ページの画像
PDF
ePub

property, and as having come into Ireland as strangers and aliens, where now they were in possession of full authority; the protestants, on the other hand, regarded the catholics as the natural enemies, from the very circumstance and operation of their religion, of their sovereign and their country. As the catholics conceived themselves to have been harshly and unjustly treated by the British government, they naturally considered those who esponsed the cause of that govern ment, who were its favourites, and who besides in many instances had been made the instruments of what they conceived its unjust proceedings, with sentiments of alienation and di-like.

For a long time, too, the protestant inhabitants of Ireland were convineed that, if the claims of their catholic countrymen were granted, not on ly would their property and perhaps their lives be unsafe, but the wellbeing of the country would be completely and radically destroyed. Even those who did not apprehend dangers of such serious and overwhelming magnitude, from granting the requests of the catholics, could not perceive why they should be granted on the score either of justice or policy: they lived for a long time in a country which had been torn to pieces by the disaffection and discontent of the catholics, and yet they were slow and unwilling to perceive, that not only jus tice but policy called loudly for the quieting of this disaffection and discontent.

But the cause of the catholics at length made its way into the understandings and the hearts of their protestant countrymen, in spite of prejudice, alarm, and bigotry. The state of Ireland indeed was such, that it was impossible for the most

blind or inattentive not to perceive, that unless some change took place the country could never prosper. In England a most lamentable ignorance has ever prevailed respecting the state of Ireland, respecting the dispositions of its inha bitants, and the improvement of which they as well as their country are capable. But this ignorance could not exist with those who lived in Ireland: they saw the extent of the evil which threatened them; they saw it advancing gradually year by year, and almost day by day; and though some of the protestants might still feel some of their old alarm and prejudices respecting the catholics lurking in their breasts, yet their alarm for the safety of their country, being much more powerful and more constant in its operation, drove the former from their thoughts.

Thus it happened that the catholics perceived their cause advancing more rapidly among their protestant fellow-countrymen than with the British government. In conse quence of this, the principal nobility and gentry of the latter persuasion, in almost every county of Ireland, gave their countenance and support to the catholic claims: they did not merely come forward with the declaration, that in their opinion justice demanded that their claims should be complied with, and that no possible harm to the country could ensue from such compliance in its fullest sense and extent; but they expressly and unequivocally declared their firm conviction, that the safety of Ireland depended upon the granting what the catholics asked. It appeared impossible to suspect the motives or objects of the protestants, when they came forward in that manner; when they petitioned government,

that

that all their exclusive privileges might be abrogated; that the catholics might be put upon the same footing with themselves. The motives and the intentions of the catholics might be suspected, those of the protestants could not.

But the cause of the Irish catholics was mainly strengthened by the union of their protestant brethren, in another point of view; it served to do away one of the strongest prejudices against them: when those who were their fellow countrymen, who had the best opportunities of becoming intimately acquainted with the influence which the catholic religion actually produced on their minds and conduct, called for their emancipation, could it any longer be believed that it would be unsafe to grant this boon, because the catholics were bound or induced by their religion to keep

no faith with heretics; or, because their object was to destroy all protestants? Were not such prejudices of that absurd character, that, where they are deeply rooted, not even the experience of ages will tear them up, assuredly they would give way to the testimony of such facts.

Thus, then, the cause of the catholics stood in the beginning of the year 1811: their expectations were raised by the circumstance of the prince becoming regent, but damped by his retaining his father's ministers: under this discouraging circumstance, however, they were encouraged to hope and to persevere, as they saw their cause gaining ground among those who now knew them best, though these very persons, become their coadju tors, had not long before been their opposers and enemies,

CHAPTER XII.

Meetings appointed to choose Delegates-Mr. Pole's Letter-Remarks on itProclamation Meeting of the General Committee of the Delegates-Arrest of some of the Members Discussion respecting the Right of challenging the Grand Jury-Trial of the Delegates--Speech of the Attorney-General-of the Counsel for the Accused-Charge delivered by the Chief-Justice-Acquit tal of the Accused-Rejoicings on the Occasion-Remarks on the Convention Act on the System of Conduct pursued by the Catholics-on the Necessity of a Convention Act-Arrest of Earl Fingal and Lord Netterville-Concluding Remarks.

IT

Tis well known that the situation of lord lieutenant of Ireland is one rather of form and rank, than of real authority and power; and that the secretary of the lord lieutenant for the time being is in reality the person who governs that kingdom. This latter situation was held during the year 1811 by Mr. Wellesley Pole, a bro

ther of the marquis of Wellesley. It was difficult from this circumstance to infer exactly what would be the line of conduct pursued with respect to Ireland. That where vigour was necessary, or deemed necessary, it would be applied with an unsparing hand, the tone of mind, as well as the uniform disposition, of all the Wellesley family

led

led to expect; while, on the other hand, as the marquis was supposed to be rather friendly to the cause of the catholics, it might fairly be anticipated, that, while his brother held the situation of secretary to the lord lieutenant, their proceedings respecting their emancipation would not be interrupted.

All doubt however, if doubt there existed, was soon utterly removed; for on the 12th of February Mr. Wellesley Pole addressed a circular letter to the sheriffs and chief magistrates of all the counties, to the following purport: That it having been represented to government that the Roman catholics were to be called together, for the purpose of appointing persons as delegates, representatives, or managers, to act on their behalf, as members of an unlawful assembly, sitting in Dublin, and calling itself the catholic committee; the magistrates were required, in pursuance of the act of the 33d of the king, c. 29, to cause to be arrested and committed to prison (unless bail should be given) all persons who should be guilty of publishing any notice of the election and appointment of such delegates, representatives, or managers, or of having attended any meeting for the choosing of them.

This circular letter of the secretary was immediately noticed, in the house of lords and house of commons, by earl Moira and Mr. Ponsonby at that time ministers were not in possession of the information and circumstances on the strength of which it had been written; but, from what they did know, they declared that they felt themselves inclined to approve and justify it. It afterwards appeared, that a circular letter of Mr. Edward Hay, secretary to the committee of the

Irish catholics, dated the 1st of January 1811, had given rise to this measure of Mr. Pole's on the 12th of February.

The first point of difference and dispute between ministers and the opposition on this subject regarded this letter of Mr. Wellesley Pole: by the latter it was contended, that the secretary had misconceived or misrepresented the act of the Irish parliament of the 33d of his majesty; that, by this act, all those who were sitting in an unlawful assembly were to be proceeded against in a particular manner. It required the mayors and justices of the peace to disperse them; but it did not say, as Mr. Pole maintained and ordered in his letter, that they should be committed or held to bail. It indeed proceeded to declare and enact, that, if resistance were made, the individuals so making resistance might be apprehended, and, if convicted, were to be deemed guilty of a misdemeanour: but, unless resistance were made, this act of parliament did not authorize the magistrates to commit or hold to bail, merely for assembling in the way mentioned in the letter of the Irish secretary. It was further urged by the opposition, that, by the common law, there were only three grounds on which persons could be held to bail, namely, treason, felony, or breach of the peace: as therefore neither the particular statute, nor the common law, authorized the magistrates to hold to bail, Mr. Pole, it was contended, had gone beyond what was legal. Another objection was also brought forward against this letter; that, whereas the act declared, that " if any person shall vote or act for the purpose of appointing delegates," the letter of the Irish secretary comprehended

prehended as coming within the statute, not merely those who voted or acted, but also those who attended; though it was evident, that many might attend such meetings for a purpose directly the reverse of the ostensible object: they might come there to oppose the proceedings, to state their objections, and to dissuade them from their pupose. To these objections on the part of the opposition, no very direct or satisfactory answer was given; and it was even allowed by the lord chancellor that the letter of Mr. Wellesley Pole was drawn up in a very slovenly manner. But there was another objection urged against the letter, which struck at it more deeply the opposition maintained that it was beyond the authority of the secretary to the lord lieutenant of Ireland to call upon the magistrates to enforce the convention act; that this ought to have been done by a proclamation issued by the lord lieutenant himself.

These differences however were trifling, and the discussions to which they gave rise comparatively of little importance: they were soon swallowed up in the subsequent proceedings of the Irish catholics, and the consequent measures of the Irish government.

The feeling and disposition of the protestants towards their catholic brethren at this crisis were very manifestly friendly: meetings for the purpose of appointing delegates were held in almost every County, and yet there was scarcely a single instance of the magistrates' interference; and some of them even went so far as to promise the protection of their official authority to such meetings as might be mo

lested.

On the 9th of July a "meeting

of the catholics of Ireland" was held in Dublin, at which resolutions to the following purport were passed:-That a committee of catholics be appointed, in order to frame petitions for the repeal of the penal laws, and to procure signatures thereto in all parts of Ireland; that this committee consist of the ca tholic peers, of their eldest sons, the catholic baronets, the prelates of the catholic church in Ireland, and also ten persons to be appointed by each county in Ireland; and that it be recommended to the committee to resort to all legal and constitutional means for maintaining a communication of senti ment and co-operation of conduct amongst the catholics of Ireland. In consequence of this meeting and these resolutions, a proclamation was issued by the lord lieutenant and council of Ireland, in which these resolutions are enumerated, and a section of the convention act quoted: the proclamation then goes on to declare it to be the intention of government to enforce the penalties of the law against such persons as should proceed to elect deputies, managers, or delegates, to the catholic committee. Mr. Pole, the Irish secretary, before this proclamation was issued, had an official interview with the earl of Fingal, who took the lead in these proceedings of the catholics, for the purpose of convincing him of the illegality of their proposed meetingbut without effect. On the day subsequent to the appearance of the proclamation, a special meeting of the general committee of the catholics was held in Capel-street, Dublin, the earl of Fingal in the chair; when it was resolved, That this extraordinary meeting is held in consequence of the proclamation; that the committec, relying on the

con

[ocr errors]

constitutional right of the subject to petition, and conscious that they are not transgressing the laws, do now determine to persevere in the course they have adopted, for the "sole, express, and specific purpose" of preparing a petition to parliament, for their full participation of the rights of the constitution; that the committee will never meet "under pretence of preparing or presenting petitions," but for that purpose alone; and that the last clause of the convention act recognises the right of petitioning secured by the bill of rights, in these words:"provided also that 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 par. liament, for redress of any public or private grievance."

After these resolutions past in consequence of the proclamation of the lord lieutenant and council of Ireland, it was to be expected that the members of the Irish committee would regularly meet, and proceed as if no such proclamation had been issued as they doubted of the application of the convention act to their case, they appeared determined to try the question: it is indeed not improbable that they might imagine the Irish government would not act upon their proclamation. If this were their idea, they were mistaken; for on the 9th of August, five gentlemen, who were present at the election of delegates in Liffey-street chapel, were arrested, and carried before the chief justice of the king's bench, on the charge of being elected delegates, or being present at the election, and aiding and assisting

therein.

The meeting of the general committee of delegated catholics took place in Dublin on the 19th of October: 300 delegates were assembled from all parts of the kingdom. Lord Fingal was called to the chair. A petition to parliament was moved by lord Netterville: after it was read, lord Fingal put the question, whether it should be received as the petition of the catholics of Ireland; which was carried unanimously. A motion was then made that the meeting should adjourn until one fortnight previous to the meeting of the imperial parliament; which was also carried unanimously. Immediately afterwards the members began to disperse; when two magistrates entered, but finding that the assembly was dissolved they could not act.

By the arrest of the delegates at the meeting in Liffey-street chapel, the question whether the convention act applied to the catholics was in a train of being legally decided. It came on accordingly in the court of king's bench in the month of November: on the 6th of that month, as the proper officer was beginning to read the pannel of the grand jury of the city of Dublin, the counsel for one of the arrested delegates moved the court for a copy of the information sworn against his client: this however was not granted: he then moved that "triers" should be appointed to try and determine, by legal evidence, whether each person on the pannel, who held places of emolument under the crown, and who were removable at pleasure, were such as the law required, namely probi et legales homines: this motion also, having for its object the right of the pannel to challenge the grand jury, the court, after long and solemn hearing of the counsel on

both

« 前へ次へ »