CHAP. XXVII. 1775. 10th Nov. Other changes. 17th Nov. Despondency tion. on those who suffered a lavish expenditure through neglect, or to gratify dependents, or with a view to power or popularity. The Earl of Rochford, retiring about the same time, was succeeded by Lord Viscount Weymouth, who thus resumed the office he vacated at the time of the dispute relative to Falkland's Island. Lord Lyttelton, who on the first day of the session had opposed the address, was gratified with a seat at the council-board, and the office of chief justice in Eyre beyond Trent. Administration gained, or rather, for a time, fixed on their side a florid, ready, and eloquent speaker; but the reproach of versatility, often repeated, prevented the beneficial effects of his exertions. The efforts of opposition, although unsuccessful in of administra- Parliament, threw a gloom, approaching to despondency, over the ministry: the affairs of America became daily more perplexed and unpromising, and the probability that the authority of Congress would be rapidly extended, indicated a necessity for increasing energy. Treaties were concluded with the Landgrave of Hesse, the Duke of Brunswick, and some other continental princes, for troops; an application to Russia was less successful*. Œuvres posthumes de Fréderic II, Roi de Prusse, t. iv. p. 149. CHAPTER THE TWENTY-EIGHTH. 1775-1776. State of Ireland.-Effect of the American contest.-Money bill rejected.-Contract respecting troops.-Debated in the British Parliament.-Debate on the treaties with German princes. In the House of Lords.-Motion by the Duke of Richmond.-Debate on the army extraordinaries.—The Duke of Grafton's conciliatory proposition.—Mr. Hartley's proposition to place America on the same footing as Ireland. -Sawbridge's motion for that purpose.-Fox's motion for a committee of enquiry.-Miscellaneous transactions. — Wilkes's motion for a reform of Parliament.-Trial of the Duchess of Kingston.-Motion for inspecting the powers of commissioners. - Against prorogation. -King's speech on terminating the session.-View of the conduct and politics of foreign powers.-France.-Spain.-Austria.-Prussia.-Negotiation with Russia.-State of the press in England.-Dr. Price's publication.-Its effects.-Re-establishment of tranquillity in the city. CHAP. XXVIII. 1775. IRELAND, as Dr. Franklin had asserted*, shared in the sensations excited by the American dispute, and, during the government of Lord Harcourt, strong parties were formed, and great exertions growing to maturity. The public was frequently alarmed by accounts State of of the defection of manufacturers, the migration of Ireland. labourers, and the successful operations of rioters; but for several years no important transaction occurred. As the American contest advanced, the Parliament of Ireland and the people of Dublin began again to Effect of the embarrass government with opposition and cabals, American contest. 66 The dissenters were active and violent*; and the guild of merchants of the metropolis, beside their address of thanks to Lord Effingham on his resignation, voted a similar compliment to those peers who, "in support of "the constitution, and opposition to a weak and wicked "administration, protested against the American restraining billst.' The sheriffs and common council were also desirous of imitating the city of London, by transmitting petitions against the measures relating to America, but were restrained by the Lord Mayor and Aldermen. Indignant at this impediment, they declared their anxiety to preserve their names from the odium which all posterity must attach to those who promoted the acts carrying on in America, their grief for the injured inhabitants of that continent, and their own brave countrymen sent on the unnatural errand of slaughtering their fellow-subjects; and resolved, that whoever refused his consent to a dutiful petition tending to undeceive the King, and by which the effusion of one drop of subject blood might be prevented, was not a friend to the constitution. The Lord Lieutenant met the Parliament with a speech in which he recapitulated the benefits lately derived from the liberality of Britain, reprobated the rebellious spirit of the Americans, and recommended attention to the discharge of arrears which had been unavoidably incurred. A money bill was prepared and transmitted to England; but, having been altered in council, was on its return rejected by Parliament; which prevented an immediate supply. In pursuance of the plan of vigorous operation resolved on in the British cabinet, Lord Harcourt requested the House of Commons to concur in sending out of the kingdom four thousand men, to be taken into British pay, and offering, if it were the desire of Parliament, to replace them, as soon as his Majesty should be enabled so to do, by an equal number of foreign Protestant troops, who were also to be main Gibbon's Posthumous Works, vol. i. p. 496. † Annual Register, 1776, p. 43. This address was presented under the corporation seal, and published with the several answers of each peer. tained without expense to Ireland. The House reluctantly assented to the required diminution of their national force, but refused the aid of foreigners in their stead*, and the opposition unsuccessfully endeavoured to obtain an act for embodying the militiat. CHAP. XXVIII. 1776. the British This was the first important transaction which en- 15th Feb. gaged the attention of the British legislature after the Debated in recess. Mr. T. Townshend, after expatiating on the Parliament. privileges of Parliament, which, though the undoubted right of all the commons of England, were but secondary to that great privilege of keeping the purse of their constituents from the hands of violence, art, or fraud, read the proceedings of the Irish legislature. Lord Harcourt's message, he said, contained two propositions, both binding on the British Parliament; to pay the troops to be sent to America, and to replace them with four thousand foreign Protestants; twelve thousand men were still to be retained in Ireland, which was, at the same time, to be relieved of an annual burthen of eighty thousand pounds. Such a proposition could only originate in the worst designs, or the most consummate folly: for the minister not only engaged that the expense should be borne by the British Parliament, but, adding folly to temerity, promised that eight thousand men should be taken into pay, although no more than four thousand would be in the service of Great Britain. He complained of Lord Harcourt's message as contrary to the privileges of the English House of Commons, derogatory to its honour and authority; and moved for a committee of inquiry. The debate was long and animated, frequently degenerating into personalities. The defence of Lord Harcourt was not conducted on a consistent principle. Some insisted that the Speaker of the Irish Parliament had mistaken the sense of his message, which purported only that his Majesty, if desired by the Irish and authorized by the English Parliament, would pay The division on this occasion was 106 to 68, and it was considered by the opposition party as a great triumph. Plowden. vol. i. p. 427 to 434. See the message, &c. on this subject, Parliamentary Register, vol. iii. p. 313. Parliamentary History, vol. xviii. p. 1129. CHAP. XXVIII. 1776. the four thousand foreigners. Others argued, that, at the time of increasing the establishment in Ireland, the King had engaged that twelve thousand troops should always be maintained in that kingdom, except in case of actual invasion or rebellion in England; and the present demand for troops not being within those exceptions, it was necessary the King should be absolved from his promise by those to whom it was made. An application to the Commons of Great Britain would have been a direct violation of the promise to the sister kingdom. On the other side, it was contended, that the message was an experiment to procure the reception of foreign troops, in order to establish a precedent, which afterwards might be applied to other purposes. It was the aim of administration to habituate both countries to certain notions which must, in the end, reduce the Parliament of each to mere instruments, without will or independence. It was a scheme, however deep, formed on very simple principles, and had a direct tendency to vest in the crown the virtual power of taxing both countries. In Ireland, the minister was to ask some favour; then England was to be pledged; in England, Ireland was to be taxed, in order to maintain the supremacy of the British legislature. The various modes of defence were ridiculed with great success: no two of the confidential servants of the crown agreed in a single sentiment. Some allowed the message to import what was stated in the complaint; others acceded to a part; while a third party modestly contended, in defiance of every rule of rational and obvious construction, that the message meant the very reverse of its manifest import. In answer to an insinuation by Mr. Dunning, that, although this famous message had been disavowed by the friends of administration in England, the Lord Lieutenant would not have risked such a measure entirely on his own judgment; Lord North acknowledged his co-operation in giving general instructions; but would not charge his memory with having assisted in framing any specific authority on which it was |