unless he shall have taken, made, and subscribed the oaths and declaration, and performed the several requisites which by any law heretofore made, and now of force, are required to enable any person to sit or vote, or to hold, exercise, and enjoy the said ofces respectively. X. Provided also, and be it enacted, Tat nothing in this act contained, shall enable any papist, or person professing the popish or Roman catholick religion, to exercise any right of presentation to any ecclesiastical benefce whatsoever. XI. And be it enacted, Tat no papist or person professing the popish, or Roman catholick religion, shall be liable to, or subject to any penalty for not attending divine service on the sabbath day, called Sunday, in his or her parish church. XII. Provided also, and be it enacted, Tat nothing herein contained, shall be construed to extend to authorize any popish priest, or reputed popish priest, to celebrate marriage between protestant and protestant, or between any person who hath been, or professed himself or herself to be a protestant at any time within twelve months before such celebration of marriage, and a papist, unless such protestant and papist shall have been frst married by a clergyman of the protestant religion; and that every popish priest, or reputed popish priest, who shall celebrate any marriage between two protestants, or between any such protestant and papist, unless such protestant and papist shall have been frst married by a clergyman of the protestant religion, shall forfeit the sum of fve hundred pounds to his Majesty, upon conviction thereof. XIII. And whereas it may be expedient, in case his Majesty, his heirs and successors, shall be pleased so to alter the statutes of the college of the holy and undivided Trinity near Dublin, and of the university of Dublin, as to enable persons professing the Roman catholick religion to enter into, or to take degrees in the said university, to remove any obstacle which now exists by statute law; be it enacted, Tat from and afer the frst day of June, one thousand seven hundred and ninety-three, it shall not be necessary for any person upon taking any of the degrees usually conferred by / the said university, to make or subscribe any declaration, or to take any oath, save the oaths of allegiance and abjuration, any law or statute to the contrary notwithstanding.

142

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

XIV. Provided always, Tat no papist or Roman catholick, or person professing the Roman catholick or popish religion, shall take any beneft by, or under this act, unless he shall have frst taken and subscribed the oath and declaration in this act contained and set forth, and also the said oath appointed by the said act passed in the thirteenth and fourteenth years of his Majesty’s reign, entitled, An act to enable his Majesty’s subjects of whatever persuasion to testify their allegiance to him, in some one of his Majesty’s four courts in Dublin, or at the general sessions of the peace, or at any adjournment thereof to be holden for the county, city, or borough wherein such papist or Roman catholick, or person professing the Roman catholick or popish religion, doth inhabit or dwell, or before the going judge or judges of assize, in the county wherein such papist or Roman catholick, or person professing the Roman catholick or popish religion, doth inhabit and dwell, in open court. XV. Provided always, and be it enacted, Tat the names of such persons as shall so take and subscribe the said oaths and declaration, with their titles and additions, shall be entered upon the rolls, for that purpose to be appointed by said respective courts; and that the said rolls once in every year shall be transmitted to, and deposited in the rolls ofce in this kingdom, to remain amongst the records thereof; and the masters or keepers of the rolls in this kingdom, or their lawful deputy or deputies, are hereby empowered and required to give and deliver to such person or persons so taking and subscribing the said oaths and declaration, a certifcate or certifcates of such person or persons having taken and subscribed the said oaths and declaration, for each of which certifcates the sum of one shilling and no more shall be paid. XVI. And be it further provided and enacted, Tat from and afer the frst day of April, one thousand seven hundred and ninety-three, no freeholder, burgess, freeman, or inhabitant of this kingdom, being a papist or Roman catholick, or person professing the Roman catholick or popish religion, shall at any time be capable of giving his vote for the electing of any knight or knights of any shire or county within / this kingdom, or citizen or burgess to serve in any parliament, until he shall have frst produced and shewn to the high sherif of the said county, or his deputy or deputies, at any election of a knight or knights of the said shire, and to the respective chief ofcer or ofcers of any city, borough, or town-corporate, to whom the return of any citizen or burgess to serve in parliament doth or shall respectively belong, at the election of any citizen or burgess to serve in parliament, such certifcate of his having taken and subscribed the said oaths and declaration, either from the rolls-ofce, or from the proper ofcer of the court in which the said oaths and declaration shall be taken and subscribed; and such person being a freeholder, freeman, burgess or inhabitant so producing and shewing such certifcate, shall be then permitted to vote as amply and fully as any protestant freeholder, freeman, burgess, or inhabitant of such county, city, borough, or town-corporate, but not otherwise.

AN ACT TO PREVENT THE ELECTION OR APPOINTMENT OF UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLIES

An Act to Prevent the Election or Appointment of Unlawful Assemblies (1793), in Te Statutes at Large, Passed in the Parliaments held in Ireland, Vol XVI (Dublin: Printed by George Grierson, Printer to the King’s Most Excellent Majesty, 1796).

During 1791–3 the Irish government and Parliament had grown alarmed at the activities of the Catholic Committee, the Catholic Convention and the Societies of United Irishmen who were actively campaigning for religious and political reforms. Tey did this by forming popular associations, issuing public declarations, seeking popular support for public petitions, and petitioning and addressing the king directly, rather than approaching the Irish executive or legislature in the traditional manner of those seeking the redress of grievances. Te authorities were afraid that such activities encouraged sedition and the kind of public disorder that was widespread and indeed endemic in much of Ireland. Tey maintained that such associations, claiming to be the true representatives of the Irish people, were usurping the legitimate authority of MPs and the Convocation of the Church of Ireland, but they did not forbid the right of subjects to petition parliament or to address the king in the traditional way for the redress of public or private grievances.

– 143 –

An Act to Prevent the Election or Appointment of Unlawful Assemblies (1793), in The Statutes at Large, Passed in the Parliaments held in Ireland, Vol XVI (Dublin: Printed by George Grierson, Printer to the King’s Most Excellent Majesty, 1796).

[33 George III, cap. 29 (1793)] WHEREAS the election or appointment of assemblies, purporting to represent the people, or any description or number of the people of this realm, under pretence of preparing or presenting petitions, complaints, remonstrances, and declarations, and other addresses to the King, or to both or either houses of parliament, for alteration of matters established by law, or redress of alleged grievances in church and state, may be made use of to serve the ends of factious and seditious persons, to the violation of the public peace, and the great and manifest encouragement of riot, tumult, and disorder, be it declared and enacted by the King’s most excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the lords spiritual and temporal, and commons in parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, Tat all assemblies, committees, or other bodies of persons elected, or in any other manner constituted or appointed to represent, or assuming or exercising a right or authority to represent the people of this realm, or any number or description of the people of the same, or the people of any province, county, city, town, or other district within the same, under pretence of petitioning for, or in any other manner procuring an alteration of matters established by law in church or state, save and except the knights, citizens, and burgesses elected to serve in the parliament thereof, and save and except the houses of convocation / duly summoned by the King’s writ, are unlawful assemblies; and it shall and may be lawful for any mayor, sherif, justice of the peace, or other peace ofcer, and they are hereby respectively authorised and required, within his and their respective jurisdictions, to disperse all such unlawful assemblies, and if resisted to enter into the same, and to apprehend all persons ofending in that behalf.

– 145 –

146

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

II. And be it further enacted, Tat if any person shall give or publish, or cause or procure to be given or published, any written or other notice of election to be holden, or of any manner of appointment of any person or persons to be the representative or representatives, delegate or delegates, or to act by any other name or description whatever, as representative or representatives, delegate or delegates of the inhabitants, or of any description of the inhabitants of any province, county, city, town, or other district within this kingdom, at any such assembly; or if any person shall attend and vote at such election or appointment, or by any other means vote or act in the choice or appointment of such representatives or delegates, or other persons to act as such, every person who shall be guilty of any of the said ofences respectively, being thereof convicted by due course of law, shall be deemed guilty of an high misdemeanor. III. Provided always, Tat nothing herein contained shall extend or be construed to extend to or afect elections to be made by bodies corporate, according to the charters and usage of such bodies corporate respectively. IV. Provided also, Tat nothing herein contained shall be construed in any manner to prevent or impede the undoubted right of his Majesty’s subjects of this realm to petition his Majesty, or both houses, or either house of parliament, for redress of any public or private grievance.

THE ADDRESS OF THE POOR PEOPLE OF MUNSTER

Te Address of the Poor People of Munster, to their Fellows in Ireland, with their Bill of Grievances Annexed ([c. 1794]).

Munster experienced popular disturbances in the late 1780s and early 1790s that led some contemporaries to propose solutions to the manifest grievances of the Catholic poor of the province. Te author of this pamphlet is clearly sympathetic to the plight of the Catholic poor and seeks to highlight their major grievances and what might be done to have them addressed. Critical of the clergy and the propertied elite, this author protests that the Catholic poor have to pay tithes to the Protestant clergy of the established Church of Ireland, while also being expected to support their own Catholic priests by their fnancial contributions. Tey also have short or insecure leases or no fnancial security at all and yet they labour long and hard to maintain the propertied and political elite in luxury. It is argued that necessary reforms include changes to the fnancing of the diferent churches in Ireland, greater security of tenure for the peasantry, reductions in the number of placemen and pensioners, the extension of the franchise and educational provisions for the poor. Raising the issue of education is unusual, and the author here argues that it is necessary in order to overcome the stigmatization of the Catholic poor as ignorant and superstitious and therefore undeserving of any political representation in the Irish Parliament.

– 147 –

The Address of the Poor People of Munster, to their Fellows in Ireland, with their Bill of Grievances Annexed ([c. 1794]).

“Let those who have Ears Listen.”1

BELOVED FELLOW SUFFERERS, That Almighty and incomprehensible Spirit, which governs all things, has long been witness to our Suferings under the severest strokes of poverty and oppression. – Could we, beyond all Nations, be so wicked as to deserve such persecution? or have our Forefathers with their Lives and Properties, not been able to appease this wrath which is visited on the 9th and 10th generation? We could wish to bury, like christians, the remembrance of past calamities with our fathers in the grave, and leave those, who then acted their part on the bloody and tragic stage, to account to the Judge of the living and the dead for their deeds. – To recount what tradition has transmitted, and history, no doubt, recorded, would be to cause old wounds to bleed afresh, and kindle vindictive sentiments in your breasts – our nature as well as our religion forbid this. Enough, alas! too much of our own bitter cup have we to pour out, without the necessity of aggravation from past transactions. – And what could it avail, to excite in your minds sentiments of detestation and horror, unworthy of a generous though wretched people, against those who are no longer in existence, and whose memories are as execrated as their actions have been odious and abominable. – Even at this distance, we shudder at the feint remembrance of what passed in the reign of the First Charles,2 when what we should now possess was violently snatched with their lives from the greatest number of that generation, and mercyless strangers provided for at their expence. How could we fnd time or courage to recount to you the unheard of barbarities of Cromwell,3 and the dire cruelties of his band of usurping assassins? Te torrents of Irish blood, which have fowed at their hands, and the sequestration of property which at that time happened. – Our manly opposition to tyranny has been branded with rebellion – and our adherence to what we thought right, rewarded with the halter. In fne the original sin of our fathers, and which unhappily is visited on the children to the present generation, – 149 –

150

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

was their resistance to invaders, and their endeavours to preserve their properties from the claims of conquest – but alas! their honest endeavours proved abortive. Tyrants and their generals prevailed, our ancestors sunk, but not tamely, under the weight of superior power, and though now in the valley of wretchedness and misery, it is fattering to our hearts, that they fell in defence of our natural rights and liberties. But we have yet the consolation to think that the iron hand of power, the bloody sword of arbitrary laws, the combination of foreign enemies, have not all been able to remove us from a country which we cherish and hold dear, and which, through the blood of our ancestors, mingled with our own sweat, brings forth fruitful crops for us, and for those who persecute and hate us. We hope, and hope is the inheritance of the aficted, that providence has not altogether forsaken us. Compared with the natives of America, the unhappy Caribs,4 or the more unhappy inhabitants of Africa, we are happy, numerous and free; neither the ferocity, avarice or humanity of our masters have been carried to such extremes; as to expel us from our native coasts, exterminate us from the land of our Ancestors, or what is worse, lead us in bondage to the torrid zone, to slave for the luxuries of human monsters. But though this be not our lot, yet have we sore and heavy complaints of our own, and now is the time to state them. If reason be not folly, we are convinced that the Earth is the common inheritance of all men; and though this be a general truth, yet we shall fnd it tend to individual beneft and good. It has been ordained that man should live by the sweat of his brow,5 and this ordinance, we have the vanity to think, we comply with more religiously than any other class of people from his Majesty to the Clergy inclusively. Te great grievance as to land in the manner in which we possess it; instead of holding it from a ffh or sixth occupier, every one should derive immediately under the proprietor of the soil, and occupy the quantity, that he may be able with his family to cultivate and improve; the land being valued, and a reasonable allowance made to the man who tills and improves it; this would raise us from our present state of slavery to a happy situation, where our supplies would keep pace with our wants, and the fruits of our labour would be partly our own. If we calculate right, (and who ought to know better than those who practice) the landlords would not feel any reduction in their revenues; for a share of the profits arising to intermediate tenants (mere locusts in the land) from our labour, would devolve to them, and we the labourers, enjoying the overplus, could smile on our children, and tell them that we had not laboured in vain. It is said the labourer is worthy of his hire;6 and what must we expect, who have long borne the heat of the day, and by our industry, support so many unworthies in Church and State. As we are all so naturally connected with the Earth, we cannot abandon the subject, without saying a word more. Let Monopolists be for ever banished from the soil, and let those only who toil, feel the sweets;

Te Address of the Poor People of Munster

151

let the laborious peasant call some spot his own, and let the children enjoy part, at least, of their father’s industry; we claim nothing but our right; and justice has from eternity awarded it. Tough humbled in the dust, we feel ourselves animated with a spark which no tyranny has been yet able to stife; and though MEN, we do not presume, like our more refned and philosophic neighbours, to hurl the higher orders from their seats; if such a punishment should await them, it must come from Heaven. TITHES come in next place; and sure Satan must have frst invented them, to excite contentions among men, to swell the pride of the Ministers of the Gospel, excite the avarice of the Church, lessen the infuence of Religion, infame the animosities of parties, and provoke the labourer to imitate the murderous act of Cain.7 Tithes have long been the apple of discord8 in the nation, and kept men of diferent profession from uniting in the dear bonds of brotherly love. It is true, the law has decreed that one class of men should in an especial manner, feed at our expence, and riot on the tenths of our labour; policy may then require it, but justice and humanity roundly forbid it. No honest men could take upon them to alienate our property without our consent; and no just men could enjoy them upon such principles, rewards and services ought to be reciprocal; and where there is no service, rewards are not due. Could the Apostles of Christ, in conscience, receive Tithes from Pagans? or could the Roman Senate decree, in honour, or justice, the frst fruits of Cicero’s orchards9 to St. Paul or Peter? We have long borne the weight of this grievance, and many of our Brothers sealed their abhorrence of the imposition with their blood: It is time that lives should be spared, and that the loud and unanimous voice of the nation should cry down this oppressive and base trafck: Let those who will have Priests be Priest-ridden, and those who like Parsons, pamper and indulge them; or if the diferent Rabbies10 must have a secure and fxed establishment, let Church-lands, originally the property of the people, be disposed of to the best advantage, and the revenues divided among the men of God, according to their deserts: Ten we shall no more be plagued with those who seem only to mind our Temporals, & abandon our Souls to reason and to God: let this oeconomy take place, and we shall soon forget all diference between Protestant and Catholic, Quaker and Presbiterian: When our clergy do not vie for the bone of contention, all creeds will be like, and virtue and vice will constitute the only diference among parties: Having spoken of Tythes, we should not forget Priests, who are as numerous as they are burdensome to their congregations. Te tyranny of the greater part is insupportable, and the exactions of many shameful and extravagant: Teir system of taxation extends from the cradle to the grave, and for the sake of money they follow their victims to purgatory: Teir many impositions have been long patiently borne with, and we have for God’s sake thrown a veil over their scandalous vices. Te habit of such practices has made too deep an impression on our

152

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

minds, and naturally lessened our esteem for the PRIEST as well as our regard for his doctrine; for such is the constitution of the human mind, that it suspects the fruit when the tree is rotten; And, indeed, the spirit of Liberty, which produced such wonderful efects in other Nations in Europe, seems to have been felt by many of our Fellow Citizens. It has invigorated their bodies at the same time that it has given a strange energy to their minds: What consequences may result from this unaccountable revolution, time alone can tell: it is beyond our calculation. Beside bearing the immense burden of the National weight, we are made to support two Church Establishments. With the Members of the one we are scarcely acquainted; Tey decimate us yearly, and what they give us in return the world knows; the second is not less expensive, and the contributions for their support have grown into positive Taxes, increased at will and exacted with the severity of Roman Questors;11 this has been for many years past considered by us as a just object of Reform, and for a time, in spite of the Tunder of Excommunications and the terror of Winding Sheets, we partly succeeded; but alas! What salutary regulations can be successfully carried into efect without the support and countenance of the Laws.— ELECTIVE FRANCHISE: In a paper lately published, from Bandon, we have been called upon, (IF WE HAVE ANY GRIEVANCES) to lay them before the Legislature: Tis, indeed, would be our duty, had we REPRESENTATIVES in Parliament: But the Religion of many of us, and the Poverty of ALL, are obstacles to our Elective Franchise: as PAPISTS we are only ft for perjury, and as PAUPERS unworthy of Legislative protection: Cruel Sequence: What! If Religion should delude us, are we not men; and if Providence should devote us to poverty, are we not indefatigably laborious: Good God! Are we not as worthy of confdence as Atheistical Nobles and profigate Courtiers? And if our toils merit us not the protection of Representatives, our Lives, at least, ought to be secured by Laws of our own making. It would be difcult to prove, how laws made without the will or consent of any body of people, could in honour or conscience bind them; as well may the Divan12 at Constantinople, require our compliance with their arbitrary Firmans,13 as a body of placemen and pensioners, collected in Dublin, insist on their acts being obeyed by those whom they do not represent. We difer not from the Royal French who lately obeyed the edicts of the Grand Monarque,14 registered in his parliaments. But we abuse your time, and insult your reason. Two millions of men, though Paupers deserve to be free, freedom cannot be enjoyed without protection, and there can be no protection without personal representation; without this, our lives, labour and industry are every Session, at the will of usurpers, who consult our interests and happiness as far as they may be useful to their own aggrandisement. Who is the greater Pauper, he who gives, or he who takes? He who toils; or he who prates? If independence be a requisite

Te Address of the Poor People of Munster

153

qualifcation for a vote, who can be better entitled than we, who are able not only to support ourselves, but even thousands, who daily riot on the superfuities of our industry. We are convinced, that if we were once equally and universally represented in the Grand Council of the nation, by men who could have no interest to deceive or be deceived, all those grievances we complain of would be done away, and universal right would take place of universal wrong. National Education: has been long withheld from us; for what purpose may be easily conjectured. Te friends of Government are constantly in the habit of ridiculing our ignorance, and laughing at our superstition, and yet they have not taken one step to remove them: Tis shews that they are fond of darkness, and would wish to keep the light from the people; the immense Revenues collected from our Industry, and lavished on wretched Placemen and useless Pensioners, would be usefully expended on National Schools established in every Parish, so that every one could avail himself of them: thus the Cultivation of our minds would keep pace with the improvement of our bodies, and we should soon be able to distinguish between right and wrong: truth and error: vice and sound morality: patriotism and ministerial treachery: what a blessing would it not be to us to receive the light of the Gospel immediately from the source, not by reflection; what joy to have its beams strike on the prism of our minds, not received as heretofore, through a Magic Lantern;15 In fne, it would be endless to detail the advantages that must result to man from a general and liberal education. We have now mentioned to you the great sources of our misfortunes, and it would be endless to enumerate the almost infnite ramifcations which fow from these. Let the healing hand of justice and wisdom dry up the former, and the latter must cease to exist. Tough we have ventured, on the spur of the moment, to draw up this hasty sketch, we have little hopes, from the vigilance of our oppressors and the restrictions on the Press, that it will fnd its way to any considerable part of you. But though attempts should be made to stife it in the cradle, and rewards ofered for the Authors, be assured its principles, which are founded on eternal truth, shall never perish. On refection, we decline oaths, as only ft to bind traitors and conspirators. Our cause is that of the people, and every virtuous man must wish us success; we call upon you by what we feel and what we sufer, to raise your energetic voice, and let it be heard in the sanctuary of the laws – Will to be free, and liberty triumphs. But frown on your enemies, and they fy before you. In imitation of the House of Lords, institute a Secret Committee16 in every parish, and let the result of our deliberations be rapidly conveyed by a special messenger from one to another; by this the necessity of tumultuous meetings will be efectually precluded; and the disasters arising therefrom happily avoided. While our system is thus concerted, and brought to maturity, peace is preserved. Folly has

154

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

hitherto marked our Councils, and imprudence attended our actions. We consulted without wisdom, and executed without a plan, and the result has been disgrace and disappointment. Here if they merited a serious refutation, would be the place to notice the general cry of Parsons, Priests, Landlords, Placemen, Pensioners and their Sattelites: that the nation is unprecedently prosperous, the people extremely happy; the price we receive for every article of produce exorbitant; but our huts; our meagre tables; our squallid visages; our rotten and flthy garments; our straw and fern beds; our naked heads and bare-feet; in fne, our general lack, not only of the comforts, but even of the necessaries of life, give the lie to such assertions. It is true the fruits of the Earth in general, as well as made up provisions bear a great price; but with whom doe the money remain? with the oppressive Landlord, who from short leases, or tenures at Will, raises the rents in proportion as he fnds the produce grow in value, keeping us still SLAVES Tis is the fountain of all our evils, and must be speedily remedied.

God Bless the People.

ADDRESS FROM THE SOCIETY OF UNITED IRISHMEN OF DUBLIN

Address fom the Society of United Irishmen of Dublin, to the People of Ireland. Couched in Moderate Language, containing Strong and Unanswerable Facts, which Demonstrate the Necessity of a Parliamentary Reform, with a Plan for an Equal Representation of the People of Ireland in the House of Commons ([Dublin], 1794).

Te Society of United Irishmen of Dublin, established in November 1791, was much infuenced by the dramatic events in revolutionary France and by the natural rights doctrine promoted by Tomas Paine. Its desire to unite Irishmen of all religious persuasions and all social ranks led the society to advocate a radical reform of the system of representation. When its proposals were attacked by conservative men of property and rejected even by liberal men such as Henry Grattan, the society, as in this pamphlet, sought to justify its proposals. Tose who rejected the proposals did so because of fears that such eforts to democratize the franchise would lead to attacks on the monarchy and aristocracy and hence the destruction of Ireland’s mixed government and balanced constitution. Tis Address maintains that the political reforms that the Society had been advocating would actually strengthen the constitution and would promote peace and happiness. Here it is argued that the franchise should be granted to the poor since they contribute to the support of the state because much of what they consumed was taxed. Similarly, the Address argues that the labour of the poor should be accepted as a form of property that deserved to be represented in the Irish legislature as much as the real estate of the rich. Furthermore, the poor should not be denied the franchise because they were ignorant; rather, they were ignorant because they had been denied their political rights. Tis pamphlet concludes with a list of practical reforms that will ensure a democratic system of representation. It proposes that placemen and pensioners should be excluded from the Irish House of Commons. It also advocates fve of the celebrated six points of parliamentary reform: universal adult male sufrage; equal electoral districts; annual general elections; abolition of property qualifcations for representatives in the Irish House of Commons; and the payment of such representatives. Te reform that is absent is a demand for the secret ballot. It has been suggested that – 155 –

156

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

this omission was because of the fear that the Catholic majority might become too powerful and too independent of Protestant landowners and employers if they could vote in secret.

Address from the Society of United Irishmen of Dublin, to the People of Ireland ([Dublin,] 1794).

We submitted to your consideration such a Plan for your Equal Representation, as would, in our Judgement, if carried into efect, give you your just and constitutional weight in the Legislature. – We exulted in the thought that our exertions had contributed to raise the public mind to that elevated point, from which it might view its widely extended rights; from which it might discover the real insignifcance of every proposal towards Reform, that should not seek the full measure of justice; which should not give to all, who were in any degree bound by the Law the power of chusing those who made the Law[.] We thought the simplicity of the Plan the best Test of its honesty, and that its appeal to the common sense of the Nation rendered any explanation of its principles unnecessary. We are, however, now called upon to justify its primary principle, by the objections which have sinse [sic] been raised against it; and should we succeed, our triumph must be that of argument over invective, of Reason over Prejudice, and of Justice over Power. It is an apprehension with some, that should every man be allowed to vote for a Representative in Parliament, the Monarchy and the Aristocracy of the Constitution would soon be overborne and destroyed, by the exorbitant Power and Republican Spirit of the Democracy. Let it be remembered, that the British Constitution has amply provided against the probability of such an event. It has appointed a sole executive ofcer, invested with prerogatives to strengthen that executive Power, and with a certain portion of Legislative Authority to defend those Prerogatives. It has instituted a substantial Aristocracy, not deriving all its weight and authority merely from the King’s Patents, but hereditary, and / possessing a mass of property; by which, backed and supported, if necessary, by the Executive Prerogatives and Legislative Authority of the Crown, it is enabled to withstand the attacks of the Democracy, Away then with this idle apprehension; can any danger attack upon so much infuence and so much Power? On the contrary, can any thing short of pure Democracy maintain against them the Integrity and Independence of the House of Commons?

– 157 –

158

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

But it is said that the lower classes of the Community, being without property, have no stake in the Country, and therefore ought not to vote for any part of the Legislature: In consequence of the representative system every man is supposed to be, either individually or by his Deligate, a party to making the Laws, by which he is to be bound: Te Elective Right cannot therefore be denied on Constitutional Principle to any one; and even the poorest should be allowed the exercise of that Right, as they are bound by law as well as others, Laws operate on LIFE, LIBERTY, and PROPERTY.1 Why his [sic] property represented? Because it is valuable to the Possessor, and may be afected by Law. Why should Liberty and Life not be represented? Are they not more valuable to their possessor, and may they not also be afected by the Law? Since Liberty and Life are the most importent objects of Legislation, the poorest class have a right to some controul over the Legislature, and it is just that they should exercise it. Te Spirit of many of our / Laws is Aristocratic, and by no means calculated for the protection of the Poor. To pass over the remarkable instances of the Game Laws2 and the Samp [sic] Act,3 the latter of which, by operating on legal proceedings, shuts the door of Justice against the Poor, we shall refer to a much more important system, our Criminal Code. If the lower classes of the Community had been represented in Parliament when their necessities frst urged them to insurrection and outrage, under the denomination of White Boys4 and Defenders,5 Parliament would have enquired into, and redressed their grievances, instead of making Laws to punish them with Death. Te Acts, which are prohibited by many of our Laws, are unquestionably great crimes: but the punishments, inficted by those Laws are still greater crimes. Te reason of this disproportion is, that the Rich man is never guilty of Sheep-stealing, and the Poor man has no one to plead his cause in the Senate. If however, it be a principle that no man, who does not contribute to the support of Government, should be mediately or immediately concerned in Legislation, such principle would be no exclusion of the Poor, for they contribute in proportion to their means: Te poorest man in the land pays Taxes for his Fire, his Candle, for his Potatoes and his Cloathing;6 and the poorer he is, the greater occasion he has for a vote to protect what little he has, which is necessary not to his qualifcation merely, but to his very existence, He has a property in his Labour,7 and in the value it will bring in the Market, the Field, or the Manufactory: a Property, on account of it’s smallness, of more real value to him than Tousands of Pounds to the Rich and Luxurious: a Property, which must render him more interested in the honest disposal of the Public money, since one additional Tax may crush him, than those can be who receive that Public Money by virtue of PLACES without employment, and PENSIONS without merit. Property is merely the collection of Labour: possesses the very same qualities before, as afer it is collected into a heap; and the scattered labour of the lowest

Address fom the Society of United Irishmen of Dublin

159

ranks is as real, and ought to be as really represented / as the most fxed and solid Property. Reason, we think, says this, and sad experience has manifested, that giving Political Power exclusively to property collected, not to the mass of Living Labour, has been in all ages, and particularly in Modern Times, the true cause of Feudality, of Vassalage, and of Aristocratic Despotism. It is also used as an argument, that although in theory every man has a right to vote, yet the exercise of that right among us would be impracticable, or attended with outrage from the multitude of Voters. To that we answer, that the practicability of the measure depends on a few regulations, which we apprehend, could be easily contrived to render elections practicable and tranquil. Let their be a division of the Kingdom into parts, sufciently small, and as nearly as possible equal with respect to population, and let the several elections annually commence and conclude throughout the Kingdom on one and the same day. Some friends to universal sufrage in a new country,8 urge a local objection to its being applied to Ireland. Tey say that the lower classes of people in this country are peculiarly unft for the exercise of Sufrage, on account of their extreme ignorance. We know of no description of people unft for the exercise of their rights: and if we did, we would ft them for it by giving it to them. What has made those classes so extremely ignorant? Te privation of those rights, which, if enjoyed, would have procured them knowledge. Apply the reverse of that, which has debased, and it will exalt them. Give them the elective franchise, and let them exercise it directly. It is not just to judge of what the people would be, when embodied into the Constitution of their Country, from their present state of debasement, in which they feel themselves unconnected with it. We trust that our countrymen, even the poorest, who are now stigmatized with the appellations of Swine, Wretches and Rabble, would, if restored to their Rights, evince an elevation of Sentiment, which, setting every species of corruption at defance, must humble the pride of Wealth, by the superior lustre of virtuous POVERTY. / Indeed the local circumstances, seem to us rather in favour of introducing it into Ireland. We have lately had occasion, in considering the Catholic claims, to examine into the foundations of Government. Te Catholic has taught all Ireland, that to be taxed or legislated for, without being represented, is an oppression, which sinks the suferer into a SLAVE. He insisted on his right to the elective sufrage, because he was bound by the Laws, and contributed to the expences of the State. Te doctrine once broached, can never be forgotten; and the remaining Slave, whom reform shall not have raised to the rank of Citizen, will remember the argument of the Catholic, and ask himself “am I not bound by the Laws: and do I not in my humble sphere contribute to the expences of the State? Why am I not represented? Is it not my right? and shall I not insist upon my right?” Sooner or later the measure must come. Te eternal principle of Justice will be repeated in louder and louder tones, until at length it must be heard

160

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

and observed. Why then not now? Why leave behind a source of new reforms, perhaps of convulsions? If reform only communicates power to a greater number, and do not give liberty to all, it will only strengthen the ruling, and weaken the oppressed body; so that when the Slave shall have acquired sufcient courage to speak, the obstinacy of the Citizen will compel him to act. We cannot forget the language made use of to intimidate the Catholic from prosecuting his claims, and that those very claims shortly afer having been rejected with scorn, were admitted with respect. Te same line of Prudence and Wisdom will, we are persuaded, be pursued in the case of REFORM, whenever convincing proof of the public Sentiment shall be received on that Subject, and the kingdom by the restoration of Universal Sufrage be delivered over to uninterrupted PEACE and HAPPINESS. Contemplating this grateful prospect, we smile with much internal satisfaction, on hearing those intemperate and abusive expressions, which the Members of Opposition make use of against this Society. We smile at their inability to / conseal the vexation and disappointment they have felt on fnding themselves forsaking by the People. Tat people whose Majesty they insult, but whose forbearance they at the same time solicit – on fnding themselves falling, like the ostentatious Balloon,9 from that height to which they had risen by a sort of infammable levity, and there sustained solely by the breath of popular favour – We smile at the curious coalition of political parties against our Society – to see them club all their Wisdom and their Wit, to manifest to the whole Country that we are really formidable – but we are rather inclined to pity than forced Fraternity, that monstrous conjustion [sic], which in spite of the horror of instinct, and the antipathy of Nature, can join in one common efort the highest Genius with the lowest Ribaldry – How great must be the panic that can unite such extreems? We can bear as we have borne the common place invective against this Society; but we feel some indignation, when he,10 who should look on himself as the purchased Property of the People; to whose fortune every man, even “the Beggar on the Bridge;” has contributed, whom the “the shouts of the mob” have raised to the height of his fame. When such a man inveighs against armed Beggary and Shabby Sedition, we cannot but remember a time, when the usual adjunct to his own Name was “Shabby and Seditious incendiary.”11 It is not manly, it is not decorous to deal out this contumelious language against the great mass of mankind. Te use of contemptuous terms disposes to contemptuous treatment, and those, whom we villify as mob we soon learn to slight as men. It is the unequal partition of Rights, and what results from this, the arrogance of Power, and the abasement of Poverty, which make mob, instigate to tumult, and good to insurrection. If the People were respected, they would reverence the constituted authorities; but to gain this respect they must possess those RIGHTS, which are the Prerogative of their Nature, and the worth of Manhood.

Address fom the Society of United Irishmen of Dublin

161

Opposition seem suprized that the People should view their debates with indiference. We will tell them the reason. / It is because nothing passes of a nature to animate and interest that People – nothing, from which an individual can promise himself more Happiness, or the Community more Splendour – it is because enthusiasm no longer lights up every countenance, and swells every heart with something great and good, and with a prospect of something greater and better – it is because there appears no internal spring of action, no fxture of character; but good and bad qualities, as it were, external, and neither virtues nor vices their own. It is because once in seven years12 the PEOPLE are treated as MAJESTY, and in the interval maltreated as MOB. We have not in our Plan of Reform paled in little parks of Aristocracy. Our Plan has not been described with a pair of compasses, nor have we defaced with childish circles, the system of Nature, and the Chart of the Constitution. Tere is no truth in any political system, in which the Sun of Liberty is not placed in the Center, with knowledge to enlighten, and Benevolence to warm and invigorate; with the same ray to gild the Palace and illuminate the Cottage. Te Earth moves, said Galileo,13 and the Sun stands still. He was imprisoned for the heretical assertion; for a Lible [sic] against the Laws of Nature, and for exciting Sedition among the Stars. But the Earth moves notwithstanding; and in Spite of Fire, Imprisonment, Pillory and Transportation, the RIGHTS OF MAN are the immoveable Centre of the British Constitution, that has hitherto regulated Times and determined Revolutions. /

A PLAN, FOR AN EQUAL REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE OF IRELAND IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS. Prepared for the Public Consideration by the Society of United Irisomem of Dublin. 1. Tat the Nation, for the Purpose of Representation solely, should be divided into 300 Electorates, formed by combination of Parishes, and as nearly as possible equal in point of Population. 2. Tat each Electorate should return one Representative to Parliament. 3. Tat each Electorate should, for the convenience of carring on the Elections at the same time, be subdivided into a sufcient number of parts. 4. Tat there shall be a returning Ofcer for each Electorate, and a deputy returning Ofcer for each Subdivision, to be respectively elected. 5. Tat the Electors of the Electorate should vote, each in the Sub-division in which he is registered, and has resided as herein afer specifed. 6. Tat the returning Ofcers of the Sub-divisions should severaly return their respective Polls to the returning Ofcer of the Electorate, who should lot

162

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

[sic] up the whole, and return the Person having a majority of votes, as the Representative in Parliament. 7. Tat every Man possessing the Right of Sufrage for a Representative in parliament, should exercise it in his own person only. 8. Tat no person should have a right to vote in more than one Electorate at the same Election. 9. Tat every male, of sound mind, who has attained the full age of 21 years, and actually dwelt, or maintained a family establishment in any Electorate for six months of the twelve, immediately previous to the commencement of the Election, (provided his residence, or maintaining a family establishment, be duly registered) should be intitled to vote for the Representative of the Electorate. / 10. Tat their shall be a Registering Ofcer, and a Registry of Residence in every Sub-division of each Electorate; and that in all questions concerning Residence, the Registry should be considered as conclusive evidence. 11. Tat all Elections in the Nation should commence and close on the same day. 12. Tat the votes of all Electors shall be given by Voice and not by Ballot. 13. Tat no oath of any kind should be taken by any Elector. 14. Tat the full age of 25 years should be a necessary qualifcation to entitle any man to be a Representative. 15. Tat Residence within the Electorate should not, but that Residence within the Kingdom should be a necessary qualifcation for a Representative. 16. Tat no Property Qualifcation should be necessary to entitle any man to be a Representative. 17. Tat any Person having a Pension, or holding a Place in the Executive or Judicial Departments, should be thereby disqualifed from being a Representive. 18. Tat Representatives should receive a reasonable stipend for their services. 19. Tat every Representative should, on taking his Seat, swear that neither he, nor any person to promote his Interest, with his Privity, gave or was to give any Bribe for the Sufrage of any Vote. 20. Tat any Representative convicted by a Jury, of having acted contrary to the substance of the above Oath, should be for ever disqualifed from sitting or voting in Parliament. 21. Tat Parliaments should be annual. 22. Tat a Representative should be at liberty to resign his Deligation upon given sufcient notice to his Constituents. 23. Tat the absence from duty so [ ] should vacate the seat of a Representative. /

Address fom the Society of United Irishmen of Dublin

163

Te Society of United Irishmen of Dublin to the PEOPLE OF IRELAND. People of Ireland. We now submit to your consideration, a plan for your equal representation in the House of Commons, In framing it we have disregarded the many over-charged accusations, which we hear daily made by the prejudiced and corrupt, against the People, their independence, integrity, and understanding. We are ourselves, but a portion of the People; and that appellation, we feel, confers more real honour and importance, than can in these times, be derived from Places Pensions, or Titles. As little have we cousulted [sic] the sentiments of Administration or of Opposition, We have attentively observed them both, and, what ever we may hope of some members of the latter, we frmly believe that both those parties are equally averse from the measure of adequate reform. If we had no other reason for that opinion, the plan laid before the Parliament, in the last session, under the auspices of Opposition, might convince us of the melancholy truth. Tus circumstanced, then, distrusting all Parties, we hold it the right and the duty of every Man in the Nation, to examine, deliberate, and decide for himself on that important measure, As a portion of the People (for in no other capacity, we again repeat it, do we presume to address you) we suggest to our ideas, by which we would provide to preserve the popular part of the Legislature uninfuenced by, and independent of the other two parts, and to efectuate that essential principle of Justice and of our Constitution, that every Man has the right of voting, through the medum [sic] of his Representative, for the law by which he is bound: that sacred principle, for which America fought, and by which Ireland was emancipated from British supremacy! If our ideas are right; which we feel an honest conviction they are, ADOPT THEM; if wrong, discussion will detect their errors, and we at least, shall be always found ready to proft by, and conform ourselves to the sentiments of the People. / Our present state of representation is charged with being unequal, unjust, and by no means calculated to express your deliberate will, on any subject of general importence. We have endeavoured to point out the remedies of those evils, by a more equal distribution of political power and liberty; by doing justice; and by anxiously providing that your deliberate will shall be, at all times, accurately expressed in your own branch of the Legislature. If these are not the principles of good government, we have yet to learn from the Placemen and Pensioners that fit about the Castle, in what the science of Politics can consist. But we know they are, and we are bold to say, that the more a government carries these principles into efect, the nearer it approaches to perfection. We believe it will be said that our plan, however just, is impracticable in the present state of this Country. If any part of that impracticability should be sup-

164

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

posed to result from the intrested resistance of borough-proprietors, although we never will consent to compromise the Public Right, yet we, for our parts, might not hesitate to purchase the Public Peace by an adequate compensation. At all events, it rests with you, Countrymen, not with us, to remove the objection. If you do not wish the accomplishment of such a Reform, it will not take place; if you do, we cannot believe that Ireland is yet sunk to that state of misgovernment, in which it may be truly said, that although the great body of the People seriously determined on its attainment it is nevertheless impracticable. To you, among our Countrymen, for whose welfare we have peculiarly laboured from the frst moment of our institution, and the contemplation of whose prosperity will more than compensate us for the suferings we may have endured, for the calumnies with which we are asperced, and for those which the publication of this unpalarable [sic] plan will call down upon us; To you the poorer classes of the Community we now address ourselves. We are told you are guorant14 [sic]; we wish you to enjoy LIBERTY, without, which no People was ever enlightened: we are told you / are uneducated and immoral; we wish you to be educated, and your morrality [sic] improved, by the most rapid of all instructors A GOOD GOVERNMENT. Do you fnd yourselves sunk in poverty and wretchedness? Are you overloaded with burdens, you are but little able to bear? Do you feel many grieveances, which it would be tedious and might be unsafe to mention? Believe us, they can all be redressed by such a reform as will give YOU your just proportion of infuence in the Legislature, and by such a measure only. To that, therefore, we wish to rivet all your attention. Let those Men, who wrangle about preserving or acquiring power, catch at popularity by their petty regulations to check the progress of these growing evils; do you deliberate, in the retirement of your own hearts, upon their only adequate remedy. Desist, we entreat you, from those disturbances, which are disgrace to your country, and an injury to yourselves, which impair your own strength, and impead your own cause, Examine, peaceable and attentively, the plan of Reform we now submit to you. Consider Does it propose to do You justice? Does it propose to give You sufcient protection? For we have no fears but the Rich will have justice done them, and will be always sufciently protected. Hang this plan up in your Cabbins; think on it over and over again; do not throw it by in despair, as being imossible [sic] to be carried into efect; FOR NOTHING, WE HOPE, IS IMPOSSIBLE THAT IS JUST.

SOCIETY OF UNITED IRISHMEN OF DUBLIN

Society of United Irishmen of Dublin (Dublin, 1794), pp. 13–14, 30–2, 50–73, 81–90, 199–202.

Although coming under pressure from its political opponents in 1794, the Society of United Irishmen of Dublin sought to keep up its spirits and to encourage its followers by printing a collection of its previous addresses, notices and communications issued between 1792 and 1794. Te followed text reproduced here includes the most important, but not all, of these public communications. Tis selection reveals the connections that the society had with other such societies, with reform-minded Catholics, and with the wider public. It proves its frm commitment to Catholic emancipation and it explains and justifes the society’s support for a radical reform of the electoral system. It also condemns the policies of the Irish government and parliament. It expresses strong hostility to the war with revolutionary France, which is seen as a means of buttressing the power of the governing elite and undermining support for political reforms. It denounces the repressive measures being adopted by the government and parliament, and ofers a defence of those of its leading members who are in danger of being prosecuted and imprisoned for their political activities. It explains the constitution of the society and explains how new members should be inducted into the society.

– 165 –

Society of United Irishmen of Dublin (Dublin, 1794), pp. 13–14, 30–2, 50–73, 81–90, 199–202.

“LET THE NATION STAND.”

[…] TO THE SOCIETY OF UNITED IRISHMEN IN BELFAST. Prompted by Duty as well as Inclination to make always an early Answer to your Letters, out Delay in the present Instance was at frst occasioned by trivial Circumstances, made important merely by their Number, but latterly has been owing to a simple and a serious Cause. – Te compelled Absence of our Secretary Mr. NAPPER TANDY,1 a Man who with an erect Mind, and an honest Heart, has during a long course of Years, stem’d the torrent of corruption, in the midst of a corrupt City; who at the Risk even of his Popularity the sole Reward of a Life spent in the public service, entered with Ardour into your scheme of coalescing all religious Persuasions in the Unity of a common Cause; and who, if he now sufers, has the Consolation to think that he sufers in common with Magna Charta.2 Te fundamental Principles of the Constitution are violated in his Person: the personal Liberty of the Subject is laid prostrate at the Mercy of a Resolution of one branch of Legislature, the priva lex3 becomes equivalent to an act of Legislation: Proclamation foreruns law, / anticipates its Judgment and Magna Charta is thus crucifed between the two thieves of the Common Right, Privilege on the one hand, and Prerogative on the other. While we are thinking of Elective Franchise and Political Power, let us take heed that we are not losing even civil Liberty, and that a custom of Parliament does not operate as a real Lettre de Cachet,4 against Personal Security and freedom. Whether the Jurisdiction which the House of Commons, has over its own members, or the privileges which shield them from the abuse of Prerogative, should be converted into an omnipotent instrument of ministerial Vengeance against the people, stretching its Arm across the Nation, and suspending the natural Process of Law, (all Crimes

– 167 –

168

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

being cognizable in their proper Courts) whether such a power not founded on any Principle, not defned by any rule, and justifed only by occasional practice, be consistent with the Liberty of the Nation, the sacred trial by jury, the law of the land, judge ye! We shall only ask what is tyranny but the oppressive and injurious exertion of unconstitutional and indefnite Authority, where they who do Injustice commit it with Impunity, and he who sufers it, is without Redress, however Innocent he may be, however Meritorious. We join with you in thinking that the reciprocal Admission of Members subject to the Regulations you mention would serve to draw the bonds of political Brotherhood more closely between our Societies, and the adoption of such a Seal as you have described has the stamp of our approbation. February 28th, 1792.

[…] November 3, 1792.

To WILLIAM DRENNAN, M.D.5 Chairman.

of the SOCIETY of UNITED IRISHMEN IN DUBLIN. SIR, AS Chairman of the Catholics of Dublin, I am ordered to transmit a copy of their proceedings on Wednesday, October 31st. We trust you will fnd in that paper, a just refection of your own principles, no less honourable to yourselves, than advantageous to the true interests of your Country. With every sentiment of gratitude for the services which the Catholic cause has received at your hands, we are Sir, your most obliged and obedient servants, By order of the Meeting, THOMAS BRAUGHAL,6 Chairman.

[…]

Society of United Irishmen of Dublin

169

October 31, 1792

CATHOLIC MEETING of DUBLIN. RESOLVED That we embrace this opportunity to repeat our Tanks to the illustrious Characters in both Houses of Parliament, who have nobly stood forward in support of Catholic Emancipation, and the Right of the Subject to Petition for Redress of Grievances. Tat our warmest Gratitude is due and hereby respectfully ofered to our countrymen, the Citizens of Belfast, for the uniform and manly exertions which they have on all occasions made in support of our cause, and for the example of liberality and genuine public spirit which they have thereby shewn to the kingdom at large. Tat our sincere Tanks are likewise due to the diferent Volunteer Corps lately reviewed in Ulster, to the Societies of United Irishmen of Dublin and Belfast, to the Protestant Freeholders of Cork, the diferent Gentlemen who at Grand Juries and County Meetings have supported our Cause, and to all others among our Protestant Brethren, who have manifested a wish for our Emancipation; and we trust we shall evince by our conduct, that we are not insensible nor unworthy of the kindness which they have shewn us. Tat our Chairman be ordered to transmit Copies of this Day’s proceedings to the Chairman of the Town-Meeting of Belfast, the Chairman of the diferent Societies of United Irishmen, / men, the diferent Reviewing Ofcers in Ulster, and the other distinguished Characters who have interest themselves in the Cause of Catholic Emancipation. By Order of the Meeting SIMON Mc. GUIRE,7 Secretary.

[…] Back-lane, January 11th, 1793. WILLIAM DRENNAN, Chairman, ARCHIBALD HAMILTON ROWAN,8 Sec.

The SOCIETY of UNITED IRISHMEN of the CITY of DUBLIN. Unconnected with Party, faithfully attached to the principles of the Constitution, and associated for the attainment of a communion of Rights, and of an equal and impartial Representation of the Nation in Ireland, are happy in

170

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

expressing their tribute of praise and gratitude, to their most Gracious Sovereign for that part of the Speech from the Trone, whereby his Majesty particularly recommended to his Parliament, to take into their serious consideration, the situation of his Catholic Subjects.

---------------- / January 25, 1793.

The SOCIETY of UNITED IRISHMEN of DUBLIN.

To the IRISH NATION. WILLIAM DRENNAN, Chairman. ARCHIBALD HAMILTON ROWAN, Sec. It is our right and our duty, at this time and at all times, to communicate our opinion to the public, whatever may be its success; and under the protection of a free-press, itself protected by a jury, judges of law as well as fact, we will never be afraid to speak freely what we freely think, appealing for the purity of our intentions to God, and as far as these intentions are manifested by word, writing, or action, appealing to the justice of our cause, and the judgment of our country. On the 9th of November, 1791, was this Society founded.9 We and our beloved brethren of Belfast frst began that civic union, which, if a nation be a society united for mutual advantage, has made Ireland a nation; and at a time when all wished, many willed, but few spoke, and fewer acted, we, Catholics and Protestants, joined our hands and our hearts together; sunk every distinctive appellation in the name Irishman; and in the presence of God, devoted ourselves to universal enfranchisement, and a real representation of all the people in Parliament. On this rock of right our little ark found a resting-place; gradually, / though not slowly, throughout the country, other stations of safety appeared, and what before was agitated sea, became frm and fertile land. From that time have the body and spirit of our Societies increased, until selfsh Corporations, sunk in conscious insignifcance, have given way to a grand incorporation of the Irish People. We have, in our Digest of the penal laws, addressed ourselves successfully, to the good sense, humanity, and generous indignation of all Ireland, convincing public reason, alarming public conscience, and holding up this collection of bloody fragments as a terrible memorial of government without justice, and of legality without constitution. It has been our rule and our practice never to enter into compromise or composition with a noxious principle, and we have therefore set our face, and lifed our voice, against this persecuting and pusillani-

Society of United Irishmen of Dublin

171

mous code, as against the murderer of our brother, eager to erase the whole of it from the statute-book as it erased our countrymen from the state, and wishing to proscribe such an incongruous and monstrous conjunction of terms as Penal Laws not only from a digest of the laws but from the dictionary of the language. It has appeared our duty, in times such as these, when the head is nothing without the heart, and with men such as we oppose, not only to write and speak but to act and sufer; to reckon nothing hazardous, provided it was necessary; to come forward with the intrepidity which a good cause inspires, and a backward people required; by going far ourselves to make others follow faster, though, all the time conjuring us to retreat; in short, to make the retrograde stationary, and the stationary progressive; / to quicken the dead, and add a soul to the living. Knowing that what the tongue is to the man, the press is to the people, though nearly blasted in our cradle by the sorcery of solicitors of law, and general attorneys, we have persisted with courageous perseverance to rally around this forlorn hope of freedom, and to maintain this citadel of the constitution, at the risque of personal security, property, and all that was dear to us. Tey have come to us, with a writ and a warrant, and an ex ofcio information,10 but we have come to them in the name of the genius of the British constitution and the majesty of the people of Ireland. Is sedition against the ofcers of administration, to exercise the criminal jurisdiction of the country, and is sedition against the people, to walk by with arrogant impunity? We have defended the violated liberty of the subject against the undefned and voracious privilege of the House of Commons, treating with merited scorn the insolent menaces of men infated with ofce, and not only have we maintained the rights of the people at the bar of this branch of the legislature, but we have, at the bench of judicature, vindicated the right of the nation, its real independence and supremacy; demonstrating that general inviolability was made transmissible to one or many deputies, to the utter extinction of responsibility, the evasion of criminality; and that the executive power of imperial and independent Ireland, was merely a jingling appendage to the great Seal of Great Britain. Not a man so low, that, if oppressed by an assumption of power, civil or military, has not met with our counsel, our purse and our protection: not a man so high, that if acting contrary to popular right or public independence, / we have not denounced at the judgment seat of justice, and at the equitable tribunal of public opinion. We have encountered much calumny. We have, among a thousand contradictory epithets been called republicans and levellers, as if by artfully making the terms appear, synonymous, their nature could be made the same; as if a republican were a leveller, or a leveller a republican; as if the only leveller was not the despot who crushes with an iron sceptre every rank and degree of society into one; as if republican or democratic energy was not, as well as aristocratical privilege, or regal prerogative, sanctioned by the fundamental principles of the constitution,

172

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

by all those memorable precedents which form its frst features, and by which the just and virtuous struggles of our ancestors, recognized by successive generations, point out to their posterity when they ought to interpose, and how long they ought to sufer. In his words, whose name rests unknown, but whose fame is immortal,11 we desire “that the constitution may preserve its monarchical form, but we would have the manners of the people purely and strictly republican.”12 Are you not sensible that this cry of republicanism, as the clamour against Catholic delegation, has been raised and prolonged by the mischievous malignity of the lower gossips of government, merely to drown the general voice for reform, like the state manœuvre which ordered a fourish of trumpets, and alarum of drums, at the side of sufering patriots, when they wished to address themselves to the reason and justice of the people. – But we will speak and you will hear. – Yes, countrymen, we do desire that extended liberty which may allow you, as citizens, to do what you will, provided you / do not injure another, or rather to do all the good you can to others, without doing injustice to yourselves. Yes, countrymen, we do wish for an equality of rights which is constitutional, not an equality of property which is impossible. Yes, countrymen, we do long for another equality, and we hope yet to see it realized: an equality consisting in the power of every father of a family to acquire by labour either of mind or body, something beyond a mere subsistence, some little capital to prove, in case of sickness, old age, or misfortune, a safeguard for his body and for his soul, a hallowed hoard that may lif him above the hard necessity which struggles between conscience and corruption; that may keep his heart whole and his spirit erect, while his body bends beneath its burden; make him fing away the wages of venality, and proudly return to an humble home, where a constitution that looks alike on the palace and the hovel, may stand at his hearth a tutelar divinity, and spread the Egis13 of equal law to guard him from the revenge of those who ofered the bribe and ofered it in vain. Yes, Irishmen, we do proclaim it our dearest wish, to see a more equal distribution of the benefts and blessings of life through the lowest classes of the community, the stamina of society; and we afect it as our frm belief, that an equal distribution of the elective franchise must contribute to this end; for national happiness depends upon employment, which must itself spring from industry; and that again depends on liberty, security of person and property, equal law, speedy and impartial justice, and, in short, on that tenure in the state, which may raise the community in relative value as in self-estimation; make the agency of the People instrumental to a good government, and the reagency of good Government meliorate the morals / and manners of the People; bind together the distinct, and hitherto contending classes of society; by the cement of reciprocity and the interchange of obligations, and make the higher ranks – ballustrades that adorn the arch – feel their dependence on the people, who are the piles that support it. On the whole, we are so far republicans, as to

Society of United Irishmen of Dublin

173

desire a national House of Commons, in its origin, its form, its features, and its spirit; reverencing the people, not conspiring, with every other rank, against them, against their privileges, their pleasures, their homely happiness, their freside enjoyment; but rather cherishing the elective franchise, the poor man’s ewe lamb, and stigmatizing the landlord, who would despoil him of it, as a traitor to the constitution, a robber of national right, and a murderer of public happiness. We have addressed the Friends of the People in England,14 and have received their concurrence, their thanks, and their gratulation. – We have addressed the Volunteers.15 – Deliverers of this injured land! – Have we done wrong? – if we have, tear your colours from the staf, – reverse your arms, – mufe your drums, – beat a funeral march for Ireland, – and then abandon the Corpse to Fencibles, to Militia, to Invalids, and dismounted Dragoons. If we have not done wrong, – and we swear by the Revolution of 82 that we have not, – go on with the zeal of enterprizing virtue, and a sense of your own importance, to exercise that Right of self-defence, which belongs to the Nation, – and to infuse constitutional energy into the public will, for the public good. We now address Ireland, – We address you as a moral person, having a conscience, a will, and an understanding, – bound not only to preserve, / but to perfect your nature, – the nations around you to witness your conduct, and a God above you to reward your virtues, or to punish your crimes. We speak to you as Man to Man, – reading your countenance – remarking the various passions that now shif across it, and striving to recollect a character long obliterated by foreign infuence, or, afer short and ferce developements, becoming the same dull blank as before. Severed as you have always been into counteracting interests, – an English interest, an Aristocratic interest, a Protestant interest, and a Catholic interest, – all contradistinguished from common-weal; and all, like the four elements, before Wisdom moved on the surface of the deep, exerting their respective infuences to retain a chaos rather than create a Constitution: Actuated, as you have most generally been, by circumstances merely external, – compressed at one time into fortuitous union by the iron circle of British domination. – at another time, by the panic of invasion and fear of famine, when a bankrupt merchantry and embarrassed gentry, were starved into the common cause of a beggared People, whom Government had frst pillaged, and then abandoned; – at the present time, perhaps impelled chiefy by the extraordinary events that have taken place on the Continent, it is not surprising that your real character is still, in a great measure, unknown to Europe, to Britain, and even to yourself. It is not surprising, that recollecting the past, we should be anxious about the future; – that we will not entirely confde in the fugitive splendor of the moment, the passing spirit of the people, or even the miraculous conversion of Parliament; – never, – never satisfed or secure, until we see a real Representation of that People in that Parliament; / – until we can see Britain and Ireland connected by constitution, not by

174

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

corruption, – by equal, not by strong government; – until we see Public opinion, or the Will of the Nation, not as now, acting with rude and intermittent shocks, but the settled and central ballance of the political order, around which, without apparent motion in itself, the diferent branches of the Legislature may revolve with the silence and regularity of the planetary system. We address your understanding, – the common sense of the common-weal, and we ask you, is it not a truth, that where the People do not participate in the Legislature, by a delegation of representatives, freely, fairly, and frequently elected, there can be no public liberty? Is it not the fact, that in this country there is no representative Legislature; because the People are not represented in the Legislature, and have no partnership in the Constitution? If it be the principle of the Constitution, that it is the right of every commoner in this realm to have a vote in the election of his Representative; and that without such vote, no man can be actually represented, it is our wish, in that case, to renovate that constitution, and to revive its suspended animation, by giving free motion and full play to its vital principle. If, on the other hand, the constitution does not fully provide for an impartial and adequate representation of all the People; if it be more exclusive than inclusive in its nature; if it be a monopoly, a privilege, or a prerogative; in that case is our desire to alter it; for what is the Constitution to us, if we are as nothing to the Constitution? Is the Constitution made for you, or you for it? If the People do not constitute a part of it, what is it to them more than the ghost of Alfred;16 and / what are principles without practice which they hear and read, to practice without principles which they see and feel? Te people of Ireland want political power: – taxation without consent, and legislation without representation, is not a partial grievance, or a Catholic grievance, but the grievance of the nation. Te elective franchise is with-held from all, while all want a constituency in the constitution. Te disfranchised, and the unfranchised, the unrepresented, and the misrepresented, the Catholic and the Presbyterian, are equally under the law, and out of the constitution & the Protestant, who is supposed to have it, and the Catholic who wishes to have it, are equally interested in having it free; for the truth is, that the whole community wants that emancipation which is necessary to a Free Government; we can give no truer defnition of slavery, than that state in which men are governed without their consent, and no better description of freedom, than that not only those who make the law, should be bound by the law, but those who are bound by the law should have a share in the making it. All Ireland knows and feels that the people are ousted from their own constitution, and that in a Government where they have no participation, the King must become a despot, and the Nation a slave. Public reason is convinced, and we assert with the confdence of conviction, that there are not 100 in this island, inimical to a renovation of the genuine constitution, who are not, at the same

Society of United Irishmen of Dublin

175

time, personally interested in the continuance of its corruptions and the prolongation of its abuses. Te time is come when the Nation must speak for the Nation, and the long expected hour of redemption approaches, / perhaps providentially protracted, until the universal voice could be heard, and the universal will, declared. Te Nation is one: one in body, one in soul, an union of colours in a single ray of truth; and the same inextinguishable principle which has accomplished many bloodless revolutions in our history; the peaceful revolution of 79, which gained a Free Trade, the peaceful revolution of 82, which gained an independence of right to Ireland; will consummate her imperfect freedom, with equal safety, honor and tranquillity, by the same means, a constitutional interposition of the people, justifable by law, reason, right and expediency. Te honor of Ireland, her dearest interests, present and future, the interest of her land-holders, and of her merchants, her commercial credit, her staple manufacture, are all involved in the present crisis, and urgently call upon you to declare in Convention, your wish, your will, and your determination; that the House of Commons may be restored to that true representative character which would regain national confdence, most efectually suppress all particular associations, give vigour to Government, and rest to the perturbed spirit of the people. O, Ireland! Ireland! country to which we have clung in all our misfortunes, personal, religious, political; for whose freedom and happiness we are here solemnly united; for whom, as a society we live; and for whom as men, if hard necessity commands it, we are ready to die; let us conjure you not to abuse the present precious moment, by a self-extinguishment, by a credulous committal of your judgment and senses to the direction of others, by an idle and ideot gaze on what may be going on in parliament. In receiving good ofces from all, distinguish between sound / Hibernicism17 and that windy patriotism, which is now pufng and blowing in the race of popularity. Trust as little to your friends as to your enemies in a matter where you can act only by yourselves. Te will of the Nation must be declared before any Reform ought to take place. It is not therefore any class however numerous, any society however respectable, any subaltern assembly that have either right or competency to express that authoritative will. Nothing less than the people can speak for the people. Tis competency resides not in a few freeholders shivering in the corner of a county hall, but only in the whole community represented in each county, (as at present in Antrim,) by parochial delegation, and then fom each county by baronial delegation, to provincial conventions, the union of which must form the aweful will of the people of Ireland. Let us therefore conclude, by conjuring the county meetings now assembling to follow the example of Ulster, and by appointing delegates to a Convention of their respective provinces, to unite their scattered and insulated wills into one momentous mass, which may have authority sufcient to make a declaration of rights in behalf of the Nation. Ten will the Sovereign graciously

176

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

interpose on the petition of all the people; the reality as well as form of good Government will be established; the justice of the constitution vindicated; and when all this complicated system of national servitude and personal oppression, of perverted principle, and base practice, shall be done away, men shall exceedingly wonder how a Nation that boasted of a free constitution, and the benignity of its laws, could have sufered itself to be loaded so long with a burthen so grievous and insupportable.

--------------- / February 10, 1793.

UNITED IRISHMEN of DUBLIN. Hon. SIMON BUTLER,18 Chairman. OLIVER BOND,19 Secretary. At a Meeting specially convened to receive the report of the Committee appointed to enquire into the tendency of the war with France, – of the raising of the Militia,20 – and of the bill now pending in Parliament, for preventing the importation of Arms and Gun-powder into this Kingdom, and the removing and keeping of Gun-powder without licence,

Te following Report was received and adopted: That whatever pretexts may be held out, the real objects of the war about to be declared against France,21 appear to this Society to be not merely to punish crimes, but to persecute principles; not merely to protect the allies of these kingdoms, but to produce a counter-revolution in France; not merely to check the progress of republicanism in Great-Britain and Ireland, but to stop the progress of liberty throughout Europe; and this Society is convinced, that this war would never be carried on, if it did not tend to efectuate a treaty, or rather a conspiracy, entered into by tyrants and abettors of tyranny,22 when France had committed no crime, unless the emancipation of 24 millions of men be one. Tat it appears to this Society, that a war, / which must be chiefy waged at sea, and which however successful, can scarcely be maintained except to the ruin of commerce, is peculiarly dangerous to this island, the prosperity of which depends almost entirely upon its trade, and the commercial credit and confdence of which, have already been insidiously shaken to a degree which every merchant and trader feels, and which several of its infant manufactures have lamentably experienced. Tat this Society frmly attached from serious deliberation and conviction to a reform in the representation of the people in parliament, and to a government by king, lords and commons, cannot but come forward publicly to express its

Society of United Irishmen of Dublin

177

disapprobation and sorrow at a war, the tendency of which, if successful, must be to perpetuate inveterate abuses, and if unfortunate, may lead to the establishing of systems of government untried in this country, and the apprehension of which, is alledged as a principal reason for engaging in hostility. Tat it appears to this Society, not only inexpedient, but an infatuation amounting almost to madness, to subject Ireland, labouring under grievances hardly submitted to in time of peace to the invasion of men, who profess to carry along with them “not fre and sword but liberty.” And if a war with France be in truth unavoidable, a redress of those grievances, more peculiarly by a total emancipation of the Catholics, and by a radical reform in parliament, ought to be considered as an indispensible preliminary. Tat it appears to this Society, that the tendency of raising the militia in this kingdom, is to invest an ever-grasping administration with an enormous and alarming patronage, to extend its infuence wide beyond the walls of parliament, / and to difuse corruption through all classes of the people. Tat it has also another aficting tendency, namely, to repress, and if possible, to destroy the Volunteer institution, by which this island was once before defended in time of war, and to which we again look, almost exclusively, for the protection of ourselves and of our constitution, in the awful crisis that awaits us. Tat it appears to be intended by the bill now depending in parliament, entitled, “a bill to prevent the importation of arms and gun-powder into this kingdom, and the removing and keeping of gun-powder without license,” to prohibit the importation into this country of arms, ammunition, gun-powder or military stores, by any of his Majesty’s subjects, under the penalty of forfeiture of the same, and also of the sum of £500: a precaution which cannot but appear extremely singular at the commencement of a war; a period, when it is the usual policy of states to encourage the importation of all articles necessary for defence, and to discourage their exportation; and the only exception to this extraordinary prohibition, is a particular and special licence, difcult to be obtained, and which may be refused. Tat it appears to this Society, that the palpable tendency of this bill is to enact, as against the whole body of the people, the rigour of that penal code, respecting the keeping and using of arms, which it is professed, is intended to be partially repealed, as in favour of the Catholics. Tat in order to carry this into efect, it is intended by this bill to enact, that no person shall remove from any part of this kingdom, to any other part of this kingdom, any arms, ammunition, / gun-powder or military stores, without a special and particular licence, under the penalty of a forfeiture of the same, and of £500. Tat this Society is not aware what interpretation will hereafer be put upon the words “from any part of this kingdom to any other part of this kingdom,” as that may depend upon the charge of a corrupt judge, or the verdict of a packed jury; but in strictness of construction, no man will be warranted, under this bill, to remove his frelock from his city to his country residence, or even perhaps

178

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

from one chamber to another, or to take it down from his chimney and fre it at a house-breaker, without a special licence. Tat by this bill it is intended to infict on each act (which it constitutes a crime without considering the intention of the agent) at least the penalty of £500, paying no regard to the nature of the act, or the situation and circumstances of the party, and which, in its execution, will to a large majority of the nation amount to perpetual imprisonment[.] Tat by this bill it appears intended to empower every justice of peace, without information upon oath, at his discretion, whenever he may think proper, at any hour of the day or night, forceably to enter and to search the house of any of his Majesty’s subjects. Tat according to the provisions of this bill, it may not be in his Majesty’s clemency to remit the penalty or forfeiture incurred under it, in as much as any common informer may sue for the same. Tat this Society cannot be much consoled by reading that this bill is to expire at the end of the next session of parliament afer the 1st. of / January 1794, when it refects, that many of the oppressive acts, which still continue to disgrace our statute-book, had their commencements as temporary laws, and were ever aferwards most shamefully sufered to receive their continuances in silence. Tat although this bill is pretended to be grounded on the late tumultuous risings in some parts of this kingdom, and the clandestine importation and secret keeping of arms, ammunition, gun-powder and military stores, its concealed but direct object appears to this Society to be, like the militia bill, to put down the Volunteers of Ireland, by rendering their array utterly impracticable. Tat this Society would recommend it to certain members of parliament, who call themselves Patriots, because they are in Opposition, to watch over the welfare of the nation, and if they have not endeavoured to prevent its being involved in a war which must be ruinous to its commerce, and may probably prove destructive either of its liberty or of its constitution; at least to protect it from a militia, calculated, while it strengthens the standing vice of our government, to overbear the saviours of their country, and to avert from it the grievous oppressions of a bill, which contravenes every principle of penal law, and which for atrocity is scarcely paralelled even by any of the statutes enacted against the Catholics of Ireland. And this Society would submit to those gentlemen, whether by so doing they will not better fulfl their duty to their constituents, and better save themselves from becoming subjects of dupery and derision to their enemies, and of melancholy pity to their friends, than by calumniating an institution, the objects of which are more upright and constitutional than even the principles / they profess to maintain, and the members of which are not chargeable with any tergiversation of conduct.

-------------------

Society of United Irishmen of Dublin

179

Friday, March 1st, 1793.

HOUSE OF LORDS. The Hon. Simon Butler and Mr. Oliver Bond appeared at the Bar in pursuance of their summonses. Lord Mountjoy23 proposed, that the following paper, which he had read on the night preceding, and which had the names of the persons at the bar prefxed to it, should be submitted to their inspection. 24th February, 1793.

UNITED IRISHMEN of DUBLIN. Hon. SIMON BUTLER, Chairman, OLIVER BOND, Secretary, WHEN a Committee of Secrecy was frst appointed by the House of Lords, to enquire into the causes of the risings in certain counties of this kingdom; although this Society well foresaw the danger of abuse, to which such an institution was subject, yet it was restrained from expressing that opinion by the utility of the professed object, and by the hope, that the presence and advice of the two frst Judicial Ofcers of this country,24 would prevent that Committee from doing those / Illegal acts, which less informed men might in such a situation commit. But since it has thought ft to change itself from a Committee to enquire into the risings in certain counties of this kingdom, into an Inquisition, to scrutinize the private principles and secret thoughts of individuals; since it has not confned itself to simple enquiries and voluntary informations, but has assumed the right, and exercised the power of compelling attendance, and enforcing answers upon oath to personal interrogatories, tending to criminate the party examined: since its researches are not confned to the professed purposes of its institution, but directed principally to the discovery of evidence in support of prosecutions heretofore commenced, and utterly unconnected with the cause of the tumults it was appointed to investigate; since in its proceedings it has violated well ascertained principles of law, this Society feels itself compelled to warn the public mind, and point the public attention to the following observations: Tat the House of Lords can act only in a Legislative or Judicial capacity. Tat in it’s Legislative capacity it has no authority to administer an oath. Tat in it’s Judicial capacity it has a right to administer an oath; but that capacity extends only to error and appeal, except in cases of impeachment and trial of a peer, in which alone the House of Lords exercises an original jurisdiction.

180

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

Tat the House of Lords, as a Court, has no right to act by delegation. Tat the Committee of Secrecy possesses no authority, but what it derives by delegation from the House of Lords. / Tat as the House of Lords does not possess jurisdiction in the subject matter referred to the Committee; and as, even if it did, it could not delegate the same, it necessarily follows, that the Committee has not judicial authority, and cannot administer an oath. Tat even if the Committee of Secrecy acted as a Court, it’s proceedings ought not to be secret. Tat no court has a right to exhibit personal interrogatories upon oath, the answers to which may criminate the party examined, except at the desire of the party, and with a view to purge him from a contempt. Tat it was the principal vice of the Courts of High Commission25 and Star Chamber,26 to examine upon personal interrogatories to convict the party examined; and that those courts were abolished, because their proceedings were illegal, unconstitutional and oppressive. Tis paper was accordingly delivered into the hands of Mr. Butler, by the Gentleman Usher – afer he had seen it, he was asked by Lord Mountjoy, if that paper, bearing his name, was printed by his directions or authority? Mr. Butler said, that the paper contained a Declaration of the Society of United Irishmen of the City of Dublin, and bore date the 24th February, 1793, – that he presided at the Meeting – that as Chairman he put the question on the several paragraphs, according as they were handed to him by the Committee which had been appointed to prepare them, – that he was then, and is still satisfed, that every paragraph of that declaration was agreeable to law, and the principles of the constitution. / Lord Mountjoy said, that Mr. Butler had not yet answered, whether he authorized the publication? Mr. Butler replied, that he meant to give the fullest information on the subject, he did authorize the publication, he authorized it in common with every individual of the Society. Mr. Bond was then interrogated – he was asked whether he had signed the paper, – he replied that neither he nor Mr. Butler had signed the paper. – Te resolutions of this Society are referred to the Committee of Correspondence for publication. – Te Committee cause the names of the Chairman and Secretary to be prefxed to every publication. – Tat as Secretary he delivered this declaration to the Committee of Correspondence. – And, on being asked, by Lord Clonmell,27 whether he delivered it to the Committee for the purpose of publication, and whether he thereby authorized the publication, he replied in the afrmative.

Society of United Irishmen of Dublin

181

Lord Chancellor28 then asked Mr. Butler, whether he had any thing further to add. – Mr. Butler said, that he attended to answer questions, that if his Lordship had any questions, to ask, he (Mr. Butler) was ready to answer. Mr. Butler and Mr. Bond were ordered to withdraw, but not to leave the House. Tey were shortly aferwards again ordered to the Bar, and the following resolutions, agreed to by the House in their absence, having been read, viz. “Tat the said paper was a false, scandalous, and seditious libel, a high breach of the privileges of this House, tending to disturb the public peace, and questioning the authority of this High Court of Parliament. / Tat Simon Butler and Oliver Bond having confessed that they had authorized the same to be printed, should be taken into custody.” Tey were committed to the custody of the Gentleman Usher29 – and ordered to withdraw in such custody. In some time aferwards they were brought to the Bar in custody of the Gentleman Usher. Te Lord Chancellor, afer reciting the foregoing resolutions, spoke to the following purport: “Simon Butler and Oliver Bond, you were called to the Bar to answer for a libel on this High Court of Parliament, – you have confessed that such libel, which for its presumption, ignorance and mischievous tendency is unprecedented, was printed by your authority – you, Simon Butler, cannot plead ignorance in extenuation – your noble birth, your education, the honourable profession to which you belong, his Majesty’s gown which you wear,30 and to which you now stand a disgrace, gave you the advantages of knowledge, and are strong circumstances of aggravation of your guilt. – It remains for me to pronounce the Judgment of the House, which is, that you, Simon Butler and Oliver Bond, be imprisoned Six Months in the gaol of Newgate;31 that each of you pay a fne to the King of £500, and that you are not to be discharged from your confnement till such fne be paid.” Tey were then taken from the Bar, and in a short time afer, conveyed in a Coach to Newgate, under the escort of 50 or 60 Soldiers and directions of Alderman Warren.32

---------------- /

182

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

March 1st, 1793.

at a full MEETING of the SOCIETY of UNITED IRISHMEN. BEAUCHAMP BAGENALL HARVEY,33 in the Chair. THOMAS RUSSELL,34 Secretary.

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY, That a Deputation of fve do wait, as early as possible, on the Hon. Simon Butler, and Mr. Oliver Bond, to express the feelings of this Society as Men, as Citizens, and as United Irishmen on the events of this day, to testify our warmest sense of gratitude for their dignifed and magnanimous avowal of the Resolutions of this Society before the House of Lords, and to pledge to them our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honour, that we will never forsake our Ofcers, nor abandon the post of legal and constitutional Principle which we and our Ofcers have hitherto maintained, unshaken, unseduced and unterrifed.

---------------- / Newgate, March 2, 1793. Te Deputation having waited on Mr. Butler, and Mr. Bond, they returned the following Answer to the Society. gentlemen, We received with pride your approbation of our conduct – Our cause is honourable and just. Whatever precedents may be adduced from English Journals in times antecedent to the Revolution and the Bill of Rights, our suferings, unexampled for severity, are unprecedented in this Kingdom, unwarranted by Law and inconsistent with the principles of the Constitution. We will, however, bear them with fortitude; and entertain the sanguine hopes that as we have been the frst, so we may be the last Victims of Arbitrary power in this Nation. SIMON BUTLER. OLIVER BOND.

[…] June 7, 1793.

Society of United Irishmen of Dublin

183

UNITED IRISHMEN of DUBLIN. HENRY SHEARES,35 President. EDW. JOS. LEWINES,36 Secretary. On Motion, the following Resolution of the Catholic Committee was read: “RESOLVED that it is with pleasure and gratitude, we have observed the House of Commons, in this Session, unanimously taking into their consideration, that most important measure, the present representation of the People in Parliament: and we do most earnestly exhort the Catholics of Ireland, to cooperate with their Protestant Brethren, in all legal and constitutional means to carry into efect, that great measure, recognized by the wisdom of Parliament, and so essential to the feedom, happiness and prosperity of Ireland –a Reform in the Representation of the People in the Commons House.” Resolved, that this Society do agree to the following Address to their Catholic Countrymen. FELLOW CITIZENS, We hasten to recognize, under this new and endearing title, a People tried by experience, and schooled by adversary, who have signalized their loyalty amidst all the rigours of the Law – who have proved their fdelity to a constitution which / with respect to them violated all its own principles, and who have set an example of patient perdurance in religious faith, while for a century they experienced a persecution equally abhorrent from every maxim of good government, and every principle of genuine christianity. We congratulate our country on such a large addition to the public domain of mind, the cultivation and produce of which may in some degree compensate for past waste and negligence. We congratulate the Empire that the loss of three millions across the Atlantic is supplied by the timely acquisition of the same number at home. We congratulate the Constitution that new Life is transfused into its veins at a period of decay and decrepitude; and we trust that the Heroism which sufered with such constancy for the sake of religion, will now change into a Heroism that shall act with equal steadiness and consistency for the freedom, the honour and the independence of this country. By the wise benevolence of the Sovereign, by the enlightened spirit of the times, by the union of religious persuasions for the good of civil society, by the spirit, prudence, and consistency of the Catholic Committee, who, during their whole existence, were true to the trust reposed in them, and whose last breath sanctifed the expedience and necessity of a Parliamentary Reform; by these causes, along with other fortunate coincidences, you have been admitted into the outer court of the constitution. Look around you – but without superstitious awe, or idolatrous prostration, for the edifce you enter is not a Temple

184

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

but a Dwelling. Enter therefore with erect heads, and yet with grateful hearts, grateful to your King, grateful to your Country, attached to the constitution by manly principle not by childish prejudice, faithful to your friends through every change either of / their fortune or your own, and if not forgetful of the virulence of your enemies, having always the magnanimity to pity and to despise them. Loving the constitution rationally, not adopted merely to its infrmities, loving it too well, to dote upon its abuses, you must shortly be sensible, that, without reform, the balance of the elective franchise will be more of the centre than before, the inequality of popular representation more glaring and monstrous, the disproportion more enormous between the number of electors in 32 counties, and that in the boroughs from which you are excluded. What was kept close and corrupt before, will be close and corrupt still; common right will still be private property; and the constitution will be imprisoned under the lock and key of corporations. Te æra of your enfranchisement will therefore eventually work the weal or woe of Ireland. We do trust that you will not be incorporated merely with the body of the constitution without adding to its spirit. You are called into Citizenship not to sanction abuse, but to discountenance it, not to accumulate corruption but to meliorate manners and infuse into society purer practice and sounder morality; always separating in thought and action, mis-government and mal-administration from the good sense and right reason natural to, and co-eval with the constitution; and always remembering that nothing can be good for any part of the nation which has not for its object the interest of the whole. Fellow-Citizens. – We speak to you with much earnestness of afection, repeating with sincerest pleasure, that tender and domestic appellation which binds us into one People. But what is it which has lately made and must keep us one? Not the soil we inhabit, not the language we use, but our singleness of sentiment respecting one / great political truth, our indivisible union on the main object of general interest - Parliamentary Reform. Tis is the civic Faith for which the Society exists, and for which it sufers under a persecution that still, as of old, savage in its nature, though somewhat smoother, in its form, wreaks its mighty vengeance on person and property, or exerts its puny malice to ruin us in the professions by which we live, merely for an undaunted adherence to a single good and glorious principle which has always animated our publications and will always regulate our practice. We conjure you, in the most solemn manner, to remember with the respect due to such authority, the last Words, the political Will and Testament of a body of men who have deserved so well of their constituents and of their Country. Never forget them. Never forsake them – Let this principle of Reform live in your practice, and give energy to the new character you are about to sustain for the glory or the disgrace of Ireland. As for us, our particular suferings as a Society are lost, at present, in an overwhelming sense of national calamity. We wish in our social, and individ-

Society of United Irishmen of Dublin

185

ual capacities, to expedite every measure that has the remotest chance of giving the smallest relief to such urgent distress, lamenting at the same time that every means adopted must prove partial, palliative and inadequate, until the origin of the extended evil, be boldly looked to, and what is universally understood, is as plainly and publicly expressed. What then is the Cause? War. What is the Cure? Peace. What will prevent a relapse and perpetuate that health and soundness which it had restored? a National House of Commons, that would conform to the will of the people by the imposition of such duties as might secure, to Irish manufactures, a natural but not / exclusive preference in an Irish market: a National House of Commons acting fom and therefore for the People, not personating but representing them, not holding forth the Constitution merely as an object to provoke doubts, or excite terrors, speaking always in clouds, or by thunder; but writing the Law in the tablet of our hearts, rivetting the constitution into the common sense of the community, the basis from which it has shifed, and extinguished all discontent and disafection by difusing rational loyalty and the allegiance of convinced understanding. We will never cease to dwell on this theme, for we wish to make the times conform to us, rather than to make our principles conform to the times. For the present, we lye just in the track of the pestilential wind of calumny which purposely confounds the reformer, the republican and the regicide; which preserves and propagates a panic of innovation and a distrust between man and man, in order to keep back internal union, at the dreadful sacrifce of commercial credit, of public revenue, and of national character. Even, at this moment, perhaps, a provident jealousy may be contriving means for our dispersion, naturally fearful that wherever two or three honest men are assembled together, their conversation must, at this time, turn on the oppressions of the subject, and the misery of this Country.

----------- / June 21st, 1793.

the SOCIETY of UNITED IRISHMEN DUBLIN.

to the PEOPLE of IRELAND. HENRY SHEARES, President. WILLIAM LEVINGSTON WEBB,37 Sec. When the present War frst threatened this Nation with the calamities, under which it has since groaned, and by which it is at this moment almost overwhelmed, we warned you of the approaching danger, and sought by a timely

186

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

caution to avert the consequent ruin. – We told you it was a measure, fraught with destruction to your infant Manufactures, to your growing Commerce, and to your almost mature Spirit – How far the Prediction we then uttered has been justifed by the event, let the surrounding miseries of this Country determine – An expiring and nearly extinguished Credit – the Pride of Commerce humbled and disgraced – the cries of Famine re-echoed thro’ encreasing thousands of your Manufacturers, discarded from the exercise of their honest labour, driven into penury and inaction; and compelled to seek an uncertain subsistence from the humanity of their more afuent, tho’ less industrious Fellow-citizens. Such are the efects, and such were the predicted consequences of a War, commenced without provocation, and which, if sufered to continue a few Months longer, must inevitably produce / national Shame, national Bankruptcy, and national Destruction. We declared that the persecution of Principles, was the real object of the War, whatever pretexts may be held out. Judge of this assertion also by the event – Behold the external invasion against Liberty seconded by internal outrages on your most valued Rights – Behold your band of Patriots, once embodied and exulting in the glorious cause of Freedom; once the Pride of Ireland, and the admiration of attentive Europe, your Volunteers now insulted and disarmed – Behold your loved, your revered, your idolized Palladium, the tryal by Jury, profaned and violated; trampled in the dust by the unhallowed foot of undefned Privilege – Behold your faithful Friends, for daring to step forward in your defence, dragged to a loathsome Prison, and loaded with every injury, which falsehood and tyranny could suggest. Imposed upon through the medium of a generous sensibility, falsely and designedly excited to entrap you, you too slightly regarded the salutary caution of your Friends; and though your reason and your interests revolted at the War, you sufered in silence that pernicious measure to be adopted – Again we stepped forward; for we have no pride, but in the conscious discharge of duty. We attempted to alleviate the miseries we could not avert. Foreseeing the dreadful state of abandonment, into which an interruption of Commerce must throw the most useful and industrious part of the community, we held forth an example to the public, which, if then followed, would have lessened and postponed that inevitable calamity – We publicly and solemnly pledged ourselves to the exclusive consumption of Irish Manufactures, and called on our fellow-citizens, / by uniting in a similar resolution to aford the only relief then in their power to bestow. Yet even this act of Patriotism and Humanity supplied calumny with encrease of poison in endeavoring to forewarn our Countrymen of all the dangers and miseries, which at this instant shake private happiness and public safety to their centres, we were represented as acting from malignant motives, and as seeking, by alarming the public mind with groundless apprehensions, to agitate it to outrage – With silent contempt we listened to the base suggestion, for it

Society of United Irishmen of Dublin

187

was not worthy our resentment. We knew that those, who had doomed this unhappy Country to its present suferings, would at last be compelled to adopt the palliatives since they had rejected the preventives we at frst proposed: We knew that they would be forced to stop the cries of clamorous famine, by taking up the precedent we had set them, and to fy to those means of appeasing the desperate resentment of starving thousands, which they had before reprobated as the instrument of exciting it. What has been the case? Although the War has yet existed but a few months, it’s dire efects have already pierced the very marrow of Society – Tose indeed, who advised to plunge you into all it’s horrors, have not sufered the slightest inconveniences: but is there an Artifcer of any description, a Manufacturer of any denomination, a single Irishman who lives by his honest industry, who has not wholly or in part been deprived of his means of sustenance? All export is destroyed, except the export of Specie, wrung from the hard hand of labour to pamper the luxury of Absentees38 – Every trade is suspended, except the trade of Corruption, which fourishes by the impoverishment of this devoted soil – / At length this city is summoned to devise the best means to alleviate the pressing misery, and guard against the growing danger. In it’s decision is recorded the public approbation of those measures our provident anxiety frst suggested – It is from the verdict of our fellow-citizens alone that we have met or wish to meet redress against Calumny and Outrage – To their tribunal we alone appeal – at their tribunal we alone fnd justice. What has hitherto been attempted for your relief, is but of a nature temporary and transient. Disease and pain will again recur, and with redoubled force, unless you trace the evil to it’s source and rectify it there. Dare then, Citizens of Ireland, to look your situation in the face. Shrink not from the touch of truth, but with a manly fortitude efectuate your cure, however painful the necessary operation – Since even those members of opposition, in whom you have hitherto foolishly and fatally confded, have abused that confdence, deserted your interests, and supported this destructive measure; it is your right, and it is your duty to act for yourselves in this great crisis. Assemble in your Parishes, in your Towns, in your Counties and in your Provinces, there speak forth your sentiments, and let your will be known – With the frm voice of injured millions require a Peace – Pursue the example of the Catholic Convention – Unite order with spirit, tranquillity with action – Like them, carry your wishes to the throne itself, and fear not for their success – But like them, whilst you seek a remedy for your present suferings, ever remember that a radical Reform in the system of representation is the only means of avoiding a repetition of them – Call on your King to chain down the monster War, which has devoured your Commerce: which gorges it’s hateful appetite / by preying on the wretchedness of your Manufactures, and enslaving them for life, the instruments of tyranny and slaughter

188

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

– Call on him to spurn from his counsels those, who shall assert that you are bound to rob and to be robbed, to murder and to be murdered, to infict and to endure all the complicated miseries of War, because an unfeeling policy should dictate the horrid act – Call on him to give you Peace – But would you render permanent it’s blessings, when obtained? – Would you add vigour to your Agriculture, to your Manufactures, and to your Commerce? – Would you secure to yourselves the produce of your various labours, now consumed by oppressive and encreasing taxes; by placement without employment,39 and pensioners without merit?40 Reform your present state of representation by an infusion of purity and health into your Commons House – Hold forth to your Sovereign the records of Parliament, and let him read therein the incompetence of it’s existing form – He has already partially acknowledged the fact, and failed not to espouse the People’s Cause. – He will see, and with the same ingeniousness he will avow, that those repeated necessities for your personal interference prove the evil of which you complain – From his candour and from his justice you have every thing to hope, you have nothing to fear.

[…] CONSTITUTION OF THE

SOCIETY of UNITED IRISHMEN of the CITY of DUBLIN. The Society is constituted for the purpose of forwarding a brotherhood of afection, an identity of interests, a communion of rights, and an union of power, among Irishmen of all religious persuasions, and thereby obtaining an impartial and adequate representation of the Nation in Parliament. Te members of this Society are either ordinary or honorary. Such persons only are eligible as honorary members, who have distinguished themselves by promoting the liberties of mankind, and are not inhabitants of Ireland. Every candidate for admission into the Society, whether as an ordinary or honorary member, shall be proposed by two ordinary members, who shall sign a certifcate of his being, from their knowledge of him, a ft person to be admitted – that he has seen the test, and is willing to take it: Tis certifcate, delivered to the Secretary, shall be read from the Chair at the ensuing meeting of the Society; and on the next subsequent night of meeting the Society shall proceed to the election. – Te names and additions of the candidate, with the names of those

Society of United Irishmen of Dublin

189

by whom he has been proposed, shall be inserted in the summons for the night of election. – Te election, shall be conducted by ballot, and if one-ffh of the / number of beans be black, the candidate stands rejected. Te election, with respect to an ordinary member, shall be void, if he does not attend within four meetings aferwards, unless he can plead some reasonable excuse for his absence. Every person elected a member of the Society, whether honorary or ordinary, shall previous to his admission, take and subscribe the following test: “I A.B. in the presence of God, do pledge myself to my country, that I will use all my abilities and infuence in the attainment of an impartial and adequate representation of the Irish nation in Parliament; and as a means of absolute and immediate necessity in the establishment of this chief good of Ireland, I will endeavour, as much as lies in my ability, to forward a brotherhood of afection, an identity of interests, a communion of rights, and an union of power among Irishmen of all religious persuasions; without which every reform in Parliament must be partial, not national, inadequate to the wants, delusive to the wishes, and insufcient for the freedom and happiness of this country.” A member of another Society of United Irishmen being introduced to the President by a member of this Society, shall, upon producing a certifcate signed by the Secretary, and sealed with the Seal of the Society to which he belongs, and taking the before-mentioned test, be thereupon admitted to attend the sittings of this Society. Te ofcers of the Society shall consist of a President, Treasurer and Secretary, who shall be severally elected every three months, viz. on every frst night of meeting in the months of November, February, May and August; the election to be determined by each member present writing on / a piece of paper the names of the object of his choice, and putting it into a box – Te majority of votes shall decide – If the votes are equal, the President shall have a casting voice. No person shall be capable of being re-elected to any ofce for the quarter next succeeding the determination of his ofce. In case of an occasional vacancy in any ofce by death or otherwise, the Society shall on the next night of meeting, elect a person to the same for the remainder of the quarter. Te Society shall meet on every second Friday night – ofener if necessary. – Te Chair shall be taken at eight o’Clock from 29th September to 25th March, and at nine o’Clock from 25th March to 29th September. Fifeen members shall form a quorum. No new business shall be introduced afer ten o’Clock. Every respect and deference shall be paid to the President – his chair shall be raised three steps above the seats of the members – the Treasurer end Secretary shall have seats under him, two steps above the seats of the members. – On his rising from his Chair and taking of his hat, there must be silence, and the members be seated. – He shall be judge of order and propriety, be impowered to direct an apology, and to fne refractory members in any sum not above one

190

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

Crown. – If the member refuse to pay the fne, or make the apology, he is thereupon expelled from the Society. Tere shall be a Committee of Constitution, of Finance, of Correspondence, and of Accommodation. – Te Committee of Constitution shall consist of nine members, that of Finance of seven members, that of Correspondence of fve members. – Each Committee shall, independent of occasional reports, make general reports on every quarterly meeting. Te Treasurer shall be under / the direction of the Committee of Finance, and the Secretary under the direction of the Committee of correspondence. Te election for Committees shall be on every quarterly meeting, and decided by the majority of votes. In order to defray the necessary expences, and establish a fund for the use of the Society, each ordinary member shall on his election pay to the Treasurer, by those who proposed him, one Guinea admission fee, and also one Guinea annually, by half yearly payments, on every frst night of meeting in November and May; the frst payment thereof to be on the frst night of meeting in November 1792. On every quarterly meeting following, the names of the defaulters, as they appear in the Treasury-book, shall be read from the chair – If any member afer the second reading neglect to pay his subscription, he shall be excluded the Society, unless he can shew some reasonable excuse for his default. Te Secretary shall be furnished with the following seal, viz. a Harp – at the top “I am new strung;” at the bottom “I will be heard;” and on the exergue41 “Society of United Irishmen of Dublin.” No motion for an alteration of, or addition to, the constitution shall be made but at the quarterly meetings, and notice of such motion shall be given fourteen days previous to those meetings – If upon such motion the Society shall see ground for the proposed alteration or addition, the same shall be referred to the proper committee, with instructions to report on the next night of meeting their opinion thereon; and upon such report the question shall be decided by the Society.

BELFAST POLITICS

[William Bruce and Henry Joy (eds)], Belfast Politics: or, A Collection of the Debates, Resolutions, and Other Proceedings of that Town, in the Years M,DCC,XCII, and M,DCC,XCIII. With Strictures on the Test of Certain of the Societies of United Irishmen. Also, Toughts on the British Constitutions (Belfast, 1794), pp. i–xviii, 1, 3–4, 48, 52–3, 66–4, 98–104.

Te contents of this pamphlet are largely explained by the long title. Te complete text has not been reproduced here. Two features have been retained and are printed below. Te frst is the Preface, which praises the distinguished role that Belfast had recently played in promoting Catholic emancipation and radical political reforms. Te second feature presents a number of the more important reports, addresses and resolutions that reveal the attitudes and activities of several reform groups in Belfast, particularly the United Irishmen. Tey reveal radical attitudes towards political reforms in Ireland and the revolution in France. Te Belfast radicals are shown to have made contact with the Irish Volunteers, the French National Assembly and radical groups in England and Scotland. Te full text of this pamphlet was edited by William Bruce (1757–1841) and Henry Joy (1754–1835). Bruce, who was minister of the First Presbyterian Congregation of Belfast (1789–1831) and principal of Belfast Academy (1790– 1822), was a staunch supporter of parliamentary reform. Joy was the son of Robert Joy, the Belfast printer and newspaper proprietor, who, with his brother (also named Henry Joy), had founded the infuential Belfast News-Letter. Tis younger Henry Joy was a more moderate reformer than his more famous cousin, Henry Joy McCracken, a leading radical who was to connect the United Irishmen with the Catholic Defenders and who was to be executed for taking up arms in the Irish rebellion of 1798. Tis text was dedicated to Alexander Henry Haliday (c. 1728–1802), a physician and prominent fgure in the social, cultural and political life of Belfast.

– 191 –

[William Bruce1 and Henry Joy2 (eds )], Belfast Politics: or, A Collection of the Debates, Resolutions, and Other Proceedings of that Town, in the Years M,DCC,XCII, and M,DCC,XCIII. With Strictures on the Test of Certain of the Societies of United Irishmen. Also, Toughts on the British Constitutions (Belfast, 1794), pp. i–xviii, 1, 3–4, 48, 52–3, 66–4, 98–104.

he knows nothing of men, who expects to convince a determined party man; and he, nothing of the world, who despairs of the final impartiality of the public. Lavater.3

[…] PREFACE. The distinguished part, which Belfast has always taken in Irish Politics, especially since the beginning of seventeen hundred and ninety two, with the applause and condemnation which it has drawn from diferent parties, suggested the idea of the following collection. It occurred to the compiler that a faithful report of the proceedings of that town, and the sentiments of those who took a lead in the controversies by which it was agitated, might prove a valuable record. He conceived, that an impartial collection of this kind must be acceptable to all parties; and even indulged the hope that such a review would tend to heal, rather than irritate the wounds, wich [sic] public intercourse or private friendship might have received during the contest: At all events, he thought it should induce the inhabitants of a town, long conspicuous for harmony, to make a liberal allowance for diversity of sentiment in future, and to hold the right of private judgment as sacred in others as in themselves. To them, it must / aford sensible pleasure, and useful entertain-

– 193 –

194

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

ment, to contemplate the progress of measures in which they were, individually and collectively, so deeply engaged. Strangers, who concurred with either of the parties in this controversy, will be gratifed by a detail of transactions, debates, and disquisitions, which may have escaped their notice, or eluded their search; as well as of some papers, that are now, for the frst time, presented to the eye of the public. Tose who condemned them all, may learn to think more favourably of their intentions and exertions. Te advocates for the majority, will triumph in the immediate success of its operations. Te partisans of the minority, will lament by anticipation the eventual consequences of premature and precipitate measures; and fnd consolation in applauding the sagacity, with which they foresaw the degradation of the town, and the delusion of the kingdom: while the dispassionate philosopher and practical politician may trace the progress of popular ardour, and the operation of those minute springs which ofen produce the most important movements, in the political machine. With these views was the compilation undertaken. Of the execution, it is hoped, no party or individual will have reason to complain; for no authentic source of information has been intentionally neglected. The debates and proceeding of town meetings, resolutions of numerous societies, and some other papers, arranged nearly according to their dates, occupy the frst division of the publication. / The second consists of political essays, controversial and didactic; of these, the arguments relative to the test taken by some of the united irishmen, are frst in order of time. Tey are inserted on account of the extraordinary efect, which that engagement was supposed to have produced on the deliberations of the societies, and ultimately of the town. These are followed by a series of papers, entitled, thoughts on the british constitution. Tis publication was occasioned by an apprehension, that some fanciful and dangerous opinions were gaining ground among the multitude. Te splendid success of the French Revolution, the popular nature of its principles, and the imperfect state of our representation, had excited serious apprehensions that the afections of the people would be alienated from the form of the government under which we live. Struck with this apprehension, the writer of the frst Number submitted it to the inspection of a Friend, who proposed, that it should be made the introductory paper of a series, and recommended Toughts on the British Constitution, as a title that implied neither systematical composition nor methodical arrangement. Te papers were accordingly composed and published, in such order as the changes of the public mind or the occurrences of the day required, and with such haste as the occupations of the writers rendered indispensable. Te order has since been changed and some considerable additions made, particularly in Numbers VII. XIII. XIV. XVI. and XX. Te succinct view exhibited in the ninth, tenth, and eleventh Numbers, of the / several plans which, at diferent periods, have been proposed for a reform in the representation of the people in parliament, will be prized as the frst and

[Bruce and Joy (eds)], Belfast Politics

195

only collection of the kind, by all sincere friends of the measure. It was intended to subjoin the letters between portia and mr. Jones,4 as calculated to throw light on a curious circumstance in history; but from the present size of the volume, they are necessarily omitted. Notwithstanding the number of these sheets, it is to be apprehended that no party has been convinced; and that any apparent change in the temper of the town has been occasioned by circumstances very diferent from dispassionate refection, or conclusive argument. The few who uniformly incline to the court, were for a considerable time compelled to give way to the popular torrent. Tey either maintained a prudent silence, or concurred with that party whose views appeared to be most moderate. Of late they have been more at liberty to avow their former opinions, being supported by the presence of a military force, and encouraged by the visible promptitude of the army. The party who were lately predominant, and exerted their infuence with that degree of moderation and decorum, which is to be expected from a triumphant faction, plume themselves on having been materially instrumental in efecting a change of popular opinions and political measures, in behalf of the Roman Catholics. Tey are persuaded, that this was occasioned by the Societies of united Irish-men in Belfast and Dublin, without whose alliance the / Roman Catholics would have been treated in the manner recommended by the corporation of the metropolis, and the Grand Juries of the Kingdom. In answer to the objections which have been made to the nature and proceedings of these associations, they maintain, that in a country where the voice of the people is ofen disregarded, public opinion seldom consulted, and every thing carried either by the strong hand of power, or by the silent infuence of the court, no signal advantage can possibly be obtained by ordinary means:– Tat this circumstance warranted the extraordinary measure of establishing clubs, which formed a chain of correspondence, concentrated the popular strength, and demonstrated the possibility of bringing it into action:– Tat the violence of the means, was vindicated by the importance of the end; and the wisdom of the plan, evinced by its success. What has been accomplished they look upon as a considerable step, not only to the entire emancipation of the Roman Catholics from every remaining restriction, but to a radical reform in parliament; for such, say they, must be the consequence of that permanent cordiality, which they expect will subsist between the allied powers, and that spirit of liberty which they confdently look for among the great body of their new friends. Te Catholics will labour incessantly to efect a further renovation of the constitution; as all they have attained can be of little avail, while the boroughs which return two thirds of the commons, are the exclusive monopoly of the aristocracy in both houses. Teir / own interest therefore will secure their co-operation, and success will be certain. Tey allege that the almost instantaneous change that took place in the minds of protestants, from intolerance to amity, proved the wisdom of the

196

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

measures pursued, and the folly of that shallow system of enfranchisement, from time to time, which the opposing party so zealously contended for. – Acting on the most enlarged principle, and directed by the eternal rule of right, they would have blushed to demand liberty for themselves, while they denied it to others. Had they condescended to the weakness and fears of some of their townsmen, or followed the advice of timid friends, emancipation would never have come round; and the true advocates of the measure had no alternative, but to carry it by a sort of Coup de Main, as they did, or to lose both it and reform, for ever. Te success of the violent measures lately adopted by government, they ascribe to the supineness of the nation the timidity of some, the bigotry of others, and the prevalence of aristocratic ideas in the higher orders of society. For their part, let the consequence be what it will, they scorn to make any compromise with bigotry and injustice; or to subject the Rights of Man to any temporizing modifcation. Those, who attempted in vain during the period treated of in this volume, to them the tide of popular precipitation, are equally tenacious of their ancient notions; and as little disposed as formerly, to approve of the proceedings which they opposed. Tey draw a gloomy picture of the state of public afairs, and particularly of / the condition of this town. Tey represent the country as having been reduced to servitude. Tey describe the place of their nativity as having been subjected to martial law; the emporium of commerce, become a military station; the inhabitants insulted and put to the sword in the streets, and the whole kingdom looking on with acquiescence: and then they exclaim – Do our demagogues ever ask themselves how it came to pass that they were so deserted by their countrymen? Tat a land which for ten years past has been unanimously anxious for liberty, and particularly for a parliamentary reform, should muster but fve counties at Dungannon, and that these counties should be viewed with suspicion by the rest of the kingdom; that parliament should be unanimous, or nearly so, in passing the gunpowder and delegation acts, in suppressing the volunteers, in approving of the proceedings of the Lord’s committees, such as private interrogatories, discretionary imprisonment, and unlimited fnes imposed by an extra-judicial sentence? Do they ever enquire how government could venture upon such measures at the eve of a war, and continue them afer its commencement? They insist that this cannot be owing solely to a daring or arbitrary spirit in government, to venality in parliament, nor yet to an artful management of popular prejudice; because government is the same, parliament the same, and the people the same. Nay, it is our boast that our people are better, more enlightened, more united, and more liberal. How then, they say, does all this happen? / They themselves, charge it upon three principles. The first is an afectation of secrecy and mystery, with a design of producing alarm; which, pervaded the measures of the United Irishmen, and aferwards infected the whole party. Tey contend that secret cabals are unconstitutional and unmanly, unft for a free country or for free men; that no wise and good citizen will countenance societies whose members are unknown, whose proceedings

[Bruce and Joy (eds)], Belfast Politics

197

are secret, or whose designs and principles are concealed; that bad citizens will always endeavour to render them objects of jealousy; and that from this jealousy government will gain invincible strength. To’ in some subjects obscurity may be a source of the sublime, in politics it is only a source of jealousy and distrust. The second is an imitation of republican principles and language, accompanied with extravagant demands and menaces, published with a view to intimidation. Tis conduct alarmed all men of title, rank, and hereditary fortune, dissolved the opposition in parliament, prompted timid men to cling about the castle,5 or wish for an union with Britain; and inclined even some resolute and determined patriots to postpone a reform to calmer times. An attempt to intimidate, when not founded on power, they assert is equally mean and inefectual. It is dishonorable in a gentleman to bluster when he can do nothing, to say more than he means, and to use threats which he is neither able nor willing to execute; and it is inefectual in a multitude to / endeavour to outwit their governors. Tey should employ nothing but plain and public declarations, or active force. If the people be unanimous, this will succeed; if not, it is vain for clubs and juntos to think of inspiring government with any permanent alarm. Tey may occasion a temporary dismay, till their weakness is discovered; but the artifce will soon be detected. Government have a multitude of agents, both voluntary and mercenary, in every district, who can soon ascertain the strength of a party; but the inhabitants of a country, scattered as they are over the whole face of it, have no such means of information. Government therefore will soon recover from their surprise, and industriously avail themselves of the occasion, by difusing a sprit of distrust and disunion among the people, that one of the parties may join their standard. Tey will promote dissention among the subjects, to encrease the infuence of the crown. Tus on the present occasion, the wily minister of our sister country encouraged the Catholics when they were weak – then doubted of his ability to perform what he had given them reason to expect – advised them to apply to their own parliament – resisted their pretensions there – and at length brought all parties to depend upon Royal favour, as the only source of relief from domestic oppression. In this manner he carried of the glory of the measure, and insidiously endeavoured to attach the Catholics to the throne; dictated to parliament, and rendered the Cabinet of Saint James’s6 a Court of appeal paramount to the legislature of Ireland. – Tis, (say they), is the present situation of afairs. Two knots of men / in Dublin and Belfast, have disgusted and frightened the only persons who could in any case obtain a reform in the ways of peace. Tey threw down the gauntlet. Government took it up. By their threatening language and warlike preparations, they seemed to say that they were able to obtain their demands by force. Administrations knowing their imbecility, and feeling the additional strength it had acquired from such premature proceedings, said “Let us try. – Tere is a proclamation - for you; insulting, and you will say, unconstitutional. Is that enough?” All is quiet. – “Here is a gunpowder bill. Won’t that provoke you?” “No.” “We’ll take your artillery. You sha’n’t assemble in arms: and

198

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

the people who shall disperse your darling volunteers are the police, the odious police. Will nothing rouse you to put forth your boasted strength?” Even dragooning and military roots, in one part of this kingdom, were succeeded only by silent stupor and inaction. The third error, was separating Catholic emancipation from general reform. Under this head, they loudly declare, that they were as hearty in the cause of liberality as their opponents. Tey were as well disposed to unite Irishmen; but they knew that Protestant prejudices must be conciliated, as well as Catholic. Tey wished for Catholic emancipation, but would have linked it with a system of general liberty. Tey wished to lead the people, in one phalanx, to demand a reform; and think that their force would then have been irresistible. As far as the feelings of Catholics are concerned, they rejoice / in the extension of franchise; but as a national measure, their enfranchisement without a reform will be a calamity – It will drown the few good voters we can boast of, in a deluge of the meanest class of Catholic electors. With a reform, this extension of franchise would have benefted all parties. Tey should therefore have gone hand in hand. Had this been the case, the Catholics would have remained with the people. Tey will now, it is apprehended, strengthen the hands of government, encrease the expence and corruption of elections, and render many of the old patriots tenacious of the boroughs, as a bulwark of the Protestant interest. Tey insist that the Protestant and Catholic should have been bound together by the tie of a common interest, a partnership in oppression, and a joint hope of freedom, which neither could obtain without the other. Tis they admit, would have required time; but that they do not think a material objection. Being apprehensive of sudden shocks in the political machine, they profess themselves friends to gradual and deliberate measures. Incredulous with respect to sudden revolutions in popular or religious prejudices, they fear that the progress of liberality, or decay of bigotry, is not by any means as great or general as is pretended; and that whatever views wise and enlightened men may take of the subject, three millions of people will not be easily excited to an opposition which some may consider dangerous to themselves, and others ungrateful to the court. A religious sect, whose dearest prejudices are in favour of Monarchy and Hierarchy, will scarcely prefer a combination either / with associations suspected of republicanism, or with professed presbyterians, to an alliance with the State, and with the Church of Ireland, which they may consider as a sect of popery; since it acknowledges a human head, and professes to derive the efcacy of all its orders and ordinances, by apostolical succession thro’ the Church of Rome. These they assert to have been their ideas; but fnding the union of the clubs and the populace to be irresistible, and the advice or assistance of age, experience, approved integrity, and acknowledged abilities, rejected with disrespect, and being at the same time unwilling to obstruct so liberal a design, how much soever they deplored the mode of prosecuting it, – they very early withdrew their opposition; and thus precluded the dominant party from saying, that their plans had been thwarted, or their projects marred.

[Bruce and Joy (eds)], Belfast Politics

199

The present paralytic state of the nation, (they say) is, by no means, the least pernicious consequence of these violent and premature exertions: nor is it the least extraordinary of those symptoms, which indicate this malady, that two county elections in which Belfast had always acted an honourable part, should pass unnoticed: that with respect to the County of Down in particular, a member should be returned without a poll, while the inhabitants of Belfast were frst certainly informed of the name of the candidate by his advertisement of thanks. Te moderate party seem satisfed to submit to any imposition, rather than with a renewal of / old disputes, and give an opportunity to popular agitators to disseminate their principles. Te more decided patriots not only talk of elections as matters of no importance in the present state of things, but even express a wish, that grievances may encrease, that they may be the sooner and more efectually redressed. – Against this sentiment I most earnestly protest. It is the part of a good patriot, never to despair of the country, but in every situation to act for the best; and he must be a bad citizen or a shallow observer, who wishes that our political lethargy should encrease with the hope of being roused by a French reform. Such a man admits no medium between slavery, and revolution; the loss of liberty, and the subversion of all government. Amid ten thousand chances of despotism and anarchy, there is scarcely one of rational freedom; and this afer a series of atrocious factions. – While these parties argue thus, the partizans of the castle manage elections, as well as all other public business, at discretion. Such are the views taken by both parties. It has been thought best to give them in the strongest language used by the partizan on either side, that the reader may perceive the force of their respective arguments, and be able to form an impartial judgment. We cannot here forbear to remark, that the censure so lavishly heaped on the town which gave rise to this publication – is indefensible. Granting that a majority of those inhabitants who of late attended public meetings, were considered by the government of the country as having / proceeded unwarrantable lengths – twenty thousand people are not therefore to be indiscriminately condemned. Of this we have sufcient proof, in the protest of two hundred and ffy fve persons. Among them were enrolled by far the greater number of those whose patriotism, moderation, and decision, had long given dignity and consistency to the proceedings of Belfast. Under such circumstances, what plea in wisdom could be found, for pouring in bodies of troops out of all proportion to the magnitude of the town, and consequently so scattered over it as to be beyond controul. What necessity demanded an union of the functions of a General with those of the Civil Magistrate; removing an useful barrier between the ardour natural to the standing army, and the cool deliberation requisite in the execution of the law? In vain shall we search for an extenuation of the scenes of lawless violence which have so repeatedly occurred; or an excuse for exhibiting to the world a picture of the majesty of the laws prostrated. – The laws, nothing should be sufered to trample upon with impunity, because their efciency depends on public opinion; and the popular idea of their being omnipotent, is necessary to their support.

200

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

The civil power that should be superior on every occasion, seemed to sink under the exertion; and our streets displayed the occasional anarchy of Paris in miniature. Common sense informs us, that troops to make a fgure in the feld abroad, must practice subordination at home: and history says that the Pretorian bands7 / of Rome, hastened the downfall of the Empire, and tyrannized over the very people that employed them. Belfast, by its consequence in the scale of Commerce, Manufactures, and Revenue, contributes eminently to the prosperity of the kingdom. It has paid near the rate of one hundred and twenty thousand a year in port duties alone, besides the incalculable share it otherwise takes in the general burthens of the state; and it has been said to have had a greater number of ships employed in foreign trade than all the rest of Ireland beside. Manufactures experience in it the fostering hand of the most assiduous culture. When credit was tottering to its base in almost every corner of Europe, here it held its ground. Its merchants blended prudence with enterprize, and reaped the reward of unsullied integrity. In acts of munifcence, in charitable institutions, and private donations, none will deny its merit. During the period of near a century and an half, from the usurpation of Cromwell,8 it was signalized as much for loyalty to its Prince and attachment to his government, as by zeal in the pursuit of civil liberty. When our governors within these sixteen years dreaded a French invasion, and the Lord Lieutenant’s secretary9 informed us, that government could only spare to the rich northern coast, the nominal protection of “a troop or two of horse, or “part of a company of invalids,” Belfast pressed forward in defence of the country. It was / seen in arms, from the earliest dawn of that auspicious æra, which opened with the enlargement of our trade, and closed with an acknowledgment of our national independence. With that precious care such a character should be preserved, and what lenity and protection those who possess it have a right to expect – need no illustration. Persecution in politics, as well as religion, is absurd. It rivets error, while it vainly attempts to check the progress of truth: But a mild administration of government disarms the violent, and confrms the zeal and infuence of its friends. When we imagine we are forging fetters for human thought, we open new regions to its fight, enlarge the sphere of its action, and excite energies that were latent before. We venture to pronounce, that valuable maxims in politics are to be drawn from the whole of these proceedings. Tey shew that there is danger of promoting general disafection to the form of our government, if those who administer it practise a system of profigate expence, break thro’ the best mounds of the constitution, and oppose every attempt at moderate reform. Te alarm occasioned by the late exertions of a single town, and by the spirit which was difusing itself over a respectable province, may satisfy rulers that tranquility cannot be relied on, unless the will of the people be regarded, their complaints attended to, and their afections preserved. Tat the town which led the van, advanced / too far beyond the main body, is sufciently obvious. To that circumstance perhaps it is owing, that it failed in efecting still more important changes in national meas-

[Bruce and Joy (eds)], Belfast Politics

201

ures. But here, Ministers had little reason to boast. Te people have a fund of unredressed grievances to refect upon, and a spirit of discontent is consequently fostered in the most temperate bosoms. Tis may not always confne itself to the Northern Counties, but ultimately infect the thirty two. Administration may then, have a change of maintaining its authority, by the insidious policy of dividing the popular force: but how much more easily and more honorably might the same efect be produced, by uniting it? Te worst governments should for their own safety rectify abuses that may in time undermine them, as a good one will encourage the natural tendencies of the constitution to renovate itself. Te errors of France, as a beacon, point out the danger of universal sufrage; but instead of deterring government from a rational improvement in the representative branch of our legislature, they should stimulate them to grant, and the subjects to expect it. Had the Ministers of France made their appeal to the people in an earlier stage of the Monarchy, while the public mind was frmly attached, as ours is, to the Prince and to the form of his government, temperate measures would probably have been the result. Tat crisis was sufered to escape, and the consequences are to be deplored by every friend of liberty and order, in their own country and in the world. / On the whole, it were to be wished that from these petty broils, both government and its subjects would learn to guard against more lamentable convulsions, by attending to the following advice of Macchiavel.10 “Let administration and the legislature study to render themselves so much beloved and respected by the people, that no party shall indulge a hope of disturbing them with success, or impunity: and let not a discontented faction be too confdent, that the multitude, however disafected, will support them in their enterprizes, or accompany them in their dangers.” – “Imparino pertanto i principi a vivere in maniera, e farsi in modo riverire e amare, che niuno speri potere ammazzandoli salvarsi; e gli altri conoschino quanto quel penfero fa vano che ci faccia confdare troppo che una moltitudine, ancoura che malcontenta ne’ pericoli tuoi ti seguisti o ti accompagni.” storie fiorentine, lib. 7.11 /

DEBATES, RESOLUTIONS, ESSAYS, &c. […] To the principal inhabitants of the Town of Belfast. gentlemen, As Men, and as Irishmen, we have long lamented the degrading state of slavery and oppression in which the great majority of our countrymen, the Roman Catholics, are held – nor have we lamented it in silence – we wish to

202

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

see all distinctions on account of religion abolished – all narrow, partial maxims of policy done away. We anxiously wish to see the day when every Irishman shall be a citizen – when Catholics and Protestants, equally interested in their Country’s welfare, possessing equal freedom and equal privileges, shall be cordially united, and shall learn to look upon each other as brethren, the children of the same God, the / natives of the same land – and when the only strife amongst them shall be – who shall serve their country best. Tese, gentlemen, are our sentiments, and these we are convinced are yours. We, therefore, request a general meeting of the principal inhabitants at the town-house, on Saturday next, at noon, to consider of the propriety of a Petition to Parliament, in favour of our Roman Catholic Brethren. We are, Gentlemen, your most obedient Servants, Robert Tompson Tomas Sinclaire13 Robert Simms16 Gil. M.‘Ilveen, jun.18 Tomas Milliken20 Samuel Neilson21 Samuel M‘Tier23 Hu. M‘Ilwain24 Wm. M‘Cleery26 Wm. Tennent29 Wm. Magee32 Wm. Simms33 Robert Callwell34 Hu. Montgomery35 John M‘Donnell Henry Haslett37 David Bigger39 John Haslett42

Tos. Neilson Tos. M‘Donnell14 Robert Hunter17 Tos. M‘Cabe19 Wm. Martin Jas. M‘Cormick James Luke James M Kain25 Sam. Tompson27 Hu. Johnson30 Christ. Strong George Wells James Stephenson Sam. M‘Clean36 John Graham Wm. Bryson38 John Tisdall40 Hugh Crawford

Robert Getty12 James Hyndman15 Robert Major Walter Crawford Sam. M‘Murray Tos. Brown22 John Bankhead Isaac Patton J. Campbell White28 J. S. Ferguson31 John Todd Richd. M‘Clelland John M’Connel John M‘Clean And. M‘Clean Tos. Ash John Caldwell41

[…] May 18, 1792. THE Belfast Second Society of United Irishmen, at a meeting on Tuesday evening, unanimously, resolved on contributing their share of money to assist the people of France in the present war, undertaken in support of the new constitution of that country – and that they will continue so to do while the present war, in defence of the liberties of mankind, may last. /

[…]

[Bruce and Joy (eds)], Belfast Politics

203

14th july – 1792.

BELFAST REVIEW – AND CELEBRATION of the

FRENCH REVOLUTLON. ON Friday evening, the several country corps marched into town, and were billeted on the inhabitants; who were happy in renewing expressions of afection for their neighbours and friends in the fourteenth year since the commencement of reviews, and in the sixteenth of the volunteer æra. Assemblies of smaller bodies than formerly, having been deemed best calculated to preserve at present the military spirit among the citizen-soldiery of Ireland, another review is to be held on Broughshane Moor on the frst of August. Te number of corps which would otherwise have attended at Belfast having been thus considerably reduced, it was not thought proper to call on the venerable General of the volunteer army of Ulster, the Earl of Charlemont,43 to attend on this occasion; but the Revewing General, who acted in his room, was requested by the committee to make a regular return to his Lordship of their numbers, state of discipline, &c. Te gentleman appointed in his place was Colonel Sharman,44 of Moira Castle, who presided with such dignity last year in the civil assembly of the inhabitants of Belfast and its neighbourhood, at the celebration of the French Revolution. An unexpected illness having prevented that justly admired character from flling an ofce for which he was so eminently qualifed, Major Crawford,45 of Crawford’s-burn, was unanimously nominated to act as Reviewing General; in testimony of the respect due to decided virtue in public and private life. / On Saturday morning a brigade was formed in High street, extending from the Bank to the Quay; and the whole were marched of to the old reviewground in the Falls,46 at about eleven o’clock, by the Exercising Ofcer, Major M‘Manus. On their return to town, at three o’clock, there was a Grand Procession, the order of which is mentioned underneath, and feu de joyes were fred in Linenhall-street by the whole body, in honour of that day, which presented the sublime spectacle of near one sixth of the whole inhabitants of Europe bursting their chains, and throwing of, almost in an instant, the degrading yoke of slavery. /

[…]

204

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

COPY OF THE ADDRESS TO THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OF FRANCE. IT is not from vanity or ostentation, that we, the citizens of Belfast, and citizen soldiers of that town and neighbourhood, take the liberty of addressing the representative majesty of the French people – We address you, with the rational respect due to a title elevated far above all servile and idolatrous adulation, and with that afectionate fraternity of heart which ought to unite man to man, in a mutual and inseparable union of interests, of duties, and of rights; which ought to unite nation with nation, into one great republic of the world. On a day, sanctifed as this has been, by a declaration of human rights, the germ of so much good to mankind, we meet with joy together, and wish well to France, to her National Assembly, to her people, to her armies and to her King. May you, legislators, maintain by the indefatigable spirit of liberty, that constitution which has been planned by the wisdom of your predecessors, and never may you weary in the work you have undertaken, until you can proclaim with triumphant security, it is fnished! Manifest to an attentive and progressive world, that it is not the phrenzy of / philosophy, nor the fever of wild and precarious liberty, which could produce such continued agitation; but that imperishable spirit of freedom alone, which always exists in the heart of man, which now animates the heart of Europe, and which in the event, will communicate its energy throughout the world, invincible and immortal! We rejoice in the sincerity of our souls, that this creative spirit animates the whole mass of mind in France. We auspicate happiness and glory to the human race, from every great event which calls into activity the whole vigour of the whole community; amplifes so largely the feld of enterprise and improvement, and gives free scope to the universal soul of the empire. We trust that you will never submit the liberties of France to any other guarantees, than God, and the right hands of the people. The power that presumes to modify or to arbitrate with respect to a constitution adopted by the people, is an usurper and a despot, whether it be the meanest of the mob, or the ruler of empires; and if you condescend to negociate the alteration of a comma in your constitutional code, France from that moment, is a slave. Impudent despots of Europe! Is it not enough to crush human nature beneath your feet at home, that you thus come abroad to disturb the domestic settlement of the nations around you, and put in motion your armies, those enormous masses of human machinery, to beat down every attempt that man makes for his own happiness? – It is high time to turn these dreadful engines against their inventors, and organized as they have hitherto been, for the misery of mankind to make them now the instruments of its glory and its renovation. Success, therefore, attend the armies of France!

[Bruce and Joy (eds)], Belfast Politics

205

May your soldiers, with whom war is not a trade, but a duty, remember that they do not fght merely / for themselves, but that they are the advance guard of the world: nor let them imagine that the event of the war is uncertain. A single battle may be precarious, not so a few campaigns. – Tere is an omnipotence in a righteous cause, which masters the pretended mutability of human afairs, and fxes the supposed inconsitency of fortune. If you will be free, you must; there is not a chance that one million of resolute men can be enslaved; no power on earth is able to do it; and will the God of justice and of mercy? Soldiers! there is something that fghts for you even in the hearts of your enemies. Te native energies of humanity, rise up in voluntary array against tyrannical and preposterous prejudice, and all the little cabals of the heart, give way to the feelings of nature, of country and of kind. Freedom and prosperity to the people of France! We think that such revolutions as they have accomplished, are so far from being out of the order of society, that they sprung inevitably from the nature of man and the progression of reason; what is imperfect he has the power to improve; what he has created, he has a right to destroy. It is a rash opposition to the irresistible will of the public, that in some instances has maddened a disposition, otherwise mild and magnanimous, turned energy into ferocity, and the generous and gallant spirit of the French, into fury and vengeance. We trust that every efort they now make, every hardship they undergo, every drop of blood they shed, will render their constitution more dear to them. Long life and happiness to the King of the French! Not the Lord of the soil and its servile appendages, but the King of men, who can reserve their rights, while they entrust their powers. In this crisis of his fate, may he withstand every attempt to estrange him from the nation; to make him an exile in midst of France, and to prevent him / from indentifying himself as a magistrate with the constitution, and as a Frenchman with the people. We beseech you all as men, as legislators, as citizens and as soldiers, in this your great confict for liberty for France, and for the world, to despise all earthly danger, to look up to God, and to connect your councils, your arms, and your Empire to his throne, with a chain of union, fortitude, perseverance, morality and religion. We conclude, with this servent prayer: Tat as the Almighty is dispersing the political clouds which have hitherto darkened our hemisphere, all nations may use the light of Heaven: that, as in this latter age, the Creator is unfolding in his creatures, powers which had long lain latent – they may exert them in the establishment of universal freedom, harmony and peace: may those who are free, never be slaves: may those who are slaves be speedily free. [On the motion of Mr. Tomson, the above was to be transmitted to the national Assembly.]

206

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

COPY OF THE ADDRESS TO THE PEOPLE OF IRELAND. WE, the volunteers and other inhabitants of the town and neighbourhood of Belfast, assembled to commemorate this great day, embrace with earnestness the opportunity which it afords, at once to express our zeal and afection for the cause of liberty in France, and our undisguised opinions on subjects of the last importance to our native land. Trained from our infancy in a love of freedom, and an abhorrence of tyranny, we congratulate our brethren of France and ourselves, that the infamous conspiracy of slaves and despots, against the happiness and glory of that admired and respected nation, and against the common rights of man, has hitherto, proved abortive. / Fixing our view steadily on the great principle of Gallic emancipation, we will not be diverted from that magnifcent object, by the accidental tumults or momentary ebullitions of popular fury. We will not estimate the wisdom of her legislators by the transports of a mob; nor the spirit of her armies by the cowardice of a regiment; nor the patriotism of her people by the treachery of individuals; nor the justice of her cause by the numbers of her enemies. We judge with other views and on other principles. We see with admiration, France extending the land-marks of human knowledge in the great art of government, and opening to the world new systems of policy and of justice. We see her renounce all wars on the principle of conquest. We see her propose an universal brotherhood and an eternal peace among the nations. We see her even now, when forced into arms and bloodshed, by the unjust and unprincipled machinations of her enemies, separating, as far as possible, the innocent subjects from the guilty despot; respecting, amidst the horrors of war, the property of individuals; and exempting from interruption the peaceful trafc of the merchant. It is from views like these, that we estimate that stupendous event, the Revolution, which we this day commemorate; not from accidental irregularities, which, while we condemn them, we are compelled to pity, as feeling that they spring not merely from a spirit of licentiousness, but from a sense of injury working on a sanguine people, full galled with the recollection of recent tyranny and oppression, and jealous of liberty, but just recovered, and scarcely yet secure. Such are our sentiments on the subjects of the French Revolution; – we come now to the state of our own country. Impressed as we are with a deep sense of the excellence of our constitution, as it exists in theory, we rejoice that we are not, like our brethren in France, reduced to the hard necessity of tearing up / inveterate abuse by the roots, even where utility was so intermixed as not to admit of separation. – Ours is an easier and less unpleasing task; to remove with a steady and a temperate resolution, the abuses which the lapse of many years inattention and supineness in the great body of the people, and unremitting vigilance in their rulers to invade and plun-

[Bruce and Joy (eds)], Belfast Politics

207

der them of their rights, have sufered to overgrow and to deform that beautiful system of government, so admirably suited to our situation, our habits and our wishes. We have not to innovate, but to restore. Te just prerogatives of our Monarch we respect and will maintain. Te constitutional power of the Peers of the realm we wish not to invade. We know that in the exercise of both, abuses will be at once corrected, so as never again to recur, by restoring to us the People; what we, for ourselves, demand as our right, our due weight and infuence in that estate, which is our property, the Representation of the people in Parliament. Thoroughly impressed with the unjust and ruinous inequality of that representation, with the consequent corruption, which pervades all ranks in the state; with the destruction of the morals, the sacrifce of the commerce, and the hourly and imminent danger to the liberty of our country, we will infexibly persevere in the pursuit of that great remedy for all our political evils, a parliamentary reform; a reform temperate, equal and just, which shall restore lustre to the crown, dignity to the peerage, and their due weight and infuence to the people of Ireland. But while we thus state our sentiments on the subject of reform, we feel it incumbent upon us to declare, as we now do, that no reform, were even such attainable, would answer our ideas of utility or justice, which should not equally include all sects and denominations of Irishmen. We reprobate and abhor the idea, that political inequality should result / from religious opinions; and we should be ashamed, at the moment when we are seeking for liberty ourselves, to acquiesce in any system founded on the slavery of others. We have now declared our sentiments to the world. In declaring them we spurn with equal disdain, restraint, whether proceeding from a mob or a monarch; from a riot or a proclamation. We look with a mixture of abomination and contempt on the transactions which, on the last anniversary of the French Revolution, degraded the national character of England; when neither the learning, the piety, the public spirit, nor the private virtue of a Priestley,47 could protect him from the savage fury of the vilest of an ignorant and a bigoted rabble; before whom the religion of the country was dishonoured, the name of the Sovereign insulted, and all law and order levelled in the dust; to the disgrace, not less of the integrity of the magistrates who were the fomenters, than of the spirit of the people, who were timid witnesses of the ravage and destruction. As little should we respect any attempt, under colour of authority, to fetter down our minds or prevent the publication of our grievances, and our determination to seek redress. In the pursuit of reform, that great measure indispensable to the freedom, the happiness and the glory of our country, we will infexibly persevere, and for its attainment we rely with confdence on the steadiness, the public spirit and zealous co-operation of our countrymen.

-----------------

208

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

AT a meeting of the Belfast Volunteer Company, (Blue) 7th September, 1792, Captain Brown, in the Chair: Te following Resolutions were unanimously agreed to: Resolved, Tat we are happy to see the present revival of volunteering throughout this province, / confdent that the rights of the people are most secure when they are able to assert them. That we are frmly persuaded that this country is indebted to the spirit and wisdom of the volunteers for whatever commerce or constitution it possesses, and that their success was owing to the justness of the principles on which they acted. That we consider it necessary at this crisis for all volunteers to recur to those principles which have stood the test of time, and have become by their universal adoption, sacred and uncontrovertible. That these principles are fully expressed in the resolutions of the frst48 and third49 Dungannon meetings, and that a strict adherence to them by the old volunteer corps, and the adoption of them by every new corps, is essential to the welfare of Ireland. That we again declare to our countrymen, and to the world, our frm determination to adhere to the principles contained in the resolutions of the frst and third Dungannon meetings; and we warmly recommend it to every volunteer corps in the kingdom, the adoption of similar declarations. – United in sentiment, the volunteers will again become the happy instrument of producing essential benefts to the welfare of their country. Resolved, Tat these resolutions be published in the Belfast news papers; and also in hand-bills; with the resolutions of the frst and third Dungannon meetings prefxed, and be dispersed through this province. Signed by Order, JAMES Mc. CLEAN, Sec.

--------------------at a meeting of the

FIRST BELFAST VOLUNTEER COMPANY, held at the donegall-arms, september 7, 1792; mr. hugh johnson, in the chair. AT this important crisis, which is likely to form a remarkable æra in the history of man, when many of the European despots have combined to crush a / great

[Bruce and Joy (eds)], Belfast Politics

209

nation struggling for liberty:– At a period when the spirit of volunteering seems to revive in this neighbourhood, we hope it will not be deemed presumptive in us, who frst took up arms in the cause of our country, and who have never laid them down, nor slackened in our eforts to promote its prosperity, to declare the principles we hold, relative to the volunteer institution of ireland which we cannot do better than in the words of our own association, and in the following resolutions of the Dungannon meetings of February 1782, and September 1783:– (association of the first belfast volunteer co) “We, whose names are hereunto subscribed, having associated ourselves together, to learn the military discipline, for defence of ourselves, this town and country, and the support of the rights of ireland, under the name of the first belfast volunteer company, do plight our faith each to all, to be governed by the voice of the majority in every case that may arise; that we will not withdraw from the company from any other cause than removal or bodily indisposition and that we will never accept of any wages or reward from government as a volunteer company, or submit to take any military oath or obligation therefrom.” (dungannon meeting, February 15, 1782.) Resolved, that we hold the right of private judgment in matters of religion, to be equally sacred in others as in ourselves. Resolved, therefore, that as men, and as irishmen, as christians, and as protestants, we rejoice in the relaxation of the penal laws against our roman catholic fellow subjects; and that we conceive the measure to be fraught with the happiest consequences to the union and prosperity of the inhabitants of Ireland.’ (Dungannon Meeting, September 8, 1783.) resolved, that freedom is the Indefeasible birth-right of irishmen and britons, derived from the Author of their being; and of which no power on earth, much less a delegated power, hath a right to deprive them. Resolved, that they only are free, who are governed by no laws but those to which they assent, either by themselves in person, or by their representatives freely chosen, subject to the controul, and frequently returning into the common mass of constituents. Resolved, that the majority of our House of Commons is not chosen by the people. Resolved unanimously, that the foregoing association and resolutions, form the basis of our creed as citizen soldiers. Resolved unanimosly, that the foregoing resolutions, passed at the Dungannon meetings – adopted by the whole volunteer army, and by most of the counties in Ireland – we look upon as a standard, by which to judge who are,

210

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

and who are not, volunteers upon principle: And that we will not associate, or be reviewed with any, if any there be, who are formed on principles opposite thereto. Resolved unanimously, that we will persevere in the pursuit of an adequate representation of the Irish nation in Parliament, without distinction on account of religious opinions. Resolved unanimously, that, venerating order, and abhorring licentiousness, we will be ever ready, as we have heretofore been, to support the Magistrate in the execution of the law, in this neighbourhood. Signed, by order of the First Belfast Volunteer Co. HU. JOHNSON, Chairman. Resolved unanimously, that these resolutions be published in each of the Belfast newspapers. JOHN RABB,50 Sec. / belfast, october 2, 1792. at a meeting of the

FIRST SOCIETY OF UNITED IRISHMEN, mr. t. milliken in the chair: Te following Declaration was unanimously agreed to, and ordered to be published: THE right of petitioning, that sacred claim of those who sufer, is a natural right which municipal law neither gives nor can take away. Every age, and nation, has recognized it. It has been consecrated in these realms under the sanction of common and statute law; and it is exerted in Turkey under the sabre of despotism. With respect to the manner of preferring complaint, it would have become those Grand Juries who have confederated against the common right of the subject, to point out any mode by which three millions of people could express their grievances more peaceably than by delegation. Attached as we are to one favourite principle – the good of the whole – the greatest happiness of the many, it is neither petty political scandal, nor peremptory diction, nor the throng of names, and chorus of corporations, which can divert us from the unity and integrity of our political faith. To render authority either secure or permanent, it must be established in the afections of the whole people, and we have no scruple in declaring, that without some share of political power, no people, nor any class of people, can have any security for their personal freedom, their property, their trade, or their religion. It is so with

[Bruce and Joy (eds)], Belfast Politics

211

Protestants – It must be so with Catholics. Te self same principle which makes the former call for a reform, makes the latter anxious for the elective franchise, as a shield from oppression; and that principle we venerate, whether lodged in the bosom of a Protestant or a Catholic, an African or an American. To circumscribe liberty / is to destroy it; and without free circulation, like the air we breathe, it loses its spring, stagnates, corrupts, and then issues out from the grand jury rooms, hot and pestiferous, to check the rising prospects of the nation, and to blast the glories of 1782. As for us, we disclaim, we abhor the idea of establishing a sovereignty over our fellow-citizens. We refuse any share in an ascendancy which claims exclusive and eternal dominion, surmounts law and legislature, and cuts of, with merciless proscription, a whole people from all hope of political equality. Te law, in every free country, ought to know no exceptions; but to make the exceptions more general than the rule, is monstrous; and with concern we say, it is Irish policy. We, who in 1782, pledged our lives and fortunes to gain sovereignty to Ireland, will not, at this day, subscribe to the sovereignty of any party, who under the pretext of religion, disguise political jealousy and the selfshness of monopoly; nor will we dress up any such proud assumption with the attributes of royalty, and with the spoils of our countrymen. – We, who in the hour of danger, and in the face of the enemy, were glad to take the Catholics into our ranks, will not now throw them of as noxious incumbrances, and belying the nature and end of the volunteer institution, blaspheming the writ of Dungannon, set ourselves in array against the very men, whom, the other day, we embraced as brothers. We who have always asserted the honour, the interests, and internal independence of Ireland to be maintainable only by the freedom, frequency, and power of Parliament, will not complement the abuses of the constitution at the expence of the community; nor will we, with heroic indiference to consistency pledge life and fortune to the support of a political system in all its branches, while resolutions still tingle in our ears, that without adequate reform, there is no salvation for Ireland. – Nor, fnally, will we add ourselves to the train of / those upstarts in ofce, who acquire character and importance abroad, in the same proportion as their country is losing both at home; who swell into unnatural signifcance by civil dissention, and whose haughtiness encreases with, and by, national humiliation. We follow that excellent man whose personal glory is bound up with that of his country – who in this great question, rises above the sordid atmosphere of party, and we beseech him and his liberal coadjutors, tho’ they may, for a time, be unsuccessful, to go on and complete the redemption of a long sufering people. We have resolved, and we keep our resolution. We have chosen, and we pursue our choice. We act honestly, and therefore conclude that we think justly. Let the law judge of our actions, but for our faith we appeal unto God – the God of all mankind, in whose presence there is no ascendancy but that of virtue and

212

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

justice – distinction of religion, like distinction of colours, is of his ordination. We will never vilify the religion of any man, and far less will we presume to make those varieties of faith, which are perhaps natural and necessary, the engines of civil persecution and political usurpation. (Signed by order of the Society) JAMES HYNDMAN, Secretary.

---------------At a meeting of the

THIRD SOCIETY OF UNITED IRISHMEN, in the town of belfast – 3d october, 1792. MR. CLOTWORTHY BIRNIE in the chair: Te following Declaration was agreed to, and ordered to be published: ASSOCIATED as we are, for the purpose of producing union of interest and afection among all the inhabitants of Ireland, we abhor the idea of withholding from our Roman Catholic brethren their / civil and religious rights, at the time that we would wish to enjoy those rights ourselves. We are persuaded that the religion of any man, and his politics, are not necessarily connected: On the contrary, that the former ought not to have any connection with the latter. In a civil view, there undoubtedly is a communion of interests and rights, and that every individual who contributes to the support of the state, ought to have a voice in framing the laws which regulate that state. But religion is personal; the individual alone accountable; we therefore deem it impious to intrude between his conscience and that Almighty Being, who alone knoweth his heart. We assert, that the right of petitioning in the subject, of whatever denomination, is not only natural, but presently agreeable to the spirit of our constitution; and we confess ourselves ignorant of any mode by which our Catholic brethren could have so peaceably collected, and expressed their sentiments, as by delegation. We have seen of late the publications of Grand Juries, which ought to have contained mild and peaceable sentiments, illiberal and ungenerous; directly calculated to sow dissention, and keep up that religious animosity which has so long distracted this island, and subjected it to the ridicule of a foreign administration. – Persevere, Catholic brethren! constitutionally persevere! – Te cause in which you are engaged is natural and virtuous. A cause in which the Catholic and Protestant are equally involved; and whether opposed by wicked administrations, or by silly corporations, whose understandings and hearts are equally frozen, whilst there exists an almighty and righteous Ruler, your exertions will

[Bruce and Joy (eds)], Belfast Politics

213

be crowned with success. Our endeavours shall never be wanting to attain the much desired object, and we trust the day will speedily arrive, when Catholic and Protestant, Mahometan and Jew, over the whole world, shall equally enjoy the sacred blessings of freedom and of peace. DAVID BIGGAR, Secretary.

----------------/ At a meeting of the

BELFAST SECOND SOCIETY OF UNITED IRISHMEN George-inn, Tuesday, oct. 9, 1792. Te following declaration having been laid before them, by their committee, was unanimously agreed to, and ordered to be published: ASSOCIATED on the principles of humanity, and zealous for her rights, we view with generous indignation, the combinations of despots, to keep her in degradation, and suppress the voice with which she attempts to recite her suferings and prefer her claims – Whether those despots be decorated with diadems, arrayed in the livery of a hunting club; or the petty tyrants of the country, assembled in a jury room, their principles and object are the same in themselves, and to us equally detestable. While we refect with regret, on the success of despotism in Poland,51 and execrate with horror its attempts in France, we cannot be insensible to its presumption and audacity in our native land, and the injustice and cruelty which it proposes to perpetuate. We have long seen, and seen with pity, three millions of our brethren degraded from the rank of citizens, and languishing in slavery. – We have seen the same three millions peaceable and submissive to, and scrupulously amenable to the laws of their country – their haughty Lords. – Nay, we have seen them forgetful of themselves, their injuries and their insults, armed for the defence of the ungrateful minions who vilify their characters, insult Heaven by pronouncing them incapable of the rights of men, and pledge their lives and fortunes to keep them, and their posterity, in eternal thraldom. Captivated with this unparalled magnanimity and founding our judgments on the solid basis of character, approved by experience, we pronounced / those three millions of our Catholic brethren not only capable of citizenship, but worthy of its blessings – On this foundation, as men of integrity, we pledged ourselves to our country, and each other, to use our utmost infuence to remove the stigma from their character, and the slavery from their persons, of which they have to long and so justly complained, and restore them to a community of privileges and interest, and consequently of afection with their brethren.

214

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

We now declare, that we are neither ashamed of our judgment nor sorry for our conduct. Te foundation of the one appears more solid, and the propriety of the other more conspicuous, every day. Te dignifed moderation, the legal precision, generous ardor, and unawed magnanimity of their procedure, demonstrate that they are worthy of our friendship and the freedom of their country. – Of that friendship we solemnly assure them, in its utmost extent – and we trust the period is at hand, when the wisdom of the legislature will justify our judgment, sanction the propriety of our conduct, and realize our prospects. While we thus repeat the avowal of our friendship, and express our trust, we declare at the fame time, that the honor, prosperity, peace and happiness of our country, are our great object, and a regard to these our leading principle. Of these, we know, identity of interest, equality of privilege, and harmony of afection, form the only solid base. Neither house nor kingdom, divided against itself, can possibly stand.52 We, therefore, disclaim all connection with, and attachment to, party or cabal. We reprobate with indignation, the idea of an ascendancy, whose imaginary height depends upon depressing brethren, and plunging them in the depths of servitude and wretchedness. We wish to present the ascendancy, whatever it is, in its true elevation, by restoring all around to its proper level. Nay, we wish to secure to our countrymen, not / excepting venal burgesses, self devoted jurors, and other resolutioners, who volunteer in the cause of human degradation – those very lives and properties, which they have so rashly pledged themselves, wantonly to throw away. Lastly, we declare to you, our Catholic brethren, that we are fully convinced of the justice of your claims, and the legality of your proceedings. Your right of petitioning all or any of the branches of the legislature, is unanimously sanctioned by the voice of common sense, the laws of the land, and the practice even of despotism. Go on, then, generous, though degraded men! Liberty is your object; and ye have long deserved it! Let the love of liberty be your principle, the law your guide, and unanimity your support! Ministers may frown; courtiers intrigue, and juries fulminate proscriptions without end. Be not afraid of them, neither be ye disconcerted. Teir frown is insignifcance, their intrigues foolishness, and their fulminations, like the showmen’s fash, from pounded rosin, are only the amusement, or the terror of children. All these will speedily disappear. Your voice, preferring the claims of justice, and supported by reason and sound policy, must, and will be heard. “Te night of political ignorance, delusion, and superstition, is far spent; and the day is at hand.” – Te day, which shall raise you to the dignity of men, and your country to a name among nations. We look forward to its appearance with ardent expectation, and shall hail its presence with hallowed joy. We recognize you with sympathy as brethren, disinherited, proscribed, and alienated, in your native land.

[Bruce and Joy (eds)], Belfast Politics

215

We have pledged ourselves to support your claims of restoration to your natural rights, and we will be faithful to our word. In this cause, we stand not alone. Te brightest ornaments of the senate and the bar, the wise and / liberal in every corner of the land, and above all, the eternal principles of reason and justice are mustered on our side. Tus supported, we may be disappointed for a season, but cannot despair. We repeat, “your voice must, and will be heard:” your prayers granted, and your rights restored. Te day which shall enrol you in the ranks of fellow-subjects, will give security to the liberties of Irishmen, nerves to their industry, and honor to their name. Till that day, we must continue, as we are, a weak, wretched, and insulted people. WM. OSBORNE,53 Chairman. WM. MITCHELL, Secretary.

--------------at a meeting of the

FOURTH SOCIETY OF UNITED IRISHMEN of belfast, october, 19, 1792; mr. edward kelly, in the chair; Te following declaration was unanimously agreed to, and ordered to be published: IMPRESSED with benevolent sentiments towards all the human kind, we lament, at this great æra of reform, that there should exist Irishmen, who, living under the enjoyment of constitutional privileges, wish to debar their fellow-subjects of the same rights. Connected as we are with another country, whose aggrandizement has been the destruction of Ireland, we view with astonishment and abhorrence, the weak policy of these men, who, from whatever motives, wish to prevent the Union of Irishmen. We are satisfed that every individual, in whatever country, and of whatever persuasion, has an equal, natural right in the blessings of the state in which he lives; we regret that any part of our fellow subjects should be deprived of those blessings; / – and we do sincerely lament that Protestants, whether under the garb of religion or policy, should even dare to wish for a continuation of such slavery. We congratulate our Catholic brethren, on the appearance of that happy period, when the general interests of this island will be the only object in view among all its inhabitants; when Catholic and Protestant will be mutually concerned in one common cause; when religious opinions shall no longer debar a subject from the enjoyment of civil rights.

216

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

The just claim which every subject has, to prefer his petition to the legislature, for a redress of those grievances under which he labours, we believe, need not now be disputed. We admire the wisdom and modesty of our Catholic brethren, in the mode which they adopted of preferring this claim; and we feel ourselves peculiarly happy in assuring them of our uniform co-operation, and decided support in the attainment of an object that so much concerns the general good. Some late publications no further merit our attention, than by urging us to declare our utter abhorrence of the sentiments they contain, in order to dissuade weak minds from adhering to such assertions, to force men to think for themselves, unfettered by grand juries or corporations – to act a just part, and leave the consequence to the Supreme Disposer of events. At this remarkable period, we do most heartily rejoice with all the friends of liberty, at the downfall which tyranny has received in France – a downfall, natural indeed! – in which the inhabitants of Ireland as well as France, are interested; and we hail that happy day, when despotism, under whatever mask, over the whole earth will receive a similar fate – and the standard of liberty be erected in its stead. ISRAEL MILLIKEN, Sec. /

BELFAST VOLUNTEERS. BY command of the committees of our respective corps, jointly convened by summons, we request the attendance of all their members in full uniform, at the White Linen-Hall, to-morrow, precisely at 12 o’clock, for the purpose of expressing their joy at the success of the arms of the French Republic, by fring three feu-de-joies. The volunteers request the attendance of their fellow-citizens, at the Donegall-Arms, at seven o’clock said evening, to join with them in declaring their sentiments on this auspicious event. Monday, 29th October, 1792. HU. M‘ILWAIN, Sec. Belfast Troop. JOHN RABB, Sec. First Belfast Vol. Com. JAMES M‘CLEAN, Sec. Belfast Vol. Com.

--------------BELFAST – NOVEMBER 2 – 1792. AGREEABLY to a late advertisement, the successes of the French were celebrated on Tuesday by the volunteers and citizens of Belfast, with that warmth of afection which they generally display in every good cause.

[Bruce and Joy (eds)], Belfast Politics

217

The two volunteer artillery companies, and the two infantry corps, assembled about two o’clock, and fred three feu-de-joyes,54 in honour of the day, on which a Duke and a King, at the head of an armed host, ingloriously deserted the feld, afer a campaign which, both in point of design and execution, was as disgraceful to the arms of Austria and Prussia, as its object was detestable and unjust.55 In the evening a numerous meeting was held at the Donegall-Arms, consisting of volunteer citizens, and citizens unarmed, in pursuance of an advertisement requesting an assembly of the inhabitants – when the following declaration was unanimously agreed to: /

MR. SAM. MC.TIER IN THE CHAIR: WE, the inhabitants of Belfast, with hearts overfowing with joy, again assemble together, publicly to declare our happiness at the glorious success of the French arms, against innumerable hosts of enemies – the enemies of the human race – and their fnal expulsion from the Gallic territories: An event by which every obstacle to the compleat establishment of civil and religious liberty, is removed from that hallowed land – an event which secures liberty to surrounding nations. Sanguine as our opinions were of the invincible power of a nation of freemen, opposed to the armed slaves of tyrants, yet the event has surpassed our fondest expectations. When we contemplate the treachery of the executive power, the perfdy of ofcers, the disorganized state of the army – when we consider the combination of formidable enemies, with generals of the frst military abilities at the head of veteran troops, yet observe, that these armies have not been capable of achieving a single important object, credibility is almost staggered, but the world has witnessed it. We cannot help attributing the success of the French arms to the signal interposition of the Deity, as an example of the success with which he will crown the eforts of mankind, in every attempt to establish civil and religious liberty; and we fervently implore the infuence of the Divine Spirit, to guide the councils of the National Convention56 in perfecting the great work in which they are engaged, so as to render it productive of happiness to millions yet unborn.

--------------The town was almost universally illuminated. – Every thing demonstrated sincere pleasure in the disgrace of two tyrannical courts,57 that attempted to dragoon an united nation into that deplorable state of spiritual well as political bondage, from which / it was just recovering; and that dared to tell twenty-fve millions of men – ye shall not be free.

218

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

In the windows of six or seven houses a number of transparencies presented themselves:– a few of the mottoes are subjoined, as trifing circumstances sometimes mark the disposition of the times. Perfect union and equal liberty to the men of Ireland. – Vive la Republique: Vive la Nation. – Church and State Divorced. – Liberty Triumphant. – Te Rights of Men established. – Despotism prostrate. – Te Tyrants are fed; let the People rejoice. – Heaven beheld their glorious eforts, and crown’d their deeds with success. – France is free; so may we; let us will it. – Awake O ye that sleep. – A gallows suspending an inverted Crown, with these words:– “May the fate of every Tyrant be that of Capet.” 58– A check to Despots. – Te Cause of Mankind triumphant. – Irishmen rejoice. – Union among Irishmen. – Rights of Man. – Irishmen! look at France. – Liberty and Equality. ireland. 8th Sept. 1783. – Armed Citizens spoke. 2d Dec. 1783. – Teir Delegates ran away. 30th Oct. 1792. – We are taxed, tyth’d, and enslaved, but we have only to unite and be free. france. 14th July, 1789. – Sacred to Liberty. 10th August, 1792. – Te People triumphant. 22d October, 1792. – Exit of Tyranny. The night closed in the most orderly manner, without either bonfre or any kind of irregularity whatever.

--------------NO[R]THERN WHIG CLUB. AT a general meeting on the 5th of November, held pursuant to notice, the following Resolutions were agreed to: / arch. h. rowan, esq. in the chair: Resolved, Tat it is with the greatest satisfaction we embrace this opportunity to congratulate our country on the late ignominious fight of the enemies to liberty, from the territory of the French Republic; and to express our hopes, that the present disturbances in that country may speedily terminate in the stable tranquility of a good Government, founded on the principles of equal liberty, and the unalienable rights of man. – (Unanimously.) Resolved, Tat as an early acquiescence in the just demands of the people is the surest pledge of peace and tranquillity in any country, we trust we shall

[Bruce and Joy (eds)], Belfast Politics

219

speedily see the wishes of this nation complied with, by an honest and efectual reform in the representation of the people, on a broad principle of equal justice and equal liberty to all sects and denominations of Irishmen; satisfed as we are that a sincere union among ourselves, and a total oblivion of past dissentions, from whatever cause arising, can alone secure to this country, freedom, happiness, and prosperity. – (One dissentient.) Resolved, Tat we see with the greatest satisfaction the rapid decay of prejudice and bigotry in the part of the country most immediately within our observation; and we anticipate with pleasure the day of their total downfal. – (Unanimously) WM. SINCLAIRE,59 SECRETARY.

-------------BELFAST VOLUNTEER COMPANY (BLUE). AT a meeting of the Belfast Volunteer Company (Blue), at the Exchange, November 24, 1792, lieut. getty in the chair: [Te packets having this day brought the glorious intelligence, of the French having obtained the possession of Brussels, the capital of the Austrian / Netherlands60 – and thereby having virtually compleated the liberation of the Belgic people.] The company unanimously agreed to publish the following declaration of their sentiments, upon that great event:– Again has liberty triumphed – again have her sons conquered – and again we rejoice. We rejoice that another great country is free – and that in Belgia, we are now able to recognize a nation of freemen. We congratulate our countrymen on the good news; and we hail it as a certain pledge and forerunner of that reform in parliament, which will procure to the people their due weight in the legislature of this country. Already corruption trembles – and, ere long, at the united voice of the people, she must depart the land. Now is the time for Irishmen to banish prejudice, and to embrace each other as brethren – the children of the same God. Forgetting past errors, let them strive in future, to promote the happiness of every religious sect and denomination; and their country must be free and fourishing. JAMES M‘CLEAN, Sec.

----------------

220

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

REPLY TO THE SHEFFIELD AND BELFAST ADDRESSES. Answer of the President of the French Assembly, (Citizen Gregoire)61 to the Addresses of the Societies of Shefeld, and Belfast in Ireland. Citizens of the world, Your addresses to the representatives of the French nation, have flled them with pleasing emotions – In imposing on me the honourable duty of a reply, they make me regret that I can but imperfectly express, what all with so much energy feel. To have the honour to be an English or a Frenchman, carries / with it a title to every degree of mutual afection that can subsist among men. The curious in your country are pleased to traverse the globe in order to explore nature; henceforth they can visit Montblanc (Savoy)62 without quitting France; in other words without leaving their friends. Te day on which free Savoy unites itself with us, and that on which children of high minded England appear among us, are, in the eye of reason, days of triumph. Nothing is wanting in these afecting scenes, but the pretence of all Great Britain, to bear testimony to the enthusiasm with which we are inspired by the name of liberty and that of the people with whom we are about to form eternal alliance. The National Convention has wished to testify its satisfaction to the English, in decreeing that they would conduct in the presence of some of them the trial of the last of their Kings. Sixty ages have elapsed since Kings frst made war on liberty: the most miserable pretexts have been sufcient for them to spread trouble over the earth. Let us recollect with horror that under the reign of Ann,63 the falling of a pair of gloves, and that under Louis XIV.64 a window opening from one apartment into another, were sufcient causes for deluging Europe in blood. Alas! short is the duration prescribed by eternal power to our weak existence; and shall then the ferocious ambition of some individuals embitter or abridge our days, with impunity? Yet a little moment, and despots and their cannons shall be silenced; philosophy denounces them at the bar of the universe; and history, sullied with their crimes, has drawn their characters. Shortly the annals of mankind will be those of virtue; and in records of France, a place will be reserved for our testimonies of fraternity with the British and Irish societies; but especially for the Constitutional Society of London.65 Doubtless the new year, which is now approaching, will see your rights restored. Te / meeting of your parliament attracts our attention. We hope that then, philosophy will thunder by the mouth of eloquence, and that the English will substitute the great charter of Nature, in place of the great charter of King John.66 The principles upon which our own Republic has been founded, have been discovered by the celebrated writers of your nation; we have taken possession of their discoveries in the social art, because, truths revealed to the world are the property of all mankind. A people which has brought reason to maturity, will not be content with liberty by halves; it will doubtless refuse to capitulate with despotism.

[Bruce and Joy (eds)], Belfast Politics

221

Generous Britons! let us associate for the happiness of the human race; let us destroy every prejudice; let us cause useful knowledge to flter thro’ every branch of the social tree; let us inspire our equals with a sense of their dignty [sic]; let us teach them above all, that vices are the inseparable companions of slavery; and let us depend upon it, that our eforts will be favoured by the God of liberty, who weighs the destiny of empires, and holds in his hands the fate of nations.

------------------BELFAST VOLUNTEER COMPANY. At a meeting of the Belfast Volunteer Company, (Blue) 14th December, 1792, to take into consideration a late Proclamation, issued by the Lord Lieutenant and Privy Council of Ireland,67 mr. james munfoad in the chair: Resolved, Tat a Committee of fve be appointed, for the purpose of taking into their consideration the said Proclamation – and do report the same to this Company on Monday next. / At a meeting of the Belfast Volunteer Company, Monday, 17th December, 1792, lieutenant getty in the chair, Te following Address was unanimously agreed to: to the volunteers of ireland. fellow citizens, WE are induced to address you on the present occasion, with an exposition of our sentiments, in consequence of the late Proclamation, issued by the Lord Lieutenant and Council of this kingdom, against the assembling of certain new volunteer associations in the county and city of Dublin – and we shall be very happy indeed, if our sentiments shall meet your approbation – which will be best known by the resolutions which the said proclamation is likely to draw from other associated corps, like ourselves. Whether the peace of the country is intended by this proclamation, we shall not pretend to say – we are however more confdent in believing that its aim is to divide; and the forced compliment paid to more ancient Associations, in contradistinction to those now forming, against which this proclamation is levelled, leaves us on this head little room to doubt. We do not suppose it possible, however, that this efect will be produced; our country has been too long divided by trifes, and is now too sensible of the rising consequence of its people, by the unity which pervades all ranks, to fear such an event. – We all look forward to the same common object of political

222

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

liberty, and we know too well by sad experience, that it is not by divisions we are to accomplish our purpose. Philanthropy, the ofspring of charity and benevolence, is shedding over us its infuence like the best of blessings, and mankind becoming wise are determined to be free. / We originally took up arms for our defence against foreign invasion, and we have continued in the use of them, because we consider it a means of producing internal tranquillity. We have always when called on, given our assistance to the magistracy of our country, in the due execution of the laws. In a word, we esteem it proper that citizens should know the use of arms, and we consider that country in the best state of defence, when the people are strong. Te same force which was ready to defend the country against the attempts of foreign force, we hope, will be ever found equally ready to assert domestic quiet; the preservation of private property; and the common rights of all the people of Ireland. We consider for ourselves, that it is the unalienable right of all the people of Ireland to carry arms, and in confrmation of the said opinion, this Company always has been open to the admission of men of every religion; – and the experience of many years proves to our knowledge, that a man’s sentiments in this respect is no test of his ability, because we have found the same address, and the same good behaviour in our brother soldiers, professing to be Roman Catholics, as in those of any other religion. Impressed with these sentiments, and highly sensible of the great and useful consequences which may result from the people embodying themselves for the purpose of learning the use of arms: We hail as brothers our fellow citizens, entering into associations like our own, for the welfare, prosperity and emancipation of their country; under whatever name or of whatever religion; and we will cultivate with them one common interest. We declare for ourselves, that the freedom of our country is our only object; and if we are asked, what are our views and our wishes; without hesitation, we answer, we want the renovation of the Constitution; and to these people who are pleased to call all public virtue treason, and all improvement innovation / – we reply, that an efectual and adequate reform in the representation of the people in parliament is our only object, in the pursuit of which object we shall never slacken our eforts. If bad advisers, or weak and wicked men, shall force the people into extremity – on them let all the miseries fall of civil convulsion. The people demand that share of the Constitution which its spirit warrants, and in the pursuit they are justifed. – We are now united – let us persevere – and success will crown our endeavours. JAMES M ‘CLEAN, Sec. /

[…]

[Bruce and Joy (eds)], Belfast Politics

223

at a meeting of the

FIRST BELFAST VOLUNTEER COMPANY, december 18, 1792, william tennent, in the chair. the following address was unanimously agreed to.

TO THE VOLUNTEERS OF IRELAND. fellow soldiers,

YOUR COUNTRY IS IN DANGER! THE period of a few feeting months has scarcely elapsed, since the First Belfast Volunteer Company, impressed with the interesting situation of this island, and the extraordinary encrease of its armed citizens, did publish to the world, anew, their sentiments concerning the volunteer institution – a dignifed and most honourable institution, in whose lists should be found enrolled the names of all the virtuous inhabitants of Ireland. We, who in the hour of danger, and in the face of the enemy, took up arms in defence of our country, when lef to its own energy by an abandoned and imbecile administration; We, who have received the unanimous thanks of every branch of the legislature, did not imagine, that the arm of power would ever be uplifed in this land, to suppress the revival of our laudable associations. When the right of the people to appear in arms is called in question, by a proclamation of the Lord Lieutenant and Privy Council of Ireland; when the exercise of this right is branded with the epithets, illegal and seditious – when menacing preparations by land and sea, indicate the near approach of war; and when false and malicious report are industriously circulated, with a view of spreading jealousies and discontents; we call upon you to be frm! – to persevere!–to unite! The union of the people now makes despots tremble in foreign lands. It is to union Ireland must owe its salvation: the want of union, ten years / since, rendered abortive all your eforts for emancipation. Our fellow soldiers of Dublin, are charged with assembling “to withstand lawful authority, and violently and forcibly to redress pretended grievances.” – What! are the grievances of which the people complain, only “pretended ones?” Is seeking a restoration of our rights – a reform in the representation of the people in parliament, an attempt to subvert the constitution? We say, no! it is to restore it. Under these circumstances, we esteem it our duty to make a further declaration of our principles and opinions. We associated for the defence of ourselves, this town and country, and for the support of the rights of Ireland. We say, that it is the right of the people to be represented in parliament – taxation without representation is oppression – that the people are not represented – that parliament is not as it ought to be,

224

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

an emanation from the people – – that the grievances under which the people labour are almost innumerable and intolerable :– But we add, that a real and radical reform in the representative branch of the legislature, would restore the people to their due weight in the government of the country, and every lesser evil would quickly vanish. These are our opinions; – neither proclamations not threats shall deter us from the pursuit of our rights. – Our desire is peace; the welfare of our country, of our families, of our friends, require it of us. Let those who, by resisting the united voice of a nation, drive the people into extremities, be alone answerable to God and their country, for the consequences. Fellow-Soldiers! – Unite! – encrease your numbers and improve your discipline! – a people aspiring to be free, should be able to protect liberty. An armed nation can never be made slaves. Persevere! and our country must be saved! WILLIAM TENNENT, Chairman. JOHN RABB, Secretary. / town meeting. WE the subscribers, inhabitants of the town of Belfast, earnestly request the attendance of our fellow-citizens, at a general meeting of the town, at the markethouse, on Wednesday next, the 26th inst. as noon, for the purpose of expressing our sentiments on the present state of public afairs; and to enter into such other measures is may be deemed expedient for the accomplishing that great object – an equal representation of the people in parliament. Belfast, December 19, 1792. C. Ranken Wm. Brown Cunn. Greg68 Alex. Orr69 Will Stevenson Jas. Ferguson John Macartney Sam. Tompson James Holmes

Robert Davis Robert Tomson Will. Sinclare Robert Getty Alex Mitchell John Holmes70 John Brown Alex. Gordon John Robinson

---------------

Wm. Magee John Cuming Wm. Tennent Tomas Brown John Boyle Tos Sinclare Sam M‘Tier Henry Haslett.

[Bruce and Joy (eds)], Belfast Politics

225

COPY OF AN ADDRESS To the Delegates for Parliamentary Reform, in Scotland, unanimously agreed to by the Second Society of United Irishmen, of Belfast; and recommended to the other Societies of this town, to be sent as the joint address of the four Societies; which was accordingly done, in December, 1792. ASSOCIATED for the purpose of promoting union among Irishmen, restoring three millions of brethren to the rights of citizenship, and efectuating a radical and complete reform of parliamentary representation for the people of Ireland, we cannot behold, with indiference, the vivid glow of patriotism which brightens the face of other nations, and the irresistible elasticity, with which man, long bent down into a beast of burden, shakes of the / yoke of despotism and resumes his form erect, in neighbouring kingdoms. We exult in the triumph of humanity which regenerated Gaul71 exhibits; and the revival of the long-dormant valor, which the Caesars tremble, and in earlier times, flled Rome itself with suppliant mourners. We accompany with raptures, the steps of freemen traversing the montains of Savoy, erecting the standard of liberty on the strong holds of despotism and uniting the great family of God in the bonds of fraternity. In the fruitful plains of Belgia we hail prospects equally grateful to the enlightened eye, and fattering to the liberal heart. Te arm of despotism palsied – her hosts discomfted – her throne tottering to ruin – and her motley train of slaves and sycophants, with all her proud abettors, plunged in despair, or meditating, with fell revenge, a last convulsive struggle in her cause. But our raptures and our triumphs might be ranked with the transports of children, did we dwell for ever, as with the stare of foolish wonder, on these the glories of another land; while even the fainter brightness which opens on our own, and sister kingdoms, shines unnoticed. Tank God! there too we see the light of political knowledge widely difused; and the seeds of liberality vegetating with vigor in the genial warmth of restored fraternity, and united patriotism. With us, that knowledge hath already assumed the form of language, and, in humble respectful petition, presented the claims of a proscribed nation at the bar of the legislature. We are sorry to say these claims were nor treated with deference, or decency. We were not discouraged, but reanimated by their rejection. Te chaos of Irishmen, as by the voice of Omnipotence, was instantly moulded into a body, its members arranged, and the frame organized. Nor were vigor and harmony ever characterized in greater perfection, than in the representation of that body now exhibited in the metropolis of the kingdom. – / And as it refects the image of the original, we know it will speak its voice – the people’s voice! – the only “Jure Divino”72 Law of Nations! We know too, that voice shall be heard. Irishmen have willed it, and they must be free. Te violations of their constitution, the perversion of its principles,

226

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

the abuse of its powers, and the avowed infuence of venality and corruption, must be swept away together; not, we hope, by the awful experiment of a contested Revolution – may Heaven avert the dreadful necessity! but, by a voluntary, immediate, and radical Reform. While this is the object of our desires, our actions, and our union, and we are unalterably determined, by peaceable and constitutional means, to obtain it we reprobate the mean idea of enjoying it exclusively. Liberty is the desire of all nations! Te birth right of all men! To preserve it, with watchful jealousy, is the frst political duty! To recover it, when arrested by the hand of tyranny, the highest pinnacle of human glory. Tat all men may assert, reclaim, and enjoy it, is, therefore, the fervent prayer of our hearts! That Scotland, for ages, the asylum of independence, and equally renowned in arms and arts; that Scotland, the modern nurse of literature and science, whose seminaries73 have supplied the world with statesmen, orators, historians and philosophers; Scotland, whose penetrating genius, has forced its way into the repositories of nature, unveiled her hidden mysteries, and brought forward all her richest treasures for the healing of the nations! Scotland, where a Reid74 and a Beatty75 broke the spells of an annihilating philosophy, which had reduced the universe to a shadowy idea; who held her up to ridicule; and presented creation anew, in her native substantiality and solid glories, to the sight of all men! Tat this same Scotland should have so long forgotten her degraded state, as a nation, slept over her political insignifcance, or silently acquiesced in / the mockery of a popular representation, among the senators of another people, hath long flled us with inexpressible astonishment. And, when we refected on our relation of fellow-subjects, or as our Catholic brethren have more properly denominated us, fellow slaves! and the more solemn ties of religion and blood by which many of us are connected with you, we candidly own our astonishment was not free from a mixture of regret: for, however humiliating our own situation may have been, the Protestants and reformed among us, in the scale of freedom, were much superior to the Scottish people. What your state as a people, was, previous to the day which set upon your independence, and blotted your name from among the nations of the earth, we presume not to delineate. What your state, from that day, has been, and now is, we know, and ye, the delegates for promoting a reform, must feel. Delineation of it is, therefore, unnecessary. We only say – and we say it, with confdence, Scotland as a nation, or part of a nation, has no people! Te idea therefore of a parliamentary representation of the Commons of Scotland is only a political fction!76 a fction so bold, that we are astonished at the audacity, which frst presumed to hold it out as a reality. And when we consider that a whole nation implicity swallowed the idea as a reality, we cannot be surprized that the genius of a Hume77 should invert the position, and endeavour to impose the reality of the universe, upon a credulous sceptical world, as an idea only.

[Bruce and Joy (eds)], Belfast Politics

227

Your eyes, brother-friends of a reform, are now opened to the deception; your tongues are loosed, and your pens ready. While, with your eyes ye behold the necessity and importance of the political regeneration which you have united to promote, let your tongues make it familiar to the ears, and your pens present it to the eyes of your brethren, whose father were a people. We are assured of your abilities, your learning, and your eloquence; / your patriotism we doubt not; and on your perseverance we rely with confdence. Nor can we suppose, for a moment, that ye will ever sufer the whisper of malice, or the frowns of ofce to deter you from your pursuit. It is worthy of men – worthy of you – And ye will not abandon it! Ye will never disappoint your brethren by disgracing yourselves! We know the confict is ardous. But, where the public good is the end, and the means are legal, every step is safe; – Success sure, tho’ fow, and the reward immortal. (Te above, it is believed, was only published in hand bills, and not in the newspapers.)

HENRY GRATTAN’S PROPOSAL FOR A BILL FOR THE RELIEF OF HIS MAJESTY’S ROMAN CATHOLIC SUBJECTS

Henry Grattan’s Proposal for a Bill for the Relief of His Majesty’s Roman Catholic Subjects (4 May 1795), in Te Speeches of the Right Honourable Henry Grattan, in the Irish and in the Imperial Parliament, ed. by his son, 4 vols (London: Printed for Longman, Hurst, Rees, Orme, and Brown; and R. Milliken, Dublin 1822), vol. 3, pp. 187–98.

Henry Grattan (1746–1820) had been a leading Patriot in securing Irish legislative independence in 1782 and he remained an active Whig campaigner for Catholic emancipation and moderate parliamentary reform thereafer. He had hoped to have the support of Earl Fitzwilliam in promoting a Catholic emancipation bill that would allow Roman Catholics to sit in the Irish Parliament, but Fitzwilliam had been recalled from his post as Lord Lieutenant of Ireland in February 1795. Despite this major setback, Grattan proceeded to propose that a Catholic relief bill be introduced into the Irish House of Commons. Tis provoked a lengthy and intense debate that produced one of Grattan’s most famous speeches. In this speech, Grattan insists that he is justifed in bringing forward such a controversial measure in wartime because Ireland needs to be unifed and needs the support of the Catholic majority at such a difcult time. He maintains that the Catholic Irish deserve to enjoy the kinds of liberties gained by Englishmen by the Glorious Revolution of 1688–9. He denies that emancipating the Catholics will endanger the constitution, weaken Ireland’s links with Britain or embarrass the King who had taken an oath to safeguard the Protestant religion. In his view, Catholics can be admitted to the Irish Parliament without making them a potent threat to the existing constitution in church and state. He refutes the claim made by his opponents that the British cabinet were against his proposal. However with such arguments he was on weak ground here and his opponents knew it. He failed to gain permission to bring in a relief bill. Tis whole debate can be read in Te Parliamentary Register: or, History of the Proceedings and Debates of the House of Commons of Ireland, Vol. XV (Dublin,

– 229 –

230

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

1795), pp. 207–361. Tere is an entry on Grattan in the ODNB and the History of the Irish Parliament, 1692–1800. Tere is a fuller biography in R. B. McDowell, Grattan: A Life (Dublin: Lilliput Press, 2001).

Henry Grattan’s Proposal for a Bill for the Relief of His Majesty’s Roman Catholic Subjects (4 May 1795), in The Speeches of the Right Honourable Henry Grattan, in the Irish and in the Imperial Parliament, ed. by his son, 4 vols (London: Printed for Longman, Hurst, Rees, Orme, and Brown; and R. Milliken, Dublin 1822), vol. 3, pp. 187–98.

pro patria et vivere et mori.1

[…] Mr. grattan said: what brings forward this bill? a right honourable gentleman2 interrogates. Justice! It is the progeny of the public mind; it is the birth mature, of time. Does he solicit more causes? Te Irish minister3 who, in 1792, insulted the Catholics, and the British minister4 who, in 1793, encouraged them, and his new friends,5 who, in 1794, patronized them, and both, who in the same year consented to the Catholic emancipation, though, in 1795, they have / deserted that engagement. Does the right honourable gentleman wish to hear more causes? Te defeats of these ministers, who have made it necessary to combat by the privileges of the constitution the principles of an enemy whom they cannot restrain by arms; and still more necessary in Ireland, because they have taken away her troops, her arms, and her artillery, and lef her to fght the enemy by the native spirit and unanimity of her people. But we are asked, why bring on this question in war? Because you want the service of the Catholic in war, and, therefore, in that time, should give him that inducement; because, if you mean to give up the Protestant ascendancy on the peace, you had better not expose him to the provocation of the refusal in the war; because it is folly in the extreme to embrace unpopularity, when you want the people, in order to embrace the people, when you stand less in need of popularity. Besides, what security is there if this measure is postponed, that it will be conceded voluntarily? Who will answer for the honour of public men? Who will answer for their continuance? – 231 –

232

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

A right honourable gentleman has advanced an argument which goes to exclude the Catholics for ever. Teir emancipation, says he, cannot be agreed to without danger to the constitution of both countries. Dreadful denunciation! Eternal decree! Without danger to the constitution of both countries, does the member say? On what ground? He tells you, because if you establish their emancipation, you must repeal the oath and declaration against the Papal supremacy, the Virgin Mary, and the real presence. It seems, then, we have been in a mistake all this time, and that the present danger is not republican principles, democratic sentiments, or French opinions; it is the Pope, the Virgin Mary, and the real presence! and to guard against such infuences, observing and lamenting as he does, that the Pope has lost all power, he proposes to alienate the afection of 3,000,000 of your people, and one-fourth of the empire. Tus he proposes to realise the danger which exists, in order to strengthen you against those dangers which are vanished. He seems to see danger in every thing which is safe, and safety in nothing but in that which is dangerous. Te temerity of such caution, and the phrenzy of such precaution, shelter themselves under the name of revolution. It seems we are to state names against things, and sounds against principles. Te Revolution6 was a great event, but has nothing to say to the present question. It established great principles of liberty, which did not take place in / Ireland for near one hundred years. It began by imposing on you the power of the British Parliament, and those very oaths required in the frst of William,7 were imposed by an English act of Parliament; and before they were arguments against the liberty of the Catholics were badges of the slavery of the Protestants. But in the course of years, the Irish Protestant availed himself of the principles of the Revolution; in a course of years it is reasonable the Irish Catholic should avail himself of the same principles. Tat course is now completed; the leading part of the Revolution is the claim of right8 which is founded on the petition of right,9 which was declaratory of the law of England, obtained by the Catholic ancestors of the English nation; and though religion interfered in the dispute, yet religion was not, and liberty was, the essence of the Revolution. And now, when the cause of religious interference, namely, the adverse claim to the crown, is at an end, you are unwarranted in opposing the principles of the Revolution in their extent to all the Irish. But the gentleman argues the contrary; he quotes the Revolution against its own principles; he urges the Revolution as a bar to liberty. Te right honourable gentleman adds, that the Catholic exclusion is necessary for the connection as well as the constitution; and he teaches us to think that he speaks with the authority of the British cabinet. What! will they say so? will they? Will that ministry whose country has lost Holland, lost Brabant,10 lost a great part of Germany, lost the terror of the British name, will they reject the Catholics of Ireland? Will they, afer the loss of America, with an increase of debt in the last thirty years of above 200,000,000l.; with a new republican

Henry Grattan’s Proposal

233

empire rising upon them, dreadful from its principles, its power, its extent, and its victories, will they talk in this manner? Have they lef themselves any room for internal proscription or for eternal persecution, or for theological tyranny under the mask of religion? Or have they lef themselves enough of territories, or space enough in the world, to proscribe three-fourths of this island and onefourth of the empire? To what allies and assistance have this ministry resorted, who, for the sake of the connection, would exclude the Irish Catholics? Are not their armies mostly Catholics? Is not your militia mostly Catholics? Is not a great portion of their seamen Catholics? Are not the princes with whom they are leagued Catholics? Te king of Prussia11 is not so, nor the Dutch, I acknowledge. What Catholic prince have they not sought? What Popish potentate have they not trusted? Have they not canvassed every / Papist in Europe, and bought every pennyworth of blood, and every pound of fesh, and begged of princes to take their subsidies? And do they now cast of 3,000,000 of Irish? Tey think it better it seems to buy Prussian faith with English money, than Irish soldiers with Irish privileges. Tey think it better to neglect unanimity against France, and throw up new dykes and fortifcations against the Pope12 and the Pretender.13 Tey see, with dismay, two or three servants of the crown dismissed; the exclusion of 3,000,000 of men they regard not, it seems; they alienate the subject to preserve the connection. At what does the English cabinet tremble? At the loss of Holland? No; they bore that well, very well. Te loss of Brabant? No; they bore that well, very well. Te anxious state of the West Indies? No; that too they bore very well; but when a proposal is made to give Irish subjects constitutional privileges, then fears, such as they might have felt at the event of their own operations, begin to scare the ministry of Great Britain. So trembled the Carthaginian assembly.14 Tose great men who had the honour to preside over the disgrace of their country, had borne the loss of their armies, the loss of their elephants, the loss of their power, with much philosophy, but when something that touched their own cabal, some tax on themselves was proposed, then they also trembled. Te senate of Carthage trembled: like the British ministry, they were moved by nothing, but the least of their misfortunes. But when I suppose the British ministry really afected by fears, either for the constitution or connection, on the present question, I pay too little deference to their understanding: they are alarmed about neither, and I will prove it. Tree months ago they were willing to concede this very question; their present opposition to it must, it follows, have arisen from something that has happened since, which they do not choose to discover, and not from their apprehension about the connection or the constitution. It seems it was safe for the connection and constitution in 1793 to admit the Catholics, but in 1795 fatal to both. No; a few months ago this House would have passed this bill, and the British cabinet would have consented. Now if the constitution or connection were objections, they were

234

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

permanent objections, and existed when the cabinet and the Parliament were friends to the bill; and therefore whatever may be the present motives of both, the connection and constitution enter not into the consideration of either. Te right honourable gentleman having alluded to authority in England, accounts for the difculty in Ireland; he / ascertains the seat of the disease, and the place of the impediment; and it appears, that the bar to the freedom of the Catholics of Ireland is the cabinet of Great Britain. I rejoice that the people of Ireland stand acquitted. Te Protestants of Ireland are willing; vast numbers of them have petitioned. Te great cities are willing; the great mercantile interest are willing. Te cabinet of England is the bar to the freedom of the Catholics; and the dispute is no longer a question between the Protestant and Catholic, but between the British minister and the Irish nation. And on this ground I do not content myself with dissenting from them, and from those who say that Catholic emancipation would be fatal to the connection; I say precisely the contrary; I say Catholic emancipation is necessary to the connection. I will add also, it has become necessary to empire; her ministers have made it so; as the bounds of the empire contract, the privilege of her constitution must be extended. But I fnd that Catholic emancipation is held incompatible with our monarchy. What! His Majesty,15 the head of a Catholic league, the king of Corsica,16 the lord of Canada,17 the great ally of the Emperor,18 the grand confederate of the King of Spain,19 the protector of the Pope – the King of England, whose armies are Catholic, whose European connections are Catholic; are his Irish subjects the only Catholics in whom he will not confde? Has he found religion make the Emperor false, or the Prussian faithful? Such were the sentiments of the speeches from the throne in 1793 and 1795, when His Majesty calls on all his subjects to defend their religion and their constitution. What religion? a religion of disabilities! What constitution? a constitution of exclusion! Am I to understand that His Majesty called forth his Catholic subjects to fght for a constitution which was to be dangerous to the King, and for a religion which was dangerous to the King, and penal to the Catholic? No; it was not the Pope, nor yet the Pretender; it was Paine,20 it was the French republic, against which you called for the zeal of your people, and held out the blessings of the constitution. But now it seems, it is the Antichrist against whom you place your batteries, the Virgin and the real presence: and in that strain of grave and solemn raving, a right honourable gentleman proposes to take up arms against the grave of Popery, which is shut, and to precipitate into the gulf of republicanism, which is open: perfectly safe for the King, he and those who join him think it, to afront the Catholic subjects by gross suspicions. Others have proceeded to the grossest invectives; perfectly safe, they think it, / to banish them from all places at court and seats in Parliament; to tell Catholic virtue, Catholic talents, Catholic ambition, you must not serve the King; you may have property and infuence, but

Henry Grattan’s Proposal

235

you must not act in constituted assemblies, nor in any rank or distinction for the Crown. Perfectly safe, they think it, to establish an incompatibility between Popery and allegiance. Perfectly safe they think it to insulate the throne, and reduce the King of Ireland, like the Pope, to Protestant guards, instead of a people; and then it is proposed that those Protestant guards should monopolize all the powers of government and privileges of the constitution, as a reward for their disinterestedness. In support of such a policy, it has been advanced, in a very idle publication, that the Roman Catholics, as long as they have the feelings of men, must resist the natural propensities of the human heart, if they do not endeavour to subvert a Protestant king; but I pass that over with the scorn it deserves. It has been also said that his Majesty’s oath is a bar.21 Oaths are serious things. To make them political pretences is a high crime. To make an obligation, taken for the assurance of liberty, a covenant against it; to impose on conscience a breach of duty; to make the piety of the King the scourge of his people; to make the oath of the King the curse of his people, is an attempt atrocious in the extreme. Examine the argument, and you fnd the oath was taken three years before the exclusion of the Irish Catholics. Te oath is the frst of William,22 the tests that exclude them the third;23 so that His Majesty must have sworn in the strain and spirit of prophecy. Examine a little further, and you will fnd his Majesty swears, not in his legislative, but in his executive capacity. He swears to the laws he is to execute, not against the laws which Parliament may think proper to make. In that supposition he would, by his oath, control not himself but Parliament, and swear not to execute laws but to prevent them. Examine a little further, and you will fnd the words of the oath cannot support the interpretation: “I will support the true profession of the Gospel, and the Protestant religion as by law established.” Tis is the oath. I will perpetuate civil incapacities on Catholics; this is the comment. Such comment supposes the true profession of the Gospel to stand on pains and penalties, and the Protestant religion on civil proscription. Examine the oath a little further; and, if the comment is true, the oath has been broken, by His Majesty’s gracious recommendation in favour of the Catholics in 1793; broken by the grant of the elective franchise;24 broken by the Canada bill;25 broken by the Corsican constitution.26 Hear the speech of the viceroy27 of / the loss of their privileges is to be added to the preference of their religion; to secure to the established church Catholic hostility, they add the new and powerful motives of interest, ambition and pride, to the languid motive of religion, and in the complication of hostile passions fnd a security for the church. Tis alarm explains itself, and is acknowledged to be an apprehension for the fate of tithe. Tus the true profession of the Gospel, and the Protestant religion takes somewhat a grosser connection, and the divine strain of argument is explained into something very temporal and very mercenary. Here is a new odium, and therefore a new danger annexed to tithe. Tree-fourths of your

236

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

people pay the church without compensation, and therefore it is proposed they should pay it without privilege. Te payment they render is made an argument against the liberty they seek. Tey pay the clergy the profts of their church. Te clergy are desired to deprive them of the blessings of the constitution, lest they should use the power to defeat payment – that is, the clergy are advised to return evil for good, and to justify pains and penalties by pre-supposing delinquency. But I speak not of the immorality, I rely on the impolicy of such an argument, so long as the tithe is only a temporal payment without spiritual consolation. Te Catholic, like the Presbyterian, may submit; but when once the tithe of the clergy is made inseparable from the civil incapacities of the people; when, to preserve your tithe you disqualify your fellow subjects, tithe is on the brink of ruin. When the institution of tithe is made incompatible with the constitution of the land, tithe is on the brink of ruin; it is not in your piety to save it. When once it is to encounter not only the love of gain, but every other motive in the human breast, the tithe is in danger. Tus the advocates for this objection expose the church, its establishment and its income, in the front of the battle, as they before exposed the connection and the monarchy, and represent, under an afectation of zeal, the establishment of the Protestant church, like the connection and the monarchy inconsistent with the liberties of the people. From the church, their error proceeds to the senate, and it is urged, that Parliament will be destroyed by the admission of the Catholics; that Parliament will at last be destroyed, like man and the works of man, I do suppose. Tat institution, says some famous author, will perish; it will yield to time that conquers every thing, to corruption that moulders every thing. I wish to delay its dissolution and therefore I would add to its strength by communicating its privileges; I would enlarge its circulation; I would invite property, talents, / and ambition to act here, so that the sphere of the constitution should be the region of their activity. You have no objection to poverty, to dependency, to purchase, or even to bankruptcy. Why not admit a portion of your country’s strength as well as its weakness? Te strength you gain is the embrace; you must strike your root to the centre, if you mean to lif your forehead to the skies. Open the doors of your House, and shut the gates of controversy, and thrown on the image of discord that chain which she has thrown on your people. It seems, however, in some opinions, this is not the method to preserve Parliament; better to sell the peerage and exclude the Catholic, and so reduce the senate to a synod of the orthodox, the champions of the minister, rather than the representatives of the people. To preserve the institution of Parliament it is proposed to democratize, by exclusion, Catholic property; to democratize Catholic aristocracy; and thus mass them all in one host of ex-constitutionalists, and on that mass to pour the chalice of invective and vituperation.

Henry Grattan’s Proposal

237

You complain of their meetings, you are the cause; you send them out of doors, and when you fnd them in the street, you are angry. You are the founders of their Francis-street meetings;28 you are the authors of their convention; you are authors of the vehement language therein; it was the echo of your passion, and the reverberation of your own declamations. Te Roman Catholic, far from being dangerous, has borne his testimony in favour of the institution of the Irish Parliament, for he has resolved to relinquish his emancipation rather than purchase his capacities by an union. He has said, let the Catholic be free, but if his freedom is to be bought by the extinction of the Irish Parliament, we wave the privilege, and pray for the Parliament. I beg to recur to the four heads of objection, – the connection, the monarchy, the church, and the Parliament; and I beg leave to lay it down as absolutely and as broadly as language will permit, that these four objects are not endangered by Catholic emancipation; but, on the contrary, that they cannot be saved without it; that it is absolutely necessary, in these times, for the connection, for the monarch, for the church, and for the Parliament, that their existences shall be rendered compatible with the privileges of people. Te empire and the constitution, are like the world, large enough for all their inhabitants, and all their establishments. Te policy that excludes, is your ruin; the bill that harmonises, your safety. Before such a consideration, the difculties of honourable gentlemen, the real presence, the Virgin Mary, and the Pope, / vanish. Before such a consideration, the real difculties, the quarrel of one minister with another minister, to displace whom, the former destines 3,000,000 of men to everlasting incapacities, do not vanish, but appear in the highest degree culpable and fatal. It has been said, that this question was forced forward by the last administration. I afrm that it was not in the power of that administration to have kept it back. Te mode in which it should be brought forward was a subject in which the Catholics would have been directed by those who supported them; but the bringing it forward was, in their minds, an unalterable determination. I afrm it, their communication was touching the mode only, their determination was to bring forward the bill; which is an answer to that stuf which written or spoken, that Earl Fitzwilliam brought forward the Catholic question. No; we found the question; and we supported it, because it ought to have been supported. It is said the Catholics have had communication with a person, as their secretary,29 against whom, in a late trial, some intercourse with Jackson30 has appeared; but he was not their secretary when he had that communication; and, I understand, on that trial it did appear as follows:– Tat this gentleman, among other reasons for declining to go to France, said he would thereby lose the money promised by the Catholics, by which it, appears, from this testimony, that their mind was not disposed to a French communication, but abhorrent to it. – Tus the circumstance, if relevant at all to the question, is an evidence in their favour.

238

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

Gentlemen have mentioned the conduct of the Catholics to the government. May I be permitted to mention the conduct of the government to them, and I beg leave to call that conduct the history of proscription. In 1792, the religious war began; can we forget the attempt of government to divide the Catholic democracy from its aristocracy,31 and the people from their leaders, and the fock from the clergy; their attempt to use the infuence of the latter to defeat the claim of the former, and to pervert religion into an instrument against liberty? Can we forget the paper war of that time carried on by government, where the scribes of the court, whose fortune was their falsehood, levelled their artillery against the people; and by paragraphs, and libels, and impudence, outraged the wounded feelings of the Catholic subject, and, fed as they were by his taxes, turned assassins of his character? Do we forget the scornful rejection of the Catholic petition, and the sad and miserable grand jury war? Do not we recollect the instructions sent from / the Castle32 to their friends in the counties, to pledge Protestant against Catholic, on the question of elective franchise. Do we not remember a minister33 presiding most improperly at one of those meetings, to infame, mislead, and canker the mind of the Protestant? Do we forget the order in favour of the Catholics from the throne; the instant crouching to that order; and then the return of the malice of the Irish court, and the bitterness of its prosecutions; the hive, swarming forth again of hireling scribblers, against the characters, and the prosecutions against the lives, of the Catholics, for having petitioned for their liberty? Do we forget these things? Where are the ears of your perjured witnesses, and the minister’s little manifesto, hawked about the streets of London and Dublin, (as little to be relied on as these witnesses)? Have we not heard of the closet conversation, and the attempt to poison the mind of the King? the tampering with the corporation, and the endeavoring to exclude, by infuence, those whom the government took credit for having rendered admissible by law? And now behold the growth of the cause under this course of persecution. Tey began with a division among themselves, and conclude with an unanimity among themselves, and a division among you: if that can be called a division, where the Protestants of a number of the counties, of all the great cities, and all the mercantile interests, have come to petition in their favour, and when nothing prevents the success of the Catholic but the infuence of the government. Te youth of the kingdom, too, they who in a few years must determine this question, they have decided for the emancipation, with a liberality which is natural to youth, and a sagacity which is peculiar to years – and they will sit soon in these seats, blended with Catholics, while we, blended with Catholics, shall repose in the dust. Another age shall laugh at all this,

Henry Grattan’s Proposal

239

“Her justice bury what your pride has planned, And laughing plenty reassume the land.”34

In this general application for the Catholics, there has been no application against them, nor city, nor county, nor grand jury, nor corporation, has appeared against them, that of Dublin alone excepted. Tus the Catholic emancipation ceases to be a question between the Irish Protestant and Catholic, and is now a question between the ministers of another country and the people of Ireland. Tey advance – the Catholic description of them; they advance from the wilderness, where for an hundred years they have wandered, / and they come laden with their families and their goods, whether conducted by an invisible hand, or by a cloudy pillar, or a guardian fre, and they desire to be received into your hospitable constitution. Will the elders of the land come forth to greet them? Or will the British ministry send out their hornet to sting them back again to the desert?35 I mentioned that their claim was sustained by a power above; look up! Behold the balances of heaven! – pride in the scale against justice, and pride fies up and kicks the beam! Te House divided on the motion that the bill be rejected; – Ayes 155, Noes 84; Majority against the bill 71. Tellers for the Ayes, Lord Kingsborough,36 and Mr. Cufe;37 for the noes, Mr. G. Ponsonby,38 Mr. Maurice Fitzgerald.39

SPEECH OF ARTHUR O’CONNOR ESQ.

Speech of Arthur O’Connor Esq. in the House of Commons of Ireland, Monday, May 4th, 1795, on the Catholic Bill (Dublin: Printed by P. Byrne, 1795).

Arthur O’Connor (1763–1832), staunchly anti-Catholic in his early years, changed his views and became a committed supporter of Catholic emancipation, an enthusiastic admirer of the French Revolution and, by 1796, a militant United Irishman who encouraged the French to undertake an invasion attempt in late 1796. He was arrested early in 1797 for a publication printed below and imprisoned for some months. In April 1798 he was arrested in England when on his way to France, but was acquitted. Although he was not active in the Irish rebellion of 1798 he was again arrested and imprisoned in Fort George in Scotland. Released in 1802, he settled in France, became a French citizen and returned to his former anti-Catholicism. On 4 May 1795, while representing Philipstown, he gave the speech in the Irish House of Commons that is reproduced here. He delivered this speech in support of Henry Grattan’s proposal for a bill to grant the right of Catholics to sit in the Irish Parliament (see pp. 231–9 above). He used this opportunity to launch a stinging attack on the political system in Ireland and to advance ideas in support of both Catholic emancipation and radical parliamentary reform. Claiming that the present age was enlightened, he praised the expansion of the press, the growth of commerce and the spread of knowledge. He attacked the penal laws as inefective and the abuse of power of the Protestant ascendancy as unjust. He opposed the war with France, criticized the British government’s interference in Irish afairs, and feared that Ireland would be forced into a union with her stronger neighbour. Te extreme tone of his speech and his openly democratic stance shocked many members in the Commons, provoked a ferce response from some of his listeners, and did nothing to advance Grattan’s proposal. It did, however, attract a more positive response out-of-doors. Patrick Byrne, a Roman Catholic printer, decided to publish it. Byrne was a militant member of the Society of United Irishmen in Dublin. He was arrested in 1798, banished and emigrated to Philadelphia, United States.

– 241 –

242

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

Tere is an entry on O’Connor in the ODNB and the HoIP 1692–1800. Also useful are F. MacDermot, ‘Arthur O’Connor’, Irish Historical Studies, 15 (196667), pp. 48–69; J. H. Hames, Arthur O’Connor: United Irishman (Cork: Collins Press, 2001); and C. D. Conner, Arthur O’Connor: Te Most Important Revolutionary You May Never Have Heard Of (Bloomington, NY: iUniverse, Inc, 2009).

Speech of Arthur O’Connor Esq. in the House of Commons of Ireland, Monday, May 4th, 1795, on the Catholic Bill (Dublin: Printed by P. Byrne, 1795).

THE attention and amazement with which the following Speech was received in the House of Commons, can only convey an adequate idea of the manner in which it was delivered. And that not one of the numerous arguments with which it abounds was answered by any member who opposed the Catholic Bill, altho’ the debate continued for nine hours afer it was delivered, is the best criterion of its matter. Te only remarks we shall make is, that if the soundest argument, the strongest reasoning, – if eloquence and justice should ensure success to any cause, not only the cause of the Catholics, but the cause of the whole people of Ireland, has found them united in this Speech. /

SPEECH of ARTHUR O’CONNOR, ESQ. sir, I SHOULD not have trespassed on your time, at this late hour, was it not that, as ofen as this important subject has been agitated since I have had a seat in this House,1 I have contented myself with giving silent votes for the most unqualifed emancipation of my Catholic countrymen; and I have done so from conviction of the justice of their claims to freedom, and of the inexpediency and folly of continuing to sacrifce the civil and political rights of the people, for the purpose of aggrandizing a few families, under the mask of promoting religion. But Sir, the times call for something more than silent votes. Te situation in which we are so unaccountably placed, is so critical, and the bill under your consideration involves such consequences in its train, that every man who is not wholly indiferent to the welfare of his country, must feel himself called / on to lay aside every lesser consideration, and to deliver his opinion with that freedom, and that boldness, by which only the country can be saved. What do the whole of the arguments which have been advanced on this night, against the emancipation of our Catholic countrymen by the gentlemen – 243 –

244

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

of the opposite side of the House amount to? To a meer unsupported assertion, that it would destroy our Constitution in Church and State. Tis is not the only instance in this country, in which the most egregious job has been concealed under a specious phraseology. One would imagine from the language held by the Right Hon. Gentleman, (Mr. Pelham)2 that the people of this country were in the actual enjoyment of the British Constitution in all its purity, and that it had been in this country that the experiment of that Constitution had been made, by which it has become the admiration of the world. Is it that the condition of the people of Ireland corresponds so well with the great natural advantages of their country, that we are to infer that their civil and political constitution was of that immaculate nature which the Right Hon. Gentleman (Pelham) has represented it? Is it because we were the most wretched, and most miserable nation in Europe, as long as this system of monopoly and exclusion, for which the Gentlemen on the opposite side of the House contend, under the title of Constitution in State and Church, was / in its most entire state, and that we have emerged from that wretchedness and misery in an exact proportion as we have destroyed this system of monopoly, by extending the blessings of freedom to our Catholic countrymen, that we should now desist from our labours? Is it because we have heard those gentlemen at the opposite side of the House, year afer year, ever since this question has been agitated, predict the ruin of the country, from extending the constitution to our Catholic countrymen, and that we have seen the country thrive in an exact proportion as it has been extended, that we should now stop short on their authority, and consecrate the remainder of the system of monopoly and exclusion? Before we risk every thing in defence of a system upon authority which has hitherto proved so utterly fallacious, let us enquire into its merits. I will suppose the worst of systems; and I will leave it to the advocates of this system, to shew in what it difers from this system of theirs, which they have consecrated under the mystical words of Constitution in Church and State. I will suppose the whole representation of the people of Ireland converted into a subject of trafc, and a monopoly of the trade given to a few families, with an exception of that small portion of freedom, which falls to the share of the counties: I will suppose, even this pittance assailed by these monopolists, by their profuse distributions of jobs and of patronage, and by their appointing the men of the best interests in their / several counties, for seats for their boroughs, whom they could fnd mean enough to accept them, on the condition of servitude and wages in so vile an occupation; I will suppose these wholesale dealers in our rights and liberties; coming from their rotten boroughs, and from the counties they had debauched, with their attendant supporters of Constitution in Church and State, to discharge their cargo at the seat of government, at the countinghouse of an English factor; bartering an unqualifed sacrifce of Irish trade, of Irish industry, of Irish rights, and of Irish character, at the feet of English domi-

Speech of Arthur O’Connor Esq.

245

nation, and of English avarice. For what? What shall I suppose the price of this infernal cargo, like Pandora’s box,3 a collection of every ill that can afict mankind? – Te whole nation of Ireland would blush to hear it. Tey would blush at their own degradation? Nothing less than the most unqualifed sacrifce of every thing in this unfortunate country that could exalt these Farmers General4 of our rights and liberties, and of every thing that could debase an injured, insulted, and impoverished people. Here is a system by which our national character would be degraded in the eyes of surrounding nations. Here is a system by which the people of this country would be doubly impoverished, to pay for that treason which was to revile and villify them in the legislature of their own country, and to pay for that treason which was to sacrifce their dearest interest to the aggrandizement of another / the nation; I CALL UPON THE GENTLEMEN OF THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE HOUSE, TO SHEW IN WHAT THIS EXECRABLE SYSTEM DIFFERS FROM THE CONSTITUTION IN CHURCH AND STATE, FOR WHICH THEY CONTEND? And yet you have been told, that on the continuance of this system your lives, your liberties, your property, and your religion depend; – on the continuance of this system you have been told your constitution depends. Nay, to fll up the measure of their efrontery, there are men who will unblushingly tell you, that this system, so proftable to them, and so ruinous to the country, shall be your constitution itself! Fortunately it is no longer a subject of contention between the Protestants and the Catholics, for every man in this country, except monopolists, and those in pay of monopolists, whether Protestants, Presbyterians, or Catholics, have declared themselves equally interested in the destruction of this odious system. Fortunately the Protestants and Presbyterians of Ireland have, at length, discovered the folly of sacrifcing their own rights, and the prosperity of their country, in a criminal attempt to exclude three-fourths of their countrymen from the blessings of freedom, for no other purpose, than to perpetuate a system, in which a few families are unnaturally exalted, at the expence of millions of their countrymen, as unnaturally debased. But it is no longer a secret that the men who oppose the abolition of religious / distinctions in our civil and political concerns, when the general voice of the nation has concurred in so wise, so just, and so politic a measure, are the men who usurp the whole political power of the country, the men who have converted the whole representation of Ireland into family patrimony; to the poverty, to the oppression, and to the disgrace of the nation, and to the monstrous aggrandizement of themselves, their relatives, and their servile adherents; THESE ARE THE MEN WHO OPPOSE CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION, and why? – Because Catholic emancipation would be incompatible with their accursed monopoly. Here lies the incapacity of the Catholics to participate in the feedom of their country; here lies the excellence of the present constitution in church and state. In this is comprised the whole guilt of our Catholic countrymen, and in the eyes of

246

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

men of this description, the same incapacity would attach itself to angels fom heaven, if the abolition of their accursed monopoly was to make any part of the consequence. – Let those men who fatter themselves that they can continue the old system of monopoly and exclusion, by which the few have been raised on the necks of the many, risk what they please in its defence; but let me conjure you, who are without the pale of their political communion, to consider the important change which has taken place in the public mind, to consider the language which has been spoken by all descriptions of men, from one end of the kingdom to / the other. Let me conjure you to consider, that you are no longer legislating for the barbarous ignorant ages which are gone by, but that you must now legislate for the more enlightened and more intelligent age in which you live, and for the still more enlightened ages which are to come. It is on these safe and liberal grounds I invite you to weigh the arguments which have been advanced on this night against the emancipation of your Catholic countrymen. An Hon. Gentleman (Ogle)5 says, if you emancipate them, they will get the upper hand, and they will erect a Popish government; and a noble Lord (Kingsborough)6 says, that Catholic emancipation is incompatible with Protestant freedom, which assertions are founded on the supposition, that the Catholics pay such implicit obedience to their clergy in religious matters, that they will destroy our liberties by paying a like implicit obedience to the civil magistrate in political concerns. Is there any thing in the conduct of the Catholics at this day to warrant these charges? Is it not harrowing up charges from the barbarous ages that are gone by? – Ask the Catholic clergy, and they will tell you that their power has declined. Ask the Protestant gentry from one end of the kingdom to the other, and they will tell you that the superstitious power of the Catholic clergy is at an end. But have you not heard the Right Honorable Gentleman (Pelham) on this night lament the decline of this power? Have you not heard him in the / vilest prostitution of terms, lament its decline, as the decline of a wholesome controul? But whilst it is with joy I express my satisfaction, that all superstitious controul over the minds of my Catholic countrymen is at an end, as that circumstance, which puts the justice of their claims to freedom beyond all doubt, I cannot, nor will not, suppress my detestation and abhorrence of the Right Hon. Gentleman’s (Pelham’s) doctrine, which would make a superstitious, a wholesome controul; – at this doctrine of passive obedience, which would revive the reign of ignorance and superstition, as the doctrine of some despots, who having some infernal system of oppression to support, and shrinking from the light of reason, would replunge us into that darkness and obscurity we have escaped. Backed then by the authority of the Catholic clergy, backed by the authority of the Protestant gentry, and backed by the still more general authority of the general observation of every man within and without these walls, from one end of the kingdom to the other, I will assume it as a fact that the superstitious controul of

Speech of Arthur O’Connor Esq.

247

the Catholic clergy over the Catholic mind is at an end. What becomes of the charge of a Popish government? What becomes of the insecurity of the Protestants, from the Catholics sacrifcing your liberties, by paying a like implicit obedience to the civil magistrates? Is there any thing like this in the conduct of the Catholics? Has the Hon. Gentleman, and the noble Lord who / have made these charges, found the Catholics so criminally indiferent to the blessings of civil and political liberty? Have those gentlemen who have lef no secret means untried to defeat Catholic freedom, found them so criminally tame and submissive under the pressure of civil and political exclusion? Is it a fact, that the Catholic laity have been so slack, and so backward in the pursuit afer civil and political liberty, as to require the incitement of their clergy? Or is it the characteristic of the clergy of any religion to be very ardent in the pursuit afer civil and political liberty? I put it to the Gentlemen at the opposite side of the House, does the current of public opinion at this time in any nation of Europe, run in favour of despotism, or of Popery, or of Popish government? But these Gentlemen do not perceive the contradictory nature of the arguments they have this night advanced against Catholic freedom. At one time they represent them as men so priest-ridden, as to endanger the Constitution, by erecting a Popish, slavish government; in the same breath they represent them as overthrowing the Constitution, by their Democratical and Republican principles, serving up at the same instant, the most heterogeneous compositions that were ever ofered to the human mind. But I refer those Gentlemen to the history of mankind, where they will fnd that the men who have been really and dangerously priest-ridden, have invariably borne the yoke of despotism with patience and resignation; / but whenever they had assumed sufcient courage to assert their civil and political rights, it was not until afer they had thrown of the tyranny of the priesthood. Reasoning from this indisputable fact, instead of agreeing with the Gentlemen opposite, that the frm tone in which the Catholics have demanded their freedom should be a ground for refusal, I shall ask no better proof that they are entitled to liberty, than their having had the spirit to claim it. But the Gentlemen on the other side of the House, knowing the weakness of these contradictory arguments, have had recourse to prophecy. Tey have entrenched themselves in the fastnesses of futurity, and in the spirit of divination they have accused us, who are advocates for Catholic freedom, with the ruin of posterity. To this prophetic accusation I answer, as far a prophetic accusation admits of an answer, that the dark ages of ignorance and superstition have ever proved congenial to the tyranny of priests and despots; but that the independence which has arisen from the intercourse of nation with nation, from the invention of the mariner’s compass, and the knowledge which has fowed from the invention of the press, have proved fatal to its continuance. Look round the world, and you will fnd in those countries where foreign commerce is discouraged, and

248

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

where the invention of the / press is unknown, that despotism uniformly prevails over liberty: Look to China and the East-Indies; look to Persia – to the Ottoman and African empires, – those immense portions of the globe, where foreign commerce is discouraged, and where the invention of the press is either disused or unknown, and you will fnd the civil and political rights of the people immersed in ignorance, superstition and abject servility; the sport of the most rapacious despotism. In these countries the ears of the governing power are never grated with the harsh sounds of the Rights of Men: No; all is despotism on the part of the governors, all is passive obedience on the part of the people. Turn your eyes from these wretched countries to the several nations of Europe, and you will fnd how uniformly civil, political, and religious liberty have taken place of civil, political, and religious slavery, in proportion as foreign commerce has been encouraged, and as the press has been protected. See how uniformly these causes and efects correspond; and if any one of you doubt that these great causes are at this moment operating those salutary efects, I refer him to the despots of Europe, and this war in which they have immolated so many human sacrifces, and in which they have deluged all Europe with such torrents of blood, and their present fears for their darling despotism, shall be their answer. But it is some consolation to me to refect, that the avarice of these despots, which has tempted / them to encourage foreign commerce in their dominions, and the vanity or necessity which has led them or obliged them to give some protection to education and the press, is at this moment sowing the seeds of that independence and knowledge which will one day crush that despotism, even which they and their blood-hounds have disgraced. Impressed with these great and important truths, is it when our country is becoming commercial, under all its artifcial disadvantages – is it when we have thrown of some of the shackles of our trade, and when, by passing this bill, by creating a people, we shall be enabled to restore it to perfect freedom, that we are to reject this bill, through fear of destroying posterity? – Is it when knowledge is progressive amongst us, when the youth of the nation are giving such brilliant examples that liberality of thought is the ofspring of education? Is it when our Catholic countrymen are displaying such eminent talents in the pursuit afer civil and political liberty; talents which I am sorry to say we have had many examples this night to prove how much more easy it is to vilify, than to rival, or imitate – Is it under these circumstances we are to entertain fears for posterity? Is it when our countrymen have resumed their reason in such an eminent degree, that we should suspect them of relapsing into ignorance and superstition? Is it when our Catholic countrymen / are claiming their civil and political rights, with the address, and frmness of men of enlightened minds, that we should suspect them of relapsing into slavery and a Popish government, basely surrendering the noblest privileges of man? – Never shall such tinsel reasonings make me see

Speech of Arthur O’Connor Esq.

249

the ruin of my country in the actual freedom of my countrymen; never shall such weak argument dissuade me from an act of immutable justice, where the rights and liberties of millions of my countrymen were at stake upon the issue:– No; on this head the prospect is a bright one, and accursed be that man, who, for interested motives, would darken or obscure its lustre. So much for the dangers of your Constitution in State: But the Church is in danger. What is that part of the system to which the Protestant religion is under such obligations? What is that part of the system with whose destruction the destruction of the Protestant religion is so closely connected? It is simply the system of conversion; but is it a system of conversion from conviction? No; it shuts every avenue leading to conviction; it closes every door by which a Catholic could enter the Protestant church; they have been barred by those rewards and punishments which short-sighted bigotry invented for the purpose of forcing religious opinions. By this system you have exposed the Catholic who is willing to follow the dictates of conviction, to the execration of his / own sect, for deserting them, because he appears to have done so to escape the penalties annexed to adherence; and you have exposed him to the contempt of the Protestants, whose tenets you wish him to embrace, by making him appear to them as a man who had sold his principles, his religion, and his God, for no other purpose, than to gain the immunities you hold out to conversion. So that instead of promoting your religion, you have called forth the dread of execration and contempt, to steel the Catholic mind against that conversion you afect to promote, and to attach him to that religion, from which you wish to estrange him. – Tus it is with narrow-minded bigotry, ever defeating its own ends by the means it employs to attain them. You have not its heats nor its passions to excuse you, but you have had the experience of its example to direct you. Cease, then, to prescribe to the Almighty the intent and manner of the adoration he shall receive; cease to place your rewards and punishments in competition with his, for you cannot but observe how thoroughly the blasphemous presumption has exposed the impotency of the attempt. Act like Legislators. Leave the way to conviction and conversion as free and as open as the superiority of the tenets of your religion appears to you clear and indisputable. Act like men sensible of your duty to your Creator. Presume not to meddle with opinions he has not given you faculties to understand, and which / require his omniscience to controul. Away with that system which exacts the sacrifce of the civil and political rights of the people, for the inefectual purpose of promoting religion. We have tried it long enough in this unfortunate country to prove its inefcacy. It has had free scope amongst us ever since the passing the law against recusants in the reign of Elizabeth,7 until these few years that we have begun on its abolition;8 and if you would judge fairly of the merits of the system, and of its abolition, by their efects, I call on you on this night, to choose between centuries of disun-

250

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

ion, of civil wars, and of wretchedness unexampled in any nation on the globe, and a few years rapid progress in union, in civilization, and in the industry of the people. – But I fnd it is not enough to have combated this last objection in its own shape; it is not enough that I have proved to you that you have not promoted your religion by this system of persecution; for, in opposition to the professions and the tolerant principles of those gentlemen who oppose this bill, I do assert that every, the least disability on account of religious opinions, makes part of the system of persecution. Te objection makes its appearance in another shape, and the dangers which were said to threaten the Protestant religion from Catholic emancipation, have been made by an Hon. Gentlemen (Mr. Pelham) to re-appear in the shape of dangers which he says threaten the Protestant establishment. He / has confounded the establishment with the religion, and by an artful transmigration, he has made the Protestant establishment to stand for the soul of the Protestant religion; and afer we have defeated the objection under the colours of the one, he has made it to rally, Antæus9 like, with additional strength, under the colours of the other. I say with additional strength, for I am aware that Protestant Establishment is a word of that mystic meaning in this House, that those who would wish to retain it in that state of consecration in which it has been placed by the priesthood in the days of our most inveterate bigotry, have a considerable advantage over me, who would examine its meaning before the tribunal of reason. It is their interest to confound the establishment with your religion, in order that it may derive all the sanctity of the religion itself. It is mine to separate them; but they may as well attempt to confound the military establishment, by which the ofcers and soldiers are paid, with the tactics and manœuvres which it is their duty to learn. In order to answer this last objection it will be necessary to prove, either that the Protestant establishment would undergo no alteration from the emancipation of the Catholic; or that if it was to undergo an alteration, the Protestant religion, so far from being injured, would be highly benefted by the change. And I prefer / the latter, because I believe in my soul, that if some very material alteration be not speedily made in our religious establishments, there will be an end not only to all religion amongst us, but to all moral principle, without which religion is a farce. As the legislature of this country have been mistaken in their attempt to promote religion, by their system of persecution, so also they have been utterly mistaken in the nature and efects of religious establishments. Tey have confounded the interest of the clergy with the interest of religion, and they have imagined that, in proportion as they enriched the Protestant clergy, they were promoting the Protestant religion; and that, by dooming the Catholic clergy to have no establishment whatsoever, they were consigning the Catholic religion to eternal oblivion. Was I on a subject upon which I could expect any share of candour, I would rest the whole argument on the fact. I would ask, has

Speech of Arthur O’Connor Esq.

251

the Protestant religion been promoted, in proportion as the Protestant clergy have been enriched? Have the numbers of the Catholic religion diminished, according to the views of the legislature, who doomed their clergy to poverty, and to have no establishment at all? Te state of the population of the two sects is sufciently well known, to prove that the reverse is the fact; and if you will examine the nature of these establishments, you will discover which is best adapted for the purpose of promoting their respective religions. From that absurd notion of promoting religion, by / enriching its clergy, the Protestant establishment has made men of fortune of its clergy; it has made them to live with men of fortune, and to live as men of fortune; it has induced them to live with men of fashion, with men of pleasure, and with men of the world; and it has made them to live as men of fashion, as men of pleasure, and as men of the world; it has thrown them entirely into that class of men whose education, whose high sense of honour, and whose respect for the opinion of an observant world, renders the attendance of a minister of religion almost unnecessary: but it has taken them from the dull, but useful rounds of parochial duties: it has estranged them from cultivating a friendly and intimate acquaintance with the lower classes of the people, whose want of education, whose want of a sense of honour, and whose ignorance of moral obligation, makes the constant and friendly attendance of a minister of religion indispensibly necessary to keep them from falling into irreligion; to keep them from that vice and debauchery, which, unsupported by any other fund than that of their labour and their industry, which it must shortly consume, must make them bad subjects under any government, must lead them to pilfering and punishment, perhaps to robbery and murder, and to a disgraceful death. By this establishment you have raised excessive hopes of preferment in the minds of the clergy, from the inequalities it has lef in the provisions which it makes for / them, by which their characters have been subjected to the imputation of cringing and servility to the dispensers of patronage, to the meanly sacrifcing their civil and political rights, and opinions, upon the altar of an earthly superior, by which they appear, in the eyes of the people, as men either disregarding or disbelieving that leading and essential tenet of the Christian religion, which forbids the sacrifce of their duty to their worldly promotion. Injurious as these defects in this establishment, for which such fears are entertained, have proved to your religion, they almost vanish when I come to consider the evils which arise from the mode of payment which it allots its clergy. I shall not dwell on how destructive this part of the establishment has proved to the agriculture of your country, the most important branch of industry in which your people can be employed. I shall confne myself to state, that it has sown the seeds of eternal rancour, animosity, and litigation, between the minister and his parishioners; it has allied the minister of the meek and charitable religion of Christ with the very dregs of the earth; it has made him one in a company with

252

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

valuators, with proctors, with process servers, and with civil bill attornies; it has made him the principal suitor in that hell upon earth, the Civil Bill Court, where perjury is all-prevalent; it has converted the minister of the disinterested religion of Christ into a tithe-setting auctioneer, distributing / his liquors, in order to intoxicate his bidders, that they may vie with one another for the purchase of his wares; it has made them appear the most avaricious, and the greatest persecutors, who, by the tenets of the religion it is their duty to inculcate, should be the most disinterested, and the least worldly; it has made it appear to the world as if this establishment was instituted to make the people sensible of their indigence, by a comparison with the wealth of their clergy; to make them sensible of their own wants, by a comparison with the abundance in the hands of their clergy; to make them sensible how miserably their hard labour was rewarded by a comparison with the indolence, but immense and sudden fortunes of their CLERGY; it has made it appear to the world, as if this establishment was instituted in this country, for no other purpose than to provide exorbitantly for the families and connexions of the political jobbers, and political advocates for the Constitution in Church and State, in its present limited conditions; and it has made to appear to the world, as if YOUR PROTESTANT RELIGION had no other business in your country, than to support this establishment, and not the establishment to support the religion. Turn your eyes to that establishment or rather no establishment, which you forced on the Catholic religion, with a view to its abolition: you have not enabled its clergy to mock the simplicity of the Christian / religion by the splendour of their equipages, by the magnifcence of their palaces, their furniture, or their side-boards, by the massiness of their plate, nor by the voluptuousness or luxury of their tables; you have not tempted them, for you have not enabled them to desert their parishes, and their religious duties, in search of pleasure at Bath, at London, in your capital, at the water-drinking places, the resort of the fashionable:– No; you have apportioned their salaries to the discharge of their duty, and you have called out the strongest incitements in man, – the procuring a subsistence, and the hopes of bettering their condition, to stimulate them to the most active discharge of their duty. I am not the advocate for either establishment; for I am as averse to that establishment which, by its enormity, sets the clergy above the discharge of their religious duty, as I am to that establishment which, by obliging the clergy to humour the weakness, or to encourage the ignorance of his parishioners, as the only means of procuring a subsistence, makes it an ofce beneath a man of education. But I cannot but observe, you have an example in your country of an establishment by which a greater number than those of the established religion are carefully and diligently instructed in their religious duties, by a resident clergy, of the purest morals, the most decorous manners, and of the greatest learning, between whom and their parishioners / the greatest amity and afection subsist; and not the ffeenth part

Speech of Arthur O’Connor Esq.

253

so burdensome to the nation as your Protestant Establishment. – I am aware that, in the eyes of weak and timid men, who subscribe to the doctrine, that Reformation is the parent of Revolution, I shall appear as one who has entered on a delicate subject with too much freedom; as a dangerous man, as a Jacobin,10 as one that would embrue my hands in the blood of my countrymen. – But I will appeal from such contemptible decision to the sounder judgment of those, who subscribe to the safer doctrine, that abuses are the parent of Revolution, and that a timely and rational reform of those abuses, as well in Church as in State, are the only security against those convulsions, which shake society to its foundation. An eye witness to the horrors of a revolution in another country, I must be more than monster to wish to see them raging in my own. But if ever there was a time when it behoved men in public station to be explicit, if ever there was a time when those scourges of the human race called politicians should lay aside their duplicity and their fnesse, it is the present moment. Be assured the people of this country will no longer bear that their welfare should be made the sport of a few family factions; be assured they are convinced their true interest consists in putting down men of selfcreation, who have no object in view but that of aggrandizing themselves and their families, at the expence of the public; and in setting up men who shall represent the nation, who shall be accountable to / the nation, and who shall do the business of the nation. And if I could bring my mind to suspect that my Catholic countrymen, afer they had been embodied in the constitution amidst their Protestant and Presbyterian fellow-citizens, would basely desert the common cause of our general feedom, by enlisting under the banners of this or that family monopolist, I should conceive that, in having been the advocate for their emancipation, I had been the advocate for their disgrace. But honour, interests, and the rising spirit of the nation, forbid such unworthy suspicions. If I was to judge by the dead silence with which this is received, I should suspect what I have said was not very palatable to some men in this House; but I have not risked connexions endeared to me by every tie of blood and friendship, to support one set of men in preference to another: I have hazarded too much, to allow the breath of calumny to taint the objects I have had in view, from the part I have taken. Immutable principles, on which the happiness and liberty of my countrymen depend, convey to my mind the only substantial boon for which great sacrifces should be made. I might allay the fears of the Protestant monopolists for what, in true spirit of political bigotry, they call their Protestant Ascendancy, by stating, that as the boroughs continue in the hands of Protestant proprietors, centuries must pass away before the Catholics can participate, in any considerable portion, of the political power of their country. But I am contending for the purity of the constitution, not for its abuses. / I disclaim contending for Catholic freedom, in the hope, that the grant may be a dead letter. I disclaim contending for Catholic freedom, in the hope, that the rights and liberties of my country may continue to be monopolized, in the same

254

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

manner afer their emancipation they were before. BUT I HERE AVOW MYSELF THE ZEALOUS AND EARNEST ADVOCATE FOR THE MOST UNQUALIFIED EMANCIPATION OF MY CATHOLIC COUNTRYMEN, IN THE HOPE, AND CONVICTION, THAT THE MONOPOLY OF THE RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES OF MY COUNTRY, WHICH HAS HITHER TO EFFECTUALLY WITHSTOOD THE EFFORTS OF A PART OF THE PEOPLE, MUST YIELD TO THE UNANIMOUS WILL, TO THE DECIDED INTEREST, AND TO THE GENERAL EFFORTS OF A WHOLE UNITED PEOPLE. It is from this conviction, and it is for that transcendently important object, that, while the noble Lord (Kingsborough) and the Rt. Hon. Secretary,11 are ofering to risk their lives and fortunes in support of a system that militates against the liberty of my countrymen, I will risk every thing dear to me on earth. It is for this great object I have, I fear, more than risked connections dearer to me than life itself. But he must be a spiritless man, and we must be a spiritless nation, if we do not resent the baseness of a British Minister,12 who has raised our hopes in order to seduce a rival13 to share / with him the disgrace of this accursed political crusade, and blasts them afer, that he may degrade a competitor to the station of a dependant; and, that he may destroy friendship his nature never knew, he has sported with the feelings of a whole nation; raising the cup with one hand to the parched lip of expectancy, he has dashed it to the earth with the other, in all the wantonness of insult, and with all the aggravation of contempt. Does he imagine that the people of his country, afer he has tantalized them with the cheering hope of present alleviation, and of future prosperity, will tamely bear to be forced to a re-endurance of their former suferings, and to a re-appointment of their former spoilers? Does he from confdence of long success in debauching the human mind, exact from you, calling yourselves the representatives of the people of Ireland, to reject a bill, which has received the unanimous consent of your constituents? or does he mean to puzzle the versatile disposition of this House, on which he has made so many successful experiments already, by distracting you between obedience to his imperious mandates, and obedience to the will of the people you should represent; or does he fatter himself that, because he has succeeded in betraying his own country, into exchanging that peace, by which she may have retrieved her shattered fnances, for a war, in which he has squandered twenty times a greater treasure, in the course of two years, than with all his famed / economy, he had been able to save, in the course of ten; for a war in which the fower of the youth of the world have been ofered up, victims to his ambition and his schemes, as boundless and presumptuous, as ill-concerted and ill-combined; for a war in which the plains of every nation in Europe have been crimsoned with oceans of blood; for a war in which his country has reaped nothing but disgrace, and which must ultimately prove her ruin. Does he fatter

Speech of Arthur O’Connor Esq.

255

himself, that he will be enabled, Satan like, to end his political career, by involving the whole Empire in a civil war, from which nothing can accrue, but a doleful and barren conquest to the victor. I trust the people of England are too wise and too just to attempt to force measures upon us, they would reject with disdain themselves; I trust they have not so soon forgotten the lesson they so recently learnt from America, which should serve as a lasting example to nations, against employing force to subdue the spirit of a people DETERMINED TO BE FREE! But if they should be so weak, or so wicked, as to sufer themselves to be seduced by a man, to whose soul duplicity and fnesse is as congenial, as ingeniousness and fair dealing is a stranger; – to become the instruments of supporting A FEW ODIOUS PUBLIC CHARACTERS IN POWER AND RAPACITY, AGAINST THE INTEREST AND AGAINST THE SENSE OF A WHOLE PEOPLE:– If we are to be dragooned / into measures against our will by a nation that would loose her last life and expend her last guinea in resenting a similar insult if ofered to herself:– I trust in God, she will fnd in the people of this country a spirit in no wise inferior to her own. You are at this moment at the most awful period of your lives:– the Minister of England has committed you with your country, and on this night your ADOPTION OR REJECTION OF THIS BILL, MUST DETERMINE IN THE EYES OF THE IRISH NATION, WHICH YOU REPRESENT THE MINISTER OF ENGLAND, OR THE PEOPLE OF IRELAND! And although you are convinced you do not represent the people of Ireland, although you are convinced every man of you, that you are self-created, it does not alter the nature of the contest, it is still a contest between the Minister of England and the people of Ireland; and THE WEAKNESS OF YOUR TITLE SHOULD ONLY MAKE YOU THE MORE CIRCUMSPECT IN THE EXERCISE OF YOUR POWER. – Obey the British Minister; Disregard the voice of the people:– France must have lost her senses if she hesitates what part she will take; it is not an Eighty-fourth department14 you will have moulded to her wishes; it is not simply a La Vendee15 you will have kindled in the bosom of your country. For / if you shall have once convinced the people of this country that you are TRAITORS TO THEM, AND HIRELINGS TO THE MINISTER OF AN AVARICIOUS DOMINEERING NATION, under the outward appearance of a sister country. If you shall have convinced the people of this country, that the fee national constitution for which they were committed, and for which they risked every thing dear to them in 1782, has been destroyed by the bribery of a British Minister, and the unexampled venality of an Irish Parliament. If you shall have convinced them that instead of rising or falling with England, they are never to rise, but when she has been humbled by adversity, and that they must fall, when she becomes elated by prosperity. If you shall have convinced the people of this country, that instead of reciprocal advantage, nothing is to be reaped fom their connexion

256

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

with England, but supremacy and aggrandizement on the one side, and a costly venality, injury, insult, degradation, and poverty on the other; it is human nature, that you shall have driven the people of this country to court the alliance of any nation able and willing to break the chains of a bondage not more galling to their feelings than RESTRICTIVE OF THEIR PROSPERITY. Te gentlemen at the opposite side of the House have attempted to infuence you by the mention of Jackson16:– So will I. – Read the correspondence of that / traitor with your enemy, and you will fnd a volume of instruction in every line that he has written. – If the people of this country do enjoy the Constitution in Church and State, why has that traitor found the people of the one country free from that oppression which goads nations into all the horrors of revolution? – Why has he found the people of the other so highly sublimated to his purpose? Examine the whole of his intelligence, and you will fnd the weakness of your country in the conduct you have pursued, and in the converse of that conduct only you can establish her strength. Do not depend on the bayonet for the support of your measure, believe me that in proportion as your measures require force to support them, in an exact proportion, are they radically and mischievously bad. Believe me there is more strength in the afections and confdence of the people, than if you were to convert every second house in the nation into barracks for your soldiery. And when the gentlemen (Cufe17 and Kingsborough) whom I have heard this night tell you, that to act in contempt of the public opinion, is spirit and frmness; and that to act with a decent respect for that opinion, is timidity and cowardice; – they make the character of the legislator to merge into the character of the duellist; and they set you upon splitting points of honour with your constituents. Is it not enough that you live in the age and in the / midst of the horrors of Revolutions, to deter you from acting in contempt of the public opinion? Have you not had examples enough to convince you, that men in throwing of the the [sic] russet frock18 for the uniform of the soldier, do not at all times throw away the ties of kindred and of blood? Have you not had examples enough to convince you, that even soldiers cannot at all times be brought to shed the blood of their parents, their kindred, and their friends. And have you not had a great and memorable example to convince you, that the soldiers of an odious government, may become the soldiers of the nation? It these are plain truths, this is the time to tell them. If I speak daggers to you, it is that neither you nor my country may ever feel them. But if you wish to be deceived, hearken to those men who are interested in risking every thing, that they may continue to monopolize the whole political power of your country. – hearken to those men who are interested in risking every thing, that may continue to draw their better inheritance from the sale of the welfare of your country; – but let me caution you, whose property is too considerable to be hazarded in the

Speech of Arthur O’Connor Esq.

257

base pursuit afer the rights and property of your enslaved, and impoverished countrymen, to take care what part you act on this night; let me caution you, that the decision of this night goes / much farther than the important bill under your consideration. You, none of you can be ignorant that the British Minister has designs in procrastinating this question, to procure advantages for his own country, at the expence of yours, greater than she was capaple of receiving since the revolution,19 at least since Union.20 And so strongly impressed is this on the public mind, that you who shall on this night vote for the rejection of this bill, will appear in the eyes of the Irish nation, not only as men voting in obedience to the British Minister, against the voice of the people, but as men voting for an UNION WITH ENGLAND, by which this country is to be everlastingly reduced to the state of an abject province. – Fortunately the views of the British Minister have been detected; fortunately the people of this country see him in his true colours, like the desperate gamester who has lost his all, in the wildest schemes of aggrandizement, he looks round for some dupe to supply him with the further means of future projects; and in the crafy subtleness of his soul, he fondly imagines, he has found that easy dupe in the credulity of the Irish nation. Afer he has exhausted his own country in a crusade against that phantom, political opinion, he fatters himself he will be enabled to resuscitate her at the expence of yours. / As you value the peace and happiness of your country; as you value the rights and liberties of the soil that has given you birth; and, if you are not lost to every sense of feeling for your own consequence and importance as men, I call on you on this night to make your stand. I call on you to rally round the independence of your country, whose existence has been so artfully assailed. Believe me the British Minister will leave you in the lurch, when he sees that the people of this nation are TOO MUCH IN EARNEST to be tricked out of their rights or the independence of their country; afer he sees that they have been sufciently alarmed at seeing the same men who uniformly opposed the independence of their country, when it was a question in this House in eighty-two, recalled into power when that independence was to be attacked in ninety-fve when he has gained his ends of you, and when he has made you the instruments by which he shall have so divided and disgraced the opposition of England,21 as to render it impossible to form an efcient government out of his opponents, he will make his peace with this country by conceding this measure, leaving you “fxed fgures for the hand of scorn to point its slow and moving fnger at.”22 – Gracious God! that you should fall into that very error which has so recently overwhelmed a great nation in such unheard of calamities! – Will you not take warning from the fate of the government of France, which by / not adapting its conduct to the changes of the public mind, has brought ruin on itself and destruction on its country.

258

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

What a display of legislation have we had on this night? – Artifcers who neither know the foundation on which they work – the instruments they ought to use – nor the materials they are to form! Is it on the narrow basis of monopoly and exclusion you would erect a temple to the growing liberty of your country? Is it by foreign troops you would lead the ardent sprit of your countrymen? Is it in the fusty records of barbarous ages you would seek for that existent mind to which you should adopt your laws? If you will legislate: Know, that on the broad basis of immutable justice only, you can raise a lasting, beauteous temple to the liberty of your island; whose ample base shall lodge, and whose roof shall shelter her united family from the rankling inclemency of rejection and exclusion. – Know, that Reason is that silken thread by which the lawgiver leads his people; and above all, know, that in the knowledge of the temper of the public mind, consists the skill and the wisdom of the legislator. Do not imagine that the minds of your countrymen has been stationary, while that of all Europe has been rapidly progressive; for / you must be blind not to perceive, that the whole European mind has undergone a revolution, neither confned to this nor to that country, but as general as the great causes which have given it birth, and still continue to feed its growth. In vain do these men, who subsist but on the abuses of the government under which they live fatter themselves, that what we have seen these last six years, is but the fever of the moment, which will pass away as soon as the patient has been let blood enough. As well may they attempt to alter the course of nature without altering her laws. If they would efect a counter-revolution in the European mind, they must destroy commerce and its efects; they must abolish every trace of the mariner’s compass; they must consign every book to the fames; they must obliterate every vestige of the invention of the press; they must destroy the conduit of intelligence, by destroying the institution of the post-ofce: Ten, and not until then, they and their abuses may live on, in all the security which ignorance, superstition, and want of concert in the people, can bestow. But while I would overwhelm with despair, those men who have been nursed in the lap of venality and prostitution; who have been educated in contempt and ridicule of a love for their country; and who have grown grey in scofng at every thing like public spirit; let me congratulate every true friend to mankind, that that Commerce, / which has begat so much independence, will continue to beget more; and let me congratulate every friend to the human species, that the Press, which has sent such a mass of information into the world, will continue, with accelerated rapidity, to pour forth its treasures so benefcial to mankind. It is to these great causes we are indebted, THAT THE COMBINATION OF PRIESTS AND DESPOTS, which so long tyrannized over the civil and political liberty of Europe, HAS BEEN DISSOLVED; it is to these great causes we are indebted, that no priest, be his religion what it may, dare preach the doctrine, and that no man believes the doctrine which

Speech of Arthur O’Connor Esq.

259

inculcates the necessity of sacrifcing every right and every blessing this world can aford, as the only means of obtaining eternal happiness in the life to come. Tis was the doctrine by which the despotism of Europe was so long supported; this was the doctrine by which the political Popery of Europe was supported; but the doctrine and the despotism may now sleep in the same grave, until the trumpet of ignorance, superstition, and bigotry, shall sound their resurrection! – Tanks be to God, the European mind demands more substantial food than the airy nothing of metaphysical belief. Tanks be to God, the absurdity of one set of men framing opinions for other men to relieve, upon a subject which neither have faculties to understand, has been exploded; / and that every heart and every mind is anxiously engaged in perfecting a civil and political code; which, as it is within the scope, so it is the most important concern to every nation on the globe. And so far from believing they would earn Heaven by a base dereliction if their rights, they are frmly convinced, that in promoting the true, civil, and political rights of man, they are advancing human society to that state of perfection, it was the design of the Creator it should attain; convinced that the CAUSE OF FREEDOM IS THE CAUSE OF GOD.

FINIS.

A FAIR STATEMENT, OF THE ADMINISTRATION OF EARL FITZWILLIAM

A Fair Statement, of the Administration of Earl Fitzwilliam, in Ireland, containing Strictures on the Noble Lord’s Letter to Earl Carlisle (London: Printed for Richard White, 1795).

William Wentworth-Fitzwilliam (1748–1833), fourth Earl Fitzwilliam, a leading Rockingham and then Foxite Whig, followed the Duke of Portland in deserting Fox and joining a coalition with William Pitt in 1794. He was appointed Lord Lieutenant of Ireland in August of that year. He arrived in Ireland believing that he had the British cabinet’s agreement that, while the Irish executive should not propose Catholic emancipation, it should not obstruct it if such a measure was passed by the Irish Parliament. He undoubtedly favoured such a concession more than the ministers back in Britain. Recognizing the hostility to Catholic emancipation of leading Protestant members of the Irish executive, Fitzwilliam set about removing several of them from ofce. Tis encouraged Henry Grattan to begin planning a Catholic relief bill. Tese actions alarmed the Protestant Ascendancy in Ireland and caused considerable concern back in Britain, where the King and his ministers believed that Fitzwilliam was going beyond what had been agreed before he lef for Ireland. Fitzwilliam responded by maintaining that his actions were essential to the peace and unity of Ireland, but in late February 1795 the British government decided that he should be recalled from Ireland. Fitzwilliam then set about defending his conduct in Ireland. He wrote and published in Dublin two letters to his friend, Frederick Howard (1748–1825), ffh Earl of Carlisle, a former Lord Lieutenant himself: First Letter: A Letter fom Earl Fitzwilliam, Recently Retired fom this Country, to the Earl of Carlisle: Explaining the Cause of that Event (Dublin, 1795) and Second Letter: A Letter fom Earl Fitzwilliam, who Recently Retired fom Ireland, to the Earl of Carlisle, Explaining the Cause of that Event (Dublin, 1795). Tese were reprinted in London, without Fitzwilliam’s knowledge, and in a somewhat altered state. Tese publications shocked even Fitzwilliam’s friends, but he remained unrepentant. He presented a memorial in his defence to the King in person and he sought,

– 261 –

262

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

though in vain, to have a parliamentary investigation into his conduct in Ireland and into the reasons for his recall. Receiving no satisfaction, he spent almost all of the rest of his political life in opposition. Fitzwilliam’s defence centred on his claim that he was recalled primarily because of the resentment created among leading members of the Protestant Ascendancy in Ireland by his eforts to remove John Beresford and others from executive ofce. He denied that he was recalled because of his support for Catholic emancipation, a policy that his opponents believed that he knew had no support in the British cabinet. He insisted that this claim by his opponents was just an excuse to get rid of him in order to placate the angry leaders of the Irish Protestant Ascendancy. He could point out that when he lef Dublin on 25 March the streets were silent and dressed in mourning because so many of its citizens approved of his stance on Catholic emancipation. Te pamphlet printed here is an attempt to reject Fitzwilliam’s defence of his conduct in his two published letters to Carlisle. It asserts that Fitzwilliam’s proCatholic stance was the prime reason for his recall and it accuses him of betraying confdences and of going far beyond the terms agreed between him and the British cabinet before he had lef Britain for Ireland. Te author is very well informed of the discussions that had taken place between Fitzwilliam and British ministers prior to Fitzwilliam’s departure for Ireland. It seems very likely that the anonymous author was briefed by members of the British government and perhaps also by leaders of the Protestant Ascendancy in Ireland so that Fitzwilliam’s defence would be destroyed and the decision to recall him could be justifed. Tere is an entry on Fitzwilliam in the ODNB. Tere is a useful and substantial biography of him: E. A. Smith, Whig Principles and Party Politics: Earl Fitzwilliam and the Whig Party 1748-1833 (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1975); and two scholarly articles on this particular episode in his career: R. B. McDowell, ‘Te Fitzwilliam Episode’, Irish Historical Studies, 15 (1966), pp. 115–30 and D. Wilkinson, ‘Te Fitzwilliam Episode, 1795: A Reinterpretation of the Role of the Duke of Portland’, Irish Historical Studies, 29 (1995), pp. 315–39.

A Fair Statement, of the Administration of Earl Fitzwilliam, in Ireland, containing Strictures on the Noble Lord’s Letter to Earl Carlisle (London: Printed for Richard White, 1795).

A FAIR STATEMENT, &c. His Lordship frst supposes all his dismissals and measures, (but particularly his conduct on the Catholic question) to be the grounds of his recall: He then asserts that the Catholic question has nothing to do with it, and that the dismissal of Mr. Beresford1 alone is the real cause of his disgrace: lastly, he rejects these grounds altogether, and ascribes his removal to an original determination in Mr. Pitt,2 at the time of the coalition, to discredit him and his friends. It is a proof of weakness to shif the ground of defence; but it is a still greater proof of weakness to fy from facts to insinuation, from argument to personality. Lord Fitzwilliam seems to have omitted no possible mode of defence, since he has even revealed the secrets of his sovereign, and disclosed the confdential correspondence of the cabinet. Had such a disclosure justifed his Lordship, it would even then be difcult to excuse it; but as it palpably condemns him, he is in every light unpardonable. Tis breach of ofcial confdence is made for the purpose of shewing that he acted from authority in his conduct / on the Catholic question, and that it was not the cause of his recall. Let us examine his Lordship’s proofs. He frst mentions that he had proposed in cabinet, that ‘additional indulgencies to the Catholics should be ofered from the throne: but that to this proposal objections were stated that appeared of sufcient weight to induce the adoption of another plan.”3 He then states, that “he consented not to bring forward the subject on the part of government, but rather to endeavour to keep it back until a period of more general tranquillity, when so many material objects might not press upon government.”4 Tus it appears that Lord Fitzwilliam was instructed to keep the Catholic question back till a peace, and that he had consented to do so if possible. Yet at

– 263 –

264

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

the very period of his making this engagement with the cabinet, his own confdential minister, Mr. Grattan,5 was bringing the Catholics forward, and teaching them to petition for a repeal of every restrictive law from every parish in the kingdom. On his Lordship’s arrival on the 4th of January, he fnds that “the Catholic petitions to parliament were prepared, but that he was happy the business was in the hands of Grattan[”];6 nevertheless he writes on the 8th to the cabinet, that he would obey their instructions, and “use what eforts he could to stop the progress of it.”7 Every man in Ireland knew early in December, that Mr. Grattan was to be Lord Fitzwilliam’s minister; every man knew, that about the 15th of December, he had meetings with Mr. Byrne,8 and others of the Catholic committee, wherein it was settled that the Catholic body should come forward with petitions to parliament; and every man had read the proceedings of the Catholics of Dublin on the 23d of December, wherein it is resolved to demand the repeal of all restrictive laws whatsoever. / Was Mr. Grattan, as minister to Lord Fitzwilliam,9 authorised to bring the Catholics forward? If he was, Lord Fitzwilliam is convicted on his own statement: If he acted without authority, did Lord Fitzwilliam disavow him? And if he did not, with what sincerity did his Lordship write on the 8th of January, that “he would use every efort to keep the question back?”10 And on what pretence could he say, [“]that he was happy to fnd the question in the hands of Mr. Grattan,”11 who had thus committed him without his authority, and against his instructions? But Lord Fitzwilliam must have surely known what passed in Ireland previous to his leaving London; for Mr. Grattan saw Mr. Byrne, and settled every proceeding with him about the 15th of December, and he could hardly have failed communicating the steps he had taken to Lord Fitzwilliam, to whom he was minister; so that Lord Fitzwilliam must have known what had passed in Ireland before he lef London, which was not till the last day of the year. As to the idea of Lord Fitzwilliam “giving a handsome support to the measure if it could not be kept back:”12 this admission is no excuse whatsoever, if he used no eforts to do so; and can merely be construed, that he was to support the measure, if it could not be resisted afer every efort made. How then does the fact stand? Te actual bringing forward of the question was the work of Lord Fitzwilliam’s minister; this minister was not disavowed. When Lord Fitzwilliam received the address of the Catholics, he gave the most encouraging answer to their hopes, and the most decided approbation of his minister. It will be allowed that these were eforts, but they were eforts not to delay, but to urge on the Catholic claims; they were all contrary / to the tenor of his instructions; nor does his Lordship attempt to produce one single exertion which he made in compliance with them.

A Fair Statement, of the Administration of Earl Fitzwilliam

265

Te dispatch of the 8th of January has been mentioned, wherein his Lordship states, “that he should immediately use every efort to keep back the Catholic question.”13 Te cabinet of course conceived that his Lordship was sincere and determined, they felt, perhaps, confdent (and they had every reason to feel so) that if his Lordship exerted himself according to his promise, he would have been successful; and of course due credit is given to his Lordship, and no answer is returned to a letter which did not require one. On the 15th of January his Excellency writes another dispatch, states his answer to the Catholics, in which he conceived [“]he had kept clear of all specifc engagements,”14 but “urges the grant of all the Catholics wished;” and he gives notice “that if he received no very peremptory orders to the contrary, he should acquiesce.”15 He then with apparent justice complains, that no answer was returned to him till the 8th of February. His Excellency omits stating frst, that his dispatch of the 15th of January (being delayed in Ireland by contrary winds) did not arrive in London until the 27th of January; and 2dly, that Lord Milton16 received a letter from a cabinet minister (Mr. Windham)17 on the second of February “giving intimation of discontent among his colleagues in England.”18 Where is now his Lordship’s ground of complaint? Five days afer his dispatch of the 15th arrived in England, notice was sent that his conduct gave discontent; and on the 7th of February a fnal cabinet on that conduct is held, and positive orders are sent him on the 8th to adhere to the original instructions he had received, and which, from his / letter of the 8th of January, it appears he fully understood; and his Lordship is acquainted, that his putting of the Catholic question until the peace, “may be of more essential service than any act of any minister since the revolution, at least since the union.”19 On receiving this dispatch merely confning to his frst instructions, and original engagements, does he make any efort to comply or obey? Does he call for advice of the king’s servants? does he apply to his friends for support? does he endeavour to check the Catholics? So far from adopting such measures, he gives not himself a moment’s time to consider and deliberate – he answers the dispatch with precipitancy and passion, by return of the post, “expresses his surprise at being now pressed for the frst time,” (although it was his original engagement to do so) “to defer the question; positively refuses to run the risk,” and in the most violent language, declines “to be the person,” (so he is pleased to state) [“]to raise a fame in the country, which nothing short of arms could be able to keep down.”20 On the arrival of this letter, the cabinet fnding his Excellency resolved to resist their instructions, and not knowing what might be the consequences of his continuing in Ireland, (for Mr. Grattan had on the 12th of February moved for leave to bring in the Catholic Bill, had refused a committee on the Catholic petitions, and declared he would pass the bill before the assizes;) the cabinet, I say, thus circumstanced, are reduced to a decisive measure, and on the 21st they recall him.

266

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

Can any chain of evidence hang more completely together than the above statement? Yet his Lordship insists that the Catholic question did not enter into the causes of his dismissal: because, afer the dispatch of the 8th of February enforcing delay, the Duke of Portland21 enters upon the / subject at length, in his letters of the 16th and 18th of February: that is, his Grace not having received Lord Fitzwilliam’s determination to decline the commands of the cabinet; acts under the persuasion that his Lordship would obey them, till he is informed by Lord Fitzwilliam’s dispatch of the 15th that he positively will not, and then his Grace unavoidably concurs in his dismissal on the 21st. It would be easy to detect many other inconsistencies in Lord Fitzwilliam’s statement, if necessary; for instance, in his frst letter, he says, “If the only point referred for consideration was the time and manner; and if it was not implicitly lef to his consideration to judge of that manner and time:”22 What is this, but saying that the time and manner were reserved, and at the same time were not reserved to the British cabinet? If Lord Fitzwilliam was judge of the time and manners, those points were not reserved; and if they were reserved, he was no longer the judge of them. But his Lordship’s inconsistencies of statement are not the object of these observations; they are made to prove that under his own shewing his recall was necessary. He was sent with instructions to keep back the Catholic question; afer promising to do so, he countenances the person who brought it forward, continues him as his minister, and having encouraged the Catholics in his answer, he orders that minister to move their bill in the House of Commons, to refuse a committee on their petitions, to declare that he will pass this bill before the assizes; and then being desired to delay the measure, and adhere to his frst instructions, he positively refuses altogether, and rejects the command of the cabinet. / Afer such a direct and formal disavowal of the authority of his Majesty’s ministers, his continuance in the administration would have been a dissolution of the unity of government. He was therefore unanimously recalled, as his Lordship states from the Duke of Portland’s dispatch, “for the preservation of the empire.”23 If Lord Fitzwilliam has not been fortunate in the justifcation of his conduct as to the Catholic question, he has been less happy in the subject of his dismissals. His Lordship quotes a letter from Mr. Pitt, in which his Lordship is charged “with having acted inconsistently with that principle, by which alone the full advantage of the union which had taken place in England could be extended to Ireland.”24 He thus tacitly admits his having adopted and acquiesced in this principle, and proceeds to vindicate his conduct as strictly conformable to it. Adopting therefore, with his Lordship, this principle of union as a leading maxim of his government, let us apply his conduct to the rule: Te whole of his government was mere party, of the most narrow and contracted kind; as to measures, confned to a very few, and as to patronage, to a single family,25 his Lordship’s cousins. Tere was not one old servant of the crown in the real

A Fair Statement, of the Administration of Earl Fitzwilliam

267

confdence of government, and if two or three were occasionally consulted on specifc points, on which their assistance was absolutely necessary, scarce any of them escaped some mark of indiference or slight. In order to secure his Lordship steadfast to party views, he was encompassed with every forbidding form and ceremony; was closely watched and guarded by partisans, and was secluded from any general intercourse with the leading characters of the kingdom; he submitted to draw all his informations and opinions from one set of men only; to them he became subservient / in the most unexampled degree; hardly any gentleman was received with common civility that was not a friend of his connections; all the friends of the former administration seemed upon that account to be set aside, and the old supporters of government were in continual expectation of being removed for having supported the crown. Party was carried to such an extreme, that it was avowed in parliament, that the administration intended to go back to the regency, and overturn the arrangements which at that period were adopted. Such is the unexaggerated picture of the line of conduct pursued by Lord Fitzwilliam in compliance with the principle of union on which he accepted the Government. But let us attend to Lord Fitzwilliam’s pathetic appeal: “Am I then (says his Lordship) so little known to my friends, that whilst I pretended the public good, and the king’s service, I am insidiously consulting my private interest, and instead of my country have only my connections in view?”26 To judge of this appeal, a few leading facts must be stated. Mr. W. Ponsonby27 was to be Secretary of State for life, at Mr. G. Ponsonby,28 to be Attorney-General, Mr. Curran,29 a creature of Mr. Ponsonby’s, as stated by Lord Fitzwilliam, Mr. L. Morres,30 a near friend of Mr. Ponsonby’s, to be UnderSecretary in the Civil Department Total,

£. 1,700 2,400 2,000 2,000 £. 8,100

Such was the frst family arrangements for the good of the country. It was indeed natural and fair that Lord Fitzwilliam should attend to the claims of his cousins / with an honourable partiality; but to state that the removal of Mr. Wolfe31 to make way for Mr. George Ponsonby, the removal of Mr. Toler32 to make way for Mr. Curran, and of Mr. Hamilton,33 to accommodate Mr. Morres, were measures adopted merely for the public good; and the King’s service, is rather extravagant. Does his Lordship mean to assert that his threatening to dismiss Mr. Wolfe, if he would not accede to his terms of removal, one of the most upright Servants a Monarch ever possessed, the frst Lawyer at the Bar, a Character of the greatest weight and dignity in Parliament, of tried consistency and consummate integrity, was a measure adopted merely for the public good and the King’s service?

268

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

Does his Lordship mean to assert that the bribing of a Judge to retire (against his will) by a pension of 300l. a year to his family, and 1200l. a year to himself, in order to make Mr. Curran Solicitor-General, and to force from his situation one of the oldest, ablest, most attached and most resolute of his Majesty’s Servants, and the determination of palming such an odious measure upon the Parliament, was merely for the public good and the King’s service? Does his Lordship mean to state that putting an addition to the Pension List of 1200l. a year, in order to get rid of Mr. Hamilton, who had served his Majesty for ffy years with ability, industry and integrity seldom equalled, and never excelled, in order to accommodate a Gentleman who never was in any habits of business at all, was solely for the public good and the King’s service? No – no; the King’s service or public good never entered into these arrangements; they were alone dictated by Family considerations, unless another principle conjoined / its infuence – the scheme of forming an exclusive party, and disgracing all the old servants of the Crown. Tis principle accounts for the removal of Mr. Coke,34 who had been long employed under successive Governments, and whom his Lordship attacks for disrespect; because he rejected a provision by pension of less than 250l. a year, though his Lordship intimates that he ofered him 1200l. Why does his Lordship suppress his adherence to the principle of union in the dismissal of Lord Glemorth from the Clerkship of the Hanaper,35 and his kind consolation to his Lordship, that he had been particularly recommended to him by Mr. Pitt? Why does his Lordship suppress his adherence to this principle in the afront he put on the Crown, – , when without previous consultation, he sent him a list of eight King’s Counsel to swear in, although the nomination to that rank is almost invariably lef to the Chancellor’s judgment? But his adherence to the principle of union in the removal of Mr. Beresford, is indeed conspicuous – dismissal, misrepresentation, defamation. Indeed his Lordship’s resentment to all the persons he removed is unaccountable, unless the proverb that we never forgive those we have injured, be allowed as an excuse. However, as the removal of Mr. Beresford is made one of the leading causes of Lord Fitzwilliam’s recal, let us consider his Lordship’s statement of the subject: First, his Lordship states, that “he had mentioned to Mr. Pitt, Mr. Beresford’s dangerous power, and his apprehensions that he should be obliged to remove him, and that Mr. Pitt did not ofer the slightest objections or say a word in his favour.”36 2dly, He states, “that he submitted / to the odium of leaving Mr. Beresford his full income, through fear of displeasing his colleagues, by infringing the emolument of a person professing great attachment to them, though indeed at the same time he had no slight ground of doubting the sincerity of

A Fair Statement, of the Administration of Earl Fitzwilliam

269

those professions.”37– 3dly, He says, “that for the person whom Mr. Pitt contends so strenuously, he has no regard, and that he doubts whether he will permit him to resume his station at the Revenue Board.”38 Tus does his Lordship state, that neither was Mr. Beresford attached to Mr. Pitt, nor Mr. Pitt to Mr. Beresford; and yet, that the sole cause of his own downfal was the dismissal of a man to whose removal Mr. Pitt had stated no objection, for whom he had no regard, and whom he did not intend to replace. Te inconsistency of this statement refutes itself. But on Mr. Beresford’s dismissal more will be said hereafer. What has been observed is merely to shew that the sole imputed cause, was not the only cause, but that it was a general system of conduct repugnant to agreed principles, defned engagements, and positive instructions, which occasioned Lord Fitzwilliam’s removal. Lord Fitzwilliam quotes from one of Mr. Pitt’s letters, “that Mr. Beresford’s dismissal was contrary to engagement;” and cites from another, that “Mr. Pitt felt himself bound to adhere to those sentiments he had expressed before on the subject of arrangements, not only with respect to Mr. Beresford, but to the line of conduct adopted in so many instances towards the former supporters of government. By these sentiments, he must at all events be guided from a regard to the king’s service, and to his own honour, however he may sincerely lament the consequences which must arise from the present situation.”39 / Here let us pause: Lord Fitzwilliam admits, that on coming to Ireland, he consented to use every efort to keep the Catholic question back to peace; he admits, that he came to adopt the same principle of union among parties which had taken place in England: his conduct was a continual violation of engagement on these two leading articles, and he was of course recalled. By stating the cabinet correspondence, he has disclosed and admitted every thing that condemns, and nothing which justifes his conduct; and as we are not masters of the whole correspondence but of such passages only as have been selected for the purpose of his vindication, we must be assured that he quoted those alone which were most favourable to his cause, and that if the most favourable passages cannot support his conduct, it is more than probable that the whole of the correspondence would have lef him still more indefensible. Lord Fitzwilliam states, that the Duke of Portland, in his dispatch of the 21st of February, sums up all the reasons why his recall was deemed necessary by the cabinet without one dissenting voice, for the very preservation of the empire; but he does not state those reasons. It has been, however, shewn from his own letters, that in the great points of the Catholic question, and of his dismissals, he acted against his instructions, and without authority; and that being desired to restrain himself within his instructions, he fatly and peremptorily disobeyed. If afer this marked defance he had been continued, he would have established an administration independent of the king and the cabinet; the executive power would have been divided; there would have been two distinct administrations;

270

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

and the Irish government would have been in the most pernicious situation possible; as Mr. Grattan stated it – it would have been departmental. His Lordship was / therefore on the principle of his disobedience of orders, (which he not only admits, but asserts) necessarily recalled for the preservation of the empire. His Lordship mixes his own vindication with the severest charges on the British cabinet. “One short word (says his Lordship) more on this part of the subject. Te dismissals; – when were those dismissals made, and when announced to the British cabinet? Before the meeting of parliament. When did their criminality, and the enormity of their ofence frst commence? It was when, under the credit of my administration, perhaps derived from those very causes, the parliament had submitted to unparalleled burdens, not solely for the purpose of providing for the internal security of the kingdom by the most ample and formidable military establishments, but likewise by lending its assistance to the empire at large in the hour of its greatest distress, by aids great and munifcent beyond all example: then commenced the breach of all faith and arguments on my part, and not till then.”40 Here is an accusation of the most tremendous kind against his Majesty’s Ministers for having broken faith with the Irish nation, and for having duped and betrayed the Irish Parliament: such an accusation is not, we must suppose lightly made; it is built upon solid proof, not upon vague surmise; the truth of it is certain; at least it is probable; surely it cannot be impossible. Let us examine his Lordship’s arguments: on the 3d of February, Mr. Grattan moved for a vote of 200,000l. for the purpose of manning the King’s navy; a vote merely equivalent to the supply given at the time of the afair of Nootka Sound,41 and equal only to a 98th part of the British supply for the present year. On the 2d of February Lord Fitzwilliam states, that a letter was written / by Mr. Windham, marking discontent at his conduct: and that on the 7th a fnal Cabinet was held, in which his conduct was disapproved. Now, by the course of the Mail it is certain, that the account of the vote of seamen could not have reached London until the 8th of February, and the letter marking discontent was written on the 2d; the Cabinet vote of disapprobation of Lord Fitzwilliam passed on the 7th. Te general supply was not stated to Parliament till the 9th of February, when 40,000 men, and a loan of 1,500,000l. were voted unanimously; the date also of Mr. Pitt’s letter, disapproving Lord Fitzwilliam’s dismissals, is the identical 9th of February; so that to prove Lord Fitzwilliam’s assertion just, Mr. Pitt must have known in London on the 9th of February, by a miraculous intuition, what was at the same moment passing in Ireland. Tus does his Lordship endeavour upon a suggestion which his own letter proves to be physically impossible, to fx a stigma upon the British Cabinet, to raise a fame in the Irish parliament, and to create resistance in the Irish Nation against his Majesty’s government. And his Lordship makes this charge at a time when, if he could prove it true against the British Cabinet, he must know it to be false, as it respects the Irish Parliament. For, to

A Fair Statement, of the Administration of Earl Fitzwilliam

271

assert that the great supplies of the present year were voted in gratitude for his dismissal of the King’s old servants to favour his Lordship’s relations; or that a loan of 1,500,000l. was unanimously voted by a Protestant House of Commons, under the express stipulation that it should be Protestant no longer, is so preposterous, that it is hardly credible that the utmost blindness of passion should have adapted such an absurdity. / His Lordship states, that “he was charged with the government of a distracted, discontented country:”42 Alas! the distraction, the discontent were of his own making. Did his Lordship never hear or read of the unanimity of the last Session of Parliament? Did he never hear of the great and unanimous Supply which was then voted? Did he not know, that by the eforts of his Predecessor,43 Faction was nearly extinguished? Tat by the benign recommendation of the Crown, and liberality of the Parliament, the Catholics were in a state of satisfaction and content, from which nothing but the eforts of himself and his Partisans could have roused them? Did he not fnd his own estate fourishing, and without the smallest arrear of rent? Did not he fnd the Public Revenue rising in almost every article, so that its increase this year has been a ffh over the former produce? Did not he fnd a general zeal among the Gentlemen to exert themselves in the Militia and in the raising of Levies, and to display their loyalty on every occasion? And if his Lordship was sensible of these circumstances (of which he could not be ignorant) upon what pretence can he justify his libel on the kingdom, by terming unanimity discontent, and tranquillity distraction; and thus attempt to destroy the reputation of his Predecessor, who had established those blessings? Having for his own vindication falsely accused the Ministry, and libelled his Predecessor and the country, the next attack made by his Lordship is against himself; and in this he is as successful, as in his others: he is unfortunate. It seems that Lord Carlisle had recommended to him a discreet and loyal conduct during his continuance in Ireland; to this his Lordship replies, “that whatever it may cost his feelings, he shall not forget the duty he owes to his Majesty, or neglect the trust he has been graciously / pleased to repose in him. A sense of his own honor, and what he owes to himself, will unite with whatever his country has a right to expect from him. – In imposing on himself this task he shall omit no personal sacrifce that may tend to the ease of his Majesty’s Government, or the advancement of his service, as far as depends on his infuence during the short period of his retaining the authority with which he so lately condescended to invest him.”44 Such are his Lordship’s sentiments of his duty: what was his conduct? Te reverse of these sentiments. From the moment that his Lordship’s measures were fnally disavowed, and his recall signifed, the confdential agents of his Government were indefatigably at work to stir up discontent in every part of the kingdom; all his Lordship’s newspapers teemed with infammatory statements and paragraphs; even his Prime Minister came forward in language little short

272

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

of treason; and his Lordship himself fnishes the climax with the infammatory appeal to the nation in the shape of a letter to a friend; and at the moment of embarking from the kingdom, tosses from his Majesty’s yacht a frebrand on shore to kindle the island. A few passages shall be quoted. He states, the instruction of the cabinet for him to delay the Catholic question as “a desperate resolution to change the whole of their system, on a subject which they knew would involve in its decision the safety and existence of the kingdom.”45 In another his Lordship states, “that the putting of the Catholic question will be attended with a certainty of the most alarming and fatal consequences.”46 Again he trusts “the evil Genius of England will not so far infatuate its Ministers as to induce them to wait for more decisive corroboration of his sentiments.”47 / Again, “he refused to be the person to raise a fame in the country, which nothing short of arms could keep down.”48 And again, “rather than indulge me must the Ministers of England boldly face, I had almost said, the certainty of driving this kingdom into a rebellion, and open another breach for ruin and destruction to break in upon us.”49 Afer the temperate addresses formed by his relations and friends, afer the mild and discreet answer of his Prime Minister to the Catholics, such is the judicious and conciliating farewell of Lord Fitzwilliam to the loyal people of Ireland. When Sir Lawrence Parsons50 brought forward a motion for a three-months Money-Bill, and used unguarded language, nothing could be severer than the rebuke of Lord Milton. He considered the motion and the language as a direct invitation to the common enemy; and he stated that such a measure would give more hopes to the French than any of their victories; that it would counteract all the efect of their supplies; and he represented in the most passionate terms the pernicious efect such language would have at Paris and in the National Convention, where it would be soon read. If such was Lord Milton’s censure of Sir Lawrence, who spoke as an individual, and without authority, what must be his condemnation of Lord Fitzwilliam, who, from the seat of Government and on the throne of deputed Royalty, proclaims to Europe, that this recall will produce almost a certainty of rebellion? Yet his Lordship may have formed an excuse for himself, which possibly he did not intend: “am I then” says / he, “that light, weak, and easy man, that in matters of the highest import to the service with which I have been entrusted, I should have abandoned my judgment, and committed my decisions to others, without consulting my own understanding?”51 May not this defence be in some degree accepted? does it not bear an appearance of truth? does it not coincide with every circumstance of his Lordship’s government? If, instead of delaying the Catholic question; according to his

A Fair Statement, of the Administration of Earl Fitzwilliam

273

instructions, he manifestly urged it forwards: if, instead of making a coalition of parties, he dismissed many of the king’s old servants, in order to establish the power and party of his cousins; if he brought accusations against the British cabinet, which he proved to be physically impossible; if he concluded his administration with a statement the most false and infammatory, at the very moment that he was declaring he would omit no sacrifce that might tend to the ease of his Majesty’s government, and the advancement of his service; if this was his Lordship’s conduct, and if thus his Lordship proves, that his measures are contrary to his instructions, his accusations to his proofs, and the expressions of his passion to his sense of duty, let the vindication he has ofered be accepted; let us allow him to “have abandoned his judgment,” to [“]have committed his decisions to others;” and never to “have consulted his own understanding[”];52 It is a poor apology – but it is the only one.

FINIS.

AN IRISHMAN’S SECOND LETTER TO THE PEOPLE CALLED DEFENDERS

An Irishman’s Second Letter to the People called Defenders ([Dublin?, 1795]).

Tis is a second attempt to persuade the Catholic Defenders to abandon their violent eforts to achieve their objectives.1 Te frst is printed on pp. 103–6 above. Here the author insists that the aims of those leaders who are misleading the Defenders are not to secure the redress of economic grievances such as low wages, insecure leases and high rents. Rather, the leading Defenders – who are seen as United Irishmen in disguise – are seeking to undermine the constitution in church and state and to seize the estates of their Protestant landlords. Tese leaders are also claiming, unjustifably, that the French will come to the assistance of the Catholic poor and expect nothing in return. If the Catholic poor follow such leaders, the result will be mass violence and a civil war; the French and the political leaders of the Defenders will beneft, but not the poor Catholic masses. All the advice they are being given by their leaders is impracticable and will led to disaster for the country and for themselves. Te rank and fle Defenders are strongly advised that they should desert their leaders, break the secret oaths they have taken, and return to their allegiance. Notes 1.

For more on the Defenders, see M. Elliott, ‘Te Defenders in Ulster’, in Te United Irishmen: Republicanism, Radicalism and Rebellion, ed. D. Dickson, et al. (Dublin: Lilliput Press, 1993), pp. 222–33; T. Garvin, ‘Defenders, Ribbonmen and Others: Underground Political Networks in Pre-Famine Ireland’, Past and Present, 96 (1982), pp. 133–155; B. McEvoy, ‘Te Peep of Day Boys and Defenders in the County Armagh’, Seanchas Ardmhaca: Journal of the Armagh Diocesan Historical Society, 12:1 (1986), pp. 122–63 and ibid., 12:2 (1987), pp. 60–127; and Peep O’Day Boys and Defenders: Select Documents on the County Armagh Disturbances 1784–96, ed. D. W. Miller (Belfast: PRONI, 1990).

– 275 –

An Irishman’s Second Letter to the People called Defenders ([Dublin?, 1795]).

My Countrymen, Near three years have elapsed since I frst addressed you. Your object then was not so visible as now, but sufcient appeared to disclose the rest, and to enable me to assure you that your pursuits were vain. You have had full time to try your plans. I warned you that your practices would procure nothing but misery and ruin to yourselves, and disgrace to your country, while the relief you sought never could be obtained. I am entitled now to ask you, have my words or those of your leaders hitherto proved true? You see I do not address you in anger; tho’ public indignation is roused against you. It is with sorrow indeed, and with pain, that I feel it necessary, afer so long an interval, to address you again; but I still have hopes lef that you are not utterly abandoned. I cannot persuade myself that no spark remains of national pride among you, that you have lost all sense of allegiance to your king, of reverence for your religion, or of love for your country. Notwithstanding all your misdeeds I pity you, because I believe you to be dupes of the deep wickedness of others: you labour under a fatal delusion; a leprosy of the mind has seised you, and you have become infected with the guilt of your leaders. I accept however, the distinction you wish to make between the true defender and the robber, the assassin and the hougher1 of cattle. / But what are the purposes of the true defender, and the ends he has in view? I will tell you what they are not; they are not to lower rents, nor to raise the wages of labour; for rents are moderate and wages high in many parts where your outrages have most prevailed. In the county of Dublin, the present scene of your depredations, the common labouring man this harvest has had in some places three shillings a day; and as to rents, the indulgent landlord, whose poor tenants rise to comfortable farms, the humane master, is no more spared than the severe. But I do not charge you with the hypocrisy of alleging that the grievances you wish to redress are low wages and high rents. Te White Boys2 in 1786 posted their complaints, illegally indeed, on chapel doors, and in market places, but yours will not bear the light. Te grievances of which you complain are the – 277 –

278

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

laws, the constitution, the government, the religion of the country, the property of your landlords, and the want of estates yourselves. Te object of your leaders is no longer secret – it is to disarm your countrymen, and to leave them open and unprotected, a prey to pillage and massacre. Tey tell you that when you have taken all the arms from the gentlemen of the country, the French, out of pure compassion for your oppressions, will leave all the miseries they labour under at home unredressed, and fy to relieve yours, and from no other motive but your advantage, will invade the country and make you masters of it, and immediately provide you with what they never yet have been able to obtain for themselves, nor ever will obtain – a constitution and government, under which there neither shall be poverty, nor taxes, nor grievances, nor complaints. And what are the means you employ to efect / this scheme of desperate folly and abandoned wickedness? a civil war, a secret and dastardly war, begun and carried on with cowardice and in darkness, by nightly plunder, against your countrymen; your footsteps followed by a horrid crew of merciless salvages, houghers of cattle, burners of houses, pillagers of the poor as well as of the rich, assassins and murderers of women, old men, and children. But what is most monstrous in all this is, that you call upon the God of truth and liberty to bear witness that you mean to break his laws and the vows you had long before made to him, and that you will with all your might support the works of the devil – you pretend to fght the cause of heaven under the banners of hell. What progress have you made in your designs in the long space of three years? Your numbers have encreased, but those whom you call false defenders, plunderers, robbers, houghers, have encreased to double your numbers. In this you see the certain mischief you have produced. If the French could give you the estates of this country, the false defenders would cut your throats and divide the spoil. But with the encrease of your numbers have you efected your frst and great intention, disarming the inhabitants of the several counties, and weakening their strength? Do but open your eyes and see in this your horrible delusion. So far from disarming the inhabitants, you have strengthened their hands and armed them ten times more powerfully than before. And why? because you have roused the sluggish to protect themselves; you have alarmed the secure; you have hardened the hearts of the weak or compassionate, who now see that the grievances of the midnight robber and assassin deserve not pity or redress; you have / called forth the spirit of selfdefence; you have awakened the pride of public spirit; you have declared war unprepared, against your countrymen prepared with the means of supporting it and resisting you. For every weapon of defence you have taken from them they have purchased ten. Do you see that money is arms? While they possess their estates and their rents, your depredations will encrease their strength; the country pays the losses of individuals, and you contribute; armed associations

An Irishman’s Second Letter to the People called Defenders

279

are formed of the gentlemen in every county, who are pledged with their lives and fortunes to supports each other; they practice by day, you by night. Added to all this their hands are strengthened by a powerful army in the country, and by a steady and loyal militia. You were told that the militia would lay down their arms if called on to oppose you; it is false; experience has proved it false; they hunt you down as the rebel enemies of their king and country; you can no more stand before them than chaf before the wind; you have nothing in prospect but the musquet or the halter. I speak with moderation therefore; when I say you have armed your countrymen in place of disarming them, and they are ten times more strong to resist invasion now than before your depredations. See then what you have done hitherto. You have strengthened the hands of the magistrates and given vigour to the arm of the law, and the vengeance of that arm has fallen on your own heads; you have encouraged a brood of wolves in the shape of men, who prowl about afer you by night to glut their appetites in the houses you have lest defenceless of arms, and disappointed of human blood, satisfy themselves with torturing and mangling the carcasses of innocent beasts, to / gratify their ears with cries and howlings. You disown these savages, it is true, but they are your ofspring they follow your footsteps, and they proft by your labours. Te innocent blood of men once good members of society, seduced by you and fallen a sacrifce to the law, is on your heads; men, whose children, by honest industry, might have purchased the estates of those you envied. You have become suspected and odious to your landlords, many of whom were well disposed to listen to your complaints, and to relieve your wants, but you have bid defance to their power, and trampled on their humanity; and you persuade yourselves that all this mad brutality and blind stupidity will recommend you in foreign countries, and gain you friends. You are told that the plunderers of France have united with the defenders of Ireland, and out of pure friendship will come over here to settle them in the estates of their masters. – Is there no understanding lef among you! – Tose who love treason hate such traitors. Believe me, the French are not so rank fools as to trust you; they hold you in contempt; false to your own country, they know you cannot be true to them. Te traitors here who would have made their market of you and sold you to the French, described you to them by the name of Half-barbarians, that is, animals ft to hew wood and to draw water, food for powder, moving sacks to stop a canon ball, proper enough to fll up their armies by requisition, or to people their colonies. I can scarcely proceed to address you as my countrymen – –is it possible that I have lived to see the day when an Irishman, once renowned all over the world for honesty, loyalty, true-heartedness, valour, allegiance to his king, and love of his country, shall take an oath to renounce all these and to be true to the French, the enemies / of his country, the enemies of his king, the enemies of his God, the enemies of his holy Catholic religion!

280

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

Your frst plan of disarming the country has had, you see, the opposite efect. Attend now to the probability of an invasion; or, if it could be efected, the consequences of it. Tis country being an island can never be invaded but by a feet, and the invading feet must be sufciently strong to overpower the British. Before May last you received assurances that in that month an invasion would be efected. June, July, August and September, have passed over, and no efort or attempt of that nature made. Te stormy season is now come, and the thing is impracticable. Tis is one of the many falsehoods on which your hopes depended. Do you know the condition of the French feet? one half of them is either taken or destroyed, the remainder for a long time has not dared to quit their ports. Te British feet, more powerful than ever, rides triumphant, truly mistress of the seas and manned with forty thousand brave fellows more than it has been known to contain, every man of whom will shed the last drop of his blood in defence of his king and his country. Tey are false traitors, therefore, who tell you that France and Ireland are united; they are separated by an eternal barrier established by God himself, by the empire of the seas, in which France never could boast so little dominion. But suppose an impracticable thing accomplished, and that the French became masters of this island; suppose their Gods under the earth fought for them, and had power, by a sudden earthquake, to bury the mighty empire of Great Britain in the bosom of the deep, so as to leave them an undisturbed possession – do you suppose the French would conquer this country to make / you the inhabitants masters of it? Have they yet done so in any country where they came? would they till the ground for you, or make you till the ground for them ? Ask your teachers if the old inhabitants of any country were put into possession where the French became conquerors. Ask your pay-masters what became of the inhabitants of Flanders who opened their gates to receive the French. Does the Dutch peasant, or the Flemish peasant sit at the table which had been his master’s, free from labour and from taxes? no, he is compelled to serve by requisition in the armies, that is, by force, without having consented to enlist; the few who are lef till the ground for their new masters, their masters only being changed, but not their burthens; “curses not loud but deep”3 interrupt each morsel they eat; they mutter their miseries to each other, for they dare not speak them aloud, and would gladly return to what they called their antient bondage. Ask your countrymen who have seen the inside of French prisons, how Irishmen are treated in France; what famine, what horrors they have sustained; ask the American Tom Paine4 himself, the Apostle of liberty, who taught you that you would be happier without a king, without a government, without religion, what cordial afection he has experienced for his services in his dungeon in the Land of Liberty? Ask those traitors who fed their country,5 distrusted abroad for their treachery in their native land, like the frst-born rebel Cain,6 the hand

An Irishman’s Second Letter to the People called Defenders

281

of every man against them, without home or resting place, – ask them what honors and rewards have recompensed their treasons, and how foreign Traitors are cherished and beloved in France. France, however, believes you can serve her by disturbing the domestic repose of these countries, her enemies; by creating an artifcial / famine, if she could persuade you to destroy the fruits of the earth and the beasts of the feld, and thereby starve yourselves and your countrymen; or by joining the cries for peace with those who rake the fres of sedition with one hand, while with the other they fourish the olive branch in the air. France, so far from being at leisure to make a constitution for you, is contending at home about a new constitution for herself; her representatives, mean time, insist on retaining the power which they had sworn to give up; they vote themselves proper to be elected again, and declare they will continue two thirds of the old convention; they cry down, as a chimera or nonsense that Equality with which they so long amused and deceived the people; and to prevent the sovereign people from declaring their free will in a new election, they surround Paris with troops. One in ten of the French people has accepted the new constitution7 and laws, the remaining nine, with the guillotine at their doors, are silent, or vote against them, and yet they tell you this constitution is freely chosen by the majority of the people. In a short time you will probably see another bloody farce; Tallien8 will sleep with Robespierre,9 and you will hear of a new and pure constitution rising out of the corruption of the present. In all this barefaced struggle to hold ill-gotten power over their countrymen, can you expect that the tyrants of France will be generous and true to you? But though the French cannot assist you, they send you French agents and French gold to assist them. You have been scantily fed indeed, and seen little of that gold, but your pay-masters, your catechism-makers have their pockets well flled; and while they fed well and throve on your pay, many of you pined and languished in gaols, stood unprotected in the dock, lef to the mercy / of a jury and to the humanity of those laws which you had violated, without money to fee counsel or an attorney in your defence, and perished at last deserted and abandoned at the gallows, leaving perhaps a wife and helpless family without a morsel of bread to eat, or hands to earn it. Tese men promise you estates, and yet with your wages of wickedness in their possession, deny you in your utmost need the means to live. You know this is the case, and you have complained of it; yet you are true to those traitors and deceivers who are bought with the price of your blood; for so much is there of allegiance in the heart of an Irishman, that if he has forgot his loyalty to his king, he must bestow it somewhere, though on a traitor; like a dog that has lost his scent, he will bark at his master who feeds him, and lick the feet of a murderer. Many of you, I believe, repent of being Defenders, and would quit their society but that you have taken an oath, an oath possibly not voluntary, but by

282

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

compulsion, and whether by compulsion or voluntary, not binding; an oath most probably taken without refection or consideration. If there be any part of your delusion deeper than another, it is this – Suppose you had taken an oath last night to commit murder on the frst man you met this day, would God punish you, do you think, for breaking that oath, for keeping it? doubtless for keeping it, because by keeping it you would break a former oath or promise you had made to God to obey his laws, that is, not to commit murder. If you promise Peter to pay him a debt you owe him, and the next day promise James, his son, that you will not pay that debt, but rob his father, do you think Peter would be just to punish you for breaking the rash promise you / made his son; if not, do you think God less just than man? – Suppose you take an oath to Peter to pay him the debt you owe, and take another oath to James, the next day, not to pay that debt; you do wrong, no doubt, in taking that second oath, but you will do much worse in keeping it, and thereby breaking the frst oath. An oath in that repect difers in nothing from a promise, and the promissory oath is not binding if the promise itself be not so. An oath is of no force to bind, unless you believe God will punish false swearing, and if you believe he will punish false swearing, you must of course believe he will punish the breach of your frst oath, or promise to him, and that was to obey his laws. A man who has made a promise cannot free himself from the performance by making a second promise, for that would be to discharge himself from a debt by his own act, and therefore a second promise, or a second oath, is never binding when it contradicts a former which is just and legal. Every morsel of bread you eat is accompanied with obligation to obey the laws of nature which has fed you. Every returning blossom of Spring is a promise from the God of Nature that you shall enjoy the fruits of a harvest: when, you eat the fruits of that harvest, you promise on your part to obey his laws. Every year that you live, you renew the promise you have made with God. In one hour of rashness and folly, or perhaps of intoxication, you take an oath to become a Defender; that is, to break his laws by robbery and murder, if commanded by your leaders. Te next year comes, and God renews and keeps his promise by sending the fruits of the earth; if he broke his promise with you as you do with him, Winter would follow Spring without a harvest between, or the earth would yield poisons / in place of food. – Now do you hesitate to say whether you are to break the promises so ofen renewed to God, or the promise made to a fellow-creature in a rash hour, and without refection? When called as a witness in a court of justice for a brother Defender, you declare, in the presence of God, that you will speak nothing but the truth, and yet your whole testimony is ofen false from beginning to end. You think it no crime to break a lawful oath in endeavouring to save a life, and yet you hold it criminal not to keep an unlawful oath which binds you to disobey the will of your Maker even to the shedding of blood; an oath therefore which absurdly

An Irishman’s Second Letter to the People called Defenders

283

calls upon God to punish you if you do not break his laws when commanded by a fellow-creature. It is impossible you can believe the cause of God is concerned in the oath you have taken as a Defender, or that it tends to establish your religion; for those to whom you swear to be true have overturned that religion, have pulled down the altars of God, and destroyed the sacred relicks of his saints and martyrs; have abused and massacred the ministers of that religion, and endeavoured to blot out the very memory of it by declaring there shall no longer be a seventh day of rest. Your church, by the voice of your clergy, has informed you that the Defenders’ oath is not binding, that he who takes it, and dies in the principles of a Defender, is an outcast from God and from the communion of his church; and that in his last moments that man shall not receive the holy rites of the Sacrament administered to the dying, but shall go with all his sins on his head into the presence of the Almighty: a terrible example of this appeared lately at Naas.10 If you believe the Defenders’ oath will / make your peace above, then your holy Catholic Church, which you seek to establish, is false. It is not yet too late. – Return to your allegiance, and desert those who have deserted you. Shew the world that although the unsuspecting hearts of Irishmen are open to the designs of traitors, they are neither so stupid nor so wicked as to persevere afer they have discovered their error. An opportunity now ofers; an upright and active government, which has shewn its vigilance to discover, and its power to punish ofenders, is ready also and much more willing to display its clemency by pardoning the penitent transgressor who lays down the weapons of rebellion. Return, then, before it be too late, to the arms of your country, now outstretched to receive you. You will be protected in your several counties, encouraged and cherished. If real grievances you have, then, and not till then, they will be inquired into and redressed; for while you make war on your countrymen as enemies, they cannot, and they ought not to treat you as friends; they alone can aford you relief, and yet you endeavour to shut their hearts against you. Have mercy on your wives, your children, your fathers, your mothers, your brothers, your sisters, your friends: return to your allegiance – your children’s children shall bless you for the deed: if your country casts you of as profigate rebels, you are abandoned by the world. France, of all countries on earth, will detest you most, for she has seen and felt what reliance there is to be had on the faith of Traitors. By addressing you as my countrymen, I prove that I do not yet despair of you: let me not have reason to change my opinion, to be ashamed of my country, or to renounce the name of An IRISHMAN. October 6, 1795.

AN ACT MORE EFFECTUALLY TO SUPPRESS INSURRECTIONS, AND PREVENT THE DISTURBANCE OF THE PUBLIC PEACE

An Act More Efectually to Suppress Insurrections, and Prevent the Disturbance of the Public Peace (1796), in Te Statutes at Large, Passed in the Parliaments held in of Ireland, Vol. XVII (Dublin: Printed by George Grierson, Printer to the King’s Most Excellent Majesty, 1797), pp. 978–90.

Popular disturbances were endemic in many parts of Ireland, but, by 1796, the Irish government and Parliament had become increasingly concerned that more radical, militant and organized groups, especially the Defenders and the United Irishmen, were enlisting large numbers of men, administering unlawful oaths to them, distributing seditious literature and securing greater quantities of arms. A serious insurrection or rebellion was now feared. In consequence, an increasing number of proclamations were issued and Acts of Parliament passed in order to strengthen the hands of the justices of the peace and increase the punishments that could be inficted on ofenders. Tis Act sought to disarm potential rebels, and to impose penalties for such activities as holding unlawful assemblies, distributing seditious literature, swearing secret oaths and attacking government informers or local magistrates.

– 285 –

An Act More Effectually to Suppress Insurrections, and Prevent the Disturbance of the Public Peace (1796), in The Statutes at Large, Passed in the Parliaments held in Ireland, Vol. XVII (Dublin: Printed by George Grierson, Printer to the King’s Most Excellent Majesty, 1797), pp. 978–90.

[36 George III, cap. 20 (1796)] Whereas traitorous insurrections have for some time past arisen in various parts of this kingdom, principally promoted and supported by persons associating under the, pretended obligation of oaths unlawfully administered: And whereas the penalties for administering and taking such unlawful oaths, enacted by an act passed in the twenty-seventh year of his Majesty’s reign, entitled, An act to prevent tumultuous risings and assemblies, and for the more efectual punishing of persons guilty of outrage, riot, and illegal combination, and of administering and taking unlawful oaths, have been found insufcient to deter wicked and designing men from administering and taking such oaths: be it enacted by the King’s most excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the lords spiritual and temporal, and commons in this present parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, Tat any person or persons who shall administer, or cause to be administered, or be present, aiding and assisting at the administering, or who shall by threats, promises, persuasions, or other undue means, cause, procure, or induce to be taken by any person or persons, upon a book, or otherwise, any oath or engagement, importing to bind the person taking the same, to be of any association, brotherhood, society, or confederacy, formed for seditious purposes, or to disturb the publick peace, or to obey the orders or rules, or commands of any committee, / or other of men, not lawfully constituted, or the commands of any captain, leader, or commander, (not appointed by his Majesty, his heirs and successors) or to assemble at the desire or command of any such captain, leader, commander, or committee, or of any person or persons not having lawful authority, or not to inform or give evidence against any brother, associate, confederate, – 287 –

288

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

or other person, or not to reveal or discover his having taken any illegal oath, or done any illegal act, or not to discover any illegal oath or engagement which may be tendered to him, or the import thereof, whether he shall take such oath, or enter into such engagement, or not, being by due course of law convicted thereof, shall be adjudged guilty of felony, and sufer death without beneft of clergy;1 and every person who shall take any such oath or engagement, not being thereto compelled by inevitable necessity, and being by due course of law thereof convicted, shall be adjudged guilty of felony, and be transported for life. II. Provided always, Tat inevitable necessity shall not justify or excuse any person or persons taking such oaths or engagements, unless he, she, or they shall within ten days afer the taking such oath or engagement, if not prevented by actual force or sickness, and then within four days afer such actual force or sickness shall cease to disable him to give information of the same, disclose to one of his Majesty’s justices of the peace in the county in which he or the shall then be, by information on oath, the whole of what he or she knows touching the compelling him or her to take such oath or engagement, and of the person and persons by whom the same was administered, and who were present at the administering thereof, and the place where the same was administered. III. And be it further enacted, Tat persons present aiding at the administering of such oath and engagements, or persons causing such oaths and engagements to be administered, though not present, shall be deemed principal ofenders, and tried as such, though the persons who actually administered such oaths or engagements, shall not have been tried or convicted. IV. And be it further enacted, Tat it shall not be necessary in any indictment to be found against any person: administering, or taking such oath or engagement, to set / out the words of such oath or engagement, and that it shall be sufcient to set forth therein the purport of such oath or engagement. V. And whereas many persons have in diferent parts of the kingdom taken oaths and engagements contrary to the said recited act of the twenty-seventh year of his Majesty’s reign, and have not yet been brought to trial for such their ofences: be it enacted, Tat upon any indictment founded on the said recited act that inevitable necessity shall not be an excuse to any person so heretofore sworn, unless he or she shall, on or before the tenth day of June, in the year one thousand seven hundred and ninety-six, disclose by information on oath to some one of his Majesty’s justices of the peace, the whole of what he or she knows touching the administering of such oath or engagement, and of the person or persons, by whom, and the place where the same was administered, and who were present at the administering thereof. VI. And be it further enacted, Tat all persons who shall have arms in their possession at any time afer the passing of this act, shall on or before the frst day of May, one thousand seven hundred and ninety-six, or immediately afer

An Act More Efectually to Suppress Insurrections

289

they shall have possession of such arms, deliver to the acting clerk of the peace in the county, town, or city in which he resides, or to any magistrate of such county, town, or city, to be by him delivered to such clerk of the peace, a written notifcation, signed by him or her, specifying therein the place, parish, barony, and town-land, in which he or she resides, or if in a county of a town or city, the parish, town-land, or street, that he or she keeps arms, and the place or places where the same are usually kept, accompanied by an afdavit, sworn by the person signing such notifcation, that the notifcations is true, and that he believes he is by law entitled to keep arms, which notifcation and afdavit the clerk of the peace shall fle among the records of the county, and such clerk of the peace shall register in books, or in a book, if in a county of a town or city, one to be kept for every barony or half-barony in the county, in alphabetical order, the names and places of abode of every person making such notifcation, according to their respective baronies, or half-baronies, where the place of abode shall be specifed to be in a barony, or half- barony, / which books shall be kept by such clerk of the peace at his ofce in the county-town, or town, or city, and shall at all seasonable times be open to the inspection of any justice of the peace of the county, town, or city, and from which every such justice shall be at liberty from time to time to make such extracts as he shall deem ft. VII. And be it further enacted, Tat the said afdavit may be sworn before any justice of the peace of the county, town, or city, in which the person making the same shall be at the time of swearing the same, or before the chief justice, or any of the other justice of his Majesty’s court of king’s-bench. VIII. And be it enacted, Tat any person having arms, and not making such registry as aforesaid, shall upon being convicted thereof, on the testimony of two credible witnesses on oath before any magistrate, for the frst ofence forfeit the sum of ten pounds, to be levied by sale of the goods and chattels of such person, by the warrant of such magistrate, or be imprisoned by such magistrate for the space of two months, and for the second and every other ofence, shall in like manner forfeit the sum of twenty pounds, or be imprisoned for the space of four months. IX. And be it further enacted, Tat any person who shall make such notifcation as aforesaid of his having arms, shall at any time when required by any justice of the peace, being of the quorum, if in a county, deliver to such justice an exact list or inventory of all the arms in his possession, verifed by his afdavit, to be made before such justice, and so from time to time as ofen as he shall be so required. X. And be it further enacted, Tat it shall and may be lawful for any justice of the peace, or for any person authorized thereto by warrant under the hand of any justice of the peace, to search for arms in the houses or grounds of any person not having made such notifcation as aforesaid, and whom he shall have reasonable ground to suspect of having arms, and also in the houses or grounds of any person who having made such notifcation, shall refuse or neglect to deliver such

290

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

list or inventory, or whom he shall have reasonable ground to suspect to have delivered a false list or inventory, and in case of refusal of admission, to break into such house and every part thereof by force, and / if any arms shall be found in the possession of any such person respectively, to seize and carry away the same for the use of his Majesty. XI. Provided always, Tat nothing herein contained shall be construed to extend to the registering of any regimental arms in the possession of any person serving in the army or militia, or to authorize any person to keep or carry arms, who is not by the laws now of force qualifed to keep or carry arms. XII. And whereas in several instances persons who have given information against persons accused of crimes have been murdered before trial of the persons accused, in order to prevent their giving evidence and to efect the acquittal of the accused, and some magistrates have been assassinated for their exertions in bringing ofenders to justice, be it declared and enacted, Tat if any person who hath given or shall give information or examinations upon oath, against any person or persons for any ofence against the laws, shall afer the twentieth day of February, one thousand seven hundred and ninety-six, and before the trial of the person or persons against whom such information or examination hath been or shall be given, be murdered or violently put to death, or so maimed or forcibly carried away and secreted, as not to be able to give evidence on the trial of the person or persons against whom such information or examinations were given, the information or examination of such person so taken on oath, shall be admitted as evidence on the trial of the person or persons against whom such information or examination was given. XIII. Provided always, Tat the information or examination of a witness secreted, shall not be evidence, unless the person secreted shall be found on a collateral issue to be put to the jury trying the prisoner, that he was secreted by the person then on trial, or by some person or persons acting for him, or in his favour. XIV. And be it further enacted, Tat if it shall appear to the satisfaction of any grand jury at any assizes, or the presenting term in the county or the county of the city of Dublin, that any person giving information or evidence against persons charged with ofences against the publick peace, shall have been murdered or maimed previous to giving their evidence on any trial or on account of any such / evidence given, or that any magistrate or other peace ofcer shall be murdered or maimed on account of his exertions to bring disturbers of the publick peace within the county, town or city of which he is a magistrate or peace-ofcer to justice, it shall and may be lawful to and for the grand jury of such county, town or city, to present such sum or sums of money as they shall think just and reasonable to be paid to the personal representative of such witness, magistrate or peace ofcer who shall be murdered, or to such witness, magistrate, or peace ofcer who shall be maimed, having regard to the rank, degree, situation and

An Act More Efectually to Suppress Insurrections

291

circumstances of such witness, magistrate or peace ofcer, to be raised on the county at large, barony, half-barony, or parish in which such murder or maiming shall respectively have been perpetrated, at the discretion of such grand jury. XV. And be it further enacted, Tat it shall and may be lawful for any justice of the peace to arrest and bring before him, or cause to be arrested or brought before him, any stranger sojourning or wandering, and to examine him on oath respecting his place of abode, the place from whence he came, his manner of livelihood, and his object or motive for remaining or coming into the county, town or city, in which he shall be found; and unless he shall answer to the satisfaction of such magistrate, such magistrate shall commit him to goal or the house of correction, there to remain until he fnd surety for his good behaviour. XVI. And in order to restore peace to such parts of the kingdom as are or may be disturbed by seditious persons; be it further enacted, Tat it shall and may be lawful to and for any two justices of the peace in any county, or county of a city or town in this kingdom, to direct by writing under their hands and seals such clerk of the peace to summon a special session of the peace to be holden at each place and at such time as they shall deem expedient, not sooner than fortyeight hours afer such direction shall have been signed, to consider the state of the county; and such clerk of the peace shall forthwith post notice thereof on the door of the court-house of the county, town or city, and cause, as far as in him lies, every justices of the peace resident within the county, town or city, to be summoned thereto, in serving which summons every constable, sub-constable, and sherifs bailif is hereby required to obey / such clerk of the peace, and that the justices assembled in consequence, not being fewer than seven or the major part of them, one of whom to be of the quorum, or if in a county of a town or city, not being fewer than three, shall and may if they see ft upon due consideration of the state of the county, signify by memorial signed by them to the lord lieutenant or other chief governor or governors of this kingdom, that they consider their county, or any part thereof, to be in a state of disturbance, or in immediate danger of becoming so, and praying that the lord lieutenant and council may proclaim such county, or part thereof, to be in a state of disturbance, or in immediate danger of becoming so; and thereupon it shall and may be lawful to and for the lord lieutenant or other chief governor or governors of this kingdom, by and with the advice of his Majesty’s privy council by proclamation to declare such county, or any part of such county; to be in a state of disturbance, or in immediate danger of becoming so, and also such parts of any adjoining county or counties as such chief governor or governors and council shall think ft, in order to prevent the continuance or extension of such disturbance. XVII. And be it further enacted, Tat within three days afer such proclamation made, or as soon afer as may be, every clerk of the peace of every part of the district proclaimed, shall respectively in his county give notice of holding

292

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

within two days, or as soon afer as may be, a petty session of the peace, and the justices of the peace shall pursuant to such notice assemble themselves, and shall have power to adjourn from time to time, and place to place as they shall fnd convenient, until the general sessions of the peace or some adjournment thereof shall be held next afer the frst meeting of such petty session; and the said justices shall at the frst petty sessions to be held by virtue of this act, issue their precepts to the high, petty, and sub-constables, and other peace ofcers within their respective jurisdictions, requiring their attendance at the next succeeding petty session to be held pursuant to this act, which precepts shall contain an account of the time and place appointed for the next succeeding session, and shall from time to time cause to be afxed on some conspicuous part of every house or place of holding such sessions, notice of the time of holding the next / succeeding sessions, twenty-four hours at least before the time of holding the same; and the said justices at said frst meeting shall order and direct a notifcation signed by them to be made throughout the district so proclaimed, that such district has been so proclaimed, and commanding the inhabitants to keep within their dwellings at all unseasonable times between sun-set and sun-rise, and warning them of the penalties to which a contrary conduct will expose them, and the said justices shall cause such notifcation to be distributed throughout every such proclaimed district, and to be fxed up in some conspicuous place in all towns and villages within such district by the constables of the county, or such other persons as they may think sit to appoint for the purpose. XVIII. And be it further enacted, Tat it shall and may be lawful to and for any magistrate or other peace ofcer within such district, afer such notifcation shall be made as aforesaid, to arrest or cause to be arrested any person who shall within such district be found in the feld, streets, highways, or elsewhere out of his dwelling or place of abode at any time from one hour afer sun-set until sunrise, and to bring him before two justices of the peace, one of whom to be of the quorum, which justices shall examine the person so brought before them, and unless he can prove to their satisfaction that he was out of his house upon his lawful occasions, such person shall be deemed an idle and disorderly person, and shall be transmitted by the warrant of such justices to the ofcer at some port appointed to receive recruits for his Majesty’s navy, by which ofcer such person shall be received as a recruit for his Majesty’s navy, and transmitted to serve on board his Majesty’s navy. XIX. Provided always, Tat it shall and may be lawful to and for every such person so arrested, to appeal to the next session of the peace, and on his giving bail within forty-eight hours to the satisfaction of such justice of the quorum, before whom he shall be so brought for his appearance at such sessions, he shall be discharged from custody until such sessions, at which his appeal shall be fnally disposed of, and if the judgment of the two justices before whom he was frst brought

An Act More Efectually to Suppress Insurrections

293

be afrmed, he shall be forthwith, or soon as conveniently may be, transmitted to / such ofcer of the navy as aforesaid, by order of the justices at such session. XX. And be it further enacted, Tat it shall and may be lawful for any justice of the peace, or any person thereto authorized by the warrant of any justice of the peace at any time from one hour afer sun-set until sun-rise, to demand admission, and, if refused, by force to enter into any house in any district so proclaimed as aforesaid, from which he shall suspect the inhabitants or any of them to be then absent, and search therein, so as to discover whether the inhabitants or inmates or any of them be absent; and if the inhabitants or inmates or any of them be absent between the said hours, the person or persons so absent shall be deemed idle and disorderly persons, unless he or they can prove to the satisfaction of the justices before whom he or she shall be brought, or upon an appeal to the sessions, giving such bail as aforesaid, that he or they were absent on his or their lawful and proper occasions, and shall be dealt with to all intents and purposes, and in all respects as persons out of their dwellings between the hours aforesaid. XXI. And be it further enacted, Tat all persons taking unlawful oaths shall be deemed disorderly persons within the meaning of this act, and being charged with such ofence on oath may be arrested, and such charge enquired into, and adjudged of in the same manner, with like appeal, to all intents and purposes as herein before directed, of and concerning persons out of their dwellings between the hours aforesaid. XXII. And be it enacted, by the authority aforesaid, Tat persons who cannot upon examination prove themselves to exercise and industriously follow some lawful trade or employment as a labourer or otherwise, or to have some substance sufcient for their support and maintenance, shall be deemed idle and disorderly persons, and shall be dealt with according to what is herein before directed respecting persons out of their dwellings at unseasonable hours as aforesaid. XXIII. And be it further enacted, Tat any person sent to serve on board his Majesty’s feet in consequence of any such adjudication as aforesaid, shall be thereby discharged and freed from any penalty to which by law he might be subject by reason of the ofence, for the committing of which he shall have been so adjudged to serve in the navy. XXIV. And be it further enacted, Tat in any county, county of a town or city, or part thereof, which shall be proclaimed as aforesaid, during such time as the same shall so remain proclaimed, / the court of sessions of the peace shall from time to time so adjourn, that there shall not be a greater length of time between any two sittings of the court than fourteen days. XXV. And be it further enacted, Tat it shall and may be lawful for the justices of the peace adjudging any person to serve on board the navy as aforesaid, immediately on such adjudication, if the person adjudged does not appeal and fnd surety as aforesaid, or if he shall appeal, then for the justices at sessions

294

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

immediately on confrmation of the order to cause any person so adjudged to be transmitted out of the county if they shall think proper to any other gaol in this kingdom, there to remain until he shall be removed and sent on board his Majesty’s navy by the ofcer appointed for that purpose, to whom such justices shall cause immediate notice to be given of such committal. XXVI. And be it further enacted, Tat all sherifs and gaolers shall receive and be answerable for the safe-keeping of all persons so transmitted and to them respectively delivered, as if they had been delivered by the warrant of any magistrate of the county, town or city in which the gaol lies. XXVII. And be it enacted, Tat it shall be lawful for the said justices, or any two of them, at any session or adjournment of a session of the peace, to impose upon any gaoler or keeper of any house of correction or prison, who shall sufer any person committed to his custody by virtue of this act to escape, or upon any constable or other peace ofcer for every wilful neglect or default in the execution of any warrant or order to him directed pursuant to this act, a fne not exceeding ten pounds, and to cause every such fne to be levied by distress and sale of the ofender’s goods and chattels, rendering the overplus (if any) to the owner, and to pay the fne to the informer or informers, or in default of payment or levying such fne, to commit such person to gaol for the space of three months. XXVIII. And be it further enacted, Tat no person delivered over or adjudged to be delivered over to the ofcer of the navy pursuant to this act, shall be liable to be taken out of any gaol to which he shall be committed as aforesaid, or out of his Majesty’s service, by any writ or process other than by some criminal process for treason or felony, and that all proceedings by justices of the peace at sessions under this act, shall be carried on summarily, and shall not be removable by certiorari.2 XXIX. And be it further enacted, Tat it shall and may be lawful for any justice of the peace, or any person authorized by the warrant of such justice in any district so proclaimed and / whilst such proclamation shall remain in force, to call upon every person who has registered arms within such district, to produce or account for the same, and to enter any house or place whatever, and search for arms and ammunition, and to take and carry away all arms and ammunition which they may think necessary to take possession of, in order to preserve or restore the publick peace, and to dispose thereof in a place or places of safety; provided nevertheless that the justice or other person taking such arms, do upon demand give to the owner or possessor thereof, a receipt specifying the number and kinds thereof, to the end that when such district shall cease to be disturbed, such arms and ammunition may be restored to the owner or possessor, if he be entitled to receive and keep the same, or to be otherwise disposed of as the law directs. XXX. And be it further enacted, Tat if in any district in this kingdom so as aforesaid proclaimed, any persons shall unlawfully or tumultuously assemble in the day time, such persons and every of them shall be deemed idle and disorderly

An Act More Efectually to Suppress Insurrections

295

persons within the meaning of this act, and be dealt with accordingly, and in manner as herein directed respecting persons out of their dwelling at the unseasonable hours aforesaid. XXXI. And be it further enacted, Tat all persons found assembled in any proclaimed district, in any house in which malt or spirituous liquors are sold, not being inmates thereof or travellers, whether licensed or unlicensed, afer the hours of nine at night and before six in the morning, shall be liable to be deemed idle and disorderly persons within the meaning of this act, and shall and may be arrested and carried before two justices of the peace, one to be of the quorum, and be dealt with accordingly. XXXII. And be it further enacted, Tat if any man or boy shall, in any district so proclaimed, hawk or disperse any seditious hand-bill, paper or pamphlet, or paper by law required to be stamped and not duly stamped, such man or boy shall be deemed an idle and disorderly person, and dealt with accordingly, and as is herein before directed; and if any woman shall hawk or disperse any seditious hand-bill, paper, or paper not duly stamped, such woman being convicted thereof by the oath of one witness before two justices of the peace, one of whom to be of the quorum, such woman shall by the warrant of such two justices be committed to the gaol of the county, there to remain for three months, unless she shall sooner discover the person or persons from whom the received or by whom she was employed to sell, hawk, or disperse such papers or pamphlets: provided always, that such woman / may appeal from such adjudication to the next sessions of the peace. XXXIII. And be it further enacted, Tat in counties of towns and cities where there cannot be justices of the quorum, orders and adjudications may be made pursuant to this act, by one or more justices of such counties of towns and cities. XXXIV. And be it further enacted, Tat if any person or persons shall wilfully do any act or thing whereby the execution of this act, in searching for, taking, seizing and securing any person or persons, ammunition or arms as aforesaid, shall be hindered or obstructed, every such person so hindering or obstructing, shall be deemed an idle and disorderly person within the meaning of this law, and dealt with accordingly. XXXV. And be it further enacted, Tat it shall and may be lawful to and for all magistrates of the adjacent counties at large respectively, to execute this act within the several counties of cities or counties of towns in this kingdom, except the county of the city of Dublin, and in like manner that the several magistrates of such counties of cities and counties of towns shall have like powers to execute this act in the adjacent counties at large. XXXVI. And be it further enacted, Tat if any action, suit, plaint or information shall be commenced or prosecuted against any person or persons for what he or they shall do in pursuance or execution of this act, the same shall be com-

296

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

menced within six months afer the ofence committed, and shall be brought or laid within the county where the fact was committed; and such person so sued may plead the general issue of not guilty, and upon issue joined may give this act, and the special matter in evidence; and if the plaintif or prosecutor shall become non-suit or forbear prosecution, or sufer a discontinuance, or if a verdict or judgment on demurrer pass against him, the defendant shall recover treble costs. XXXVII. Provided always, and be it further enacted, Tat when a verdict shall be given for the plaintif in any action to be brought against any justice of the peace, peace ofcer or other person, for taking or imprisoning or detaining any person, or for seizing arms or ammunition, or entering houses under colour of any authority given by this act, and it shall appear to the judge or judges before whom the same shall be tried, that there was a probable cause for doing the act complained of in such action, and the judge or court shall certify the same on record, then and in that case the plaintif shall not be entitled to more than sixpence damages, nor to any costs of suit. / XXXVIII. Provided also, Tat where a verdict shall be given for the plaintif in any such action as aforesaid, and the judge or court before whom the cause shall be tried, shall certify on the record that the injury for which such action is brought was wilfully and maliciously committed, the plaintif shall be entitled to double costs of suit. XXXIX. And be it further enacted, Tat it shall and may be lawful for the lord lieutenant, or other chief governor or governors of this kingdom, by and with the advice of the privy council, to revoke and annul any proclamation issued in pursuance of this act. XL. And be it further enacted, Tat it shall be lawful for every grand jury at any assizes, and for the grand juries at the presenting terms for the county of Dublin, to present a sum to be raised of the county, and paid to the acting clerk of the peace afer the rate of three pounds for each session of the peace which shall be held by virtue of this act, and which he shall personally attend, and that it shall be lawful likewise for them to present to be raised in like manner such sum as may be necessary to pay the expences of sending prisoners to gaol under the provisions of this act, not exceeding the sum of three pence per mile for each constable and assistant which the justice who shall sign the warrant of commitment, shall certify to have been ordered by him to go with such prisoner, and that it shall be lawful likewise for them to present to be raised in like manner all such sums as may be requisite to defray the expences necessarily incurred in the execution of this act. XLI. Provided always, and be it enacted, Tat this act shall continue in force until the frst day of January, in the year one thousand seven hundred and ninetyseven, and to the end of the next session of parliament, and no longer.

AN ACT TO AMEND AN ACT ENTITLED AN ACT TO PREVENT AND PUNISH TUMULTUOUS RISINGS

An Act to Amend an Act, Passed in the Fifeenth and Sixteenth Years of His Majesty’s Reign, entitled, An Act to Prevent and Punish Tumultuous Risings of Persons within the Kingdom, and for other Purposes therein Mentioned (1796), in Te Statutes at Large, Passed in the Parliaments held in Ireland, Vol. XVII (Dublin: Printed by George Grierson, Printer to the King’s Most Excellent Majesty), p. 1061.

Tis short Act extends to the city and county of Dublin the provisions enacted in 1776 for those seeking damages as the result of popular disturbances.

– 297 –

An Act to Amend an Act … entitled, An Act to Prevent and Punish Tumultuous Risings of Persons within the Kingdom, and for other Purposes therein Mentioned (1796), in The Statutes at Large, Passed in the Parliaments held in Ireland, Vol. XVII (Dublin: Printed by George Grierson, Printer to the King’s Most Excellent Majesty), p. 1061.

[36 George III, cap. 22 (1796)] Whereas by an act passed in this kingdom, in the ffeenth and sixteenth years of his Majesty’s reign, entitled, An act to prevent and punish tumultuous risings of persons within this kingdom, and for other purposes therein mentioned; it is enacted, Tat persons receiving injury and damage, as therein mentioned, in their persons, habitations, possessions, property, goods or chattels, may sue for and recover satisfaction and amends for the injury, loss, or damage incurred or sufered, at the next assizes for the county where such ofence was committed, in manner as therein directed: and whereas assizes are never holden in the county of Dublin, or county of the city of Dublin, and therefore persons sustaining such injuries, losses and damages in the said counties, in manner mentioned in the said recited act, are, and have been without the remedy intended for them by the said act: for remedy thereof, be it enacted by the King’s most excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the lords spiritual and temporal, and commons in this present parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, Tat all persons who, by virtue of the said recited act, would be entitled to receive satisfaction and amends for such injuries and damages within the county of Dublin, and county of the city of Dublin, by presentment of the grand juries of the said counties respectively, shall and may, at the next presenting term in the King’s-bench, afer the ofence committed, by exhibiting to the said court of King’s-bench, such petition as is by the said recited act required to be exhibited to the judge or judges of assize, have compensation made to them for such loss

– 299 –

300

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

or damages, as they shall respectively have sustained, within the meaning of the said recited act; and in examining, directing, and acting on such petition, the court of King’s-bench shall have and exercise the same authority, as is by the said recited act given to the judge or judges of assize; and the grand juries of the said two counties are hereby required to make presentments upon such petitions respectively, in like manner as the grand juries at assizes are by the said act required to make presentment in their counties.

RUSSELL, A LETTER TO THE PEOPLE OF IRELAND

Tomas Russell, A Letter to the People of Ireland, on the Present Situation of the Country (Belfast: Printed at the Northern Star Ofce, 1796).

Tomas Russell (1767–1803) was a deeply religious member of the Church of Ireland, though he later supported Catholic emancipation. As a young man he served as a soldier in India. In 1790, afer his return to Ireland he met and befriended Teobald Wolfe Tone and, with him, he established the frst Society of United Irishmen in Belfast in October 1791. He was later also active in the Dublin society. He contributed regularly to the Northern Star in Belfast and the Press in Dublin. Ofen in fnancial difculties, he was a thinker and theorist rather than an organizer of political activities. He was a passionate supporter of the French Revolution, had greater sympathy for the common people than most political radicals and he took an oath to overthrow British rule in Ireland. He was arrested in 1796 for producing the pamphlet printed here and consequently imprisoned until 1802, but was never brought to trial. Te authorities held him so long because he refused to give sureties for his future good behaviour. Shortly afer his release he was arrested again for trying in vain to rescue Robert Emmet afer the latter’s abortive rising in Dublin in 1803. He was executed on 21 October 1803. Russell’s pamphlet published here reveals many of his central arguments and ideas that shaped his political attitudes. He is highly critical of the propertied elite, whether Catholic or Protestant, and whether in ofce or in opposition. He supports Catholic emancipation and parliamentary reform and urges unity to achieve these objectives. Te recent abuses of power, by both the British and the Irish governments, are recounted and highlighted. More than most radicals, he is concerned with the poverty of the masses, believes that the rich proft unfairly from the labour of the poor, and insists that the poor labourer has as much right to have an infuence on the laws that govern him as does the rich landowner. In his view, all men pay taxes of some kind and hence all should be enfranchised. He is critical of the recent creation of the Orange Order and appalled by the continuance of the slave trade. With the country at war with revolutionary France,

– 301 –

302

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

he undoubtedly alarmed the Irish government by attacking England’s infuence on Irish afairs and the employment of militia forces to keep the people in subjection. He even hints that Ireland could weaken England’s power and infuence in Ireland if the latter allied with France. Tere is an entry on Russell in the ODNB and he is the subject of two useful biographies: Denis Carroll, Te Man fom God Knows where: Tomas Russell, 1767–1803 (Blackrock: Columba Press, 1995) and James Quinn, Soul on Fire: A Life of Tomas Russell (Dublin: Irish Academic Press, 2002). For some of his writings, see Journals and Memoirs of Tomas Russell 1791–1795, ed. C. J. Woods (Blackrock: Irish Academic Press, 1991).

Thomas Russell, A Letter to the People of Ireland, on the Present Situation of the Country (Belfast: Printed at the Northern Star Office,1 1796).

to the PEOPLE OF IRELAND “it is a goodly thing, brethren, to dwell together in unity.”–Psalms.2

From the time that the Convention of Volunteers failed in obtaining their great object of Reform in the year 1784,3 the spirit of the nation gradually declined; and in the year 1791, and the preceding ones, it may be said to have been utterly extinguished. Te propriety of Reform seemed to be allowed by all, but those who had an interest in the government; and it was lost by that body not espousing the claims of the Catholics. By this it became only an efort of a part of the people, and was lost, and deserved so to be. – Tis dereliction of Catholic claims did not arise from a want of liberality in the bulk of the Volunteers; (for their resolutions and declarations, particularly the Northern ones, at the time of that memorable and illustrious institution, / assert the right of the Catholics in the most explicit manner) but from their placing too great a confdence in their leaders, who were men of the frst lordly and landed interests in Ireland, and who shamefully and meanly deserted the people. Te Catholics at that time were led, from the dereliction of their cause by the Convention, to entertain no hopes from the liberality or justice of the Protestant or Dissenting interest. Te great mass of that body were then and before ignorant of and uninterested in the general politics of Ireland. Unacquainted with the remote cause, they felt nothing but the oppression of the tax-gatherer, tytheproctors, and their landlords. Unconnected by any band of union, and having none of ability, education, consequence, or integrity to espouse their cause, they remained in a state of hopeless despondency; or if any attempted to redress what they conceived to be grievances, by partial disturbance, they were crushed in a moment by the power of government, supported by the whole landed and – 303 –

304

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

ecclesiastical bodies. Severe punishments were inficted; and the most odious ideas of criminality were annexed to those unfortunate ofenders, while no serious enquiry was instituted into the real or supposed grievances which led these wretched and ignorant beings to transgress laws which they had no share in framing; but which if they did not obey, death or exile, or such punishment as the framers thought proper to annex to the action, was certain to follow. Such a system must and did produce a degredation of spirit, and they looked up not to justice and the rights of nature, but to the discretion of their landlords and magistrates. Te Catholic gentry, with some exceptions, were men, who being precluded by the laws from sharing any of the power of Ireland, to which their fortunes and families / gave them pretensions, could only engage in the pleasurable pursuits of the times, and from an adherence to their conscience, found themselves inferior in point of political consequence to every petty Protestant ’Squire. Personal courage, necessary to protect them from personal insult, they possessed to an eminent degree; but a century of slavery had divested them of political courage or a wish for political disquisition. Teir most daring and adventurous spirits, acquired in all the armies of Europe, (England excepted) an high and deserving reputation. By them it was that the name of Ireland was heard out of its limits; for otherwise the town of Birmingham was as well known, and possessed as much weight in the scale of Europe and the British empire, as the island which we inhabit has ever done since the capitulation of Limerick.4 Te Catholic of the city of Dublin were, generally speaking, the most enlightened of that body. Many of them had the wish and hope that the day would arrive when the Protestants of Ireland would see their true interests, and strenuously endeavour to place all their countrymen on a level with themselves. Te only political organization of the Catholics was a committee, composed of some members, elected mostly from the city of Dublin, and in which the Catholic lords and some of the gentry assumed the right of voting. Tey were a body which made humble applications to government from time to time, but were very little attended to. Te impression which government, and not unsuccessfully, wished to make on them was, that government were willing to serve them, but that the Presbyterians and Protestants were against it, and so recommended loyal and dutiful behaviour. Indeed, of so little consequence were the Catholics considered, that in the summer of 90, or 91, the then lord lieutenant, Lord Westmorland,5 being in the south, refused to receive a dutiful and loyal address from / the Catholics of one of the southern cities; because, in it they expressed a hope that their case might be taken into consideration. Tere was no national spirit in Ireland – on the contrary the anniversary of those events which led to the degradation of the country were celebrated, strange as it may appear, by Irishmen with martial pomp and festivity, difering in this from all nations, ancient or modern: if any felt diferently they prudently concealed their sentiments.

Russell, A Letter to the People of Ireland

305

Te great Protestant landholders had the representation of the people, as it is called, in their own hands; the power of returning members to the House of Commons, even for counties, with one or two exceptions was in the hands of a few leading men in each district: when these could not agree as to the person who was to be called a re-representative of the people, the speculations ran “that my Lord such-a-one’s interest joined to Sir John such-a-one, would succeed in returning Mr. such-a-one against the Marquis of such-a-one.” As to the interest or wishes of the community, that was not pretended to, and the men thus returned had the power, for the power of England was to support them, of taxing the people of Ireland to what amount their honours and consciences directed. It was an easy, pleasant, and lucrative task to govern such a country: the person sent over had only to engage so many of the great land and borough-holders in his interest as insured a hollow majority in the Commons, and as these gentlemen and their friends could be renumerated [sic] by the taxes they imposed on Ireland, and the places created there, it did not cost the English agent much. However, as economy is a virtue, it was practised by the English agent in some respects, for he did not retain, except in cases of emergency, more than was sufcient to do the king’s business; by this means he had a greaser number of places and / emoluments to bestow on his English friends, and such as were useful to the English ministry elsewhere. From this system, it is obvious that the interests of some of these landholders will in smaller matters clash with each other; though in the main object, that of holding in their hands the power of the country against the people at large, they will agree. In proportion then as the people show any desire to assume political consequence, these gentlemen will all unite with the English party against the common enemy – the people - and in proportion as the people are crushed and torpid, the separate interest of these gentlemen in counties and boroughs, making of roads, canals, excisemen commissioners, bishops, judges, &c. &c. &c. will be considered, and diferences will arise: this will serve as a clue to the parliamentary debates. Let them be taken, for example, about the year 1791. Tree or four years previous to that, some of the these gentlemen formed what was termed an opposition in Parliament, and indeed no word could have explained their views better, for they were not more adverse to the government whose places they wished to obtain, than they were to the vital interests of Ireland, and the inalienable rights and liberties of mankind. It was necessary that such a body should hold forth some measures, which might give them a degree of popularity, as without that their opposition would be fruitless, the majority of the landholders being engaged on the other side, so that it could only be by public opinion that they could oust the gentlemen of the party of Government and themselves attain their stations. It was likewise necessary, that the points held forth should not be such as would endanger the common cause, and they acted accordingly. Whoever takes the trouble of referring to the debates of these years will see this statement veri-

306

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

fed. Te scheme, however well laid, did not / succeed; the people had too much apathy or rather too much wisdom to interest themselves in the cause, and the ability of these gentlemen (certainly frst rate) was exhausted night afer night, and session afer session, haranguing in vain – all the argument was on their side; but the dead majority who did not come to argue but to vote, was on the side of government. Tey exhausted themselves therefore without producing any efect, except that of detaining the government members once or twice a week, during a session, from their festivity till a late hour. Now that the motives assigned above were the true ones which infuenced the gentlemen of opposition can scarce be doubted from their conduct in the session of 92, when the Catholic question and that of reform forced themselves on the government: this was the act of the common enemy, the people of Ireland, and to be vigorously resisted, and accordingly no persons reviled the Rights of Man or the French Revolution, or gabbled more about anarchy, and confusion, and mobs, and United Irishman, and Defenders, and Volunteers, or coincided more heartily in strengthening the hands of that government which they had opposed, and riveting the chains of the people, or to sum up all, plunged this unfortunate country into all the guilt and calamity of the present war with more alacrity than the gentlemen of the opposition. Tis aristocracy, or oligarchy, governed Ireland with despotick sway; such a system could only be upheld, either – 1st, by foreign and extrinsick power, which could at any time crush the whole nation – 2d, by ignorance – 3d, by cowardice – 4th, by want of military resources in the people – or fnally, by the disunion of the people among themselves. Now, as to the frst, though England be the most powerful of the two nations, yet it is undeniable that much of that power has been, and now is / derived from the connection between the two islands; if any person doubts of this, let him consider the immense resources in provisions and men drawn from this country during the diferent wars in which England has thought proper to engage. Suppose every Irish soldier withdrawn from the English armies, what a fgure would they make? How would they protect those foreign possessions which are so much vaunted of, and to which Irish merchants are forbidden to trade? It is said that the English feets cover the ocean – how could these feets be provisioned if Ireland did not furnish it? If every Irish seamen had been withdrawn from the English feet on the frst of June,6 will any man in his senses say, that memorable victory would ever have been obtained? It were easy to dilate on this, and to push it still farther, by shewing that if Ireland, instead of being neutral in any contest (particularly the present) in which England was engaged, was hostile, the commercial pre-eminence of England, on which her political power is founded, would not be eclipsed, but extinguished. As to the second head – ignorance, in a philosophical sense of the word, may be considered as the sole cause that can make people slaves or wicked; but in

Russell, A Letter to the People of Ireland

307

the general acceptation of the term, there was a sufcient degree of political knowledge difused to shew the people their rights. As to the third – the military history of every state of Europe bears such ample testimony to the gallantry of the Irish, as renders any argument on this head unnecessary: it may, however, be observed, that it is very possible, and frequently happens, that a person who possesses personal courage to an eminent degree, may be defcient in political, and that the apprehension of a constable or jail will deter, where a company of grenadiers or a battery would not; this arises from the notion of always attaching moral guilt to the breach of human laws, an error of the greatest magnitude. As to the fourth – a bare inspection of the / situation of Ireland, and reference to what has been said under the frst head is sufcient. Te only cause then adequate to depress such a people was disunion – so long as that prevailed, so long could this aristocracy plunder and insult the country, and even quarrel among themselves for the division of the spoil with impunity; but when ever an union of the people takes place – when they once consider all Irishmen as their friends and brethren, the power of this aristocracy will vanish – nor is this abstract reasoning: let facts be appealed to. In the year 1791 it was projected by a few individuals, who were abhorrent of the mode in which Ireland was governed, to banish religious prejudices by efecting a union of Irishmen of all religious persuasions, and by that means to obtain a reform of Parliament, which should equally include Irishmen of every sect. In pursuance of this plan the famous society of United Irishmen was formed in Belfast, in the month of October, and in Dublin in the month of November, of that year, and it was intended to spread similar associations through the country; as it was evident that when once the people knew each other, interest as well as afection, would make their friendship permanent. Means were taken to make the Protestant of the North and the Catholics of the South understand their mutual views. – In this winter the independent part of the Catholic Committee difered from their aristocracy of lords and gentlemen, and, by a decisive majority, freed themselves from those hereditary advisers. A few of these gentlemen published an address, such as government wished – but as all who isolate themselves from the mass of their party do, they soon became insignifcant. Tat session produced some trifing relaxation of the penal code;7 but this did not deter the independent part of the Catholics, who persisted in urging their claims. Te great body of Dissenters were rapidly embracing and promoting them; and calling a / General Committee of the Catholics, who could fully and indisputably represent the wants and sentiments of that body still further promoted the great cause. From the moment that the attempt at union was obvious, the aristocracy lost no opportuninity [sic] of abusing the system, and all who were active in promoting it – and in the absurd and wicked language of that faction, the union of a people so desirable to every man of virtue and religion, was called an unnatu-

308

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

ral union; but it was against the meeting of the Catholic Committee that their chief eforts were directed, and in consequence the Grand Juries, at the summer assizes, issued their resolutions, of which the sentiments and composition were equally contemptable. – Tose formidable denunciations, and the torrents of abuse which were powered forth in the public prints, did not prevent the meeting of the Delegates of the Catholics in Dublin, on the 3d of December, 1792,8 a memorable day for Ireland. Tis meeting was sanctioned by the great body of the Dissenters, who, by associations and resolutions enforced their claims – and this may be considered as the act, and the only act for a length of time of the Irish people. Now what was the consequence? Te very government who, some time before slighted the Catholics and their claims, now requested to have the petition of the Catholics transmitted by them to the king, and it was refused them; and the very Parliament who met shortly afer, and who had refused to listen to any alteration, now acknowledged the propriety of a reform, and were willing to concede one. Now it is obvious that this alteration could have arisen only from the union and spirit of the people, no other adequate cause can be assigned. Most people were then of opinion that the great desideratum of Ireland, a reform, would be obtained, and it apparently required little ability to ensure it. Had the same line of conduct been pursued, the unity of action and design which had hitherto produced such great efects – if Catholic emancipation / had been considered but as a step, and as a step which would be almost useless, unless accompanied by reform, it probably would have succeeded. Had the Catholic petition been only presented and lef to its intrinsic weight, without comment or explanation, it is probable that the government and aristocracy, dismayed as they were at that period, would have acceded to the wishes of the people; – but these hopes were disappointed. It is not here intended to go into the history of that period, or censure any body of men; it is only intended to point out the power of union, and the futility of any eforts without it. At this time some individuals were anxious to know how much government would grant to the Catholics. Tat any of the Catholics should be satisfed with a partial repeal of the penal code, or even make the total repeal, their ultimate object was sufcient to betray a want of unity in the design. From the instant that the government saw this, the cloud which hovered over them was dissipated, as if by enchantment; that instant they took their ground; the Catholic bill was procrastinated; strong measures were adopted with the greatest harmony and unanimity by Parliament; part of the people was attacked; the most spirited part of the north was dragooned; proclamations were issued; volunteers were disarmed; arbitrary imprisonments were inficted; prosecutions were instituted; the gun-powder and militia bills9 were passed; the nation was foil’d in its pursuit, and put down; terror was the order of the day; it could scarce be believed but by those who were witness to it, how rapid the change was in the

Russell, A Letter to the People of Ireland

309

spirit of the metropolis, and so completely was the common enemy, the people, subdued, that long before the end of the session, some of the opposition again ventured to rail at the government. Te Catholic bill did not pass till the month of April,10 and it may be doubted, whether, if the battle of Nerwindin11 and the defection of Dumourier12 had taken place sooner, it would have passed into a law; and / had the royal assent been refused, there was no spirit in the nation to bring it forward in a shape likely to ensure its success. But though the bill did pass, yet the spirit of the people being for a time suppressed – the vital principle of union being for a time suspended – and the political powers of the country remaining in the same hands, it was to be expected that the bulk of the Catholics would feel the vengeance of every petty country aristocracy irritated by their late defeat, every man must easily see that this was the case. Witness the prosecutions of Fay,13 Bird, Delahoyd,14 Byrne,15 &c. &c. &c. Witness the severities exercised on the lower orders of Catholics, which continue to this day, and of which it is impossible to hear the true account without indignation and horror. It was plain that the Catholic gentry would be equally odious on the same grounds; that any privilege to which they could aspire under the act, that of being a grand juror or magistrate, could only make them the tail of an aristocracy which detested them, and the only real consequence they could have would be from their intimate union with the Catholic body. Teir interest then, as well as their duty should have led them to make a common cause with the Catholics of their country: by this it is not meant that they should support them in any improper proceeding, but that they should protect the poor with their fortunes, their ability, and their courage, whenever they were oppressed and mal-treated merely as catholics, of which the three last years aford so many cruel instances; by this conduct these gentlemen would not only have protected innocent men, they would have acquired a weight in their respective counties which would give efcacy to any future petition, and they would have been enabled efectually to put a stop to any “insurrection or scene of anarchy, and confusion, and murder, and plunder, and equality of property,” (to make use of the cant invented by Mr. Pitt,16 and so industriously propagated by his understrappers.) / It is proper here to observe that it is by no means intimated that such views were entertained by the lower order of people. It is well known that the traveller will receive in the most wretched cabbin in the wildest parts of Ireland all the hospitality that the circumstances of the owner can aford: he will get his share of the milk, if there is any, and of the potatoes; and if he has lost his way he will be guided to the road for miles, and all this without the expectation or the wish for a reward: from such a people the commission of such crimes are less to be expected, than from those who so falsely and infamously traduce them. But it unfortunately happened that in many instances the Catholic gentry attached themselves to this aristocracy, or at least did not protect the people.

310

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

Tis ofen arose from the fear of being implicated as Defenders,17 from the system of terror which was then spread, and from the want of that political courage which has been before mentioned. Te consequence was, that such men, without acquiring the confdence, or having any infuence with the aristocracy, lost all weight and infuence with the lower orders, and thus became both insignifcant and insecure. Tat the lower orders, thus lef to themselves, conceiving that they were oppressed and without people of knowledge or consequence to advise or protect them, should at times commit unjustifable actions is not surprising. Tis was another instance of the misfortune of want of union. And it is certain that the Catholic body, since the passing of that bill, have been regarded with a jealous eye, and have not derived from it that security and importance, nor Ireland that degree of freedom which many expected. Te very summer following, such was the strength of government and the weakness of the nation, that the militia act was enforced, though it was so obnoxious to the people that it was resisted in many countries, and much blood was spilled before it was carried into efect:18 A formidable Irish army was raised, armed and disciplined, to keep Ireland in subjection; / the armed peasantry of one country were employed to subdue the peasantry of another, who were resisting real or supposed grievances that they had felt in common. How this may ultimately afect the liberty of the country is yet to be seen; but it is probable that at present government would not be at such such pains to enforce such an act, nor would they meet so much opposition it [sic] its execution. Te weakness of the country is still further exemplifed by what occurred during the administration of Earl Fitzwilliam,19 and on his removal. When Mr. Pitt deemed it expedient to dupe the Duke of Portland20 and some more of his party, it was generally understood that part of the bargain was, that the Irish afairs were to be managed by them, and Lord Fitzwilliam’s appointment was in consequence of that arrangement. Tis Portland party had some retainers in the Irish Parliament, who were part of the gentlemen of opposition, and they were to be in the administration under him; this was to be a government of conciliation, that is, some unimportant concessions were to be made; but by them the great point a blind obedience to the English infuence and administration, particularly in regard to the present war, was to be ensured. Te views of that government were developed in a speech of considerable length and ability, by one of the leading members21 at the opening of the session. Domestic insurgents, &c. &c. were to be crushed; we were at all risques to stand and fall with England, and in consequence the war with France was to be carried on with the greatest vigour. In this speech it was that the war prophanely styled a war to preserve man and the Godhead. Immense sums were voted and taxes imposed for these purposes. Te great measure of conciliation was, the repeal of the remainder of the penal code. It was understood that this was certainly to take place. Address and petitions poured in from all parties in favour of it. However, so far from passing,

Russell, A Letter to the People of Ireland

311

this governor was recalled, and the addresses from / all parts of Ireland requested his stay, and the passing of the bill: he was removed and it was rejected; and the gentlemen of opposition from railing at the French, the seditious, the Defenders, &c. &c. were again at leisure to resume their old trade of railing against the government. Now the Catholics were evidently in favour of Lord Fitzwilliam, and likewise the Dissenters: nevertheless, government did not scruple to act diametrically opposite to their sentiments, thereby shewing how completely the spirit of the people was down in their judgements. But it is needless to multiply proofs, as every day efords [sic] instances of their disregard to the witness of Irishmen. One curious fact came to light by the removal of Lord F. which shews what dependence is to be put in courts and statesmen, and should sink deep in the mind of every Irishman. He asserts in his letter, in vindication of himself, “that his orders fom England and his own in[ten]tions were not to bring on the Catholic question if it could be kept back.” From that period new laws of an oppressive and sanguinary nature have been enacted, and enforced for the purpose of extinguishing any spark of freedom that might yet exist. For the last eighteen months a system of brotherly love and union and a revival of national spirit has been rapidly taking place among the people; it was to be expected that this would be opposed: Of late a set of men have appeared in diferent parts of the North, styling themselves Orange-men,22 and professing themselves to be inimical to the Catholics. Some of these called Orange-men in the country of Armagh were undoubted execrable villains and plunderers; but many have taken that name and arrayed themselves by the instigation of artful and wicked men. Now as these Orange-men can have no real interest in this, and as many of them are very ignorant; and as some of them have appeared in places where no disturbance on pretext of religion had taken places, and / as religious animosities was the engine by which this country was kept in subjection; this may be considered as the last efort of the enemies of Ireland to prevent that union which when once efected will terminate their power. All, therefore, who value the liberty and peace of Ireland should oppose this and all other attempts at division, and endeavour so far as in them lies, to promote the union of Irishmen. From the facts which have been stated, it appears, that if the spirit of union and nationality pervaded the Irish, they could with ease efect a proper reform of Parliament; and the examples of Holland, Switzerland, and America, countries less powerful than Ireland, shew that when a country is seriously bent on recovering or acquiring liberty, it is scarce possible to prevent them. It remains to be proved, that it is not only the interest, but the bounden indispensable duty of a nation and of every man in it, to assert and maintain their political rights. Great pains have been taken to prevent the mass of mankind from interfering in political pursuits; force, and argument, and witt, and ridicule, and invective,

312

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

have been used by the governing party and with such success, that any of the lower, or even middle rank of society who engage in politics, have been, and are, considered not only as ridiculous, but in some degree culpable; even those who are called moral writers, employed their talents on the same side, so that at last it became an indisputed maxim that the poor were not to concern themselves in what related to the government of the country in which they lived, nevertheless it is an error of the most pernicious nature, as will appear from considering the subject. Tose insolent enslavers of the human race, who wish to fetter the mind as well as the body, exclaim to the poor, “mind your looms, and your spades and ploughs; have you not the means of subsistence; can you not earn your bread, and have wives and get children; and are you not protected / so long as you keep quiet; and have you not all that you can earn, except so much as is necessary for us to govern you; leave the government to wiser heads and to people who understand it, and interfere no more!” Now in the frst place, think who this government party have for the most part been; – “by their fruits ye shall know them;”23 look at their fruits in history, and see what terrible calamities the perfdy, ambition, avarice and cruelty of these rulers have brought on mankind; look at the people who are said to make laws for this country; look at some of that race who inherit great fortunes without the skill or capacity of being useful; those fungus productions, who grow out of a diseated [sic] state of society, and destroy as well the vigour as the beauty of that which nourishes them. Tese are some of the wiser heads; these are the hands in which the people are to repose their lives and properties; for whose spendid debaucheries they must be taxed; and for whose convenience they must fetter even their thoughts. Now on what foundation do these arrogant claims rest; it is not superior virtue, for in such hands power should be vested; on a fair comparison it will be found, that the aristocracy have not a superiority in that respect. Power, long continued in any mortal hands, has a tendency to corrupt; and when that power is derived from birth or fortune, and held independent of the people, it is still more likely to be abused; it is not that they contribute more to the support of the state, for that is manifestly not the case. Supposing for a moment that the whole of the expence was defrayed by the rich, though they might with some colour of justice claim the exclusive right of making laws afecting property, yet this could never extend to laws afecting life – every man has a life to lose, though perhaps no property – laws, therefore, afecting life, should have his concurrence. But take any district, / and see how much more the mass of the people pay than the governing party; and it is still more obvious, when the proportion which each pays according to his income is considered: Here, if a man of fve pound income pays one, the proportion to a man of one thousand pound income, would be two hundred pound; but this proportion is not observed: Again, each of these

Russell, A Letter to the People of Ireland

313

men have a chance of an equally numerous family; the man of fortune will have afuence afer having paid his proportion; but it may happen that though a family could be supported on fve pound, they could not on four, which is supposed to remain afer paying the taxes – and here again there is no proportion: Further, it might be thus argued, if the rich men derived their wealth by digging it out of the earth, or received it from a foreign land, but the fact is, the rich men (those whose wealth arises from commerce excepted) derive their wealth from the labours of the poor. Te possession of land without cultivators is of no value to a man, except so much as could support himself, and that several of these gentlemen who vilify the mob would be but ill qualifed to do. It is not here intended to question the right of landed property; but merely to shew, as is evident from these considerations, that even in a pecuniary view, the mass of the people are entitled to a share in the government as well as the rich. Agriculture is the basis of all riches, commercial as well as other; the earth was given to man by he who alone had a right to give it, for his subsistence; let not those then who raise the fruits of it among us be despised. But these are in the language of the great:– “the mob, the rabble, the beggars on the bridge, the grey-coated men, whose views are anarchy and plunder, and whose means are bloodshed and murder” – are such men to be trusted with power? No. Keep them down – do they complain, disregard them – do they resist, dragoon them – send an army to / burn their houses, and murder them with the bayonet or the gibbet. Te God of Heaven and earth endowed these men with the same passions and the same reason as the great, and consequently qualifed them for the same liberty, happiness and virtue; but these gentlemen conceive themselves wiser than the Deity; they fnd that he was wrong, and set about rectifying his work; they fnd the moral qualities and political rights of their fellow-creatures commensurate with their fortunes; they punish the poverty which their own insatiable avarice in a great degree creates; and thus, as in every case, when the will of God is departed from, instead of order, confusion, folly, and guilt is produced either immediately or ultimately. How diferent was the conduct of him in whom we profess to believe? What did he who knew the hearts of man, say of the great and powerful? He did not revile the poor – he comforted, he instructed, he blessed them, he forgave them their sins, and declared the judgments of God on such as laid on them grievous burthens and hard to be borne. Tough it appears that the mass of mankind have a right to political freedom, yet the extent of the duty which is incumbent on every member of society in consequence, does not seem to be sufciently attended to, notwithstanding it is a duty of the greatest magnitude, as will appear from the following considerations: 1st, No man can doubt that as a moral agent he is accountable to God for the use to which he applies his money, his strength, his time, and his abilities.

314

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

2d, If one man was applied to by another to assist him in committing a robbery or murder, there can be no doubt that it is his duty to refuse, and not only so, but to endeavour to prevent the perpetration of the deed. 3d, If he was asked for money to carry such purpose into efect, he is bound to refuse; if he give it he would be / as guilty of the design of robbery or murder as he who planned or executed it. 4th, No man or set of men, let them call themselves or be called what they please, or be they ever so numerous, can make an act which is immoral in itself, proper, or can have any power to authorise its commission. 5th, Man is bound to refuse committing robbery, murder, or other sinful act, and to resist its being perpetrated, if resistance be in his power, whether he is ordered or incited by one or ten thousand, or whether those who order him, call themselves, or are called Emperors, or Popes, or Kings, or Judges, or Senators, or Directors, or Parliaments, or Conventions. Tese propositions, which are exceedingly plain, and indeed self-evident, shew how much it is the duty of every man in society to attend to the government and politics of the state in which he lives. Tat is his duty to his neighbour in the most extensive sense of the word – embracing the whole family of mankind. Tey likewise shew what regard should be paid to human laws; these are to be obeyed so far as they consist with the Divine will and no further. No human law can justify a breach of the law of God, and whenever laws are made in contradiction to it, they should be resisted. Tis respect for, and obedience to human laws, has been one of the greatest causes of the calamities and wickedness which fll the annals of mankind. Reason was so corrupted, that men conceived themselves justifed in killing their fellow creatures and taking their property, and otherwise torturing them, if there was what was called a law commanding it. Tis assumed power in no wise difers from that said to have been claimed by the Popes of forgiving sins; for the pretending to authorise the commission of a sin, and the pretending to pardon it afer its commission, are equally antichristian, and will equally be destroyed. / Let this reasoning be applied to the present state of the Irish nation as an instance; we are engaged in a war, and every man and every woman in the nation, who pays taxes, contributes to its support; the taxes go to the government, and with them the government, carry on the war. Every person who drinks whiskey, or any thing stronger than water – every person who wears shoes pays something to the government; it is therefore clearly their duty to know in what manner their money, the produce of their labour, is applied; if it is to a bad purpose they are accountable; if the war be unjust on our part, every man killed in it by the Irish is murdered, and every acquisition made by it is robbery. Now let every person seriously ask himself what injury did the French do to the Irish – and

Russell, A Letter to the People of Ireland

315

how are we justifed in making war on them. In answer to this, we may be told that the country is thriving and prosperous – but it is not fact. Te prosperity of a nation does not consist in the acquisition of immense fortunes by any class of men, such as merchants or landholders. Te prosperity of a state has been well defned by the excellent Mr. Tytler in his Historical Register,24 “if the majority can procure a comfortable subsistence with little labour, and have something to share with those who are in want, the state of the people is fourishing; but on the other hand, if they feel that they can scarce live upon their income, and that this income can only be procured by incessant toil, that the moment this toil is interrupted they are in absolute want, then the country does not fourish.” Now it is notorious that the majority of the people in this country are in a state of extreme poverty, that it is by hard and incessant labour that they can subsist, and if sickness or accidents befal them they are almost deprived of the means of existence. But, supposing for a moment, that by the war prosperity and afuence, sufcient to satiate avarice, was brought home to every individual of the nation; still, if the war was unjust, this wealth / would only be the fruits of robbery and murder. If the English, or any other people, think gold a sufcient cause to shed blood – if they they [sic] are satisfed to fll the world with carnage and misery, that may acquire cloves, and nutmegs, and contracts, and slaves, let it not be so with us, – let justice be the rule of our conduct, and let us not, for any human consideration, incur the displeasure of the Deity. Many good people exclaim – What! would you make confusion at home? Are we not at peace here, and is not peace a great blessing? We see nor feel none of the battles and calamities which involve other countries. But let these good people consider how great a number they deprive of that greatest of sublunary blessings, and how much of these misfortunes they themselves occasion, and for which they must certainly be answerable. Let not Ireland be considered as unimportant in the war; immense sums have been voted to its support. It has been calculated that near one-third of the seamen in the British navy are Irish. Above 150,000 Irish soldiers have been employed in the war. Mankind are used to disregard actions which do not immediately fall under their observation. Let us for a moment consider the miseries which this multitude of men have inficted on people who never injured them; the number of our fellow creatures whom they have killed or mangled; the widows and orphans that they have made, who cry to heaven for redress; the plunder, violence, rapes, massacres, confusion, fight, afiction, anguish, despair and horror which they have occasioned, and which are incident to and inseparable from the execrable trade of war. Are then these dreadful scenes less real, or are the Irish nation less accountable for them because they are acted at a distance, because they occur in France, Flanders, in Holland, in the Atlantic, in the East or West Indies, than if they occurred at home? /

316

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

Consider beside the number of these your countrymen who have themselves perished by disease, famine and the sword; think of the men torn, without even the form of legal process, from their destitute innocent families under the name of defenders, by a set of detestable rufans; crammed on board of ships of war, and there forced to fght in a cause which, perhaps, they thought wrong. Te North American savages are superior to such a practice. When they go to war, every man of the tribe who disapproves of it is at liberty to remain at home or peaceably follow his avocations of hunting: but here, a man may be forced to act against his reason and his conscience, or be exposed to such torments as all men’s fortitude is not equal to withstand. Are the Irish nation aware that this contest involves the question of the slave trade, the one now of the greatest consequence on the face of the earth? Are they willing to employ their treasure and their blood in support of that system, because England has 70 or 7000 millions engaged in it, the only argument that can be adduced in its favour, monstrous as it may appear? Do they know that that horrid trafc spreads its infuence over the globe; that it creates and perpetuates barbarism and misery, and prevents the spreading of civilization and religion, in which we profess to believe? Do they know that by it thousands and hundreds of thousands of these miserable Africans are dragged from their innocent families like the miserable defenders, transported to various places, and there treated with such a system of cruelty, torment, wickedness and infamy, that it is impossible for language adequately to express its horror and guilt, and which would appear rather to be the work of wicked demons then of men. If this trade is wrong, is it right for the Irish nation to endeavour to continue it? And does not every man who contributes to the war contribute to its support? Afer this statement of the immediate and remote consequence of war; afer its appearing that every man who pays taxes contributes / to it and to every act of the government of his country, is it not evident that it is not only the right but the essential duty of every man to interest himself in the conduct of the government; and with what indignation should that infamous intolerable proposition be rejected, that the mass of the people have no right to meddle in politics, which has been so long and so successfully propagated by these “calm thinking villains,”25 who arrogate to themselves the government of mankind? In that great and dreadful day when all the human race shall appear in the presence of their creator and judge; when the heavens and earth shall fy away from his face, and the guilty shall in vain call upon the rocks and mountains to hide and cover them; when the innocent blood which had been shed shall be avenged, what answer could be made? – “Lord, we never saw these things; they are not our doing; we only paid for them, and we were told that it was not our business to mind politics.” – Remember his words when on earth – he instructed us how to regard and compassionate all mankind. – “In as much as ye did it not to one of the least of these ye did it not to me.”26

Russell, A Letter to the People of Ireland

317

Te great object of mankind should be to consider themselves as accountable for their actions to God alone, and to pay no regard or obedience to any men or institution, which is not conformable to his will. It is on this account that liberty should be sought and is truly estimable; by breaking and destroying those prejudices and institutions which made man bow down before man, or his law; and to these Idols of his own making, ofer up the sacrifce of his abilities, his judgment, his conscience, and his eternal happiness. It appears that the Irish nation have not that portion of liberty, which would give them an efcient weight in their government; that this want of liberty arises from want of union among the people; that by union the people would acquire sufcient weight to give political integrity and virtue / of their government, and liberty, peace and happiness to themselves; and that they are bound by every consideration of interest, of prudence, of reason, of justice, of mercy, and of religion, to pursue that union in defance and in contempt of every human obstacle; the means are the most delightful that life can aford, the cultivation of brotherly love to our fellow-creatures, and the end the greatest that the imagination of man can conceive, that of being acceptable in the sight of the Almighty, all perfect and adorable author of Nature. THOMAS RUSSELL. Belfast, September 11, 1796.

O’CONNOR, A LETTER TO THE ELECTORS OF ANTRIM

Arthur O’Connor, A Letter to the Electors of Antrim (Dublin, 1797).

Arthur O’Connor represented Philipstown in the Irish Parliament from 1790 to 1795. He had been brought into parliament by the infuence of his uncle. His speech in the Irish House of Commons on 4 May 1795 (see pp. 243–59 above) led to a breach with his uncle, who did not support Catholic emancipation or parliamentary reform. Tis led O’Connor to resign his seat. He went to France with Lord Edward Fitzgerald in 1796 and persuaded the Directory to launch an invasion of Ireland that led to the abortive landing at Bantry Bay at the end of that year. O’Connor published this pamphlet in January 1797 in an efort to gain election for Antrim. In this pamphlet he explains why he resigned his seat in 1795 and replies to what he regards as misrepresentations and falsehoods that appeared in a government-inspired pamphlet that sought to destroy his credit with Irish electors. He goes on from this defence to attack the oppressive measures recently passed by the Irish Parliament and the Irish government’s resort to force to silence radical critics who wished to secure Catholic emancipation and parliamentary reform. Tese abuses of power he blames on the excessive infuence that Britain had on Irish afairs. He urges the Irish people to stand on their own feet and decide Ireland’s fate for themselves. O’Connor’s ferce hostility to the British connection and his evident sympathy for French principles led to his arrest in February 1797. He remained in prison, without trial until August. In April 1798, he was arrested in England on his way to France. He was acquitted, but the trial prevented him playing any active role in the Irish rebellion that broke out shortly aferwards. Tis did not prevent him being arrested again in Ireland later in 1798 and imprisoned in Fort George in Scotland until 1802. Tere is an entry on O’Connor in the ODNB and the HoIP 1692–1800. Also useful are: F. MacDermot, ‘Arthur O’Connor’, Irish Historical Studies, 15 (1966– 7), pp. 48-69; J. H. Hames, Arthur O’Connor: United Irishman (Cork: Collins Press, 2001); and C. D. Conner, Arthur O’Connor: Te Most Important Revolutionary You May Never Have Heard Of (Bloomington, NY: iUniverse, Inc, 2009).

– 319 –

Arthur O’Connor, A Letter to the Electors of Antrim (Dublin, 1797).

A LETTER, &c. Fellow-citizens, The Post-ofce is so immediately dependant on the Government, that any anonymous production issuing from thence, must be looked on as coming from the Administration itself; in this light I have viewed the anonymous paper which has been so industriously distributed through the Post-ofces of the North, avowedly to deprive me of whatever share of your confdence I might have gained; and in this light I have given it an answer. Had I treated it with silent contempt, I should have hoped that its coming from an Administration which had so deservedly forfeited the confdence of every Irishman, who values the liberties of his country, would have insured me from sufering, in your estimation, from the falsehood and calumny with which it abounds; but my respect for those invaluable censors, the press and the public opinion, the conscious integrity of my own heart and the most perfect reliance on the virtue of the cause I espouse, prompts me to seize any occasion which afords an opportunity of vindicating it or myself from the aspersions of an Administration, whose heaviest charge in their wretched production is, that at any time of my life I had been the advocate of them or their measures. As the whole of the work is one continued tissue of misrepresentation and falsehood, a plain recital of facts will be the best means of giving it a full refutation. Afer the question of Regency, that memorable display of the infamy and principles of the factions of Ireland, some / of the most considerable of them were forced into Irish Parliamentary patriotism, by being stripped of the wages of their prostitution. I accepted of a seat from my uncle Lord Longueville,1 in the chimerical hope that this crash between the factions and the Government might be improved to the advantage of Ireland; but experience soon convinced me that nothing short of the establishment of a National Government, a total annihilation of the factions and their usurpations, and an entire abolition of religious distinctions, could restore to my country those rights and that liberty which had

– 321 –

322

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

been so long a subject of trafc, under a regularly organized system of treason: and acting up to this conviction, from the day I accepted the seat from Lord L. to the day I resigned it, I earnestly intreated him to declare for a Reform of Parliament, and for the freedom of my Catholic countrymen. Te thanks which were given me by the Delegates of the Catholics of Ireland, for the defence of them and their cause, so early as 1791. and the vote which I gave for their total emancipation, against Lord Longueville and the Government, in the beginning of 1793. gives the lie to the assertion of Administration, that I was not the advocate of Catholic Freedom, until my having spoken on that subject in 1795; and so wholly is it unfounded in truth, that I have exerted myself in defence of the liberties of my country, because the Government refused me a Commissioner’s place,2 that although Lord L. repeatedly pressed me to let him procure me a Commissioner’s place, I as ofen refused it, assuring him that it was contrary to my principles to accept the mony of my impoverished countrymen for the detestable reason of betraying their rights, their industry, their manufactures and commerce; that for the bribe of a British pander I should basely contribute to aggrandize / his country, at the expence of every thing dear to my own; whilst so far from bartering my principles to better my fortune, that though Lord L. pressed me to accept large sums of his own money, I declined them; and it is notorious he has disinherited me, for the open avowal of my political sentiments on the Catholic question. Being forced, in my own vindication, to speak of myself, I will leave you, my fellow citizens, to judge of an Administration, that by falsehood and calumny have attempted to widen a breach between me and connexions that was but too widely extended before; yet whilst they have given me an opportunity of proving to you that no consideration could induce me to abandon my principles, they shall never succeed in making me utter one unkind expression of a man whose wishes to promote me in life have lef a grateful remembrance their malice shall never eface. Abandoned Administration who have trampled on the liberties of my country, do you presume to accuse me of dissuading my countrymen from arming to oppose an invasion, which yours and your accomplices crimes have provoked? Is it that the inalienable rights of freeborn men, to make their laws by Delegates of their choice, should be bartered and sold by usurpers and traitors, that I should persuade them to arm? Is it that our markets, our manufactures, and commerce, should be sold to that nation which appoints our Government, and distributes our patronage, that I should persuade them to arm? Is it to support the Gunpowder Bill,3 which deprives them of arms, or the Convention Bill,4 which aims at perpetuating the usurpation of rights, by proscribing the only obvious and orderly means to regain them, that I should persuade them to arm? Is it to support the suspension / of the Habeas Corpus Bill,5 which has destroyed the bulwark of Liberty, by withholding the Trial by Jury, that I should persuade them to arm? Is it to rivet the bolts, or to guard the dungeons of their

O’Connor, A Letter to the Electors of Antrim

323

fellow-citizens, who, torn from their homes and their families by Administration, vainly demand that Trial by Jury, which by proving their innocence, must establish its guilt, that I should persuade them to arm? Is it that a vile pander of national honour and legislative duty should be invested with uncontrouled power over the opinion and persons of an injured, a gallant and generous people, that I should persuade them to arm? or to crown all, is it under the auspices of the indemnifed Carhampton,6 I should persuade them to arm. Go impotents; to the Catholicks whose elevated hope of all-glorious freedom you have been appointed to tauntingly blast, and if they should charge you with the crimes of your mission, although you cannot plead the having raised them to equal rights with their fellow-citizens, you can at least boast that you have levelled those rights to the standard of Catholic thraldom. Hence, then, contemptible Administration, from those you have insulted and levelled to those whom you have raised, go to the Monopolists of the Representation of Ireland, and ask them to arm; go to those whom the continuance of the system of corruption enables to live in afuence, at the expence of that poverty and misery their treason has caused, and ask them to arm; go to those hussars of fees and exaction in the revenue, whose regular pay bears no proportion to their pillage and plunder, and command them to arm; go to attornies and lawyers, who live by villainy, chicane, and fraud, under a system of complexity, fnesse, and fction, at the expence and ruin of those who / are forced to employ them, and tell them they ought to arm; go to those swarms of petty tyrants, perjured Grand Jury jobbers, army contractors, tythe proctors, and land sharks and tell them how necessary it is for them to be armed; go to the established clergy, who pocket those monstrous funds for instructing nine-tenths of the nation which should provide decent establishments for three such countries as Ireland, and tell them to preach to the nine tenths who are excluded from this glorious half of the Costitution [sic], to arm in its defense or ask them to blow the expiring members of religious dissension, and I will leave it to the inhabitants of Armagh, at length recovering from delusion to judge of their zeal in this Christian-like duty. Tese factions administration are your natural allies: these are your strength; on these you may reckon, and although as devoted to systems which should be abolished, as apostates to national rights and national honour they count but too high; thank Heaven! they are as insignifcant in numbers as in strength to those that are sound. Although the old volunteers have been discouraged, because they boldly threw of the open avowed dominion of Britain, and that these yeoman corps have been raised to support the concealed deadly infuence she has gained by corruption and treason; although the old volunteers have been rejected because they extended the rights and liberties of their country, and that these corps have been set up to support laws subversive to both; yet when the systematic scheme of the British Ministry and of those vermin that have nestled about the throne, to

324

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

frame some new modelled despotism for the ruins of freedom, by the erecting of barracks, those bills that have been / passed year afer year, the late contempt of that only privilege of the Commons which was lef them, the granting of money, and the correspondent conduct of their creatures in this country, shall have been developed to that degree which would make resistance an indispensable duty; from my soul I believe that they would fnd themselves widely mistaken in the support they will meet from many of these corps they have raised. Are the people of Ireland so weak as to convert a threatened invasion from France into an expatiation of the injustice, the crimes and oppression by which the temptation to make it was caused? or shall an invasion from France act like magic in changing the present afection of the people of Ireland for liberty, into an unbounded display of loyalty to a system of corruption and treason, by which the most happily gifed nation on earth has been made to contain more misery than any country in the creation? Away with delusion! Are the people of Ireland sure that the factions and Administration who so earnestly press them to arise to repel the invasion of France, are not invaders themselves? Are we sure, that their master and maker, the Minister of Britain,7 has not invested them with enormous funds of corruption, to which our wretchedness has been made to contribute? Are we sure that these funds have not been distributed among traitors, in the heart of our island, for betraying, the industry, manufactures, and commerce of the people of Ireland; to aggrandize those of Great Britain? Nay, are we not certain that every market in Great Britain is shut against every species of Irish industry, with the solitary exception of linen, whilst every manufacture of England has free access to every market / in Ireland, without any exception whatever? With these facts in our view, what Irishman can doubt, that to support the worst of invasions, the invasion of rights and commerce, 15,000 English and Scotch have not been sent to invade us already? or can we be certain that the shambles8 of Germany have not been resorted to, to invade us with more? Compare the few troops they lef us in the war against American freedom, when they had all Europe their foe, with the numbers they have sent us this war against the freedom of France, when they had all Europe their ally; compare the weakness of Ireland, divided by religious dissension, when troops were so few, with that strength which union has given, when troops are so many; we cannot but see with whom they seek to contend. Could French invaders do worse than establish a system of pillage and treason within, that they may pillage and plunder without? Could they do worse than reject laws an unanimous people had sought, or than pass those they detested? Could they do worse than commit the personal liberty of the people of Ireland to two men without connexion or interest in the country. without responsibility or controul?9 Could they do worse than withold trials from Irish citizens cast them into dungeons, to the destruction of their health, and the ruin of their property? Could they do worse than establish mili-

O’Connor, A Letter to the Electors of Antrim

325

tary magistrates throughout the nation, and indemnify those whose unfeeling souls had torn hundreds of Irish citizens from every endearing connexion in life, afer depriving their habitations of every privilege due to the residence of free born men, consigned them to the fames, turning their wives and their children to beggary and famine, exiled their husbands / to fght (against that freedom of which they had robbed them) on an element they disliked, and in a cause they abhorred? Or could any thing be more alarming to a people who valued their liberties, than the appointment of a man,10 that could require such an indemnifcation, to be Commander in Chief of the army? Or, to crown all, could any invaders do worse, that with powers to legislate for a limited time, under the form of Constitutional order destroy the Constitution itself ? In vain shall the accomplices of the author of carnage inveigh against French fraternity, as long as Ireland exhibits so melancholy a picture of the fraternity they have adopted themselves. I will not compare the systems of fraternity in the East or West Indies, adopted by England and France; but I will compare the alliance which England had formed with France, she calls her natural enemy, with that she dictates to Ireland, she calls her brother and friend. In her alliance with France, she gave what she got, and reciprocity was the equitable basis on which it was made: whilst in her alliance with Ireland, she has taken all she could have asked or demanded, and she has given us exclusion in grateful return. On the scale of British fraternity, let her hirelings boast of British connexion. On this scale of British fraternity may my country no more be cursed with the friendship of Britain. Too long a tyrant, she forgets her dominion has ceased. Too long her slaves, we must shew her we are resolved to be free! Had she ceased to maintain power by the accursed means of fomenting religious dissension; had she ceased to support factions, usurpers, and traitors; had she abandoned the false illiberal notion, that she gained more by our depression than by our exaltation; had she treated us like brothers and friends, I may, with confdence / afrm a more afectionate, generous ally never existed, then she would have found Ireland to her. But if the existing fraternity, my fellow-citizens, be the bonds by which you wish a connexion with Britain, I am not a delegate ft for your choice, for though I stood alone in the Commons of Ireland, I would move the repeal of every law which binds us to England, on those or on any such terms. I will neither be conquered by England or France: nor are we any more bound to a disadvantageous alliance to one than we are to the other; and before England, the factions of Ireland, and the Administration, I speak it, if it is more the true interest of Ireland to form an alliance with France than with England, she is free to adopt it. Te jargon of standing or falling with Britain is false: in the days that are past, we have always been down; it is time we should seek to be up! Rich in a population of 4,000,000 of a healthy and intelligent people, rich in her fertile soil; rich in her harbours and navigable rivers; rich in her favourable position between the

326

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

old and new world rich in her insular situation without usurping dominion over any people upon earth; what interest, what cause, what pretext can the Administration of Ireland assign for the blood and the wealth they have lavished, in a war commenced in despotism, conducted in ignorance, and ending only by ruin? With 800,000 gallant citizens, able to arm, is it that the English and Scotch have more to fght for in Ireland than the Irish themselves, that we cannot be trusted with self-defence? When in the unanointed Republics of Swiss they can defy the invasion of Germany, of France, and Sardinia, those warlike and powerful nations, by which they are / bounded, by that law which obliges every citizen from eighteen to sixty years old, to be provided with arms, why cannot Ireland defy the whole world by a like obligation? Why has the Gunpowder Act, which disarms our people, been passed? Te answer is too plain for infatuation to mistake it. Happy for Ireland if the prime mover of mischief had borrowed the councils of that great and intuitive, mind England is ruined by having neglected. Happy could he and his minions be taught, in the language and wisdom of Fox,11 that there is more strength to be gained by gaining the confdence of the people of Ireland, than forty thousand of the best forces of Europe. Let them give up corruption, and they may safely disband the troops it has furnished; let them cease to narrow the limits of freedom, as the expansion of intellect demands that they should be extended; let them rest assured, that a system which cannot be supported without spies and informers, must soon be abandoned; instead of buying, of bribing, or of perfecting the press, let them strip falsehood of the advantages she gains by concealment and misrepresentation, and give to truth that light and publicity, with which she must ever prevail; let them recal those base orders throughout the Post-ofces, for violating the secrets of friendship, and betraying the credit of commerce; let them open the dungeons, by repealing those laws by which they are crowded; let them abolish what the Chief Magistrate’s deputy12 calls the mildness of Government, and give us an adequate representation for the basis of liberty, and I will stake my life on it, no nation shall ever invade us! But, alas! my fellow-citizens, I / lament that the same infatuation, usurpation, and folly, which have been so much the order of the day, will still prevent those equitable terms from being conceded. But mark me, the whole Irish fabric is supported by that of Great Brinain [sic], whose progress in ruin can only be equalled by her infatuation. If the principles of the French Revolution are as wicked, as destructive, and as diabolical as the minister has represented them, why was it necessary to involve the people of England in the horrors and ruin of war, that they may not be persuaded to adopt them? Is it that the extreme of vice is so seducing, that the most violent of remedies only could prevent a wise people from rushing to meet it? And although the minister has assigned day afer day, diferent objects having involved them; and that every assertion on which he has founded his argument of the day has

O’Connor, A Letter to the Electors of Antrim

327

been belied by the facts of the morrow; still they have been deaf to the councils of his glorious opponent, which, as long as tradition continues, must ever remain a wonderful instance of the eforts of genius and patriotism, to rescue a besotted and misguided people from ruin. But the privileged and the rich yielding to fear and corruption, have deserted this champion of liberty, to prostrate themselves at the feet of that minister, it was once their province to controul; placing Terror in the seat of Reason, sacrifcing every species of industry to the manufacture of soldiers they have looked to the bayonet of the mercenary for their only salvation. Presumptuous delusion! Do they imagine they can force back the current of public opinion? Is it by that corruption whose necessities must increase by geometrical measure, whilst its means must decrease in the same rapid proportion? Is it by a carnage / which would exhaust the creation? Is it by oaths wrung from oppression? Know they not that the frst oath of allegiance is from the king to the laws the constitution and people; and that if swearing, without consideration, was binding, Charles13 could never have, sufered James14 have been excluded, nor a Brunswick sat on the throne! We know that King, Lords, and Commons exists but by the people’s permission; if useful their titles can never be questioned: if not, they can never be bolstered by swearing. Vain eforts to change the current of the human mind, like the noisy winds, which, to the shallow sight, give a seeming current to the troubled face, whilst with ponderous weight great ocean moves the tide, with a slow majestic pace to its predestined limits. Although it were in nature to rescue Britain from impending destruction, it is not in nature that Ireland can be longer held by the disgraceful and ruinous vasselage by which she is bound. Much has been said of the loyalty of the South, contrasted with that of the North; if they mean loyalty to that system of government which this administration have adopted; to the jobbing and perjury of Grand juries; to tithe proctors, and land-pirates: to the annual exportation of two million worth of the produce of Ireland, to pay absentees, without any return; to the immoderate high rents and the low rate of wages; or the enormous expence by which these corruptions are moved and maintained, I will answer for it, that the people of Leinster, or Munster, and Connought, are as sensible of the misery and poverty these grievances have caused, and that they will go as far as the people of Ulster to get them redressed. I know the means which have been used / to persuade the Catholics of the South that the persecutions of the Catholics in the North, which have been so diabolically fomented and protected in Armagh, were the acts of Presbyterians of the North; but I stake whatever credit I possess with my Catholic and Presbyterian countrymen, on the assurance I give to the Presbyterians, that the Catholics of the South have buried in eternal oblivion all religious distinction, and in the assurance I give to the Catholics that the crimes with which their Presbyterian countrymen stand charged, and for which so many are dungeoned at this instant, is their zeal for the union of Irishmen

328

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

amongst one another, without distinction of sects or religion, it is the essence of christianity, it is the essence of all morality, and cannot by human laws be abolished. Trust me, my fellow-citizens, that as the minister of England perceives the dying convulsions of a country, on the destruction of whose liberty he has so long supported his power, he will be obliged to change his system in Ireland of tyranny and force, into concessions and conciliation; you will then see his minions exchanging the saucy fippancy with which they now insult and traduce you, into humiliation and meanness, with which they will endeavour to sooth you; the insolence of the coward, the sport of the droll, and the petulance of the puppy will soon evaporate into the insignifcance from whence they have risen; but let no wretched paliative induce you to allay your cause with corruption; let nothing short of a perfect representation satisfy you. With this admonition I leave you, but that I may not be suspected of seeking your confdence / by any other means than the fullest disclosure of my political sentiments, I promise you, as soon as time will permit, that I will lay before you the best account of the state of our country my poor abilities will allow me to furnish. Te best assurance I can give of my fdelity to you and your cause, is that I believe in a better order of things; that those who violate the property and rights of others will forfeit their own, whilst those who respect the rights and property of others will be certain to have theirs respected in turn. With these sentiments knowing that you had wisely determined never to interfere any more in elections, under the system of corruption and undue infuence, I have ofered my services to use every means in my power to efect its destruction, and fnding, that from the monopoly of one aristocratic faction or another, yours was the only place of popular election I could hope to succeed in. Tink it not presumptuous, my countrymen, that one who loves Liberty should seek her in the only asylum she has lef; think it not presumptuous, my fellow-citizens that one who will never outlive the threatened liberties of his country, should seek an advanced post where he may triumph in her cause, or fall in her defence. In contempt of calumny, united with you in brotherly love and afection, and in the glorious cause of Reform, I will ever remain your faithfull friend and fellow-citizen. ARTHUR O’CONNOR Belfast, Jan. 20, 1797.

LAKE, PROCLAMATION TO THE PEOPLE OF THE PROVINCE OF ULSTER

Gerard Lake, Proclamation to the People of the Province of Ulster (Belfast, 1797).

Lieutenant-General Gerard Lake (1744–1808), commanding the troops in Ulster in 1796–7, issued this proclamation in an efort to disarm and cripple what he clearly perceived to be a serious threat of insurrection. He sought as much information as possible about those planning insurrection and he urged loyalists to rally in support of the legal and constitutional authorities. He came in efect close to imposing martial law on the province. He was accused by his critics of ignoring abuses committed by troops under his command and also of overlooking the violence committed by loyalists. Lord Lieutenant Camden and the Irish Privy Council issued a proclamation on 17 May 1797 urging the utmost force to be used to suppress any insurrection.1 Gerard Lake was a professional soldier from a very early age. He fought in Germany during the Seven Years’ War, in America during the War of American Independence and in Flanders in 1793–4. In April 1798 he commanded all the government forces in Ireland. He defeated the Wexford rebels at Vinegar Hill on 21 June and helped Cornwallis defeat the invading French force at Ballinamuck on 8 September. His harsh treatment of the rebels brought him into conficted with Lord Cornwallis, the recently appointed Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. He later served with distinction in India and was made a viscount in 1807. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB and a biography of him, Memoir of the Life and Military Services of Viscount Lake, by Hugh W. Pearse (London: W. Blackwood & Sons, 1908). Notes 1.

Tis proclamation can be found in Te Journals of the House of Commons of the Kingdom of Ireland, vol. 17 (Dublin, 1797), Appendix, p. dccclvii.

– 329 –

Gerard Lake, Proclamation to the People of the Province of Ulster (Belfast, 1797).

Belfast, March 13, 1797 Whereas the daring and horrid outrages in many parts of this province, evidently perpetrated with a view to supersede the laws and the administration of justice by an organized system of murder and robbery, have increased to such an alarming degree, as, from their atrocity and extent to bid defance to the civil power, and to endanger the lives and properties of His Majesty’s faithful subjects. And whereas the better to efect their traitorous purposes, several persons who have been enrolled under the authority of His Majesty’s commissions, and others, have been forcibly and traitorously deprived of their arms; it is therefore become indispensably necessary, for the safety and protection of the well-disposed, to interpose the King’s troops under my command; and I do hereby give notice, that I have received authority and directions to act in such manner as the public safety may require. I do therefore hereby enjoin and require all persons in this district, (peace ofcers and those serving in a military capacity excepted) forthwith to bring in and surrender up all arms and ammunition which they may have in their possession, to the ofcer commanding the King’s troops in their neighbourhood. I trust that an immediate compliance with this order may render any act of mine to enforce it unnecessary. Let the people seriously refect, before it is too late, on the ruin into which they are rushing; let them refect on their present prosperity, and the miseries into which they will inevitably be involved by persisting in acts of positive rebellion; let them instantly, by surrendering up their arms, and by restoring those traitorously taken from the King’s forces, rescue themselves from the severity of military authority. Let all the loyal and well-intentioned act together with energy and spirit, in enforcing subordination to the laws, and restoring tranquillity in their respective neighbourhoods, and they may be assured of protection and support from me. And I do hereby invite all persons who are enabled to give information touching arms and ammunition which may be concealed, immediately to communicate the same to the several ofcers commanding His Majesty’s forces in

– 331 –

332

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

their respective districts; and for their encouragement and reward, I do hereby promise and engage that strict and inviolate secrecy shall be observed, with respect to / all persons who shall make such communication; and that every person who shall make it, shall receive as a reward the full value of all such arms and ammunition as shall be seized in consequence thereof. G. LAKE,1 Lieut.-Gen. Commanding the Northern District

THE APPEAL OF THE PEOPLE OF ULSTER

Te Appeal of the People of Ulster to their Countrymen, and to the Empire at Large (Belfast, 1797).

Tis short pamphlet was a ferce response to General Lake’s proclamation that virtually placed Ulster under martial law. Te author, clearly himself a United Irishman, denies the charges levelled against the United Irishmen of opposing all order in the province and of encouraging murder. He also accuses the authorities of double standards, in not protecting the Catholics against the violence perpetrated against them by militant loyalists in county Antrim. While there had been some recent attacks on magistrates, this was in response to their abuses of power against lovers of liberty. Te author even suggests that the authorities are trying to drive these lovers of liberty into an armed insurrection when all they seek are parliamentary reform and Catholic emancipation by peaceful means. He appeals to the Irish militia and yeomanry not to support the war that the authorities are, in efect, waging on the United Irishmen and to the British people to recognize that they share the same political aims as reformers in Britain. Rather than seeking to break Ireland’s connection with Britain, he wishes the lovers of liberty in both countries to unite in opposition to the oppressive systems of government in Britain and Ireland.

– 333 –

The Appeal of the People of Ulster to their Countrymen, and to the Empire at Large (Belfast, 1797).

Irishmen! Our best Citizens are entombed in Bastilles,1 or hurried on board Tenders,2 our Wives and our children are become the daily victims of an uncontrouled and licentious foreign3 soldiery. Irishmen! Ulster, one of your fairest provinces, containing one-third of the population of the land – Ulster, hitherto the pride and strength of Ireland, is proclaimed and put under the bar of Martial Law! Te Executive Government of the country has sentenced us to military execution, without trial, and the Legislature of the Country has sanctioned this illegal act without inquiry!4 Te Constituted Authorities of the land (without condescending to examine into the existence of our grievances, the truth of the outrages alledged against us, or the nature of the circumstances that may have provoked them), have stigmatized us as objects of terror to the rest of Ireland and of horror to the rest of Europe. What, you will naturally ask, are your crimes? – Hear them: Our enemies say, that under the appellation of United Irishmen, and by means of illegal oaths, we have established and organized a horrid system of murder; that we are the avowed enemies of all order and good government, and fnally, that our ultimate object is pillage, massacre, and plunder! Countrymen! these charges are false! Tey are malevolent; for the only proof which our accusers have pretended to adduce in their support is, that in one whole province, where the servants of Government have, for the last four years, by a system of premeditated persecution, endeavoured to drive the people into insurrection, a few individuals, who had rendered themselves notorious by their vindictive pursuit of this system, have, during the last six months, lost their lives. – We do not defend these outrages; they give us more real grief than they do our enemies. / But, how has it happened that the same horror was not expressed by the same persons, when a civil war was for two years carrying on in the county of – 335 –

336

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

Armagh,5 against the Catholics, supported by Magisterial exertions, and it was said by Ministerial connivance? Do you not know, countrymen, that these cruel persecutions were carried on by men, not only enjoying impunity, but boasting that they were acting under the authority of Government? Do you not know that the same system of tyranny and terror has been enforced with various success in almost every part of the North? that Belfast has been dragooned? that our most virtuous inhabitants have been nearly decimated? that Magistrates have frequently issued forth, by day and by night, at the head of parties of the army, to scour the country, to burn the houses, and imprison the persons, of those who are suspected to love liberty? Can you then wonder, if men, who have made themselves peculiarly obnoxious by their cruelties, should sometimes fall victims to individual vengeance? However you may lament in common with us, can you be surprised if the son, whose father has been torn from his family and illegally imprisoned, or carried on board the feet; if the husband, whose wife has been dragged from her lying-in bed, at the hour of midnight, and thrown into the street to see her house burned before her eyes; if the father, whose property has been destroyed, and his children cast out into want and misery; – Can you be surprised even if men, who are daily witnesses to such transactions, without redress, and without the shadow of legal authority, and who are themselves sufering under a grinding persecution, the acts of which cannot be easily particularised, but which, by its unceasing operation, crushes and destroys; – Can you be surprised if men thus situated, determined not to be forced into insurrection, should seek to assuage their revenge, and vainly hope to stop the current of general calamity by the assassination of the most atrocious of their persecutors? Do not, we beseech you, falsely impute their acts to the moral depravity of any body of men. – No: if the hands of the inhabitants of the North were not restrained by the strongest ties of duty and religion, the highest heads and most overbearing spirits of our oppressors would have long since expiated their tyranny. We have told you, Countrymen, the charges exhibited against us – hear now the facts, and for the truth of them we solemnly appeal to the Searcher of hearts. We are under an obligation (and we glory in it) to promote a brotherhood of afection among Irishmen of every religious persuasion. We are united in an organized system, not to promote murder, but to promote peace; not to destroy persons and property, but to save both from destruction. Lastly, beloved Countrymen, we are most solemnly pledged (a pledge we will never forfeit) to cooperate with you in every temperate and rational measure for obtaining freedom of our country, by a full and adequate representation of all the people of ireland, without regard to religious distinctions. / Tese are the crimes of Ulster. Tey are the common crimes of Ireland. How should it be otherwise, when they arise from the duty we owe to our Country and to our God? Yes, Irishmen, the sacred fame has become general. – Tat

Te Appeal of the People of Ulster to their Countrymen, and to the Empire at Large 337

which originated in Antrim has been reverberated from Cork, and all the intermediate space, from Wicklow to Mayo, glows with the same enthusiasm. It has been our glory to raise the abutments – to you belongs the still more glorious task of crowning the arch. Our intentions have been, and still are, to obtain the great objects of our pursuit, through the means of calm discussion, and their own unquestionable justice. Te common enemy know that these are the most powerful and irresistible weapons. It is, therefore, that they have practised upon us a system of reiterated aggression, unparalleled in the history of civilized nations, for the purpose of goading us into insurrection, or driving us into despair. Tey have hitherto failed, and they will still fail, thanks to that bountiful Being, who has endued us with Patience as well as Courage. We can, even yet, endure for our Country’s sake. But, Countrymen! is there not a point, beyond which forbearance becomes a crime, and human nature is incapable of enduring? Shall we be forced beyond that point? If we should, our poor and feeble oppressors would fnd, that United Ireland could, in an instant, trample them to the dust. To our national armed force, whether militia or yeomanry, we peculiarly appeal. Soldiers! when you took up arms to defend your Country, did you intend to turn them against your Countrymen? Was it to raise the Catholic against the Protestant, and the Protestant against the Catholic that you arrayed? Was it to support an Administration which has brought your Country to the verge of destruction, by a wicked war against Liberty abroad, and a still more wicked war against Liberty at home, that you swore allegiance? If you should ever, with parricidal hearts, turn your arms against your Fellow-citizens, whose only crime is their patriotism, would you not feel that you were guilty of Treason, Rebellion and Perjury against your King, your Country, and your God? Tink then in time, Remember you are Irishmen? Remember that you must shortly answer for every act of murder, or even pillage, that you might be induced, by unjust orders, to commit, before that BEING who is the Avenger of the oppressed. To the British Nation we also appeal! Is it criminal, Britons! to follow the example of your renowned Ancestors? If you feel the defects in your Representation, and if you are sensible that you, as well as we, have been precipitated into the most wicked and destructive wars, in consequence of those defects, can you possibly blame us, whose Representation is infnitely more inadequate, for our peaceable exertions to remedy those defects? – Shall Ireland be considered as hostile, because / she has caught a spark of that holy fre which was kept alive in your Island, when surrounding Europe was sunk under a barbarous Despotism? But you will be told that we wish to get rid of the connection. If that connection only existed in the manifold evils which have been heaped upon us by the present abominable Administration, we surely would wish for separation.

338

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

But, Fellow-subjects, connected as we are by the ties of blood – of a common language and polity; intimately connected as we are by our relative situation with each other and with the rest of the world, as well as by our mutual wants and redundancies – so far from wishing to lessen these ties of connection, we call upon, we entreat you to unite still farther with us in the just and necessary work of Reform. We conjure you, by the Manes of your Lockes,6 your Sidneys,7 your Hampdens,8 and your Russells,9 to join us in a great and united efort to save it – a radical Reform in the Representation of the People. Te removal of your present wicked Ministers will only operate as a temporary relief – the cause of all our evils will still remain. Had not your Minister10 known that his Infuence, owing to the defective state of our Representation, enabled him to draw from Ireland 150,000 men to recruit the Army, and 40,000 seamen to man the Fleet of the Empire, he would not so rapidly have rushed into this detestable War, which has brought you, as well as us, to the brink of ruin. Britons! remember the words of the most illustrious Statesman that ever adorned your Country or directed your Councils – of that Pitt11 who conducted the Empire to glory abroad whilst he cherished Liberty at home. In the year 1766, when Massachusets was charged with Rebellion, as Ulster is now, “I rejoice that America has resisted,” said that great man. “Tree millions of people, so dead to all the feelings of liberty as voluntarily to submit to be slaves, would have been ft instruments to make slaves of the rest. If America was to fall, (continued he) she would fall like the strong man; she would embrace the pillars of the State, and pull down the Constitution with her. She has been wronged; she has been driven to madness by injustice: Will you punish her for the madness you have occasioned?”12 – His Councils succeeded – the obnoxious laws were repealed,13 and America sat down contented. – Shortly afer, the system of coercion was again resorted to, and America was lost. Finally, we appeal to the Father of the Universe, whose Almighty Power we invoke, to conduct us by the paths of Peace, to Liberty and Happiness. Belfast, April 14, 1797.

ADDRESS OF THE INHABITANTS OF THE COUNTY OF ARMAGH

Address of the Inhabitants of the County of Armagh, to such of their Roman Catholic Brethren as have been Driven fom their Country by the Late Persecution ([c. 1797]).

Tis short address also attacks the conduct of the authorities (and the military) in persecuting the Catholics in County Armagh. Clearly written by a United Irishman, it seeks to unite the oppressed Catholics, who might be provoked into joining the militant Defenders, behind the reform programme, including religious equality and parliamentary reform, being advocated by the United Irishmen of Ulster.

– 339 –

Address of the Inhabitants of the County of Armagh, to such of their Roman Catholic Brethren as have been Driven from their Country by the Late Persecution ([c. 1797]).

FRIENDS, BRETHREN, and FELLOW-CITIZENS, In this unhappy Country, the designing Emissaries of a venal and profigate Administration have, with Impunity, too long, scattered amongst us the Seeds of Disunion and Religious Persecution. – Tey saw, that if the People were once united in the Bonds of Social Love and Afection, that System of Corruption, which they have substituted for the pure Spirit of the Constitution, would have perished for ever. Hence, Brethren, they adopted the diabolical Maxim, divide et impera.1 – In their Hands, the Religion of the most high GOD – the Spirit of which is Peace and Love and Union and Social Order, has become the Instrument of Discord and Bigotry – of Persecution, bloody and relentless. We lament that Infatuation – that misguided and ill-judged Zeal, which drove from their Habitations many of our most useful Citizens, and rendered our Country odious to the World. From this Moment, we wish to bury, for ever, all Animosities that may separate US from our Fellow-Citizens. In the UNION of Love – in the Spirit of Universal Benevolence – WE invite you, that are now forlorn and friendless Wanderers through the Kingdom, to return to your Habitations. – WE promise you Protection in the Exercise of the inalienable Rights of Man. Your Tyrants, abhorred by the Community, and skulking from the scrutinizing Eye of an injured People, have lost the Power to molest you. At your Return, you will fnd us UNITED AS ONE MAN, and ready to receive, without Religious Distinctions, our Countrymen into an holy and exalted Compact. Our Aim is, to procure a Reform in Parliament, and Catholic Emancipation – and to the attainment of these grand Objects, our Progress shall be moderate, yet frm – temperate, yet irresistable.

– 341 –

AN ACT TO EXPLAIN AN ACT MORE EFFECTUALLY TO SUPPRESS INSURRECTIONS, AND PREVENT THE DISTURBANCE OF THE PUBLIC PEACE

An Act to Explain An Act Passed in the Tirty-Sixth Year of His Majesty’s Reign, entitled An Act More Efectually to Suppress Insurrections, and Prevent the Disturbance of the Public Peace (1797), in Te Statutes at Large, Passed in the Parliaments held in Ireland, Vol. XVIII (Dublin: Printed by George Grierson, Printed to the King’s Most Excellent Majesty, 1798), pp. 440–2.

Tis Act strengthened and clarifed the Proclamation Act reproduced above because of the growing fear of insurrection and rebellion. It arose out of concern that proclamations and convictions might not be attempted or achieved because of any failure to observe the precise terms of the previous act. It also reinforced the condemnation of and penalties for the administering of illegal oaths or engagements, such as those being used by the United Irishmen.

– 343 –

An Act to Explain … An Act More Effectually to Suppress Insurrections, and Prevent the Disturbance of the Public Peace (1797), in The Statutes at Large, Passed in the Parliaments held in Ireland, Vol. XVIII (Dublin: Printed by George Grierson, Printed to the King’s Most Excellent Majesty, 1798), pp. 440–2.

[37 George III, cap. 38 (1797)] Whereas by an act passed in the thirty-sixth year of the reign of his present Majesty, it is among other things enacted, Tat within three days afer any country or part of a country shall, as therein directed, be by the lord lieutenant or other chief governor of this kingdom, proclaimed to be in a state of disturbance, or in immediate danger of becoming so, or as soon afer as may be, a petty session of the peace shall be held within such country, as therein directed, and that the justices of the peace assembled at such petty sessions, shall have power to adjourn from time to time, and place to place, as they shall fnd convenient, until the general sessions of the peace, or some adjournment thereof, shall be held next afer the frst meeting of such petty session, and the justices shall, at the frst petty session to be held by virtue of the said act, order and direct a notifcation signed by them, to be made throughout the district so proclaimed, that such district has been so proclaimed, and commanding the inhabitants to keep within their dwellings at all unseasonable hours, between sunset and sunrise, and warning them of the penalties to which a contrary conduct will expose them, and the said justices shall cause such notifcation to be distributed throughout such proclaimed district, and to be fxed up in some conspicuous place in all towns and villages within such district, by the constables of the country, or such other persons as they may think ft to appoint for the purpose: And whereas in one or more county or counties which, or parts of which have been proclaimed to be in a state of disturbance, or in immediate danger of becoming so, the justices assembled at such frst petty sessions, as aforesaid, have by order directed a notifcation to be made, as aforesaid, and such notifcations have been made by – 345 –

346

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

the clerk of the / peace, and doubts are entertained whether such notifcation or notifcations have been well made pursuant to the said act, from whence much inconvenience and litigation may arise, for remedy whereof, and to remove such doubts, be it enacted by the King’s most excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the lords spiritual and temporal, and commons in this present parliament assembled and by the authority of the same, Tat all such notifcations made or to be made in pursuance of the order of the justices, or majority of the justices assembled at such petty sessions, and in all other respects conformable to the said act of parliament, shall be deemed good and efectual to every purpose whatsoever, if the same have been or shall be made by the clerk of the peace, by any printed or written notice to which his name shall be afxed, printed, or written, though the same have not been or shall not be signed by any justice of the peace, and that no act or acts done or to be done in any county proclaimed, or to be proclaimed in pursuance of the said act, shall be void or voidable, merely because such notifcation had not been or shall not be signed by the justices of the peace at such petty sessions, provided the same was ordered by such justices at such sessions to be made, and was made by the clerk of the peace by their order. II. And be it further enacted, Tat no prosecution, suit, action, or attachment shall be commenced or carried on against any justice of the peace, sherif, constable, or other person for or on account of any thing done pursuant to the said act, in other respects merely on the ground that such notifcation had not been signed by the justices of the peace, or a majority of such justices assembled at such petty sessions. III. Provided always, Tat nothing herein contained shall extend, or be construed to extend, to avoid any adjudications heretofore actually made upon any appeals brought pursuant to the said act. IV. And be it further enacted, Tat all proclamations which have been heretofore issued, or shall hereafer be issued under the said recited act, by the lord lieutenant or other chief governor or governors of this kingdom, by and with the advice of his Majesty’s privy council, or the Dublin Gazette, importing to contain a copy of such proclamations respectively, shall be deemed and taken to be, and shall be conclusive evidence in all courts of civil or criminal jurisdiction in this kingdom, of all such facts as were or shall be necessary to authorize the issuing of such proclamations, as aforesaid, and every such proclamation shall be deemed and / taken in all such courts respectively, to have been issued in conformity to the several provisions of the said recited act. V. And to obviate doubts touching the administering or taking unlawful oaths, be it declared and enacted, Tat all oaths or engagements whatsoever, importing to bind the person taking or subscribing the same, to be of any association, brotherhood, society, committee or confederacy whatsoever, are unlawful

An Act to Explain An Act More Efectually to Suppress Insurrections

347

oaths, and engagements within the said recited act, and that any persons who by virtue of the said recited act, have for taking or administering such oaths, or for any other ofences been or shall be ordered to serve on board his Majesty’s feet, may by the warrant of the chief governor or governors of this kingdom, be ordered to serve in his Majesty’s land forces, and that the persons so ordered to serve in the land forces, shall not be liable to be sent as seamen on board the feet, but shall be detained in custody until sent to join the regiment in which they shall be ordered to serve.

‘THE DECLARATIONS, RESOLUTIONS AND CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED IRISHMEN’

‘Te Declarations, Resolutions and Constitution of the United Irishmen’, Journals of the House of Commons of the Kingdom of Ireland, 17 (1797), appendix, nos 24 and 25.

Both Houses of the Irish Parliament appointed Committees of Secrecy to report on what could be discovered about the aims and activities of the United Irishmen. Te House of Commons submitted its report to Lord Castlereagh, the Chief Secretary of Ireland, in July–August 1797. Tis report included many appendices with details of arms imported into Ireland, evidence gained from government informers, recent trials, proclamations against violent disturbances, extracts from radical newspapers, etc. Te most useful appendices, printed here, provide information on the constitution and the resolutions and declarations of the United Irishmen not easily found elsewhere. Te material, printed here, can be found in the very lengthy Appendix to volume 17 of the Journals on pp. dccclxxxviii–dcccxcii.

– 349 –

‘The Declarations, Resolutions and Constitution of the United Irishmen’, Journals of the House of Commons of the Kingdom of Ireland, 17 (1797), appendix, nos 24 and 25.

CONSTITUTION. 1st. Tis Society is constituted for the Purpose of forwarding a Brotherhood of Afection, a Communion of Rights and an Union of Power among Irishmen of every religious Persuasion, and thereby to obtain a complete Reform in the Legislature, founded on the Principles of civil, political and religious Liberty. 2d. Every Candidate for Admission into this Society shall be proposed by one Member and seconded by another, both of whom shall vouch for his Character and Principles. Te Candidate to be ballotted for on the Society’s subsequent Meeting, and if one of the Beans shall be black, he shall stand rejected. 3d. Each Society shall fx upon a weekly Subscription suited to the Circumstances and Convenience of its Numbers, which they shall regularly return to their Baronial by the proper Ofcer. 4th. Te Ofcers of this Society shall be a Secretary and Treasurer, who shall be appointed by Ballot every three Months; on every frst Meeting in November, February, May and August. 5th. A Society shall consist of no more than twelve Members; and those as nearly as possible of the same Street or Neighbourhood; whereby they may be all thoroughly known to each other, and their Conduct be subject to the censorial Check of all. 6th. Every Person elected a Member of this Society shall, previous to his Admission, take the following Test; but in order to diminish Risque it shall be taken in a separate Apartment, in the Presence of the Persons who proposed and seconded him only, afer which the new Member shall be brought into the Body of the Society, and there vouched for by the same.

– 351 –

352

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

test. “In the awful Presence of God, I, A. B. do voluntarily declare that I will persevere in endeavouring to form a Brotherhood of Afection among Irishmen of every religious Persuasion, and that I will also persevere in my Endeavours to obtain an equal, full and adequate Representation of all the People of Ireland. I do further declare that neither Hopes, Fears, Rewards or Punishments shall ever induce me, directly or indirectly, to inform on or give Evidence against any Member or Members of this or similar Societies, for any Act or Expression of theirs, done or made, collectively or individually, in or out of this Society, in pursuance of the Spirit of this Obligation.” 7th. No Person, though he shall have taken the Test, will be considered as an United Irishman until he has contributed to the Funds of the Institution, or longer than he shall continue to pay such Contribution. 8th. No Communication relating to the Business of the Institution shall be made to any United Irishman on any Pretence whatever, except in his own Society or Committee, or by some Member of his own Society or Committee. 9th. When the Society shall amount to the Number of twelve Members it shall be equally divided by Lot, (Societies in Country Places to divide as may best suit their local Situation) that is, the Names of all the Members shall be put into a Hat or Box, the Secretary or Treasurer shall draw out six individually, which six shall be considered the senior Society and the remaining six the junior, who shall apply to the Baronial Committee, through the Delegates of the senior Society, for a Number. Tis Mode shall be pursued until the whole Neighborhood is organized.

Order of Business at Meetings. 1st. New Members read Declaration and Test, during which Subscriptions to be collected. 2d. Reports of Committees received. 3d. Communications called for. 4th. Candidates ballotted for. 5th. Candidates proposed.

Constitution of Committees. Baronial Committees. 1st. When any Barony or other District shall contain from four to ten Societies, the Secretaries of these shall constitute a lower Baronial Committee; they should not exceed ten and be numbered in the Order of their Formation. /

‘Te Declarations, Resolutions and Constitution of the United Irishmen’

353

2d. An upper Baronial to consist of ten Secretaries from ten lower Baronials. 3d. Baronial Committees shall receive Delegates from Societies of a contiguous Barony, provided said Barony did not contain four Societies.

County Committees. 1st. When any County shall contain four or more upper Baronial Committees their Secretaries shall assemble and chuse Deputies to form a County Committee. 2d. County Committees shall receive Delegates from Baronial Committees of adjacent Counties if said Counties do not contain four Baronial Committees.

Provincial Committees. 1st. When two or more Counties shall have County Committees, two Persons shall be elected by Ballot from each to form a Provincial Committee. (for three Months.) 2d. Delegates from County Committees in other Provinces will be received, if such Provinces do not contain two County Committees.

National Committee. Tat when two Provincial Committees are formed, they shall elect fve Persons each, by Ballot, to form a National Committee. Societies frst Meetings in November, February, May and August to be on or before the 5th, Baronial Committees on or before the 8th, County Committees on or before the 25th of the above Months. Baronial, County and Provincial Committees shall meet at least once in every Month and report to their Constituents. Names of Committee Men should not be known by any Person but by those who elect them.

Test for Secretaries of Societies or Committees. “In the awful Presence of God, I, A. B. do voluntarily declare that as long as I shall hold the Ofce of Secretary to this I will, to the utmost of my Abilities faithfully discharge the Duties thereof. “Tat all Papers or Documents received by me as Secretary I will in Safety keep; I will not give any of them or any Copy or Copies of them to any Person or Persons, Members or others but by a Vote of this and that I will at the Expiration of my Secretaryship deliver up to this all such Papers as may be then in my Possession.”

354

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

RECAPITULATION. Societies to consist of not less than four, nor more than twelve; complete twelve; Under Baronials of not less than four Secretaries of Societies, nor more than ten, complete one hundred and twenty; Upper Baronials of not less than four Baronial Secretaries, nor more than ten, complete one thousand two hundred.

An Address of the County Committee of Dublin City, to their Constituents; and an Appendix to our glorious Constitution. many Hardships and Persecutions having been, and still continue to be suffered by the Brotherhood, partly occasioned by the misguided Zeal of some of its Members; partly by the incautious and indiscriminate Admission of Persons, without due Regard having been had to their moral Character, or sufcient previous Knowledge of their political Sentiments and Patriotism; and partly by the Arts and wicked Contrivances of our Enemies, to defeat our honest Pursuits, by which we hope to rescue our Country from the System of Corruption which has nearly destroyed it; your Committee think it necessary to recommend some Alterations as Remedies to those Evils, and as the Means of restoring Confdence, renewing Exertions, and enabling Societies and Committees to meet with Ease and Safety in future. We recommend, in the most earnest Manner, your constant Recollection of your solemn Obligation, to promote a Brotherhood of Afection amongst Irishmen of every religious Persuasion; sufer it not to be a mere Profession, but realize it by every Act of Benevolence and Kindness to each other, as Circumstances shall enable you, and as you would do to your natural Brothers. Union and Love are the Foundations of your Association, and they cannot be too strongly, or too frequently inculcated, in and out of your Meetings. Be sober and promote Sobriety in all your Circles; by the Observance of this, many Inconveniencies and much Hazard will be avoided, and more Good to yourselves and Loss to your Enemies will be thereby efected, than can possibly be calculated; to the same End it is recommended to abstain as much as possible from the Consumption of exciseable Articles, or those which pay high customary Duties, such as Wine, Spirits, Sugar, Tobacco, &c. you will thereby dry up the Springs and Sources of Corruption, that powerful Engine in the Hands of your cruel and implacable Enemies, a Government which draws its Resources from Vice, (such as Gambling and Drunkenness) must fall so soon as the People become Virtuous. We recommend the patriotic Practice of preferring, on all reasonable Occasions, the Manufactures and Products of your own Country to those of that Country from whence our Slavery is derived, and the Government of which is our only natural Enemy.

‘Te Declarations, Resolutions and Constitution of the United Irishmen’

355

Banish all violent and intemperate Language from your Meetings, be assured, nothing can injure the Cause of Liberty more than such Conversations; whoever persists in such, must either be dishonest or indiscreet, and therefore ought to be carefully avoided; violent and intemperate Language is afected by Spies or Enemies, and should therefore be watched; or where it is caused by intemperate Zeal, it ought to be corrected; for in this Case it has aforded but too much Occasion to your Enemies to calumniate your honest Purposes.

APPENDIX. Diminish, as much as possible, the Risque of giving or taking the Test; for this Purpose, therefore, we recommend that when any Person has been admitted a Member of a Society, and is to take the Test, Practice should be, that it be taken in the Presence of his Friend only who proposed him, or of such other Member of the Society as he may prefer for that Purpose. It is likewise strongly recommended, that one black Bean should exclude from Admission. Avoid, as much as possible, Meetings in public Houses, either of Societies or Committees; because they might be attended with much Danger, and the Occasions of Meeting induce no such Necessity; a few Minutes in any convenient Place will be sufcient for a small Number of Men to confer on the Objects of their Deliberation. As it appears from good Foundation, that an irregular System of Finance has produced a great Waste and Dissipation of the Funds, it is our decided Opinion, that no Society, Committee, or Treasurer under any Pretence, should be allowed to apply the Money passing through their or his Hands, to any Occasion whatever; but that the whole of the Subscriptions should pass unimpaired to the County Committee, who should be obliged, in reporting back to the Societies, to account for the Disposal of such Finances; of course all Applications for pecuniary Aid should be made to the County Committee, to which all the Necessities of the political Association must be reported. Te Societies are earnestly called upon to exert themselves with Zeal and Diligence, in paying in and forwarding their Subscriptions, for the Demands are of the utmost Urgency; the Suferings and Afictions of the Brotherhood greatly require Alleviation. It is also strongly recommended, that each Society shall fx upon a weekly Subscription suited to the Circumstances and Convenience of its Members, which they shall regularly return to their Baronial by the proper Ofcer. Your Societies should be new modelled immediately; and on the most mature Deliberation, and all Circumstances considered, we are decidedly of Opinion, that no Society should consist of more than twelve Members, and those, as nearly as possible, of the same Street or Neighbourhood, whereby they

356

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

may be all thoroughly well known to each other, and their Conduct be subject to the censorial Check of all. / We recommend baronial Committees to consist only of the Secretaries for the Time being, of ten Societies, Which Number should on no account be exceeded; baronial Committees to be numbered in the Order of their Formation. Te District Committee to be composed of the secretaries for the Time being of the baronial Committees, but not to exceed ten Members, but if the Baronials should be so numerous in the district as to render it necessary, fve, fx, seven, eight, or any Number, more or less, of the baronials, as the Case may require, most convenient to each other, should each send their Secretary to an upper baronial Committee, from which upper baronials, in that case, Secretaries should be sent to constitute the District Committee; it being earnestly recommended that no Committee, whether baronial or district, should exceed ten Persons. Te County Committee to be constituted, as at present, by two Members from each District Committee. Observing these Recommendations and Regulations, we rely, that Order will be restored and Confdence revived; as Risque will be so considerably diminished. August 27th, 1797.

No. XXV. Printed Hand Bills distributed by the United Irishmen.

ADDRESS TO THE MORE WEALTHY CLASSES OF UNITED IRISHMEN. You to whom fortunate Circumstances give a Power of promoting the public Cause, with so much general Efcacy, and so little personal Risque; who may alleviate, from a Portion of your Superfuities, the Suferings of those adventurous Brethern [sic], whom an over-ardent, but on the whole a necessary Zeal, has subjected to the Vengeance of Government, whilst a cautious Reserve has exempted most of you from Persecution: We call upon you in what we trust is a well founded Confdence, that you will make up by pecuniary Contributions, for the Defciency or Neglect of other Exertions. We know that all Men cannot be useful in the same Way, and do not desire that Men in delicate Situations should run unnecessary Hazards; but he surely is a luke-warm Patriot, without Title to Confdence or Credit, who goes no farther than barren Professions; thinks it enough to give a Toast to the Cause of Liberty, or utter some Sneaking Condemnation of the Atrocities of Government.

‘Te Declarations, Resolutions and Constitution of the United Irishmen’

357

Unless it be your own Faults, Men of Wealth and Education, you will be the frst to proft by the Reform of Abuses and solid Independence of your Country. You, for the most Part, yet escaped from the Vengeance of its Enemies, whilst they who laboured to prepare it, have some of them been deprived of Life, others lost Health and Fortune some were hurried to distant Climes, the Regions of Pestilence and Death; and many, very many linger at this Moment in the Bastiles of our Tyrants. Imprisonment, a Ting so horrible in itself, is aggravated in the Cause of those virtuous Men, whose invincible Fidelity an abandoned Administration persecutes with the utmost Rigour: Te common Attentions which Humanity seldom refuses to Felons and Murderers, are frequently withheld from the United Irishmen; and being withheld by Order (it is said) of those in high Authority, require to be supplied by more than ordinary Means. As far as our Funds could hitherto allow, some Provision has been made for the Wants of our Brethren, but from the Irregularity that has crept into Payment of Subscriptions, and with the Exception of a few bright Examples, the small Obligation they as yet owe to the Rich, our Means are inadequate to the Relief of our Fellow-suferers. Where an industrious Citizen is torn from his Employment or Pursuits, lies Captive in a Dungeon; where a Wife with her Children is robbed of the Protection of her Companion, every Person a Friend to the Cause for which he sufers and which his Virtue scorns to betray, will feel the Call of Duty and of Honour to come forward in his Support. If a Trial at last be granted, Innocence has still to pay for being defended; it has still to struggle with an Host of suborned or tutored Witnesses, a Bar of Crown lawyers, Packed Juries, sometimes prejudiced sometimes corrupt Judges, before whom a Charge must be twice refuted, Malice twice confounded, and Innocence made clearer than the Sun, to obtain a Verdict of Acquittal. What under Heaven can more forcibly interest the generous Mind than the Suferings of the imprisoned United Irishmen, and the Virtue of the Suferers. Whilst Administration does not disdain to profer immense Sums as a Lure to Perfdy and the Purchase money of Blood, it can procure but a few Out-casts only, already abandoned to every Species of Vice; and the Jails overfow with our persecuted, pennyless Brethern [sic]: Of those several have scorned to save their Lives by Treachery to their glorious Cause, but carried their Principles and their Secrets inviolate to the Grave; and many more at this Hour, with the Sword of Despotism threatening their Existence, hold them in their faithful Bosoms, as in a Citadel which Cowardice will not surrender, or Lucre ever buy. Oh! much injured Countrymen! so ofen contemned by your foreign Oppressors, more culpably reviled by some unnatural Natives of the Land, Traitors to your Interests and Strangers to your Virtues, what Nation can boast a higher Character of Honour than you now confer upon your own. With the Terrors of Punishment and Death on one Side; the Allurements of Reward and

358

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

Impunity on the other; you infexibly adhere to your plighted Faith and Obligations, and exhibit a Proof of moral Character and Integrity, which few People have ever equalled – none have ever surpassed. Much injured and gallant Country; a Day will come when your magnanimous Patience will be requited: It shall not be forgotten, that although your Dwellings were destroyed, your little Property laid waste, tho’ Fear is a Stranger to your Hearts, and you lost all you had to lose, yet did you hearken to the Voice of Reason dissuading from premature Resistance, which alone can bring Ruin upon your Country, or frustrate the brilliant Destiny that awaits it. Why should Irishmen bound to each other by Ties so sacred and so honourable be found less zealous in each other’s Support; than their Enemies are zealous to put them down? If Imprisonment be applied to torture Patriotism, it cannot conquer; yet shall a Brotherhood of Afection go forth into the Cell; and besides the Consolations of Sympathy carry with it the little Comforts of which Nature stands in Need. And if perchance this Address should fall into other Hands, than those for whom it is intended, we conjure such People to bestow one Moment’s dispassionate Refexion upon the Views and Measures of Government, and the Object and Proceedings of the United Irish, let them determine which is better, a fee Legislature, or a pensioned Parliament; a national Administration, or an irresponsible foreign Executive; an Oblivion of religious Animosities, or the exterminating Persecution of Orange-men.1 Let them, if they be Children of this Soil, contrast the System of IRISH UNION with that of ENGLISH DISSENSION; the Fidelity, Patriotism and Honour of the Supporters of one, with the polluted Spy, the blood-thirsty Magistrate, the merciless Bravo, the venal and sanguinary Senator, who rank as the Friends of the present Government. When they shall have compared the Men and the Measures, they will feel that their Properties and Lives will be most secure under the Protection of the United Irish, and that their exaggerated Fears of the Efects of a Revolution can have no Foundation, unless in their own Misconduct.

IRISHMEN! Te Period is fast approaching, which must fx our Destiny. Te present Rulers of Ireland have extended the System of Tyranny and Extermination as far as can be excuted without depriving them of Worshippers and Slaves; not satisfed with feecing the People, and mercilesily exposing them to Penury and Want, they glut themselves with Blood. – “See with what Heat these Dogs of Hell advance, To waste and havoc yonder World, so fair And good created.”2

‘Te Declarations, Resolutions and Constitution of the United Irishmen’

359

Ah! whence that Noise! cometh it from the Spirits of murdered Friends, the Groans of imprisoned Patriots? No, your Groans shall not be heard in vain, you shall be revenged – soon shall we hail that auspicious Day, ushered in by a bright and cloudless Sky, which shall set you free, accompanied by a general Shout of Ireland as it should be. – Tremble then, thou Ministers of Death, ere that Day arrives, fy from a Soil which you have cursed by your Counsels, which you have polluted by your Crimes. / Countrymen, Be frm; trust in your Strength; be united; before one Month passes, you shall be free; – honoured Patriots become more respectable by Captivity, and you, ye virtuous Fugitives, with Hearts of sterling Worth, be not appalled at the gorgeous Shew of Power exhibited – a few declining Suns, and it passeth away, never more to sully our Horizon; be of good Comfort, the Hearts of the People are with you, and soon shall you receive the marked Gratitude of a free People. We are accused of a Predilection for French Principles – supposing the Fact, who forced them on us? Men who have taken from us that which not enriches them and makes us poor indeed; Usurpers, who exceed in Persecution the human Sacrifces of former Ages; but they mistake, we contend only for Irish Rights; and whatever Coincidence there be between the Rights of Ireland and France, has been established by the God of Nature, and who shall impiously disjoin them. Friends, Liberty, like the great Orb of Nature has its Periods of Darkness and Efulgence; but let us not vainly imagine that what is only contingent, can interrupt the great Plan of the Deity, in perfecting the Happiness of Mankind. We as a Portion of intelligent Beings want not the moral Freedom to will, nor the physical Power to act. Te frst is confrmed by our Union; and to support our Claim to both, half a Million of Heroes are ready – yes, they only wait the second coming,3 to commence the Millenium of Freedom. And thou noble-minded Youth; whose princely Virtues acquire new Splendour, from a fervent Zeal for your Country’s Rights: Oh! may the Genius of Liberty, ever faithful to its Votaries, guard your Steps – may the new Harp of Erin4 vibrate its thrilling Sounds through the Land, to call you forth, and hail you with the angelic Cry of the Deliverer of our Country. March 27, 1798. A CITIZEN.

360

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

TO THE UNITED IRISHMEN. AT this awful and important Crisis, when the Tyrants of Ireland violate every Tye that binds Man to Society; when “Rigour beyond the law,” is avowed and practised by the Governors, and adopted as a defensive Duty by the governed; when the judicial Bench is made the Seat of Assassination; where Yelverton5 weeps over the Victim in the Refnement of Cruelty, or Toler6 with less Equivocation, mingles the course Wit of an Horse-jockey, with the Solemnity of a Sentence that dooms an Irishman to Death; when the art of printing that invaluable Bulwark of Liberty, that inestimable, Source of Happiness, that powerful Opponent of Despotism, is openly and contemptuously annihilated by the Servants and Slaves of a foreign Government assuming the Mockery of Legislators, like a Divan of Saracens,7 or a War Council of Vandals,8 sweeping with Barbarian Ferocity every written Monument of Knowledge, every Trace of Letters from the Face of the Land. Worthy Progeny of the frst English Invaders, whose savage Legislation banished Instruction by transporting and hanging the Irish Teachers, under the specious Pretext of eradicating the Catholic Faith; – Infamous Oppressors! how unlike the generous Ambition of ancient Rome, who carried the Arts into the Countries she conquered; she polished the Nations into which she bore her Eagles, where your Banners waved, you created Enormity, Barbarism, Extermination, as a French Orator truly said. “you would rather reign over a Church-yard, than cease to govern.” When an O’Connor9 is hunted from his Country, and a Conspiracy made in the British Cabinet against his Life, for the Crime of loving Ireland; when Fitzgerald10 is a Fugitive, for sacrifcing the Prejudices of Birth to accelerate the Happiness of his Country, and repelling with the Arms of Justice that infamous Power that burns the Peasant out of his Dwelling, or puts him on the Bayonet; when the honourable Trade of a Merchant, the peaceable one of a Physician, the learned Profession of a Lawyer, the humble one of a Husbandman or an Artist, are no Protection against a Persecution that is directed against the Virtue and Integrity of Irishmen, that will eradicate the Name of Ireland, if not speedily checked in its horrid Career by an united Appeal to Heaven, which will ultimately give to our armed Exertions the Means of Victory, Liberty, and terrible Justice. In the preparative Interim, let Sobriety be national and unchangeable; by abstaining totally from the Use of Spirituous Liquors you will destroy the Excise, which is the only Branch of Revenue remaining, from whence is produced the principal Strength of Government; you will prevent the Distillation of Grain, which consumes nearly double the Quantity that is otherwise used for the Necessaries of Life; you will consequently make Bread one third cheaper, beneft the Community, and embarrass your Enemies. To promote this desirable Object, let the following Test be taken:–

‘Te Declarations, Resolutions and Constitution of the United Irishmen’

361

I, A. B. do solemnly promise, by the Obligation of an U.I. which I have taken, that I will not make use of any spirituous Liquors, nor sufer them to be used where I have any Infuence, for Months, nor will I associate with any Person who will violate this sacred Obligation.

IRISHMEN. a new act of base and perfdious Tyranny, directed against the whole of the Patriotism of Ireland, though immediately and personally operating only on a few Individuals, has deprived us for a Time of the Countenance and Consolation of honest and able Men, whose only Crime is the Suspicion of being your Friends. Our Oppressors, despairing to efect by the most subtle Refnements of legalized Murder, by partial Sherifs, by packed Juries, and by Judges sanguinary, timid or corrupt, the Destruction of the Victims whom they had pre-doomed to die at the approaching Assizes, so long as they could leave them the Protection of faithful and eloquent Advocates known to be zealous in their Cause, and pledged to their Defence, have robbed the latter of Liberty, in order to rob the former of Life. Tat Administration, and that Legislature, who so lately told you there was no Conciliation for Ireland, have with perfect Consistency, followed up this Denunciation of Carnage and Proscription, of Fire and Sword, of Robbery and Rape. Tis explicit and unequivocal Declaration of War on the Irish People, by a Proceeding which leaves not a Shadow of Doubt or Ambiguity to disguise their Intentions; which forces four hundred thousand fghting Men, the physical Strength of Ireland, to make, in convenient Time, their fnal Option between Death and Self-defence, and which proves, by Evidence more than palpable, that this Nation and that Administration cannot exit together. Yet has this, their last Treason, like all their former ones, turned with an overwhelming Recoil upon themselves. On the memorable Day, which saw so many virtuous and respectable Citizens of Dublin dragged ignominiously to Prison, by arbitrary Mandates unsupported by Information on Oath, Confusion and Trepidation marked the Conduct of the Oppressors, while the unclouded Serenity, the calm unassuming Fortitude of conscious Innocence, beamed from the Countenance of the oppressed. With mingled Horror and Contempt, the Capital saw the Prime-Miscreant, the Robespierre of Ireland, the nefarious Author and Apologist of Atrocities without Name and Number, appalled by the mere Gaze of Irish Eyes, and shaking in a Paroxysm of Rage and Terror, while the murderous Weapon trembled in his palsied Hand, the strong Tirst of Blood struggling in vain with the still stronger Impulses of conscious Guilt and native Cowardice. For us, the keen but momentary Anxiety, occasioned by the Situation of our invaluable Friends, subsided, on learning all the Circumstances of the Case, into a calm Tranquillity, a consoling Conviction of Mind, that they are as safe

362

Ireland in the Age of Revolution, 1760–1805: Volume 4

as Innocence can make Men now; and to these Sentiments were quickly added a redoubled Energy, a tenfold Activity of Exertion which has already produced the happiest Efects. Te Organization of the Capital is perfect. No Vacancies existing, Arrangements have been made, and are still making, to secure for our oppressed Brethren whose Trials approach, the Beneft of legal Defence; and the Centinels whom you have appointed to watch over your Interests, stand frm at their Posts, vigilant of Events, and prompt to give you Notice and Advice, which, on every Occasion at all requiring it, rely on receiving. Tis Recital, Irishmen, is meant to guard those of you, who are remote from the Scene of the late Events, against the Consequences of Misrepresentation and Mistake. Te most unfounded Rumours have been set afoat, fabricated for the double Purpose of Delusion and Intimidation. Your Enemies talk of Treachery, in the vain and fallacious Hope of creating it; but you, who scorn equally to be their Dupes or their Slaves, will meet their Forgeries with dignifed Contempt, incapable of being either goaded into untimely Violence, or sunk into pusillanimous Despondency. Be frm, Irishmen, but be cool and cautious: be patient yet a while; trust to no unauthorised Communications; and above all, we warn you, again and again we warn you, against doing the Work of your Tyrants, by premature, by partial or divided Exertion. If Ireland shall be forced to throw away the Scabbard; let it be at her own Time, not at theirs. Dublin, March 17th, (St. Patrick’s Day) 1798. /

TO THE UNITED IRISHMEN. Countrymen, No Moment was ever so awful to Ireland as the present one – Liberty or Slavery is now before us. Tat the Decision is in your Hand, I am well assured. Glorious Prospect! Te People of Ireland are United. Shew the pitiful Tyrants who calumniate you – Shew Europe – Shew the World that you are a Band of Brothers, actuated by a Sense of Honour, Virtue and Patriotism – Shew an Example of the Efects of your Principles in Armagh. Te Hills and Vallies which were lately stained with Blood, are now covered by the real Spirit of the Gospel, and Peace, and Love, and Charity, and Union reign in the Hearts of Irishmen! – Look at this, ye Traducers, ye Dividers, ye Devourers of Ireland. Yes, thank Heaven, we are United, and that our Enemies know right well. Let not the honest Indignation of your virtuous Souls provoke you to a Word or an Action unworthy of your Country or your Cause, when you hear yourselves termed “a Nest of execrable and infamous Traitors.” You must learn to smile at the impotent Attacks of malignant Despair. Look at the Map, says a Ministerial Character, and you will fnd that Ireland must belong to England or France. What Occasion to look at the Map, or why

‘Te Declarations, Resolutions and Constitution of the United Irishmen’

363

employ the Word must? But, if this be the Decree of Fate for Ireland, let it be done with Unanimity, with Love, and with Power; let no internal Broils, no local Situations, no religious Opinions, ever provoke an Irishman to spill the Blood of an Irishman. But let us for the Sake of our common Interest, for the Sake of our common Country, for the Sake of our common God and Father, go with one Hand and one Heart together. Trouble not yourselves whether France is to send 40 or 50,000 Troops here; whether England is to send 40 or 50,000 Troops here; but turn your Attention to Ireland – think of what she was, what she is, and what she may be. Tink, that were you to divide as in former Days, and one Part to Seek Protection and Assistance from one of those powerful Nations, the other party from the other Nation, what Carnage and Rivers of Blood would ensue – Slavery would follow, and Ireland be undone, perhaps for ever. But in your Union is your Safety – in your Union is your Strength, your Importance and your Liberty. In whatever Scale your Weight is cast, it will preponderate in an Instant. He is your Enemy and the Man of Blood who would divide you – he is your Friend and the Man of Peace who would keep you together. I am far from assuming so much Importance, as to attempt laying down a Plan of Conduct at this critical Period. Your Obedience to the Laws, your Sobriety, Industry, Prudence and Patience, have rendered you the Envy of your Enemies, and make any Ting I could say unnecessary. Your Will must prevail – let it then be matured – let it result from Refection – from cool, determined Adherence to your Principles – from a Regard to the Peace of your Country – from the glorious Love of Liberty and the Irish Name. If your Hearts pant afer a Continuation of the British Minister’s Behaviour to Ireland11 – if you admire the War, the Conduct of the War, and the Consequences of the War: If you be satisfed that three-fourths of the People of Ireland should not enjoy the Benefts of the Constitution – that the very Name of Reform should be scouted with Derision – if the Suspension of the Trial by Jury, the Convention Bill, the Gunpowder Bill, the Proclamations and Bastiles appear eligible and salutary, you will have no Difculty how to conduct yourselves. But should these Tings appear to you in a diferent Point of View, it will be necessary, perhaps, to conduct yourselves in a diferent Manner. And that that Manner may terminate in the Glory, Liberty and Happiness of Ireland, ought to be the honest Wish of every honest IRISHMAN.

EDITORIAL NOTES

Declaration of the Catholic Society of Dublin 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

PETER HOEY: Peter Hoey (d. 1813) was a Catholic printer and bookseller and a member of the Dublin Society of United Irishmen from 1791. to the subjects of an arbitrary Monarch: Tis is a reference to the French subjects of Louis XVI (1754–93). Te octennial period: Te Octennial Act of 1768 restricted the maximum duration of the Irish Parliament to eight years. the British Senate did not refuse its attention to the unfortunate exiles of Africa: Te Westminster Parliament at this time was debating whether to abolish the slave trade. Theobald M’Kenna, Secretary: Teobald McKenna (d. 1808) was a Catholic barrister, who served for some years as the Secretary of the Catholic Committee, but resigned in December 1791 and was replaced by the more radical Teobald Wolfe Tone. He supported Catholic emancipation and moderate parliamentary reform for many years and is the author of several pamphlets in these volumes. Tere is a short entry on him in the ODNB, where he is referred to as Mackenna.

Strictures on the Declaration of the Society Instituted for the Purpose of Promoting Unanimity amongst Irishmen, and Removing Religious Prejudices 1. 2. 3.

4. 5. 6.

Mr. Troy: James Troy (d. 1791 was a rich Dublin merchant and the father of John Tomas Troy, later Roman Catholic Archbishop of Dublin. Comerford: John Comerford (d. 1795) was a rich merchant in Cork and Dublin. He was the father of John Comerford, a well-known miniature painter. O’Brien: Denis Tomas O’Brien (1736–1814) was a rich Dublin merchant, involved in various trades, including textiles. He was in partnership with John Comerford senior, who was also his brother-in-law. He was a member of the Catholic Committee from 1791, but he seceded with Lord Kenmare’s more moderate faction in December 1791. He nevertheless attended the Catholic Convention in 1792. Mr. Byrne: Edward Byrne (d. 1804) was a very rich Dublin Merchant and an active member of the Catholic Committee. Mr. Roche: Stephen Roche (1724–1804) was a rich wine merchant in Cork. his Majesty being somewhat bound by the ties of his coronation oath: George III’s coronation oath had required him to swear to defend the Protestant religion and the Protestant church establishment. Tis was to persuade him to oppose Roman Catholic emancipa– 365 –

366

Notes to pages 21–32

tion in 1800–1, when the Prime Minister, William Pitt, had hoped to persuade him to agree to this concession to the Irish Catholics. 7. His English subjects have recently displayed a fery zeal in support of the present system: A reference to the alarming Gordon riots of 1780 in London, sparked of by anti-Catholic prejudice against a recent efort by the Westminster Parliament to promote a Catholic relief measure. 8. Simon Butler: Simon Butler (1757–97) was the third son of the tenth Viscount Mountgarret. He was the frst chairman or president of the Dublin Society of United Irishmen, founded in 1791. A landowner and barrister, he was fercely attacked in the House of Lords in 1793 for his support for radical political publications and he was imprisoned for six months. He fed to Scotland for a time afer his release. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. 9. Napper Tandy: James Napper Tandy (1740–1803) was a Protestant tradesman in Dublin. He served for a time on the Dublin corporation. He was a radical agitator for parliamentary reform. He had been active in opposing Prime Minister Pitt’s commercial propositions of 1785. He helped found the Dublin Society of United Irishmen in 1791 and he served as its frst secretary. He also joined the Defenders. He fed to the United States 1795–8, but arrived in France in February 1798 and helped plan the French invasion of Ireland that year. He landed in Ireland, but soon retreated. He was later arrested in Hamburg, put on trial in Dublin, but was reprieved and exiled to France in 1802. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB and a biography, R. T. Coughlan, Napper Tandy (Abergele, Conwy: Anvil Books, 1976). 10. his Majesty’s Attorney General: Arthur Wolfe (1739–1803), later frst Baron and then frst Viscount Kilwardin, was MP for Coleraine 1783–90, Jamestown 1790–7 and Dublin 1797–8. He was Solicitor General 1787–9, Attorney General 1789–98, then Chief Justice of the King’s Bench from 1798. He was murdered by a mob of rebels on the streets of Dublin during Robert Emmet’s rising in 1803. Tere are entries on him in the HoIP 1692–1800 and the ODNB. 11. in 1779 and 1781: Tis is a misdated reference to the Catholic Relief acts of 1778 and 1782, printed above in Volumes 1 and 2 respectively.

General Committee of Roman Catholics 1.

2.

3.

4.

a Nobleman: Tomas Browne (1726–95), fourth Viscount Kenmare, a leading Roman Catholic landowner and nobleman, who played a leading role in the Catholic Committee before seceding from it in 1791 because his moderate views clashed with those of the radicals on the Committee who wished to be more aggressive in promoting Catholic relief. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. Mr. Byrne: Edward Byrne, a rich Catholic merchant who sent out a circular letter seeking support for the campaign to petition the king for further Roman Catholic relief measures, including the right to vote in parliamentary elections. that Sub-Committee: Tis body, which became known as the Backlane Parliament from the place in Dublin where it held its meetings from December 1791, helped draf the Catholic petition to the king in late 1792. Mr. Secretary Hobart: Robert Hobart (1760–1816), later fourth Earl of Buckinghamshire, was an Irish MP for Portarlington 1784–90 and Armagh City 1790–7 and Chief Secretary 1789–93. He defended the Protestant ascendancy and was reluctant to accept the petition seeking the enfranchisement of Catholics. He was later compelled by the

Notes to pages 32–41

5.

6.

7. 8.

9.

367

British government to promote the bills in 1793 to enfranchise the Catholics and to establish an Irish militia. Tere are entries on him in HoIP 1692–1800 and the ODNB. Mr. Keogh: John Keogh (1740–1817), a Dublin merchant very active in the Catholic Committee, helped appoint Teobald Wolfe Tone as its secretary. He was a friend of Edmund Burke (the famous politician and political writer) and a member of the Dublin Society of United Irishmen. He was active in submitting the Catholic petition to George III and he helped secure the Catholic Relief Act of 1793, which enfranchised Roman Catholics in Ireland on the same terms as Protestants. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. Mr. Richard Burke: Richard Burke (1758–94) was the son of the celebrated Edmund Burke. He acted as the London agent of the Catholic Sub-Committee. He was MP for Malton in the Westminster Parliament from 1794. Mr. H: Hobart. Mr. William Bellew: William Bellew (c. 1762–1835) was the brother of Sir Edward Bellew, sixth baronet, of Barmeath, County Louth and a relation of the Bellews of Mount Bellew, County Galway. See K. Harvey, Te Bellews of Mount Bellew (Dublin: Four Courts Press, 1998). Randal McDonnell, Esq: Randal McDonnell (d. 1821) was a business partner of Edward Byrne and was later a leading Catholic merchant in Dublin. He was a member of the Dublin Society of Irishmen.

A Report of the Debate … for the Purpose of Considering the Propriety of Adopting the Declaration of the General Committee of the Roman Catholics of Ireland 1.

2.

3. 4.

5.

6.

P. BYRNE: Patrick Byrne was a Catholic printer and bookseller. He was a member of the Catholic Convention, a member of the Dublin Society of United Irishmen, and was arrested in May 1798 for his involvement in the Irish rebellion. He was banished by an act of parliament, 38 George III, c. 38. He emigrated to Philadelphia, United States. Bernard O’Neil, Esq: Bernard O’Neill (c. 1715–98) represented County Antrim at the Catholic Convention of 1792. He took the chair at the meeting on 30 October 1792 which prepared the Catholic address to the king and signed the Catholic petition of 1793 as the representative for County Antrim. Mr. Edward Byrne: Edward Byrne was a rich Catholic merchant in Dublin, who was active in securing support for the campaign for the enfranchisement of Catholics. Dr. Troy: John Tomas Troy (1739–1823) was the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Dublin from 1786. He was determined to improve clerical discipline and religious practices. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB and a scholarly study of him, Vincent J. McNally, Reform, Revolution and Reaction: Archbishop John Tomas Tory and the Catholic Church in Ireland, 1787–1817 (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1995). Mr. Keogh: John Keogh (1740–1817) was a rich Dublin merchant involved in silk and brewing. He was an active campaigner for the enfranchisement of Roman Catholics in Ireland. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. the Act of Settlement: Tis Act of 1662, passed by the Irish Parliament, restored to some Catholic proprietors land which they had lost afer the Cromwellian conquest of Ireland in the early 1650s. Many of these Catholic proprietors lost their lands again afer the Williamite conquest of 1689–91.

368 7. 8.

9. 10.

11.

12. 13. 14.

15.

16.

17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23.

24.

Notes to pages 41–52 descended fom a Milesian stock: In Irish mythology the earliest Gaelic or Celtic settlers of the country hand come from Scythia and then Iberia, and were known as Milesians. Mr. Hamill: Hugh Hamill was active in the Catholic cause 1790–5. He served on the Catholic Sub-Committee with John Keogh, Edward Byrne, Denis Tomas O’Brien, Randal MacDonnell and John Sweetman. He signed the Catholic petition of 1793 as the representative for County Monaghan. In 1795 he was involved in the negotiations with Wolfe Tone and Henry Grattan for Catholic emancipation when Fitzwilliam was Lord Lieutenant. Brazen Walls: See in the Old Testament, Jeremiah 1:18. Mr. Macdonnell: Randall MacDonnell (d. 1821) was a leading Catholic merchant in Dublin and a partner with Edward Byrne. He was an active member of the Catholic Sub-Committee and of the Dublin Society of United Irishmen. Mr. Sweetman: John Sweetman (1752–1826) was a Catholic brewer in Dublin and a radical member of the Catholic Sub-Committee and of the Catholic Convention. He denied a government charge that he was a member of the Catholic Defenders, but he did join the Dublin Society of United Irishmen. He was arrested in 1798 for his involvement in the Irish rebellion, was sent to prison on Fort George in Scotland in 1799 and exiled in 1802. He did not return to Ireland until 1820. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. to give a testimony to our brethren of the truth which is within us: 2 John 2 and the 3 John 3. though proud oppression would not hear them: Jafer in Tomas Otway’s Venice Preserved, or A Plot Discovered, I.i. unequalled man: Henry Grattan (1746–1820), the Protestant Irish patriot who had done much to secure Irish legislative independence in 1782 and was now actively campaigning for Roman Catholic emancipation. Tere are entries on him in the HoIP 1692–1800 and the ODNB. See also R. B. McDowell, Grattan: A Life (Dublin: Te Lilliput Press, 2001). Mr. Thompson: Anthony Tompson sat on the Catholic Sub-Committee and signed the Catholic petition of 1793 as the representative for the town of Turles, in County Tipperary. Wolfe Tone referred to him as ‘an infernal Tory’. See Life of Teobald Wolfe Tone, ed. T. Bartlett (Dublin: Lilliput Press, 1998), p. 220. Mr. O’Sullivan: possibly Jeremiah Sullivan (d. 1818), a Catholic papermaker in Dublin, who was a member of the Catholic Convention and the Dublin Society of United Irishmen. Mr. J. Byrne: Tere were four men named John Byrne and one Joseph Byrne in the Dublin Society of United Irishmen and some of these were also Catholics. Visirs: A Vizier was a high ofcial in ancient Egypt and in several Muslim countries. Right Honourable Member of the British House of Commons: Edmund Burke (1729–97), the great speaker and writer on politics. the nine millions of beef-eaters: the English nation. the castle: Dublin Castle, the seat of the Lord Lieutenant and the Irish executive. the present Lord Lieutenant: John Fane (1759–1841), tenth Earl of Westmorland, was Lord Lieutenant of Ireland from October 1789 to December 1794. the Secretary: Robert Hobart (1760–1816), later fourth Earl of Buckinghamshire, was Chief Secretary 1789–93. Tere are entries on him in the HoIP 1692–1800 and the ODNB. “Te Digest of the Popery Laws,”: Te report of a committee appointed by the Society of the United Irishmen of Dublin, to enquire and report the Popery laws in force in this realm (Dublin, 1792).

Notes to pages 52–5

369

25. their respectable Chairman, the Honourable Simon Butler: Simon Butler (1757–97) was a member of the Catholic Committee and the frst chairman or president of the Dublin Society of United Irishmen. He abandoned the United Irishmen in 1794. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. 26. the bar: Te collective noun for the barristers of Ireland. 27. Grand Juries: A body of local men selected by an assize court to decide whether someone should be charged with a serious ofence. Te petty jury would then decide on the case brought before it. 28. a certain noble Lord: Tomas Browne (1726–95), fourth Viscount Kenmare, a leading Catholic landowner and nobleman, who helped develop the Catholic Committee, but who then seceded from it in December 1791. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. 29. and to induce the sixty-eight to subscribe: Te Catholic gentlemen who joined Kenmare in seceding from the Catholic Committee at the end of 1791. 30. To Derry: Te Protestants of Derry were among the frst to support the campaign to enfranchise the Catholics of Ireland. 31. College – Green: the location of Trinity College Dublin. 32. which they call the Protestant ascendancy – which they asserted, was founded on the principles of the Revolution of 1688, though the word was never heard of till 1792: For the origins of the term ‘Protestant ascendancy’, see W.J. McCormack, Te Dublin Paper War of 1786–1788: A Bibliographical and Critical Inquiry, including an Account of the Origins of Protestant Ascendancy and its ‘Baptism’ in 1792 (Dublin: Irish Academic Press, 1993). 33. Poyning’s Laws: Poynings’ Law 1494 (10 Henry VII, cap. 22) stated that no Irish Parliament could be summoned until the head of the Irish executive or the Irish Privy Council had decided on this and also had had the decision approved by the monarch and the English Privy Council, 34. Tey lost their power by treaty: the Treaty of Limerick, 3 October 1691. 35. General Ginckle: Godard van Reede-Ginckel (1644–1703) was a Dutch lieutenant-general who served under William III in the Irish campaign of 1689–91. He commanded the king’s forces at the siege of Limerick. He was created Earl of Athlone in 1692. He ofered moderate terms by the treaty with the Jacobite Catholic rebels, but these were later undermined by the Irish Parliament. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. 36. Earl Lucan: Patrick Sarsfeld (d. 1693), frst Earl of Lucan from 1689, had joined James II in exile and had then accompanied him to Ireland. He served at both sieges of Limerick. He helped 12,000 Jacobite soldiers to return with him to France. He then served in the French army and was fatally wounded at the battle of Landen in July 1693. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. 37. Viscount Gallmoy: Piercy, Viscount Gallmoy, was one of the commanders of the French and Jacobite forces who agreed the surrender terms at the Treaty of Limerick. 38. Monsieur Chateau Renault: François Louis de Rousselet (1637–1716), Marquis de Chateaurenault, won naval victories at Bantry Bay 11 August 1689 and at Beachy Head 10 July 1690. He later evacuated the French and Jacobite forces from Ireland. 39. James: James Stuart (1633–1701) was king as James VII and II from 1685 to 1688, when he fed the country. 40. King William: William of Orange (1650–1702), the Dutch stadtholder, was King William III from 1689 to 1702. 41. Queen Mary: Mary Stuart (1662–94) was the daughter of James II and the wife of William III (and joint monarch with him 1689–94). 42. Charles II: Charles Stuart (1630–85) was King Charles II 1660–85.

370

Notes to pages 56–66

43. Will a Pitt: William Pitt the Younger (1759–1806), Prime Minister 1783–1801 and 1804–1806. 44. a Fox: Charles James Fox (1749–1806), the leader of the opposition to Prime Minister William Pitt. 45. a Burke: Edmund Burke (1729–97), the great political orator and writer, was a longtime ally of Fox, but split with him in 1792 over how to respond to the French Revolution. He then became a supporter of the Pitt ministry. 46. a Grenville: William Grenville (1759–1834), frst Baron Grenville, was Foreign Secretary 1791–1801. He resigned with Pitt when the King refused to contemplate Catholic emancipation. 47. a Dundas: Henry Dundas (1742–1811), later frst Viscount Melville, was Home Secretary 1791–94 and Secretary at War 1794–1801. He was Pitt’s closest political ally, supported Union with Ireland and resigned with Pitt in 1801. 48. una voce: Latin for ‘with one voice’, that is unanimously. 49. Mr. M’Loughlin: Daniel McLoughlin signed the Catholic petition of 1793 as the representative for County Donegal. 50. Quo semel est imbuta recentes servavit odorem, testa diu: Horace, Epistles, bk 2, ll. 99–100. Te Latin can be translated as: ‘Te jar will long retain the odour of that with which it was once flled’. 51. neither are we thereby required to believe or profess “that the Pope is infallible,”: Te dogmatic defnition of papal infallibility was not promulgated until the First Vatican Council of 1869–70. It referred to a papal doctrine concerning faith or morals and it must be based on or at least not contradict sacred tradition or sacred scripture. 52. EDWARD BYRNE, Chairman: Edward Byrne (c. 1740–1804) was a very rich merchant and distiller in Dublin. He sent out circular letters to secure support for the Catholic campaign for the franchise, served as chairman of the Catholic Committee and represented County Roscommon at the Catholic Convention. 53. RICHARD M’CORMICK, Secretary: Richard McCormick (d. 1827) was a poplin manufacturer in Dublin. He was secretary of the Catholic Committee, a leading member of its Sub-Committee and the Catholic Convention, and signed the Catholic petition of 1792 as a representative for County Limerick. He was a founding member of the Dublin Society of United Irishmen and a friend of Wolfe Tone. He fed to France in February 1798, was attainted later that year, but later allowed to return to Ireland.

A Candid Enquiry, Whether the Roman Catholics of Ireland, Ought or Ought Not to be Admitted to the Rights of Subjects 1.

2.

3. 4.

Te Resolutions of County Meetings: See, for example, the “Resolutions of the Grand Jury of the City and County of Londonderry, at the summer assizes of 1792, relating to the Catholic Sub-Committee (1792)’, in Life of Teobald Wolfe Tone, ed. Bartlett, pp. 307–8. to the volumes of Belarmin: Robert Bellarmine (Roberto Francesco Romolo Bellarmino, 1542–1621) was an Italian Jesuit, archbishop and cardinal and one of the most important fgures in the Counter-Reformation and the author of many devotional works. I will give myself up to be burned at a stake: Bellarmine condemned Giordano Bruno to be burned at the stake in 1600. they acknowledge also George the III. King of Great-Britain and Ireland: from 1760 to 1820, though the Prince of Wales acted as Regent from 1811.

Notes to pages 67–85 5.

6.

7. 8. 9.

371

and it is proclaimed that the Constitution is threatened, Church and State are in danger, and the Catholic Committee is compared to the National Assembly of France: Te National Assembly of France (17 June 1789 to 9 July 1789) was a transitional body between the Estates General and the National Constituent Assembly, which endeavoured to draf a written constitution for France. Were your strength never so great, all you could efect by opposition would be, like Sampson: Sampson destroyed a pagan temple dedicated to Dagon by pulling down its central pillars. See Judges 16:29–30. what avails a man to gain the whole world, and lose his own soul: Jesus in Mark 8:36 and Matthew 16:26. Of such people our Redeemer speaks in those terrible words, you shall seek me and you shall not fnd me, but you shall die in your sins: John 7:34 and 8:21. a neighbouring Kingdom: France.

Te Address of the Association of the Friends of the Constitution, Liberty and Peace, in Ireland 1.

2.

3. 4.

DUKE of LEINSTER: William Robert Fitzgerald (1749–1804), second Duke of Leinster from 1773. A great landowner and political reformer, he supported both Catholic relief and parliamentary reform. He helped form this short-lived association, which tried to operate between the inefective Whig Club in Ireland and the radical United Irishmen. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. JAMES RIDGWAY: A London publisher from 1784 to 1833, Ridgway was sentenced to four years in prison on 8 May 1793 for publishing Tomas Paine’s Rights of Man and his Address to the Addressers. Te extraordinary, and almost miraculous revolutions in Government, and in sentiment, which have lately astonished the earth: Te French Revolution. Richard Griffith, Secretary: Richard Grifth (1752–1820) was MP for Askeaton, in County Limerick, 1783–90. Tere is an entry on him in the HoIP 1692–1800.

Te Petition of the Catholics of Ireland to the King’s Most Excellent Majesty 1. 2.

3.

Edward Byrne: Edward Byrne (c. 1740–1804) a rich Catholic merchant who was very active on the Catholic Committee. John Keogh: John Keogh (1740–1917) was a Dublin merchant who was very active on the Catholic Committee and who helped appoint Wolfe Tone as secretary, although Tone was ofen critical of him. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. James Edward Devereux: James Edward Devereux (c. 1769–1845) of County Wexford represented his county at the Catholic Convention. He was the author of Observations on the Factions which have Ruled Ireland; or Te Calumnies Trown upon the People of that Country and on the Justice, Expediency and Necessity of Restoring to the Catholics their Political Rights, 2nd edn (London, 1801) and Address to the People of County Wexford on the Repeal of the Union (Dublin and London, 1830). He was in France in 1803 when war with the United Kingdom broke out and he was held a prisoner in France 1803–14.

372 4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

Notes to pages 85–97 Christopher Bellew: Christopher Dillon Bellew (1763–1826) was the eldest son of Michael Bellew of Mount Bellew, County Galway. He was heavily involved in the campaign for Catholic emancipation. He did meet George III when presenting this petition. Tere is an entry on him in the Dictionary of Irish Biography, ed. H. Boylan, 3rd edn (Dublin: Gill and Macmillan, 1998). Sir Tomas French, Bart: Sir Tomas French (c. 1765–1814) represented County Galway at the Catholic Convention. He committed suicide when his bank, set up in 1804, collapsed in 1814. H. Fitzpatrick: Hugh Fitzpatrick (1778–1821) printed many Catholic religious works and was printer to the Catholic Committee and later to the Catholic seminary at St Patrick’s College, Maynooth. And to enforce this prohibition … within these sixteen years: An Act to Prevent and Punish Tumultuous Risings of Persons Within the Kingdom (1776), 15 & 16 George III, cap. 21, clause XV. No Catholic whatsoever, as we apprehend, has his personal property secure: the law: An Act to Prevent Further Growth of Popery (1704), 2 Anne, cap. 6. See J. G. Simms, ‘Te Making of a Penal Law (2 Anne, c.6) 1703–4’, Irish Historical Studies, 12 (1960), pp. 105–18. the said right of Elective Franchise was fnally and universally taken away fom the Catholics of Ireland, so late as the frst year of his Majesty King George the II: An Act for the further regulating the Election of Members of Parliament … (1728), 1 George II, clause VII. See J. G. Simms, ‘Irish Catholics and the Parliamentary Franchise, 1692–1728’, Irish Historical Studies, 12 (1960), pp. 28–37.

Defence of the Sub-Committee of the Catholics of Ireland 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

REPORTS having been propagated … and supplied them with money: Te secret committee of inquiry set up by the Irish House of Lords investigated the causes of the disturbed state of the country and implied that the Catholic Sub–Committee had encouraged the violent protests of the Defenders. See Journals of the House of Lords of Ireland, vol. 7, pp. 128–9. a party known by the name of “Peep-o’Day Boys,”: See B. McEvoy, ‘Te Peep of Day Boys and Defenders in the County Armagh’, Seanchas Ardmhaca: Journal of the Armagh Diocesan Historical Society, 12:1 (1986), pp. 122–63 and 12:2 (1987), pp. 60–163. BERNARD O’NEIL, Esq: Bernard O’Neill (c. 1715–98) represented County Antrim at the Catholic Convention of 1792. He took the chair at the meeting on 30 October 1792 which prepared the Catholic address to the King and signed the Catholic petition of 1793 as the representative for County Antrim. RICH. M’CORMICK: Richard McCormick (d. 1827) was a poplin manufacturer in Dublin. He was secretary of the Catholic Committee, a leading member of its SubCommittee and the Catholic Convention, and signed the Catholic petition of 1792 as a representative for County Limerick. He was a founding member of the Dublin Society of United Irishmen and a friend of Wolfe Tone. He fed to France in February 1798, was attainted later that year, but later allowed to return to Ireland. About this time, Mr. Tomas Patrick Coleman: On 25 February 1793, Tomas Patrick Coleman was ordered into custody by the Irish House of Lords because of his failure to provide evidence to the secret committee investigating the late disturbances. He was a Dublin merchant and business associate of John Sweetman. Mr. John Sweetman: John Sweetman (1752–1826) was a Catholic brewer in Dublin and a radical member of the Catholic Sub-Committee and of the Catholic Convention. He

Notes to pages 97–100

7.

8.

9.

10. 11. 12.

13.

14. 15. 16. 17.

18.

373

denied a government charge that he was a member of the Catholic Defenders, but he did join the Dublin Society of United Irishmen. He was arrested in 1798 for his involvement in the Irish rebellion, was sent to prison at Fort George in Scotland in 1799 and exiled in 1802. He did not return to Ireland until 1820. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. requesting to know whether the ofence … also recommending one Nugent: See J. Sweetman, A Refutation of the Charges Attempted to be Made Against the Secretary to the Sub-Committee of the Catholics of Ireland, Particularly that of Abetting the Defenders (Dublin, 1793), pp. 4–7. Mr. Sweetman’s letter on that occasion, dated 9th. August … something towards the liberation of his kinsman: Tis letter was published in the secret committee’s report in the Journals of the House of Lords of Ireland, vol. 7, 128–9. the expence of their various applications was defayed by a voluntary subscription of the Catholics: Quarterage was a quarterly fnancial payment for permission to engage in a trade or profession without being allowed to be a full guild member. Catholic ‘quarter-men’ were not allowed all the privileges of freemen of town corporations or all the privileges of full members of guilds, both being restricted to Protestants, but Catholics could carry on their profession or trade on payment of this fee. On this issue, see M. MacGeehin, ‘Te Catholics of the Towns and the Quaterage Dispute in Eighteenth-Century Ireland’, Irish Historical Studies, 8 (1952), pp. 91–114. a Catholic nobleman: Nicholas Taafe (c. 1685–1769), who had served in the Austrian army, acted in this manner. See ibid., p. 107. an Agent should be employed in England: Owen Hogan, a Dublin notary, acted as agent in Ireland in 1772. See, ibid., p. 108. a professional gentleman of great respectability: James Wallace (1729–1783) a British MP and Solicitor-General 1778–80 and Attorney-General 1780–2 in Lord North’s administration. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. a noble lord high in legal situation: Barry Yelverton (1736–1805), frst Viscount Avonmore from 1800. He was a leading patriot when the Irish Parliament campaigned for legislative independence. He was appointed Attorney-General in 1782 and then Chief Baron of the Irish Court of Exchequer. Tere are entries on him in the HoIP 1692–1800 and the ODNB, another professional gentleman: Richard Burke (1758–94), the son of Edmund Burke, the famous politician and political writer. A deputation of fve gentlemen: Edward Byrne, John Keogh, James Edward Devereux, Christopher Bellew, and Sir John French. See the previous pamphlet. the British Minister: William Pitt the Younger (1759–1806), Prime Minister 1783– 1801 and 1804–6. the last person who bore the ofce was the late Mr. Dermott: Francis Dermott succeeded his father Anthony as Treasurer of the Catholic Committee in 1784, but died in 1788. His family was involved in fshing and the provision trade. Mr. John Comerford: John Comerford (d. 1795) was a rich merchant in Cork and Dublin. He was the father of John Comerford, a well-known miniature painter. Denis Tomas O’Brien (1736–1814) was a rich Dublin merchant, involved in various trades, including textiles. He was in partnership with John Comerford senior, who was also his brotherin-law. He was a member of the Catholic Committee from 1791, but he seceded with Lord Kenmare’s more moderate faction in December 1791. He nevertheless attended the Catholic Convention in 1792.

374

Notes to pages 100–11

19. EDWARD BYRNE: Tere are notes on Byrne, O’Brien, Keogh, Hamill, and MacDonnell in notes for previous pamphlets, printed above. 20. THOMAS WARREN: Tomas Warren (d. c. 1815) was a Dublin cotton manufacturer, who represented Carlow Town at the Catholic Convention and was a member of the Dublin Society of United Irishmen. 21. THOMAS BRAUGHALL: Tomas Braughall (1729–1803) helped Wolfe Tone to rally support for Catholic relief and helped transmit the Catholic petition to Henry Dundas in 1792. He represented the City of Dublin in the Catholic Convention. See J. W. Hammond, ‘Tomas Braughall 1729–1803, Catholic Emancipationist’, Dublin Historical Records, 14 (1956), pp. 41–9. 22. THOMAS RYAN, M.D.: Tomas Ryan (d. c. 1798) was a physician and a member of the Dublin Society of United Irishmen. He represented County Roscommon at the Catholic Convention. 23. M. F. LYNCH: Martin French Lynch (c. 1765–1826) was a lawyer and barrister, who represented Galway at the Catholic Convention. 24. THOMAS FITZGERALD: Tomas Fitzgerald (c. 1753–1808) was a country gentleman who represented County Kildare at the Catholic Convention. He was arrested during the 1798 rebellion.

An Irishman’s Letter to the People called Defenders 1.

2.

3.

4.

Your seducers tell you that you shall recover the forfeited estates: Many Irish Catholics lost their lands during the Cromwellian conquest of the 1650s and not all these lands were returned afer the Restoration of 1660. Afer the Williamite conquest of 1689–91 there were further confscations. Te Catholic Irish owned a tiny proportion of the land of Ireland by the late eighteenth century. You are persuaded that you will be able to resist the united powers of the country civil and military, to abolish taxes, tithes and cesses: Local taxes raised to pay for the building and repair of roads, bridges, etc. Were the Oak Boys, the White Boys, the Hearts of Steel, or the Hearts of Oak: Tese were popular agrarian protests movements in Ireland in the eighteenth century, against tithes, taxes, enclosures, etc. Tey were ofen sectarian in their composition, being formed of either Catholics or Protestants and they were sometimes opposed to each other. Besides look at the distresses of France at home, they have been lately defeated with great slaughter: Te forces of the French republic were defeated at the battle of Neerwinden on 18 March 1793.

Proceedings of the Society of United Irishmen of Dublin 1.

2.

3.

Te Hon. SIMON BUTLER: Simon Butler (1757–97) was the third son of the tenth Viscount Mountgarret. He was a barrister and King’s Counsellor and the frst president of the Dublin Society of United Irishmen. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. Police Act: A police force was created in Dublin in 1786 by an Irish act of parliament (26 George III, cap. 24). It was amended and extended to all Ireland in 1787 (27 George III, cap. 40) and again in 1792 (32 George III, cap. 16). JAMES NAPPER TANDY: James Napper Tandy (1740–1803) was a radical tradesman in Dublin, a member of the city corporation and a member and frst secretary of the Dublin Society of United Irishmen. He fed to the USA 1795–98, then went to France

Notes to pages 111–20

375

to plan an invasion during the 1798 rebellion. He landed in Ireland, but soon retreated. Arrested in Hamburg in 1800, he was put on trial in Dublin, but acquitted on a technicality and exiled to France in 1802. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB and see also Coughlan, Napper Tandy. 4. ARCHIBALD HAMILTON ROWAN, Esq: Archibald Hamilton Rowan (1751–1834) was infuenced by John Jebb, while at Cambridge University. He travelled much in Europe before he joined the Irish Volunteers and became deeply involved in popular and radical politics. He was a founder member of the Dublin Society of United Irishmen and served as president and as secretary in 1792–93. He was convicted of seditious libel in 1794, imprisoned, but escaped to France. In 1795 he went to the United States where he joined Wolfe Tone and Napper Tandy. In 1800 he went to Germany. He was allowed back to England in 1803 and back to Ireland in 1806. He remained liberal in his politics, but he was not a violent revolutionary. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. 5. THEOBALD WOLFE TONE: Teobald Wolfe Tone (1763–98) was a Protestant barrister, radical activist, assistant secretary to the Catholic Committee and founding member of both the Belfast and the Dublin Societies of United Irishmen. He was the author of An Argument on behalf of the Catholics of Ireland (1791) and was involved in the Catholic Convention and went to England to help present the Catholic petition in January 1793. He began conspiring with the French in 1794 and sought military assistance from France in 1795. He fed to the USA and was in France by 1796, when he joined the French army. He arrived with part of the French invasion forces during the rebellion of 1798, was arrested, convicted, but committed suicide to avoid the punishment planned for him. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB, an excellent modern biography, M. Elliott, Wolfe Tone: Prophet of Irish Independence, 2nd edn (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2012). For his voluminous writings, see Te Writings of Teobald Wolfe Tone, 1763–98, ed. T. W. Moody, R. B. McDowell and C. J. Woods, 3 vols (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998–2007). 6. Mr. Speaker: John Foster (1740–1828), later frst Baron Oriel, was MP for Dunleer 1761–68 and County Louth 1768–1900, and Speaker of the Irish House of Commons 1785–1800. He opposed political concessions to the Catholics, including the franchise in the debates on this question in 1793, and he later opposed the Union. Tere are entries on him in the ODNB and the HoIP 1692–1800 and a substantial scholarly biography, A. P. W. Malcomson, John Foster: Politics of the Anglo-Irish Ascendancy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1978). 7. the Lord Lieutenant: John Fane (1759–1841), tenth Earl of Westmorland was Lord Lieutenant 1789–94. He opposed granting the franchise to Irish Catholics, but reluctantly gave way in 1793. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. 8. scattered and peeled, meted out and trodden down!: Book of Isaiah 18:7. 9. our late revolution: a reference to the achievement of legislative independence by the Irish Parliament in 1782. 10. Popish Congress: In December 1792 a Catholic Convention, composed of representatives chosen from across the country, began meeting to discuss plans to secure further political concessions at Tailor’s Hall, Back-Lane, Dublin. To discredit it, its critics referred to it as the Back-Lane parliament. 11. the Protestant Ascendancy: Although a Protestant elite had long dominated Irish politics this term only came into use in the late eighteenth century. See A. Browne, A Brief Review of the Question, whether the Articles of Limerick have been Violated (Dublin, 1788), p. 62.

376

12. 13.

14.

15. 16. 17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

Notes to pages 120–6 For the scholarly dispute on the origins of the term Protestant Ascendancy, see Dublin’s Paper War of 1786–1788, ed. W. J. McCormack (Dublin: Irish Academic Press, 1993). the virtuous founder of the Revolution of 1782: Henry Grattan (1746–1820), the Irish patriot who did so much to secure Irish legislative independence in 1782. THOMAS WRIGHT: Tomas Wright was a surgeon, who had served with the British army in the American War of Independence. He then began a practice in Dublin and soon became involved in the military wing of the United Irishmen and was involved in the Irish rebellion of 1798. He may have been a government informer at this time. He certainly provided information to the government in 1805 and sought a minor government post. See R. B. McDowell, ‘Te Personnel of the Dublin Society of Irishmen, 1791–4’, Irish Historical Studies, 2 (1940), p. 53. FRIENDS OF THE PEOPLE AT LONDON: Te Association of the Friends of the People was formed by liberal-minded Whigs in England. I have produced an entry on them in the on-line version of the ODNB. Louis 11th: Louis XI (1423–83) was King of France from 1461. He was ofen portrayed as a villain. her great deliverer: Henry Grattan. a REFORM in Scotland: See H. W. Meikle, Scotland and the French Revolution (reprint, London: Frank Cass, 1969) and Scotland in the Age of the French Revolution, ed. B. Harris (Edinburgh: John Donald, 2005). WILLIAM DRENNAN: William Drennan (1754–1820) was a physician, poet and political reformer. Te son of a Presbyterian minister, he was educated at Glasgow and Edinburgh universities. He supported legislative independence in the early 1780s, joined the Dublin Society of the United Irishmen and was several times its president. He was put on trial for sedition on 29 June 1794, but was acquitted. He then withdrew from the United Irishmen and was not involved in its later revolutionary activities. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. Buchanan: George Buchanan (1506–82), a poet, historian and administrator, who had educated James VI and I. He defended constitutional monarchy and the right of subjects to depose a bad king in De juri regni (1579). Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. Fletcher: Andrew Fletcher of Saltoun (c. 1653–1716), a Scottish patriot and political theorist, who advocated a citizen militia and spoke out in the Scottish Parliament against the incorporating Union between England and Scotland agreed in 1707. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. Wallace: Sir William Wallace (d. 1305), a Scottish patriot, who resisted English eforts to conquer Scotland. He won the battle of Stirling Bridge, but was defeated at the battle of Falkirk. Captured in 1305, he was executed for treason. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. 16 Peers: Te Act of Union of 1707 prescribed that the Scottish peers could elect sixteen of their number at each general election to represent them in the United Parliament at Westminster. We remember that … Act of Parliament in 1746: Te Westminster Parliament abolished heritable jurisdictions in Scotland in 1746, afer the defeat of the 1745 Jacobite rebellion, by the Heritable Jurisdictions (Scotland) Act, 20 George II, cap. 43. following the example of a Catholic Parliament just a century before: Tis is a reference to the Irish Parliament summoned by James II in Dublin in 1689, which was dominated by Catholics. See J. G. Simms, Te Jacobite Parliament of 1689 (Dundalk: Dundalgan Press, 1966).

Notes to pages 128–51

377

25. to make the passions of the individuals struggle, like Cain and Abel: Te sons of Adam and Eve. Cain slew Abel. See Genesis 4:1–16. 26. Your illustrious Fletcher … preserve a nation fom slavery: For this quotation, see Te Political Works of Andrew Fletcher, Esq. of Saltoun (Glasgow, 1749), p. 234. 27. a Proclamation has been issued by the Lord Lieutenant and Council in Ireland: On 8 December 1792, the Lord Lieutenant, the Earl of Westmorland, issued a proclamation against ‘divers ill-afected persons’ associated together ‘to withstand lawful authority and violently and forcibly to redress pretended grievances and to subvert the established constitution of his majesty’s realm’. See the Northern Star, 12 December 1792, and N. Curtin, Te United Irishmen: Popular Politics in Ulster and Dublin, 1791–1798 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994), pp. 52–53. 28. Te 15th of February: Te Irish Volunteers met at the famous Dungannon Convention on 15 February 1782 that did so much to assist the Irish patriots in the Dublin Parliament to secure legislative independence that year. 29. the printed Hand Bills which Archibald Hamilton Rowan: Archibald Hamilton Rowan was arrested on 21 December 1792 for distributing an address, entitled ‘Citizen Soldiers to Arms’ (printed above). He was released on bail. Te trial did not take place for a year. He was put on trial in January 1794, found guilty and was sentenced to two years in prison and a fne of £500. In May he escaped and fed to France. See the entry on him in the ODNB. 30. James Napper Tandy: In March 1793, James Napper Tandy was prosecuted at the County Louth assizes for a similar ofence. He fed to England. See the entry on him in the ODNB.

An Act for the Relief of His Majesty’s Popish, or Roman Catholic Subjects of Ireland 1.

the college of the holy and undivided Trinity of queen Elizabeth, near Dublin: Trinity College Dublin, the only university in Ireland at this time. Entry was restricted to members of the established Protestant Episcopalian Church of Ireland. Protestant Dissenters and Catholics could not gain a degree there.

Te Address of the Poor People of Munster, to their Fellows in Ireland 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

Let those who have Ears Listen: Jesus in Mark 4:9 and Matthew 11:15. the First Charles: Charles Stuart (1600–49), King Charles I from 1625. Te reference is to the Irish rebellion of 1641. the unheard of barbarities of Cromwell: Oliver Cromwell (1599–1658), who conquered Ireland 1649–50. Many Irish died at the siege of Drogheda in particular. the natives of America, the unhappy Caribs: An Amerindian people of the southern West Indies and northern coast of South America. It has been ordained that man should live by the sweat of his brow: Genesis 3:19. It is said the labourer is worthy of his hire: St Paul’s First Epistle to Timothy 5:18 and Luke 10:7. to imitate the murderous act of Cain: Cain slew his brother Abel. See Genesis 4:8. Tithes have long been the apple of discord: according to Greek mythology the goddess Eris tossed the golden apple of discord into the midst of the festivities at the wedding of Peleus and Tetis, sparking a dispute which led to the Trojan War.

378 9.

10. 11. 12. 13. 14.

15. 16.

Notes to pages 151–8 the frst fuits of Cicero’s orchards: Marcus Tullius Cicero (106–43 bc), the Roman philosopher, statesman, lawyer and orator. In his retirement, he took great pleasure in his orchards. Rabbies: Rabbis, the spiritual and religious leaders of Judaism. Roman Questors: Tese were elected (later appointed) Roman public ofcials who supervised fnancial afairs. the Divan: Te council of ministers in Constantinople (Istanbul) and later the name for the Turkish National Assembly. Firmans: Royal decrees issued by the Ottoman Sultan. the Royal French who lately obeyed the edicts of the Grand Monarque: Te kings of France registered their decrees in the French parlements before the summoning of the StatesGeneral. a Magic Lantern: an early type of image projector improved by the invention of the Argon lamp in the 1780s. Secret Committee: Te Irish House of Lords had established a Committee of Secrecy to investigate the causes of and participants in recent disturbances.

Address fom the Society of United Irishmen of Dublin, to the People of Ireland 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

But it is said that the lower classes of the Community … they are bound by law as well as others, Laws operate on LIFE, LIBERTY, and PROPERTY: J. Locke, Two Treatises of Government, bk 2, para 87. Game Laws: Game Laws were passed by the Irish Parliament in 1698, 1797, 1787, and later in 1797. Tese imposed penalties on poaching and restricted the right to hunt game to freeholders worth £40 p.a. or to owners of £100 in wealth. Samp [sic] Act: Te Irish Parliament passed a Stamp Act in 1773–74 (An Act for Granting to His Majesty, His Heirs and Successors, Several Duties upon Vellum, Parchment, and Paper, 13 & 14 George III, cap. 6), which insisted that almanacs, newspapers, pamphlets, legal documents etc. should be printed on stamped paper. It was similar to the Stamp Act applying to the American colonies that was passed by the Westminster Parliament in 1765 and repealed the next year because of ferce resistance to it from the American colonists. the denomination of White Boys: J. S. Donnelly, ‘Te Whiteboy Movement’, Irish Historical Studies, 21 (1978), pp. 20–54; J. S. Donnelly, ‘Irish Agrarian Rebellion: Te Whiteboys of 1769–76’, Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, Section C, 83 (1983), pp. 293–331; T. Bartlett, ‘An Account of the Whiteboys from the 1790s’, Tipperary Historical Journal, 4 (1991), pp. 140–7. Defenders: M. Elliott, ‘Te Defenders in Ulster’, in Te United Irishmen: Republicanism, Radicalism and Rebellion, ed. D. Dickson et al. (Dublin: Lilliput Press, 1993), pp. 222–33; T. Garvin, ‘Defenders, Ribbonmen and Others in Pre-famine Ireland’, Past and Present, 96 (1982), pp. 133–55; Peep O’Day Boys and Defenders: Select Documents on the County Armagh Disturbances, 1784–96, ed. D. W. Miller (Belfast: PRONI, 1990); McEvoy, ‘Te Peep of Day Boys and Defenders in the County Armagh’; and T. Bartlett, ‘Select Documents XXXVIII: Defenders and Defenderism in 1795’, Irish Historical Studies, 24 (1985), pp. 373–94.

Notes to pages 158–68 6.

7. 8. 9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

379

Te poorest man in the land pays Taxes for his Fire, his Candle, for his Potatoes and his Cloathing: Te Irish Parliament had placed excise duties on all of these products, which hit the poor particularly heavily. He has a property in his Labour: J. Locke, Two Treatises of Government, bk 2, paras 27–51. a new country: United States of America. the ostentatious Balloon: Te Montgolfer brothers built, but did not pilot, the frst hotair balloon, which lifed of from Paris on 21 November 1783. Several other fights were made soon afer. We can bear as we have borne the common place invective against this Society; but we feel some indignation, when he: Henry Grattan had been given a substantial grant by the Irish Parliament as a reward for his role in securing legislative independence in 1782. Shabby and Seditious incendiary: Tis is an attack on the terms used by Henry Grattan in a speech in the Irish House of Commons on 4 March 1794, when he spoke against the desire of the United Irishmen to enfranchise all men, even the poor beggars on the bridge. See Te Parliamentary Register, or, History of the Proceedings and Debates of the House of Commons of Ireland, 15 vols (Dublin, 1784–95), vol. 14, p. 81; and A. Knox, Essays on the Political Circumstances of Ireland, Written during the Administration of Earl Camden (Dublin, 1798), pp. 162–3. At a meeting of the United Irishmen on 14 March 1794 Grattan was attacked for betraying the people. He was described as a mendicant and a hired incendiary. See Te Proceedings of the Dublin Society of United Irishmen, ed. R. B. McDowell (Dublin: Irish Manuscripts Commission, 1998), p. 117. It is because once in seven years: Te Westminster Parliament had a maximum life between general elections of seven years; for Ireland it was actually eight years under the terms of the Octennial Act of 1768. Te Earth moves, said Galileo: Galileo Galilei (1564–1642), an Italian astronomer, who supported by observation Copernicus’s claim that the earth moved around the sun rather than vice-versa. He was attacked by the Inquisition and spent the rest of his life under house arrest. guorant: that is, ignorant.

Society of United Irishmen of Dublin 1.

2. 3. 4.

5.

Te compelled Absence of our Secretary Mr. NAPPER TANDY: James Napper Tandy (1740–1803) was a radical tradesman in Dublin, a member of the city corporation and a member and frst secretary of the Dublin Society of United Irishmen. He fed to the United States from 1795 to 1798, then went to France to plan an invasion during the 1798 rebellion. He landed in Ireland, but soon retreated. Arrested in Hamburg in 1800, he was put on trial in Dublin, but acquitted on a technicality and exiled to France in 1802. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB and see also Coughlan, Napper Tandy. he sufers in common with Magna Charta: the Magna Carta, the great medieval charter of liberties accepted by King John in 1215 under pressure from many of his leading subjects. priva lex: Latin for a privilege. Lettre de Cachet: A letter signed by the King of France, counter-signed by one of his ministers and closed with the royal seal, which sent direct orders from the king. Tey were ofen used to enforce arbitrary actions and judgments that could not be appealed. Tey could lead to arrests and imprisonment without trial. To WILLIAM DRENNAN, M.D.: William Drennan (1754–1820) was a physician, poet and political reformer. Te son of a Presbyterian minister, he was educated

380

6.

7.

8.

9. 10. 11.

12.

13. 14.

15.

16.

Notes to pages 168–74 at Glasgow and Edinburgh universities. He supported legislative independence in the early 1780s, joined the Dublin Society of the United Irishmen and was several times its president. He was put on trial for sedition on 29 June 1794, but was acquitted. He then withdrew from the United Irishmen and was not involved in its later revolutionary activities. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. THOMAS BRAUGHAL: Tomas Braughall (1729–1803) was a Dublin merchant who was a member of the Catholic Committee from 1786 and who represented the City of Dublin at the Catholic Committee in 1792. He helped oust Lord Kenmare from the leadership of the Catholic Committee and he supported the Catholic petition for the enfranchisement of Catholics. He joined the United Irishmen, but lef in 1794 because he opposed revolutionary activities. He was arrested during the Irish rebellion of 1798, but never prosecuted. He visited France afer the peace of Amiens and died in Picardy. See Hammond, ‘Tomas Braughall 1729–1803’. SIMON Mc.GUIRE: Simon McGuire, a Dublin merchant, who was a member of the Catholic Committee and the United Irishmen. Regarded as an ‘agitator’, he was on the small committee which drew up the ‘Address to the People of Ireland’ and was also on the committee of twenty-one, which drew up the United Irishmen’s Plan of Parliamentary Reform. ARCHIBALD HAMILTON ROWAN: Archibald Hamilton Rowan (1751–1834) was infuenced by John Jebb, while at Cambridge University. He travelled much in Europe before he joined the Irish Volunteers and became deeply involved in popular and radical politics. He was a founder member of the Dublin Society of United Irishmen and served as president and as secretary in 1792–3. He was convicted of seditious libel in 1794, imprisoned, but escaped to France. In 1795 he went to the United States where he joined Wolfe Tone and Napper Tandy. In 1800 he went to Germany. He was allowed back to England in 1803 and back to Ireland in 1806. He remained liberal in his politics, but he was not a violent revolutionary. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. On the 9th of November, 1791, was this Society founded: the Dublin Society of United Irishmen. an ex ofcio information: a formal criminal charge made by a law ofcer of the crown without obtaining a previous indictment from a grand jury. In his words, whose name rests unknown, but whose fame is immortal: Tis is a reference to ‘Junius’, the pseudonym of a political writer, who contributed a series of letters to the London newspaper, the Public Advertiser, from 21 January 1769 to 21 January 1772, that were highly critical of George III’s British ministers. that the constitution may preserve its monarchical form, but we would have the manners of the people purely and strictly republican: Te Letters of Junius, ed. J. Cannon (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1978), p. 293, letter 59, 5 October 1771. the Egis: In Greek mythology, the Aegis was the shield or breastplate of Athena and Zeus, bearing Medusa’s head. It ofered powerful protection. the Friends of the People in England: Members of the Whig opposition in England, who supported moderate parliamentary reform. I wrote the entry on them in the online version of the ODNB. the Volunteers: Te volunteer defence force raised in Ireland during the War of American Independence to defend the country against a French invasion. It still existed, though with less infuence than before. the ghost of Alfed: Alfred the Great (849–899), the king of Wessex from 811, who successfully defended his kingdom from Viking invaders. Tere are several references in

Notes to pages 174–80

17. 18.

19.

20.

21. 22. 23.

24.

25.

26.

381

eighteenth-century writings about the need to bring back the ghost of Alfred in order to restore a better world. Hibernicism: an Irish expression, trait or custom. Hibernia was the Roman name for Ireland. Hon. SIMON BUTLER: Simon Butler (1757–97) was the third son of the tenth Viscount Mountgarret. He was a barrister and King’s Counsellor and the frst president of the Dublin Society of United Irishmen. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. OLIVER BOND: Oliver Bond (1760/1–1798) was a Dublin woollen merchant, born the son of a Dissenting minister in County Donegal. He joined the Dublin Society of United Irishmen at its inception. And was active in trying to establish a radical volunteer National Guard in Ireland. He was arrested with Simon Butler on 1 March 1793 for criticizing in print the Committee of Secrecy established by the Irish House of Lords. Both were imprisoned for six months and fned £500. He was a militant United Irishman in the later 1790s. Te members of the Leinster Directory of the United Irishmen were arrested at his house on 12 March 1798. He was saved from execution when these state prisoners agreed to provide detailed information on the recent activities of the United Irishmen. He died in prison of an apoplectic seizure on 6 September 1798. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. the Militia: Te Irish militia was established by the Militia Act of 1793 (33 George III, cap. 22). It was much resented by some Irishmen. See T. Bartlett, ‘An End to Moral Economy: Te Irish Militia Disturbances of 1793’. Past and Present, 99 (1983), pp. 41–64. That whatever pretexts may be held out, the real objects of the war about to be declared against France: In fact, France declared war on Britain in February 1793. by tyrants and abettors of tyranny: A reference to Austria and Prussia, both already at war with France. Lord Mountjoy: Luke Gardiner (1745–98), frst Baron (from 1789) and later frst Viscount Mountjoy (from 1795), had been MP for County Dublin from 1773 to 1789. A landowner and property developer he generally supported the Irish government, but he did support various Catholic relief measures. He led his militia force against the Wexford rebels in 1798 and was killed at the battle of New Ross on 5 June. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. the two frst Judicial Ofcers of this country: John Toler (1745–1831) was Solicitor General 1789–98 and Attorney General 1798–1800. He was MP for Tralee, Philipstown and Gorey 1776–1800 and Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas 1800–27. He was created frst Baron then frst Earl of Norbury. Arthur Wolfe (1739–1803) was Attorney General 1789–98 and was then appointed Lord Chief Justice of the King’s Bench. He was MP for Coleraine and then Jamestown 1783–98. Although known for his opposition to arbitrary measures by the authorities, he condemned William Orr to death in 1797, although the evidence against him was very unreliable. He was made frst Baron (1798) and then frst Viscount Kilwarden (1800). Hated by the United Irishmen, he was murdered on the streets of Dublin during the abortive rising led by Robert Emmet. Tere are entries on Toler and Wolfe in both the ODNB and the HoIP 1692–1800. the Courts of High Commission: Te supreme ecclesiastical court in England, instituted by Elizabeth I in 1559 and dissolved by Parliament in 1641. James II created a similar court in 1686 that lasted until 1688. Tis was regarded as having acted in an arbitrary manner. Star Chamber: Te Court of Star Chamber, named afer its decorated ceiling, met in secret, with no formal indictments and no witnesses called. It was accused of acting in an arbitrary manner. It was created in 1487 and abolished by the English Parliament in 1641.

382

Notes to pages 180–3

27. Lord Clonmell: John Scott (1739–98), Baron Earlsfort 1784–9, frst Viscount 1789–93, and then frst Earl of Clonmell was MP for Mullinger 1769–83 and Portarlington 1783–4, Solicitor General 1774–7, Attorney General 1777–82 and the Lord Chief Justice of the King’s Bench 1784–9. Tere are entries on him in the ODNB and the HoIP 1692–1800. 28. Lord Chancellor: John FitzGibbon (1748–1802), later frst Earl of Clare, was MP for Trinity College Dublin 1778–83 and Kilmallock 1783–9, Attorney General 1783–9 and Lord Chancellor 1789–1802. He was a frm supporter of the Protestant Ascendancy. He opposed Catholic emancipation and the Irish rebellion and supported Union. Tere are entries on him in the ODNB and the HoIP 1692–1800. 29. the Gentleman Usher: Te Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod, the principal servant of the Irish House of Lords. Te post was held by Sir John Lees (1737–1811) from 1780 to 1793. 30. you, Simon Butler, cannot plead ignorance … Majesty’s gown which you wear: A barrister, Butler had been a King’s Counsellor since 1784. 31. in the gaol of Newgate: A new prison of Newgate near Smithfeld in Dublin had been built between 1773 and 1783, but it was badly located, built and administered. 32. Alderman Warren: Nathaniel Warren (1737–96) was a Dublin Alderman, MP for Dublin 1784–90 and Callan 1790–6, and police commissioner from 1786. On 23 May 1794 he dissolved the last legal meeting of the United Irishmen, meeting at Tailors’ Hall and seized their books, papers and addresses to the people of Ireland. 33. BEAUCHAMP BAGENALL HARVEY: Beauchamp Bagenal Harvey (1762–98) was an Irish barrister and landowner of County Wexford. Although a Protestant he was a frm supporter of Catholic emancipation. In politics he seemed more of a moderate than a militant, but he was arrested just prior to the outbreak of the Irish rebellion in 1798. Released by rebels, he was chosen as commander of the Wexford rebel forces, a largely honorary position. He opposed reprisals on local loyalists and stood down or was deposed on 7 June 1798, but he was still active in administering the town of Wexford. When Wexford was captured by the government’s forces, he attempted to fee. He was captured and executed on Wexford Bridge on 27 June and his head was spiked on the court house. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. 34. THOMAS RUSSELL: Tomas Russell (1767–1803) was brought up as a Protestant, but had Catholic relatives. He became a close friend of Wolfe Tone. He was a founding member of the Belfast Society of the United Irishmen. He took an oath to overthrow British rule in Ireland in 1795, helped create an underground revolutionary movement, but was imprisoned 1796–1802 without being brought to trial. He assisted Robert Emmet’s abortive rising in 1803, was arrested and executed on 21 October. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. See also D. Carroll, Te Man fom God Knows Where: Tomas Russell 1767–1803 (Blackrock: Columba Press, 1995) and J. Quinn, Soul on Fire: A Life of Tomas Russell (Dublin: Irish Academic Press, 2001). 35. HENRY SHEARES: Henry Sheares (1753–98) was active in radical politics with his brother John. He visited France in 1792, supported the revolution and was present at the execution of Louis XVI. He joined the Dublin Society of United Irishmen in 1793 and soon rose to prominence. He helped reorganize the United Irishmen as a secret revolutionary movement and he was part of the new Directory set up afer the arrest of members of the Leinster Directory at Oliver Bond’s house on 12 March 1798. He and his brother were arrested in May, found guilty of treason and were executed on 14 July. Tere is a joint entry on the Sheares brothers in the ODNB.

Notes to pages 183–95

383

36. EDW. JOS. LEWINES: Edward Joseph Lewines or Lewins (1756–1828) was educated at a French seminary. He became a lawyer, representative on the Catholic Convention, and a member of the Dublin Society of United Irishmen. He went to France as an agent of the United Irishmen and worked with Wolfe Tone in planning a French invasion of Ireland. When the rebellion failed he helped Irish exiles in France, but withdrew from Irish radical politics. He became a naturalized French citizen and died in Paris. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. 37. WILLIAM LEVINGSTON WEBB: William Levingston Webb was a Dublin barrister and King’s Counsellor. He attended the last legal meeting of the Dublin Society of United Irishmen when it was raided, dissolved and had its papers seized on 23 May 1794. 38. to pamper the luxury of Absentees: Rich Irish Protestant landowners, who spent much of their wealth while living in England and who were criticized for showing little interest in the welfare of their tenants and workers. 39. by placement without employment: Holders of paid positions that required no work (that is, sinecures). 40. and pensioners without merit: Men who served the Irish government in some way and were rewarded with an undeserved pension paid by the state. 41. the exergue: a part of the reverse below the main device.

Belfast Politics: or, A Collection of the Debates, Resolutions, and Other Proceedings of that Town 1.

2.

3.

4.

William Bruce: William Bruce (1757–1841) was minister of the frst Presbyterian congregation of Belfast from 1789 to 1831 and Principal of Belfast Academy 1790–1822. He was a strong supporter of the Volunteers and of parliamentary reform and favoured gradual Catholic emancipation. He opposed the Irish rebellion of 1798 and supported Union. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. Henry Joy: Henry Joy the younger (1754–1835) was the son of Robert Joy, the Belfast newspaper proprietor and printer, who had founded the Belfast News-Letter and who published many liberal and radical with his brother (also Henry Joy). Henry Joy the younger continued his father’s publishing business until 1795. He was a moderate reformer, unlike his famous cousin, Henry Joy McCracken, the radical member of the United Irishmen, who helped connect the United Irishmen with the Catholic Defenders. McCracken was arrested and imprisoned 1796–7 and was executed on 17 July 1798 afer being defeated and captured while leading the Irish rebellion in Ulster. Lavater: Johan Caspar Lavater (1741–1801), a Swiss pastor, poet and physiognomist. Te quotation is from his Aphorisms on Man. Translated fom the original manuscript of the Rev. John Caspar Lavater (1788), 3rd edn (Dublin, 1790), pp. 159–60. It was intended to subjoin the letters between portia and mr. Jones: Tis is a reference to Reply to an Anonymous Writer fom Belfast, signed Portia. By William Todd Jones Esq.. To which is prefxed, Portia’s Original Letter, ed. W. P. Carey (Dublin, [1792]). Te editor introduces this defence of Catholics against those who libel them. Te arguments in favour of Catholic emancipation frst appeared in Te Rights of Irishmen or National Evening Star. He published Portia’s letter to the Belfast News-Letter on 15 February 1792, in reply to Jones’s original letter. Jones then replies on 14 March 1792. William Todd Jones (1757–1818) was MP for Lisburn 1783–90. He was a supporter of parliamentary reform and Catholic emancipation, and was on friendly terms with Wolfe

384

5. 6. 7.

8. 9.

10. 11. 12. 13. 14.

15. 16.

17.

18.

19. 20.

Notes to pages 195–202 Tone. He also authored A Letter to the Societies of United Irishmen of the Town of Belfast, upon the Subject of Certain Apprehensions which have Arisen fom a Proposed Restoration of Catholic Rights (Dublin, 1792). Tere is an entry on him in the HoIP 1692–1800. See also P. Rogers, ‘A Protestant Pioneer of Catholic Emancipation’, Down and Connor Historical Society’s Journal, 6 (1934), pp. 14–23. timid men to cling about the castle: Dublin Castle was the seat of the Lord Lieutenant and the Irish executive. the Cabinet of Saint James’s:Te British cabinet in London. the Pretorian bands: Te Praetorian troops formed the bodyguard of Roman generals during the republic and later of the Roman emperor. Te unit was dissolved by the Emperor Constantine in the fourth century ad. Cromwell: Oliver Cromwell (1599–1658), who conquered Ireland 1649–50. When our governors within these sixteen years dreaded a French invasion, and the Lord Lieutenant’s secretary: Tis is a reference to the late 1770s when the French threatened the invasion of Ireland during the War of American Independence. John Hobart (1723– 93), second Earl of Buckinghamshire, was Lord Lieutenant 1776–80. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. His Chief Secretary was Sir Richard Heron (1726–1805), who held this ofce 1776–80 and was MP for Lisburn 1777–83. Tere is an entry on him in the HoIP 1692–1800. Macchiavel: Niccolo Machiavelli (1469–1527), an Italian politician, philosopher, diplomat and historian. storie fiorentine, lib. 7: Istoria Fiorentine di Nic Macchiavelli, bk 7, in Opere di Niccolo Macchiavelli, 8 vols (Londra [in fact Paris], 1768), vol. 2, pp. 286–7. Robert Getty: Robert Getty (c. 1752–1815) was a wealthy Belfast merchant dealing in oil and rum, and a Belfast Volunteer. Tomas Sinclaire: Tomas Sinclair (1719–98) was a Belfast linen manufacturer and a leading Volunteer. Tos. M‘Donnell: Tomas MacDonnell (d. 1809) Dublin printer and bookseller; owner of the Hibernian Journal; member of the Dublin Society of United Irishmen; representative at the Catholic Convention of 1792. James Hyndman: James Hyndman (c. 1760–1825), was a Belfast cloth merchant, a Belfast Volunteer and secretary of the Belfast Society of United Irishmen. Robert Simms: Robert Simms (1761–1843) was a Belfast tanner and merchant; one of the proprietors of the Northern Star. He was arrested in 1794, but acquitted; arrested again in 1797 for publishing O’Connor’s Address in the Northern Star. Arrested again for involvement in the Irish rebellion, although he resigned as adjutant-general of the Antrim United Irishmen before the rebellion broke out in Ulster. He was imprisoned from 1798 to 1801 in Ireland and then Scotland. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. Robert Hunter: Robert Hunter was a Belfast ship broker, who cooperated with the Dublin United Irishmen in 1797, but refused to take part in the rebellion in 1798 when the rising in Dublin was aborted. Gil. M.‘Ilveen, jun: Gilbert McIlvaine junior (d. c. 1830) was a Belfast linen draper and banker. He was arrested, charged but acquitted as one of the proprietors of the Northern Star. Tos. M‘Cabe: Tomas McCabe (c. 1740–1800), was a Belfast jeweller and silversmith, who was a captain in the Belfast Volunteers and a very active United Irishman. Tomas Milliken: Tomas Milliken was a Belfast merchant and a member of the Belfast United Irishmen; he died in 1796.

Notes to page 202

385

21. Samuel Neilson: Samuel Neilson (1741–1803), a woollen draper, one of founders of Belfast United Irishmen, one of proprietors and editor of the Northern Star. He was arrested and imprisoned 1794–7 and 1798–1802. He emigrated to the United States, but died soon afer arriving. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. 22. Tos. Brown: Tomas Brown was a member of the Belfast Volunteers. 23. Samuel M‘Tier: Samuel McTier (c. 1738–95), public notary and Belfast ballast master; radical Dissenter; active Volunteer; brother-in-law of William Drennan. 24. Hu. M‘Ilwain: Hugh McIlvaine or McIlwain (d. 1796) was a Belfast merchant and member of the Belfast Volunteers. 25. James M Kain: Perhaps a mistake for James McCain, who was secretary of the Belfast Volunteers? 26. Wm. M‘Cleery: William McCleery or McCleary was a Belfast tanner, and one of the proprietors of the Northern Star, who was charged but acquitted in 1794. 27. Sam. Tompson: Samuel Tompson of Greenmount, near Antrim, was a Belfast Volunteer and a United Irishman, who supported the setting up of the Northern Star. 28. J. Campbell White: John Campbell White (d. 1840s) was a physician, who was arrested in 1798 and who emigrated to the United States and settled in Baltimore, MD. 29. Wm. Tennent:William Tennent (1760–1832) was a beer and spirits merchant. He was a member of the Belfast Volunteers and one of the proprietors of the Northern Star charged but acquitted in 1794. He was arrested again in 1798. 30. Hu. Johnson: Hugh Johnson was a member of the Belfast Volunteers. 31. J. S. Ferguson: John Stephenson Ferguson (1761–1833) was a bleacher, paper manufacturer; and later a banker, who was an active supporter of the Northern Star. 32. Wm. Magee: William Magee, Belfast printer and bookseller; sold copies of Tone’s An argument on behalf of the Catholics of Ireland and Paine’s Rights of Man. He was one of the proprietors of the Northern Star charged but acquitted in 1794. 33. Wm. Simms: William Simms (1763–1843) was the brother of Robert Simms. A Presbyterian, he was a tanner and merchant. He was one of the proprietors of the Northern Star who was charged and acquitted in 1794. He was arrested and briefy imprisoned in 1797. 34. Robert Callwell: Robert Caldwell in fact (1764–1836) was one of the proprietors of the Northern Star. He was arrested, prosecuted, but acquitted in 1794. 35. Hu. Montgomery: Hugh Montgomery was a partner in a brewing frm and member of the Northern Whig Club. 36. Sam. M‘Clean: Tere were fve brothers named McLean who were engaged in business in Belfast in the 1790s. 37. Henry Haslett: Henry Haslett (1758–1806), Belfast broker and shipping agent; one of the early proprietors of the Northern Star; arrested 1794 and 1796. Prosecuted for inserting the ‘Address of the United Irishmen to the Volunteers of Ireland’ in the Northern Star. Te jury returned a verdict of ‘Guilty of publishing; but not with a malicious intent’. Te court would not accept this and so the jury recorded a verdict of not guilty. Tis was met with applause in the court room. See, A faithful report of the second trial of the proprietors of the Northern Star (Belfast, 1795). 38. Wm. Bryson: William Bryson (1730–1815) was a wealthy Belfast merchant. He was the father-in-law of Samuel Neilson and cousin of James Bryson (c. 1730–96), minister of the Presbyterian General Synod of Ulster. 39. David Bigger: David Biggar (not Bigger) was a member of the United Irishmen. 40. John Tisdall: John Tisdall, a Belfast printer and one of the proprietors of the Northern Star. Arrested with Henry Haslett in 1794 and charged with the same ofence.

386

Notes to pages 202–20

41. John Caldwell: John Caldwell was a physician and a Belfast Volunteer. 42. John Haslett: John Haslett, a wholesale woollen draper. He was tried and acquitted along with his brother in 1794. 43. the Earl of Charlemont: James Caulfeild (1728–99), frst Earl of Charlemont, was an early patron of Henry Flood and Henry Grattan, an active patriot during the campaign for legislative independence, Commander-in-Chief of the Volunteers and supporter of the Whig Club. He was not a radical, however, and was a belated advocate of Catholic emancipation. He opposed the Union. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. See also, M. J. Craig, Te Volunteer Earl: Being the Life and Times of James Caulfeild, frst Earl of Charlemont (London: Cresset Press, 1948). 44. Colonel Sharman: William Sharman (1730–1803) was a Protestant landowner, a colonel in the Volunteers, a moderate reformer, and MP for Lisburn 1783–90. Tere is an entry on him in the HoIP 1692–1800. 45. Major Crawford: John Crawford of County Down. His daughter Mabel married Sharman’s son in 1805. 46. the Falls: Te Falls road and park are in west Belfast. 47. Priestley: Joseph Priestley (1733–1804), was a Dissenting minister, educator, theologian, chemist, political theorist, etc. He was a radical reformer, whose meeting house and laboratory in Birmingham were destroyed by a loyalist mob in 1791. See R. B. Rose, ‘Te Priestley Riots of 1791’, Past and Present, 18 (1960), pp. 68–88. Priestley then emigrated to the United States. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. 48. the frst: held on 15 February 1782. 49. and third: held on 8 September 1783. 50. JOHN RABB: John Rabb was the printer of the Northern Star. He was one of those arrested, charged but acquitted in 1794. 51. despotism in Poland: Russia and Prussia were at this time engaged in the forcible second partition of Poland in order to destroy the Polish constitution of 1791. 52. Neither house nor kingdom, divided against itself, can possibly stand: Jesus in Mark 3:24–5. 53. WM. OSBORNE: William Osborne was a Belfast merchant involved in soap boiling and the chandling business up to 1796. 54. feu-de-joyes: celebratory volleys. 55. Duke and a King, at the head of an armed host … its object was detestable and unjust: Te Prussian forces, commanded by Karl Wilhelm Ferdinand (1735–1806), Duke of Brunswick, were defeated by the French revolutionary army at the battle of Valmy on 20 September 1792. 56. the councils of the National Convention: Te French revolutionary legislature which sat from 20 September 1792 to 26 October 1795. 57. The town was almost universally illuminated. – Every thing demonstrated sincere pleasure in the disgrace of two tyrannical courts: Te royal courts of Austria and Prussia which were seeking to overturn the French republic. 58. May the fate of every Tyrant be that of Capet: When Louis XVI of France was put on trial he was referred to as Citizen Louis Capet. Te House of Capet had ruled France from 987 to 1328. Louis was of course a member of the house of Bourbon. 59. WM. SINCLAIRE: William Sinclair (1758–1807) was the son of Tomas Sinclair, the linen manufacturer and leading Belfast Volunteer. 60. the Austrian / Netherlands: modern-day Belgium. 61. (Citizen Gregoire): Henri Grégoire (1750–1831), the President of the French Convention, favoured the prosecution, but not the execution of Louis XVI. He served in the

Notes to pages 220–31

62. 63. 64. 65.

66. 67.

68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74.

75.

76.

77.

387

legislature under the Directory and the First Consul. He later opposed the creation of the empire in 1804. (Savoy): France annexed Savoy in 1792. It was returned to Piedmont-Sardinia in 1815, but returned to France in 1860. Ann: Anne Stuart, the younger daughter of James II, ruled as Queen 1702–14. Louis XIV: Louis XIV (1638–1715) was King of France 1643–1715. the Constitutional Society of London: Te Society for Constitutional Information was a leading reform association in London 1780 to 1795, distributing propaganda in support of radical parliamentary reform. I have written the entry on it in the on-line version of the ODNB. the great charter of King John: Magna Carta, the great medieval charter of liberties, agreed to in 1215 by King John (1166–1216), who was king from 1199. At a meeting of the Belfast Volunteer Company, (Blue) 14th December, 1792, to take into consideration a late Proclamation, issued by the Lord Lieutenant and Privy Council of Ireland: On 8 December 1792 the Irish Lord Lieutenant issued a proclamation against ‘divers ill-afected persons’ associated ‘to withstand lawful authority and violently and forcibly to redress pretended grievances and to subvert the established constitution of his majesty’s realm’. See Northern Star, 12 December 1792. Cunn. Greg: Cunningham Greg (c. 1763–1830) was a Belfast merchant. Alex. Orr: Alexander Orr was a Belfast chandler. John Holmes: John Holmes (c. 1755–1825) was an eminent Belfast banker. Gaul: that is, revolutionary France. Jure Divino: Divine law. seminaries: universities. a Reid: Tomas Reid (1710–96), the natural and moral philosopher, was a professor at Glasgow University and the founder of ‘common sense’ philosophy. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. a Beatty: James Beattie (1735–1803) was a poet and philosopher. Like Reid he was a critic of the sceptical philosophy of David Hume. He was a professor at Marischal College, Aberdeen. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. Te idea therefore of a parliamentary representation of the Commons of Scotland is only a political fction!: Scotland was represented in the Westminster House of Commons by only forty-fve (out of 558) MPs. the genius of a Hume: David Hume (1711–76), the philosopher and historian. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB.

Henry Grattan’s Proposal for a Bill for the Relief of His Majesty’s Roman Catholic Subject 1. 2.

3.

pro patria et vivere et mori: Tis Latin phrase can be translated as ‘to live and die for one’s country’. a right honourable gentleman: John Toler (1745–1831) was Solicitor General 1789–98 and Attorney General 1798–1800, and MP for Tralee, Philipstown and Gorey 1776– 1800. Tere are entries on him in the ODNB and HoIP 1692–1800. Te Irish minister: Robert Hobart (1760–1816), later fourth Earl of Buckinghamshire was Chief Secretary 1789–93 and MP for Portarlington and Armagh city 1784–97. He

388

4. 5.

6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13.

14.

15. 16.

17. 18. 19. 20. 21.

22.

23.

24.

Notes to pages 231–5 strongly opposed enfranchising the Irish Catholics in 1792. Tere are entries on him in the ODNB and the HoIP 1692–1800. and the British minister: William Pitt the Younger (1759–1806), Prime Minister 1783– 1801 and 1804–6. his new fiends: Te Portland Whigs, who abandoned opposition and formed a coalition with Pitt. Tey were more willing to consider Roman Catholic emancipation. Lord Fitzwilliam, one of their number, was briefy Lord Lieutenant in 1795. Te Revolution: the Glorious Revolution of 1688–9. It began by imposing on you the power of the British Parliament, and those very oaths required in the frst of William: 1 William and Mary, session 2, cap. 9. the leading part of the Revolution is the claim of right: Te Bill of Rights (1689),1 William and Mary, session 2, cap. 2. founded on the petition of right: Te Petition of Right of 1628, a protest by the Westminster House of Commons against the policies of Charles I. Brabant: Brabant was a province of the Austrian Netherlands (modern Belgium). Te king of Prussia: Frederick William II (1744–97), King of Prussia from 1786. the Pope: Giovanni Angelico Braschi ( 1717–99) was Pope Pius VI from 1775. the Pretender: Henry Benedict Stuart (1725–1807), the Cardinal Duke of York, was regarded by the surviving Jacobites as Henry IX, afer the death of his brother, Charles Edward Stuart, in 1788, though he made no attempt to regain the throne of his grandfather, James II. So trembled the Carthaginian assembly: Te ancient state of Carthage had an elected senate of 300 members dominated by a Council of thirty, made up of the leaders of the wealthiest families. Afer the defeat of Hannibal by Scipio in 203 bc harsh terms were imposed on the city. In 146 bc the Romans destroyed the city afer the third Punic war. His Majesty: George III, King 1760–1820. the king of Corsica: In 1794, British and Corsican forces freed the island of Corsica from French control. For a short time Corsica was added to the dominions of George III. Te island was reconquered by the French in 1796 and became a department of France. the lord of Canada: Te majority of George III’s Canadian subjects were French Catholics. the great ally of the Emperor: Francis II (1768–1835) was the last Holy Roman Emperor from 1792 to 1806. the grand confederate of the King of Spain: Charles IV (1748–1819) was King of Spain from 1788 to 1808 when he abdicated under French pressure. Paine: Tomas Paine (1737–1809), the radical writer and the author in particular of the two parts of Te Rights of Man (1791–2). It has been also said that his Majesty’s oath is a bar: Tis is a reference to George III’s coronation oath by which he swore to uphold the Protestant religion and the rights of the established Church of England. Te oath is the frst of William: 1 William and Mary, session 1, cap. 6: An Act for establishing the Coronation Oath, which includes ‘Will you to the utmost of your power maintain the laws of God, the true profession of the Protestant religion established by law?’ the tests that exclude them the third: 3 William and Mary, cap. 2: An Act for abrogating the Oath of Supremacy in Ireland, and appointing other oaths. Tis was an act of the English Parliament. by His Majesty’s gracious recommendation in favour of the Catholics in 1793; broken by the grant of the elective fanchise: Te Irish Roman Catholics gained the franchise on the same terms as Protestants by the Catholic relief act of 1793, 33 George III, cap. 21.

Notes to pages 235–9

389

25. broken by the Canada bill: Te Quebec Act of 1774, 14 George III, cap. 83 and the Canada Act of 1791, 31 George III, cap. 31, both granted Catholics the free practice of their faith. 26. the Corsican constitution: Te second Corsican constitution of 1794, with George III as nominal king of the island, protected the free practice of the Catholic religion. 27. the viceroy: William Wentworth Fitzwilliam (1748–1833), fourth Earl Fitzwilliam, who was Lord Lieutenant from January to March 1795, was recalled so quickly, in part, because he was too sympathetic to full Catholic emancipation. His replacement, John Jefreys Pratt (1759–1840), second Earl Camden, was appointed in March 1795 to reduce Catholic expectations. Tere are entries on both of them in the ODNB. 28. Francis-street meetings: Te Catholic Committee was meeting at this time at a chapel in Francis Street, Dublin. 29. their secretary: Teobald Wolfe Tone (1763–98), a Protestant who served as secretary the Catholic Committee and who was also a founder of the societies of United Irishmen in both Belfast and Dublin. In April 1794 he made contact with a French agent, William Jackson. To secure immunity from prosecution he informed the authorities of his dealings with Jackson. When Jackson was arrested in April 1795, Tone realized he was in serious danger of being prosecuted. He made plans to emigrate and lef for the United States on 12 June 1795. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. 30. with Jackson: William Jackson (1737–95) was an English clergyman of Irish birth. He was soon involved in establishing links between the United Irishmen and the French. He was arrested in April 1795, but committed suicide before he could be sentenced. 31. In 1792, the religious war began; can we forget the attempt of government to divide the Catholic democracy fom its aristocracy: In 1792 the Irish government tried to dissuade the Catholics from pressing to be enfranchised. Te conservative elements on the Catholic Committee, led by the Earl of Kenmare, seceded when the more radical Catholics decided to take their campaign to the wider Catholic community and proposed taking a petition to the king in person. 32. the Castle: Dublin Castle, the seat of the Lord Lieutenant and the Irish executive. 33. a minister: Sir John Parnell (1744–1801), an Irish MP 1767–1800 and Chancellor of the Exchequer 1785–99. He was a staunch opponent of Catholic relief 1792–95. Tere are entries on him in the ODNB and the HoIP 1692–1800. 34. Her justice bury what your pride has planned, / And laughing plenty reassume the land: Tis is a misquotation from A. Pope, Epistles to Several Persons: Epistle IV to Richard Boyle, Earl of Burlington, ll. 81–2. It should be: ‘Deep harvests bury all his pride has plann’d / And laughing Ceres reassume the land’. 35. they advance fom the wilderness … back again to the desert?: Exodus 23:28. 36. Lord Kingsborough: Robert King (1754–99) held the courtesy title of Lord Kingsborough. He was an Irish MP for Boyle and then County Cork, 1776–97 and then second Earl of Kingston. He faced trial for murder in 1797–8, but was acquitted. Tere is an entry on him in the HoIP 1692–1800. 37. Mr. Cufe: James Cufe (1747–1821) was MP for County Mayo 1768–97. Tere is an entry on him in the HoIP 1692-1800. 38. Mr. G. Ponsonby: George Ponsonby (1755–1817) was an MP for Wicklow, Innistiogue and then Galway borough 1778–1800. Tere is an entry on him in the HoIP 1692–1800. 39. Mr. Maurice Fitzgerald: Maurice Fitzgerald (1772–1849) had just been elected MP for County Kerry. Tere is an entry on him in the HoIP 1692–1800.

390

Notes to pages 243–55

Speech of Arthur O’Connor, Esq. in the House of Commons of Ireland 1. 2.

3. 4. 5.

6.

7.

8. 9.

10.

11. 12. 13.

14.

since I have had a seat in this House: that is, since 1790. (Mr. Pelham): Tomas Pelham (1756–1826), later second Earl of Chichester. He was an Irish MP for Carrick, Clogher and then Armagh from 1783 to 1799. He was also Chief Secretary 1783–84, but resigned afer William Pitt became Prime Minister. He was persuaded to take up the post again 1795–8 when the Portland Whigs formed a coalition with Pitt. He was also an MP at Westminster from 1780. Tere are entries on him in the ODNB and the HoIP 1692–1800. Pandora’s box: In Greek mythology Pandora’s box (in fact, a large jar) contained all the evils of the world. To open it will have very severe and far-reaching consequences. Farmers General: Te major tax collectors in the French tax farming system were the fermiers généreaux (farmers general in English). An Hon. Gentleman: George Ogle (1742–1814), Irish MP for County Wexford and then Dublin City 1769–1800, was an independent, who ofen supported the Patriots in opposition until the 1790s, but he also opposed all the Catholic relief measures while in parliament. He was a staunch advocate of the Protestant Ascendancy, opposed leniency to the rebels in 1798, and became Grand Master of the Orange Order in 1801. Tere are entries on him in the ODNB and the HoIP 1692–1800. and a noble Lord (Kingsborough): Robert King (1754–99) held the courtesy title of Viscount Kingsborough. He was an Irish MP for Boyle and then County Cork, 1776–97 and then second Earl of Kingston. Tere is an entry on him in the HoIP 1692–1800. the reign of Elizabeth: Elizabeth Tudor (1533–1603) was Queen of England from 1558. She reversed the Catholic policies of her predecessor, Queen Mary, and established a Protestant Church of Ireland. until these few years that we have begun on its abolition: a reference to the various Catholic relief acts since 1778. Antæus: In Greek mythology Antaeus was a giant son of Poseidon and Gaia, who killed many adversaries. His strength declined if his feet did not touch the ground. Hercules killed him by holding him alof and crushing him as a dangerous man, as a Jacobin: Te Jacobins were a radical group in revolutionary France, who met at the Jacobin Club in Paris. Teir leaders were deeply involved in the Terror of 1793–4. Te term was ofen used in Britain and Ireland to attack domestic radicals. the Rt. Hon. Secretary: Tomas Pelham, the Chief Secretary (see the note on him above). a British Minister: William Pitt the Younger (1759–1806), Prime Minister 1783–1801 and 1804–6. a rival: William Henry Cavendish Cavendish-Bentinck (1738–1809), third Duke of Portland, deserted Charles James Fox and formed a coalition with William Pitt in 1794 to combat the French revolution abroad and radicals at home. He himself became Home Secretary. He supported the appointment of Earl Fitzwilliam as Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, but accepted that he should be recalled early in 1795 when he alienated Protestant opinion by being too sympathetic to Catholic emancipation. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. See also D. Wilkinson, Duke of Portland: Politics and Party in the Age of George III (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003). Eighty-fourth department: Te French republic initially divided France into eighty-three departments.

Notes to pages 255–64

391

15. La Vendee: a royalist and counter-revolutionary rebellion broke out in 1793 in La Vendée, on the west coast of France, south of the Loire. It was encouraged by Britain, but was eventually crushed in 1796. 16. Jackson: William Jackson (1737–95) was an English clergyman acting as a French agent and in communication with Wolfe Tone and radical United Irishmen. He was arrested and charged with treason in 1795, but committed suicide on 30 April 1795. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. 17. the gentlemen (Cufe: James Cufe (1747–1821) was an MP for County Mayo 1768–97. Tere is an entry on him in the HoIP 1692–1800. 18. russet fock: the typical garb of an agricultural worker. 19. since the revolution: the Glorious Revolution of 1688–9. 20. at least since Union: the Act of Union between England and Scotland in 1707. 21. he has gained his ends of you … disgraced the opposition of England: Prime Minister William Pitt had successfully split the Whig opposition to his administration at Westminster, winning over the Portland Whigs in 1794 and reducing the Foxite Whigs to a small rump incapable of regaining power for many years. 22. fxed fgures for the hand of scorn to point its slow and moving fnger at: Othello in Shakespeare’s Othello, IV.ii.

A Fair Statement, of the Administration of Earl Fitzwilliam in Ireland 1.

Mr. Beresford: John Beresford (1738–1805), a son of the frst Earl of Tyrone, was MP for County Waterford 1761–1805. He had long supported the government interest and was a rival of the Ponsonby interest. He resented Lord Lieutenant Fitzwilliam’s accusation of corruption and even challenged him to a duel. In 1795 Fitzwilliam dismissed him as frst Commissioner of the Revenue, a decision that Prime Minister Pitt, who was on good terms with Beresford, refused to accept. When Fitzwilliam was recalled, Beresford was restored to his position, an ofce he retained until 1801. He supported Union and helped devise the commercial terms. 2. Mr. Pitt: William Pitt the Younger (1759–1806), Prime Minister 1783–1801 and 1804–6. 3. additional indulgencies to the Catholics … adoption of another plan: [Fitzwilliam,] A Letter fom a Venerated Nobleman, Recently Retired fom this Country, to the Earl of Carlisle: Explaining that Event (Dublin, 1795), p. 28. Both the frst and second letters to Carlisle are published in this pamphlet. 4. he consented not to bring … press upon government: Ibid. 5. Mr. Grattan: Henry Grattan (1746–1820), the leading Irish patriot and advocate of moderate parliamentary reform and Catholic emancipation. 6. the Catholic petitions to parliament were prepared, but that he was happy the business was in the hands of Grattan: [Fitzwilliam], A Letter, p. 17. 7. use what eforts he could to stop the progress of it: Ibid., p. 29. 8. Mr. Byrne: Edward Byrne was a rich Catholic merchant who had been very active in recent eforts to secure Catholic relief measures. 9. Mr. Grattan, as minister to Lord Fitzwilliam: Grattan held no ofcial position, but had some infuence over Fitzwilliam. 10. he would use every efort to keep the question back?: [Fitzwilliam.] A Letter, p. 16. 11. that he was happy to fnd the question in the hands of Mr. Grattan: Ibid., p. 17. 12. giving a handsome support to the measure if it could not be kept back: Ibid., p. 32.

392

Notes to pages 265–7

13. that he should immediately use every efort to keep back the Catholic question: Ibid., p. 28. 14. he had kept clear of all specifc engagements: Ibid., p. 30. 15. that if he received no very peremptory orders to the contrary, he should acquiesce: Ibid., pp. 30–1. 16. Lord Milton: George Damer (1746–1808) held the courtesy title of Lord Milton and was later the second Earl of Dorchester. He served briefy as Fitzwilliam’s Chief Secretary 1794–5 and was Irish MP for Naas 1795–7. He was also several times an MP at Westminster. Tere is an entry on him in the HoIP 1692–1800. 17. a cabinet minister (Mr. Windham): William Windham (1750–1810) was elected to the Westminster Parliament in 1784. He was for some years a Foxite opposition Whig, but he became a leading critic of revolutionary France and broke with Fox in 1793. He became Secretary at War in 1794 and was active in seeking a restoration of the Bourbon monarchy in France, Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. 18. giving intimation of discontent among his colleagues in England: [Fitzwilliam,] A Letter, p. 34. 19. may be of more essential service than any act of any minister since the revolution, at least since the union: Ibid., p. 35. 20. expresses his surprise … to raise a fame in the country, which nothing short of arms could be able to keep down: Ibid., p. 37. 21. the Duke of Portland: William Henry Cavendish Cavendish-Bentinck (1738–1809), third Duke of Portland, who broke with Charles James Fox in 1794, formed a coalition with William Pitt and took the post of Home Secretary. 22. If the only point referred for consideration … to judge of that manner and time: [Fitzwilliam], A Letter, p. 15. 23. for the preservation of the empire: Ibid., p. 39. 24. with having acted inconsistently with that principle, by which alone the full advantage of the union which had taken place in England could be extended to Ireland: Ibid., p. 41. 25. to a single family: the Ponsonby family. 26. Am I then (says his Lordship) … my country have only my connections in view?: [Fitzwilliam], First Letter, p. 41. 27. Mr. W. Ponsonby: William Brabazon Ponsonby (1744–1806) was the son of John Ponsonby, Speaker of the Irish House of Commons 1756–71. He was a leading Irish Whig and ally of Charles James Fox. He was MP for Cork, Bandon-Bridge and then County Kilkenny from 1764 to 1800. He was on the point of being appointed Secretary of State in 1795, but went back into opposition on Fitzwilliam’s recall. He later opposed the Union. Tere are entries on him in the ODNB and the HoIP 1692–1800. 28. Mr. G. Ponsonby: George Ponsonby (1755–1817), the brother of William, was a barrister and MP for Wicklow borough, Innistiogue and then Galway borough 1776–1800. He was appointed Chancellor of the Exchequer in 1782. He was not appointed Attorney General because of Fitzwilliam’s recall. He later opposed the Union, but served in the Westminster Parliament 1801–17. Tere are entries on him in the ODNB and the HoIP 1692–1800. 29. Mr. Curran: John Philpot-Curran (1750–1807) was a popular Irish lawyer and MP from 1783 to 1800. He supported moderate parliamentary reform and Catholic emancipation. He defended several United Irishmen accused of rebellion in 1798 even though he opposed their views. He later opposed the Union. Fitzwilliam thought of appointing him as Solicitor General, but he did not gain this post. Tere are entries on him in the ODNB and the HoIP 1692–1800.

Notes to pages 267–71

393

30. Mr. L. Morres: Lodge Evans Morres (1746/7–1822 was to be appointed under-secretary in the civil department in Fitzwilliam’s plans for recasting the Irish administration. Tis did not happen, but he did become a treasury commissioner. He was MP for Innistiogue, Bandon-Bridge, Ennis and Dingle 1768–1800 and for Ennis in the imperial parliament 1801–18. Tere is an entry on him in the HoIP 1692–1800. 31. Mr. Wolfe: Arthur Wolfe (1739–1803) was a very able lawyer and MP for Coleraine, and then Jamestown 1783–98. He was appointed Solicitor General 1787–89 and then Attorney General 1789–98. He was made Lord Chief Justice of the King’s Bench and Viscount Kilwarden in 1798. He was murdered by rebels on the streets of Dublin, during Robert Emmet’s abortive rising in 1803. Tere are entries on him in the ODNB and the HoIP 1692–1800. 32. Mr. Toler: John Toler (1745–1831) was a lawyer and MP for Tralee, Philipstown, and then Gorey 1773–1800. He was Solicitor General 1789–98, Attorney General 1798– 1800 and then Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas 1800–27. Tere are entries on him in the ODNB and the HoIP 1692–1800. 33. Mr. Hamilton: Sackville Hamilton (1731/2–1818) was MP for St Johnstown, Clogher, and Armagh 1780–97 and under-secretary in the civil department in the Irish government. He retained this post until 1796. Fitzwilliam wanted to get rid of him and Edward Cooke (below) because he believed they were acting as ministers rather than as civil servants. See [Fitzwilliam], First Letter, p. 5. Tere is an entry on him in the HoIP 1692–1800. 34. Mr. Coke: Edward Cooke (1755–1820), an Englishman, had been private secretary to Richard Heron when he was Chief Secretary in 1782. He was under-secretary in the military department of the Irish executive 1789–96 and then for the civil department 1796–1801. He was MP for Liford and then Old Leighlin 1789–1800. He favoured Catholic emancipation. He was very active in supporting Union and he served many years under Lord Castlereagh afer the Union. Tere are entries on him in the ODNB and the HoIP 1692–1800. 35. the Clerkship of the Hanaper: Te Clerk of the Hanaper was an ofcial in the Court of Chancery, who was paid fees for searching out charters, patents, etc. and who sometimes issued writs under the great seal. 36. he had mentioned to Mr. Pitt, Mr. Beresford’s dangerous power … Mr. Pitt did not ofer the slightest objections or say a word in his favour: [Fitzwilliam], First Letter, p. 8. 37. that he submitted … though indeed at the same time he had no slight ground of doubting the sincerity of those professions: Ibid., p. 9. 38. that for the person whom Mr. Pitt contends … to resume his station at the Revenue Board: Ibid., p. 37. 39. Mr. Pitt felt himself bound to adhere to those sentiments … however he may sincerely lament the consequences which must arise fom the present situation: Ibid., pp. 39–40. 40. One short word (says his Lordship) more on this part of the subject … then commenced the breach of all faith and arguments on my part, and not till then: Ibid., pp. 10–11. 41. the afair of Nootka Sound: In the 1780s, Britain and Spain were in dispute over the sovereignty and control over Nootka Sound, on the rugged west coast of Vancouver island. Te two countries came close to war in 1789, but the crisis was settled peacefully, though with some difculty, in 1790. 42. he was charged with the government of a distracted, discontented country: Ibid., p. 42. 43. his Predecessor: John Fane (1759–1841), tenth Earl of Westmorland, was Lord Lieutenant of Ireland 1789 to 1794.

394

Notes to pages 271–83

44. that whatever it may cost his feelings … so lately condescended to invest him: [Fitzwilliam], First Letter, p. 25. 45. a desperate resolution … and existence of the kingdom: Ibid., p. 22. 46. that the putting of the Catholic question … fatal consequences: Ibid., p. 20. 47. the evil Genius of England … corroboration of his sentiments: Ibid., pp. 20–1. 48. he refused to be the person … could keep down: Ibid., p. 37. 49. rather than indulge me … to break in upon us: Ibid., p. 42. 50. Sir Lawrence Parsons: Lawrence Parsons (1758–1841) was MP for Trinity College Dublin and then King’s County 1782–1800. He served in the Imperial Parliament 1801–7, succeeded his uncle as second Earl of Rosse in 1807, and sat in the House of Lords 1809–41. 51. “am I then” says he, “that light … without consulting my own understanding?” : [Fitzwilliam,] First Letter, p. 11. 52. let us allow him … and never to “have consulted his own understanding: Ibid., p. 11.

An Irishman’s Second Letter to the People called Defenders 1. 2.

the hougher: a person who cuts the hamstrings of cattle. Te White Boys: Rural protesters, who ofen wore white shirts or smocks. See M. Wall, ‘Te Whiteboys’, in Secret Societies of Ireland, ed. T. D. Williams (Dublin: Gill and Macmillan, 1973), pp. 13–25. 3. curses not loud but deep: Macbeth in Shakespeare’s play, Macbeth, V.iii. 4. the American Tom Paine: Tomas Paine (1737–1809), a radical writer active in Britain, America and France. He was born in Britain, but had adopted American citizenship. He was the author of Te Rights of Man (1791–2) and Te Age of Reason (1793–94/5). He was imprisoned in Paris by the French revolutionaries 1793–4 and came close to being executed by them. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. 5. Ask those traitors who fed their country: Teobald Wolfe Tone and Archibald Hamilton Rowan, for example. 6. like the frst-born rebel Cain: the son of Adam and Eve, who slew his brother Abel. See Genesis 4:1–16. 7. the new constitution: Te French Directory was established in 1795 on the basis of a restricted propertied franchise. 8. Tallien: Jean-Lambert Tallien (1767–1820) was a committed Jacobin, who spread the Terror from Paris to the French provinces, but who took part in the Termidorian reaction which helped to overthrow the Jacobin leadership. He escaped assassination attempts, but lost infuence when the Directory was established. 9. Robespierre: Maximilien de Robespierre (1758–94), the main Jacobin leader during the Terror of 1793–4. He was executed without trial afer the Termidorian reaction. 10. Naas: the county town of County Kildare. Lawrence O’Connor, a leading Defender, was put on trial at Naas and executed. He was excommunicated by the Catholic Church and denied the fnal sacraments. He was hanged, drawn and quartered. See the Kildare Nationalist newspaper, 31 October 2008 and also www.seamuscullen.net/oconnor [accessed 5 February 2013].

Notes to pages 288–309

395

An Act More Efectually to Suppress Insurrections 1.

2.

whether he shall take such oath … beneft of clergy: Originally, only clergymen could claim beneft of clergy, which put them beyond the jurisdiction of the secular courts, but eventually laymen who were frst ofenders could claim that a lesser sentence should be imposed on them, if they could prove their literacy by reading Psalm 51, which became known as the neck or halter verse. certiorari: an order given by a higher court, directing a lower court or public authority to send the record of a given legal case for review.

Russell, A Letter to the People of Ireland, on the Present Situation of the Country 1.

printed at the northern star office: Te Northern Star radical newspaper was established by leading members of the Belfast Society of United Irishmen. It was supported fnancially by many of the richer members. It was edited by Samuel Neilson. It frst appeared in Belfast on 1 January 1792 and lasted until May 1797. Several of its proprietors and contributors were prosecuted during these years. See G. O’Brien, ‘“Spirit, Impartiality and Independence”, “Te Northern Star”, 1792–1797’, Eighteenth-Century Ireland, 13 (1998), pp. 7–23. 2. “it is a goodly thing, brethren, to dwell / together in unity.” – Psalms: Psalm 133. 3. From the time that the Convention of Volunteers … in the year 1784: Te Irish Volunteers held a Convention from 10 November to 2 December 1793 at which plans for the reform of the system of parliamentary representation in Ireland were discussed. Henry Flood proposed the reform of parliament in the Irish House of Commons, but his proposals were defeated on 21 March 1784. 4. Limerick: Limerick capitulated to the forces of William III, in October 1691, completing the Williamite Conquest of Ireland 1689–91. 5. Lord Westmorland: John Fane (1759–1841), tenth Earl of Westmorland, was Lord Lieutenant of Ireland from January 1790 to December 1794. Tis is a reference to the Cork address of 1791. See T. Bartlett, Te Fall and Rise of the Irish Nation: Te Catholic Question 1690–1830 (Dublin: Gill and Macmillan, 1992), p. 129. 6. If every Irish seamen had been withdrawn fom the English feet on the frst of June: Te Royal Navy gained a major victory (known as ‘Te Glorious First of June’) over the French feet, west of Ushant in the Atlantic Ocean on 1 June 1794. 7. Tat session produced some trifing relaxation of the penal code: the Roman Catholic Relief Act of 1791, 31 George III, cap. 32. 8. Tose formidable denunciations … on the 3d of December, 1792: Te Catholic Convention, derisively called the ‘Back-Lane Parliament’ because it convened at Tailors’ Hall, Back-Lane, Dublin. 9. the gun-powder and militia bills: Te Gunpowder Act of February 1793 (33 George III, cap. 2) sought to prevent the importation of arms and gunpowder that might be used by Irish radicals. Te Militia Act, of the same month (33 George III, cap. 22), removed the ban on Roman Catholics bearing arms and allowed them to join the ranks of the militia, but not to serve as ofcers. 10. Te Catholic bill did not pass till the month of April: Te Catholic Relief Act of 1793 (33 George III, cap. 21), which enfranchised Roman Catholics on the same terms as Protestants.

396

Notes to pages 309–16

11. the battle of Nerwindin: Te Austrians defeated the French forces at the battle if Neerwinden on 18 March 1793. 12. Dumourier: Charles-François du Périer Dumouriez (1739–1823) fed to the Austrians in April 1793 afer his defeat at Neerwinden. For years aferwards he was engaged in royalist conspiracies. 13. Witness the prosecutions of Fay: See Te Trial of John Fay, Esq. of Navan in the County of Meath, for Conspiring with Others to Kill and murder the Revd Tomas Butler of Ardbracken (Dublin, 1794). 14. Bird, Delahoyd: See A Full and Accurate Report of the Trial of James Bird, Roger Hamill, and Casimir Delahoyde (Dublin, 1794). 15. Byrne: Richard Byrne was accused of being involved in the conspiracy led by John Fay, above. 16. Mr. Pitt: William Pitt the Younger (1759–1806), Prime Minister 1783–1801 and 1804–6. 17. Defenders: that is, as members of the clandestine Catholic violent protest movement known as the Defenders. 18. Te very summer following … much blood was spilled before it was carried into efect: See Bartlett, ‘An End to Moral Economy: Te Irish Militia Disturbances of 1793’. 19. Earl Fitzwilliam: William Wentworth Fitzwilliam (1748), fourth Earl Fitzwilliam, who briefy served as Lord Lieutenant of Ireland in early 1795, before being recalled for being too sympathetic to Catholic emancipation and because he had alienated infuential Protestants. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. 20. the Duke of Portland: William Henry Cavendish Cavendish-Bentinck (1738–1809), third Duke of Portland, who joined a coalition with Prime Minister Pitt in 1794 and was appointed as Home Secretary. Tere is an entry on him in the ODNB. On his relations with Fitzwilliam, see D. Wilkinson, ‘Te Fitzwilliam Episode, 1795: A Reinterpretation of the Role of the Duke of Portland’, Irish Historical Studies, 29 (1995), pp. 315–39. 21. Te views of that government … by one of the leading members: by Henry Grattan (1746– 1820). His speech of 22 January 1795 is printed in Te Parliamentary Register, or, History of the Proceedings and Debates of the House of Commons of Ireland, 15 vols (Dublin, 1784–95), vol. 15, pp. 4–11. 22. Of late a set of men have appeared in diferent parts of the North, styling themselves Orange-men: See P. Gibbon, ‘Te Origins of the Orange Order and the United Irishmen’, Economy and Society, 1 (1972), pp. 135–63; and J. Smyth, ‘Te Men of No Popery: Te Origins of the Orange Order’, History Ireland, 3:3 (1995), pp. 48–53. 23. by their fuits ye shall know them: Jesus, in Matthew 7:16. 24. Te prosperity of a state has been well defned by the excellent Mr. Tytler in his Historical Register: [ James Tytler (c. 1747–1805),] Te Historical Register, or, Edinburgh Monthly Intelligencer (Edinburgh, 1791–3). He advocated parliamentary reform in 1792. He was forced to fee Scotland and emigrated to Massachusetts. 25. calm thinking villains: A. Pope, Te Temple of Fame, l. 410. 26. In as much as ye did it not to one of the least of these ye did it not to me: Jesus, in Matthew 25:45.

Notes to pages 321–32

397

O’Connor, A Letter to the Electors of Antrim 1.

2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

7. 8. 9. 10. 11.

12. 13. 14.

my uncle Lord Longueville: Richard Longfeld (1734–1811), Baron Longueville from 1795 and Viscount Longueville from 1800, was the brother of O’Connor’s mother. He was a rich Cork landowner and an Irish MP for Charleville, Clonakilty, Cork City and Baltimore 1761–96. Tere is an entry on him in the HoIP 1692–1800. the Government refused me a Commissioner’s place: in the Irish Treasury. the Gunpowder Bill: 33 George III, cap. 2, an Act of 1793, which tried to deny Irish radicals access to arms and gunpowder. the Convention Bill: 33 George III, cap. 29, an Act in 1793, which tried to suppress the United Irishmen and other radical groups. the Habeas Corpus Bill: by Lord Lieutenant Camden in 1796. Carhampton: Henry Lawes Luttrell (1737–1811), second Earl of Carhampton and Lieutenant-General of Ordnance in Ireland. In May 1795 he was given unlimited authority to tackle the problems posed by the Catholic Defenders in Connacht. Lord Lieutenant Camden admitted that he had exceeded his authority, but he protected him with an act of indemnity passed by the Irish Parliament in 1796 (36 George III, cap. 6). Carhampton was Commander-in-Chief by default in 1796 and was criticized for his handling of the French invasion attempt at Bantry Bay in late December. their master and maker, the Minister of Britain: William Pitt the Younger (1759–1806), Prime Minister 1783–1801 and 1804–6. the shambles: a slaughter house or place of carnage. two men without connexion or interest in the country, without responsibility or controul?: Lord Lieutenant Earl Camden and Chief Secretary Tomas Pelham, both Englishmen. the appointment of a man: Lord Carhampton. Fox: Charles James Fox (1749–1806), the great political rival of Prime Minster Pitt, the leader of the Whig opposition minority in the Westminster Parliament, and a defender of civil liberties, though not a political radical. Chief Magistrate’s deputy: Chief Secretary Tomas Pelham (1756–1826). Tere are entries on him in the ODNB and the HoIP 1692–1800. Charles: Charles Stuart (1600–49), King Charles I from 1625, was executed afer the British civil wars. James: James Stuart (1633–1701), King James II 1685–8, who was overthrown by the Glorious Revolution and driven into exile.

Lake, Proclamation to the People of the Province of Ulster 1.

G. LAKE: Gerard Lake (1744–1808) was an ofcer who had fought in the Seven Years’ War, the War of American Independence, and in Flanders against revolutionary France in the early 1790s. He commanded in Ulster in 1796, when Lord Carhampton was Commander-in-Chief in Ireland. In early 1797 he was promoted Lieutenant-General and he was urged by Lord Lieutenant Earl Camden to make every efort to disarm Ulster. He greatly weakened the efectiveness of the United Irishmen with his arrests and seizure of arms. In April 1798, he succeeded Sir Ralph Abercromby as Commander-in-Chief, just before the outbreak of the Irish rebellion.

398

Notes to pages 335–41

Te Appeal of the People of Ulster to their Countrymen, and to the Empire at Large 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

6. 7. 8.

9. 10. 11.

12.

13.

Bastilles: Te Bastille was the notorious prison in the centre of Paris that was destroyed by the French revolutionaries on 14 July 1789. Tenders: Te boats used to transport prisoners out to Royal Navy ships. an uncontrouled and licentious foreign: a reference to English and Scottish troops serving in Ireland. this illegal act without inquiry!: the Act referred to is 36 George III, cap. 20. when a civil war was for two years carrying on in the county of Armagh: Tis is a reference to the conficts between Catholic Defenders and Protestant Peep O’Day Boys. See, B. McEvoy, ‘Te Peep of Day Boys and Defenders in the County Armagh’, Seanchas Ardnhacha: Journal of the Armagh Diocesan Historical Society, 12:1 (1986), pp. 123–65 and 12:2 (1987), pp. 60–127; Peep O’Day Boys and Defenders: Select Documents on the County Armagh Disturbances, 1784–96, ed. D. W. Miller (Belfast: PRONI, 1990); and D. W. Miller, ‘Politicisation in Revolutionary Ireland: Te Case of the Armagh Troubles’, Irish Economic and Social History, 23 (1996), pp. 1–17. Lockes: John Locke (1632–1702), the eminent English philosopher. He was driven for a time into exile. Sidneys: Algernon Sidney (1623–83), the radical Whig political theorist and activist, who was executed for treason against Charles II. Hampdens: John Hampden (1595–1643), a leading opponent of Charles I’s policies, especially his attempt to raise Ship Money taxes, was one of the Five Members of the House of Commons that Charles I tried to arrest in 1642, sparking the civil war. Hamden was mortally wounded in one of the early battles of the civil war. Russells: William, Lord Russell (1639–83) a radical Whig activist, who was arrested and executed for his part in the Rye House Plot against Charles II. your Minister: William Pitt the Younger (1759–1806), Prime Minister 1783–1801 and 1804–6. that Pitt: William Pitt the Elder (1708–78), frst Earl of Chatham, who was seen as the architect of victory in the Seven Years’ War and a critic of Britain’s American policies that led to the War of Independence. He was the father of William Pitt the Younger. Tree millions of people, so dead … Will you punish her for the madness you have occasioned?: Pitt’s speech in support of the repeal of the Stamp Act, in the House of Commons on 14 January 1766. See Te Parliamentary History of England, ed. W. Cobbett, 36 vols (London: T. C. Hansard, 1806–20), vol. 16, cols. 104, 107. the obnoxious laws were repealed: Te Stamp Act of 1765, which aroused so much resentment in the American colonies, was repealed in February 1766, temporarily easing the disputes between Britain and the American colonies.

An Address of the Inhabitants of the County of Armagh 1.

divide et impera: Latin for ‘divide and rule’.

Notes to pages 358–63

399

‘Te Declarations, Resolutions and Constitution of the United Irishmen’ 1.

Orange-men: Members of a militant Protestant loyalist movement recently established in Ulster and taking its name from William of Orange (that is, William III who had defeated the Catholic Jacobite cause in 1689–91). See Smyth, ‘Te Men of No Popery: Te Origins of the Orange Order’; Gibbon, ‘Te Origins of the Orange Order and the United Irishmen’; K. Whelan, ‘Te Origins of the Orange Order’, Bullan: An Irish Studies Review, 2:2 (1996), pp. 19–37; and Hereward Senior, Orangeism in Ireland and Britain 1795–1836 (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul), 1996), pp. 1–117. 2. See with what Heat these Dogs of Hell advance … And good created: John Milton (1608– 74), Paradise Lost, bk 10, ll. 616–18. 3. half a Million of Heroes are ready – yes, they only wait the second coming: Tis is connecting the second arrival of a French invasion force (afer Bantry Bay in December 1796) with the second coming of Christ. 4. the new Harp of Erin: Te harp was widely seen as a representation of Ireland. Erin was the Gaelic Irish word for Ireland. 5. Yelverton: Barry Yelverton (1736–1805), frst Viscount Avonmore, was an Irish MP 1774–83. An active patriot 1780–2 in the campaign for legislative independence, but became Attorney General in 1782 and then, in 1783, Chief Baron of the Irish Court of Exchequer. He was the presiding judge in the trial of the United Irishman, William Orr, in 1797. Tere are entries on him in the ODNB and the HoIP 1692–1800. 6. Toler: John Toler (1745–1831), later frst Earl of Norbury, was an Irish MP 1776–1800, Soplicitor General 1789–98, Attorney General 1798–1800, and then Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas 1800–27. Tere are entries on him in the ODNB and the HoIP 1692–1800. 7. like a Divan of Saracens: Te Saracens were a leading Muslim group at the time of the medieval Crusades. A Divan was a high governing body in an Islamic state. 8. Vandals: Te Vandals were the last Germanic tribe to sack Rome in ad 455. 9. O’Connor: Arthur O’Connor (1763–1852) was a radical Irish MP for Phiilipstown 1790–5. He went to Hamburg in 1796 to encourage the French invasion attempt late in that year. He was arrested in Ireland in 1797 and spent some months in gaol without trial. He was arrested in England in spring 1798 and was a state prisoner until 1802, although he took no active part in the Irish rebellion of 1798. Tere are entries on him in the ODNB and the HoIP 1692–1800. See also J. H. Hames, Arthur O’Connor: United Irishman (Cork: Collins Press, 2001). 10. Fitzgerald: Edward Fitzgerald (1763–98) was the ffh son of the Duke of Leinster and an Irish MP for Athy and then County Kildare 1783–97. He served in the British army during the later stages of the American War of Independence. He married in France, joined the United Irishmen and accompanied O’Connor when he went to Hamburg in 1796 to encourage a French invasion of Ireland in December that year. He was actively involved in planning the Irish rebellion of 1798, but was arrested on 18 May just before it broke out. He was wounded during his arrest and died 4 June while the rebellion raged. Tere are entries on him in the ODNB and the HoIP 1692–1800. See also S. Tillyard, Citizen Lord: Edward Fitzgerald, 1762–1798 (London: Chatto & Windus, 1998). 11. the British Minister’s Behaviour to Ireland: a reference to the Irish policies of Prime Minister William Pitt the Younger (1759–1806).