ELECT SPEECHES 
 
 OF THE LATE 
 
 PETER BURROWES, ESQ., K. C, 
 
 THE BAR AND IN PARLIAMENT. 
 
 EDITED, 
 
 WITH A MEMOIR, 
 
 BY 
 
 WALDRON BURROWES, ESQ., A.B., 
 
 BARRISTER AT LAW. 
 
 DUBLIN: 
 HODGES AND SMITH, GRAFTON-STREET, 
 
 BOOKSELLERS TO THE UNIVERSITY. 
 IMDCCCL. 
 
ft A ^0.23 
 
 2<\ 
 
 UUHLIN : 
 
 ^vinietJ nt tf)C 2HnlUcrs(ty ^ress, 
 
 HY M. II. GII.I.. 
 
 XVTm COUJESE 
 
 205810 
 
 f< x - 
 
TO 
 
 THE BENCHERS AND BAR 
 OF IRELAND, 
 
 THIS VOLUME IS INSCRIBED. 
 
PRKFACE. 
 
 Justice to the Public, and. fairness to myself, demand 
 some brief explanation of the circumstances which 
 more immediately led to the publication of this vo- 
 lume. I confess I had long conceived the project of 
 placing upon record some memorials of the character 
 and eminent qualities of the late Mr. Burrowes. I 
 always felt that a debt was due to his memory which 
 had not yet been paid, and which, until the circum- 
 stance occurred to which I shall presently advert, I 
 despaired of ever seeing paid, even in the humble form 
 in which I have attempted it. Naturally suspecting 
 my own powers to be unequal to the composition of 
 an adequate biographical notice, and unwilling to in- 
 cur the presumptuous responsibility of such an under- 
 taking, I relinquished, not without regret, all hope of 
 attaining an object I so much desired, at least through 
 the means at my disposal. A paper, however, appeared 
 
Vi PREFACE. 
 
 in the Dublin University Magazine for April, 1849, 
 which fixed my particular and most painful attention. 
 Knowing, as I did, that this periodical enjoyed an ex- 
 tensive circulation amongst the members of the Bar, 
 and considering that the many mistaken views which 
 pervade that paper were calculated to mislead and 
 greatly to injure the memory of its object, I found I 
 had but one course, however reluctant, to pursue, 
 namely, to resume the undertaking with the materials 
 in my own possession. 
 
 Amoncst the mistakes to which I allude is that 
 wherein the author would impute cowardice, on a 
 certain occasion, to the character he professes to eulo- 
 gize. The charge is conveyed in the following not 
 very dignified language : " And he soon found that 
 1 neither words nor grass' would do, and that he must, 
 according to the very reprehensible practice which 
 then prevailed, give him a meeting, if he would pre- 
 serve his reputation as a man of honour." This unjust 
 imputation induced me to address a letter to Mr. Bur- 
 rowes' son, inquiring if he had seen the paper, or, 
 when seen, approved of it. His reply will best de- 
 scribe the pain which so unwarrantable and indelicate 
 an insinuation on his father's honour was calculated 
 to inflict, 
 
PREFACE. Vll 
 
 " Lf.kson-stri.kt, 
 " 12th April, 1849. 
 
 " My dear Waldron, — In reply to your's I hasten to inform 
 you that I have read the article you mention, which appeared 
 in the University Magazine, professing to be an accurate me- 
 moir of my father's life. Without dwelling on the very great 
 inaccuracies with which that ' paper' abounds, I shall merely 
 remark to you the manner in which its author has detailed 
 the circumstances connected with the duel in which my father 
 was engaged with Mr. Butler, and most particularly the forced 
 construction which he has been pleased to put upon my father's 
 motives in writing to his opponent the letter of the 15th of 
 April, 1 794. If we are to believe this gentleman, that letter 
 was not only written for the purpose of avoiding a personal 
 rencontre, but was, in after life, bitterly reflected on by the 
 writer as an act of cowardice. Granting that an entire want 
 of knowledge of the true character of the person whose life he 
 was writing, or inability to appreciate such a character, might 
 prove some excuse for committing so grave an error, common 
 sense, at least, should have prevented it, as a perusal of the 
 letter which my father wrote on the occasion to which he re- 
 ferred, a copy of which, you inform me, he had access to, clearly 
 shows that it could not possibly bear such a construction. I 
 well remember that my father, in referring to that duel, often 
 made use of the expression, ' that he considered it the only act 
 of cowardice he ever committed,' that is, that he was of opinion 
 he exhibited a want of true courage in making his oxen opinion of 
 what teas right subservient to the fear of that of the world, by con- 
 senting to fight a duel under any circumstances; but most cer- 
 tainly he did not, for a moment, mean to convey that he sup- 
 posed his writing of a letter which, under the circumstances, 
 every man must approve of, manifested a want of courage; in 
 fact it required an ' e.riguus a7iimus y to force such a construc- 
 tion. That my father always considered a resort to duelling 
 
Vlll PREFACE. 
 
 as condemnatory in the highest degree, and indicative of any- 
 thing but true courage, is well known to all who were inti- 
 mate with him. That he did so, and, on the contrary, was 
 most alive to promoting public justice and maintaining the 
 character of the Bar, will appear from what occurred under not 
 very dissimilar circumstances, at the Wexford Assizes, in the 
 year 1801, where he was professionally engaged against a gen- 
 tleman of the name of Pounden. He acted upon that occasion, 
 as every person said, perfectly within the limits of his duty. 
 To his astonishment, on the evening of the trial, Mr. Pounden, 
 in the Assembly Room, called him aside, insulted him, and 
 said that he awaited his challenge. My father instantly decided 
 to act as right reason and true fortitude ought to suggest. He 
 swore examinations against him, and, on the following morn- 
 ing, applied to Lord Norbury, whose fire-eating propensities 
 were well known, and with whom he never held a good un- 
 derstanding, that he should be punished for a contempt of 
 court. A warrant was obtained. Mr. Pounden was severely 
 reprimanded, and committed to prison to await the judgment 
 of the Court. In the mean time my father received from Mr. 
 Pounden's friends, and by his authority, assurances of contri- 
 tion, and olFors to make any apology he might dictate. This 
 he declined, not being actuated with a view to personal satis- 
 faction, but to the promotion of public justice and the rights 
 of the Bar. But he promised to interfere with the Judges, 
 and obtained his enlargement. They had determined upon 
 imprisoning him for one year and fining him £500; which 
 sentence, but for Mr. Burrowcs' interference, would have been 
 rigidly enforced. Those who thought he acted otherwise than 
 right on this occasion were few, and of the violent party ; not 
 being one of those himself, he was perfectly satisfied. 
 
 " Ever your's, 
 
 " Peter Burrowes. 
 "Waldron Burrowes, Esq., 
 " Dromore, County Doivn." 
 
PREFACE. IX 
 
 The imputation here so properly commented on, 
 and I trust, removed, was the more incomprehensible 
 on the part of the writer of the paper, as he had the 
 command of the correspondence which took place 
 between Mr. Burrowes and his opponent on that oc- 
 casion. 
 
 But this is not the only inaccuracy which appears 
 in that paper. Speaking of Dr. Miller and the trans- 
 action of 1790, he says, after quoting Mr. Burrowes' 
 powerful and convincing statement of the corrupt prac- 
 tices brought home to Provost Hutchinson: "This, it 
 will be admitted, was making the most of the case 
 against the Provost. As to its effect upon the pro- 
 ceedings of the Committee, it was so much very fine 
 thunder thrown away. Miller's vote had not been 
 gained, and therefore the corruption imputed was not a 
 'fait accomjjlit of which the Committee could take any 
 judicial cognizance. We all know what the crime of 
 seduction is; but the law does not punish an attempt 
 to seduce which has been unsuccessful. But a good- 
 natured world were but too well-disposed amply to 
 indemnify the advocate for any incredulity which might 
 have been exhibited by those to whom his appeal was 
 made ; and, while Hutchinson was seriously damaged 
 by the non-proven charge, Miller was exalted to the 
 
X PREFACE. 
 
 very pinnacle of reputation, as an adamantine rock of 
 principle, ' and a paragon of virtue.' " This, it will be 
 observed, does very imperfect justice to Dr. Miller's 
 own version of the affair, and, to infer the Provost's 
 exculpation from the impotency of his attempts to cor- 
 rupt, argues a very low tone of morality on the part of 
 this writer. The writer might have called to mind the 
 transaction of 1776, when, at a general election for the 
 representation of the University, the College being 
 under the same government, Mr. R. IT. Hutchinson, 
 though returned, was ignominiously expelled, upon a 
 petition being lodged against him on the ground of 
 undue influence having been exercised by his father. 
 
 Again, in the description of the entertainment given 
 by the late Dr. Whitley Stokes to a few of his select 
 friends, this writer, upon what authority does not ap- 
 pear, includes Dr. Magee, afterwards Archbishop of 
 Dublin, among the number of the guests on that oc- 
 casion. It may be remembered that the late Dr. Whit- 
 ley Stokes retired from his fellowship in consequence 
 of his attachment to his religious opinions ;„ and al- 
 though, from the laws of the foundation, this course 
 became inevitable, yet the Board, in acknowledgment 
 of his very eminent qualities, endowed a lecturership of 
 Natural History, with considerable emoluments attached 
 
PREFACE. XI 
 
 to it, which they conferred upon him, and which he 
 continued to enjoy up to the period of his lamented 
 death. Dr. Stokes' opinions being, therefore, in direct 
 controversy with those of the late Archbishop, it was 
 not probable he could have been present at the enter- 
 tainment alluded to. Indeed, Dr. Stokes' son, the pre- 
 sent eminent Professor, who had communicated the 
 anecdote to me, at once pointed out the inaccuracy, and 
 I was obliged to assure him that I was not the writer of 
 the article in question, although I had previously writ- 
 ten and intrusted to the editor of the Magazine a paper 
 on the subject, which was totally free from the error 
 he complained of, and to which the article in ques- 
 tion bore such a resemblance as to any discerning mind 
 must appear to have been scarcely fortuitous. 
 
 I will not, for obvious reasons, further comment 
 upon the mistakes alluded to. Suffice it to say, that 
 in devoting myself to the task of preparing, in the pre- 
 sent form, a biographical notice of the late Mr. Bur- 
 rowes, I have been strongly prompted by a wish to 
 correct those inaccuracies, and to connect, in a con- 
 cise and faithful narrative, the leading events of his 
 professional and brief parliamentary career. The fre- 
 quent encomiums that have been passed upon Mr. 
 Burrowes' eloquence induced me to believe that, 
 
XI 1 PliEFACE. 
 
 having embarked so far, my task would be incom- 
 plete without appending a collection of his speeches. 
 I have, therefore, selected from the best sources which 
 my industry and diligence could command, the most 
 approved and authentic records of his eloquence. His 
 prose compositions also were in every way worthy of 
 his forensic efforts. The article in the Anti-Union 
 Paper, which will be found in the Appendix, will 
 probably be considered a model of its kind. The 
 pieces he contributed to this paper I am unfortu- 
 nately unable to fix, owing to the variety of signa- 
 tures and initials which he adopted. From two 
 fragments which I discovered in Mr. Burrowes' own 
 handwriting, and which I have deemed worthy of a 
 place in this collection, it would appear that he not 
 only meditated, but composed carefully both on paper 
 and in his memory, the passages he desired to have 
 most effect. 
 
 The materials of which the Memoir prefixed is 
 principally composed are collected from such avail- 
 able sources of information as were within my reach. 
 Mr. Burrowes always considered the transactions of 
 his life much too unimportant to deserve publicity, 
 and he was not only most unwilling to sanction, but 
 sedulously discountenanced every attempt of the kind, 
 
ritEFACE. Xlll 
 
 liaving, in a moment of almost Gothic precipitation, 
 destroyed, a short time before his death, all his papers 
 and most interesting memoranda. The correspondence 
 that took place between him and the Knox and Pon- 
 sonby families would, if preserved, have thrown much 
 light upon his character and personal history. He 
 acted as a mediator, and succeeded in reconciling 
 those two noble houses. 
 
 Before I conclude, I desire to express my deep 
 acknowledgments to that distinguished ornament of 
 the Irish Bar, James Whiteside, Esq., Q. C, not only 
 for the encouragement he has extended to this under- 
 taking, but for the very efficient manner in which he 
 has recorded his admiration of Mr. Burrowes' prin- 
 ciples, and the eloquence with which he enforced them 
 in a paper he contributed to the Cambrian Magazine 
 shortly after his call to the Bar. 
 
 Such is the work I now venture to dedicate to 
 the Irish Bar, in the hope that they will be disposed 
 to allow that I have not been altogether misled by 
 my affection, in believing that the history of a man 
 with whom they so long lived and acted, cannot prove 
 otherwise than interesting. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 PAGE. 
 
 Memoir, 1 
 
 Speeches. 
 
 As Chairman of the College Historical Society, . . . 135 
 
 Jn the Case of the Borough of Trinity College, . . . 148 
 
 Against the Union, — Bar Debate, 172 
 
 The King v. Robinson, 178 
 
 The King v. Waring, 191 
 
 Valentine Lord Cloncurry v. Sir John Piers, .... 203 
 
 The King v. Edward Sheridan, M. D 213 
 
 For the Challenge, in the Case of the King v. Kirvvan, . 245 
 
 The King v. Thomas Kirwan, Merchant, 257 
 
 In the Case of the Honourable Mr. Justice Johnson, . 285 
 Parliamentary Speeches: — 
 
 1. Against the Union, 300 
 
 2. Against the Union, 308 
 
 3. Against the Union, 316 
 
 4. Against the Rebellion Bill, 322 
 
 5. Against the Union, 327 
 
 On the Advantages to be derived from the Institution of 
 
 National Schools, 336 
 
 On the Interests of Education, 339 
 
 Fragment — Exordium, 344 
 
 Fragment — Peroration, 345 
 
 The Liberty of the Press, 347 
 
 Character of Sergeant Ball, 349 
 
XVI CONTENTS. 
 
 Appendix. 
 
 From the Anti-Union Paper, 351 
 
 Convention Act, 360 
 
 Mr. Pole's Circular, 362 
 
 Mr. Burrowes' Opinion upon the Construction of the 
 
 Convention Act, 363 
 
MEMOIR. 
 
 " Non posse oratorem esse nisi virum bonuni." 
 
 CHAPTER T. 
 
 It was a favourite position among the ancient rheto- 
 ricians that, in order to be a truly eloquent or per- 
 suasive speaker, nothing was more necessary than to 
 be a virtuous man. To find any such connexion be- 
 tween probity and one of the highest liberal arts must 
 undoubtedly give us pleasure. We think it will be 
 found that the character we are about to describe pos- 
 sessed most of those important qualifications which 
 clearly exemplify the truth and reason of the alleged 
 connexion. If modesty, disinterestedness, candour, — 
 if the love of justice, of honesty, the love of liberty, of 
 country, — if indignation at insolence or oppression, and 
 detestation of fraud, meanness, or corruption, are the 
 sentiments and disposition which contribute to lend 
 weight and force to everything which a speaker utters, 
 and create in the minds of his audience a secret partia- 
 lity in favour of the side which he espouses, how 
 eminently did Mr. Burrowes support the truth of this 
 connexion. Gifted with a strong and warm imagina- 
 
 B 
 
2 MEMOIR. 
 
 tion, a quick sensibility of heart, joined with solid 
 judgment, good sense, and great presence of mind ; 
 possessing, too, an immense stock of materials, drawn 
 from his extensive acquaintance with the general 
 circle of polite literature ; inspired with that honour- 
 able enthusiasm which he cultivated at the College 
 Historical Society, surrounded by those great living 
 examples of eloquence, of which the age was so fruit- 
 ful ; — how little reason to wonder at the encomiums 
 that have been bestowed on Mr. Burrowes's eloquence. 
 And yet it must be observed that, with his great merit, 
 which was never disputed, he wanted those exterior 
 accomplishments of voice and gesture which all con- 
 cur in admitting to be indispensable to the character 
 of a finished speaker. But Mr. Burrowes's personal 
 character and disposition made amends for this imper- 
 fection. He could not insult his understanding by de- 
 scending to that theatrical quackery of manner which, 
 however it may entertain and amuse, seldom persuades, 
 and which is frequently viewed as artifice or trick by 
 a correct and discerning audience. No ; the mere sus- 
 picion of craft or disingenuousness would have pained 
 his honest nature. He certainly did not possess the 
 full, tunable voice of Bushe, who was essentially the 
 "orator of manner." His utterance was laborious, 
 from a habit he acquired of speaking from his chest, 
 but as soon as he had spoken for some time his mind 
 became fired with his subject, and his air and manner 
 bespoke the consciousness of his being thoroughly 
 persuaded himself of the truth and justice of what he 
 
MEMOIR. 3 
 
 uttered, a circumstance that made a powerful impres- 
 sion on those who heard him. 
 
 To follow the order of time, and reduce our recol- 
 lections of Mr. Burro wes from the earliest period of 
 his eventful life to its close, into a statement at once 
 concise and accurate, is a task to which we do not feel 
 ourselves equal at this remote period. It must, there- 
 fore, be our object to confine this notice, for the most 
 part, to the principal occurrences of his practical life 
 as a lawyer, as well for the purpose of illustrating his 
 very eminent qualities, as because those events will be 
 found, in a great measure, to mark and distinguish the 
 stages of, perhaps, the most brilliant period of our na- 
 tional history. 
 
 Peter Burrowes was descended from a respecta- 
 ble family in the Queen's County, and was born in 
 Portarlington, in the year 1753. The period was re- 
 markable in the history of Ireland for a strong display 
 of national feeling, and for the first general develop- 
 ment of an independent tone in the public affairs of 
 this country. It is true there had been exceptions. 
 Few will contest the generous patriotism of a Swift or 
 a Lucas. But a spirit awoke at this time which, pro- 
 gressively advancing, led to the brilliant though fleet- 
 ing glories of 1782. A consciousness of nationality 
 began to breathe through the frame of Ireland. Her 
 people gloAved with hope, and her leaders, by a bold 
 and manly assertion of her rights, extorted the conces- 
 sion of her national privileges, and the acknowledgment 
 of her commercial and legislative independence. The 
 
 b2 
 
4 MEMOIR. 
 
 subject of this memoir was honoured with the friend- 
 ship and esteem of those distinguished men whose 
 genius added lustre to the brightest period of our his- 
 tory. One, alone,* of that brilliant throng, still survives 
 to bind us to the past. 
 
 In boyhood Mr. Burrowes exhibited no more than 
 the ordinary average of intellectual endowments. By 
 industry and close application he amassed those stores 
 of information which, in maturer years, contributed so 
 much to render his oratory effective He entered the 
 University of Dublin in the year 1774, and there he 
 soon acquired distinction ; the honourable prize of a 
 first scholarship rewarding, in 1777, his industry and 
 talents. By a curious coincidence, two gentlemen of 
 the same name, eminently distinguished in after life, 
 took high scholarships on this occasion ; with one of 
 them, Mr. Robert Burrowes, f afterwards Fellow of 
 Trinity College, and who was subsequently raised to 
 the deanery of Cork, the subject of this memoir conti- 
 nued to live on terms of the most affectionate inter- 
 course to the close of his life. The other, Sir AVilliam 
 Burroughes, was called to the English Bar, and soon 
 after received the appointment of a judgeship in India. 
 The career of this gentleman was singular ; having 
 amassed a considerable fortune in that country, he re- 
 signed his office and returned home ; but, entering into 
 some unfortunate speculation, lost all his property. 
 
 * Lord Plunket. 
 
 ■)• That celebrated composition, " The night before Larry was 
 stretched," has been correctly attributed to this gentleman. 
 
MEMOIR. 5 
 
 Having very powerful colonial interest, his previous 
 high character entitled him shortly afterwards to re- 
 sume his judicial functions upon the demise of the gen- 
 tleman who had succeeded him. He amassed a second 
 fortune, returned home, married, and left one daughter 
 sole heiress to considerable possessions. Throughout 
 Mr. Burrowes's College career he had the good for- 
 tune to obtain distinction without exciting envy, being 
 most popular with his fellow-students. The manly sim- 
 plicity of his character, his cheerful manners, combined 
 with surpassing good sense, procured for him " troops 
 of friends." He studied and practised the rhetorical 
 art in the Historical Society with great success. Here 
 his friends, Plunket and Bushe, were trained to that 
 almost unrivalled excellence which they afterwards 
 attained. Mr. Burrowes's eloquence, even at this early 
 period, was nervous and impressive, and remarkable 
 for its noble simplicity, the character it ever afterwards 
 retained ; and when it is considered what a mighty 
 ally oratory is to him who aspires to public or profes- 
 sional distinction, it is not surprising that the charac- 
 ter he established for himself in the College Historical 
 Society should have travelled before him to the Bar, 
 and prepared his friends and the Profession for the 
 signal success which attended even his earliest efforts 
 there. lie was one of the most distinguished mem- 
 bers of this celebrated institution, and filled the office 
 of Auditor during the session commencing 3 1st March, 
 1779. He was honoured with the "remarkable" thanks 
 of the Society on the 24th April, 1782, having received 
 
6 MEMOIR. 
 
 eighty-four " returns" for oratory, the largest number 
 on record. To support such a panegyric, specimens of 
 his eloquence at this period of his career may be re- 
 quired. We have no fear of appealing to his speech from 
 the chair, on his closing the eleventh Session of the 
 Society, which will be found in this collection. On the 
 22nd October, 1788, Mr. George Beresford, Auditor, 
 moved that Mr. Burro wes should be requested to fur- 
 nish the Secretary with a copy of the speech he deli- 
 vered that evening, in order to its being inserted on 
 the journals; but, from a sense of modesty natural to 
 true genius, Burrowes declined this honour. 
 
 In the year 1794 the Society happened to encoun- 
 ter the hostility of the Board of Senior Fellows. An 
 order for the exclusion of extern members was the 
 beginning of a contest in which Lord Clare exerted 
 much authority. Other vexatious steps were taken, 
 which occasioned the withdrawal of the Society from 
 the walls of College, and its subsequent suppression 
 by Provost Elrington. The Exhibition Room in Wil- 
 liam-street was enffiio-ed for its future meetings ; but 
 the Chancellor, conceiving that the Society had become 
 a theatre for the discussion of modern politics, plainly 
 signified his disapproval of its proceedings, and this 
 once celebrated institution, in which the talents of the 
 most distinguished men of Ireland, of all parties, strove 
 for mastery, found itself at length obliged to separate. 
 It fell to the lot of Mr. Burrowes to close its last sitting. 
 
 Mr. Burrowes selected the Bar for his profession, 
 his elder brother having entered the Church. In the 
 
MEMOIR. 7 
 
 beginning of the year 1784, while a student at the 
 Middle Temple, he published a pamphlet, in which he 
 pointed out the defects of the representative system as 
 it then existed, and asserted the unalienable and in- 
 defeasible right of the Roman Catholics of Ireland to 
 the extension of the suffrage. His nervous and animated 
 exposure of their grievances, and the unreserved se- 
 verity of his strictures upon the policy of Mr. Pitt, 
 attracted the notice of a character at that time conspi- 
 cuously distinguished, — the celebrated Henry Flood, — 
 universally considered by his contemporaries as one of 
 the most eminent men that Ireland ever produced. An 
 introduction was effected between them, which ripened 
 into a friendship that ceased only with the life of that 
 great man. 
 
 In a fatal hour for his fame and for his country's 
 weal, Flood, soon after the dissolution of the Conven- 
 tion in the winter of 1783, transferred to England 
 those talents which had rendered such valuable service 
 to Ireland. At the pressing solicitation of the Duke 
 of Chandos, Mr. Flood was induced to enter the British 
 Parliament, where his success was sadly dispropor- 
 tioned to his great abilities. At that period of political 
 intrigue, all the dishonourable means of depreciating 
 a great man were resorted to by the indefatigable in- 
 struments of party. Flood voted against Fox on his 
 celebrated India Bill ; and, when Pitt thought he had 
 secured him, the pleasing illusion vanished upon his 
 memorable announcement, " that he rose to speak inde- 
 pendent of both the great leaders, and that he was 
 equally unacquainted with Administration or Gpposi- 
 
8 MEMOIR. 
 
 tion." This manly declaration was calculated to secure 
 him little of the affection of cither, and both were 
 equally resolved to exclude him from Parliament. 
 Many ascribed Mr. Flood's failure to this powerful 
 combination. The Duke of Chandos was suspected of 
 lending himself to these views, his Grace having sub- 
 sequently found a pretext for refusing Mr. Flood his 
 support at Winchester. This conduct gave rise to an 
 angry correspondence, by which his Grace lost cha- 
 racter and Mr. Flood his seat; but a vacancy occurring 
 immediately afterwards in the borough of Seaford, a 
 number of the inhabitants addressed Mr. Flood. Fox 
 and Pitt were already in the field, each with a candi- 
 date. Flood stood independent of both, and was de- 
 termined to abide the issue of a contest. Sir Laurence 
 Parsons, therefore, wrote a strong recommendatory 
 letter to Flood, describing the qualifications of Mr. 
 Burrowes, who was accordingly despatched to the 
 scene of action. The following narrative of the trans- 
 action, furnished by Mr. Burrowes to Captain Warden 
 Flood, when engaged in a laudable attempt to rescue 
 the genius and character of his uncle from unmerited 
 neglect, will be found interesting: 
 
 " In the year 1784, being then a law student in Lon- 
 don, in the last year of my preparation for boing called 
 to the Irish Bar, the present Earl of llosse, then Sir 
 Laurence Parsons, introduced to me his friend, Mr. 
 Flood, who had been invited and importuned by a 
 large body of men, who claimed to be entitled to vote 
 for the borough of Seaford, and who pressed him to 
 become a candidate, and with his powerful abilities to 
 
MEMOIR. V 
 
 advocate and establish rights of which they had been 
 illegally disfranchised. 
 
 " A similar trust had been, it seems, confided to 
 other persons, who, it was suspected, were unduly influ- 
 enced to betray the cause and abandon the pursuit. 
 Mr. Flood examined the question, and became of 
 opinion that the borough ought to be opened ; and he 
 and my friend, Sir Laurence Parsons, requested, a few 
 weeks before the election, that I would personally go 
 down to Seaford, live amongst the claimants (who 
 were generally fishermen) until the day of the election, 
 and, as representative of Mr. Flood, superintend and 
 manage the cause. I shortly found that very many of 
 the claimants were anxious to have a candidate for the 
 second seat, and actually pressed me to become that 
 candidate ; a request with which I could not think of 
 complying. ] t occurred to me, however, that a talented 
 and popular associate would be a highly useful acqui- 
 sition to Mr. Flood; and knowing that the assizes in 
 East Grinstead were to be held in a few days, where 
 Mr. Erskine (perhaps the most talented and popular 
 advocate then in England) always attended, I con- 
 ceived the project of tendering to him the same sup- 
 port upon which Mr. Flood was standing, and solicit- 
 ing his co-operation. I, therefore, posted to East 
 Grinstead, and at a very early hour on the first day of 
 the assizes, before the court was open, procured access 
 to Mr. Erskine, stated to him the legal grounds upon 
 which I conceived the petitioners would succeed under 
 good and prudent management, and requested him to 
 unite with Mr. Flood. lie heard all I had stated, and 
 
1 MEMOIIt. 
 
 read all such papers as I produced with great interest; 
 and, after declaring himself to be quite satisfied of the 
 justice of my conditions, said he would at once accept 
 my offer, but that he was so circumstanced that he 
 ought not and would not take any important step in 
 politics without the approbation of his friend and 
 patron, Mr. Charles Fox. In proof of his zeal and sin- 
 cerity, he immediately sent back all his briefs, and 
 repaired to London to confer with Mr. Fox upon the 
 subject, assuring me that he would communicate the 
 result to me by letter to Seaford. A few days after I 
 received a letter from Mr. Erskine, communicating his 
 regret that he could not unite with Mr. Flood, not 
 being able to obtain the permission he sought. 
 
 " Sir Laurence Parsons was then prevailed upon to 
 become a candidate in conjunction with Mr. Flood. I 
 remained at Seaford until the day appointed for hold- 
 ing the election, and attended at the hustings as repre- 
 sentative of Mr. Flood, followed by a mob of claim- 
 ants, not one of whose votes was admitted; and after 
 struggling ineffectually, equally against the candidates 
 supported by Mr. Fox and Mr. Pitt, I returned to 
 London. A petition was lodged against the return, 
 and it was vacated on the ground, I believe, that no 
 proper and legal notice had been given of the time of 
 holding the election. Mr. Flood again became a can- 
 didate, and was again defeated. There was a second 
 petition, which succeeded; and Mr. Flood, again be- 
 coming a candidate, was finally returned, and sat in 
 Parliament for Seaford. It is highly illustrative of the 
 character of Mr. Flood, and of the opinion entertained 
 
MEMOIR. 
 
 11 
 
 of him at the period to which I allude, namely, that he 
 could not be lulled, intimidated, or deceived ; and that, 
 born with powers calculated to lead, he would not, he 
 could not, dwindle into a mere instrument. Examine 
 the public prints of that period, and you will find all 
 (as well those that supported the ministers as their 
 antagonists) agreeing and vieing with each other in 
 traducing, and, as it is called, writing down Mr. Flood. 
 In many of the prints speeches are ascribed to him 
 which he never made, and which, from their folly and 
 absurdity, no man well acquainted with him would 
 have, on any evidence, believed to be his. After my 
 return to Ireland I lived in strict intimacy, I might 
 almost say friendship, witli him till the day of his 
 death, and confess that I indulged the vanity of myself 
 recording to posterity the history and personal quali- 
 ties of, perhaps, the ablest man Ireland ever produced, 
 indisputably the ablest man of his own times: but the 
 vice of procrastination, which I fear is deeply rooted 
 in my nature, has frustrated my ambitious and most 
 anxious wish, by year after year diminishing, while it 
 should have increased, my stock of materials, until it 
 has at length left me equally destitute of necessary de- 
 tails, the means of collecting them, and the power of 
 equably combining, and laying them before the public."* 
 We find the following eloquent recognition of Mr. 
 Burrowes's capacity for the undertaking in one of the 
 well-known sketches from the "Note-book of an Irish 
 Barrister." " It had been well for the fame of Mr. 
 
 * Memoir of Flood, by Captain AVarden Flood, p. 314. 
 
12 MEMOIR. 
 
 Flood that his illustrious name had descended to pos- 
 terity protected from the malice of foes and the cold- 
 ness of friends by the knowledge and experience of 
 such a biographer as Mr. Burrowes. Ireland has to 
 lament that the life of one of her greatest men has yet 
 to be written. A laudable attempt has been made to 
 rescue his genius and judgment from unmerited ne- 
 glect ; but justice has not yet been done to his cha- 
 racter. Like Malone, Molyneaux, Yelverton, Burgh, 
 his name has almost been forgotten ; and with the 
 exception of a few traditions, which every succeeding 
 year renders more evanescent, we know nothing of his 
 history. What is known of the man who wrote the 
 1 Case of Ireland,' — a work which gave Ireland a free 
 Parliament, and the commercial privileges she enjoyed 
 during her short independence? What record is there 
 of the fascinating, silver-toned eloquence of Ilussey 
 Burgh ? We have only a few fragmentary remains of 
 the massive oratory of Yelverton. Time has spared 
 only a few bricks to enable us to form an estimate of 
 the grandeur of the temple. His loud tones and lofty 
 flight remind us of the shepherd's pipe formed of the 
 eagle's wing. Even a shadow still hangs on the his- 
 tory of G rattan.* We regret Mr. Burrowes did not 
 realize his hope in a biography of Mr. Flood: of all 
 men now living he is perhaps the most competent, 
 from an intimate acquaintance with his personal .cha- 
 racter, as well as a profound knowledge of the striking 
 events in which he took so conspicuous a part." 
 
 * Grattan's " Grattan" had not then been published. 
 
13 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 Mr. Burrowes was called to the Bar in Easter Term, 
 1785, and came in to a certain share of business almost 
 immediately. He selected the Leinster Circuit. At 
 that period the Irish Bar represented most of the genius, 
 learning, and patriotism of the country. Of the posi- 
 tion which this distinguished body held at the time of 
 which we write, one whose own pretensions, in con- 
 nexion with the Irish Bar, were of no mean order, has 
 given the following testimony: "No idea," says this 
 writer, " can be formed of that illustrious body ; of the 
 learning that informed, the genius that inspired, the 
 wit that warmed it ; of the wit that relieved its wis- 
 dom, and the wisdom that relieved its wit ; of the 
 generous emulation that cherished while it contended ; 
 of the spotless honour that shone no less in the here- 
 ditary honour of the high-born than in the native in- 
 tegrity of the more humble aspirant ; but, above all, of 
 that lofty and unbending patriotism that at once won 
 the confidence of the country, and gave an imposing 
 dignity to the national character. It was then the nur- 
 sery of the Parliament and the peerage ; there was 
 scarcely a noble family in the land that did not enrol 
 its elect in that body, by the study of law and the ex- 
 
14 MEMOIR. 
 
 ercise of experience, to prepare them for the field of 
 legislation ; and there not unfrequently arose a genius 
 from the lowest of the people who won his way to the 
 distinctions of the senate, and wrested from pedigree 
 the highest honours of the constitution. It was a sub- 
 lime spectacle to behold the hope of the peerage enter- 
 ing such an intellectual arena with the offspring of 
 the peasant, all difference merged in that of mind, 
 merit alone deciding the superiority." 
 
 Such was the exalted character of the Bar when 
 Mr. Burrowes joined it. lie had no patron to assist 
 him through the dull dispiriting ordeal which invaria- 
 bly precedes future distinction. Conscious of great 
 powers, and endowed with a buoyancy of spirits which 
 never once forsook him, he obtained, by genius and ap- 
 plication, what fortune had withheld. He knew that the 
 age was peculiarly favourable to the development of 
 intellect, and having been associated with men who 
 were themselves destined to excel in energetic and 
 patriotic qualities, he became inspired with their en- 
 thusiasm, and by their intercourse, and without any 
 presumptuous estimate of his own talents, he indulged 
 the hope of one day resembling them in the essential 
 features of their characters. 
 
 Mr. Burrowes was deservedly esteemed one of the 
 best election lawyers of his day ; and it is not unwor- 
 thy of remark, that Barons Yelverton and Clonmel 
 exhibited the first proofs of their great powers in the 
 same field. Few of the speeches delivered by Mr. 
 Burrowes on such occasions have been preserved, and 
 
MEMOIR. 15 
 
 yet such cases, more than any other, severely test the 
 skill and learning of an advocate. One speech of this 
 character, however, remains, which, for eloquence, 
 varied learning, and high moral excellence, has sel- 
 dom, if ever, been surpassed. This speech was deli- 
 vered before a committee of the Irish House of Com- 
 mons, on the occasion of a petition which was presented 
 against the return of the Honourable Francis Hely 
 Hutchinson, as representative of the borough of Trinity 
 College. The petition contained several charges, all 
 involving " an exercise of undue influence on the part 
 of the Provost as returning officer, with the purpose of 
 interrupting or preventing a free and indifferent elec- 
 tion." The petitioner, Sir Laurence Parsons, retained 
 Mr. Burrowes, Mr. Plunket, Mr. Burston, and Mr. 
 Smith, as his counsel. The investigation continued 
 for a considerable time, and several counsel addressed 
 the committee. The speech of Mr. Burrowes has 
 been admitted to be the best which the occasion called 
 forth. It was powerful and impressive, and was inter- 
 spersed with frequent bursts of impassioned eloquence 
 which fascinated and convinced the committee ; for 
 the result of the investigation was morally, though not 
 technically, a triumph to the petitioner. Seven mem- 
 bers of the committee voted for the petitioner, and 
 six for the sitting member. The chairman, how- 
 ever, by using the privilege of giving two votes, saved 
 him from a second ignominious expulsion from the 
 House. 
 
 The facts of this flagrant abuse of a solemn trust 
 
16 MEMOIR. 
 
 deserve some notice. Mr. Hutchinson was appointed 
 to the office of Provost in the year 1774, and as, at 
 the time of his appointment, he was a practising barris- 
 ter of twenty years' standing, and of considerable emi- 
 nence in his profession, it was a matter of surprise 
 to his friends that he accepted such an office. The 
 true motive soon appeared. At a general election, in 
 177G, his son was a candidate for the representation of 
 the University, and was returned. A petition was, 
 however, lodged against him, and he was unseated by 
 a committee on the ground of undue influence having 
 been exercised by his father, the Provost, who openly 
 solicited votes for his son, although, being the returning 
 officer, he should not have interfered in the character 
 of canvasser. At the election of 1790 Provost Hutchin- 
 son was more cautious, and although he did interfere 
 with the canvass of his son, again a candidate, yet, pro- 
 fiting by the lesson which experience taught him, he 
 committed the delicate task to agents, so that open 
 proofs of his personal solicitation of votes could not 
 be established. An investigation of the case of Dr. 
 Miller, with reference to the Provost's misapplication 
 of the " nominating power," will render it quite clear 
 that a trust of the most serious and sacred character, 
 confided to him for the advancement of learning and 
 virtue amongst the rising youth of the land, was per- 
 verted and abused in a manner the most dangerous 
 and deadly to the interests and objects of the Univer- 
 sity. In order to obtain a fellowship in the Dublin 
 University, the student should devote the time, health, 
 
MEMOIR. 17 
 
 and labour of the most valuable portion of his life. It 
 required a mind uncommonly quick and capacious to 
 attain the necessary information by less than three or 
 four years of unremitting study. As the fame attend- 
 ing the acquisition of a fellowship makes it the highest 
 object of ambition to the men of talent in the Univer- 
 sity, so, in point of emolument, it is the highest reward 
 held out to the exertion of talents in this or, perhaps, 
 any other country. And yet this was (before the an- 
 swering was heard) offered to be conferred on Miller 
 by exercising in his favour the " nominating power," 
 and the only qualification required was a declaration 
 that he wished well to the election cause of the Pro- 
 vost's son. Miller was given to understand that the 
 Senior Fellows had conspired against him, and that 
 the only chance he had of succeeding in the great ob- 
 ject of his life, was to secure the friendship and sup- 
 port of the Provost by his compliance. If he had not 
 been a man of unusually stubborn virtue, he would, in 
 all probability, have accepted the offer, and, in such an 
 event, from the nature of the transaction, secresy must 
 have been insured. The learned author of the " Phi- 
 losophy of History" is now no more. Engaged, for a 
 considerable period of his life, in the discharge of the 
 delicate and arduous functions of forming the mind and 
 principles of the youth of the land, while presiding 
 over the diocesan seminary at Armagh, his great merit, 
 and the very distinguished reputation he had acquired, 
 could not fail to attract the notice of the Lord Primate, 
 who elevated him to the rank of Vicar-General, upon 
 
 c 
 
18 MEMOIR. 
 
 the demise of the late eminent Judge of the Prerogative 
 Court, Dr. Radcliffe. The following authentic and 
 interesting narrative of the transaction of 1789 was 
 communicated by Dr. Miller himself to the author of 
 this Memoir. It is so strongly characteristic of the 
 sentiments by which he was actuated at that remote 
 period, and affords such evidence of unimpaired powers 
 at a very advanced time of life, that we prefer his re- 
 lation of the facts to any imperfect attempt of our own : 
 
 "Armagh, 21sl October, 1845. 
 " Dear Sir, — The following are the particulars of the trans- 
 action of my early life, concerning which you have requested 
 information; though now very remote in time, they have 
 retained a sufficiently distinct place in my memory. In the 
 year 1788 I answered for a Fellowship in the University of 
 Dublin, which was, however, adjudged by the Board to Mr. 
 Magee, afterwards Archbishop of Dublin ; whether correctly 
 or not, I considered myself aggrieved by this decision, not 
 only on my own opinion of my answering, but also on that of 
 two very competent authorities, Mr. Stokes, who had been 
 the last elected, and Mr. Russell, who was then, I think, a 
 candidate, and was himself elected in the following year. I 
 resented it the more because I thought I had reason to ascribe 
 it to an exercise of personal influence by Doctor Richard Stack, 
 the tutor of Mr. Magee, over the two leading examiners. Un- 
 der this impression I prevailed with my father to withdraw 
 my name from the University, and enter it at the Middle 
 Temple, that I might prepare myself for the profession of the 
 law ; a vacancy, however, having occurred among the Fellows, 
 or being sure to occur within the limited time, I determined, 
 in the month of October, to resume my pursuit, in compliance 
 with his wish that I should make another trial. My resent- 
 ment, indeed, was unabated, and, though I was again to sub- 
 mit myself to the judgment of the same men, I refused to hold 
 
MEMOIR. 19 
 
 personal intercourse with any of them. I have mentioned 
 these particulars, though they have long ceased to maintain 
 the same feelings in my mind, to explain how it happened, 
 that so wise a man as Provost Hutchinson may have been led 
 to think himself safe in committing himself so seriously, by 
 sending me most corrupt proposals. The Fellows, senior and 
 junior, were, with few exceptions, opposed to him. I, on the 
 other hand, had not yet attached myself to either party ; and 
 I had, by my undisguised resentment, openly set his adversa- 
 ries at defiance ; it was then not unreasonable that he should 
 believe me favourably disposed towards any overtures which he 
 might make me, especially as he might suppose me to be not 
 free from apprehension of the continued hostility of the Senior 
 Fellows in the approaching trial. About six weeks before 
 the Examination of the year 1789, which was to be held in 
 the middle of May, Mr. Adair, who was then living in the 
 family of the Provost, either being at that time, or having 
 been employed as a private tutor, came to my chamber in the 
 dusk of the evening. I had known his person, but had never 
 before any personal intercourse with him. He introduced him- 
 self to me as sent by the Provost, to intimate that he was 
 aware that the Senior Fellows were hostile to me, and was 
 apprehensive that they would be influenced by that feeling 
 in the approaching election, and that he was determined to 
 prevent this great injustice by exercising, in my favour, his 
 power of nomination, if they should continue to be adverse to 
 me, as he expected. Mr. Adair further informed me, that to 
 facilitate the proposed nomination, the Provost would furnish 
 me with a list of the questions which he was himself to ask 
 in his intended examination of Ethics, so that I might be sure 
 of answering well in his course. The power of " arbitrary 
 nomination" had not then been questioned, and was actually 
 exercised in the following year, though for the last time, to 
 exclude a Mr. Allen, who, unable to encounter the obloquy 
 
 C2 
 
20 MEMOIR. 
 
 of voting for a son of the Provost, at an election of representa- 
 tives for the University, had absented himself from the elec- 
 tion ; then, indeed, it was for ever suppressed by the influence 
 of public opinion, except in the permitted case, in which no 
 one candidate should have received a majority of votes. Mr. 
 Adair visited me more than once, I think three times, always 
 in the evening. In the course of the few weeks preceding the 
 examination ; and in, I think, the second, he reinforced his ori- 
 ginal overture, by assuring me that the Provost would, through 
 his influence with the Government, procure the establishment 
 of a professorship of Ethics, to be endowed with a salary of 
 £100, and that I should be named the first Professor. To these 
 proposals I feared to give a negative, apprehending that the 
 exercise of the power of nomination would, in that case, be 
 turned against me. In this difficulty my expedient was, and it 
 appeared to be successful, to burst into expressions of violent 
 resentment against the Senior Fellows, for their past conduct, 
 whenever I felt that he was pressing me closely for a definitive 
 acceptance of his proposals. Whether it did actually blind him 
 I do not know, but it at least enabled me at the time to avoid 
 giving any answer either of acceptance or rejection. It seemed, 
 however, at length to have been judged necessary to bring me 
 to an explicit declaration, for I received an invitation to dine 
 on the Sunday preceding the examination with Lord Donough- 
 more, the eldest son of the Provost, who had chambers in the 
 College. To baffle this measure I pleaded the urgency of the 
 business of my preparation as excuse for declining the invita- 
 tion. My last communication with Mr. Adair was by a note 
 of congratulation addressed to me after the first trial, congratu- 
 lating me on my successful answering : to this I sent no reply. 
 The issue of the whole was, that, to the honour of the Board, 
 not less than of myself, I was unanimously elected to the single 
 vacancy which was then to be filled. Shortly after my elec- 
 tion there was an election for Representatives of the Univer- 
 sity, in which a son of the Provost was returned by the Provost 
 
MEMOIR. 21 
 
 as one of the successful candidates. A petition was lodged by 
 Sir Laurence Parsons, afterwards Earl of Rosse ; and on the 
 trial of this petition I was produced as a witness for the peti- 
 tioner, to prove the corrupt dealing of the Provost; on which 
 occasion I swore to the two offers of the nomination and of the 
 list of questions, not at the time remembering the subsequent 
 offer of the professorship. This testimony, however, though 
 it seriously damaged the character of the Provost, did not in- 
 fluence the Committee, because my vote had not been gained. 
 As it was afterwards said, on the part of Mr. Adair and his 
 employer, that I had availed m} r self of the absence of the for- 
 mer, to bring forward charges which I would not have ven- 
 tured to urge in his presence, I availed myself of an opportu- 
 nity afforded by a Visitation soon afterwards, called by almost 
 the whole number of the Fellows, with the aged Vice-Provost 
 Murray at their head, to inquire into the insufficiency and the 
 misgovernment of the Provost. Seeing, at this Visitation, Mr. 
 Adair, who was present as a spectator, I took the liberty of 
 interrupting the proceedings, that I might then, in his pre- 
 sence, repeat my charges. This I was permitted by the Visi- 
 tors to do ; and I then stated also the offer of the professor- 
 ship, which had before escaped my memory. Mr. Adair ap- 
 peared to be confounded by this unexpected accusation; not 
 so the Provost, who immediately disowned his agent, repro- 
 bating him in the severest terms, as a man who had betrayed 
 his conlidence in making an unauthorized offer of the use of 
 papers, to which that confidence had given him access: he 
 passed over the other charges in silence. An order was made 
 that Mr. Adairs name should be struck off the roll of the 
 University, where it had been placed as that of a resident 
 Master of Arts, and the business of the Visitation proceeded 
 as before. The Visitation was brought to a close without 
 any immediate result, by the mere exhaustion of the three 
 days allowed by the Statutes for such an occasion ; but the 
 appointment of such a person to the presidency of the College 
 
22 MEMOIR. 
 
 was rendered so odious as greatly to diminish the danger of a 
 repetition of the abuse. 
 
 " I have now, perhaps, gone into a greater detail than you 
 had desired; but you may make your own selection from it. 
 I have much satisfaction in thinking, that I contributed, both 
 in this and another part of my conduct, to effect a salutary 
 change, in consequence of which we have never since had a 
 layman or a stranger as a Provost. 
 
 " Your obedient Servant, 
 
 " George Miller." 
 
 Such were the circumstances of this extraordinary 
 case, a case presenting features of the most unprece- 
 dented corruption, and containing sufficient turpitude 
 to vitiate a thousand elections. Mr. Burrowes's descrip- 
 tion of the arts practised by the Provost, on this occa- 
 sion, is powerfully scathing. Hutchinson's abilities 
 were unquestionable ; his learning was abundant and 
 various, though not very profound ; but his political 
 propensities were by no means creditable ; his obsequi- 
 ousness to power attached him to the Court party 
 from the commencement of his career, and he conti- 
 nued its ready and plausible defender through every 
 administration. This would explain the true motives 
 for so glaring a perversion and abuse of the sacred and 
 solemn trust which, as Provost, he possessed. Mr. 
 Burrowes reviews the arguments on the whole case 
 in a peroration which, for a noble assemblage of ideas, 
 and for exalted sentiments, has seldom, if ever, been 
 surpassed. This great effort raised him high in public 
 estimation, and from this period he moved rapidly 
 forward towards the first ranks of an eminently distin- 
 guished Bar. 
 
23 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 Amongst the early events of the professional career of 
 Mr. Burro wes was his duel at Kilkenny, in 1794, with 
 the Hon. Somerset Butler. This circumstance has 
 afforded Sir Jonah Barrington scope for his story-tell- 
 ing powers. The imaginative knight's peculiar pro- 
 pensity for the fabulous and the improbable has often 
 led him into difficulties, and frequently alienated his 
 friends. His account of the affair under consideration, 
 however amusing, is altogether inaccurate. The facts 
 were as follows: 
 
 The late Lord Mountgarret (afterwards Earl of 
 Kilkenny) had for several years a number of lawsuits 
 with some refractory tenants, whose causes were gra- 
 tuitously taken up by a Mr. Ball, an eminent attorney, 
 Mr. Win. Johnson, a barrister, and several others of 
 the circuit. His Lordship, feeling very much embar- 
 rassed, applied to Mr. Fletcher, afterwards Judge, and 
 Mr. Barrington, informing them of his " situation," and 
 obtained a promise that one of them would be always 
 in attendance when his causes were called on. They 
 accordingly did most punctually attend his numerous 
 trials, were most liberally feed, but were invariably 
 most unsuccessful in their efforts. His Lordship, per- 
 
24 MEMOIR. 
 
 ceiving himself likely to be foiled, determined to take 
 another course ; in order, therefore, to avoid a system 
 of endless litigation, and to save the time and labour of 
 the Court and the Bar, his Lordship adopted a mode of 
 procedure more consistent with the national taste of 
 the period, and forthwith caused a notice to be pre- 
 pared and posted in the mess-room set apart for the 
 Bar, intimating the course whereby his Lordship de- 
 sired in future to decide his suits, and offering the 
 alternative of either fifditinff him or of declining to 
 hold briefs against him. His Lordship was remark- 
 able for his taste for this species of litigation. The 
 affair commenced by a direct challenge from his Lord- 
 ship to Mr. Ball, which was accepted, and a duel im- 
 mediately* followed, in which his Lordship had the 
 worst of it. Mr. Byrne, the King's Counsel, shortly 
 afterwards went out with his Lordship, and was 
 wounded. Mr. Burrowes, who happened to be one of 
 the counsel against his Lordship, sent an invitation to 
 his son, the lion. Somerset Butler, whose bullet he 
 received in his side. He fell, as he conceived, mor- 
 tally wounded, owing to the violence of the shock, and 
 the supposed vital direction the ball had taken ; and, 
 but for the following providential circumstance, the 
 event would have proved fatal. Mr. Burrowes had a 
 habit of thrusting all his papers and letters into his 
 pocket without regard to order or arrangement. He 
 possessed, however, notwithstanding this apparent con- 
 fusion, the power of being able at any moment to place 
 his hand upon the particular document he required. 
 
MEMOIR. 25 
 
 On one occasion Mrs. Burrowes, in her passion for 
 neatness, undertook to arrange his letters and papers ; 
 but the result only made " confusion worse con- 
 founded ;" and thenceforward Mrs. Burrowes gave 
 strict injunctions to the servant who accompanied Mr. 
 Burrowes on circuit, to take his master's papers from 
 the pockets of the coat which he had taken off, and 
 place them in the corresponding pockets of that which 
 he was about to wear. At that period it was the etiquette 
 to repair to the ground in full dress. Now it so hap- 
 pened that Mr. Burrowes, on the evening before the 
 duel, posted some letters to Dublin, and received 
 change and other letters, all which he consigned, ac- 
 cording to his custom, to his waistcoat pocket. The 
 servant transferred these to the pocket of the waistcoat 
 Mr. Burrowes was about to wear, and which, accord- 
 ing to the fashion of the time, was rather capacious. 
 Surgeon Pack, who accompanied Mr. Burrowes to the 
 ground, found that the ball was intercepted by a penny, 
 part of the change which he had received at the post- 
 office on the previous evening. 
 
 The following correspondence will explain the 
 mode of intimidation pursued towards the Bar at the 
 
 period of which we write : 
 
 " Greenes Hotel. 
 
 " Sir, — I am sorry to be obliged to tell you, that your con- 
 duct in bringing my father's name into a public Court, when 
 you must have known that I was present, was treating me ill, 
 and behaving unlike a gentleman. 
 
 " Your obedient, humble Servant, 
 
 " S. Butler. 
 " April 15." 
 
26 MEMOIR. 
 
 " Sir, — I respect the quickness of your feelings on the 
 subject of a parent's memory; I therefore do assure you I 
 did not know you were in Court when I made use of your 
 father's name. The mere using a gentleman's name in Court 
 is not in itself offensive; particularly when (as in this case) it 
 is unavoidably necessary ; but I am not conscious of having 
 used any disrespectful or insulting language towards your 
 father's memory. Having so directly and decidedly obviated 
 the grounds upon which you have formed and expressed so 
 strong an opinion upon my conduct, I hope and expect you 
 will do me the justice to change that opinion, and to signify to 
 me that you have changed it. 
 
 " I am, Sir, your most obedient Servant, 
 
 " Peter Burrowes. 
 
 " P. S. — I hope for the favour of an answer in the course 
 of this morning. 
 
 "1 5th April, 1794." 
 
 The answer to the letter of Mr. Burrowes not being 
 deemed satisfactory, his friend, Mr. Waddy, was the 
 bearer of a message, and a meeting ensued on the fol- 
 lowing; morning. 
 
 Mr. "Burrowes was never able to reflect with com- 
 posure on this circumstance of his early career, which 
 lie always designated as the, only act of cowardice with 
 which, in the course of a long life, he could reproach 
 himself. He might easily have availed himself of the 
 latitude usually conceded to counsel in such cases ; but, 
 conscious that the privileges of his profession were 
 encroached upon by a course of procedure unusually 
 daring, and desirous of upholding the dignity of the Bar, 
 assailed in his person, he yielded to a custom which, 
 happily for the welfare of society, is now almost extinct, 
 and, unable to encounter the obloquy of the world, he 
 
MEMOIR. 2 7 
 
 displayed a deficiency of moral courage for which, as 
 we have above stated, he never forgave himself. 
 
 Many years afterwards Mr. Burrowes happened to 
 meet his old antagonist at the house of his friend, John 
 Humphreys, of Fitzwilliam-street. He was not ac- 
 quainted witli his person, never having seen him but 
 for the few moments they confronted each other on the 
 ground. Mr. Butler was put forward as the champion 
 of the Mountgarret family, and, under the circum- 
 stances we have already detailed, had resolved to fasten 
 a quarrel on Mr. Burrowes. After passing a delight- 
 ful evening, the company were in the act of separating, 
 when Mr. Butler politely offered Mr. Burrowes his arm, 
 and proposed to accompany him as far as his resi- 
 dence in Leeson-street. On the way he commenced 
 an animated discussion upon the subject of duelling, 
 which he condemned as a wicked and absurd practice, 
 utterly unbecoming a man of sense. The other, who 
 always viewed the matter in the same light, began bit- 
 terly to reproach himself for a piece of folly of which 
 he said he had been guilty once in his life, and related 
 the entire affair, to the infinite amusement of his friend, 
 who had been in the course of the evening made aware 
 of Mr. Burrowes's presence by their host. They had 
 now reached the house, when, Mr. Butler announcing 
 himself as his opponent on that occasion, the gen- 
 tlemen enjoyed a hearty laugh, and separated mutually 
 satisfied with so agreeable and unexpected a renewal 
 of their acquaintance. They met again, though at long 
 intervals, but always as friends. 
 
28 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 Perhaps this is the most appropriate opportunity to 
 refer to the general deportment of Mr. Burrowes in 
 society, and to endeavour to explain how, notwithstand- 
 ing his extensive acquaintance with the disaffected, 
 he never incurred the suspicion of Government, except 
 in one instance, which we shall here relate, and in 
 which he completely defeated the machinations of a 
 personal enemy. 
 
 The first society of United Irishmen was estab- 
 lished in Belfast, in 1791, by Theobald Wolfe Tone, a 
 young barrister of much promise, and one of the most 
 distinguished members of the College Historical Society. 
 Whatever were Tone's private views with respect to 
 Republicanism or Separation, the great body of the 
 original members of the Society looked only to the 
 achievement of Parliamentary Reform and the aboli- 
 tion of the Penal Code. Tone himself afterwards 
 stated that the establishment of a Republic was not the 
 object of his speculations upon the first formation of 
 the Society. Mr. Burrowes, though well acquainted 
 with the principles and sentiments of the original 
 founders of the Society, with most of whom he conti- 
 nued to live on terms of the most friendly intercourse, 
 
MEMOIR. 29 
 
 was nevertheless called upon to act as counsel for the 
 Crown in some cases in which prosecutions were in- 
 stituted against the members. 
 
 Previous to the alteration in the constitution of the 
 Society, in 1795, a case occurred at Clonmel Assizes, 
 before Prime Sergeant Fitzgerald, in which Mr. Bur- 
 rowes obtained a conviction upon the charge of admi- 
 nistering the United Irishman's oath, then a capital 
 offence. Thomas Addis Emmet, who became a United 
 Irishman in the succeeding year, was in the case, but 
 would not appear, as his being concerned in it would 
 have been quite sufficient to cause the jury to decide 
 against his client ; but he acted on a motion in arrest 
 of judgment, and argued the case with a knowledge of 
 law that surprised every one who heard him. He 
 maintained that in no country could such an oath be 
 considered penal ; that no one could be punished for 
 taking it; and he concluded by the bold course of 
 addressing the Court thus . " My Lords, here in the 
 presence of this legal Court, this crowded auditory, — in 
 the presence of the Being that sees, and witnesses, and 
 directs this judicial tribunal, — here, my Lords, I, I 
 myself, in the presence of God, declare, I take the 
 oath." He sat down ; the Court were astonished ; 
 their amazement left them in no fit state of mind either 
 for remonstrance or approval ; they took no step against 
 him, and the prisoner's punishment was reduced to 
 something very slight. 
 
 It is of course unnecessary to observe that Mr. 
 Burrowes never belonged to the Society. He had a 
 
30 MEMOIR. 
 
 very sincere regard for many of its members, most of 
 whom were attached to the Dublin Union ; but he was 
 also an ardent admirer of the Constitution, and was, 
 therefore, apprehensive that an obstinate adherence to 
 the principles of some of the violent and more excited 
 members of the confederacy would drive the people 
 into republicanism. From the moment, therefore, that 
 the proceedings of the Society ceased to be of a public 
 nature (the original test having been changed into an 
 oath of secrecy), he considered its character completely 
 altered, and that its aim was revolution; and he fre- 
 quently, both in public and in private society, repro- 
 bated its entire course. 
 
 Previous to the organization of the United Irish- 
 men, and in the winter of 1790, Tone instituted a 
 kind of political club, of which Burrowes was a 
 member. The club consisted of seven or eight indi- 
 viduals, all eminent for their talents and patriotism, 
 and who had already more or less distinguished them- 
 selves by their literary productions. The experiment 
 satisfied Tone that men of genius, to be of use, must 
 not be collected in numbers ; that they do not work 
 well in the aggregate. Any two of those who formed 
 this political circle would have proved the delight and 
 entertainment of a well-chosen society ; but, together, 
 they were (as Wolsey says) " too much honour." 
 Tone and his friends had the habit of designating each 
 other by mock names taken from some trivial circum- 
 stance ; thus, Whitley Stokes, Fellow of Trinity College, 
 was styled " the Keeper," and Mr. Burrowes, "the Czar;" 
 
MEMOIR. 31 
 
 but we have no means of knowing the exact nature of 
 the circumstances which rendered these titles appli- 
 cable. 
 
 In recording the names of the members of the club 
 above alluded to, Tone adds, in reference to Mr. Bur- 
 rowes:* "There are men whom I regard as much as 
 possible ; I am sure, for example, if there be on earth 
 such a thing as sincere friendship, I feel it for Whitley 
 Stokes, George Knox, and Peter Burrowes. They are 
 men whose talents I admire, whose virtues I reverence, 
 and whose persons I love. With regard to Burrowes 
 and Knox, whom I do most sincerely and affection- 
 ately love, their political opinions differ fundamentally 
 from mine; and perhaps it is for the credit of us all three 
 that, with such irreconcileable difference of sentiments 
 we have all along preserved a mutual regard and es- 
 teem for each other ; at least I am sure I feel it parti- 
 cularly honourable to myself, for there are, perhaps, 
 no two men in the world about whose good opinion I 
 am more solicitous ; nor shall I soon forget the steady 
 and unvarying friendship I experienced from them 
 both, when my situation was, to all human appear- 
 ances, utterly desperate ; and when others, with at 
 least as little reason to desert me, shunned me as if I 
 had the red spots of the plague out on me."f This 
 
 * Tone's Life, Washington edition, vol. i. p. 48. 
 
 f Here Tone alludes to the services Burrowes rendered him on 
 the occasion of Jackson's conspiracy, in which he was deeply impli- 
 cated. Government had steadily watched his proceedings for some 
 time, and had collected abundance of proof to secure his conviction. 
 
32 MEMOIR. 
 
 was an encomium worthy of Tone, upon whose mis- 
 fortunes posterity will shed a tear ; and it redounds 
 not more to his credit than to that of his friends, that, 
 however materially they differed on points of the last 
 importance, they never forgot what was due to consis- 
 tency and principle, under circumstances, too, of pecu- 
 liar difficulty. 
 
 This testimony is very important, so far as it 
 explains the nature of Burrowes's intimacy with 
 Tone, which exposed him for a long time to the re- 
 sentment of Lord Clare, who, in consequence, passed 
 him over in all his promotions. Lord Chief Baron 
 O'Grady took much pains to inflame the prejudices of 
 the Chancellor, and even went the length of asserting 
 that Burrowes, at Tone's instance, had not only ap- 
 proved but corrected and revised the " Declaration" of 
 the first society of United Irishmen in Belfast. Tone, 
 however, entirely exculpated Burrowes, in a letter 
 addressed by him to the editor of Faulkner's Journal, 
 on the 17th of July, 1793, from which the following 
 is an extract: 
 
 " When I was told, some time ago, that some letter 
 of mine had arrived at the unexpected honour of being 
 made a subject of inquiry, and that the original was 
 
 It was disclosed on Jackson's trial that he had consented to act as 
 an emissary to France. Mr. Burrowes engaged the intercession of 
 his friend Marcus Beresford with Lord Clare, and the prosecution 
 was suspended to afford him time to complete the necessary arrange- 
 ments to leave the country. Burrowes corresponded with him 
 while in exile, though never upon political subjects. 
 
MEMOIR. 33 
 
 said to be in the custody of the illustrious personage 
 whose name you have taken upon yourself to prefix to 
 the paper which you are pleased to call his speech, I 
 became somewhat curious to know what that letter 
 could be, and having learned that, I prosecuted my 
 inquiries somewhat further. I do recollect very well 
 my writing a letter early in 1791 to a particular friend 
 of mine, which letter enclosed the " Declaration" of the 
 first Society of United Irishmen in Belfast, of which I 
 admit myself to be the author, and let what can be 
 said of it. But through what channel it may have 
 passed to the hands of the illustrious character, in 
 whose custody I am told it now is, I cannot answer ; 
 nor for what mutilations or interpolations it may have 
 suffered on its way. I could wish, for my own justifi- 
 cation, I had the letter ; for when I wrote it I thought 
 it of so little importance that I kept no copy, nor even 
 made a memorandum of the date ; I am therefore 
 obliged to take it on the dubious authority of the au- 
 thor of the speech ; and, admitting that, I see nothing 
 in its principles which I am disposed to retract ; but 
 I would venture to assert, upon memory (for, as I said 
 already, I have no copy), that in the first paragraph 
 quoted; there is an error in expression ; it is printed 
 thus : ' We have not inserted it in our resolutions, and 
 we have not said a word which looked like separa- 
 tion, although, in the opinion of our friends, such an 
 event would be the regeneration of Ireland.' This is 
 evidently meant to convey something of the idea of a 
 combination or conspiracy. The Declaration, and the 
 
 D 
 
34 MEMOIR. 
 
 letter, as I wrote them, were solely my own act. When I 
 had sketched the Declaration, I showed it to some gen- 
 tlemen whose names I mentioned in the letter, and it 
 met with their approbation ; their names the author of 
 the speech has not ventured to insert, because he was 
 cunning enough to see that, if they were made public, 
 it would blow up his innuendo of a conspiracy into 
 the air. He calls them, therefore, my associates ; some 
 physicians, a barrister,* &c. So far as writing the 
 Declaration of the first society of United Irishmen in 
 Belfast, the first, indeed, in the kingdom, and being a 
 very early member of that of Dublin, I plead guilty, 
 and I remain, in every syllable I have there written, 
 precisely of the opinion I was when I wrote it." 
 
 Mr. Burrowes at first felt indisposed to notice what he 
 considered to be the exercise of the personal dislike 
 of the Chief Baron but, urged by his friend Marcus 
 Beresford, whose family preserved their esteem for 
 him to the latest moment, he was induced to address 
 the following letter to the Chancellor on the subject: 
 
 " My Loud, — My friend, Marcus Beresford, has intimated 
 to me that you entertain such an opinion of my political 
 principles, that if it were referred to you by Government to 
 decide whether I should be appointed King's Counsel, you 
 would feel yourself bound in duty to refuse your assent, and 
 
 * Mr. Burrowes, in his address to Lord Clare, admitted that he 
 was the barrister here alluded to by Tone; but denied that he had 
 approved of the Declaration, or had ever seen it before its publica- 
 cation ; and repelled the insinuation in the strongest manner. He 
 always believed Tone to have been mistaken. 
 
MEMOIR. 35 
 
 he has been so kind as to communicate to me the ground upon 
 which you have formed such an opinion ; your Lordship 
 will not, therefore, wonder that I am extremely solicitous to 
 remove an impression which gives me the deepest concern, 
 and will, no doubt, excuse this explanation, so necessary to my 
 ease of mind, as well as to my character and pursuits in life. 
 The first thing which I feel I oughttoexplain is, why I postponed 
 this explanation until my apparent interest seemed to require 
 it, and the more so, as I acknowledge that I am the person to 
 whom Tone alluded in his letter to Belfast, and that I have 
 known, for a long time, that you were apprized that it was to 
 me he alluded. 1 was upon Circuit when public mention was 
 first made of that letter. I believe Pollock, whose name was 
 also mentioned in that letter, was the first person who commu- 
 nicated to me the transaction, informing me also that he waited 
 upon your Lordship, and fully satisfied you as to himself, and 
 at the same time assured you, from his own knowledge (as 
 with truth he might) that an approbation of the declaration 
 contained in Tone's letter was misimputcd by Tone to me as 
 well as to himself. I incline to think I was apparently, though 
 not intentionally, deficient in respect to your Lordship, not to 
 have then, in person, endeavoured to counteract the impression 
 which might be raised against me. I was actuated by these 
 considerations. The principles hinted at, and indeed, almost 
 avowed in Tone's letter, which covered the Declaration, were 
 so pernicious and so hostile to the prosperity and tranquillity 
 of these kingdom?, that no reflecting man could openly acknow- 
 ledge, and continue to live in Ireland ; an imputation, there- 
 fore, of that kind could be more effectually and delicately ob- 
 viated, by the testimony of others, than by any declaration of 
 the person suspected. Besides, whether a man, who has arrived 
 at my time of life, and been very extensively acquainted, be 
 disaffected to the constitution under which he lives, and is de- 
 sirous of breaking the connexion of Ireland with Great Britain, 
 
 1)2 
 
36 MEMOIR. 
 
 is a question which such a man as your Lordship would rather 
 decide by his general deportment, by the society in which he 
 generally lives, by the estimation in which he is held by men 
 of unquestionably good principles and discernment, who have 
 had full and frequent opportunities of knowing him by the 
 soundness of his moral principles and conduct in other respects, 
 than by any single transaction, even though, in itself, it fur- 
 nished a reasonable ground of suspicion. I communicated 
 such reflections long since to my friend M arcus Beresford, who 
 promised me that he would converse fully with your Lordship 
 on the subject; and I fear I misconceived him in supposing 
 you were satisfied. I know that he could have informed you 
 of the following circumstances, for the most part, from his own 
 personal knowledge; which, I submit to your Lordship, is 
 almost conclusive proof that, if Tone meant to intimate by his 
 letter that my politics were the same as his, he misrepresented 
 me grossly. I never was a member of the United Irishmen 
 either in Belfast or in Dublin. I am not, to my recollection, 
 personally acquainted with any individual resident in Belfast. 
 I never was in the town of Belfast. I publicly and frequently 
 reprobated the whole proceedings of the United Irishmen in 
 Dublin, from their first institution. I exerted myself frequently 
 and warmly to persuade persons whose connexions with that 
 society I always lamented, to withdraw from it. I have not 
 been resorted to in a single instance, professionally, by any 
 person indicted for any libel or any seditious practice, or any 
 of those crimes which it might be supposed would be zealously 
 defendedby a man of bad principles; indeed, Ihave so little inter- 
 fered in politics of any kind since I was called to the Bar, that 
 I believe I never received one brief from my known adherence 
 to any party or to any principles, although it was easily within 
 my power to obtain a high degree of popularity with a very 
 numerous party in this country, and to have converted that 
 popularity into emolument, a traffic which I scorned when I 
 
MEMOIR. 37 
 
 stood most in need of it. I hope these minutiae, which appear 
 to me not to be irrelevant, will not appear tiresome to your 
 Lordship. 1 now proceed to state fully and truly everything 
 I can bring to my recollection touching the Declaration and 
 letter written by Tone. I never wrote or suggested a single 
 word or idea contained in either of them. I have no recollec- 
 tion that I ever saw the Declaration until after it was adopted 
 in Belfast, and was publicly circulated in print. I perfectly 
 recollect, immediately or shortly after its publication, having 
 convei-sed upon it with Tone, and decidedly condemned some 
 of the leading sentiments contained in it. I am certain that I 
 never read or heard of the letter, covering the Declaration, until 
 it was read, I believe by your Lordship, in the House of 
 Lords ; and that I never would have suffered Tone to have 
 made mention of my name in a letter containing sentiments so 
 repugnant to my principles and feelings. I must, however, 
 injustice to Tone, state, that when I heard of the transaction 
 I remonstrated with him for having made so unjustifiable a 
 use of my name ; he answered, that he had read the Declara- 
 tion to me before he sent it to Belfast, and that he thought he 
 was warranted, by my reception of it, to state that I approved 
 of it. He disavowed in the strongest manner having had any 
 intention of insinuating that I concurred with him in any of 
 the sentiments contained in his letter, which he said he had 
 stated as his own exclusively. Such is my opinion of Tone's 
 veracity that I believe, though I have no recollection of the 
 fact, that I did see the Declaration, or hear it read, before 
 it was transmitted by him ; but I am equally satisfied that I 
 never read it as a paper in which I had any concern, or which 
 was in any way to depend for its adoption or circulation upon 
 my approbation or disapprobation : 1 would not otherwise have 
 so totally forgotten it. I shall only add, on this subject, that 
 there is not in His Majesty's dominions a man whose feelings 
 would more recoil from those disastrous consequences which 
 
38 MEMOIR. 
 
 must follow any attempt to separate tliese kingdoms; conse- 
 quences of which T am so sensible, and to which \ am so much 
 alive, that I must be a monster if I should knowingly promote 
 them. I fear I shall swell this letter to a most unreasonable 
 length by stating to your Lordship why I was desirous of ob- 
 taining a silk gown. I cannot, however, close the subject 
 without removing the possibility of your Lordship's imputing 
 it to vanity or some vain or frivolous motive. I have gone 
 Circuit ten years; my principal professional emolument is de- 
 rived from Circuit, and its consequences in town. Since I went 
 Circuit, but one barrister in business has left it; almost every 
 man who is employed in a single record is my senior by stand- 
 ing, or put above me by a silk gown. Barrington and Smyth, 
 almost the only persons junior to me who had business, have 
 obtained silk gowns. I thought my business rendered preca- 
 rious, and consulted my friends, and, amongst others, some of 
 the Judges ; they all concurred in my opinion that a silk gown 
 would serve me. Judge Downes, in particular, urged me, by 
 all possible means, to endeavour to obtain it; his perfect know- 
 ledge of my situation, and of the Circuit which I go, rendered 
 his opinion decisive. He was so kind as to add, that if lie were 
 referred to by your Lordship upon the subject, he would, in 
 the strongest manner, express his opinion of my fitness for the 
 situation. 
 
 " I entreat your Lordship's excuse for this tedious letter, 
 with which nothing but the extreme anxiety I feel to vindi- 
 cate myself from a very heavy imputation would have induced 
 me to trouble your Lordship. 
 
 " I am, &c, &c, &c, 
 
 " Peter Burrowes." 
 
 Two Terms having elapsed, and this letter not 
 having been noticed, feeling, as he conceived not un- 
 reasonably, jealous at the total silence observed by the 
 
MEMOIR. 39 
 
 Chancellor on a subject upon which it was natural he 
 should manifest so much anxiety, and upon which he 
 had tendered an explanation, if not satisfactory, at all 
 events respectful ; — thinking it, however, just possible 
 his letter might not have been delivered or received, 
 and wishing to know whether, notwithstanding that 
 explanation, the Chancellor's opinion of him was un- 
 alterably fixed, he wrote to his friend Marcus Beres- 
 ford for information on the point, requesting him, in 
 case his anticipations were well founded, to acquaint 
 Lord Clare that he had pursued the object more from 
 the urgent advice of his friends, than from any wish of 
 his own ; that he now abandoned it with no other re- 
 gret than that it had subjected him to something like 
 contemptuous treatment from a person towards whom 
 he always comported himself with the utmost defe- 
 rence, and to whom the explanation he made was, at the 
 worst, respectful ; however, that he requested him to 
 believe his most solemn assurance that there was not 
 in the State a situation which would induce him again 
 to incur the hazard of a similar mortification to obtain 
 it. Some short time afterwards he received a communi- 
 cation from his friend Marcus Beresford, intimating 
 that the Chancellor did not continue to harbour an un- 
 favourable impression towards him. His well-merited 
 promotion, however, did not accompany this intimation, 
 which circumstance Mr. Burrowes attributed to the ex- 
 ercise of the same unfriendly influence. lie therefore de- 
 cided upon relinquishing the pursuit. Events, however, 
 soon occurred which induced him to avail himself of 
 
40 MEMOIR. 
 
 the intimate personal friendship of the Beresford family, 
 and he addressed the following letter to His Grace the 
 Archbishop of Tuam : 
 
 " My dear Lord, — If the dislike which I know you feel 
 to interfering with concerns not properly within your pro- 
 vince should in any degree extend to this case, I hope you will 
 believe me to be sincere when I request that you will burn 
 this letter, and take no trouble about its contents. Some time 
 since I was pressed by some of my friends to seek a silk gown ; 
 an application for that purpose to Government was intended to 
 be made ; but before I troubled my friends I deemed it pru- 
 dent to learn whether I should have the Chancellor's approba- 
 tion. Mark Beresford applied to the Chancellor, and con- 
 veyed an answer to me, by which I learned that the Chancellor 
 objected upon the ground of a transaction which I thought I 
 could fully explain, and by the candid communication of which 
 I felt myself obliged. Accordingly I wrote to the Chancellor 
 a letter containing everything which I could urge upon the 
 subject; and after a considerable interval Mark Beresford in- 
 formed me that the Chancellor did not continue to harbour the 
 unfavourable impression which the transaction, when unex- 
 plained, had created in his mind. As he did not, however, 
 intimate, or I did not understand him to have intimated, that 
 the Chancellor had then no objection to my appointment, I 
 relinquished the object. While things were in this state, some 
 time before the commencement of last Term, Richard Griffith, 
 of Millicent (who was one of those who urged me to the pur- 
 suit, and who had himself undertaken to procure a strong re- 
 commendation to Government in my favour, and who was 
 acquainted with everything that passed) surprised me by in- 
 forming me that he had, in the course of a conversation upon 
 other matters, mentioned the subject to the Chancellor; and 
 my friend Griffith appeared highly gratified in assuring me 
 
MEMOIR. 41 
 
 that he learned from the Chancellor himself that he had no 
 objection of any kind to my appointment, and that he would 
 approve of it if applied to. Although I never authorized 
 Griffith to trouble the Chancellor on the subject, I deemed 
 it prudent to avail myself of the result, particularly as if it 
 transpired that I sought it unsuccessfully, the failure might be 
 falsely attributed to causes highly injurious to mc in my pro- 
 fession. Accordingly my friend George Knox applied to Mr. 
 Pclham, who very properly answered that, if my bar estimation 
 warranted it, he would comply; and I understand Mr. Pelham 
 intimated that he would be principally, if not solely, governed 
 by the Chancellor and Attorney-General. Very shortly after- 
 wards Mr. Pelham conversed on the subject with the Attorney- 
 General, who, I have reason to believe, spoke very favour- 
 ably of me. Mr. Pelham then informed Knox that he waited 
 to consult the Chancellor. All this passed during last Term. 
 The affairs which have since occupied Government were so 
 important that I am not surprised that further application on 
 my behalf was forgotten. At sucli a time I would not suffer 
 it to be mentioned, I do not feel it to be now indelicate to 
 resume the subject, particularly as it is of some consequence to 
 me to have it settled before Circuit. What I wish your Grace 
 to do is, to learn from the Chancellor whether he has approved, 
 or, when applied to, will approve of my appointment. My 
 friend Griffith is very sanguine, and may have mistaken him. 
 Possibly the Chief Baron may have been consulted; if so, I 
 much fear his opposition, because I well know some of his 
 select friends at the Bar hate me, particularly Egan, because 
 being employed against him upon his petition, my zeal for my 
 client, exerted certainly in an honest cause, very nearly blasted 
 all his prospects of ambition. If I were ascertained as to the 
 Chancellor, I would the better know how to proceed in respect 
 of other impediments, if any such there be. I shall not apolo- 
 gize for this trouble, because I am well assured that you are 
 
42 MEMOIK. 
 
 disposed to oblige me, and that you will give full credit to tlie 
 first sentence of my letter. 
 
 " I am, my dear Lord, your faithful friend, 
 
 " Peter Burrowes." 
 
 There can be no question that the refusal of his 
 rank of King's Counsel was extremely prejudicial to 
 Mr. Burrowes. It enabled inferior men to keep above 
 him, and, though pressing more directly upon him, it 
 operated most injuriously on some of his seniors, who 
 were not so well qualified to take a lead. This unjust 
 treatment arose from circumstances honourable in 
 the highest degree to Mr. Burrowes ; discreditable in 
 an equal proportion to those who occasioned it. He 
 happened to be a steady and unflinching Whig. His 
 opinions were early formed, and so undeviatingly 
 maintained as unquestionably to have had the most in- 
 jurious effects upon his professional fortunes. Nor can 
 there be a doubt that but for those opinions he must 
 have risen to the office of Attorney-General. Instead 
 of obtaining the chance of such promotion, he was pre- 
 vented from even having the fair prospect of elevation 
 to rank, — almost a matter of course, and all but a thing 
 of strict right, — because his political adversaries were 
 determined to keep down a very capable man, to pro- 
 tect less capable favourites. The blame of this oppres- 
 sion belonged in an especial manner to Chief Baron 
 O'Grady. Lord Clare was culpable, though in a less 
 degree. His Lordship's personal objections were now, 
 however, removed. He no longer withheld the silk 
 gown, and Mr. Burrowes was called to the inner Bar. 
 
43 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 We now approach a period in the life of Mr. Burrowes, 
 when, to the character of the eloquent and successful 
 advocate of private rights, he added that of the inflexi- 
 ble defender of national liberty. Before, however, we 
 follow him from the forum to the senate, it may not be 
 inappropriate to glance shortly at the political condi- 
 tion of Ireland at the close of the last century. 
 
 The Irish Revolution, ranging from 1779 to 1782, 
 is admitted by most readers of history to have been in 
 some respects incomplete. It was a splendid victory 
 as far as it went. Before that period the most strenu- 
 ous efforts of many members of the Irish Parliament 
 had been directed to the removal of the commercial 
 and legislative supremacy of England. Ministerial ma- 
 jorities, however, uniformly succeeded in defeating 
 these patriotic efforts. This course at length roused 
 the spirit of the people at large. The Press spoke out; 
 the Corporations, Grand Juries, Volunteers, and first 
 amongst these the Volunteer Convention at Dungan- 
 non, acting in concert with the patriotic party in 
 Parliament, demanded the rights of the Irish nation. 
 America was then slipping from the grasp of England. 
 It was not well to foment discontent nearer home. The 
 
44 MEMOIR. 
 
 Minister yielded. Commercial restrictions were re- 
 moved from Ireland, and her legislative independence 
 acknowledged. Thus far all was well. Two ques- 
 tions, however, remained unsettled, — Parliamentary 
 Reform and Catholic Emancipation. The former was 
 necessary for security against ministerial corruption, 
 and as the means of retaining the important advan- 
 tages which had been gained ; and the latter was re- 
 quired in order to give the Irish Parliament a stronger 
 claim to the affection and confidence of the majority of 
 the people. The efforts of the Opposition to carry 
 Reform were foiled by Ministers; and Emancipation 
 unfortunately had to contend not only with Govern- 
 ment, but with the prejudices of some of the popular 
 Members of Parliament. The Earl of Charlemont and 
 many other Volunteers were opposed to the concession 
 of the Catholic claims. Absurdly they desired to pos- 
 sess full freedom surrounded by slaves. Time passed 
 on. The Volunteers ceased to be formidable ; and 
 William Pitt began to look around him for means to 
 restore to England what she had lost in 1782. Large 
 majorities subserviently obeyed his commands; places 
 were created, peerages conferred, resumable offices 
 granted, the pension list increased, and no effort left 
 untried to regain England's legislative supremacy. Mr. 
 Fitzgibbon hesitated not to threaten the Parliament. 
 This threat, and its consequences, Grattan thus elo- 
 quently records: " 'Half a million or more was ex- 
 pended some years back to break an opposition; the 
 same or a greater sum may be necessary now.' So said 
 
MEMOIR. 45 
 
 the principal servant of the Crown. The house heard 
 him; I heard him. He said it, standing on his legs, to 
 an astonished and indignant nation, and he said it in 
 the most extensive sense of bribery and corruption. 
 The threat was proceeded on ; the peerage was sold ; 
 the caitiffs of corruption were everywhere, — in the 
 lobby, in the street, and at the door of every parlia- 
 mentary leader, whose thresholds were worn by the 
 members of the Administration offering titles to some, 
 amnesty to others, and corruption to all." 
 
 From 1700 the dissatisfaction of Ireland with the 
 prospects of the future began to grow apace. Eacli 
 session produced an accumulation of fresh abuses, till 
 at length the popular murmurs swelled into energetic 
 discontent; and a conviction seized the public mind 
 that the Castle fomented a conspiracy against Irish 
 freedom. The ministerial faction sought the restora- 
 tion of repose in measures of terror. With malignant 
 ingenuity they reasoned that the propensities to turbu- 
 lence are always concealed under the assumption of 
 complaints, which serve as a pretext for exercising a 
 passion for commotion, and that all the severity of le- 
 gislation should be employed to crush this growing 
 spirit. Widely different were the sentiments of the 
 Opposition. Ireland (they reasoned) gains nothing 
 by disorder. She complains of the corruption of the 
 Legislature, and she implores you to reform it. Grattan 
 foresaw the necessity of a change in the representative 
 system, and in 1793 warned the Castle of its short- 
 sighted policy. He thus described the state of the 
 
46 MEMOIR. 
 
 representation at that period : " Of 300 members, 
 above 200 are returned by individuals ; from 40 to 50 
 are returned by ten persons. Several of your boroughs 
 have no resident elector at all ; some of them have 
 but one ; and, on the whole, two- thirds of the repre- 
 sentatives in this house are returned by less than 100 
 persons." 
 
 Such was the condition of the representation in 
 1793. Yet at that period the friends of the Constitu- 
 tion were sanguine in their expectations of parliamen- 
 tary reform. The Duke of Leinster presided at a 
 meeting at the King's Arms Tavern, Fownes's-street, 
 where an address was prepared, congratulating the 
 people upon the auspicious appearance of all'airs, and 
 announcing that the King had recognised their claims, 
 and had anticipated their demand for reform. Ac- 
 cordingly Mr. Corry professed himself friendly to the 
 measure, and moved Parliament to resolve itself into a 
 committee of the whole house to take the subject into 
 consideration. But this sincerity was only apparent. 
 Mr. Pitt, through his agents at the Castle, urged the 
 most unbending opposition to the proposed changes by 
 resolutions of Corporations and Grand Juries. The 
 Minister stooped to play a double part. In some quar- 
 ters he encouraged a temporary and fallacious gleam 
 of hope, destined to result in disappointment. He had 
 one thing to whisper to the advocates of corruption, 
 and another to the friends of the people. The same 
 duplicity was practised with reference to Catholic Eman- 
 cipation. At one time the ascendancy party obtained 
 
MEMOIR. 47 
 
 support ; at another the members of the Catholic Con- 
 vention. The Protestant and the Catholic alternately 
 received the ministerial smile. The natural effect of 
 this deception ensued. The rival parties were irritated 
 against each other more than before, and national dis- 
 cord was excited by the servants of the Crown. It 
 was this policy which led to the convulsion, by means 
 of which the Minister acquired increased facilities for 
 effecting the great object of his wishes, the Union. 
 Pitt was taunted in the English house with the pro- 
 fligacy of his political conduct by Sheridan, who, 
 though not generally a far-seeing man, perceived 
 its Machiavellian tendency. Grattan, in Ireland, thus 
 commented on the course pursued by Government : 
 " Our situation is alarming, but not surprising. You, 
 who opposed our liberty in '82, became our Ministers. 
 You attempted to put down the Constitution, and now 
 you have put down the Government. We told you 
 so; we admonished you; we told you that your driv- 
 ing system would not do. Do you not remember how, 
 in 1790, we warned you? You said we were severe. 
 I am sure we were prophetic. In 1791 we repeated 
 our admonition ; told you that a Government of clerks 
 would not do ; that a Government of the Treasury 
 would not do ; that a nation who, in '82, rescued her 
 liberties from the giant grasp of England, would not 
 bear to be trodden under foot by the violence of a few 
 pigmies, whom the caprice of a court had appointed 
 Ministers." 
 
 Sheridan, when inculcating, in the English House 
 
4S MEMOIR. 
 
 of Commons, the necessity of a reform in the repre- 
 sentative svstem of these countries, introduced, in his 
 own peculiar style, the following extraordinary illus- 
 tration of the strange constitution of the Irish House 
 of Commons at that time: "I do not much relish 
 anecdotes on serious subjects, but there is one which 
 is very true and apposite. By a courtesy of the House 
 of Commons in England, members of the Irish Parlia- 
 ment are admitted to hear the debates. A friend of 
 mine, then a member, wishing to avail himself of the 
 privilege, desired admittance ; the door-keeper re- 
 quested to know what place he represented. ' What 
 place? — why I am an Irish Member.' * Oh, dear Sir, we 
 are obliged to be extremely cautious, for a few days ago 
 Barrington the pickpocket passed in as an Irish Mem- 
 ber?" 'Why, then, upon my soul I forget the borough 
 I represent, but if you get me Watson's Almanac I 
 will show you.'" 
 
 But these warnings were lost on men who preferred 
 coercion to concession ; and the country sank into a 
 sullen despair of ever seeing wrong redressed, or right 
 established, except by an appeal to arms. The Minis- 
 ter's plans soon began to be fully developed. Not con- 
 tent with having secretly fomented the rebellion, he 
 suffered it to reach a fearful maturity unchecked ; and 
 when it was extinguished in blood, he thought that the 
 proper time had at length arrived for announcing the 
 project of the Union. 
 
 The proposition of a Union was by no means un- 
 foreseen, though a popular notion of its improbability 
 
MEMOIR. 49 
 
 prevailed at the period of which we write. Pitt had 
 long contemplated the measure. No other intelligible 
 meaning can be extracted from certain passages in the 
 published correspondence between Lord Fitzwilliam 
 and Lord Carlisle. The letters also of Lord Castlereagh, 
 which have lately been given to the world, abound in 
 similar evidence. Lord Fitzwilliam assumed the go- 
 vernment of Ireland under the administration of the 
 Duke of Portland, and acted agreeably to the original 
 outline settled with the King's Ministers before his 
 Lordship's departure from London. The Viceroy and 
 the Premier concurred in the opinion that measures 
 for the removal of Roman Catholic disabilities should 
 be brought forward with all reasonable expedition. 
 " I found," says Lord Fitzwilliam, " the Cabinet, with 
 Mr. Pitt at their head, strongly impressed with the 
 same conviction. Had I found it otherwise I never 
 would have undertaken the government of Ireland." 
 Shortly after his Lordship's arrival in Dublin he re- 
 ceived a letter from the Secretary of State, enjoining 
 him to be cautious against committing the government 
 (even by encouraging language) to the adoption of the 
 measure. Lord Fitzwilliam felt bound to remonstrate. 
 " Now, for the first time," he wrote, " it seems to have 
 been discovered, that the postponement of the Catholic 
 Question would be not merely an expedient, or a thing 
 to be desired for the present, but the means of doing 
 a greater service to the British Empire than it has 
 been capable of receiving since the Revolution, or the 
 Union with Scotland." There is another passage of 
 
 E 
 
50 MEMOIR. 
 
 similar import, in a letter from the Duke of Portland, 
 in which his Grace intimates, " if the consideration of 
 the question could be deferred till peace was esta- 
 blished, he should have no doubt but that it would be 
 attended with advantages which, perhaps, are not to 
 be hoped for in any other supposable case." The mea- 
 sure of a Union is here clearly intended. Lord Fitz- 
 william naturally felt irritated at the vacillating policy 
 of which it was attempted to make him the instru- 
 ment, nay, perhaps the victim, and wrote to the Duke 
 of Portland expressing his surprise, referring to his in- 
 structions, dwelling upon the impolicy of departing 
 from them, and after justifying his dismissals (mean- 
 ing the Beresfords), concluded with a determination 
 to persist in the course he had commenced, leaving it 
 to his Grace to choose between him and the Beres- 
 fords. His Lordship was taken at his word, and was 
 soon recalled. The Ministers pursued their flagi- 
 tious course ; their intentions were soon disclosed. 
 The insurrection was excited, and, after a violent 
 struggle, suppressed ; and Lord Castlereagh at length 
 ventured, with a coolness and effrontery that eminently 
 distinguished him, to broach the question of Union 
 openly in the House of Commons. The Irish Members 
 were not altogether lost to patriotism. There still 
 lurked in their bosoms a remnant of the high virtue 
 they displayed in 1782. A select few, unswerving 
 in their principles, resolved to stem the torrent of 
 corruption, and to make one last struggle to retain 
 even the shadow of their nationality. 
 
MEMOIR. 51 
 
 Such was the state of affairs when Mr. Burrowes 
 came forward to assist in opposing the Union. On 
 this subject he exerted his great abilities with all the 
 vigour he possessed. The share which he took in the 
 proceedings of the Bar is well known. A meeting of 
 that body took place on the 9th of December, 1798, 
 at the Exhibition-room, William-street, for the pur- 
 pose of discussing the merits of the projected measure. 
 Mr. Burrowes was one of the fourteen King's Counsel 
 who signed the memorable address on the subject. His 
 speech at this meeting is one of surpassing power. 
 The Opposition became anxious to secure his services 
 in the House of Commons at the approaching struggle, 
 and he was accordingly returned as a Member of the 
 last Irish Parliament. In early life he had displayed 
 the high spirit which distinguished his brief parlia- 
 mentary career, lie was neither dazzled by the glitter 
 which surrounds the " great," nor seduced by the temp- 
 tations held out by the powerful and the wealthy. 
 The Chancellor could not intimidate him, the Minister 
 could not purchase him. Mr. John Beresford (First 
 Commissioner of the Revenue), by whose family he 
 was held in great esteem, on one occasion made him 
 an overture which would have materially altered his 
 future destinies in life. Being aware of Mr. Burrowes's 
 high academic rank, he solicited him to accompany 
 his son on his travels, and intimated that, if he desired 
 a seat in Parliament, it should be at his disposal. One 
 condition, however, was annexed, namely, that his po- 
 litical conduct should coincide with that of his patron, 
 
 e 2 
 
52 MEMOIR. 
 
 and on this subject agreement was impossible, as Mr. 
 Burrowes had uniformly entertained political opinions 
 at variance with his. lie declined the proposed mode 
 of advancing his interests, and preferred the drudgery 
 of the Bar to a political connexion with a powerful 
 family who could have easily obtained for him profes- 
 sional promotion, and by whose influence he might 
 have been rapidly elevated to a seat on the Bench. 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 Mr. Burrowes entered the Irish House of Commons 
 at the close of the year 1799, as Member for the borough 
 of Enniscorthy, with the distinct stipulation of com- 
 plete parliamentary liberty. The proceedings respect- 
 ing the Union were now rapidly progressing towards 
 a close. Every effort was strained by the Opposition 
 to defeat and counteract the measure. The plans pro- 
 posed were various ; many of them originated with 
 Burrowes. Mr. Grattan, in his memoir of his illustri- 
 ous father, presents the following very distinct view of 
 the policy which the opponents of the Union adopted. 
 " Mr. Burrowes suggested a measure that might have 
 proved successful, but he did not press it as much as 
 it should have been. At one of the meetings of the 
 Anti-Union party he proposed that an appeal should 
 be made to the yeomanry ; that they should call on 
 
MEMOIR. 53 
 
 them, by virtue of their oath, in which they had 
 sworn that they would uphold the King, Lords, and 
 Commons of Ireland, and by which, consequently, 
 they were bound to oppose such a measure as the 
 Union. He urged the members of the Opposition to 
 avail themselves of this oath, and circulate their appeal 
 from the Lawyers' Corps to every corps in the king- 
 dom. This would have given the proceeding a legal 
 character and sanction, and have tended to make it 
 more solemn and obligatory, coming with the recom- 
 mendation of a grave and legal body. However, Mr. 
 Saurin, Mr. Foster, and others, were opposed to it, and 
 induced Mr. Burrowes to abandon the measure. He 
 always considered this to have been a fatal decision, 
 and regretted that he had not been allowed to press 
 his resolution, and seemed fully convinced he could 
 have carried it. Government were apprehensive that 
 such a step might be taken, and signified their disap- 
 probation of some corps that had expressed opinions 
 on the subject of the Union. 
 
 " Several years afterwards Mr. Burrowes was in 
 company with Mr. Marsden, who had been Under Se- 
 cretary at the period of the Union, and he mentioned 
 these circumstances to him, and asked his opinion as 
 to the probable result, and what Government would 
 have done if the Opposition had taken any strong mea- 
 sure of that sort. Marsden thought that they would 
 have yielded, and would not have pressed the Union ; 
 that Lord Cornwallis and the Government were afraid 
 lest the people should rise in arms ; thatthey had just 
 
54 MEMOIR. 
 
 put down one insurrection, which had been very near 
 succeeding ; that they dreaded another ; and added 
 that this was Lord Cornwallis's feeling. Very possibly 
 Lord Cornwallis might have yielded ; he was not un- 
 friendly to the Catholics, and was a liberal man, but a 
 soldier, and one of a class not over fond of public liberty, 
 nor accustomed to favour deliberative assemblies, but 
 the more likely, on this very account, to concede to a 
 military summons, such as Mr. Burrowes proposed. 
 
 " It was not possible to oppose the measure of 
 Union with any chance of success without calling in 
 aid all the people. Mr. Burrowes accordingly proposed 
 that the chief Catholics should meet the leaders of the 
 parliamentary Opposition, and that both should act in 
 concert. He applied to the principal men, Messrs. 
 Sweetman, Byrne, Teeling, and others. They warmly 
 interested themselves in the project; willingly joined 
 it, as they were all violently opposed to the Union, and 
 would have acted with energy if the Opposition had 
 assented ; butFoster and others refused to join them, and 
 the negociation broke off. Mr. Foster subsequently saw 
 his error ; and in a conversation with Mr. Plunkett 
 observed, that, if ' the crisis demanded it, he would 
 even go the length of calling in the aid of the Catho- 
 lics.' But his penitence came too late ; his intolerance 
 lost the warm heart, and the bold, active co-operation 
 of the Catholic party ; and to a conceited and inte- 
 rested religious theory he sacrificed the Constitution 
 of his country. One of the plans adopted and acted 
 on by the Opposition was to bring into Parliament 
 
MEMOIR. 55 
 
 Members to vote against the Union ; it amounted, in 
 fact, to a project to out-buy the Minister, which in 
 itself was unwise, injudicious, and almost impractica- 
 ble, and in which they were certain to be overreached 
 by the Government. A second plan was their lite- 
 rary war. This, as far as it went, was good ; but it 
 came too late, and was too feeble a weapon at such a 
 crisis. The third plan was to meet the Castle Club, 
 and fight them with their own weapons. This might 
 have proved the most effective of the three plans, but 
 it was hazardous, and on principle it could scarcely be 
 sanctioned, and was acted on but in one instance (that 
 of Mr. Grattan and Mr. Corry) ; besides, the meeting 
 at Charlemont House rejected it. To carry into effect 
 the first of these measures a subscription was opened. 
 The names set down were numerous, and the sums 
 considerable. In a short time £100,000 was collected ; 
 but the application of this sum was difficult, and the 
 process troublesome and tedious. The next plan, viz., 
 the literary attack, consisted in collecting a number of 
 men to write against the Union. However, this could 
 avail but little ; the time was too short ; public opinion 
 was at too low an ebb, and literature not widely enough 
 circulated. The essays that appeared were undoubt- 
 edly good, and may have produced some result. Of 
 the various styles adopted, satire proved the most effec- 
 tive. The party patronized the Constitution paper, and 
 founded the Anti-Union, in which latter they chieily 
 wrote ; their speeches were published in the former. 
 Mr. Burrowes, Mr. Flunkett, Mr. Buske, Mr. Wallace, 
 
56 MEMOIR- 
 
 Mr. Goold, and Mr. Smily, were the chief contributors 
 to the Anti-Union. Mr. Thomas Wallace had been 
 just called to the Bar, and was an active, talented, 
 rising young man, fond of literature. Mr. Burrowes 
 applied to him, and, without any previous acquaint- 
 ance, proposed that he should join the Society. He 
 did so, and wrote extremely well. Mr. Plunkett was 
 said to be the author of the article called ' Sheela.' 
 Mr. Bushe wrote the one entitled ' The Hacks.' Several 
 were from the pen of Mr. Burrowes ; amongst them, 
 that which considered the probable effects of the Union 
 upon the representation of England; it was entitled 
 i Mortua quinetiam jungebat corpora vivis! It was con- 
 sidered an able and powerful production."* 
 
 The measure, though rejected in 1799, was brought 
 forward again in 1800. On the 22nd May, in that year, 
 the Lords sent a message to the Commons, stating that 
 they had agreed to the articles of Union, and request- 
 ing their concurrence. A debate ensued, and Minis- 
 ters succeeded, the numbers being 67 to 37. On 
 the next day Lord Castlereagh moved that the House 
 should depute certain of its members to wait on the 
 Lord Lieutenant with the address in favour of the 
 Union. A division took place, and Ministers again 
 succeeded, the numbers being 117 to 73. His Lord- 
 ship had determined on a course which he was in- 
 duced to believe likely to terminate the debate, in his 
 favour. He had resolved to act on the offensive, and, 
 
 * Memoirs of Grattan by his Son, vol. iv. p. 66, &c, 
 
MEMOIR. 57 
 
 by an extravagant invective against the principles of 
 the Anti-Unionists, to detach some Members from their 
 party, to silence patriotic eloquence, and to excite 
 contempt for that public reputation from which the 
 opponents of the Union derived so much strength and 
 importance. He, therefore, decided on the encourage- 
 ment of a simultaneous attack upon the principles and 
 conduct of the leaders of the Opposition. For this 
 species of conflict it seems his Lordship was admirably 
 adapted. He had sufficient pertinacity to persist in 
 any assertion. To the Bar he applied the term " pet- 
 tifoggers ;" to the country gentlemen in opposition, 
 "combinators" and " desperate faction ;" and this ex- 
 traordinary debate was continued with unexampled 
 asperity. Lord Castlereagh flew at the highest game. 
 In pursuance of this course he took an opportunity, in 
 the absence of Mr. G rattan, to asperse his motives. 
 The House looked round for a defender of Grattan's 
 name. Many were the tongues which burned to rescue 
 the character of that sterling patriot from the petulant 
 invective of his unmanly assailant. Mr. Burrowes was 
 his most intimate friend. He had himself been alluded 
 to by Lord Castlereagh in the course of his observa- 
 tions, and the Opposition singled him out for a reply. 
 He felt that he was discharging a portion of the debt 
 which he owed Ireland, when he rose for the purpose 
 of vindicating the character and fame of the most gifted 
 and persevering of her patriots. Never was success 
 more perfect. After refuting Lord Castlereagh's argu- 
 ments in a manner equally convincing and forcible, he 
 
58 MEMOIR. 
 
 referred to Mr. Grattan, on whom he pronounced the 
 following beautiful panegyric ; it may safely stand a 
 comparison with Burke's noble portraiture of Chatham : 
 " I feel but little any portion of the noble Lord's ob- 
 loquy which may attach to me, or my humble efforts ; 
 but I own I cannot repress my indignation at the au- 
 dacious boldness of the calumny which would asperse 
 one of the most exalted characters which any nation 
 ever produced, and that in a country which owes its 
 liberties and its greatness to the energy of his exer- 
 tions, and in the very house which has so often been 
 the theatre of his glorious labours and splendid achieve- 
 ments. I remember that man the theme of universal 
 panegyric, the wonder and the boast of Ireland, for 
 his genius and his virtue. His name silenced the scep- 
 tic upon the reality of genuine patriotism. To doubt 
 the purity of his motives was a heresy which no tongue 
 dared to utter ; envy was lost in admiration ; and even 
 they, whose crimes he scourged, blended extorted 
 praises with the murmurs of resentment. He covered 
 our then unfledged Constitution with the ample wings 
 of his talents, as the eagle covers her young ; like her 
 he soared, and like her he could behold the rays, whe- 
 ther of royal favour or of royal anger, with undazzled, 
 unintimidated eye. If, according to Demosthenes, to 
 grow with the growth, and to decay with the decline 
 of our country, be the true criterion of a good citizen, 
 how infinitely did this man, even in the moment of his 
 lowest depression, surpass those upstart patriots, who 
 only become visible when their country vanishes." 
 
MEMOIR. 59 
 
 " Sir, there is something most singularly curious, 
 and, according to my estimation of things, enviable, in 
 the fate of this great man ; his character and his con- 
 sequence are, as it were, vitally interwoven with the 
 greatness of his country ; the one cannot be high and 
 the other low ; the one cannot stand and the other 
 perish. This was so well understood by those who 
 have so long meditated to put down the Constitution 
 of Ireland, that, feeling that they could not seduce, 
 they have incessantly laboured to calumniate her most 
 vigilant sentinel and ablest champion ; they appealed to 
 every unguarded prejudice, to every assailable weak- 
 ness, of a generous but credulous people ; they watched 
 every favourable moment of irritation or of terror to 
 pour in the detested poison of calumny. Sir, it will be 
 found, on a retrospect of Ireland since 1782, that her 
 liberties never received a wound that a corresponding 
 stab was not levelled at his character ; and when it 
 was vainly hoped that his imperishable fame was laid 
 in the dust, the times were deemed ripe for the extinc- 
 tion of our Constitution. Sir, these impious labours 
 cannot finally succeed ; glory and liberty are not easily 
 effaced. Grattan and the Constitution will survive the 
 storm." 
 
 The eloquence of Burrowes was not on this oc- 
 casion prophetic. Grattan indeed survived, but the 
 days of the Constitution were numbered. 
 
 Scarcely had Mr. Burrowes concluded his beautiful 
 vindication of his august friend, when the following 
 most affecting incident occurred, which, though liisto- 
 
60 MEMOIR. 
 
 rically true, seems almost to savour of the unreality of 
 romance. We quote the graphic and racy description 
 of the scene, as it is given by the talented writer of the 
 " Note-Book" : " Shouts were heard outside the house. 
 The Members listened attentively. The acclamations 
 increased, and at length the long corridors on both 
 sides of the entrance, which were densely thronged, 
 rang with a storm of wild applause. A messenger was 
 despatched to learn the cause of the tumult. At length 
 the door opened, and Grattan entered, leaning on the 
 arms of his friends, Ponsonby and Moore. The Oppo- 
 sition burst into rapturous cheers at the re-appearance 
 of their illustrious leader. Nothing could equal the 
 glow of enthusiasm which filled the liberal ranks, 
 while a dead silence pervaded the ministerial benches. 
 Grattan's appearance was unexpected. The writ only 
 issued on the night Lord Castlereagh's motion for 
 a third reading of the Union Bill took place ; and not- 
 withstanding every impediment which the malicious 
 cunning of the Castle could devise to retard the elec- 
 tion, Grattan was returned in sufficient time to record 
 his last vote. The Secretary, with all his failings, was 
 not completely destitute of generosity ; he could not 
 refrain from paying some tribute of respect to the 
 veteran champion of liberty, lie rose with all his sup- 
 porters, and bowed as Grattan moved to his old accus- 
 tomed seat in front of the Minister. Grattan was not 
 what he had been. His penetrating eye had lost its 
 brilliancy ; his emaciated cheeks and drooping frame 
 but too plainly indicated the bitter agony he felt at the 
 
MEMOIR. 61 
 
 dismal posture of affairs. The heavy hand of sickness 
 was on him, and his energies seemed to have departed 
 with the decaying fortunes of his country. His friends 
 sighed even in their exultation. They remembered 
 his indignant exclamation of old : ' From injuries to 
 arms ; from arms to liberty. Liberty with England, 
 if she will it ; but at all events liberty.' The picture 
 was now reversed. He came to witness the funeral of 
 that freedom to which his own independent spirit had 
 given birth. He was now there in all the majesty of 
 history, withered and broken-hearted, to make a last 
 effort for the resuscitation of the freedom of his country." 
 Grattan had retired with some of his friends from 
 Parliament, in 1797, when Mr. Brabazon Ponsonby's 
 motion for reform was lost. He withdrew from a 
 scene where he considered he could effect no good. 
 He and his party counselled peace and conciliation, 
 and they were met with taunts of rebellion and re- 
 volution. These were the last words Grattan uttered 
 before taking the unwise course of abandoning Par- 
 liament: 
 
 " Your system is perilous. I speak without aspe- 
 rity, — I speak without resentment. I speak my appre- 
 hensions for the immediate state of our liberty, and for 
 the ultimate state of the empire. I see in this system 
 everything dangerous to both. I hope I am mistaken, — 
 at least I hope I exaggerate ; if so I shall acknowledge 
 my error with more satisfaction than usually accom- 
 panies the acknowledgment of error. I cannot banish 
 from my memory the lesson of the American war ; if 
 
62 MEMOIR. 
 
 that lesson has no effect on Ministers I can suggest 
 nothing that will. We have offered yon our measure, — 
 you will reject it ; we deprecate your's, — you will per- 
 severe : having no hopes left to persuade or dissuade, 
 and having discharged our duty, we shall trouble you 
 no more, and, after this day, shall never more attend the 
 House of Commons" 
 
 Burrowes advised Grattan against this resolution. 
 Tie pointed out to him the fearful consequences likely 
 to result from his absence, and that of his party, 
 from the House ; their presence would prove a check, 
 while their absence would leave the country a prey 
 to its enemies. But Grattan's determination was 
 unalterable, and he retired. Burrowes, when the 
 Union was mooted, exerted all his iniluence to with- 
 draw Grattan from a solitude that consumed him. His 
 advice was, on this occasion, taken ; and though Grat- 
 tan was oppressed with physical and mental sufferings, 
 he consented to be put into nomination for Wicklow, 
 when next a vacancy occurred, and was returned with- 
 out opposition. When Grattan entered the House, 
 as we have described above, the discussion somewhat 
 abated out of respect to him. It was soon, however, 
 renewed with redoubled energy, and Grattan pre- 
 pared to speak. Too feeble to rise, he addressed the 
 House from his seat. All expected a display rather of 
 weakness than of strength ; the result surprised the 
 House. He began in a cold and faltering voice, ut- 
 tering half sentences, and ungracefully pausing to com- 
 plete the remainder. As he proceeded he threw off 
 
MEMOIR. 63 
 
 some sparks of his former grandeur, and at length was 
 whirled away in one of those electric bursts that often 
 phrenzied the House. Burro wes vented his ardour 
 in a wild cheer. The Liberal benches rang again 
 and again. Even the ministerial party was somewhat 
 affected upon the delivery of one of the noblest pieces 
 of oratory Grattan ever pronounced. The peroration 
 is beautifully feeling. It was conceived in the follow- 
 ing touching language : 
 
 " But if this monster of political innovation is to 
 prove more than the chimera of a mad Minister, rioting 
 in political iniquity, away, with the Castle at your head, 
 to the grave of a Charlemont, — the grave of the Irish 
 Volunteers, — and, rioting over that sacred dust, exult 
 in your completed task, and enjoy all its consequent 
 honours. Nor yet will the memory of those who op- 
 pose you wholly die away ; the gratitude of the future 
 men of Ireland will point to their tombs, and say to 
 their children : 'Here lie the bones of those honest 
 men who, when a venal and corrupt Parliament at- 
 tacked that Constitution which they fought for and 
 acquired, exerted every nerve to maintain, to defend, 
 and to secure it. This is an honour which the King 
 cannot confer upon his slaves, — it is an honour which 
 the crown never gave the King.' " 
 
 But even the eloquence of a Grattan could not 
 save Ireland. Her destiny was fulfilled. 
 
64 
 
 CHAPTER VIT. 
 
 Upon the advent to power of the Grenville adminis- 
 tration, commonly called the Ministry " of all the 
 talents," his friend and admirer, Charles James Fox, 
 appointed Mr. Burro wes to the office of First Counsel 
 to the Commissioners of the Revenue, which he held 
 from March, 1806, to April, 1807, a short period of 
 thirteen months. This appointment took place on a 
 change of parties, and he was removed upon the re- 
 signation of Ministers, the office itself being one of 
 those that had always been subject to party changes. 
 The lucrative nature of this appointment may be ga- 
 thered from the following particulars. On the esta- 
 blishment of the Customs there were two counsel, at 
 salaries of £100 per annum* Besides this salary, 
 counsel received fees upon every case, which fees were 
 arranged in the following manner. In every case of 
 
 * Mr. Under Secretary Marsden, in the year 1801, contrived for 
 Mr. O'Grady the sinecure place of Third Counsel to the Commission- 
 ers, with a salary of £2000 per annum. This gentleman subsequently 
 succeeded Sir John Stewart as Attorney-General, and in discharg- 
 ing the duties of his responsible office was ever afterwards impressed 
 with a grateful and thorough understanding of the feelings and 
 powers of his benefactor and patron. 
 
MEMOIR. 65 
 
 seizure or penalty, upon which the Board had already 
 given an order for a prosecution, it was the practice 
 of the solicitor to take the opinion of counsel: first, 
 to advise whether an information could be supported ; 
 secondly, to advice whether the information were 
 rightly drawn ; thirdly, to advise as to the proofs 
 necessary to support the information. Those were 
 the three stages of the proceeding ; and it is mani- 
 fest that the most enormous profits were derived, not 
 only by the solicitor, but by the counsel. It is no ex- 
 aggeration to estimate the fees paid to counsel alone, 
 during the several years previous to 1818, when the 
 office was abolished, as, on an average, £14,000 a-year. 
 One of the principal sources of the solicitor's income 
 was thus contrived. In each of the above three stages 
 of the proceeding a draft of brief was charged by the 
 solicitor, and three copies for three counsel, although 
 it very rarely happened that more than one copy was 
 actually furnished, or more than one counsel consulted: 
 and, in addition to all this, when the cause was in a 
 state for trial, a fourth draft of brief, and a fourth set 
 of copies for counsel, were charged as briefs for trial. 
 It should be observed that Mr. Burrowes sacrificed 
 considerable professional emoluments, being in full 
 practice, when he consented to fill this office. The 
 Duke of Wellington, then Sir Arthur Wellesley, the 
 Chief Secretary of that day, when intimating the re- 
 appointment of Sir Charles Orinsby, accompanied the 
 communication with expressions most courteous and 
 flattering to Mr. Burrowes ; and concluded with re- 
 
 F 
 
QQ MEMOIR. 
 
 peatingthe expression of his very great pain, and deep 
 regret, at losing such valuable services ; but that the 
 obligations the Government owed its friends and sup- 
 porters had rendered that step absolutely necessary, in 
 adherence to a principle of Government, that had al- 
 ways, on similar occasions, been acted upon. On the 
 death of Sir Charles Ormsby an effort was made by 
 Mr. Burrowes's friend, Mr. (now Lord) Plunket, to 
 procure his re-appointment. The Duke of Wellington 
 was applied to on the subject, and promptly came for- 
 ward to acknowledge his previous letter as containing 
 the sentiments and feelings he entertained towards Mr. 
 Burrowes, adding, he very well remembered the pain 
 he felt at Mr. Burrowes's removal on the former occa- 
 sion. Mr. (now Sir Eobert) Peel wrote a letter on the 
 same occasion, acknowledging Mr. Burrowes's high cha- 
 racter and great abilities for public employment, but 
 added, that, in the present state of parties, Government 
 could not desert its friends. From the general tone of 
 this letter, Mr. Burrowes and his friends considered 
 that Ministers would willingly secure the advantages 
 of his services and abilities as a condition of his re-ap- 
 pointment. He hastened to undeceive them, and com- 
 municated to an influential member of the Government, 
 that his opinions on the Catholic question were unaltered 
 and unalterable. At a subsequent period Sir Robert 
 Peel offered him the First Sergeantcy, but Mr. Bur- 
 rowes declined to accept the appointment, feeling 
 that he could not consistently adopt the views of the 
 Government of the day. The appointment was after- 
 
MEMOIR. 67 
 
 wards conferred on the late Mr. Justice Burton, and 
 Catholic Emancipation, the darling project for which 
 Mr. Burrowes made such sacrifices, became, in 1829, 
 a ministerial measure. It is to be deplored that, 
 throughout an active and long life, and until old age 
 had overtaken him, he failed, while in possession of 
 the most transcendant abilities, and unblemished in- 
 tegrity, to obtain any employment except that of coun- 
 sel to the Commissioners. 
 
 The most affectionate intercourse subsisted between 
 Mr. Burrowes and the family of the Emmets, of whom 
 he was a great admirer. He lost no time in communicat- 
 ing the change of administration in 1806 to his friend 
 Thomas Addis Emmet, with whom he was most closely 
 united, apprizing him of his own good fortune, and of 
 the political and judicial arrangements incident on the 
 change ; inviting him, at the same time, to return, or at 
 least send over some of his children to be educated. 
 This letter produced the following reply from Emmet, 
 exhibiting a friendship which no adversity could shake 
 or diminish, yet breathing hostility keen and invete- 
 rate against those men whose political rancour and 
 personal ambition stifled every feeling that was honour- 
 able to human nature, and who had, as he considered, 
 treacherously contributed to blast his own happiness, 
 and disappoint the hopes of himself and his family: 
 
 " New York, Nov. 19, 1806. 
 " My dear Burrowes, — I had the pleasure of receiving 
 your's of July last in due time. And first as to the matter of 
 
 business to which it alludes, I have inquired after Mr. 's 
 
 F2 
 
68 MEMOIR. 
 
 claim to property in Baltimore, and the result is pretty conclu- 
 sively that nothing can now be done, and probably never could, 
 even if the party entitled had come out here to urge his claim. 
 
 Mr. is at present in Baltimore, and I have furnished him 
 
 with all the information I could get before his departure, and 
 on his return shall put into his hands another letter I have since 
 received. He therefore will, I suppose, write more particu- 
 larly than I have time to do. As to your late law arrange- 
 ments, I sincerely rejoice, my good friend, that promotion has 
 fallen upon your head, and those of some others where I think 
 it well bestowed ; however, there are in the list of promotions 
 men of whom I never wish to think, because I cannot think of 
 them without the strongest emotions of aversion and disgust, 
 strong and warm as was my former friendship. In the con- 
 clusion of your letter you ask a question, which, if I did not 
 know the occasional absence of your thoughts, would have 
 caused me much speculation. ' Do you ever mean to visit us?' 
 says an influential officer of the Government of Ireland, to a 
 proscribed exile, whose return would be death by law ; ' or to 
 send over any of your children?' A man who was very anx- 
 ious to return would catch at this offer; but that is not my 
 case. I am settled here with the fairest prospects for myself 
 and children. My principles and my sufferings were my first 
 passport and introduction here, and they procured me the 
 effective regard of the leading characters of this State, and in 
 the Union at large. In proportion as I cherish those principles 
 I am respected, and every day's reflection and observation 
 makes them dearer to me. Ought I to go where they are trea- 
 sonable, and sufficient ground for perpetual proscription? Be- 
 sides, my good friend, I am too proud, when vanquished, to 
 assist by my presence in gracing the triumph of the victor. 
 And with what feelings should I tread on Irish ground ? — As 
 if I were walking over graves, and those the graves of my 
 nearest relations and my dearest friends. No ; I can never wish 
 
MEMOIR. 69 
 
 to be in Ireland, except in such a way as none of my old 
 friends connected with the Government could wish to see me 
 placed in. As to my children, I hope they will love liberty 
 too much ever to fix a voluntary residence in an enslaved 
 country. Nothing in their future prospects gives me greater 
 pain than the fear that my eldest boy will be obliged, when he 
 comes of age, to go to Ireland to dispose of some settled pro- 
 perty, which, if I were worth a few thousand dollars more, I 
 should wish rather in the hands of my greatest enemy than 
 his. There is not now in Ireland an individual that bears the 
 name of Pmimet; I do not wish that there ever should while 
 it is connected with England ; and yet it will, perhaps, be re- 
 membered in its history. 
 
 " With very sincerest and warmest esteem, 
 
 " Believe me ever your's, 
 
 " T. A. Emmet." 
 
 As well, in this instance as in Tone's, Burrowes 
 seems to have forgotten that the Banishment Act pu- 
 nished with transportation any person discovered in 
 correspondence with the Irish exiles. His transgres- 
 sion, however, was purely the result of generous sym- 
 pathy for their fallen fortunes ; for no man more 
 deplored, or more frequently condemned, the rash 
 principles entertained by those distinguished men. 
 
 Thomas Addis Emmet was a man of uncommon 
 promise. Possessed of a most powerful and compre- 
 hensive mind, his talents were of an order to command 
 notice anywhere. Warm in his affections, unflinching 
 in his adherence to his principles, he richly deserved 
 the admiration of his friend ; united by College and 
 professional ties, they contributed a glorious celebrity 
 
70 MEMOIR. 
 
 to the proceedings of the College Historical Society. 
 His splendid career at the American Bar reflects a 
 lustre on his native land. Surrounded by a host of 
 envious rivals, he soon eclipsed them all by the sole 
 effort of his commanding genius. The labour of his 
 intellect pressed forward to distinction, and men of 
 high endowments and rare acquirements were forced 
 back to make room for his reputation. He rose to the 
 highest rank in his profession, and would have been 
 elected to Congress had he so ambitioned. The honours 
 paid to his memory are too notorious to require repe- 
 tition here; suffice it to say that his funeral obsequies 
 were as distinguished as those of either Washington or 
 Franklin. 
 
 Temple Emmet (his eldest brother) died pre- 
 maturely. His eloquence was great, but spoiled by 
 imagery. He could not speak prose ; it was poetry. 
 Having on one occasion to close the sitting of the Col- 
 lege Historical Society by a speech from the chair, he 
 prepared the speech and sent it to Mr. Burrowes, de- 
 siring him to curtail it as he thought proper, and so 
 alter it, if necessary, as that it should appear to the 
 best advantage. Mr. Burrowes tried, but ineffectually ; 
 he could not alter it without changing the entire. It 
 was all poetry. One passage he used to repeat with 
 great earnestness and animation: " America ! America ! 
 the land of arts and of arms, where that goddess, Li- 
 berty, was wooed and won, and twelve young eaglets, 
 springing from her nest, bore freedom upwards on her 
 soaring wings." The entire speech was in this style ; 
 
MEMOIR. 71 
 
 and Mr. Burrowes returned it, being unable to comply 
 with the speaker's wishes. He did, however, pro- 
 nounce a most flowery and eloquent address from the 
 chair on that occasion ; it was full of talent, but it was 
 a speech of blank verse. 
 
 The last member of this gifted family that remains 
 to be noticed was the unfortunate Robert Emmet. He, 
 too, possessed in an eminent degree all the mental and 
 physical qualities necessary to an accomplished speaker. 
 Moulded in Nature's happiest combination, he gave an 
 elevating influence to the society in which he moved ; 
 his learning, his taste, his talents, his fine sensibilities 
 of heart, constancy in friendship, and firmness in 
 principle, gained him the love and esteem of all who 
 knew him. The circumstances of his unfortunate 
 insurrection (if the enterprise deserved a title of so 
 much import) arc notorious. After he was arrested 
 he wrote to Mr. Curran, requesting him to act for him 
 as counsel. Curran was himself suspected by Lord 
 Clare and the Privy Council of favouring revolution- 
 ary principles ; and the ardour of Emmet's attachment 
 for his daughter lent strength to this opinion, — an 
 opinion which his old enemy, Lord Clare, was active in 
 disseminating. Thus delicately situated, he declined 
 to act in his professional capacity. After the measure 
 of Union was carried, the Bar lost much of that public 
 spirit for which it was once so distinguished. The pa- 
 tronage of Bar rank being vested in the Crown, poli- 
 tical purity and professional independence suffered 
 many discouragements. The profession certainly con- 
 
72 MEMOIR. 
 
 tributed less than its quota to the ranks of patriotism ; 
 nay more, it even frequently raised up some of the 
 most efficient enemies to public and constitutional 
 freedom. Few were disposed to signalize themselves 
 in the defence of the unhappy man. One, however, 
 was found, who accepted the task with alacrity. — 
 Emmet applied to Burrowes, whose attentions to his 
 unfortunate client were unceasing, having sought and 
 obtained permission to sleep in the prison with him 
 for the few nights preceding his trial, with the view 
 of preparing his defence. On the trial he rose to 
 address the jury, when Emmet, laying his hand on 
 his shoulder, pressed him down, observing, as he did 
 so: "Burrowes, let me entreat of you to be seated ; I 
 approve your zeal, my friend, but I well know your 
 exertions on my behalf would prove unavailing : my 
 doom is sealed." When asked by the Clerk of the 
 Crown why sentence of death and execution should 
 not be awarded against him, according to law, he rose 
 with great firmness and composure, and delivered a 
 speech of remarkable power and ability. The solemn 
 grandeur of his attitude and expression, while pronounc- 
 ing this last touching passage of his address, — " the 
 grave opens to receive me, I sink into its bosom," — will 
 never be forgotten. Mr. Burrowes has been frequently 
 heard to declare that Emmet's defence, as a specimen 
 of powerful eloquence, infinitely surpassed the profes- 
 sional efforts of the distinguished men by whom that 
 prosecution was conducted. 
 
 Though Mr. Burrowes has frequently observed that 
 
MEMOIR. 73 
 
 lie considered no object so grand as a nation struggling 
 for her liberties ; no spectacle more imposing than that 
 of a people seeking the removal of intolerable political 
 grievances ; yet it was the early and solemn conviction 
 of his mind, that, however ennobling the pursuit, it 
 should be conducted with decorum and temperance, 
 keeping the constitution and the law constantly in 
 view, neither violating the one nor trampling on the 
 other. Therefore it was that he never could revert to 
 the melancholy results of this unfortunate outbreak, or 
 the tragical event which stained its short and guilty 
 existence, without feelings of abhorrence and condem- 
 nation. The massacre of the venerable Lord Kilwar- 
 den shocked and disgusted every man who heard it, 
 and none more than the infatuated Emmet himself, 
 who instantaneously came to the resolution of aban- 
 doning his unprincipled followers. Mr. Burro wes, in 
 the course of his address in the celebrated case of 
 The King v. Kirwan, bore testimony to the charac- 
 ter of this excellent Judge : " We all remember that 
 revered character. We know that he loved the laws 
 and constitution better than life itself. The glories 
 that surrounded his last moments, and which rendered 
 his death as enviable as it was disgraceful to the mon- 
 sters who caused it, cannot soon pass away ; his me- 
 mory will live entombed in the heart of every Irish 
 lawyer as long as the profession shall retain any dig- 
 nity, or the laws, upon which he shed such lustre, shall 
 be held in any estimation." 
 
74 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 The most distinguished of Mr. Burro wes's professional 
 efforts was his celebrated defence of the Catholic De- 
 legates, in the year 1811. Before we examine the 
 merits of those important speeches, it is necessary to 
 investigate the circumstances which brought about a 
 collision between the Crown and the subject, on the 
 occasion to which we allude. 
 
 The severities which had been endured by the 
 Catholics of Ireland, throughout the eighteenth cen- 
 tury, were somewhat relaxed in the year 1793 ; but the 
 concessions were granted in a cold and narrow spirit. 
 They were given without kindness, and received with- 
 out enthusiasm. The Irish Parliament had capitulated 
 less through wisdom than through fear. In the same year 
 was passed the celebrated Convention Act, which was 
 devised by Lord Clare, as an instrument whereby to 
 disperse the organization of United Irishmen who were 
 delegated as representatives from different parts of 
 Ireland. This Act forbade election or delegation to 
 any assembly " for the purpose or under pretence of 
 presenting petitions to the Sovereign, or both or either 
 of the Houses of Parliament, or in any other manner 
 procuring alterations of the law." The Act wasnot called 
 
MEMOIR. I 5 
 
 into operation for a period of eighteen years. The year 
 1811 first saw it awakened from a long slumber on the 
 Statute book. In that year the Catholics of Ireland 
 were anxious to appoint a new Committee to take 
 charge of their interests ; and it was arranged that 
 such a Committee should be elected. It was intended 
 that the Committee should be composed of eight mem- 
 bers from each of the thirty-two counties. There was 
 already in existence a General Committee, from which 
 petitions were presented to Parliament, which were 
 uniformly disregarded. With the view, therefore, of 
 extending their body, and giving greater influence to 
 its measures, their Secretary, Mr. Hay, was directed, 
 in January, 1811, to write to the Catholics of Ireland, 
 calling on them to appoint managers in each county to 
 forward their petitions. This brought down the rigour 
 of Government on the Committee, and the Privy 
 Council came to the resolution of striking a decisive 
 blow. Mr. Wellesley Pole, the Secretary, issued a 
 circular letter to the sheriffs and magistrates through- 
 out Ireland, calling upon them to arrest all persons 
 who posted notices of the appointment of such mana- 
 gers, or who voted for them, or who acted as managers. 
 This letter threw the country into the greatest excite- 
 ment ; the subject was brought before Parliament, 
 on the 22nd of February, by Mr. Ward (afterwards 
 Lord Dudley), who moved an address to the Prince 
 Regent, for the production of a copy of the circular. 
 It was contended, throughout the country, that the 
 term "unlawful assembly," as applied to the delegates, 
 
76 MEMOIR. 
 
 was most improper, inasmuch as the Convention Act 
 did not pretend to abrogate the right of petition, and 
 it was necessary that the people should have power to 
 appoint persons to manage their petitions, and collect 
 the sentiments of those in their vicinity. The Com- 
 mittee met the attack with undaunted spirit. They 
 insisted on the legality of the elections ; and, at a 
 meeting in Dublin, over which Lord Fingal presided, 
 it was resolved to proceed in defiance of the Castle 
 circular. Mr. Percival was at that time Prime Minis- 
 ter, and the Duke of Richmond, Viceroy. A procla- 
 mation was issued against the elections. One Protes- 
 tant magistrate, Mr. Lid well, sent it back, declaring 
 that he could not conscientiously act under it, conceiv- 
 ing that the people had a perfect right to elect dele- 
 gates for the management of their petitions, as that 
 right had been secured by a proviso in the Act, though 
 the terms of it prohibited every species of representa- 
 tive capacity. Forty other magistrates expressed their 
 determination to treat the proclamation with indiffe- 
 rence. The privileges of the people were now in peril. 
 It was clear that the Catholic committee would endan- 
 ger those privileges if they yielded. The election of 
 the delegates was therefore completed, notwithstanding 
 the proclamation. The Lord Lieutenant informed 
 Lord Fingal that a Council would be held, and a pro- 
 clamation would issue against their meeting. Nothing 
 daunted, they met at Fishamble-street Theatre, and 
 immediately proceeded to the transaction of business, 
 though the proclamation had, in fact, issued the day 
 
MEMOIR. 77 
 
 before. Nearly three hundred delegates were present. 
 Amongst them were the Earl of Fingal, Viscount 
 Southwell, Lord Netterville, Lord French, and many 
 others of the upper classes of society. When the busi- 
 ness of the day had concluded, and they were about to 
 separate, a magistrate, Alderman Darley, arrived, and 
 informed them that he had instructions to disperse the 
 meeting, at the same time inviting Lord French (the 
 Chairman) to attend Mr. Pole at the Castle. Lord 
 French replied, that, feeling as he did on that occasion, 
 when the fate of millions was concerned, as well as his 
 own honour, he should decline holding any private, 
 solitary dialogue with Mr. Pole, expressing his astonish- 
 ment that Government could think that he would 
 sanction any illegal meeting. A vote of thanks to Lord 
 French having been passed, the meeting separated, 
 as the object which brought them together had been 
 accomplished. 
 
 The Government calculated on being supported in 
 their measures, and that the people would be over- 
 awed ; but, out of the 8000 magistrates then in Ire- 
 land, not one had interfered with a single election. 
 The Lord Chief Justice Downes (who was to try the 
 cases which might arise) issued his warrant, and Lord 
 Fingal, and several of the members of the Committee, 
 were arrested and held to bail. The question at issue 
 was one of the greatest importance, involving the con- 
 stitutional rights of the great body of the Irish people, 
 and public attention was riveted on the subject. The 
 trial of Dr. Sheridan, one of the delegates, took place 
 
78 MEMOIR. 
 
 in the Michaelmas Term of the year 1811. The she- 
 riffs, with their habitual solicitude for " safe" verdicts, 
 selected a jury which they considered admirable. Some 
 of the most respectable citizens were set aside by pe- 
 remptory challenge on the part of the Crown. The 
 well-known police officer, Major Sirr, stood in the 
 Court, and, as the names were called, gave a signal to 
 the Crown Solicitor. 
 
 We now return to Mr. Burrowes. The Catholic 
 Committee trusted to him the advocacy of their cause, 
 and their confidence was not misplaced : they felt that 
 by him the rights of the people would be ably de- 
 fended, and the result justified these expectations. 
 Against a hostile Court, a " select jury," and the talents 
 of Saurin and Bushe, Burrowes triumphed. His speech 
 (which appeared in the State Trials) was, probably, 
 one of the noblest efforts of skill, learning, and con- 
 stitutional reasoning, that has ever been delivered at 
 the Irish Bar. Bushe was considered by the leading 
 English lawyers of the day (Lord Erskine, Sir Samuel 
 Romilly, and Sir Arthur Pigott, then Attorney-Gene- 
 ral for England), as mistaken in his construction of 
 the Convention Act; and the last eulogized Mr. Bur- 
 rowes's speech as a specimen of constitutional reason- 
 ing which he said was unanswerable. 
 
 The victory which the eloquence of Mr. Burrowes 
 achieved was most important at the time. Arbitrary 
 authority was arrested in its despotic course, and the 
 right of delegation, for the purpose of petitioning Par- 
 liament, was restored to the people. Unfortunately, 
 
MEMOIR. 79 
 
 however, the Catholic Committee did not act with 
 wisdom. The other delegates insisted on being imme- 
 diately tried, anticipating a similar result. The Attor- 
 ney-General declared he had no desire to proceed 
 against them, and offered to abandon the other cases if 
 the Committee would cease to meet. The Committee, 
 of course, refused, and the traversers unwisely insisted 
 upon a trial without delay. Mr. Burrowes, who knew 
 how rarely a jury finds a verdict against the Crown in 
 a political case, opposed this proposition, and pointed 
 out the fatal consequences to the Catholic cause which 
 would result from a defeat in Court ; but the Com- 
 mittee, Hushed with victory, declined to follow his 
 advice. 
 
 Accordingly, in the next Term, Hilary, 1812, the 
 trial of Mr. Kir wan was proceeded with, and circum- 
 stances were then brought to light most disgraceful to 
 the administration of justice, and to the character of the 
 Government, but, unhappily, in accordance with the 
 judicial system as conducted in Ireland. It was disco- 
 vered that Sir Charles Saxton, the Under Secretary of 
 the Lord Lieutenant, had, at the Castle, given to the she- 
 riff, Mr. James, a list of jurors, from which those who 
 should try the case should be chosen. There were only 
 fourteen names on the Castle list which were not on 
 the panel. The names were marked " for the purpose," 
 (as was sworn to) "of seeing that they were proper loyal 
 men." Such a daring violation of the constitution 
 caused great excitement throughout the country. It 
 was objected, on the part of the delegates, that men 
 
80 MEMOIR. 
 
 so selected had no right to sit in judgment on them, 
 and those jurors were accordingly challenged, and the 
 question tried. Mr. Burrowes addressed the " triers" 
 (as the gentlemen appointed to decide on the fairness 
 of a panel are termed) in an argument of great skill 
 and ability. 
 
 Notwithstanding his appeal, the triers (who were 
 on this occasion officers of the court) found against the 
 challenge ; and Mr. Kirwan's trial proceeded before a 
 jury taken from the panel arranged by Government. 
 
 On the part of Mr. Kirwan it was contended that 
 the delegation was not described in the indictment as 
 it had been proved in evidence. The indictment set 
 forth, " that the traverser, being a person who professed 
 the Roman Catholic religion, and divers other persons 
 professing the Roman Catholic religion, did meet and 
 assemble for the purpose of appointing five persons to 
 act as representatives of the inhabitants professing the 
 Roman Catholic religion, of and in one of the districts 
 of the city of Dublin, commonly called the parish of 
 St. Mary." Now this parish of St. Mary comprised 
 three parishes: St. Thomas, St. George, and St. Mary. 
 The Solicitor-General insisted that the district was 
 described to be in the city of Dublin, and the persons 
 elected were to be representatives of a district in the 
 city ; but the evidence was distinct and clear that the 
 election was held for a district composed of parishes, 
 some of them extending into the county, and the elec- 
 tion comprehended representatives from the county, 
 though the indictment confined it to one parish, and 
 
MEMOIR. 81 
 
 averred that to have been situated in the city. It was 
 urged that the offence should be proved as it was set 
 out on the record. And the authority, 2 Hawk. 615, 
 was cited to show " that when a certain place is made 
 part of the description of the fact which is charged 
 against the defendant, the least variance as to such 
 place, between the evidence and the indictment, is 
 fatal." It was further urged that it was always a ques- 
 tion for the jury what the effect of the evidence is, if 
 there be any ; but it was entirely a question for the 
 Court whether there was any evidence to go to the 
 jury. The Chief Justice intimated that he would save 
 the point for the opinion of the twelve Judges. But it 
 was insisted upon, for the traversers, that the uniform 
 course of the Court of King's Bench was to allow a 
 special verdict, and give each party an opportunity 
 of arguing the question solemnly before the twelve 
 Judges. 
 
 Mr. Burrowes, therefore, proposed a collateral issue 
 to the jury, upon the question, whether de facto the 
 meeting of the 31st July elected representatives for a 
 portion of a parish out of the city of Dublin ? " We 
 offer, gentlemen of the jury," he continued, " to relieve 
 you from the invidious duty of deciding the question 
 of law, by taking your verdict on the fact, and leaving 
 the law to be definitively settled by the dernier resort. 
 The Attorney-General well knows that the opinion of 
 the Court of King's Bench is with him ; and such is 
 his perverted notion of true dignity, that he seeks the 
 sanction of a jury to uphold the Court in a point of 
 
 G 
 
82 MEMOIR. 
 
 law, while he shrinks from the opinion of the twelve 
 Judges and the House of Lords. Gentlemen, there is 
 more artifice than pride in this course ; he dreads the 
 opinion of the dernier resort upon a special verdict, 
 and trembles for the fate of his prosecution before that 
 high tribunal, to whose decision every Catholic in Ire- 
 land, to whose judgment my Lord Fingall would bow 
 the head of obedience. He who has imputed a shuf- 
 fling and disingenuous conduct, himself skulks under 
 the wings of this Court, and the expected compliance 
 of this jury, from that final Court, to which we seek to 
 carry this great question, surely not unworthy of the 
 highest tribunal. I again call upon him, — I implore 
 the Court, which I address with reverence, — I implore 
 the jury, — all to concur in a special verdict ; to separate 
 the fact from the law ; to leave the law to this Court, 
 who cannot want, who cannot wish the sanction of a 
 jury upon a question which they are told is foreign 
 from their jurisdiction. In order to remove all diffi- 
 culty, in order to silence all pretence that we do not 
 avow what we have done, I offer to admit every fact 
 to which a particle of evidence has been offered ; every 
 fact which the Attorney-General has any grounds for 
 saying really took place. Let them all be found by the 
 jury ; let the Attorney-General prepare the special ver- 
 dict himself ; he shall not meet any uncandid obstruc- 
 tion ; he shall receive every assistance, The jury will 
 be relieved from difficulty. The Court may pronounce 
 the law for themselves, and by themselves ; the judg- 
 ment will be equally valid, equally effectual, in all res- 
 
MEMOIR. 83 
 
 pects the same, except that it will be open to appeal, 
 which cannot but be gratifying to this Court, and which 
 ought not to be obstructed by the Attorney-General, if 
 his object be (what he avows) to vindicate the dignity 
 of the law, and, not what some suspect, to answer a 
 transient and a party purpose, and obtain what may be 
 miscalled a victory over the Catholic people and the 
 Catholic pursuit." 
 
 The Attorney-General would not consent to this 
 fair proposal. He demanded a general verdict decid- 
 ing upon the law, and precluding all appeal. " In 
 doing this," says Mr. Burrowes, " he forces upon me a 
 duty upon which I enter with reluctance, but which I 
 shall discharge with firmness. It is not for any man, 
 who wears a bar-gown, to shrink from the discharge of 
 any professional duty, whatever difficulties may inter- 
 pose in his way ; and even though he may be certain 
 to encounter obloquy and misrepresentation on one 
 side or the other, possibly on both, from the unfortu- 
 nate state and temper of the times, whatever course he 
 may steer, his duty is plain, his course is direct. Let 
 him call into counsel his reason and his conscience ; let 
 those counsellors be unbribed and uninfluenced ; let 
 him obey their mandates inflexibly and boldly, and he 
 may rely that the final judgment of this world will pro- 
 bably be with him ; but that, with infallible certainty, 
 he will stand acquitted before that Tribunal from 
 which there cannot be any appeal, because in it there 
 cannot be any error." 
 
 The same evidence on which Dr. Sheridan was 
 g2 
 
84 MEMOIR. 
 
 acquitted was produced at this trial, but of course 
 without avail. Mr. Kirwan was found guilty. The 
 Crown was contented with its victory, and he was dis- 
 charged on being (as a matter of form) fined one 
 mark. The other cases were abandoned, but the Ca- 
 tholic cause received a serious blow, from the effects of 
 which it did not for some years recover. 
 
 In accordance with a practice invariably adopted by 
 successive Irish Administrations, of sowing dissension 
 between the Catholic body and their friends, Mr. Ed- 
 ward Hay's character was assailed and stigmatized by 
 the Government of Lord Whitworth, with the view of 
 weakening Mr. Grattan's attachment to the Catholic 
 claims, thus indirectly attacked through their Secre- 
 tary. Mr. Burrowes, who had long known Mr. Hay 
 to be a man of unblemished honour, addressed the 
 following letter in reply to Mr. Grattan's inquiries, 
 which completely refuted the unmerited aspersions 
 under which that gentleman laboured, and secured him 
 Mr. Grattan's undiminished confidence: 
 
 " April 13, 1814. 
 " My dear Grattan, — I was one of Edward Hay's coun- 
 sel, upon his trial for high treason, immediately after the re- 
 bellion of 1798, in the county of Wexford. So was Bushe, 
 our present Solicitor-General, who no doubt would agree in all 
 I state ; no part of it will be questioned by any man who can 
 speak from knowledge. He was acquitted, without a moment's 
 delay, by twelve Protestant persons. Sir Michael Smith, the 
 Judge who presided at his trial, commenced his charge with 
 these words : ' I am happy that it has fallen to my lot to put an 
 end to the sufferings of this unfortunate gentleman.' He said 
 
MEMOIR. 85 
 
 that Hay did not require the Amnesty Act to protect him. 
 This must have been so ; for if he was guilty of treason it must 
 have been (and so the statement and evidence against him pur- 
 ported to establish) as a leader, and leaders were expressly out 
 of the pardon of the Amnesty Act. At the time Hay was 
 acquitted, the prejudice was so strong against Roman Catho- 
 lics that I would not allow Hay to examine any witness of that 
 persuasion; and I have no doubt but that every juror believed 
 him guilty before trial, and, from the influence of prejudice, 
 anxiously wished that he should be executed. Hay had been 
 treated with great cruelty, in the interval between his arrest 
 and trial, by the persons who principally managed the trial. 
 Jt was this that brought forth the observation with which 
 Baron Smith commenced his charge. 
 
 " Thomas Cloney also Avill probably be attacked as an 
 atrocious rebel. No doubt he was implicated, and condemned 
 by the casting vote of the president of a court martial. This 
 condemnation was instantly reversed by Lord Cornwallis; and 
 as soon as it could be done, without hurting the feelings of the 
 county of Wexford Protestants, he obtained a free pardon. 
 
 " Cloney was distinguished during the rebellion by repeated 
 acts of hazardous humanity ; it really appeared as if he solicited 
 command principally to control barbarous excesses. No man 
 could now read the minutes of his trial without feeling that, if 
 any rebel ought to be spared, Thomas Cloney was that man. 
 I cannot, however, but condemn the folly of those who put 
 him forward as an agent of the Catholic cause ; he was himself 
 much to blame in taking any forward part in politics. But it 
 appeared to me that the late ostensible managers of Catholic 
 affairs would be glad to furnish your adversaries with topics 
 injurious to the cause you advocate. 
 
 " Ever truly your's, 
 
 " Peter Burrowes." 
 
S6 MEMOIR. 
 
 It invariably happened that, when a section of the 
 British Ministry affected to conciliate the Catholics, 
 they were generally defeated by a party in the Irish 
 Government. Thus Mr. Sanrin was heard to declare 
 that he would allow the Catholic Board to exist as long 
 as it did mischief to its cause, and that its folly exceeded 
 its illegality. There is little room to doubt that this 
 policy was the result of a well-matured arrangement 
 with the English Government. It was for a time 
 completely successful ; discord was renewed between 
 the members of the lately suppressed Board in Dub- 
 lin. They were indiscreet enough to debate the 
 question of further entrusting the conduct of their 
 petition to Lord Donoughmore and Mr. Grattan, of 
 whose constancy and attachment they had such ample 
 experience. The petition was, therefore, confided to 
 Sir Henry Pamell, whose advocacy proved feeble and 
 unparliam entary . 
 
 Thus ended for a time Mr. Grattan's connexion 
 with the Catholic Board. lie felt that the cause of 
 the Catholics was the cause of the empire ; and, though 
 he was superseded by another in the favour of the 
 Catholic Board, he could not suffer his zeal on that 
 account to be diminished. He now devoted himself 
 to literature and the society of his early friends : Judge 
 Day, Plunket, Burrowes, Burton, Curran. Goold, Wal- 
 lace, Berwick, were his constant associates. In the 
 autumn of the year 1819 his last illness approached, 
 and as it increased he seemed more desirous of attend- 
 ing his parliamentary duties. However, upon a con- 
 
MEMOIR. 87 
 
 sulfation with his physicians, they all agreed that he 
 should not think of moving. He was resolved to go, 
 and caused his son to write to Mr. Burrowes to come 
 to him on the day he was to receive the address of a 
 deputation from the Catholic body. Mr. Burrowes 
 did attend with Lord Plunket and Judge Day, and, 
 surrounded by the members of his family, Mr. Grattan 
 received the deputation. " He feared," he said, " he 
 would not live to carry their question ; he was most 
 anxious to set their country free ; that he greatly re- 
 gretted his bad health, but would attend Parliament, 
 feeling that his last breath belonged to his country." 
 The deputation having retired to an adjoining room, 
 wished to see Mr. Burrowes, and begged he would per- 
 suade Mr. Grattan not to go to Parliament. They 
 were greatly shocked at the change in his appearance. 
 Some time afterwards Mr. Burrowes again called to dis- 
 suade him, butMr.Grattan was inexorable. On the 20th 
 May he left Dublin : the quay was lined by his friends. 
 Burrowes, Humphreys, Mr. Rothe, Mr. O'Gorman, How- 
 ley, Lord Meath, were there.* Before he closed his 
 useful and honourable career, and at the moment of 
 his dissolution, he caused his son to add to the paper 
 embodying his last recommendations to the Catholics, 
 this remarkable and imperishable record of his fidelity 
 to the cause: "Idle with the love of liberty in my heart, 
 and this declaration in favour of my country in my hand"f 
 
 * Grattan's Diary, vol. v. 
 
 f This paper, containing his valedictory advice to Ireland, was 
 read by Mr. Plunket in the House when moving the writ for Dublin. 
 
88 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 Mr. Burrowes's character as an able lawyer and an 
 eloquent advocate being now established, his services 
 were eagerly sought for in every case of importance. 
 His manner, when speaking, was most striking and 
 peculiar. Though he could not boast the fascinating 
 imagery and pathos of Curran, he atoned for their ab- 
 sence by an air of impressive earnestness which carried 
 persuasion to a jury, because he seemed convinced 
 himself. There was something so ingenuous and un- 
 suspecting in his nature, that, in some cases, where a 
 jury would be disposed to distrust Curran from the 
 command he was known to possess over their feelings, 
 the success of Burrowes was very marked, and in no 
 small degree resulted from the confidence reposed in 
 his simplicity of manner. He always appeared san- 
 guine and eager in the view he took of his case, throw- 
 ing the whole force of his mind into the thought, he 
 seemed to labour with the idea which impressed him 
 till his words burst forth with fervour. The audience 
 would often be led to feel that he was about to lecture 
 them upon some topics growing out of the subject 
 itself, less for the sake of relieving their attention, or 
 displaying his rhetorical skill, than of really edifying 
 
MEMOIR. 89 
 
 them. But the fact was far otherwise ; he stood on 
 very different ground. He certainly enlarged on topics 
 of this description, and invariably persuaded his hearers 
 that he was communicating instruction, and diverging 
 from the main subject for their improvement ; but 
 after addressing the jury for some time, and obtain- 
 ing their unsuspecting confidence, he rapidly, but not 
 abruptly, turned all he had been saying to the account 
 of his cause, by a transition both elegant and natural, 
 indicating the judicious purpose for which he indulged 
 in the supposed digression. This tact, a very valuable 
 quality in an advocate, he possessed in an eminent 
 degree. 
 
 The speech of Mr. Burro wes, in the case of Wright 
 v. Fitzgerald, forcibly illustrates what we have been 
 stating. The facts were these: — Mr. Wright was a 
 respectable man, of most excellent character and edu- 
 cation, and a teacher of the French language, as profes- 
 sor of which he was employed by two eminent board- 
 ing-schools at Clonmel, and the families of several 
 gentlemen in the town and neighbourhood. 
 
 Mr. Wright had heard that Mr. Fitzgerald had re- 
 ceived some charges of a seditious nature against him ; 
 and, with a promptitude not very characteristic of 
 conscious guilt, he immediately went to the house of 
 Mr. Fitzgerald, whom he did not find at home, and 
 afterwards to that of another magistrate, who also was 
 out, for the purpose of surrendering himself for trial. 
 lie went again the same day, accompanied by a gen- 
 tleman, to the house of Mr. Fitzgerald, and, being 
 shown into his presence, explained the purpose of his 
 
90 MEMOIR. 
 
 coming; when Mr. Fitzgerald, drawing his sword, said: 
 " Down on your knees, you rebellious scoundrel, and 
 receive your sentence." In vain did the poor man 
 protest his innocence ; in vain did he implore trial on 
 his knees. Mr. Fitzgerald sentenced him first to be 
 flogged, and then shot. The unfortunate man surren- 
 dered his keys to have his papers searched, and ex- 
 pressed his readiness to suffer any punishment the 
 proof of guilt could justify. But no ; this was not 
 agreeable to Mr. Fitzgerald's principles of justice; his 
 mode was first to sentence, then punish, and after- 
 wards investigate. His answer to the unfortunate man 
 was, " What, you Carmelite rascal, do you dare to 
 speak after sentence V and then struck him, and or- 
 dered him to prison. 
 
 Next day this unhappy man was dragged to a 
 ladder, in Clonmel-street, to undergo his sentence. 
 He knelt down in prayer, with his hat before his face. 
 Mr. Fitzgerald came up, dragged his hat from him, and 
 trampled on it ; seized the man by the hair, dragged him 
 to the earth, kicked him, and cut him across the fore- 
 head with his sword ; then had him stripped naked, 
 tied up to the ladder, and ordered him fifty lashes. 
 
 Major Rial, an officer of the town, came up as the 
 fifty lashes were completed, and asked Mr. Fitzgerald 
 the cause. Fitzgerald handed the Major a note written 
 in French, saying he did not himself understand 
 French, though he understood Irish; but he, Major 
 Rial, would find in that letter what would justify him 
 in flogging the scoundrel to death. 
 
 Major Rial read the letter. He found it to be a 
 
MEMOIR. 91 
 
 note addressed for the victim, translated in these 
 words : 
 
 " Sir, — I am extremely sorry I cannot wait on you at the 
 hour appointed, being unavoidably obliged to attend Sir Lau- 
 rence Parsons. 
 
 " Your's, 
 
 " Baron de Clues." 
 
 Notwithstanding this translation, which Major Rial 
 read to Mr. Fitzgerald, he ordered 100 lashes more to 
 be inflicted, and then left the unfortunate man bleed- 
 ing and suspended, while he went to the barrack to 
 demand a file of men to come and shoot him ; but, 
 being refused by General St. John, he ordered him back 
 to prison, where he was confined in a dark small 
 room, with no other furniture than a wretched pallet 
 of straw, without covering; and here he remained six 
 or seven days without any medical assistance, so that 
 his recovery from such a state of laceration was more 
 than could have been expected. When the insur- 
 rection had passed away, an action for damages was 
 instituted against the magistrate. Mr. Burrowes was 
 retained for Wright, whose innocence appeared mani- 
 fest. In the course of his address to the jury, Bur- 
 rowes suggested the possibility of the supposed treason- 
 able document, discovered upon the plaintiff's per- 
 son, turning out to be a version of the Lord's Prayer, 
 or some religious exercise, though expressed in a 
 language with which the defendant did not happen 
 to be familiar. His description of the officious zeal 
 of the magistrate was so humorous that it excited 
 
92 MEMOIR. 
 
 the laughter of some of the jury. Mr. Burrowes, in- 
 stantly availing himself of that departure from gravity 
 which he had adroitly provoked, paused suddenly, and, 
 with deep emotion exclaimed, " Aye, gentlemen, some 
 of you may laugh, but my client was writhing." The 
 effect was irresistible, and, at a time when prejudice 
 ran amazingly high against persons accused of dis- 
 loyalty, he succeeded in obtaining a verdict for £500 
 damages against Fitzgerald.* An application was after- 
 wards made, on the part of Mr. Fitzgerald, in the 
 Court of Exchequer, to set aside this verdict, which 
 was dismissed with full costs. 
 
 An extraordinary attempt was made to pass an ex post 
 facto law for the peculiar indemnification of this indi- 
 vidual. The Irish Government of that day could not find 
 a jury so base, so degraded, as to violate the rights of 
 the injured, or the principles of that most valuable of all 
 constitutional privileges, trial by jury ; and they abso- 
 lutely asked the House of Commons to do what a jury 
 spurned, to interfere by a measure of personal partia- 
 lity, for the purpose of affording indemnification to one 
 man ; and in effect to set aside the verdict of a respec- 
 table jury of his vicinage, living on the very scene of 
 the action, returned in consonance Avith the advice and 
 opinion of two most able Judges, with the object of 
 depriving an innocent injured man of that retribution 
 which a jury of his country had awarded him. 
 
 * Lord Yelverton, who tried the case, admitted in his charge 
 that the defendant had manifested his loyalty most fully, for he had 
 written it in blood, and imprinted it on the plaintiff's back. 
 
MEMOIR. 93 
 
 Mr. Burrowes was heard before the Bar of the 
 House on behalf of Mr. Scott, who had brought an 
 action for false imprisonment, and other outrages com- 
 mitted against him by Fitzgerald, and who conceived 
 the Bill of Indemnity tended to frustrate the effect of 
 that action. Mr. Scott resided in the town of Car- 
 rick, was possessed of a very considerable property, 
 maintained a very high character, and was otherwise 
 very much respected. Fitzgerald thought proper to 
 arrest this gentleman at his house, under an imputation 
 of treasonable practices. He requested not to be 
 exposed through the country, and offered to give Fitz- 
 gerald, on the spot, £100,000 security for his appear- 
 ance to trial, but it was refused ; and this gentleman, 
 surrounded by a military guard, was brought, at noon 
 day, twelve miles through the country, to Clonmel, 
 where he was imprisoned. General St. John, in com- 
 mand of the district, used his influence with Fitzgerald 
 to have him bailed, and succeeded ; but Mr. Scott 
 replied that he had been exposed to the ignominy of 
 being committed to prison, and from that prison he 
 never would depart until he was liberated after a fair 
 trial. Fitzgerald declined calling him to trial. He did 
 remain several days in gaol, and it was not until he 
 was assured that the life of a very delicate lady, his 
 wife, was in danger, and under the impression that 
 his liberation was necessary to save her life, that he 
 could be prevailed on to offer bail. 
 
 The death of Mr. Sergeant Ball, in the year 1813, 
 called forth Mr. Burrowes's powers in another depart- 
 
94 MEMOIR. 
 
 ment of eloquence. His sketcli of the character of that 
 distinguished man is in a more elevated style. Ele- 
 gant, without ornament, and affecting by its mournful 
 simplicity, it was quite as true as it was eloquent, for 
 John Ball (Member for Drogheda in the Irish Parlia- 
 ment) was one of the purest characters, both in public 
 and private life, that ever adorned any country. Amia- 
 ble and consistent in every relation of life, he united 
 to the steady virtues of a patriot all the pleasing cha- 
 racteristics of a friend. 
 
 When Lord Clare attempted, in the Court of Chan- 
 cery, to give unrestrained latitude to his arbitrary tem- 
 per and despotic principles, his only check was the 
 Bar; and this body he resolved, if possible, to corrupt. 
 His arrogance in Court intimidated many whom his 
 patronage could not seduce ; but the Bar, as a body, 
 was neither overawed nor corrupted. It contained 
 many men whose pride it was to sustain the Constitu- 
 tion. 
 
 An instance of the strenuous efforts of Lord Clare 
 to corrupt and intimidate the Bar occurred in the 
 Court of Chancery. On the occasion of Mr. Fitzge- 
 rald's dismissal from the office of Prime Sergeant, in 
 consequence of his differing with Lord Clare on the 
 subject of the Union, the Bar adopted the resolu- 
 tion of thanking him for his noble conduct in prefer- 
 ing the good of his country to rank and emolument, 
 and allowing him, as in office, the same precedence in 
 all cases in the Courts. It was motion day in the 
 Court of Chancery, and, according to usage, the senior 
 
MEMOIR. 95 
 
 barrister present is called on by the Bench to make 
 his motions, after whom the next in precedence is 
 called, down to the youngest barrister, until the whole 
 Bar is exhausted, the Attorney and Solicitor-General 
 having made their motions. The Chancellor called 
 on Mr. Smith, the Father of the Bar ; he bowed, and 
 said Mr. Saurin had precedence of him; he then 
 called on Mr. Saurin, who bowed, and said Mr. Pon- 
 sonby had precedence of him ; Mr. Ponsonby, in like 
 manner', said Mr. Curran had precedence of him ; and 
 Mr. Curran said, he could not think of moving any- 
 thing before Mr. Fitzgerald, who certainly had prece- 
 dence of him. The Chancellor then called on Mr. 
 Fitzgerald, who bowed, and said he had nothing to 
 move ; which caused the Chancellor to exclaim : " I see, 
 Gentlemen, you have not then relinquished the business. 
 It would be better at once for His Majesty's Counsel, 
 if they do not choose to conform to the regulations of 
 the Court, to resign their silk gowns, rather than sit 
 thus in a sort of rebellion with their sovereign. I dis- 
 miss the cause in which these gentlemen are retained, 
 with costs on both sides ;" and, thus saying, Lord Clare 
 left the Bench. The attorneys immediately determined 
 they would not charge any costs. 
 
 The judicial talents of Lord Clare were undoubt- 
 edly of the first order. It was Mr. Burrowes's opi- 
 nion that, considering the number of cases which the 
 Chancellor would decide in a given time, the cor- 
 rectness of his judgments was astonishing; and that, 
 under the same circumstances an equal number of irre- 
 versible decisions could not have been made by any 
 
96 MEMOIR. 
 
 other judge in England or Ireland. It is, therefore, 
 the more to be regretted, that Lord Clare, being a 
 man of great mental endowments, should have stooped 
 to aid Ministers in their low arts of political intrigue. 
 Some yielded to the fascinations of power, but Mr. 
 Ball was inflexible. Nothing could shake his firm 
 resolve. His influence was admittedly great, and the 
 temptations to draw him from his party were propor- 
 tionably alluring. On one occasion Mr. Secretary Cooke 
 despatched a friend to him to offer him any terms he 
 thought proper to propose. The noble reply was, 
 that " all the gold of the treasury, all the influence of 
 the Crown, multiplied an hundred-fold, could not make 
 John Ball swerve one moment from his devotion to 
 Ireland." Ball was poor, but he preferred to remain 
 the humble Recorder of Drogheda, rather than obtain 
 the highest offices in the State by the sacrifice of his 
 independence. After his death a numerous meeting 
 of the Bar assembled in the hall of the Four Courts, to 
 commemorate his virtues. Mr. Burrowes, who had been 
 one of Ball's most intimate friends, proposed a resolu- 
 tion, having for its object the erection of a monument 
 to his memory. His observations (which will be found 
 in this work) were in the loftiest style of encomiastic 
 eloquence, alike worthy of the subject and the orator. 
 Before the meeting separated, it was proposed, and 
 adopted with acclamation, that Mr. Burrowes should 
 be requested to prepare the inscription for the intended 
 monument ; and, in a few days, he delivered to a com- 
 mittee of King's Counsel appointed to superintend its 
 erection, an inscription, which was placed on the mo- 
 
MEMOIR. 97 
 
 nument in St. Patrick's Cathedral, surmounted by a bust 
 of the deceased. This beautiful specimen of posthu- 
 mous praise is so illustrative of the character and emi- 
 nent qualities of Sergeant Ball, that its insertion here 
 will probably be considered by the reader an appropri- 
 ate conclusion of our notice of that noble-minded man : 
 
 DURING A LIFE OF STRENUOUS EXERTION, 
 
 HE NEVER EXCITED ONE TRANSIENT ENMITY: 
 
 IN HIS PROGRESS TO THE HIGHEST PROFESSIONAL EMINENCE 
 
 HE NEVER STOOPED 
 
 TO ANY UNWORTHY CONDESCENSION; 
 
 ZEALOUS HUT CANDID, MODEST YET nOLD, 
 
 HIS SIMPLE HUT PERSUASIVE ELOQUENCE 
 
 WAS THE PURE RESULT 
 
 OF GENEROUS FEELING AND ANIMATED CONVICTION; 
 
 NO SOPHISM DISGRACED HIS REASONING, 
 
 NO STUDIED ORNAMENT IMPEACHED HIS SINCERITY; 
 
 WORTH, LEARNING, INTELLECT, ALL CONSPIRED 
 
 TO EXALT HIM TO DISTINCTION; 
 
 CHARACTERISTIC MODESTY GREW WITH THE GROWTH 
 
 OF HIS reputation; 
 
 WHILST IT SEEMED TO IMPEDE, IT ADVANCED HIS PROGRESS, 
 
 AND, INTERESTING ALL MEN IN HIS SUCCESS, 
 
 SHED AN UNOFFENDING LUSTRE UPON HIS PROSPERITY; 
 
 THIS UNPRECEDENTED OFFERING OF A GRATEFUL PROFESSION, 
 
 TO A MEMBER DISTINGUISHED 
 
 BY ALL THE GREAT AND AMIABLE QUALITIES 
 
 OF THE HEAD AND HEART, 
 
 WHILST IT AFFORDS A PRESENT SOLACE 
 
 TO HIS AFFLICTED FAMILY AND MOURNING FRIENDS, 
 
 AFTER PERSONAL REMEMBRANCE SHALL HAVE CEASED, 
 
 MAY PERPETUATE THE BENEFIT OF HIS EXAMPLE, 
 
 BY ENCOURAGING UNOBTRUSIVE WORTH 
 
 AND UNPATRONIZED GENIUS. 
 
 II 
 
98 MEMOIR. 
 
 In the remarkable trial of Robinson, for bigamy, 
 1813, Mr. Burrowes's power of narrative was wonder- 
 fully displayed. He was counsel for the prosecution, 
 and, in stating the case, he adopted the form of an appa- 
 rently unadorned history of the extraordinary circum- 
 stances which it contained. Without any perceptible 
 effort to exceed the simple dignity of narrative, the 
 speech contains all those qualities which are capable of 
 producing the strongest and most powerful emotions. 
 Perfect simplicity, real eloquence, without the display 
 of any of the arts of the rhetorician, lucid arrange- 
 ment, unbroken connexion of the incidents, the con- 
 stant introduction of the most picturesque expressions, 
 but never as ornaments, all the great qualities which 
 accomplish the end and purpose of narrative, are to be 
 found in this beautiful address. The orator places the 
 story and the scene before his hearers as if they wit- 
 nessed the reality. The temperate, chaste, and sub- 
 dued tone of the whole is unvaried and unbroken ; in 
 fact, descriptive eloquence rarely attained such perfec- 
 tion. Livy's beautiful story of the Roman Father is 
 not superior to this speech of Mr.Burrowes, as an exqui- 
 site specimen of narrative pathos. This is great praise, 
 but the speech will be found to justify still greater. 
 
 The facts of this case are of so extraordinary a 
 nature that they carry with them the interest of a ro- 
 mance.* " On a luckless morning, in the month of July, 
 
 * " Robinson's case contains all the romance of a fairy tale, unfor- 
 tunately (for him) combined with all the truth of history, for he 
 was convicted." — Phillips* Specimens of Irish Eloquence, page 245. 
 
MEMOIR. 99 
 
 1810" (the words of Mr. Burro wes) " the prisoner at the 
 bar presented himself at the door of Mr. Charles Berry, 
 an eminent attorney, resident on Arran-quay, in this 
 city. He was admitted to a conference ; a long and 
 fatal conference." Mr. Berry never had seen him be- 
 fore. His appearance, wretched and squalid, bore the 
 visible mark of misfortune and affliction; his enfeebled 
 frame and haggard looks excited the compassion of 
 Mr. Berry. At first, bursting into tears, as overwhelmed 
 with grief, he seemed incapable of speech. Mr. Berry 
 consoled him, and felt for him all the generous sympa- 
 thy of friendship ; a sympathy which was encouraged 
 and kept alive by introductory letters from persons in 
 whom Mr. Berry could confide, disclosing a tale so 
 overflowing with misfortunes and follies as enlisted 
 him more deeply in his favour. He, it appeared from 
 those letters, was once high in the world's estimation 
 so far at least as the sum of £100,000 — a patent mode 
 of securing respectability — could compass it. He was 
 the favourite and adopted nephew of General Robinson, 
 who had died while he was yet a child. £500 a-year 
 was devoted to his personal expenditure, and the ac- 
 quisition of such accomplishments as the most eminent 
 masters could afford him. Like other young men re- 
 leased from parental restrictions, he gave loose to the 
 most libertine and riotous excesses ; he imagined his 
 wealth knew no limits, and his profusion was un- 
 bounded. He soon purchased a commission in the 
 cavalry, and was quartered in Clonmel, where he be- 
 came attached to the eldest daughter of Mr. Stoney, of 
 
 h2 
 
100 MEMOIR. 
 
 Arranhill. He told Mr. Berry that, though still a 
 minor, Mr. Stoney suggested marriage, and they set 
 out for Scotland. On their way they arrived in Dublin, 
 and stopped at the residence of a professional gentle- 
 man, a brother-in-law of the lady, and he influenced 
 him to execute a marriage settlement amounting to 
 £20,000, and to lodge £4000 in his hands for pur- 
 poses not then defined. There he became acquainted 
 with Mr. Vigne, a jeweller, who subsequently filled no 
 unimportant part in this distressing tale. They then 
 set off for Scotland, where they were married in the 
 presence of many witnesses. Here they remained two 
 days, and thence repaired to London, where he spent 
 two years of a life compared with which his past pro- 
 fusion was temperance itself. He was the glory of 
 Newmarket, the pride of Epsom. In the language of 
 Mr. Burrowes, " he shot like a meteor across public 
 observation ; he dazzled for a week, he was recollected 
 for a month." Soon sated with all the vanity of plea- 
 sure, as his sensual enjoyments slackened, his ambition 
 rose ; he panted for senatorial eminence. Having heard 
 of a vacancy in a borough, where money was the chief 
 recommendation, he presented himself with all the 
 pomp and circumstance of a popular candidate. He 
 lavished £17,000 or £18,000 in the pursuit to no pur- 
 pose. A little while, and he was sunk from his elevation 
 to the lowest depths of penury. Bailiffs, like blood- 
 hounds, tracked his footsteps wherever he went ; Lon- 
 don became a solitude to him, and to evade them he 
 stole back to Ireland. Here he was beset with all the 
 
MEMOIR. 101 
 
 calamities of an ill-spent life. His father-in-law, who 
 had appropriated a great portion of his property, 
 spurned him from his threshold ; his wife deserted him, 
 his children were torn from him, and thus he was aban- 
 doned to the most melancholy destitution. 
 
 Such is a brief outline of the disastrous tidings Mr. 
 Berry heard. He had a compassionate heart, and not 
 only provided the wretched man with lodgings, but 
 ministered profusely to his wants. The sympathy of 
 Mr. Berry matured at last into friendship, and Robin- 
 son became an inmate of his house. 
 
 He had a lovely and accomplished daughter. How 
 beautifully Mr. Burrowes describes the duties, affections, 
 and filial attentions of a female child ; the picture may 
 stand fearless competition with the famous passage on 
 filial piety in Sheridan's immortal Begum speech. To 
 this lady Robinson paid attention ; but it never engen- 
 dered suspicion, for, besides being married, he was 
 the victim of a consuming malady. Here comes the 
 denouement. He was exceedingly fond of music, and, 
 though his life was placed in imminent danger by the 
 effort, he would go to a musical party at the jeweller's, 
 and persuaded Mr. Berry to indulge his daughter (who 
 was herself a proficient) with this gratification. Her 
 sister, a child of from ten to twelve years old, accom- 
 panied her. He was carried in the arms of servants 
 to the carriage ; he was too debilitated to walk. Their 
 marriage was celebrated at the jeweller's. On his re- 
 turn he was carried to bed in a fainting state, and of 
 course the marriage was never consummated. Such 
 
102 MEMOIR. 
 
 is the account of this harrowing transaction. It is 
 needless to say that the eloquence of Mr. Burrowes 
 prevailed, for Robinson was sentenced to seven years' 
 transportation. 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 
 The pressure of years, and the weight of increasing 
 infirmities, now began sensibly to admonish Mr. Bur- 
 rowes that the period of his retirement from his pro- 
 fession was drawing near. A host of fresh and vigo- 
 rous rivals were term after term springing up, and 
 gradually intercepting his professional emoluments. 
 He had already sustained his dignity with two gene- 
 rations at the Bar ; with the third he was unable to 
 cope. Ignorant of the arts by which blockheads dis- 
 tanced him, and too proud to demand what his station 
 and years entitled him to, he preferred the drudgery 
 of his profession rather than violate his public princi- 
 ples by ingratiating himself with a Government that 
 would have heaped honours upon his delinquency. It 
 was his fate to behold most of those in whose ranks 
 he had fought (all younger than himself) promoted 
 to high offices. Simple enough to rely on merit in a 
 venal age, when all around was corruption, he often 
 wondered at the elevation of men who only became 
 advocates when they became Judges. He, however, 
 still held on at the Bar, in the hope that some future 
 
MEMOIR. 103 
 
 administration might respect the claims of a man who 
 was so well remembered by the people. At length 
 an appointment was conferred upon him, retirement 
 from which, in due time, secured him the means of 
 repose in his old age. In the year 1821, under the 
 administration of Lord Sidmouth, he was appointed 
 Judge of the first Insolvent Debtors' Court established 
 in Ireland. On his retiring from the Leinster Bar he 
 was presented with a piece of plate, accompanied with 
 an unanimous address from that body, in terms of the 
 highest panegyric of his very eminent qualities. His 
 friends thought that his long and steady services had 
 deserved from a Government pretending to the cha- 
 racter of liberal a nobler remuneration ; that it should 
 have looked on one of the ablest, certainly the earliest 
 expounders of its principles with more benignity. 
 
 Our readers are not aware, perhaps, that, so far 
 back as the year 1783, while yet at the Temple, and a 
 member of the first regiment of Irish Brigade Volun- 
 teers, Mr. Burrowes started from the ranks, as de- 
 legate of that body, to the provincial meeting of the 
 Leinster Volunteer Delegates, instructed by his corps 
 to advance the claims of the lioman Catholics, and to 
 solicit for them the right of suffrage ; which was car- 
 ried, and referred to the National Convention * This 
 was the first serious attempt made to force the claims 
 of the Catholics on the Delegates. Mr. Burrowes said 
 " he was instructed to move the extension of the elec- 
 tive franchise to the Roman Catholics, whose behaviour 
 
 * Mr. Burrowes was a delegate from a corps of 400 men, of 
 which John Keruble, the celebrated actor, was likewise a member- 
 
104 MEMOIR. 
 
 had manifested their attachment to the Constitution. 
 He was surprised to find some gentlemen averse to 
 entering upon the subject. He was afraid an idea 
 would go abroad that they were not to receive the 
 power of voting for representatives in Parliament. It 
 would be an idea of the most fatal nature ; and gentle- 
 men should consider that their resolution on this im- 
 portant question would, in all probability, affect that 
 assembly more even than it would the Roman Catho- 
 lics themselves." Mr. Burrowes then moved, " That 
 the attachment to the Constitution, manifested by the 
 Roman Catholics, merited the extension of the elective 
 franchise to that respectable body." 
 
 The proposition caused great emotion, and the dis- 
 cussion was adjourned. In the interval many persons 
 of weight and distinction called on Mr. Burrowes, to 
 dissuade him from the measure ; but he remained firm, 
 and would not yield. 
 
 Colonel Edgeworth observed that he hoped every 
 man there, however he acted from liberality of senti- 
 ment, would disdain to be actuated by fear; for his 
 part, though he admired the eloquence of the mover of 
 the resolution, the idea hurt him, and he felt it. 
 
 Mr. Burrowes said he was sorry the gentleman 
 misunderstood him. There was a fear which he was 
 not ashamed to hold out to that assembly ; it was a 
 great, a glorious fear, — the fear of making slaves of two 
 millions of people ; the fear of being defeated in an 
 important measure ; it was the fear of doing wrong. 
 
 Major Macartney substituted the following resolu- 
 tion: " Resolved, — That a participation of the elective 
 
MEMOIR. 105 
 
 franchise to the Roman Catholics is a measure of the 
 highest importance, worthy the attention of the National 
 Convention, and therefore referred to their considera- 
 tion." 
 
 Mr. Burrowes observed that, " in hopes of una- 
 nimity, he should withdraw his former motion, and 
 adopt this. But before General Ogle would put the 
 question, he begged leave to state the difficulty of his 
 situation. He was appointed a delegate by seventeen 
 corps, not one of whom had been consulted upon 
 this subject ; he had, therefore, received no instruc- 
 tions relative thereto. No man despised pique, pre- 
 judice, or bigotry, more than he ; as an individual, 
 he would give his opinion for or against a measure 
 without hesitation, and with spirit. But he was not 
 here to act as an individual ; how then could he speak 
 the sentiments of upwards of 4000 absent men with- 
 out their ever having considered the subject, or im- 
 parted to him their opinions ? Perhaps they might 
 be of opinion that this question ought not to be agi- 
 tated at all. How then would he appear if he gave 
 the resolution his assent ? He would ever hold him- 
 self bound by the directions of his constituents ; they 
 ever should govern his conduct ; it was his duty, and 
 nothing should warp him from it." 
 
 Those who took part in the proceedings of that 
 most interesting meeting have long since passed from 
 amongst us. Mr. Burrowes spoke three days succes- 
 sively to the subject, with what power may be col- 
 lected from the following extract from the speech of 
 the late liberal and enlightened Sir Michael Smith: 
 
106 MEMOIR. 
 
 " I have not been instructed," said Sir Michael Smith, 
 " on the subject by the corps (the Lawyers') I have the 
 honour to represent ; but conceive their sentiments 
 are congenial with my own. I will support the motion. 
 Whatever doubts I may have had on the occasion they 
 are entirely removed by the gentleman (Mr. Burrowes) 
 who preceded me. I have listened attentively to his 
 arguments, and every nerve vibrated responsive to his 
 language, which may be compared to Organda's nose- 
 gay, wherever it fell it fascinated the senses." Thus, 
 on his outset in life, he displayed that intrepidity and 
 efficient zeal as a great constitutional advocate, which 
 so deservedly entitled him to the high estimation in 
 which he was held by the public and the Bar ; and 
 obliged even the enemies of liberty and toleration to 
 mention his name with respect, and contemplate his 
 eloquence with admiration. 
 
 This early efFort of Mr. Burrowes induced the 
 people, at a later period, to turn to him with hope and 
 gratitude, and to commit to his advocacy the defence 
 of their right to petition. How ably he sustained this 
 most arduous defence is still within the recollection of 
 many. We have already, in the progress of this Me- 
 moir, glanced at his conduct of this important cause ; 
 and will only add, that he evinced to the world what 
 eminent services a great mind, guided by reason, by 
 justice, by patriotism and public virtue, can confer 
 upon mankind. His successful exposure of an intole- 
 rant administration was ever afterwards remembered 
 to his disadvantage. The strong national feelings, of 
 which the effort is a most faithful record, the indomi- 
 
MEMOIR. 107 
 
 table courage with which he confronted the power of 
 the Crown and a hostile Court, precluded all chance 
 of preferment. Perhaps talents like his, exerted in 
 such a cause, discomfited and mortified Mr. Saurin ; 
 perhaps, — and what is more likely ? — env}^ poisoned the 
 source of justice in his nature, and rendered him in- 
 sensible to the worth of such an opponent ; however 
 this be, it is quite certain that Saurin henceforth re- 
 garded him in the light of a political enemy, and never 
 would recommend him for office. Though Burrowes 
 considered himself unworthily treated, he never con- 
 descended to complain. He deprecated the narrow 
 prejudice that could induce a man to overlook the 
 claims of every one engaged, however conscientiously, 
 in the discharge of a public duty, and thought that he, 
 himself, would have done more generous justice to 
 a political adversary, were he in Mr. Saurin's place. 
 " Proprium humani ingenii est, odisse quern Iceseris." 
 The public and the profession entertained a very gene- 
 ral feeling of disappointment that he was not promoted 
 to the Bench ; his blameless character and profound 
 learning would have adorned any seat of justice. 
 
 The tribute that was at length paid to his worth, 
 through the kind offices of a personal friend, however 
 slow and inadequate as a measure of compensation for 
 his splendid services, was received with a hearty wel- 
 come. Mr. Burrowes's fortune was not large, and his 
 liberality kept more than equal pace with it. Though 
 he was, for many years of his life, in what is called 
 full practice, possessing more experience in the com- 
 
108 MEMOIR. 
 
 mon law Courts than Lord Manners, Mr. Downes, and 
 Mr. Saurin, taken conjointly together, he was too 
 generous and hospitable in his habits to accumulate 
 money. The author has known him to assert, that, 
 during the period of his connexion with the Commis- 
 sioners of the Revenue, as senior advising counsel, he 
 calculated his fees as over £9000 per annum. Not- 
 withstanding this, he was, at the close of his life, com- 
 paratively poor. His generosity was continually point- 
 ing out objects to which it was impossible for his 
 nature to"refuse relief. A striking illustration of this 
 disposition occurred in the year 1832, when the cho- 
 lera first visited these kingdoms. An old and faithful 
 servant (James Curran), whose devotion to his master 
 was the constant theme of Mr. Burrowes's commenda- 
 tion, became, in consequence, the object of his bounty 
 and solicitude. His unselfish nature prompted him, 
 at considerable personal inconvenience, voluntarily to 
 deprive himself of this man's services in order the bet- 
 ter to promote his welfare. Summoning him to his 
 study one morning, he, in the most feeling manner, 
 acquainted him that the relations which subsisted be- 
 tween them for so long a period, and which, he be- 
 lieved, neither had cause to regret, were now at an 
 end ; and inquired if he might know his future plans, 
 and how he could requite such fidelity. The poor 
 fellow supplicated hard to be retained still about his 
 master's person, but Mr. Burrowes would not hear of 
 it. He then advanced him £300, and proposed that 
 he should establish himself as an innkeeper in Mo- 
 
MEMOIR. 109 
 
 naghan, his native town. In the course of some time, 
 and notwithstanding the most diligent application to 
 business, Curran's affairs became embarrassed. On 
 the breaking out of the cholera the poor fellow was 
 one of its first victims. lie had, without apprizing any- 
 one, effected an insurance on his life for £300, which 
 was immediately paid over to Mr. Burrowes's credit in 
 Ball's Bank. Alive to every feeling of honour him- 
 self, Mr. Burrowes conceived the highest admiration 
 for Curran's conduct, which was enhanced by the 
 pressure of the extremest poverty, to which the de- 
 rangement of his affairs had reduced him at the time. 
 With that friendly impetuosity which ever marked his 
 generous and ardent nature, he forced back the entire 
 sum upon the bereaved widow. 
 
 Several little anecdotes might here be related that 
 do honour to his heart, but avarice was no vice or 
 weakness of his. He was more than generous, he was 
 lavish. Lord Plunket could not resist the opportunity 
 which presented itself, on one occasion, of admonishing 
 his friend for this improvidence, which he said was 
 most censurable. After the successful issue of his 
 Lordship's contest with Mr. Croker, for the represen- 
 tation of the University, he was in the habit of giving 
 entertainments to his political supporters. On those 
 occasions he discharged the duties of host with pecu- 
 liar felicity. No man was more happy in those little 
 effusions of wit or of sentiment which enliven and sus- 
 tain a convivial meeting. He, on one of those occa- 
 sions, got up to propose Mr. Burrowes's health ; and 
 
110 MEMOIR. 
 
 commenced, with a very severe expression of counte- 
 nance, by pretending to abuse him : " I know no man," 
 says he, "who has more to answer for; he has spent 
 his life in doing acts of kindness to every human being 
 but himself. He lias been prodigal of his time, his 
 trouble, and his fortune, to a degree that is quite inex- 
 cusable. In short, I know no way of accounting for 
 such an anomaly, but by supposing him utterly desti- 
 tute of the instinct of selfishness." 
 
 The friendship that subsisted between those two 
 men was something bordering upon idolatry; the 
 growth of mutual esteem and mutual affection, it was 
 alike honourable to both. In the memorable contest 
 between Plunket and Mr. Croker, for the representa- 
 tion of the University, the state of the poll might have 
 beengathered from Burro wes's aspect — bright or black, 
 as the votes alternated, till, victory at length proclaim- 
 ing itself for his friend, he rushed into the College 
 Courts perfectly intoxicated with joy. Plunket was 
 returned by the narrow majority of four ; the Provost, 
 and the greater number of Senior Fellows, declared 
 against him ; but Burrowes (whose exertions were in- 
 defatigable) and the great majority of the Scholars, sup- 
 ported him with the most disinterested ardour. The 
 late worthy and excellent Provost Lloyd, whose pro- 
 found learning and abundant virtues endeared him to 
 all, actually pressed Burrowes to become a candidate 
 on this occasion, intimating that he had already can- 
 vassed the borough for him, and had received the most 
 flattering assurances of support from a large and in- 
 
MEMOIR. Ill 
 
 fluential proportion of the constituency ; but the inte- 
 rest of his friend entirely absorbed his faculties, and 
 Burrowes rejected a position which, it must be ad- 
 mitted, laid the foundation of much of Plunket's sub- 
 sequent prosperity. 
 
 Had Mr. Plunket been unsuccessful on this occa- 
 sion, he would not have had the opportunity of render- 
 ing that service to Government, in the case of the Man- 
 chester riots, which led ultimately to that connexion 
 which entitled him, a short time afterwards, to office 
 and distinction. Overtures were made to Lord Gren- 
 ville by Lord Castlereagh, which ended in a promise 
 of support from that section of the Opposition of which 
 the former nobleman was the accredited representa- 
 tive. Mr. Plunket accordingly, shortly after his elec- 
 tion for the University, appeared in the House of 
 Commons, to defend what was called the " massacre of 
 Peterloo." His speech was one of great power, and 
 was not more gratifying to Ministers than offensive to 
 his former friends ; Lord Grey describing him, in a 
 letter to a friend, at that time residing in this country, 
 as having exhibited " more than the zeal of an apostate." 
 
 There are some still living who may, perhaps, 
 remember Mr. Burro wes's motion for a criminal in- 
 formation against a printer, in the matter of Robert 
 Emmet. The case was one that deeply affected the 
 feelings of Mr. Plunket. The late unfortunate Robert 
 Emmet was represented, in his dying speech, to have 
 reproached Plunket with inculcating the very princi- 
 ples for which he was about to suffer, and which, as 
 
112 MEMOIR. 
 
 Crown prosecutor, he thought proper to condemn on 
 his trial with such eager zeal ; with having, in defiance 
 of all decency and humanity, selected the moment when 
 he anticipated the approach of the executioner, to pro- 
 claim his political recantation ; and, in fine, with having, 
 as a constant guest of his father's table, and after being 
 warmed in his bosom, stung his son to death. These 
 were heavy imputations ; never was calumny more 
 unfounded. The allegations were untrue, and Emmet 
 never gave them utterance ; he was far too noble- 
 minded. The whole was an interpolation of some per- 
 sonal enemy. There is nothing, however, (as a dis- 
 tinguished writer observes), that has such vitality as 
 slander; dissect it as you may, like a dissevered ser- 
 pent, its venom will still quiver with a simulated ani- 
 mation. Plunket had, in two separate affidavits, vainly 
 supposed he had established his vindication. He was 
 now compelled to make a third, and Burrowes moved 
 on it. Mr. Plunket merely sought to remove from his 
 character the stigma of treachery and ingratitude. The 
 public well understood Burrowes' s enthusiastic admi- 
 ration of the Emmet family, and Plunket was sensible 
 that few, if any, would be found bold enough to ques- 
 tion the sincerity of a vindication emanating from such 
 a quarter. 
 
 No one circumstance reflects more honour on Lord 
 Plunket's character as a man, than the unalterable re- 
 gard with which he repaid the unshaken friendship 
 of Burrowes, a friendship of which the highest in- 
 dividual in the land might feel justly proud. When 
 
MEMOIR. 113 
 
 he had raised himself, by his own superior genius (for 
 he never had a patron), to office and power, upon the 
 passing of the Irish Insolvent Debtors' Act, he recom- 
 mended Burrowes for the appointment of Chief Com- 
 missioner. Through his means the last days of his 
 friend were passed in ease and contentment, having, 
 in the year 1835, negociated with the Melbourne Ca- 
 binet a retiring allowance of £1600 a-year ; and very 
 soon after gave a further instance of his attachment 
 by appointing his son his purse bearer, upon the pro- 
 motion of the Honourable. Patrick Plunket to the 
 office of Commissioner of Bankrupts. His son's pre- 
 ferment came upon Mr. Burrowes by surprise. Lord 
 Plunket was preceded, in an evening visit to Burrowes, 
 at his residence in Leeson-street, by his son, the pre- 
 sent Bishop of Tuam, who was directed to apprize him 
 that his father would soon follow to play a hit at back- 
 gammon. Por some time their success was various, 
 but in the end his Lordship was completely victorious. 
 On rising to take leave he observed: "Well, Burrowes, 
 I owe you some reparation for the drubbing I have 
 just given you ; I waited upon the Lord Lieutenant 
 this morning, and requested his approval of the ap- 
 pointment of Peter as my purse bearer; the appoint- 
 ment being one which conferred the privilege of the 
 entree on the individual who holds it, it became neces- 
 sary to secure His Excellency's approbation, who was 
 pleased not only to approve, but to compliment me 
 upon my selection." 
 
 i 
 
114 
 
 CHAPTER XI. 
 
 In the year 1835 Mr. Burrowes retired from the Insol- 
 vent Debtors' Court, the duties of which he had con- 
 tinued to discharge for fifteen years. His decisions 
 were generally distinguished for humanity towards the 
 unfortunate debtor ; though, on the other hand, when- 
 ever he detected any attempt at imposition or fraud, 
 he visited it with the utmost severity. Here, as every- 
 where, a spirit of benevolence breathed over his con- 
 duct. It was a heart-warming spectacle to see the 
 old man presiding in his Court up to 11 o'clock at 
 night on Christmas Eve, unconscious of fatigue, while 
 contemplating the privations endured by the family of 
 the unfortunate insolvent during the period of his in- 
 carceration, and anticipating the joy that would again 
 visit his once happy home on the festival of the morrow. 
 As no man, however fearless and faithful the dis- 
 charge of his public duty may be, can hope to close 
 his career unassailed by misrepresentation, Mr. Bur- 
 rowes was not spared. In the course of his judicial 
 life he appears to have incurred the displeasure of an 
 insolvent, who, having consented to allocate a portion 
 of his half-pay for the purpose of liquidating debts 
 from which he then sought relief, afterwards thought 
 proper to complain of the order which was framed 
 upon that consent, and which was certainly made in 
 
MEMOIR. 115 
 
 compassion to him. In proof of the insolent spirit by 
 which this man was actuated towards an honourable 
 public character, deciding in all cases to the best of 
 his judgment, he addressed the following letter to 
 Mr. Burro wes: 
 
 " Sir, — Having a motion depending in the Court against 
 the Chief Clerk, your nephew, and as you are interested on 
 your own behalf, as well as on behalf of your nephew, in the 
 result, I hope you will yourself perceive the indelicacy, after 
 this intimation, of sitting or presiding on the hearing of this 
 motion, particularly as I have complaints of so serious a na- 
 ture pending against both you and your nephew before the 
 Government. 
 
 " I hope you will intimate to me your decision on this sub- 
 ject on or before the sitting of the Court on Friday next. 
 " I have the honour to be, Sir, 
 
 " Your humble Servant, 
 
 "L. Levingstone. 
 " Mr. Commissioner Burrowes." 
 
 Two days after the date of the above letter, Mr. 
 Burrowes came down to Court, and having taken his 
 seat on the Bench, he directed Mr. Levingstone to be 
 called ; when he appeared, Mr. Burrowes said, a let- 
 ter had been left at his house, purporting to come 
 from Mr. Levingstone, and signed by him, and which 
 letter he should read aloud. (He here read the let- 
 ter, and proceeded): "I think it is a rule for any 
 Judge, actuated by right feelings, not to allow a man, 
 by answering suddenly, to put himself in a situation 
 from which disagreeable results may follow from his 
 acknowledgment. Circumstances not connected in 
 any manner with this letter would have prevented 
 
 i2 
 
116 MEMOIR. 
 
 me from sitting in Court on the 20th instant, but, 
 in consequence of the receipt of this letter, I will, if 
 at all possible, attend." Mr. Burrowes here directed 
 the letter to be handed to Mr. Levingstone, and then 
 told him he should have full time to pause before an- 
 swering the Court this question, namely, whether he 
 was the writer of that letter, or whether it was written 
 by his authority ? Levingstone, unable or unwilling to 
 endure the rebuke his audacity had provoked, abruptly 
 left the Court. 
 
 Mr. Burrowes did attend the hearing, and, having 
 overruled the relief sought, thus concluded his obser- 
 vation on the entire case : " I have one word to say, in 
 order to protect my honour from the unworthy attack 
 of the gentleman who had the audacity to stigmatize 
 me as co-criminal with the assignee, and to write me a 
 letter advising me not to act in my judicial capacity 
 during the investigation of his case. I have only to 
 observe most positively, that I would not have been 
 here were it not that that letter had been written ; 
 and I now give full liberty to the individual who made 
 this base observation on me, to circulate all over the 
 world any subject he pleases respecting my principles 
 and my conduct ; and if he were to libel me I assure 
 him I would not be at the trouble of prosecuting him." 
 He was assisted in this investigation by his colleague. 
 Mr. Commissioner Lloyd, a gentleman of the nicest 
 sense of honour, whose indignation was kindled by the 
 insinuation that Mr. Burrowes could be influenced, in 
 his decision, by any human consideration except the 
 merits of the case. Mr. Sergeant Lloyd was an ho- 
 
MEMOIR. 117 
 
 nourable and distinguished member of the Irish Bar, 
 who, modestly and wisely confining his exertions to 
 the pursuit of his profession, arrived at the highest 
 degree of eminence in it. On the demise of Mr. Com- 
 missioner Parsons he received this appointment, in the 
 enjoyment of which he bounded his ambition at a time 
 when he might have obtained higher preferment. The 
 affair under consideration, though in itself as unimpor- 
 tant as the individual who brought it forward, was 
 destined to consume much of the public time, and fur- 
 nished a remarkable instance of official indiscretion 
 which received from Mr. Burrowes a dignified and 
 well-merited rebuke. This slanderer of honourable 
 and honoured men was no sooner liberated from prison, 
 by the intervention of the Court, than he commenced 
 distributing the poison which rankled in his mind, by 
 circulating the most scandalous reports respecting the 
 administration of justice in the Court. Ever fertile in 
 invention, he concocted a plan by which Sir William 
 Gossett and the Marquis of Anglesea were completely 
 duped. 
 
 On the 13th of May, 1833, Mr. Burrowes received 
 a letter from the Secretary, Sir William Gossett, by 
 His Excellency's command, enclosing copies of charges 
 seriously implicating the character of his Court, and 
 the due administration of justice, to which letter he 
 returned the following answer: 
 
 " Insolvent Debtors' Court, May 17, 1833. 
 " Sir, — I had the honour of receiving your letter of the 
 13th instant, conveying copies of documents ; with His Excel- 
 
118 MEMOIR. 
 
 lency the Lord Lieutenant's request that, after conferring with 
 Mr. Commissioner Lloyd, 1 should suggest such proceedings 
 as should be adapted for the investigation of the charges 
 (meaning the charges contained in the several letters of which 
 you have sent copies to me), involving in a material degree 
 the character of the Insolvent Court and the administration of 
 justice. 
 
 " I request you may assure His Excellency that Mr. Lloyd 
 and I will zealously and anxiously assist in any investigation 
 which may be deemed necessary, of any misconduct imputed 
 by these letters to any of the officers of the Insolvent Court ; 
 but feeling, as I cannot but feel, that I am myself plainly, 
 though indirectly, accused, in the first letter, of sanctioning the 
 imputed misconduct of the officers, as does also Mr. Commis- 
 sioner Lloyd, though in a less degree, I cannot abstain from 
 requesting that you will have the goodness to communicate to 
 His Excellency my wish (in which Mr. Commissioner Lloyd 
 joins), that His Excellency may continue to commit the inves- 
 tigation of these charges to the guidance and superintendence 
 of Mr. Sergeant O'Loghlen, to whom, from a well-deserved 
 confidence in his talents and integrity, His Excellency origi- 
 nally committed the inquiry. 
 
 " It would not become me upon this occasion to make 
 any remarks upon any of the particular charges contained 
 in the several letters, or the motives whence they originated. 
 But I think I owe it to you, and to His Excellency, to apprize 
 you of the gross imposition which I have no doubt has been 
 attempted to be practised upon you. The concealed author of 
 the three letters, I am inclined to think, hoped not only to 
 escape the imputation of being an unavowed accuser, but to 
 impress upon His Excellency's mind that the abuses of the In- 
 solvent Court were so gross and notorious that three different 
 individuals came forward from different quarters as open 
 accusers. Accordingly, the first letter, it appears, is signed 
 
MEMOIR. 119 
 
 ' William Armstrong,' but without any address ; the second is 
 signed ' Richard Henderson, Britain-street,' without any num- 
 ber. The third is signed ' Henry Morton, Pembroke-street,' 
 also without any number. Now 1 have caused inquiry to be 
 made, and am credibly informed that no account can be had of 
 any such persons so named living in these streets ; and I have 
 other grounds which convince me that the names are fictitious. 
 " His Excellency will, I have no doubt, duly estimate the 
 credit which ought to be given to a charge so brought for- 
 ward. 
 
 " I have the honour to be, Sir, 
 
 " Your most obedient Servant, 
 
 " Peter Burrowes. 
 " To Sir William Gossett, Secretary, 
 
 Dublin Castle." 
 Government confided the conduct of this inquiry 
 to the late Sir Michael O'Loghlen, a selection which 
 well merited the expression of Mr. Burrowes's appro- 
 bation. After an investigation, which was unusually 
 protracted, and for which his acuteness of discrimina- 
 tion was admirably adapted, he concluded his report 
 to his Excellency with this emphatic sentence : " My 
 Lord, I am of opinion that those charges have most 
 signally failed in every particular." The incident 
 very much tended to increase the ardour of the esteem 
 which those men mutually entertained for each other. 
 With regard to Sir Michael O'Loghlen, whenever the 
 name occurs, one cannot forbear to sigh at the reflec- 
 tion that the genius, which shed such lustre upon the 
 Bar of Ireland, and those amiable qualities which so 
 often soothe and gladden life, were suffered to exist no 
 longer in the possessor than until he had attained the 
 
120 MEMOIR. 
 
 age of fifty-four years. Eight years since Ins removal 
 have already written the eulogium of this celebrated 
 lawyer, who has transmitted to posterity a name most 
 illustrious in the annals of his native land. 
 
 Mr. Burrowes displayed, at the close of his life, the 
 same attachment to his principles which distinguished 
 the days of his vigorous manhood. In his eighty- 
 seventh year he attended the meeting convened at the 
 Adelphi Theatre, for the purpose of congratulating 
 Lord Fortescue on assuming the Irish Government ; 
 and here he was unexpectedly called on to second the 
 address. His venerable appearance in moving for- 
 ward, once more enlisted in the cause of a liberal and 
 enlightened administration, gave rise to the most voci- 
 ferous cheering. These were the last words he ever 
 uttered in public : 
 
 " My Lord and Gentlemen, — I came here by 
 accident, and did not expect I would be called upon 
 to take so prominent a part in your proceedings. In- 
 deed I never thought I should raise my voice in a 
 public assembly again. I have been requested, for 
 which I return my most grateful thanks to the gentle- 
 men who made that request, to second the address 
 which has been read for you ; and I gladly respond to 
 that call, for I consider it highly honourable to be 
 intrusted with the performance of such a duty. It is 
 not within my reach, either physically or intellectually, 
 now to do justice to the great subject contained in that 
 address. All I shall say is, that, through the course 
 of a long life, the very term ' ascendancy' afflicted my 
 
MEMOIR. 121 
 
 feelings ; and I never could hear it without regret, in 
 consequence of the abuses to which it has led. I feel 
 now the term receives a correction, by applying it to 
 the whole community; and shall conclude with this 
 sentiment, and the expression of the hope that I might 
 live still further to see the whole country ascendant, 
 and every individual belonging to that country certain 
 of justice. I beg to repeat my thanks for the honour 
 conferred upon me, and to second the adoption of the 
 address." 
 
 The Earl of Charlemont, on putting the question, 
 said " that he was highly gratified to see the veteran 
 friend of Ireland coming forward with the same senti- 
 ments of liberty which rendered illustrious his long 
 and honourable life." And Mr. Grattan, who rose 
 immediately after him, passed the following handsome 
 encomium upon his father's friend: " What would the 
 House of Lords say [meaning Lord Normanby's ca- 
 lumniators*], if they had seen that old and venerable 
 man, who has just taken his seat, coming forward, 
 and, like Priam, putting on the armour of his youth, 
 to oppose those modern Achilles. Is not such a sight 
 sufficient to make his youthful countrymen rally round 
 this veteran patriot ? My Lord, he now comes to place 
 his name in the roll of immortality. I know the his- 
 tory of that individual, — I know him in private, — but 
 I know 6 far better his public virtues, his honest, incor- 
 ruptible, and virtuous nature. I know his splendid 
 
 * Lord Rodcn, in the House of Lords, had recently moved an 
 impeachment of the Noble Marquis's Government in Ireland. 
 
122 MEMOIR. 
 
 eloquence in praise of the man whose name I bear ; 
 but it is no private sentiment that induces me to speak 
 of him now. No ; it is his virtue and patriotism, and 
 his unbounded courage in coming forward at the hour 
 of peril and of need in defence of the liberties of his 
 country. I rejoice that, before he goes to that place 
 where we are all hastening, and where he will receive 
 the reward of a virtuous life, I rejoice that this oppor- 
 tunity has been afforded him of adding one flower to 
 that glorious wreath that already adorns his venerable 
 brow." Mr. O'Connell also paid a just tribute to Mr. 
 Burrowes's worth on this occasion. " Take the tem- 
 ple of justice. Do you remember what old Saurin 
 used to call 'his days of justice' ? Did not Major Sirr, 
 in the presence of Dr. Sheridan, — and I cannot name 
 him without recollecting what a brilliant mind was his 
 [pointing to Mr. Burrowes] ; how great were his ta- 
 lents, how brilliant was the gleam which shone from 
 his imagination, accompanied by the most irresistible 
 logic, and adorned by the most brilliant phraseology, 
 which insured a victory from an honest jury, and 
 made justice triumph over the malignity of a party." 
 
 Owing to the decay of his sight, Mr. Burrowes re- 
 paired to London in the year 1841, for the purpose of 
 consulting the celebrated oculist, Dr. Alexander. His 
 friend, Lord Plunket, had met with an ungrateful re- 
 turn from his party for all his splendid services, having 
 been supplanted in his office of Irish Lord Chancellor 
 by Sir John Campbell, the English Attorney-General. 
 That Lord Plunket keenly felt a course of proceeding 
 
MEMOIR. 123 
 
 so mortifying is clear from his farewell address to the 
 Bar. It is very generally believed that his Lordship 
 was not even consulted upon the matter. On his way 
 to Nice he took leave of Mr. Burro wes ; it was a long 
 and afFecting interview ; he saw his friend, he well 
 knew, for the last time, and was so overpowered by his 
 feelings that he was obliged to be supported to his 
 carriage. Mr. Burro wes was observed to droop from 
 that moment. A severe attack of influenza, from which 
 he partially rallied, very soon after closed his existence 
 in his eighty-ninth year. In his will he bequeathed a 
 gold snuff-box to Lord Plunket, as a trifling memorial 
 of his love, which he invested with all his old gran- 
 deur of sentiment. The bequest was conceived in these 
 terms: "To my friend, Lord Plunket, whom Nature 
 hath ennobled." 
 
 CHAPTER XII. 
 
 In religion, as is well known, Mr. Burrowes was a sin- 
 cere and enlightened member of the Church of Eng- 
 land. The honourable pre-eminence which he attained, 
 in advocating a cause which oftentimes appeared hope- 
 less, but which he, nevertheless, had the good fortune 
 to see crowned with success, is equally well known. We 
 refer to his long and arduous struggle for the emanci- 
 pation of his Roman Catholic fellow-countrymen from 
 the civil disabilities which the intolerance of ages had 
 
124 MEMOIR. 
 
 heaped upon them. His conduct on the death of his 
 eldest brother, the Rev. Dr. Burrowes, cannot fail, we 
 think, to establish his character as a Christian and a gen- 
 tleman ; and evinced a sterling instance of devotion, 
 consistency, and good feeling, which seems to call for 
 particular notice here. Mr. Grattan, in his memoirs 
 of his illustrious father, adverts to the calamity which 
 then befell the family, but was under a misapprehen- 
 sion when he stated that the late Rev. Mr. Burrowes 
 was " opposed to his brother in politics, and hostile to 
 the people." The unfortunate gentleman was, on the 
 contrary, an enemy to every species of intolerance, the 
 very principles of liberty being engrafted on his heart. 
 His opinion and advice, in cases of domestic trouble or 
 difficulty, were sought for and prized by his parishion- 
 ers of every persuasion ; and frequently in the night he 
 was known to rise from his bed to quell disturbances 
 in the neighbouring village of Oulart, and always effec- 
 tually, so respected and esteemed was his clerical and 
 private character. The Rev. Mr. Sinnot, a respectable 
 Roman Catholic clergyman of an adjoining parish, was 
 a constant guest at his table, and to whom his house was 
 always open. These few particulars will, we hope, dis- 
 prove the charge, rather inconsiderately brought against 
 him, of a contrary spirit. The occurrence, so pregnant 
 with misfortune to Mr. Burrowes's family, and which is 
 noticed by the Marquis of Londonderry, in his Life and 
 Correspondence of the late Lord Castlereagh, was very 
 correctly told by Sir Richard Musgrave, as it was 
 related to him by Mrs. Burrowes herself. He says : 
 
MEMOIR. 125 
 
 " The murder of the Rev. Dr. Burrowes, rector of Kil- 
 muckridge, and the burning of his glebe-house at Kyle, 
 were marked by circumstances of peculiar atrocity. 
 Some of Dr. Burrowes's Protestant parishioners, dread- 
 ing that they would fall a prey to the sanguinary rage 
 of Father John Murphy, took refuge in the house at 
 Kyle on Saturday evening. One Murphy, though a 
 United Irishman, had candour and humanity enough to 
 inform Mr. Burrowes, about eleven o'clock that night, 
 that his house would be attacked early next morning 
 by a party of rebels. In consequence of this informa- 
 tion he, his family, and his parishioners, sat up all night, 
 and barricaded the lower part of the house, which was 
 attacked at sunrise by about 500 rebels. 
 
 " It was vigorously defended for some time, many 
 shots having been fired by the assailants and the be- 
 sieged. At last the rebels set fire to the out-ofTices, 
 which were quickly consumed, and soon after to the 
 dwelling-house, which was in a short time in a state of 
 conflagration. The rapid progress of the flames in the 
 latter was imputed to some unctuous combustible mat- 
 ter applied to the doors and windows of the house, 
 which the rebels frequently used in the course of the 
 rebellion. 
 
 " The besieged, being in danger of suffocation from 
 the thickness of the smoke, resolved to quit the house, 
 however perilous it might be ; and they were encou- 
 raged to do so by Dr. Murphy, who assured them that 
 they should not be injured if they surrendered them- 
 selves without any further resistance. Relying on his 
 
126 MEMOIR. 
 
 promise, they quitted the house ; on which they trea- 
 cherously murdered Mr. Burrowes and seven of his 
 parishioners ; and gave his son, a youth of sixteen 
 years, so severe a wound in the belly with a pike, that 
 for some time he lay motionless, and apparently dead. 
 Mrs. Burrowes, her four children, and Miss Clifford, 
 her niece, continued for twelve hours to weep over the 
 mangled bodies of her husband and his seven parish- 
 ioners, and to console and administer relief to her son, 
 who was in excruciating agonies, and bleeding so co- 
 piously that every moment he expected his dissolution. 
 
 " The horror of the scene was heightened by the 
 house in a state of conflagration, discharging immense 
 volumes of flame and smoke, and emitting such heat 
 that the unfortunate sufferers could scarce endure it. 
 All her household furniture and her clothes, except 
 what she and her children wore, were destroyed by the 
 fire. 
 
 [Mrs. Magawley, a Roman Catholic, who kept a 
 small inn at Oulart, towards the close of evening, 
 sought out this wretched family, and administered 
 nourishment to the son, who was apparently in a dying 
 condition. Mrs. Burrowes, her children, and Miss Clif- 
 ford, her niece, with her son, who was carried on a 
 door, repaired to this kind woman's house, about half 
 a quarter of a mile off, whose humane treatment at such 
 a time deserves to be noticed.] 
 
 li These unfortunate sufferers remained there till 
 Tuesday, the 29 th day of May, and during that time 
 her son did not receive any medical assistance. They 
 
MEMOIR. 127 
 
 were escorted by a party of rebels to Castle Annesley, 
 the seat of her father, Mr. Clifford, about five miles 
 off, where they were kept as prisoners till the town of 
 Wexford was taken from the rebels." 
 
 Copy of Affidavit made before Hon. Judge Downes, by 
 Thomas Clifford Burro wes, Esq., late of Kyle, 
 County Wexford. 
 
 " This deponent saith that the late Rev. Robert 
 Burrowes, this deponent's father, was rector of the pa- 
 rish of Kilinuckridge, county Wexford, and resided 
 with his family, consisting of this deponent's mother, 
 the deponent, aged between fifteen and sixteen years, 
 and two brothers and two sisters, all younger than 
 this deponent, upon the lands of Kyle, within about 
 half a quarter of a mile of the village of Oulart, which 
 is distant about ten miles from the town of Wex- 
 ford ; that upon Saturday evening, the 26th of May 
 last, several of the parishioners of Kilinuckridge, and 
 other loyal inhabitants of the neighbourhood of this 
 deponent's father, with their families, took refuge in 
 his house from an attack which they said was to be 
 made on them by a numerous body of rebels ; that they 
 continued in said house until eleven o'clock of said 
 night, when a man named Murphy came to the house, 
 and informed deponent's father, as this deponent has 
 heard and believes, that he, said Murphy, was himself 
 a United Irishman, and warned deponent's father to 
 protect himself against an attack which was intended 
 to be made at daylight in the morning ; that this depo- 
 
128 MEMOIR. 
 
 nent looked out about the house, and that, it being an 
 uncommonly light night, they could clearly discern men 
 crowding about the adjacent cabins, and lurking about 
 the hedges and ditches ; that, having fire-arms and 
 ammunition sufficient for eight or nine persons in said 
 house, they resolved to defend themselves to the last 
 extremity ; that they accordingly barricaded the lower 
 part of the house, and stationed themselves at the upper 
 windows at different sides of it. Deponent saith that 
 about sunrise of said morning a numerous body of 
 rebels, amounting to 300 or 400 persons, as this depo- 
 nent believes, armed principally with pikes, approached 
 said house, and attacked the same, and set fire to a 
 range of thatched out-houses belonging to and adjoin- 
 ing said dwelling-house, and fired several shots at the 
 windows at which this deponent and said men were 
 stationed, and, notwithstanding the utmost efforts of 
 this deponent and said men, by firing several shots at 
 said rebels, and killing and wounding several of them 
 as they approached said house, the said rebels set fire 
 to the kitchen-door, which shortly after came to the 
 staircase, and other parts of said house. 
 
 " This deponent saith that after a defence of about 
 half an hour, being in danger of being suffocated by 
 the smoke, or consumed by the flames, and one Mur- 
 phy, a priest, who headed said party, having promised 
 protection to deponent's father, upon condition of sur- 
 rendering his arms, deponent and his father issued 
 from said house, and this deponent and his father gave 
 up their fire-arms, whereupon a shot was immediately 
 
MEMOIR. 120 
 
 fired at the deponent, and deponent's father wasattaeked 
 and murdered by several men, and this deponent himself 
 was severely wounded by a stab of a pike through the 
 body, and left by the side of his father, apparently dead; 
 and that seven of the nine men, who were armed by this 
 deponent's father in defence of the house, were mur- 
 dered, and that the house and furniture, plate, clothing, 
 leases, securities for money, and property of every kind 
 contained in said house, were destroyed ; and that the 
 entire stock upon the grounds, belonging to the depo- 
 nent's father, except four cows and two calves, were 
 taken away by said rebels ; that this deponent, about 
 three o'clock of the afternoon of said day, after the 
 said mob had departed, was found languishing in the 
 lawn before said house, and conveyed upon a door to 
 the village of Oulart, where deponent's mother and 
 brothers and sisters had been received ; and that, on 
 Tuesday, the twenty-ninth of said month, this deponent, 
 his mother, and brothers and sisters, were escorted by 
 a party of said rebels to Castle Annesley, about five 
 miles distant, and kept in custody by a party of said 
 rebels until Wexford was retaken ; and General Need- 
 ham, having discovered where they were, sent a party 
 of the Durham Fencibles, who escorted this deponent, 
 and the rest of the family of this deponent's father, to 
 Wexford, where deponent's mother, his brothers and 
 sisters, are now living." 
 
 One might reasonably suppose that the murder 
 of a dear relative, the surviving members of whose 
 family were now thrown upon his protection, would 
 
 K 
 
130 MEMOIR. 
 
 have interrupted his attachment for a cause to which 
 he had tendered his unceasing and energetic support. 
 But Mr. Burro wes was sustained throughout all his 
 professional exertions on behalf of the insurrectionists 
 by the conviction that his unfortunate brother became 
 a victim to the unwise system of legislation which had 
 provoked this sanguinary outrage. 
 
 When young, Mr. Burrowes was remarkable for 
 great activity and bodily strength ; many are the feats 
 that are recorded of his College days. He was known 
 to walk from Dublin to Portarlington, a distance of 
 forty miles, and dance at a ball given in the Market- 
 house the same night, without seeming to suffer the 
 slightest fatigue. On one occasion he was proceeding 
 slowly down Grafton- street towards the College, accom- 
 panied by the Rev. Dean Burrowes, when he thought he 
 perceived an individual watching their movements, and 
 listening to their conversation. The system of espio- 
 nage was at that time rife ; the unfortunate brothers, 
 Sheares, had just been given for execution. Having 
 satisfied himself of the correctness of his suspicions, he 
 pushed the Dean inside the College gate, observing, as 
 he did so, " You have nothing to say to this ;" and, 
 turning round, he soundly belaboured the intruder. 
 
 Some short time after his call to the Bar, his reso- 
 lution and extraordinary presence of mind were se- 
 verely tested. It was in the evening, at Greek-street, 
 where he then resided, as he was preparing to go cir- 
 cuit the following morning; and being much pressed for 
 time, he rang the bell for his servant man to assist him 
 
MEMOIR. 131 
 
 in the operation of packing. Having occasion to leave 
 the room for a few moments, he returned, and, to his 
 horror, almost immediately discovered the loss of a 
 fifty pound note, all he possessed in the world. He felt 
 he was ruined. He could not join the circuit. He saw 
 the note in his desk but a few moments before he left 
 the room, lie at once rang the bell ; the servant, a 
 man of powerful frame, appeared ; Burro wes never 
 paused to ask him a single question, — he said " he had 
 not time," — but, bounding upon him, he grasped him by 
 the throat, and, flinging him to the ground, demanded 
 his fifty pound note: the man put his hand (which was 
 released for that purpose) in his pocket, and restored it. 
 Like most people who enjoy a strong constitution, 
 Mr. Burrowes was not an enemy to convivial enjoy- 
 ments. His qualities in this respect were highly es- 
 teemed ; no entertainment was dull at which he assisted. 
 His humour, which was pure and natural, and withal 
 perfectly classical, flowed in one inexhaustible stream. 
 A good-humoured playfulness of manner, not incon- 
 sistent with youth, nor yet unworthy of age, seems al- 
 ways to have attended him. Frequently, even when 
 an old man, young and beautiful women would draw 
 near him, catching delight and instruction from his 
 engaging conversation. The late Dr. Whitley Stokes, 
 Fellow of Trinity College, a gentleman, the variety 
 and extent of whose attainments were only exceeded 
 by the number and intensity of his virtues, gave, on 
 one occasion, an entertainment to a few select friends, 
 
 every one of whom was more or less distinguished 
 
 k2 
 
132 MEMOIR. 
 
 for splendid talents. The late Dr. Davenport, Fellow of 
 Trinity College, Lord Plunket, Dr. Moody, the Presby- 
 terian Minister, and George llennington, were of the 
 party. In the course of the evening's entertainment, 
 and in order to animate the discourse, the question was 
 proposed as to what was that quality which rendered 
 a man the most agreeable and desirable companion. 
 The company delivered their statements on the subject 
 seriatim. Some ascribed it to eloquence, some to wit and 
 eloquence combined ; others attributed it toluxuriancy 
 of fancy and purity in the choice of words, added to 
 cae and dexterity in their harmonious and happy ar- 
 rangement; some again ascribed it to retentiveness 
 of memory in communicating with facility anecdotes 
 abounding in pleasantry and variety ; some to historic 
 reminiscences ; others to extensive philosophic research. 
 Burrowes shouted, " Are you all done ?" All present 
 were prepared for some elaborate enunciation of his 
 opinion; they were electrified on his exclaiming with 
 an energy of gesticulation so peculiarly his own, " Ho- 
 nesty, by G — ." No kind of language is so generally 
 understood or so powerfully felt as the native language 
 of worthy and virtuous feelings. However open to 
 criticism the manner of expression, the company were 
 unanimously of opinion that his was the best solution 
 of the question admitting, that he was himself the very 
 personification of the character he described. 
 
 His reputation as a lawyer, though deservedly 
 high, was perhaps inferior to the other more uncom- 
 mon endowments which he possessed. Incapable of 
 
MEMOIR. 133 
 
 being seduced from devotion to his country, or awed 
 into forgetfulness of her interests, he disregarded those 
 professional emoluments and personal honours that are 
 not unfrequently within the reach of an aspiring bar- 
 rister, preferring to pass the best years of his existence 
 in the irksome toil of his profession. His modesty, his 
 unaffected courage of conscience ; his simplicity, the 
 grace that flows from it, which most becomes good 
 sense; his benevolence, which might be discovered in 
 the very traces of his countenance ; his strong and en- 
 during affections ; his impartiality ; his unbending in- 
 tegrity; his untarnished honour ; — these were themes 
 that we thought deserved to be transmitted to poste- 
 rity, not only for the sake of the man, but for the in- 
 struction of the younger members of his profession. 
 The example of a virtuous citizen resigning the most 
 splendid offers rather than violate a public principle, 
 preserving charity for his political adversaries, con- 
 tracting neither virulence nor envy at the rapid pro- 
 motion of men whose superior dexterity or political 
 pliancy enabled them to leave him in the race of prefer- 
 ment far behind, — was too singular not to merit selec- 
 tion. ^Instances there no doubt were, of men who made 
 sacrifices to what they called their consistency. But 
 liurrowes could make no such convenient compact 
 with his conscience ; a sense of duty was the sole noble 
 motive which directed and governed his public con- 
 duct, and no one can question that his merit in this 
 respect was exalted far above those whose patriotism 
 
134 MEMOIR. 
 
 was generally accompanied by the object of their soli- 
 citude. 
 
 The funeral honours which were due to Mr. Bur- 
 rowes, and which would have been paid to him by all 
 ranks in his own country, were, in obedience to his last 
 solemn injunctions, gratefully declined by his family; 
 and his remains now rest in the catacombs of Kensal 
 Green Cemetery, near London, surmounted by an epi- 
 taph, the simplicity of which well accords with the 
 unassuming modesty of his life. 
 
 We have now performed our task feebly, but we 
 trust faithfully ; and, though we are bound to acknow- 
 ledge that the hand which has traced these pages would 
 naturally incline to praise, we venture to aflirm that, 
 upon a diligent inquiry amongst those friends who yet 
 survive this distinguished man, the result will be found 
 to justify even more than we have here advanced. 
 
SPEECHES. 
 
 AS CHAIRMAN OF THE COLLEGE HISTORICAL 
 SOCIETY.* 
 
 Gentlemen, — You behold in this chair a new man ; you be- 
 hold an individual whom your favour, I almost think partiality, 
 has raised to an eminence to which he never presumed to 
 aspire. You first implanted, in an humble breast, the seeds of 
 ardent emulation and generous ambition ; you encouraged their 
 shootings by the kind culture of benign indulgence and flatter- 
 ing approbation ; and this night, by raising me to this chair, 
 you have exalted me beyond their most towering growth. 
 Heaven grant that the elevation may not prove a standard too 
 severe by which to estimate the merits of your Chairman and 
 the discernment of this Society in his election ! Keaven grant 
 that the sentiments of a mind, oppressed with gratitude and 
 struggling for expression, may be the only thing your Chair- 
 man shall be found totally inadequate to convey ! 
 
 I feel, Gentlemen, the animating influence of your encou- 
 ragement; that kind attention, and those flattering accents, 
 which have oft re-animated me when I trembled at the rude- 
 ness of what I offered, now tell me that you will not regulate 
 
 • A member, generally the most distinguished for his talents and eloquence, was 
 appointed to open and close each Session of the College Historical Society. The speeches 
 on these occasions consisted principally in a brilliant display of the advantages of the 
 Institution, and the excellence of the objects it pursued. [. ~ 
 
136 SPEECHES. 
 
 your expectations by honours you yourselves conferred ; that 
 you will not seek a return for the richness of your favours 
 in the poverty of my abilities; that you will accept incli- 
 nation for ability, feeling for protestation. It is my peculiar 
 happiness to close a session which the history of former sessions, 
 collected from our journals, the testimony of old members, the 
 enaction of new laws (among whose salutary effects the acqui- 
 sition of such testimony is not the least valuable), and the asto- 
 nishing improvement of several of our members, evince to be, 
 if not the most splendid, at least the most useful one this So- 
 ciety has ever seen. 
 
 This session commenced with the operation of two laws, 
 the success of which fullyjustifics the honourable reception you 
 gave them on their first proposal ; the one, guarding against the 
 momentary malevolence of offended partiality (which has often 
 involved the worthy with the unworthy candidate in the same 
 disgraceful exclusion), has thronged your benches with a rein- 
 forcement of valuable members, whilst not a single rejected 
 candidate can impeach your justice by his abilities, or a single 
 admitted member your discernment by his demerit; the other, 
 by a judicious selection of interesting questions, has communi- 
 cated to your debates that vivacity and spirit which the gen- 
 tleman who proposed it must ever inspire in every assembly 
 that shall have the fortune to possess him. Though the latter 
 ceases to be a law, as it was but a temporary rule, and the So- 
 ciety has not formally revived it, yet I hope every member 
 will esteem the interest of this Society, and of consequence his 
 own interest, as sullicient obligations to induce him during this 
 recess to provide such questions for debate as may be most 
 conducive to pleasure and improvement. And shall I here pre- 
 sume to blend censure with the most unfeigned approbation, 
 and risk the imputation of being severe or unfeeling by repre- 
 hending what I can call by no harsher name than splendid de- 
 fects. Yet defects have I perceived, originating from the very 
 
SPEECHES. 137 
 
 fountain of your glory ; and lam convincedyour generosity, your 
 sensibility, would be less wounded by a candid recital of them 
 than the unamiable reserve of smothered censure. Your uni- 
 form passion for discussing questions of modern politics, while 
 it has kindled the purest flame in your as yet unsullied breasts, — 
 while it has illumined each clear discussion with ardent phrase 
 and apt allusion, — while it has fired each warm breast with ge- 
 nerous enthusiasm, and moved even callous souls by irresistible 
 irritation, — has often led you into extravagant excesses. 
 
 The fire to which each new night has added new fuel has 
 too often flamed forth with undistinguishing brightness ; has 
 too often hurried us into transports subversive of reason and 
 decorum, and decisions evidently repugnant to truth. Witness 
 the solemn vote by which we declared Newton, the pride, the 
 boast of human intellect, to be a less excellent character than 
 Lord Chatham. What but the intemperate zeal of debate, the 
 blind frenzy of politics, could lead us to so absurd a decision ; 
 could induce us to prefer the transient and local splendour even 
 of the most consummate politician, the most uncorrupted se- 
 nator, the most accomplished orator, and most profound states- 
 man, to the immortal glory of the world's benefactor? 
 
 I do not here mean to dissuade you from discussing politi- 
 cal questions, but from being confined to them alone. Moral 
 and historical questions, frequently interspersed, abstracted 
 from a consideration of their intrinsic utility, will tend to attem- 
 per the ardour of our zeal, and diversify our debates; and in- 
 deed, without information on these latter subjects, we are as 
 unqualified to decide on the former as a mariner, unacquainted 
 with the position of the stars, to steer a vessel; or a mechanic, 
 ignorant of the construction of a watch, to remedy its defects, 
 or rectify its irregularities. 
 
 This Society had long felt an almost periodical desertion of 
 old members ; it had long lamented its prosperity, nay, its exist- 
 ence, intrusted to the friendship of strangers, the skill of novir 
 
138 SPEECHES. 
 
 tiates ; yet the discovery of a remedy for this evil was reserved 
 for the wisdom of this session. The honourable immunities 
 granted to old members, by which you have equally displayed 
 your modesty and your wisdom, are amply repaid (were they 
 to have no further operation) in the acquisition of an indivi- 
 dual, arL individual whose absence on this night gives me plea- 
 sure, because his presence would give himself pain, who would 
 suffer more from merited panegyric than many from undeserved 
 abuse, yet whose fate it must ever be to be insulted with praise, 
 as his disposition and conduct must ever provoke such attacks. 
 This valuable member had scarce time to discover the truth of 
 that report which had inflamed him with an eager desire to be 
 again connected with our institution, ere he proved himself a 
 benefactor of it. Our courses of history had hitherto been the 
 injudicious result of precipitate research, or the ostentatious 
 display of eccentric study ; some courses were too superficial, 
 others too profound ; in one we were confined to the accumu- 
 lative brevity of some dogmatical compiler, in another we were 
 compelled to trace the insipid detail of uninteresting minutiae, 
 which affectation, pedantry, or caprice, had selected by idle 
 and unprofitable toil. Besides, the frequency of our transition 
 from the history of one country to another, necessarily inducing 
 confusion and anachronism, so dissipated our attention, that we 
 could scarcely hope to attain a competent or distinct knowledge 
 in any. These evils the Historical Committee, of which that 
 gentleman was chairman, have completely removed. That in- 
 structive and liberalizing science now courts your attention 
 with all that elegance and graceful symmetry of form into which 
 that Committee have compressed her ; and it is with pride I say 
 it, you have not, and I hope will not resist her solicitations. The 
 anticipated experience of age, the collected wisdom of peren- 
 nial time, and the assembled improvements of various coun- 
 tries and constitutions, which, though differing in everything 
 else, agree in decorating her, are the charms with which she 
 
SPEECHES. 139 
 
 captivates your understandings. She teaches you to value the 
 inestimable blessings of civil liberty, by exhibiting as well the 
 ferocious aspect of uncivilized man as the more deplorable 
 view of man enslaved. She shows you that uncontrolled power, 
 as it is the exclusive attribute of heaven, so it cannot be 
 securely lodged in the frail hands of an erring mortal; that the 
 tranquil blessings of society are not to be sought in the storms 
 and fluctuations of popular assemblies; that as self-love is, if 
 not the universal, at least the most operative spring of human 
 action, so no power should ever be delegated, no public trust 
 reposed, but where interest and duty perfectly coincide; that 
 the interests of the governing and those of the governed should 
 be bound together by indissoluble ties; that this cannot be 
 effected if the power of legislation perpetually resides in the 
 same hands, or executive be united with legislative authority. 
 And, as a conclusion, justly and philosophically inferred from 
 these, and many such truths, founded on the experience of all 
 ages, she presents you with that invaluable political structure, 
 the British Constitution: 
 
 " Where mixed, yet uniform, appears, 
 The wisdom of a thousand years."* 
 
 To the author of the historical resolutions are we also 
 principally indebted (as I know not what useful measure he 
 was not principal in promoting) for a most eligible improve- 
 ment in our constitution, I mean the introduction of a new 
 officer to discharge all the laborious and unimproving duties 
 of the Society, and I doubt whether we have shown more dis- 
 cernment in the institution of the office or choice of the officer. 
 Our journals had been stained by grammatical inaccuracies, 
 and orthographical blunders, corrupted by mangled and false 
 insertions, and still more defded in their passage from careless 
 registry to illiterate transcription. Our fair copies exhibited 
 
 * Vide Lawyer's Farewell to his Muse Dopsley. 
 
140 SPEECHES. 
 
 more legible nonsense, more conspicuous barbarisms. The 
 flourish of manual decoration, like splendid vestments on a 
 deformed beau, but emblazoned the meanness of the subject 
 matter. The sordid garb in which they were originally envi- 
 roned was eligible protection from the eye of observation, and 
 transcription, perhaps, stript them of a valuable covering. 
 Motions, amendments, previous questions, questions of de- 
 bate, resolutions of committees, &c, &c, lay jumbled in wild 
 disorder. The laws by which we were to be governed were to 
 be hunted after through this confused farrago. These evils are, 
 I trust, now completely removed, and the remarkable atten- 
 tion and zeal of our Secretary encourage me to promise for 
 him that against the opening of next session he will furnish 
 us with a judicious, complete, and well-digested system of our 
 laws. And when we consider who it is that is to superintend 
 this business we cannot enjoy the security ilowing from such a 
 consideration without reflecting, with gratitude and pleasure, 
 on that vigilance which has never slumbered in our service, 
 and those exertions which warm benevolence and honest zeal 
 have still more ennobled than all the acuteness and force of the 
 clearest and most cogent reasoning. Exertions which, on 
 this night's debate, must have conveyed peculiar pleasure, 
 as they intimate to us what we are to expect when the public 
 weal or public exigency shall call them forth in their proper 
 theatre. But there were other benefits which we fondly hoped 
 to have derived from the appointment of this officer. The 
 negligence of former secretaries afforded a pretext to some 
 members to skulk from the duty of debate. The pretext is 
 now removed. Does the shame of a mean desertion of duty, 
 or fear of an ignominious censure, extort that service which 
 unprompted friendship would never have performed ? No ! 
 Fear and shame have changed their objects, they fear the ridi- 
 cule of fools, and are ashamed of the meanness of industry, or 
 pedantry of information. But, perhaps, these gentlemen will 
 
SPEECHES. 141 
 
 plead they are not orators, they do not wish to be orators; 
 they entered into this debating society unapprized of the ne- 
 cessity of speaking; they thought they might receive improve- 
 ment without contributing any; they submit the arduous task 
 of entertaining the Society toothers better qualified; they are 
 modest, bashful, timorous. Shameful pretexts ! — ridiculous 
 evasions ! Have not the amiable emotions of modest sensibi- 
 lity been ever received with tenderness and favour ? Has not 
 the slightest signification of merit been embraced as the dawn- 
 ing of genius? Have we not courted? — flattered? — elicited each 
 backward virtue ? Is not this institution as an hot-house, 
 wherein the seeds of eloquence arc matured by even forced 
 cultivation? Arc not the rude blasts of censure and chilling 
 cold of indifference quite excluded, while the genial rays of 
 approbation are transmitted with augmented warmth ? are we 
 not encouraged, exhorted, inflamed by many striking examples 
 of the most astonishing improvement to unremitting perseve- 
 rance ? We have seen, we have frequently seen, awkward hesi- 
 tation, embarrassing timidity, sterility of language, and stiffness 
 of address, so disfigure the first essay of the unpractised speaker, 
 that the acutest discernment could scarce discover genius and 
 greatness of soul struggling for birth under the load of compli- 
 cated obstruction. An undiscerninsj friend would have dis- 
 suaded, or a weak mind desisted from further exertion under 
 such discouragement; yet the assiduity of an excellent and 
 well-fortified understanding, availing itself of the rich materials 
 furnished by Nature, and the artificial polish to be acquired 
 here, has so effectually surmounted these difficulties that scarce 
 a trace remains in the almost finished orator to denote the de- 
 formity of the embryo speaker. And shall not such examples 
 stimulate us to equal industry ? Shall we not avail ourselves 
 of opportunities as transient as they are enviable? Shall wc 
 resist the charms, the solicitations, of so excellent an institu- 
 tion, — an institution where the very social attraction which 
 
142 SPEECHES. 
 
 leads others into pernicious excesses, or convivial dissipation of 
 time, cements ns in united efforts for mutual improvement ; 
 where information seduces us in the mask of pleasure, and dis- 
 cipline is but a regular adherence to the studied forms of 
 refined entertainment; where the very relaxation from the 
 severity of abstruser studies, and academical pursuits, tends 
 more to fit us for the active purposes of life than these pursuits 
 themselves; where we dispose of our knowledge at an high 
 usury, and receive the reward for communicating it in the 
 very act of communication ; where we arc taught equally to 
 shun the austere sullenness of supercilious taciturnity, and the 
 pedantic rudeness of dogmatical loquacity ; where the polish 
 of the gentleman enhances the intrinsic richness of the scholar ; 
 where the natural charms of science are decorated by classical 
 attire; where history, composition, oratory, friendship, and 
 public spirit receive equal cultivation ? These, among many 
 others, are the annual fruits of this Society, and never have 
 they flourished with superior richness or more lively bloom than 
 in this session. The fertility, the exuberance of this session, has 
 temptedusto invite a new set of guests to participate our banquet. 
 These fruits, which we have hitherto partially distributed where 
 superior merit marked no pre-eminence, are now equally offered 
 to all of equal standing. The line which severed the admissi- 
 ble from the inadmissible part of the College had hitherto been 
 bent into an invidious curvature. The inequality of the ground 
 had in some measure rendered this curvature inevitable by the 
 gentlemen who drew the boundaries. What more illiberal 
 than that a distinction, which was to be lamented when neces- 
 sary, should be continued when no longer necessary? Yet 
 there were many members who, from the very best motives, 
 opposed this innovation. A modest reverence which bound 
 them to customs sacred by time, and a fear lest innovation 
 should follow innovation till every barrier should be at length 
 removed, and the Society be deluged by a tide of members 
 
SPEECHES. 143 
 
 whose recentness in this seminary must preclude selection, and 
 whose want of preparation must prevent improvement, were 
 impressions not to be removed; and, indeed, were these appre- 
 hensions to be realized, I should tremble for the fate of this 
 Society. But, I trust, the wisdom and influence of a respectable 
 majority will ever prove effectual protection against this danger ; 
 and while the opposcrs of this measure, in concert with the 
 very movers of it, exert themselves to prevent its further ex- 
 tension, so their liberality will induce them to give it operation, 
 now it is carried. I am convinced that the gentleman, whose 
 zeal and abilities were so conspicuous in opposing it, will be 
 the first to recommend such generous conduct. 
 
 At this distinguished era of the Historical Society, when 
 the wisdom of its founders is so honourably exemplified by the 
 high characters of its present members; when its happy effects 
 have been so conspicuous and so extensive that you are induced 
 to believe them capable of still greater extension, and your 
 various and well-concerted improvements in its laws and con- 
 stitution justify the expectation that even the meridian splen- 
 dour of this period is but the morning of a bright polar day, 
 you perhaps expect, from the duty of your Chairman, such ob- 
 servations on the objects of your pursuit as may not be totally 
 unworthy the occasion, and may prove that he has not entirely 
 degenerated from his predecessors. Had your Chairman nothing 
 but his own little reputation to hazard, — were he sure that his 
 deficiencies would not be in some measure imputable to you 
 who appointed him, or that his performance would be suffi- 
 ciently recommended by impotent assiduity or barren zeal, — he 
 would not hesitate engaging in so arduous an undertaking. 
 However, in declining it he has this consolation, that that very 
 success of his predecessors, on which your expectations (if any 
 you have) are founded, is an effectual remedy for your disap- 
 pointment in him. The subjects of History, Composition, and 
 Oratory, have been so frequently and ably treated by them that, 
 
144 SPEECHES. 
 
 if any pertinent or useful remarks occurred to him, it would be 
 superfluous to mention them to you; yet one observation lie 
 will venture to make, and embrace the truest means of evinc- 
 ing the sincerity of his attachment to you by freely censuring 
 the only fault to which you are frequently subject in the con- 
 duct of your debates, — an obstinate and litigious adherence to 
 opinions once advanced has been the stain of former sessions ; 
 nor has it disappeared in the splendour of the present. As it 
 is a monster that periodically haunts us, though every succeed- 
 ino- Chairman has exerted himself to chase it away, I am led 
 to think it must originate in the nature of the institution, or of 
 the members that compose it, and am induced to submit to you 
 my reason for the latter opinion, that, if you agree with me, 
 you may be the better enabled to stiile its existence or prevent 
 its growth. We are bred in an University where we are early 
 initiated into the divine mysteries of science ; where we are 
 taught to despise authorities, to use the clear light of reason as 
 our only guide to truth. Hence, when any subject occurs, 
 many of us, through a misapprehension or perversion of the 
 rules of right reason, suddenly determine according to the 
 superior evidence in our own minds ; and, as we esteem this 
 evidence to be the very measure of truth, we pertinaciously 
 support what we so suddenly determine. There are in this 
 Society some members who esteem the circle of their own opi- 
 nions to be the horizon between ignorance and knowledge. 
 Such members will naturally esteem every declination from 
 that circle to be a lapse into darkness; such members will natu- 
 rally exert themselves to keep the Society in that luminous 
 path, that milky way ; their very benevolence will inflame their 
 obstinacy ; their friendship will become a burthen, their zeal a 
 nuisance. I entreat such gentlemen to consider that the sub- 
 jects of debate here are not matter of knowledge, but matter of 
 probability; that, though no man has a right to hold the scale 
 of their reason, yet any man may suggest such considerations 
 
SPEECHES. 145 
 
 as may make it rationally preponderate to his side ; that infor- 
 mation which has not occurred to them may have determined 
 others; that the same argument operates with different force on 
 different persons, or on the same person under different circum- 
 stances; that there is something in the constitution of body, 
 and perhaps mind, of every man, that impcrccivably increases 
 or diminishes the force of every argument he considers; and, 
 above all, that no gentleman here can be interested to err, and, 
 if he does err, moderation and calmness will be more likely to 
 reform him than obstinacy and heat. 
 
 I cannot, Gentlemen, depart without once more urging you 
 to pursue the noble purpose of your meeting here. Youth, 
 education, abilities, and fortune, qualify many of you to be- 
 come public ornaments and public blessings ; and (such is the 
 happiness of our Constitution) no narrowness of fortune can 
 preclude any from the glorious hope of serving his country in 
 the most exalted station. The enlightened genius of this Uni- 
 versity has conceived a taste for studies conducive to the public 
 service at the very time in which our country is most capable 
 of being served ; and it is the peculiar happiness of your fate 
 to exist in a period when the scene of public action is magnifi- 
 cent, illustrious, and eventful, a period which posterity (when 
 Irishmen shall at length deign to think the transactions of Ire- 
 land worthy a retrospect) shall contemplate as the auspicious 
 dawning of their political glory, which the worshipers of civil 
 liberty shall idolize as the blessed era of their country's eman- 
 cipation, and which a happy race of future freemen will recol- 
 lect with that grateful reverence with which every branch of an 
 illustrious family reflects on that worthy whose abilities or ex- 
 ploits first gave their name to heraldry and renown ; a period 
 when public virtue is not confined to public men; when the 
 dignified enthusiasm of the patriotic representative is elevated 
 by the ardent exhortation of the virtuous elector; when the 
 acquisition, rather the assertion of rights, for which our slug- 
 
 L 
 
146 SPEECHES. 
 
 gish ancestors did not dare so much as to supplicate, cannot 
 gratify us but inasmuch as they open to fairer and more liberal 
 prospects, and promise restitutions more interesting and more 
 grateful to freemen and to heroes ; a period when Eloquence, 
 reviving from her slumber of eighteen centuries with full re- 
 cruited spirits, visits this regenerate land, and confers on a 
 Burgh and a Grattan these graces and these powers which, ere 
 now, a Cicero or Demosthenes had displayed with equal splen- 
 dour and with equal force, had not the slumbering spirit of de- 
 parting liberty damped in them that ardour which new-born 
 freedom inflames in these. Long had we despaired to feel the 
 active energy of living elocution, — long had we hung with 
 senseless admiration on the uninteresting page of transmitted 
 oratory, — but now these dreams of transport are changed for 
 realities. The storied effects of generous exertions, that derived 
 discredit from their strangeness, arc established by superior 
 wonders of a recent date. No longer need we doubt that De- 
 mosthenes could rouse the slumbering resentment of the dissi- 
 pated Athenians; that he could compel that gay, that festive 
 people to dedicate to the support of business and war, from 
 which they were averse, supplies which they might appropriate 
 to pleasures that they idolized, when our own time shows us 
 our own countrymen, in a sister kingdom, by the mere influ- 
 ence of elocution, stemming the influence of modern corrup- 
 tion ; when an assembly of men, whose consciences inveterate 
 depravity had rendered callous, and whose prostitution fashion 
 countenanced, disarmed of their insensibility by irresistible 
 force of elocution, and forgetting their interest in their feel- 
 ings, were betrayed into a virtuous acknowledgment of their 
 own sordid submission to royal influence, — an acknowledg- 
 ment the effect of which the redoubled services of relapsed 
 venality can never redeem. Who now will boast of Tully's 
 power to move the world's conqueror to pardon a foe, prostrate 
 at his feet, when Irish eloquence so affected the slavish ser- 
 
SPEECHES. 147 
 
 vants of a tyrannizing Government, that even their faint repre- 
 sentations forced a jealous nation to participate with a rival 
 kingdom what she deemed her exclusive rights. The Roman 
 orator moved a generous nation to forego a resolution odious 
 to itself; our patriots wrung extorted grants from rigid breasts. 
 And have we heard these bright examples, and shall we not 
 profit by them ? We shall profit by them, — our country shall 
 profit by them. The generous effusion of patriotic sentiments, 
 that, even in this school of debate, have sunk to our very souls, 
 declare it. The keen lash that has been brandished over hard- 
 ened turpitude, and shook our souls with sympathetic indig- 
 nation, declare it. The enlightened perspicuity and manly 
 energy with which the lights of mankind have been defined 
 and defended, declare it. The very eagerness and liberal exul- 
 tation with which you receive these highly deserved encomiums, 
 declare it. I anticipate with transport the hour when talents 
 which (even when exercised in theory) have fixed the dissi- 
 pated, fired the indolent, converted the prejudiced, and charmed 
 even the invidious, mellowed by time, and whetted by reality, 
 shall pour forth the full torrent of collected elocution ; when 
 the public shall habitually trace the rapid yet clear stream to 
 its distinguished source, the Historical Society. This transport, 
 Gentlemen, is not diminished by the impossibility of my co- 
 operating in your pursuits, or participating in your glory. For 
 my part, as the present (I will call it, for I feel it) exalted sta- 
 tion is likely to be the most honourable distinction of my life, 
 so the utmost success that can possibly await me will be but 
 reputable obscurity ; yet if present sensations can be relied on, 
 as surely they can, — in every stage, in every state of life, — 
 whether I shall be engaged in the anxious bustle of strug- 
 gling industry, or blessed with the happier lot of lettered 
 ease, — whether prosperity shall encircle me in a social throng, 
 or adversity compel me to be centred in mysclfj — whether 
 restless curiosity shall urge me abroad, or domestic tranquillity 
 
 l2 
 
148 SPEECHES. 
 
 bind me at home, — among all the vicissitudes of the most 
 variegated life, or in the still listlessness of a life becalmed, — I 
 shall ever retain a heart warmly interested in the success of 
 your present pursuits ; and when public fame shall waft the 
 tidings of your glory to the remotest corner in which the 
 caprice of fortune may chance to cast me, I will embrace the 
 intelligence, as I would the rumoured happiness of long de- 
 parted brethren ; I will exult in that chance which has entitled 
 me to call the friends of my country my friends,^that fortune 
 which first introduced me to the Historical Society. 
 
 IN THE CASE OF THE BOROUGH OF TRINITY COLLEGE.* 
 
 Gentlemen, — It devolves upon me to conclude the argument 
 on this important case. I will, therefore, first consider the law 
 growing out of De Courcy's evidence, and the credibility of 
 that evidence. 
 
 This part of the case, though it brings an odious crime 
 home to the candidate, by which his scat was forfeited by the 
 clearest principles of constitutional law, is, in point of turpitude 
 and consequence, lost in the enormity and magnitude of the 
 great question of undue influence, which I shall afterwards 
 take the liberty of discussing at large ; and indeed the com- 
 plete and irresistible argument of my learned friend, Mr. Plun- 
 
 * At an election held for the borough of Trinity College, on the 15th April, 1790, 
 Laurence Parsons, Esq., Arthur Browne, Esq., and the Hon. Francis Ilely Hutchin- 
 son, being declared candidates, the Provost, as returning officer, acting as an agent 
 for his son, by himself and others exercised an illegal influence over several votes, 
 and by such means procured the return of the Hon. Francis Ilely Hutchinson. A 
 petition was lodged against this return by Laurence Parsons, Esq., and Mr. Burrowes 
 supported the petition before a Select Committee of the Irish House of Commons. — 
 (See p. 15.) 
 
SPEECHES. 149 
 
 ket, on this head, leaves me scarce anything to add or to fortify. 
 I, therefore, will not dwell long upon it. It appears now to 
 be admitted, even by counsel on the other side, that bribery 
 brought home to a candidate or his agent vitiates his election 
 by the common law of Parliament, even though he had a ma- 
 jority of unbribed votes. That any man should ever suppose 
 that, until the fifteenth and sixteenth of this king, a candidate 
 was not punishable in Parliament for bribery, appears to me 
 astonishing. Several instances of elections avoided for bribery 
 before the Act of William, without going into the question of 
 numbers at all, could be produced; as the case of Bewdly, 10th 
 March, 1G7G, 9th English Journals, 397; the case of Stock- 
 bridge, 15th November, 1G89, 10th English Journals, 276. No 
 instance could be produced of a member being allowed to sit 
 against whom bribery, or an attempt to corrupt, was proved. 
 Counsel in vain endeavoured to distinguish between an offer 
 accepted or rejected ; they were equally criminal in foro con- 
 sciential ; were equally, as was admitted by Mr. Chambcr- 
 layne, punishable by indictment or information; were equally 
 derogatory to the character of a senator ; furnished an equal 
 inference of general corruption, or, if unequal, that flowing 
 from the rejected offer was stronger; were equally the object 
 of parliamentary denunciation, and never were distinguished 
 in point of criminality or penal consequence in any case. It 
 would be tiresome to recite the number of resolutions by 
 the Commons, declaring that they would punish any man who 
 should endeavour, by bribery, to be returned to Parliament. 
 The common law punishment in Parliament for bribery was by 
 fine and vacating the seat. Lord Mansfield expressly says the 
 crime is complete by the offer; and there are several cases to 
 prove the mere attempt criminal, and none to the contrary. 
 The only colour of argument advanced against all this was 
 purely verbal, namely, that, although an attempt to corrupt is 
 a misdemeanour, yet it is not bribery. It little signifies how 
 it was denominated, while it was the same crime in substance 
 
150 SPEECHES. 
 
 and effect. Certainly to attempt to bribe is a misdemeanour 
 under the class of bribery, and none other, partaking of its na- 
 ture, and liable to its penalties. The committee might see, in 
 4th Douglass' Election Cases, p. 135, the copy of an informa- 
 tion prepared by the present Chancellor of England, then 
 Attorney-General, by order of the House of Commons, for bri- 
 bery, against Richard Smith. The information contained seve- 
 ral counts, some of them charging an actual distribution of 
 money, and others only a declaration that he would give 
 money ; but all equally stated, as the great and commou gra- 
 vamen of the offence, that it was done with an intent to inter- 
 rupt and prevent a free and indifferent election. Therefore, the 
 Act of the King is unnecessary to my client. If it were neces- 
 sary, I trust my learned friend, Mr. Plunket, has convinced 
 every man that it was immaterial whether the promise was 
 made before or after the test of the writ. Mr. Chainberlayne 
 has prudently declined saying anything about his argument on 
 that head. The Recorder only said it was very ingenious, but 
 inconclusive, without attempting to support a contrary con- 
 struction by any argument. 
 
 But the lawyers themselves give you strong, indirect tes- 
 timony of their opinion of the legal effect of proffered bribery 
 by the vehemence with which they impeach the credibility of 
 De Courcy's evidence. I pass over the celebrated dilemma ; I 
 will not delay you on the observation that, wherever a parti- 
 cular piece of evidence is not decisive, they ridicule it as frivo- 
 lous, and, wherever it is, they attack it as incredible. The 
 objections made here are three : the intrinsic improbability of 
 the fact attested ; secondly, the unnatural conduct ol'De Courcy ; 
 thirdly, alleged inconsistency. De Courcy, say they, admits 
 Mr. Hutchinson not to be a fool, and none but a fool would put 
 his election in the power of a man nearly a stranger. I will 
 not rest satisfied by answering that guilt is generally foolish ; 1 
 will not rely on the imbecility of this reasoning, flowing from 
 the extent to which it concludes, if it be at all admitted; but 
 
SPEECHES. 151 
 
 I refer you to the entire evidence to see whether the Pro- 
 vost's family, through the whole canvass, and particularly about 
 this period, were not ready to incur every hazard. Witness 
 the candidate's repeated allusions to the dominion he had 
 over the prerogatives of the Provost and the distribution of the 
 goods of the University ; witness the Provost's indiscreet can- 
 vass for his son ; witness the vile attempt upon Miller, which 
 has hazarded his situation as Provost; witness Lord Donough- 
 more's declaration about the very time, " that votes were criti- 
 cal, and should not be lost for a valuable consideration ;" wit- 
 ness the attempt upon Worrall, upon O'Callaghan, and upon 
 Kellet, at the very time ; each of these in any other case would 
 be relied upon as singly sufficient to destroy an election: 
 though these acts were almost as weak as they were wicked, 
 yet is the folly of an additional act of imprudent profligacy 
 objected to its credibility. 
 
 But De Courcy's conduct was unnatural ; and you are asked 
 which of you would have borne such an insult with such Chris- 
 tian meekness ? Perhaps, Gentlemen, none of you would have 
 acted precisely as he did ; perhaps no two of you would have 
 acted in the same way. Is he to be discredited on oath because 
 he differed from each of you, who would all, perhaps, differ 
 from each other under a like offer ? Before you can say his 
 conduct was unnatural, you must consider his nature and his 
 circumstances. Some men have a quicker sense of honour than 
 of virtue ; some would accept a bribe without hesitation, yet 
 punish the imputation with implacable vengeance. De Courcy's 
 simple life taught him simpler morals. Narrow circumstances 
 and a studious turn had for seven years abstracted him from 
 the world, where he might have learned a different lesson, to 
 books which taught him that, where he committed no crime, 
 he incurred no disgrace. This was no abrupt proposal, but 
 gradually led to by an uniform course of softening civilities. 
 Frequent invitations, kind inquiries as to his circumstances, an 
 
152 SPEECHES. 
 
 offer of a tuition through Adair, an offer of the Provost's pa- 
 tronage, a personal offer of a curacy from Mr. Hutchinson, had 
 preceded this open attempt to corrupt. The fashionable ad- 
 dress of Mr. Hutchinson escapes no man's notice; you may be 
 certain there was nothing insulting in the mode of the offer ; 
 on the contrary, there was every artifice used that could conceal 
 or palliate its enormity. It is not, therefore, wonderful that 
 De Courcy should think he had sufficiently acquitted himself 
 in rejecting it, without calling the attention of the public to an 
 obscure individual, and provoking the resentment of the Pro- 
 vost, under whose government he hoped to pass some more 
 years of tranquil study. I say, therefore, it is not unnatural 
 that he did not resent or divulge the transaction. But he was 
 accused, on the part of Mr. Hutchinson, of bribery, upon the 
 hustings, and, " if Mr. Hutchinson was conscious of the guiltj 
 no such charge would have been made : and if the transaction 
 happened, De Courcy, in resentment, would have then exposed 
 it." Gentlemen, is not seduction always suspicious, always 
 censorious? Is it not always desirous to anticipate crimination 
 by defaming the object it cannot corrupt? De Courcy did 
 resent the imputation ; he declared aloud stich a charge came 
 with a bad grace from that quarter, and was proceeding to 
 repel and resent it, when he was advised to withhold his ex- 
 planation till the scrutiny, which was postponed till after the 
 poll. By an unexpected arrangement no scrutiny ever took 
 place, and De Courcy suffered his resentment to die away. 
 But counsel say he has been inconsistent in his evidence ; that 
 he swore on his direct examination he never communicated 
 the transaction to any one but the petitioner, and that but 
 lately; and, in his cross-examination, that he communicated it 
 to O'Callaghan shortly after it happened. Now, such was not 
 his evidence. His evidence was, that shortly after the trans- 
 action he mentioned generally that he was offered a bribe, but 
 gave no account of the particular bribe, or by whom it was 
 
SPEECHES. 153 
 
 offered; and, on being asked to whom lie mentioned it, said he 
 recollected O'Callaghan as one. 
 
 It was urged with much energy by Mr. Chamberlayne that 
 you cannot believe that I)e Courcy communicated the trans- 
 action to O'Callaghan, else O'Callaghan, who was a petitioner, 
 would have charged bribery in his petition. Gentlemen, the 
 petition was prepared by counsel, not by O'Callaghan. It was 
 prepared in exact conformity with a precedent in the records 
 of Parliament. It puts bribery sufficiently in issue. The pe- 
 tition was prepared before it was decided that O'Callaghan 
 should be one of the electors to sign it. It appeared in evi- 
 dence from Sullivan that corrupt offers had been made to 
 O'Callaghan himself. You cannot discredit Sullivan, who i9 
 manifestly in the interest of the Provost's family; so that the 
 inference that the petitioner could not have known of bribery, 
 because he did not aver it in terms, fails in one instance, and is 
 equally untenable in every other. 
 
 Gentlemen, this witness has sustained a merciless cross-ex- 
 amination by two lawyers for many hours, and withstood the 
 most searching scrutiny of the Committee, without faltering. 
 If gentlemen wish it, we will call him again and again. We 
 defy them- to impeach his character. He is not a stranger 
 witness, produced by surprise, dressed in boots and buck- 
 skin, and, perhaps, christened for the occasion; coming they 
 know not from whence, and to return they know not where. 
 He has been a resident for seven years in the University. 
 We will waive the strictness of evidence, and suffer them 
 to examine his character from knowledge, from belief, or 
 from hearsay; to give particular facts in evidence against him, 
 or general opinion. On our part we offer, as we already 
 offered, to establish his credit by the best character, from 
 the most respectable men ; amongst others, the Vice-Pro- 
 vost is ready to swear that, during a long residence in the 
 University, he has been distinguished for exemplary diligence 
 and propriety of conduct. They well know the irresistible 
 
154 SPEECHES. 
 
 weight of this able and amiable man's testimony, and refuse to 
 admit it. They say De Courcy's credit has not been impeached 
 by evidence, and therefore cannot be supported by evidence. 
 Thus they call upon you to reject, as incredible, the clear, 
 consistent, and decisive testimony of a man of liberal educa- 
 tion and unblemished fame; whose character they will not 
 venture to asperse, or permit us to defend by evidence, — and 
 who, if he were perjured, might and would have cut away the 
 whole ground of their argument, by swearing to what they call 
 a complete act of bribery, and stating the transaction to have 
 happened after the teste of the writ. 
 
 Gentlemen, I will next apply myself to the undue influ- 
 ence of the Provost. This is a question of infinitely greater 
 consequence than any before agitated ; it does not turn on the 
 corruption of a single voter, or stand on the testimony of a 
 single witness. It appears, manifestly, from every witness on 
 both sides, and tends not only to corrupt the franchises of the 
 University, but to poison the sources of learning and religion, 
 and diffuse meanness and baseness through the land. The in- 
 terference of the Provost has been but faintly denied, even by 
 Counsel ; and two gentlemen set up each a different defence, 
 against which it is necessary to warn the Committee. Says 
 Mr. Fox, "Undue influence is a term of indefinite meaning. If 
 you distinguish it from bribery you will have no settled prin- 
 ciple to govern you ; you will be driven to condemn the influ- 
 ence of friendship and gratitude, and to establish a doctrine 
 inconsistent with the practice of any election and the principles 
 of human nature." Says Mr. Chamberlayne, " Undue influence 
 can only afreet the polls, it cannot operate by wholesale, and 
 affect the candidate or his election ;" and accordingly Mr. Cham- 
 berlayne went through the particular cases, and endeavoured to 
 prove that no direct proof had been given that any individual 
 had been influenced to vote by the undue means resorted to. 
 I contend that these positions are an insult to a Committee of 
 Privilege. What is the main question which you arc to try? — 
 
SPEECHES. 155 
 
 whether the election was pure and free ? Can nothing conta- 
 minate an election but money ? — can nothing prove it conta- 
 minated but the admitted baseness of a self-accusing culprit ? 
 Why do the journals abound with resolutions against those who 
 endeavour to corrupt an election ? — why is terror imposed on 
 the returning officer in itself a ground to vacate an election ? — 
 why is deceit practised on the electors as to the day of election 
 aground? — why are elections avoided on the ground of riots ? 
 — why was corrupt entertainment, even before any Statute, or 
 a general promise of reward, without any proof of particular 
 performance, a ground of vacating an election ? Do not all 
 these, and innumerable similar decisions not founded on any 
 Statute, refer to and establish this common law cardinal prin- 
 ciple of our constitution, that election must be pure and free, 
 and that a Committee of Privileges ]tro re nata should judge of 
 and vindicate their purity and freedom ? The modes by which 
 the freedom of election may be destroyed are infinite ; and 
 surely a Committee of Privileges, where they cannot but sec 
 that influence of the most pernicious kind was exerted, where 
 they cannot but see that the returned member would not have 
 had the unbiassed votes of one-tenth of the corporation but for 
 such influence, will, in conformity to a precedent precisely in 
 point, respecting the same borough and the same returning 
 officer, and still more in conformity to the most clear and co- 
 gent principle of election law, avoid the present election. I 
 shall not attempt a strictly legal or logical definition of undue 
 influence in general, but surely it is not extravagant to contend 
 that a Provost of the University, who perverts and abuses the 
 prerogatives given him for the promotion of learning and reli- 
 gion, to the sole purpose of forcing a representative on the 
 University, is guilty of undue influence ; and that the candi- 
 date, who stands upon his interest, and avowedly avails him- 
 self of his abused prerogatives, should be responsible for his 
 delinquency. 
 
156 SPEECHES. 
 
 To those who deny the undue influence of the Provost, or 
 who justify it, the best answer is a brief historic statement 
 of his administration from the general election preceding the 
 last to that under consideration. It has been given in evi- 
 dence, that very shortly after that election an attack was made 
 on such Fellows as had proved refractory, and four of the prin- 
 cipal Fellows of the College were proscribed from having any 
 pupils whatever entered under them. Any person who knew 
 the state of the College must know that almost the whole of a 
 junior Fellow's income arises from tuition; so that to deprive 
 these gentlemen of their pupils was in fact to deprive them of 
 their bread ; but the public knew the merit of these gentlemen 
 too well, and felt too strong a regard for the liberty of choosing 
 what tutors they pleased for their sons, to suffer so iniquitous 
 a proscription to continue: it was opposed and it was given 
 up. Dr. Marsh, one of the gentlemen proscribed, has sworn 
 to this; he has sworn also that, about the same time, he was 
 refused leave to go to the country ; that the Provost's liberality 
 in granting leave of absence did not extend itself to the Fel- 
 lows who had opposed his son. At this early period, the Fel- 
 lows, who are the more permanent part of the body, were alone 
 the objects for electioneering inlluence, by terror or by favour, 
 to exert itself on, for the Scholars then in being could not be 
 voters at a general election to come on in 1790 ; citations for 
 absence then go on as usual, and to nonco them would be use- 
 less ; the number of noncoes therefore diminishes, — this tide 
 of iniluence ebbs; the class of Scholars, in 1784, though nu- 
 merous, has not, during its five years, more than one person 
 noncoed in it; but, in 1785, a class of more productive 
 Scholars arises, and noncoes, from their very first appearance, 
 are distributed among them. Adair is sent out to them, Vice- 
 Chancellor's rooms are given, and citations for absence be- 
 gin, after some time, to be laid aside. Mr. Yclverton's Act, 
 passed four years before, now begins to have operation in Col- 
 
SPEECHES. 157 
 
 lege, and the emoluments intended to reward academic dili- 
 gence are perverted to maintain in another kingdom a descrip- 
 tion of Scholars aliens from the College, and the attached 
 friends of the Provost. Some of them, it has been given in 
 evidence, have, from the day of their appointment, done no one 
 act, as Scholars of the house, till their appearance at the hus- 
 tings to vote for the sitting member. But the indulgences thus 
 granted to every Scholar, who thought them not too dearly 
 purchased by submission to the Provost's candidate, were too 
 great for a Fellow to aspire to ; and the Committee had seen the 
 man, and were witnesses to his talents, to whom this privilege 
 of exerting these talents in the practice of an honourable pro- 
 fession, and in the service of his country, was denied by the 
 head of the College. 
 
 These endeavours at maturing an interest among the Scho- 
 lars were not unaccompanied by some advances towards the 
 Fellows. An offer was made to Mr. Graves, if you believe him, 
 of all, if you believe Mr. Kerr, of some of the pupils of Dr. 
 Hales, then leaving College. Mr. Graves was naturally looked 
 to on this occasion as being the man whom, as Adair had fore- 
 told, the Provost would nominate, and whom it has been sworn 
 the Provost actually would have nominated had it been neces- 
 sary; but to this offer of the pupils Mr. Graves has sworn a 
 condition was annexed " of handing forward Mr. Hutchinson." 
 Mr. Kerr, indeed, has denied that he was commissioned to 
 make or offer any such; but certain it is, that when Mr. 
 Graves's answer was found to be a refusal to comply with such 
 condition, the pupils were transferred elsewhere, and what 
 Lord Donoughmore could do was to be done for others. 
 
 And here let me advert to an argument which has been 
 urged to prove that the Provost had no wish to interfere in 
 the election, for that if he had he could by nominations have 
 put the success of his son beyond all dispute. Such an ar- 
 gument is the grossest libel which could be urged against 
 
158 SPEECHES. 
 
 the Provost. It means that, after a most trying and a pub- 
 lic examination, under the obligation of an oath taken at the 
 altar the moment before the decision, the head of the Uni- 
 veasity did not prefer the worse answerer before him who had 
 answered better. It states, as the merit of the Provost, that 
 he was not at each examination for Fellowships guilty of a most 
 gross and corrupt perjury; an offence, too, which in the end 
 must have failed of its effect ; for, in the same manner as the 
 House of Commons set aside the votes of the nineteen Scholars 
 nominated by Baldwin, there cannot be a doubt but that the 
 votes of nominated Fellows would not stand a moment before 
 a Committee. This argument, too, appeared in evidence to be 
 false in fact; it appears that the Provost did nominate, when- 
 ever a division at the Board left any colourable ground for his 
 interference; thus he virtually nominated in the case of Mr. 
 Graves, he actually nominated Usher, — nominated him against 
 a man for whom lie said he had interfered at Scholarships, 
 and whom, irritated against the body of Fellows by his mis- 
 representations, he hoped to have securely attached to him- 
 self. This artifice did not succeed with Allen, with Worrall, 
 with Miller ; and it was hoped that the same plan, endea- 
 voured to be played off against the Committee, to exasperate 
 them against the Fellows, by calumniating and abusing them, 
 that the Committee might construe this opposition to the son 
 of the Provost as a factious attempt against the head of the 
 College, might be no less successful now. In the case of Miller 
 there was proved before the Committee a promise of a nomina- 
 tion for a promise of a vote. At this period of the canvass, 
 about a year before the election, experiments more critical be- 
 gan to be tried. The general modes of non-citation and non- 
 coes had not been quite sufficient, and specific attempts at indi- 
 vidual voters became necessary. The Provost's influence at the 
 Board is to be tried ; a Board is accordingly held at an unusual 
 time; new qualifications for Natives' places are to be brought 
 
SPEECHES. 159 
 
 forward, and Cronin and O'Berne, two attached friends of Mr. 
 Hutchinson, are elected. The gratitude of those who had for- 
 merly obtained any petty favour from the Provost is called up 
 by his son most industriously on his canvass ; and those who 
 were in his confidence are desired to represent to the electors 
 the powerful influence of the Provost, and to open to them all 
 the store-houses of his patronage. But even this will not an- 
 swer, and on the brink of the election measures more desperate 
 must be resorted to. Lord Donoughmore sends Carter to tam- 
 per with Worrall — Sullivan to bribe O'Callaghan ; Mr. Magee 
 will now get a dispensation. The sitting member gets Gal- 
 braith to offer an election bait to Kcllct, and makes himself 
 the famous offer to De Courcy ; for, as Lord Donoughmore at 
 this time said, " a vote may be the casting vote of the elec- 
 tion." All would not do ; even Best's proposal to take in the 
 opposite party into a deep-laid scheme of bribery, now put 
 in force, fails of its effect; there only remained then the Pro- 
 vost's powers at the hustings, as returning officer, to make the 
 majority ; and it had appeared in evidence before the Com- 
 mittee how far such had been exerted: the small majority of 
 two could easily be made by him who had power to strike off 
 the votes of Cumine without evidence, and Gerahty against it. 
 Having concluded the general view of the Provost's con- 
 duct, there are some particulars which appear to me to require a 
 more detailed consideration : and, first, I would direct attention 
 to the Provost's assumed power of noncoing. The nature of this 
 influence has been misrepresented ; the Committee were told 
 that an equivalent was given ; that the Scholar who received the 
 income surrendered his commons, and, therefore, no favour was 
 conferred. I ask, was it no favour to be paid for commons 
 which could not be enjoyed? Was it no favour to the curate 
 or the tutor resident in the country, that he received money 
 rather than commons to be eaten in Dublin ? Was it no favour 
 to the law student resident in London ? But Mr. Chamber- 
 
160 SPEECHES. 
 
 layne said it was a disgrace to the University to suppose a man 
 ofliberal education could be swayed by so paltry a considera- 
 tion. This remark was artfully addressed, like many others, 
 \ to the liberal feelings of the Committee, and their want of 
 knowledge of the state of our University. To a young man 
 indigent and ambitious, and struggling to advance himself into 
 an expensive profession, a very slender income was a very 
 strong temptation, and particularly when it carried the fair ap- 
 pearance of being honourably earned ; but, I ask, when leave 
 of absence and protection from privation for neglect of duties, 
 and, perhaps, a Native's place, was added to the nonco, was there 
 then no ground to suspect corrupt influence ? When, of eleven 
 Scholars that were noncoed at the election, ten voted for the 
 Provost's son, and none against him, — when almost every Scho- 
 lar who voted for Mr. Hutchinson, and no one who voted against 
 him, enjoyed some College favour through the Provost, — 
 was it illogical or illegal to infer the relation of cause and effect, 
 or would a jury be unjustifiable in finding influence on such 
 evidence, if such a question were referred to them ? But I 
 contend that the imputation does not rest upon influence 
 merely. Mr. Magee swore he believed an influence was ob- 
 tained by noncoes, and the Committee might directly see how 
 noncoes were granted and how they operated. Witness Car- 
 ter's case. How was Carter noncoed, and how was Carter 
 canvassed ? Carter was tutor in the family of Mr. Burton ; 
 Mr. Burton applied to Mr. Lysaght; Mr. Lysaght applied to 
 Lord Donoughinorc; Lord Donoughmore applied to the Pro- 
 vost, and he was noncoed. Again, Lord Donoughmore applied 
 to Mr. Lysaght; Mr. Lysaght applied to Mr. Burton ; Mr. 
 Burton applied to Carter, and he voted. Could the Committee 
 be asked to travel through this Sorites of corrupt influence 
 without being convinced upon the subject? Could they see 
 every dirty step that led to the nonco retraced in order to 
 arrive at the vote, and say noncoes were inoperative? The 
 
SPEECHES. 161 
 
 Committee, I contend, cannot fail to perceive the true nature 
 of that sordid negotiation. 
 
 I will next refer to the Professorship of Divinity ; and here 
 I cannot avoid reprobating in the strongest terms the enormity 
 of rendering that sacred office an electioneering instrument. 
 The objection to this transaction has been misstated. It was 
 not the annexation of a salary to the professorship, it was not 
 the appointment of so respectable a man as Dr. Drought, which 
 has been censured. Observe the testimony of Dr. Drought 
 and Dean Bond, and see whether it is not manifest that the 
 Provost resisted every overture to dispose of it which militated 
 against his election views. Dr. Dabzac would have accepted it 
 with a small living annexed (Dr. Dabzac was the best qualified 
 man for it in Ireland) but Dr. Dabzac was already in the Provosts 
 interest. Dr. Fitz-Gerald had applied himself particularly to 
 the study of divinity, and would have accepted it. He was the 
 next best qualified of all the Fellows who could be induced to 
 accept of it, but he was in opposition to Mr. Hutchinson, and 
 had not among his acquaintance any friends of the Provost by 
 whom he might be duped. Several other arrangements were 
 opposed by the Provost, and none proposed by him, until the 
 professorship was on the eve of lapsing, and Dr. Drought, from 
 regard to the University, was induced to accept it. However, 
 before his terms were complied with, Dr. Kerr and Dean Bond, 
 the former election agents of the Provost, were employed first to 
 corrupt, and, when that was found impossible, then to deceive 
 him. The reverend Dean discovers that Dr. Drought thinks 
 that by accepting the professorship he will lose his right of 
 voting, and while he is under that error prevails on him to 
 pledge his honour that he will not vote, having accepted it. 
 Dean Bond then engages that the King's letters shall be expe- 
 dited. The Provost arrives at the knowledge of Dr. Drought's 
 engagement, and says he will give no further opposition. Dr. 
 Drought is appointed Professor. He is in town on the day of 
 
 M 
 
162 SPEECHES. 
 
 election, has not yet vacated his fellowship, and is prevented 
 from voting for Mr. Parsons, as he intended, only by this en- 
 gagement, entered into inadvertently on his part, but wickedly 
 on the part of the other negotiators. I hold it that the elec- 
 tion ought to be avoided for this transaction alone, or at least 
 the vote out of which Mr. Parsons was manifestly tricked ought 
 to be replaced. The most infantine understanding must per- 
 ceive the true nature of that sacrilegious negotiation, and the 
 committee, I trust, will mark it with their severest reprobation. 
 I will next proceed to consider the interference of Lord 
 Donoughmore. The Committee will entertain no doubt that, 
 through him, an attempt was made to corrupt Worral, O'Cal- 
 laghan, and Magee; that Worral had refused a living, O'Cal- 
 laghan an employment, and Magee a dispensation to enable 
 him to be a lawyer. It cannot escape the Committee, even 
 from what they have an opportunity of seeing, that Mr. Magee 
 is qualified in the most eminent degree for public life. No 
 man who knows him entertains a doubt but that he would 
 have risen rapidly and honourably to the very first rank of the 
 profession he panted to pursue, and which he would have pur- 
 sued, if his talents, great as they are, were not inferior to 
 his principles, and his ambition were not controlled by su- 
 perior integrity. I would remind the Committee of the sense 
 the sitting member betrayed of the importance of the testimony 
 relative to Lord Donoughmore, when he unwarily declared he 
 thought it necessary to bring his Lordship forward to contra- 
 dict it, and that he would produce him. It is not my province 
 to remark upon the insult given to the Committee by the reason 
 afterwards assigned for not producing him. If a Committee, 
 having heard it in evidence that a noble peer had interfered 
 grossly in elections, were contented to be told he would not be 
 produced to explain his conduct, lest he should give birth to a 
 question of privilege, it is unnecessary for me to contend that 
 the question had already arisen, and that the committee, in not 
 
SPEECHES. 163 
 
 requiring his attendance, were surrendering the privileges of 
 the Commons. I owe it, however, to my client to contend that 
 the committee must presume everything against his brother, 
 the sitting member, from his non-production, and give credit 
 to the testimony extracted from the reluctant witness in the 
 strongest sense. This being the case, I maintain that the ma- 
 teriality of the time of the corrupt offer ceased to be a ques- 
 tion, for the offer was made to O'Callaghan after the test of the 
 writ. And I contend that it made no difference; that the re- 
 ward promised was to proceed from Lord Donoughmore him- 
 self, and not from Mr. Hutchinson; for I hold that the words, 
 " and at his cost and charge," in the fifteenth and sixteenth of 
 the King, chap. xvi. sec. 14, were manifestly confined to per- 
 sons, not election friends or agents. The policy and spirit of 
 the Act was to make the candidate responsible for the corrupt 
 acts of his election friends and agents, even though the parti- 
 cular act could not be brought home to the candidate ; but that 
 the acts of strangers were not to affect him unless he made them 
 his own by adopting them. A contrary construction would render 
 the words " friends or agents" totally superfluous, for they would 
 be fully included in the words "any employed on his behalf." 
 I shall mention but one example more of undue influence, 
 exerted, 1 admit, without effect; and I feel myself proud of the 
 nature I partake of when I consider that it was ineffectual. 
 The case of Miller exhibits, perhaps, the strongest example of 
 contrasted cunning and wisdom, meanness and dignity, base- 
 ness and heroism, that ever occurred during a vain attempt to 
 soften and seduce inflexible integrity. The case of Miller has 
 alternately shocked and delighted every man who has heard 
 it; every man who loves the University, who thinks learning, 
 religion, or virtue, ought to be cultivated in the land, must be 
 filled with indignation at the attempt which has been made. 
 What ! is the candidate for Holy Orders, is the candidate for 
 the highest literary honour in the nation, is the man who 
 
 m 2 
 
164 SPEECHES. 
 
 aspires to the dignity of being elected by the most reverend 
 and revered body of men in the land, to discharge the delicate 
 and arduous function of forming the minds and the principles 
 of the youth of the land, to entitle himself to this dignity by a 
 base compliance with a base overture? The enormity of this 
 transaction is admitted ; but it seems it has been resolved in 
 council, on the other side, to deny its reality. The Provost of 
 the University, a wise and learned man, even if he were base 
 enough, could not be so silly as to hazard his situation by such 
 a proposal, and leave himself at the mercy or discretion of 
 Adair or Miller to betray him. To discredit Miller would be 
 a vain attempt. But Adair, the confidential and family friend 
 of the Provost, this man, whom you have seen so deeply im- 
 mired in every dirty negotiation, has contracted a foulness of 
 character which may be now turned to account; the whole im- 
 purity may be cast upon him. The Recorder, no doubt, has 
 been instructed to sacrifice him; and, if he has not offered him 
 up as a burnt-offering to expiate the offence, he at least has 
 roasted the offender. The offer must have been made to Miller 
 since he swore it. But Adair was unauthorized ; the infamous 
 man dared to use the Provost's name without his authority. 
 This you must take for granted, for the dignity of the Provost's 
 resentment will not condescend to offer proof. The Provost is 
 a classical man, and he recollects that Scipio, when accused of 
 embezzlement in office, burned his accounts, that he might not 
 be driven to the meanness of proving his innocence by vulgar 
 arithmetic. This sacrifice of Adair will, I trust, little benefit 
 the cause. This Committee will presume everything against 
 the party withholding the evidence of his own agent, and will 
 not swallow the absurd supposition that the private tutor of 
 the Provost's family, the devoted agent of his son, the man 
 whose every hope in life depends upon him, the man whom 
 we have been for six weeks abusing and reviling, would, if pro- 
 duced, be guilty of the foulest perjury to serve us against his 
 
SPEECHES. ■> 165 
 
 patron. Neither can you be affected by the supposed folly of 
 confiding this proposal to Adair and Miller; for Adair could 
 not have any temptation to divulge the corrupt secret, and 
 Miller's acquiescence might be considered as certain. The 
 Provost could not calculate upon so extraordinary an event as 
 Miller's rejecting the offer. He has had much intercourse with 
 the world ; he has been much in courts and much in senates ; 
 yet it is not extravagant to say he never had intercourse with 
 so honest a man as Miller. Under his circumstances, to reject 
 the offer may be considered as a moral miracle; certain I am 
 history does not furnish a more noble instance of heroic self- 
 denial. Consider the circumstances. To obtain a fellowship, 
 a man of the brightest and quickest intellect must devote four 
 or live of the most precious years of his life to abstruse, solitary, 
 joyless study; the pleasures of youth, the pleasures of friend- 
 ship, must be renounced. During the few last months of this 
 painful preparation the student must totally withdraw himself 
 from his friends, from his family, from his affections; the 
 strongest constitution suffers a temporary injury; the most 
 vivid spirits are deadened by this private, incessant, unanimat- 
 ing exertion: many a student has died in the pursuit. The 
 object too is proportionably great; its difficulty prevents any 
 man of independent fortune from embarking in it, and conse- 
 quently success makes the difference between poverty and afflu- 
 ence, obscurity and fame. The family too of the student par- 
 ticipate and augment his anxiety, and he often looks upon 
 success as his only means of giving relief to an indigent parent 
 or an unprotected sister. Miller had been twice unsuccessful ; 
 no man ever succeeded in a fourth attempt ; so that a few days 
 were to have decided whether he was to have been the hap- 
 piest of men, or the broken-hearted victim of a vain pursuit. His 
 defeat on each preceding examination was a shock which few 
 men could sustain. The answering was so equal, as well as so 
 excellent, between him and his successful adversary, that the 
 
166 SPEECHES. 
 
 Board might have given the prize to either without censure. 
 His friends, who were numerous, thought he was entitled to 
 succeed ; every able man feels his own force, and it is not sur- 
 prising that their opinion made him indulge the most sanguine 
 hope. Nor is it surprising, after two disappointments, that the 
 suggestions of ill-judging friends, or ill-designing enemies, 
 should make him suspect that there was a prejudice against 
 him amongst the Fellows. His jealousy on this subject was 
 known to the Provost, and resorted to as an infallible means of 
 seducing him. He was told that the Fellows were determined 
 to preclude him ; that the nominating power was his only hope. 
 Thus the unfair advantage offered him (an advantage which 
 would have made a docile parrot appear superior to Sir Isaac 
 Newton) was represented as the necessary means of obtaining 
 a justifiable end; and the condition required was an act of all 
 others most disagreeable to men whom he was taught to believe 
 were illiberal adversaries. Let the man of the proudest virtue 
 amongst you ask himself was his refusal to be expected? Let 
 the most cautious ask what was the apparent hazard that such 
 a proposal would be rejected and exposed? Let the seducer 
 enjoy the benefit of every inference which can be drawn from 
 cunning against profligacy ; but let not the virtue of one man 
 be reasoned from in exculpation of another of a very different 
 cast, nor let it be deemed incredible folly in a veteran politi- 
 cian that he did not expect to meet miraculous integrity. 
 
 It very little concerns my client whether the returning offi- 
 cer was censured for his conduct or not: that is a question in 
 which the Committee, as guardians of the privileges of Par- 
 liament, are much more concerned. I cannot, however, com- 
 prehend the refined abstraction to which the Provost's counsel 
 resorted for his defence. The same individual being Provost 
 and returning officer, my plain understanding leads me to think 
 that every prerogative he abused as Provost, in order to corrupt 
 the election, was a crime in him as returning officer ; but it sig- 
 
SrEECHES. 167 
 
 nified not in what character any man violated the freedom of 
 election. If it appeared that he violated it the Committee 
 ought to report him, whether he were a Provost, a lord of Par- 
 liament, a bishop, a general, or a commissioner ; and this though 
 there was no particular allegation against him in the petition. 
 But even though they confined their inquiry to the conduct of 
 the Provost on the hustings, I rely upon it there is abundant 
 ground to censure him. The returning officer had acted with 
 uniform partiality. It was in evidence that he prevented coun- 
 sel from explaining the nature of the bribery oath ; he resorted 
 to a book of no authority as evidence against the suffrages of 
 admitted Scholars ; he shifted the interpretation he gave this 
 book as it occasionally served his son; he admitted unsworn 
 testimony to prove minority ; he rejected Gerahty's vote against 
 the weight of that testimony ; he rejected Cumine's vote with- 
 out any evidence ; he decided on inspection against the peti- 
 tioner's voters, yet he allowed Cooke to vote against him, 
 though he was and still is in appearance the most immature 
 Scholar in the University. 
 
 I have now, Gentlemen, discussed every topic of the case 
 that appeared to me to be of importance; and, Gentlemen, 
 when my mind glances back through the principles and pro- 
 positions I have been labouring to establish, it rests satisfied 
 that, however superfluous my exertions may have been, they 
 must be successful. I feel a confidence of success which can- 
 not deceive me : it is a confidence founded upon the best and 
 the clearest principles of constitutional law ; the oaths of four- 
 teen honourable men guarantee it, and every good public and 
 private feeling conspire to prop and support it. For, Gentle- 
 men, what are the propositions, the establishment of which 
 give my client a right to succeed? Can I presume you doubt 
 that election bribery, brought home to a candidate or his agent, 
 by the common constitutional law of this land, vitiates his elec- 
 tion? Is not this principle legible in every page of the Jour- 
 
168 SPEECHES. 
 
 nals of Parliament? Is it not a principle so necessarily incident 
 to our constitution that if it were never before so decided you 
 should decide it now, or declare to mankind that you have not 
 faculties to comprehend the nature of an elected Parliament, or 
 feelings to defend its purity and its privileges ? Can I suppose 
 you distinguish in favour of the corrupter between a bribe re- 
 jected and a bribe received; or will say that what completes 
 the legal crime does not complete the constitutional crime, but 
 that a culprit, branded by a verdict for a sordid misdemeanor, 
 is pure enough to associate with the representatives of the na- 
 tion ? Or, Gentlemen (even though this case stood on the 
 Statute of the king, and that you were so narrow-minded as to 
 suppose there was no such crime as bribery before the present 
 reign), can I suppose you will limit the construction of the 
 words of the Act against its manifest end ; and when the Legis- 
 lature has said, " no one at any time hereafter shall promise," 
 confine it by construction to promises after the test of the writ. 
 These propositions, Gentlemen, are too plain to admit of any 
 doubt ; yet, plain as they are, they are not the strength of my 
 client's case. Election bribery, the growing vice of the age, 
 in its simple state has all the loveliness of virtue, compared to 
 the monstrous form it has assumed in the University. The 
 undue influence which you have seen exerted in the Univer- 
 sity, whether you consider the mode, the place, or the end of 
 its operation, must fill you with disgust, with sorrow, and with 
 indignation ; and I doubt whether the natural feelings of an 
 unsophisticated man would be more shocked at the foul trans- 
 actions which have been brought to light, or the unfeeling 
 levity with which they have been defended as the mere ordi- 
 nary exercise of lawful prerogative, such as every man of sense 
 ■would exert, and none but visionary men would condemn. I 
 am not surprised at the impatience which you manifested while 
 this subject was investigating, and almost wish you had inter- 
 posed your authority between the right of my client and the 
 
SPEECHES. 169 
 
 odious investigation, rather tlian have exposed to the public 
 view the disgraceful and disastrous state of the University. 
 But, Gentlemen, it is a consolation highly gratifying, that 
 while you have been forced to behold the learned youth of the 
 land corrupted and debased, you have at the same time wit- 
 nessed examples of the most exalted virtue. Indeed in this 
 interesting and variegated inquiry you have witnessed incidents 
 calculated alternately to excite pity, admiration, grief, and 
 abhorrence. 
 
 You have seen parental authority hired to corrupt the suf- 
 frage and pollute the honour of a child ; you have seen the best 
 principles of morality, and the noblest feelings of the heart, 
 committed in deadly discord, for purposes of corruption ; and 
 the wretched son compelled to disclose a fathers disgrace or be 
 himself disgraced. 
 
 You have seen young ambition panting to pursue the invi- 
 tation of ardent genius, and wily seduction watching a favour- 
 able crisis when rigid principle might be relaxed in the hot 
 pursuit; and, thank heaven ! you have seen honour triumphant 
 over ambition, and the brightest talents, and their most alluring 
 calls, subjected to paramount integrity. 
 
 You have seen the student, on the eve of his third experi- 
 ment for Fellowship, while his mind was fainting under the 
 severity of prolonged and reiterated study, and ease, honour, 
 and competency were floating before him, at this moment of 
 mental and bodily lassitude, you have seen his principles as- 
 sailed by an offer of what he was dying to enjoy; and, if the 
 corrupt logic of the age shall not persuade you that such heroic 
 self-denial is incredible, you have seen such sordid overtures 
 nobly spurned, and the short path to infamous prosperity 
 rejected with scorn. 
 
 You have seen poverty, recluseness, and simplicity of man- 
 ners, operate as invitations to direct corruption. You have 
 exulted to see courtly manners and splendid offers ineffectual 
 
1 70 SPEECHES. 
 
 in seducing rugged integrity; and I trust you felt a liberal 
 indignation when you saw impotent attempts to corrupt suc- 
 ceeded by impotent attempts to defame. 
 
 You have seen the Professorship of Divinity devoted to 
 purposes of corruption ; you have seen every arrangement to 
 preserve it from lapsing baffled, every overture to fill it received 
 with deafness or with contumely ; and when no man could be 
 found base enough to accept it on terms of stipulated prostitu- 
 tion, you have seen an honest and an able, though simple man, 
 tricked into becoming an unconscious instrument of the foulest 
 profanation. 
 
 Thus you have seen the very fountain of religion conta- 
 minated, and the support and patronage of a tutor and a friend 
 pilfered by sacrilegious craft from a pupil, who was the object 
 of his love, of his pride, of his admiration. 
 
 Gentlemen, these are not remarks addressed to your feel- 
 ings abstracted from your reason. The consequences of con- 
 stitutional law are a forcible commentary on the law itself. 
 If you hold undue influence to be no election crime in the 
 University, what will you virtually determine ? That the 
 College shall be as corrupt as any potvvalloping borough ; 
 that the whole interval, from one election to another, shall be 
 filled up in preparing for that which is to ensue; that every 
 honour and every emolument of the University shall be de- 
 voted to that purpose ; in short, that all the attributes of the 
 Provost shall merge in the returning officer, and every func- 
 tion of the University be strained to the one act of returning 
 two slaves to Parliament. AVhcn the University shall be so 
 degraded, it will be, perhaps, a consolatory consequence that it 
 will be shortly depopulated, — emptied, I mean, of everything 
 liberal, ingenuous, active, aspiring. That the only trace of an 
 University which will remain will be the octennial convention 
 of an unresisted Provost, and unresisting electors, to return 
 suitable representatives to Parliament, and celebrate the festival 
 
SPEECHES. 171 
 
 of banished literature and vanquished public spirit. For, Gen- 
 tlemen, in such a state of the University, who would send his 
 son there who would not send his daughter to a brothel for 
 education ? I repeat it, Mr. Chairman, that the decay of the 
 University, in such an event, will be a desirable consequence. 
 It will be desirable that University honours shall become a 
 brand of disgrace in Society, and that the contaminated scholar 
 shall become a despised and abandoned citizen. Gentlemen, 
 you are not, perhaps, aware of the immense consequence it 
 must be of to the character and the virtue of the nation to keep 
 the electors of the University pure, or to prevent their pro- 
 gress in public life. Hitherto they have become a most respec- 
 table part of the community ; some of the most important 
 offices of the State are filled by men who were Scholars of the 
 University. In the learned professions the most eminent men 
 have in their youth been Scholars. The most respectable di- 
 vines, the most eminent lawyers, a considerable number of the 
 Judges of the land, have been scholars. Every individual of 
 the eight lawyers who appeared before this Committee have 
 been Scholars of the University. Is it of trifling import that 
 such a class of citizens should be preserved from pollution in 
 the greenness of youth and of principle ? The Scholar who 
 would negotiate his vote in the University would trade upon 
 the justice of the land in the judgment seat. Such premature 
 contamination cannot but awaken your feelings. You cannot 
 be indifferent to the cause of learning, of morals, and religion. 
 You cannot resist a precedent which the nation has approved 
 of ; left you a by Committee of men of high character, who va- 
 cated the Provost's return in 1777 for undue influence, which, 
 compared to what has appeared before you, was virtue. You can- 
 not, exercising a sacred constitutional trust, under the obliga- 
 tion of a solemn oath, in the presence of an anxious and atten- 
 tive public, — on a subject so interesting to every individual of 
 the nation, — after hearing evidence so various, so full, so satis- 
 
172 SPEECHES. 
 
 factory, so uncontradicted, — I sit down assured you cannot 
 pronounce the Honourable Francis Hely Hutchinson to have 
 been duly elected. 
 
 AGAINST THE UNION.* 
 
 I support my learned and respected friend ; from deference 
 to him I abstain, at present, from submitting a stronger propo- 
 sition to this assembly. A Legislative Union with Great Britain, 
 upon any terms which can be rationally conceived, is, in its 
 principle, at all times, inadmissible; at the present juncture 
 the measure is peculiarly pernicious. What is in truth and 
 simplicity the question? Whether the Irish nation should at 
 all deliberate upon the terms and conditions upon which it 
 should surrender a Constitution founded upon the soundest 
 principles of human policy, which it has enjoyed lor six cen- 
 turies, and under which, with all its imperlections and abuses, 
 it arrived at a state of great improvement, and was proceeding 
 in a course of rapidly accelerating prosperity, until, in common 
 with other countries, the political malady, which has of late 
 afflicted the world, had visited it with evils not ascribable to its 
 constitution. I say this nation ought not to entertain such a 
 question: the discussion is certain degradation, the measure 
 is certain ruin. We are told that the abstract proposition is 
 harmless, and that everything will depend upon the terms. 
 I answer, that every possible modification of an Union necessarily 
 
 * In pursuance of a requisition, signed by twenty-seven members of the senior 
 Bar, and addressed to Ambrose Smith, Esq., Father of the Bar, a meeting of that 
 body was convened, and held at the Exhibition Room, William-street, on 9th De- 
 cember, 1798. Mr. Saurin opened the proceedings, and, in a speech of extraordinary 
 power, proposed the following resolution : " Resolved, — That the measure of a Legis- 
 lative Union of this kingdom and Great Britain is an innovation which it would be 
 highly dangerous and improper to propose, at the present juncture, to this country." 
 
SPEECHES. 173 
 
 involves evils, which cannot be compensated in any possible 
 modification. Let us consider the necessary actual sacrifices 
 and consequences, and see whether there be even any specula- 
 tive equivalent. The total extinction of the Irish name, and 
 independent Irish Legislature, is a necessary preliminary. The 
 merging of our representatives in an assembly where they will 
 be more than quadrupled, and where, if they were unanimous, 
 they could have but slight influence upon any subject, is a 
 necessary preliminary. The perpetual existence of the United 
 Legislature in another country, to the influence of whose wishes 
 and opinions they will be subject, is a necessary preliminary. 
 The increase, to an enormous extent, of the principal evil 
 which, for centuries, afflicted this country, namely, our absen- 
 tees, is a certain consequence, — the increase of taxes is a certain 
 consequence, — the increase of our national debt is a certain con- 
 sequence, — and that we must depend upon the good faith and 
 feeling of a nation which experience tells us has, or may con- 
 ceive she has, a rival interest, for the preservation of any part 
 of the system which may benefit us, is a certain consequence. 
 
 Who is not startled at this deficient catalogue of prelimi- 
 nary sacrifice? Can any price warrant the surrender of the 
 constitution and liberties of a nation ? and what then is the 
 price offered? We are told of great commercial acquisitions, 
 or embarrassing commercial difficulties from which we may be 
 relieved by this arrangement. I do not believe, even if I ad- 
 mitted our Constitution to be a saleable commodity, that Eng- 
 land has any commercial price to offer. As to foreign trade, 
 we enjoy it already, except as far as it is locked up in compa- 
 nies, from which monopoly an Union could not rescue it. As 
 to the Channel trade, we labour under some disadvantages, 
 from which Government has promised to relieve us, which 
 Parliament can easily settle and adjust, which are of but slight 
 comparative consequence, and which never can be a justifiable 
 apology for surrendering the source and security of all com- 
 
174 SPEECHES. 
 
 raerce, and of every thing else that is valuable, — a national 
 independent Legislature. Upon this head I will not dwell ; it 
 is too extensive in its detail, and too slight in its comparative 
 import, to be discussed here. 
 
 I hasten to that which is the grand pretence for this alarm- 
 ing innovation. The security of the connexion with Great 
 Britain, it is said, requires it. This is, indeed, a powerful 
 appeal. Connected as we are by so many ties to that great 
 and powerful people, there are but few things which we ought 
 not to sacrifice to the preservation of that connexion. But let 
 not our zeal mislead us ; let us coolly investigate the probable 
 effect of this measure in that respect. I assert, I hope without 
 contradiction, that the security of that connexion must depend 
 upon affection, and not force. Disaffection is the only source of 
 separation ; and see whether, upon the whole, this measure bo 
 not more likely to extend than restrain it. Consider it in rela- 
 tion to the governing and governed bodies of this country. 
 Does any man seriously think our Parliament likely to endan- 
 ger the connexion by anything hostile or factious ? Is it pos- 
 sible to add to their zeal for the interest of the empire ? Perhaps 
 that interest would be more soundly promoted if they displayed 
 more local attachment. At all events the transfer of one hun- 
 dred, probably, of the same men, into the British Parliament, 
 will not tend to abate the motives to disaffection among the 
 governed here, which is the prime consideration, and to which 
 I hasten. I cannot, however, quit this head without expressing 
 my astonishment and indignation that the very men who but 
 yesterday asserted that our representatives were pure and per- 
 fect, and who seemed to think that the highest character in the 
 land who should asperse them should be treated as a rebel and 
 an outcast, that these very men should themselves now load 
 them with the most unmeasured calumnies, should represent 
 them as mean, mercenary, profligate, and incorrigible. I shall 
 now consider this subject in respect of the governed body of 
 
speeches. 175 
 
 Ireland, and the influence of this measure upon them. The very 
 lowest orders of the people I consider as mere machines on such 
 occasions. There is, however, a middle order, in which the 
 political energy and actuating power of every free nation re- 
 sides, and which, by accident, in this country, is so subdivided 
 as much to facilitate the present inquiry. The yeomanry, the 
 United Irishmen, and the Reformists, form, I think, an adequate 
 division of the political body of this country ; at all events 
 sufficiently accurate and adequate for fair practical inference. 
 They comprehend all religions, and extend to all classes neces- 
 sary to be considered. 
 
 Of the yeomanry, who unquestionably preserved the con- 
 nexion and the Constitution, which they had sworn to defend, I 
 need not say much. I need not tell you that loyalty to their 
 sovereign, and attachment to the constitution, so predominated 
 in their minds, that all other sentiments and considerations 
 seemed to be totally discarded. Their loyalty could not admit 
 of augmentation, but it may be forced to subside; and I can- 
 not conceive anything so likely to affect them as to lose their 
 Constitution at the very moment they have rescued it from in- 
 vaders, and placed it, as they conceived, out of the reach of 
 danger. I confess I have seen without wonder a very conside- 
 rable and a very lamentable change within a very short time. 
 Since this fatal question has come forth, the most loyal men I 
 know inquire into the affairs of the empire with feelings, per- 
 haps, insensibly altered : they do not hear of a British victory 
 with that ebullient joy which indicated, even at a distance, the 
 approach of glad tidings. Are men aware of the consequences 
 of setting speculation loose upon the probable state of Ireland 
 in new and untried relations? I hope the minister, who is such 
 an enemy to innovation, has well weighed these consequences. 
 I come now to the United Irishmen. Surely no man thinks a 
 closer connexion with Great Britain will conciliate them. But 
 I beg pardon, I am in error; the United Irishmen, I am told, 
 
176 SPEECHES. 
 
 hold a jubilee of joy at this measure; they are its warmest ad- 
 vocates. They well know that their numbers will be increased, 
 and their views promoted by it. They well know that France 
 will not require an ambassador to communicate the strength of 
 her friends in this country while such a measure is discussing, 
 or after it shall be carried ; that France experimentally knows 
 hoiv such connexions are formed, to what purposes they are subser- 
 vient, and by lohat means alone they can be preserved. I come 
 now to the Reformists. They object, and I think truly object, 
 that the influence of the minister is too great, and the influence 
 of the nation too little, in the representative body of the nation ; 
 they will not, I think, consider matters to be much mended 
 when the former becomes everything, and the latter nothing; 
 at present they prefer, at least the majority of them prefer, the 
 present Constitution, even unreformed, to a revolution. If that 
 Constitution be once displaced, itis difficult to know what Consti- 
 tution they may wish to establish in its room ; but it is tolerably 
 certain that, they being Irishmen, they will wish for an Irish 
 Constitution. It should be recollected that I am now speaking 
 of Reformists, as contradistinguished to United Irishmen. Upon 
 the whole of this head, I think, the attachment of the governing 
 body to the connexion cannot be increased, and that the attach- 
 ment of every considerable portion of the governed will be dimi- 
 nished by this measure, and that, consequently, it leads directly 
 to disaffection and separation. Of the powerful effect which 
 this terrific innovation will probably have upon the liberties of 
 the British nation and the balance of the British Constitution, 
 I shall not here speak ; this consideration will, I trust, be ma- 
 turely weighed by the people of another country. But even 
 though it were possible to devise a system of union which 
 ought to be adopted, this is a juncture the most unfit for pro- 
 pounding or discussing it. I am no metaphysician in politics; 
 I do not derive my opinions from mere abstract reasoning. Yet 
 I hold it to be indisputably certain that the ancient established 
 
SPEECHES. 177 
 
 Constitution of a nation like this cannot be justifiably annihilated 
 without the previous consent of the nation, founded itpon the freest 
 and fullest discussion of the subject. That this measure will not 
 be carried by fraud or by force I am fully convinced. The 
 illustrious nobleman who presides here, and whom I am dis- 
 posed to contemplate as a missionary from heaven, sent to stop 
 the effusion of human blood and the progress of human crimes, 
 is my security. Whatever may be the views or the wishes 
 of a British minister, he will not hazard his well-earned and 
 widely-extended fame by an act which will not bear the judg- 
 ment of future ages. 
 
 If, then, previous or even concomitant discussion be neces- 
 sary, can it be now safely obtained? Can it ever be credited 
 that an Union carried now was founded upon national consent? 
 And if the contrary opinion should prevail, how fatal would 
 the consequences probably be ! How various are the impedi- 
 ments to popular discussion at present ! Do we forget that as- 
 semblies of the people are under temporary restraints, at least 
 regulations not heretofore deemed necessary in our Constitu- 
 tion ; that the Habeas Corpus Act is suspended ; that extraordi- 
 nary powers are vested in magistrates; that that undefinable 
 monster, Martial Law, still exists in parts of Ireland ; that re- 
 bellion is but just subdued, and invasion still hovering around 
 our coasts; and, above all, that a numerous English army 
 exists in this country? To that army I acknowledge myself, 
 amongst the rest of my countrymen, to be deeply indebted; I 
 attribute no bad designs to it ; but I assert that there cannot be 
 a free discussion of the question under such circumstances, and 
 I add that, if there could, it ought not to be now provoked. I say, 
 therefore, that this is not only an improper time, but the most 
 improper time, thatcouldbe devised forsetting forth so dangerous 
 and inflammatory a topic; and I am astonished that any man 
 could be so rash and daring as to cast such a firebrand into a 
 country so combustible. In opposing the introduction of this 
 
 N 
 
178 SPEECHES. 
 
 measure, I feel that I am contending for peace and tranquillity, 
 as well as freedom. I confess I feel a sentiment of national 
 pride, and perhaps national prejudice, in favour of the liberties 
 of Ireland, of which I am not ashamed. Perhaps these emo- 
 tions may somewhat iniluence my judgment; if they do, I am 
 unconscious of it, because I feel a rational conviction on the 
 subject. I should not, however, much regret it if it were the 
 case, because I am persuaded that even a prejudice in favour of 
 the Constitution of one's country is one of the best cements of 
 human society. Condemning, as I do, the principle of an 
 Union, I give the previous question my decided opposition. 
 
 THE KING (AT THE SUIT OF BERRY) v. ROBINSON.* 
 
 My Lords, and Gentlemen of the Jury, — It falls to my lot, 
 very much by me regretted, to state to you a case as pregnant 
 with circumstances of human woe, as strongly appealing to the 
 feelings of humanity, as ever appeared in a court of justice. 
 The prisoner at the bar stands indicted for a crime too often 
 committed and seldom prosecuted in this country, — a crime 
 which, I think you will agree with me, stands pre-eminently 
 high in the scale of offences, — a crime at once preying upon the 
 best interests of society, and annihilating the happiness of the 
 individual who chances to be its victim. I shall not misrepre- 
 sent or aggravate this transgression. It is impossible to doubt 
 your anxiety, Gentlemen, if a proper case for your verdict 
 should arise, to prevent, by punishment, the repetition of such 
 an offence, and administer the only possible consolation to the 
 agonized feelings of an injured family. I shall proceed briefly 
 to state to you the facts of this case. 
 
 * See Memoir, page 98. 
 
SPEECHES. 179 
 
 On a luckless morning, in the month of* July, 1810, the 
 prisoner at the bar rapped at the door of Mr. Charles Berry, 
 an eminent attorney resident on Arran-quay, in this city. 
 He was admitted to a conference, and a long and fatal con- 
 ference. Mr. Berry never had known him, never had seen 
 him, never heard that such a man was in existence; his ap- 
 pearance was wretched and squalid to a degree of extremity, 
 carrying the marks, the legible marks, of misfortune and 
 affliction. His debilitated frame and haggard looks at once 
 recommended him to the sympathy of Mr. Berry. This sym- 
 pathy was kept alive and augmented by introductory letters 
 which this man carried with him, and by a sad and instruc- 
 tive talc of folly and misfortune, which was communicated 
 to Mr. Berry in the most impressive manner by this forlorn 
 stranger, and which was in many parts corroborated by letters 
 from persons in whom Mr. Berry could confide. From these 
 sources Mr. Berry was informed that he had once been high in 
 fortune's favour; that he was the favourite and adopted nephew 
 of General Robinson, who died in the year 179?); that, whilst 
 almost a boy, he was treated with the most lavish and impro- 
 vident indulgence, placed under masters to be taught what are 
 called accomplishments ; that he had been allowed for his ex- 
 penditure £500 per annum; that his uncle, on his death, be- 
 queathed him so large a legacy as £100,000, vested in the 
 English funds ; he of course concluded his wealth was inex- 
 haustible, and he became as lavish and dissolute as the most 
 prodigal man of the day ; he purchased into the cavalry, 
 and, what with his credit and the unkind accommodation of 
 friendly loans, he was in a short time, and whilst under age, 
 enabled to waste £20,000 of his fortune ; that at length, in 
 1800, an unlucky wind wafted him to this country; that he 
 was quartered at Clonmel, in the county of Tipperary, in that 
 year, and shortly after became acquainted with the family of Mr. 
 Stoney, of Arran Hill. Gentlemen, when I am relating facts 
 
 n 2 
 
180 SPEECHES. 
 
 as to that family, I am telling you what he told Mr. Berry, for 
 the truth of which I do not vouch. I would not hazard the doing 
 so, fori know the origin from which the communication came. 
 He told Mr. Berry that Mr. Stoney had advised him to quit 
 the army; that he did so; that Mr. Stoney gave him a hospi- 
 table invitation to enjoy the pleasures of the chase at his coun- 
 try mansion ; that he accepted the invitation, and was treated 
 with kindness and hospitality ; that he enjoyed the sports of 
 the field abroad, and the pleasures of the drawing-room at 
 home ; that Mr. Stoney's eldest daughter was strongly recom- 
 mended by her personal charms, and that Mr. Robinson, though 
 still a minor, was not insensible to their influence, and that a 
 mutual attachment was the consequence. He told Mr. Berry 
 that Mr. Stoney encouraged his addresses ; that he did not 
 throw any impediment in the way on the ground of his mino- 
 rity ; that he did not suggest any prudential recommendation to 
 wait one year till he should arrive at age ; that, on the con- 
 trary, he suggested and supplied means of immediate mar- 
 riage, and prepared the parties with accommodations for Scot- 
 land. On their way to Scotland, in Dublin, they stopped at 
 the house of a professional gentleman who hud been married 
 to a daughter of Mr. Stoney. There it was managed that he 
 should execute a most liberal marriage settlement, amounting 
 to £20,000; and it was thought right also that Mr. Barry (Mr. 
 Stoney's son-in-law) should retain a further sum of £4000, 
 for purposes not then defined. At this time it was that the 
 prisoner got acquainted with Mr. Vignc, the jeweller. They 
 then set off for Scotland, and arrived, as rapidly as could be 
 expected from the nature of the mission, at Portpatrick. There 
 the prisoner at the bar was married, in the presence of many 
 witnesses, to Miss Ruth Stoney, by a clergyman of the Church 
 of Scotland, in a place of public worship. Having been mar- 
 ried, they remained in Portpatrick one or two days, and thence 
 immediately repaired to London. Hi3 stay there was not very 
 
SPEECHES. 181 
 
 long, but it was not an idle time; it was no sluggish, no ob- 
 scure and inglorious period. On his arrival he hired a fur- 
 nished house in the most fashionable part of the city. He 
 hired a country villa, purchased four carriages and seven race 
 horses, with an endless establishment of grooms, postilions, and 
 outriders. lie flourished at all places of public resort; at New- 
 market and at Epsom. He shot like a meteor across public 
 observation. He dazzled for a week ; he was recollected for a 
 month. Being sated with the glories of the sod, he was smitten 
 with a passion to become a candidate for Parliament, and em- 
 barked in all the extravagance and bustle of a contested elec- 
 tion. He heard of a vacancy in a borough, where money 
 recommended to distinction, and offered the senatorial dignity 
 to the highest bidder. Thither he repaired with all the pomp 
 and circumstance of a popular candidate. Though lie did not 
 succeed, he polled a prodigious number of free and independ- 
 ent voters at the price of £17,000 or £18,000. But, Gentle- 
 men, it is useless to dwell on the idle and puerile instances of 
 his prodigal folly. You are aware this course could not long 
 continue; a man thus blazing with lavish dissipation in every 
 direction must soon have burned out. At the close of two 
 years he was without money, without credit. The man who 
 s-hone with such splendour dared no longer to appear in the 
 open day. Bailiffs were his principal visitors; London became 
 a solitude to him, and he repaired to Ireland. The prudence 
 of his father-in-law had enabled him to vest in a purchase in 
 Ireland a sum of money, which produced about £900 a-year. 
 To this remnant of his property he repaired, and he took up 
 his habitation near his father-in-law. A man of his capacity 
 lor expense must have contracted debts in Ireland as well as 
 England. After a few years of ignoble extravagance in Ire- 
 land, he became a prisoner in his own house; it was besieged 
 with bailiffs, and all the calamities of ruined fortune surrounded 
 him. The man who had shone so brilliantly in the metropolis 
 of the empire was at last unable to show his face in the smallest 
 
182 SPEECHES. 
 
 village in Ireland. He told Mr. Berry that a project was 
 at last formed by his wife's family to preserve the income of 
 the property which he had purchased for the maintenance of 
 himself and family. It was suggested that his wife's pin-money 
 was in arrear, and that an amicable bill should be filed by the 
 trustee in order to raise it; that a receiver would be put \ipon 
 the estate, by which stratagem it would be protected from the 
 creditors, and he would draw the rents for his own support. 
 The bill was filed, he put in his answer, admitting all that was 
 stated, and there was a decree. A receiver was put upon the 
 lands, and, as he stated, the rents fell into the hands of Mr. 
 Stoney. In order, then, to excite the humanity of Mr. Berry, 
 he told him, that the moment the rents were thus taken from 
 him his father-in-law refused to furnish him with a penny. He 
 told Mr. Berry that, whilst in his career of prodigality, he had 
 lent his father-in-law from £8000 to £10,000; and he told 
 him, as the winding up of his ingratitude, that the very mo- 
 ment the receiver was put upon his property, his wife and chil- 
 dren, — for he had, and still has, four children, — deserted him, 
 and went to his father-in-law's house. He attempted to follow 
 them, but was repulsed. The exhausted prodigal would not 
 be sheltered under the roof of the man who had seized his last 
 stake. His misery now was complete, and without remedy; 
 he was abandoned by his dearest relations, banished from their 
 society, their confidence, and love ; the doors of his father's 
 house were closed against him, and he was left a stranger in a 
 strange land, bereft of his fortune, abandoned by his wile, 
 shunned by his offspring, and left a prey to want and the im- 
 pending horror of arrest and imprisonment. 
 
 Such was his pitiful tale to Mr. Berry, a tale against the 
 effects of which he could not, he would not struggle. Mr. 
 Berry at once took him under his protection, little thinking 
 that the hand which he grappled in friendship would one day 
 wound him where he was most vulnerable. His humanity was 
 not chilled by suspicion; he thought not of the artifice of the 
 
SPEECHES. 183 
 
 impostor, while he was stimulated to relieve the stranger; 
 and that relief was as bountiful as it was disinterested. How 
 was he treated? Mr. Berry, Gentlemen, provided the prisoner 
 at the bar with lodging, for the rent of which he became secu- 
 rity ; in that lodging he supplied him, outcast as he was, with 
 the necessaries, with the comforts of life. He was labouring 
 under a heavy bodily malady ; he procured him an apothecary, 
 a physician, medicine, and wine. It was necessary, in the fur- 
 therance of his legal pursuits, to have frequent intercourse with 
 Mr. Berry, and he constantly crept out in the darkness of the 
 night to visit the family of his benefactor; whenever relieved 
 from the apprehensions of the bailiff, or by a casual relaxation 
 from his disease, he came, pouring out the benedictions of a 
 grateful heart to the house of his friend and benefactor. When- 
 ever he came he was received with open arms, and the most 
 confiding hospitality. Those visits were dangerous to his 
 health, and hazardous to his liberty. Yet they were necessary. 
 These difficulties, half hinted and half anticipated, produced 
 an invitation to become resident in Mr. Berry's house, while 
 the necessary inquiries for legal proceedings were making. 
 lie thus became an inmate in that house which he has ren- 
 dered a scene of unparalleled and incurable affliction. Mr. 
 Berry, with indefatigable industry, collected materials to lay 
 before counsel. He was advised to fde three bills in Chancery; 
 one to review and reverse the decree obtained in the manner 
 I have described; another to force his father-in-law to disco- 
 ver and account for various sums said to be lent to him; and 
 a third to compel Barry to account lor £4000, alleged to be kept 
 by him at the time of the marriage. Mr. Berry, at his own 
 expense, filed all these bills, and the suits are still depending 
 During his residence in Mr. Berry's house, his wish to please 
 was unceasing, and he manifested, in every act and in every 
 word, the animated gratitude by which he was actuated. Com- 
 passion grew into esteem in every part of Mr. Berry's family. 
 
184 SPEECHES. 
 
 Gentlemen, let me say one word or two as to the domestic 
 situation of Mr. Berry at this momentous period. He was a 
 man of industry and business, not addicted to pleasure, the 
 duties and concerns of an arduous profession keeping him con- 
 stantly employed. Mrs. Berry was in a delicate state of health, 
 a valetudinarian, whose almost only care should be the preser- 
 vation of her own existence. He had two daughters, — the one 
 a child, the other but a few years older, now in her sixteenth 
 year of age. She, Gentlemen, it is, who has become the hap- 
 less heroine of the sad story of this unfortunate family. She 
 was in her person lovely, in her manners interesting, in female 
 accomplishments eminently cultivated, in domestic virtues and 
 filial duty pre-eminent. She had an ardent and elevated mind, 
 a warm and affectionate heart. She was the delight of her 
 parents at home, their pride abroad, the solace of their labours 
 and their cares, and the anticipated hope and joy of their de- 
 clining lives. The love of offspring, the most forcible of all 
 our instincts, is even stronger towards the female than the male 
 child. It is wise that it should be so, it is more wanted ; it 
 is just that it should be so, it is more requited. There is no 
 pillow on which the head of a parent, anguished by sickness 
 or by sorrow, can so sweetly repose, as on the bosom of an 
 affectionate daughter. Her attentions are unceasing. She is 
 never utterly foras-familiated. The boy may afford occasional 
 comfort and pride to his family ; they may catch glory from 
 his celebrity, and derive support from his acquisitions ; but he 
 never can communicate the solid and unceasing comforts of 
 life which are derived from the care and tender solicitude of 
 the female child: she seems destined by Providence to be the 
 perpetual solace and happiness of her parents. Even after her 
 marriage her filial attentions are unimpaired; she may give 
 her hand and heart to her husband, but still she may share her 
 cares and attention with her parents, without a pang of jealousy 
 or distrust from him. He only looks on them as the assured 
 
SPEECHES. 185 
 
 pledges of the fidelity, and the unerring evidences of a good 
 disposition. Mr. Berry ought, perhaps, to have guarded this 
 treasure with more jealous suspicion ; perhaps he ought not to 
 have suffered a man, acknowledging himself to have been sunk 
 in the vortex of fashionable dissipation, to have had opportu- 
 nities of converse with this young female; but, Gentlemen of 
 the jury, it is easy to be wise after experience; it is easy to 
 suggest expedients to prevent evil after it has occurred. Is 
 there a man of you could suspect that a married man, with four 
 children, paralysed and forlorn, received under your hospitable 
 roof, covered with benefits which would have kindled gratitude 
 in the basest nature, could be guilty of meditating the inflic- 
 tion of such a fatal wound upon his benefactor ? The slightest 
 suspicion never glanced across the mind of Mr. Berry or his 
 family ; it was out of the nature of things. Look at him, Gen- 
 tlemen, at the bar of his country! Is he an object likely to en- 
 gender suspicion of such a crime? You have heard the story 
 of his shattered fortunes, — could his wealth have been attrac- 
 tive ? What could Mr. Berry have dreaded from the intercourse 
 of such a man, even if he were unmarried? But, Gentlemen, 
 it has turned out that he had means of acquiring an ascendancy 
 over a young female mind, which were unfortunately too pre- 
 vailing; he was a man of polished manners, and, though super- 
 ficial, yet attractive endowments; his understanding, though 
 not sound, was not altogether uncultivated ; he had a taste for 
 the belles lettres, was an adept in music and poetry, understood 
 drawing, was conversant in the fashionable tales of the day, 
 and possessed of all that little artillery of accomplishment which 
 make a man agreeable, particularly in female society. Gentle- 
 men, it sometimes happens that the same courses which vitiate 
 the morals improve the manners, and that the surface appears 
 the more polished for the corruption which it covers and con- 
 ceals. Tn the month of December, 1810, he was ordered to 
 Cheltenham. Mrs. Berry was at the time very ill, and she was 
 
18G SPEECHES. 
 
 prescribed also the Cheltenham waters. Mr. Charles Berry, 
 being himself detained on professional business, in the spirit of 
 affectionate indulgence, consented that the young lady should 
 accompany her mother and tire prisoner at the bar to Chelten- 
 ham ; thence they went to London. Mr. Robinson, when in the 
 full possession of wealth, had dealings with several persons in 
 London who never had fully accounted with him, and whilst there 
 collected a few hundred pounds from the ruin of his property. 
 Whilst in London he paid those attentions to the young lady 
 and her mother which a polite man is never deficient in pay- 
 ing, and which no suspicion of his design induced them to 
 reject; he offered some slight presents to the young lady, :of 
 trivial value, which were rejected. He came to Mr. Berry and 
 lamented the situation into which the obdurate rejection of his 
 gratitude had placed him. He affected the most high-wrought 
 sensibility; his remonstrance could not have excited any sus- 
 picion : " You have taken me under your protection ; you have 
 expended your money in supporting me, and in pursuit of an 
 object which has not as yet fructified; you have received me 
 into your house, and you will not accept of remuneration ; why 
 then refuse me making you this slight but grateful return ? 
 Ask yourself the question, if you refuse me can I ever return 
 to your house? Can 1 live under the load of your benefaction?" 
 His importunities succeeded; and Miss Berry, with the con- 
 sent of her father, received from him some trifling presents, not 
 amounting in value to £20. Gentlemen, can you conceive any- 
 thing indelicate in that conduct? Will you say that suspicion 
 should have been excited ? Was there any imprudence in the 
 acceptance? Gentlemen, is there a man of you, who, if he had 
 received one-hundredth part of the favour conferred upon the 
 prisoner, would not conceive himself called on to make a return 
 of tenfold value. The party returned back to Ireland in the 
 Spring, and things remained on this footing until the fatal 18th 
 November last. I shall trace him through the melancholy occur- 
 
SPEECHES. 187 
 
 rences of that day. Through what artifice, through what fasci- 
 nation, through what suggestion, by what sophistry, by what 
 allurement, he must have drugged the mind of this young 
 female, it is impossible to say. It is a moral miracle ! It is out 
 of the ordinary course of human agency. Yet so it happened, 
 that on the 18th of November, he being at the time so worn 
 down by illness that his life was in danger, with strength 
 scarcely sufficient to admit his being carried to the carriage in 
 the arms of the servant, he induced this young lady to accom- 
 pany him ; he told her parents that he was going to the hot 
 baths, and would leave her at Mr. Vigne's to hear an eminent 
 proficient, his (Vigne's) sister, play on the piano-forte, and 
 begged Mr. Berry would indulge her with this musical gratifica- 
 tion, as Miss Berry was considered a first-rate performer. It is 
 impossible for me, Gentlemen, to account for his influence over 
 this young lady's mind ; it would be vanity in me to attempt 
 to explain the cause ; however, he did induce her, accompa- 
 nied by her sister, a child from ten to twelve years old, to go 
 to Mr. Vigne's in Nassau-street, where the prisoner had provided 
 a clergyman, of the name of Harris, who actually did celebrate 
 the ceremony of marriage between them ; and having prevailed 
 on her to become his wife in point of ceremony, he was carried 
 back to his carriage, and afterwards, in Mr. Berry's servants' 
 arms, to his own bed. I am happy, Gentlemen, to say, that he 
 did not, he could not, render his crime perfect and complete. 
 It is really a curious riddle; it surpasses anything I ever heard 
 or read of; and, but for the melancholy and afflicting distress of 
 her injured family, it would be a matter of novel and curious 
 inquiry to discover how he should have sought or acquired 
 that ascendancy over her mind. It could not be a gross and 
 sensual passion ; a glance of your eye must refute the idea. 
 What ! — asensual passion for a being such as you behold, droop- 
 ing under the ravages of disease, and unable to walk to a car- 
 riage ! It could not be a mercenary attachment to the object 
 
188 SPEECHES. 
 
 of her father's charity; it must have been some mental fascina- 
 tion. By what artifices that unworthy man could influence 
 the mind of a person ten times his superior in understanding 
 is astonishing; the means are incredible. Whether he told her 
 of the sufferings of his youth, the ruin of his fortunes, his de- 
 sertion by his wife and her ingratitude, — whether his distresses 
 excited her compassion, or whether he deluded her into the 
 notion of his marriage being void, — is quite inexplicable; but 
 so prevalent was his power over her mind, that she would not 
 have disputed his authority, and probably she would have more 
 cheerfully obeyed him, if he had commanded her to give her 
 hand to any other man. The charitable public who will hear of 
 this trial ought to carry in their minds this extenuation, — the 
 utter impossibility that anything sensual, or vain, or mercenary, 
 could have actuated her mind tothatstrange and blindobcdience. 
 And when female criticism sits in judgment upon this hapless 
 young lady, and is about to pronounce an austere and unfeel- 
 ing judgment, I hope it will be recollected that their common 
 and primaeval parent fell under the fascination of a reptile. 
 Gentlemen, Miss Berry returned from the ceremony to her 
 father's house; very soon it became visible that some dire mis- 
 fortune had befallen her and her family ; from the hour of her 
 return to the day of the disclosure of her calamity she drooped 
 and languished; at meals a mere spectator; her interesting 
 deportment, her cheerful manners, were gone ; she could not 
 look in the face of her parents, and the eye of any human crea- 
 ture was distressing to her: from the hour of her misfortune she 
 never entered into the door of her aunt (Mrs. Hetherington), 
 whose property she was to inherit, and to which, I trust, she 
 has not disentitled herself. What was, Gentlemen, the object 
 of the prisoner at the bar? His object was to render home so 
 irksome and odious to her that lie could induce her to elope 
 with him, and he was, in fact, collecting funds to put his plans 
 into execution. At length the expostulation of her friends, 
 
SPEECHES. 189 
 
 upon the alteration of her manners, drew from this unhappy 
 girl the acknowledgment of her situation, in the presence of 
 Mr. Robinson, who did confess the fact and claim her as his 
 wife. And Avhat, Gentlemen, was the consequence ? It affected 
 Mr. Berry with amazement, rage, and horror, but with such 
 a stupor of grief that the acknowledged culprit crawled off 
 with his life. The intemperate sorrow of Mr. Berry led him 
 thoughtlessly to disclose the melancholy tale to his wife, and 
 for three days she was affected with unremitted fits of hyste- 
 rics threatening a permanent loss of reason! And, Gentlemen, 
 what was its effect upon her aunt ? The moment she heard it 
 she^was affected with an apoplexy. Such, Gentlemen, was the 
 gratitude flowing from the prisoner at the bar to Mr. Berry, 
 for the services he had rendered him. Gentlemen, under these 
 circumstances Avhat was Mr. Berry to have done ? Has he acted 
 right ? He had but one of three courses to adopt. He might 
 have connived at this improper connexion, and irreligiously 
 sanctioned it by his subsequent ratification, choosing between 
 exposure and vice; but, had he deliberated upon this alterna- 
 tive, he would have been a worse criminal than the man he 
 prosecutes. He might have strove to have hushed it. Perhaps 
 a man whose sensibility was stronger than his reason might 
 waver in his determination as to this course. But Mr. Berry 
 had no choice ; even that expedient was denied him. The priso- 
 ner at the bar publicly claimed her as his wife. It was not left 
 this unhappy father to bury the whole transaction in oblivion ; 
 he was driven to the last and sad alternative, — to yield to the sug- 
 gestions of his own feelings, — to yield to the unanimous advice 
 of his friends; for though his life may be embittered, though 
 he and his family may never wear the cheerful smile, or appear 
 with that unclouded hilarity which accompanied their former 
 intercourse with the world, yet he must derive consolation from 
 the recollection of his having brought a delinquent of his atro- 
 cious guilt to punishment, and in having provided that this 
 
190 SPEECHES. 
 
 man shall not repeat his crimes and bring sorrow into the 
 bosom of other families; and if he does, it must be in that 
 region of culprits to whom he has levelled himself as a fit asso- 
 ciate. Gentlemen, we will prove this case to you. There can- 
 not be a doubt of the double marriage; how it can be vindi- 
 cated it is impossible for me to discover. It comes before you 
 badged with every aggravation which sensibility would shud- 
 der at ; but if you doubt the fact of these marriages, God forbid 
 that anything I have said or could suggest should operate to 
 supply the evidence. The very enormity of the crime should 
 be aground of favour in deciding upon his guilt; but as to 
 any cavilling points and capricious doubts, not denying the 
 turpitude of the case or the commission of the crime, you can- 
 not, Gentlemen, feel yourselves warranted in entertaining them 
 with favour. Gentlemen, I have now stated what I conceive 
 to have been due to public justice and the family of this lady, 
 and T now implore those who are present at this trial, or may 
 hear of it abroad, — I implore those who may be ready to cen- 
 sure indiscretion in others, when they have been more fortu- 
 nate themselves, mercifully to recollect the youth of this hap- 
 less female, and the influence by which she was led away, — the 
 kind of man under the fascination of whose power she wan- 
 dered from the direct path of rectitude, the utter impossibility 
 of her being actuated by sensual or mercenary motives, how 
 tyrannical that mental influence becomes over an understanding 
 naturally strong and superior to the government it submits to, 
 a government which we see every day exercised by the mean- 
 est instruments over the most exalted characters. We will 
 produce the evidence to establish those facts, and I know you 
 will find that verdict which the evidence will warrant. 
 
191 
 
 THE KING (AT THE SUIT OF O'CONNOR) v. WARING.* 
 
 Gentlemen of the Jury, — I shall commence by saying that, 
 in my opinion, the learned gentleman who opened this case 
 has not at all overstated the enormity of the offence now 
 charged upon the prisoner at the bar. He is indicted for the 
 very worst species of the blackest and most pernicious crime 
 which can disgrace society, or bring into danger the adminis- 
 tration of justice, lie is accused of making an attempt upon 
 the life of an innocent man through the execrable medium of 
 false swearing. The crime is the blackest in the catalogue of 
 human offences, and the mode by which it is said to have been 
 sought to be carried into effect the most odious and detestable. 
 But, admitting the atrocity of the offence, allow me to accom- 
 pany the admission by reminding you that the evidence to 
 satisfy a jury of the fact should be proportioned to the enormity 
 of the crime imputed. It is the principle and spirit of our 
 Constitution, — a commendable and noble one, — that no jury 
 should pronounce a verdict, which goes to convict a man of 
 such crimes, whilst they have a reasonable doubt upon their 
 minds of his guilt. 
 
 Gentlemen, this is an observation which an advocate is war- 
 ranted in making in every case ; but, if ever there was a case in 
 which he should be allowed the benefit of it, this is that case; 
 because the gentleman, who has now come forward against the 
 
 * Mr. O'Connor, of Dangan Castle, county Month, was arraigned at the suit of 
 the Crown for robbing the mail. The evidence was not deemed sufficient to secure his 
 conviction. In order, therefore, to satisfy the world of his innocence, he instituted a 
 prosecution for perjury against the witness for the Crown, who was acquitted without 
 hesitation. Evidence then came out which clearly established O'Connor's guilt. 
 
192 SPEECHES. 
 
 prisoner at the bar, probably exists by the operation of this 
 very principle. 
 
 Gentlemen, before I enter upon the subject give me leave 
 to make another preliminary observation. The prosecutor 
 here, I am sure, would not wish that a gentleman of rank and 
 fortune should be subject to one law, and a man in a grey coat 
 to another. His counsel has urged to you the infamy of the 
 witnesses who appeared against him, and the temptation under 
 which they laboured in acting under the influence of gratitude 
 for their pardon. I do not deny that their testimony became 
 blemished, perhaps blasted, by their crimes and their impunity. 
 But let me entreat you to reflect whether the present prosecu- 
 tor does not now come forward under a similar temptation, not- 
 withstanding that he has sworn, or rather stated upon his 
 honour, that he comes forward under no interested feeling to 
 procure a conviction in order to protect himself from infamy. 
 He is a witness, Gentlemen, who disclaims the authority of the 
 Old and New Testaments, and scorns any obligation derived 
 from the sacred ceremony of an oath. 1 trust I am not super- 
 stitious; Mr. O'Connor will probably think me so when I say 
 that a man, who denies the authenticity of Holy Scriptures, 
 both old and new, — who believes that the Saviour of this world, 
 who came to redeem mankind, and hold out the strongest mo- 
 tives and sanctions to moral duty, was a dupe or an impostor, — 
 does not only stand disparaged in his testimony, but should be 
 considered as not sworn at all. The obligation of an oath to 
 him is nothing; his honour is the sole principle of obligation. 
 His will is his law; his appetites are his conscience; and he is 
 uninfluenced by all the great and powerful motives to moral 
 conduct in this life, arising from the hope of everlasting happi- 
 ness in another. 
 
 But, Gentlemen, I need not claim your discredit of him 
 because he is not a Christian ; I only require that his testimony 
 should derive no force from his infidelity. Weigh his assertions, 
 
SPEECHES. 193 
 
 and believe him if you can. He has declared two propositions 
 upon his honour, — that he entertains no resentment against 
 the man, who, if he is to be believed, meditated his murder 
 through the medium of perjury; and that he feels no anxiety 
 about his character. He told you he did not wish to have him 
 punished. No, Gentlemen, he considers himself as an object 
 of persecution of higher powers, and a greater class of men, 
 who have combined to put him down. Do you believe it? 
 Do you believe that Mr. O'Connor feels himself so highly 
 dignified, so firmly established, so completely invulnerable 
 in fame, so far above all other men, that he does not want the 
 assistance of your verdict; that you are acting at the peril of 
 your own characters; and that, if you dare to say he is guilty, 
 your characters are to pay the forfeit? He has said that one 
 jury acted illegally, a second unworthily, and a third so as to 
 disgrace itself; in effect, that every man who presumes to stop 
 the career of his conduct is guilty ; that he stands so superior 
 and so fortified that nothing he can do can tarnish his reputation. 
 Gentlemen, there are heights and depths which equally put 
 character out of human jurisdiction. You will consider to 
 which of these extremities it is that Mr. O'Connor stands in- 
 debted for his invulnerability. If he be not actuated by a de- 
 sire to rescue his character, and have your verdict to support 
 him, he must be destitute of the best feelings of a gentleman. 
 I will, therefore, pay Mr. O'Connor the compliment of not cre- 
 diting him in that assertion, and consider it as the casual effu- 
 sion of a man unsworn. I will suppose that he does come 
 forward for the vindication of his character, and to do away 
 those aspersions on his fame which resulted from his trial, and 
 the transactions connected with it. I shall give you, Gentle- 
 men, a short history of a criminal trial not dissimilar in its cir- 
 cumstances, though the catastrophe cannot be exactly the same 
 A man, — a gentleman, I believe, — happened to be upon trial 
 for his life; the evidence against him, though it tarnished his 
 
 o 
 
194 SPEECHES. 
 
 character, was insufficient to convict him, and the Counsel for 
 the Crown gave up the prosecution. However, from a high 
 sense of honour, he entreated liberty to examine witnesses to 
 clear his character. He was indulged, convicted, and hanged. 
 
 Gentlemen, I shall now briefly state the outline of the case 
 made against this unfortunate man by a witness as interested 
 as any that could be produced, fully as much so as the person 
 against whom he appears, and labouring under a stronger feel- 
 ing, if infamy of character and excommunication from all in- 
 tercourse with men of virtue and respectability be as great an 
 evil to a gentleman as the deprivation of life in the eye of a 
 plebeian. If such, I say, be the case, the principal witness 
 here has given his testimony under as strong a bias as could 
 possibly have actuated any person against him. 
 
 Gentlemen, I shall, without looking at my notes, give you 
 a very short and general sketch of the evidence upon which 
 Mr. O'Connor claims a verdict, at the peril of infamy on your 
 names as conspirators against him. There are two allegations of 
 perjury in this indictment. One is that Martin M'Keon, at a 
 certain time, opened a side gate, and admitted these robbers, 
 together with Mr. O'Connor, into the demesne. Another is, 
 thatM'Kcon accompanied them to a place called Saint's Island. 
 I suppose the name of this place is derived, like lucus, a noil 
 lucendo, and that it was first given when Mr. O'Connor became 
 its resident. How has he proved these assignments of per- 
 jury? By the production of three witnesses only. In a case 
 which abounded with opportunities of manifold corroborations, 
 he has thought proper to rest upon the testimony of M'Keon, 
 who is a religious man, but not a moral ; of himself, who de- 
 spises religion, but relies upon his morality ; and of a woman 
 who does not appear to have much of either. 
 
 Observe now, Gentlemen, what a body of suspicious cir- 
 cumstances attend Mr. O'Connor on the first view of this case. 
 I am happy that no censure has been cast upon the persons who 
 
speeches. 19.5 
 
 administer the Post Office department with so much zeal and 
 activity. Mr. Lees is here, who has a paramount concern in 
 this prosecution, and who has not skulked from the responsibi- 
 lity of instructing Counsel for the defence of this man. A body 
 of circumstances was stated to him sufficient to satisfy him of 
 the guilt of a gentleman who had been often suspected, but 
 against whom no decisive evidence could be procured before; 
 and he woidd have been blameable and worthless if the rank of 
 life of Mr. O'Connor had deterred him from entering upon a 
 solemn inquiry, where he was convinced that the evidence was 
 such as not only to warrant a prosecution, but upon which, but 
 for the lenity of the law, Mr. O'Connor would probably have 
 been found guilty. 
 
 Gentlemen, observe this admitted assemblage of facts: that 
 the mail-coach was robbed on a Friday night; that the men 
 principally engaged in that robbery had been, by his own con- 
 fession, in the employment of Mr. O'Connor; that the spoil was 
 taken into his demesne, not by passing over hedges or climb- 
 ing walls, but deliberately admitted through his gate by per- 
 sons in his employ; that full notice was given to lu3 servants 
 of the admission of the plunder; that it was conveyed to his 
 demesne, where an investigation of the contents must have 
 taken place ; that the plunderers must have spent many hours 
 there in culling the valuable part and leaving the rest, of which 
 Mr. O'Connor afterwards gets possession by mere accident. He 
 sends the spoils to the Post Olhce of Summer-hill, the very 
 conduct which cunning counsel would suggest to a guilty man. 
 It would have been dangerous to have a bulk of that kind, 
 which, if found concealed, might lead to his detection. It 
 would have been difficult, if not impossible, to have consumed 
 it by fire or otherwise. Three witnesses are produced to coun- 
 teract these circumstances. What is their testimony? Mr. 
 O'Connor is above all suspicion. Nothing could tempt him to 
 deny what is true, or assert what is false. Is he entitled to 
 
 o 2 
 
196 SPEECHES. 
 
 credit because he is not a Christian ? Will you not examine 
 his testimony with the same suspicion which a Christian, under 
 the same circumstances, must encounter? What is his evi- 
 dence? First, a denial; to be sure he would deny the charge. 
 Do you believe that, even if he had not the advantage of being 
 a deist, he would admit such a charge upon his honour? That 
 the robbery was committed is clear, and by men who are 
 brought home as connected with him by a variety of circum- 
 stances. By Owens, who worked in his employment, and lived 
 in his neighbourhood; by Owens' brother; and by Savage and 
 Heery, who had fled from justice, and had taken refuge in his 
 demesne, and were sheltered by him. But his connexion does 
 not cease ; it becomes more cordial after the crime was com- 
 mitted. A witness of his own, two days after the perpetration 
 of the robbery, tells him that he has reason to believe that 
 Michael Owens was guilty ; and yet it has appeared that at the 
 Cavan Assizes, a year after, when Owens was tried, he steps 
 forward as a voluntary, eager, and anxious witness, to testify 
 to the excellence of his character. Is there nothing, Gentle- 
 men, in this solicitude to protect that man, to induce the 
 strongest belief that Mr. O'Connor knew more of this trans- 
 action than his zeal for his character would allow him to 
 admit? lie acknowledges that the very day after the rob- 
 bery (Sunday) he was told that a convicted felon, one of the 
 very robbers who had broken gaol, was concealed in his de- 
 mesne ; that he afterwards had a conversation with Mr. Wain- 
 w right, Mr. Mockler, and other magistrates, and yet that he 
 never disclosed that fact, or made the slightest effort to have 
 that man arrested. Put this plain proposition to your minds. 
 Has Mr. O'Connor a right to claim your assent to this assertion, 
 that he is actuated in this prosecution only by motives of pub- 
 lic justice? He does not deny that he knew these fellows had 
 escaped from justice ; he divulged it to a person who will come 
 forward; and has any man a right to claim credit from a jury 
 
SPEECHES. 197 
 
 who could allow such an incident to take place and not endea- 
 vour to apprehend the culprit? He allows him to escape with- 
 out even communicating the fact to any magistrate, a circum- 
 stance which might have led to his detection. It is plain that 
 Mr. O'Connor had every reason, a few days after the robbery, 
 to believe that Owens was guilty ; and yet he said afterwards, 
 upon his oath, that he never heard anything to his disadvan- 
 tage. He tells you he does not know why, to whom, or for 
 what he was upon those occasions called on to give his testi- 
 mony. We will prove that upon every one of those occasions 
 he came to give his testimony like a lover, not of justice, but 
 of felony ; that he interested himself warmly on behalf of these 
 men, thanked their Counsel for their exertions, abused the 
 gaoler for intercepting his letters to them, and, in short, acted 
 like a confederate under the apprehension of disobliging a man 
 tried for his life. He swore (I mean he said) he never com- 
 municated the testimony he would give ; yet we will prove 
 that it was detailed in the prisoners' brief, and given in precise 
 conformity thereto. 
 
 Gentlemen, he told you that the mother of Owens called 
 upon him to assist her son, and that his feelings were such that 
 he could not refuse. He must have had a bad opinion of the 
 man, who was already more than a suspected felon, and yet 
 he cannot resist the importunity. I will put two alternatives, 
 whether he gratified that woman because he was afraid of her 
 resentment, or compassionated her feelings. She might peach, 
 Gentlemen, and he might himself be indicted. This feeling for 
 the Ovvenses never flags until Owens becomes his accuser. At 
 length he commits a new felony, and is condemned to be 
 hanged. His brother comes to Mr. O'Connor (though it would 
 appear from his testimony that he never knew him), and asks 
 his assistance; and what is his answer? That he could do 
 no more for him, that he could give him no more money, and 
 had already conferred favours enough upon him. He gives 
 
198 SPEECHES. 
 
 him materials for a coffin ; and, even at the last Spring Assizes, 
 he and his son become bail for the brother, with whom he af- 
 fects to be totally unacquainted. 
 
 Gentlemen, I now go to the witness whom Mr. O'Connor 
 has brought up to corroborate his testimony ; a man ecpially 
 swearing in defence of his own character, who was charged 
 as his associate, and has lived in habits of great intimacy 
 with him. Mr. O'Connor has given us a Latin maxim, nos- 
 citur a sociis. I hope he alone is not to be exempted from 
 its application. His Counsel says he will give evidence as to 
 his character ; I hope it will be that of his neighbours, not de- 
 rived from a foreign country, nor from distant times; I hope 
 it will be that of those in whose society he has lived ; I hope 
 he can produce any one gentleman in his neighbourhood to 
 swear that he is a credible witness. 
 
 It has been stated on the other side that a brother of the 
 present prisoner, named Richard Waring, was hanged for this 
 robbery shortly after it was committed, and that he gave no 
 information. Our answer to that is, that he did; and, if they 
 make no objection on the other side, we shall give in evidence 
 his informations before his trial or conviction. He brought 
 forward the very same charges against Mr. O'Connor, as the 
 man now on trial; nay more, a servant of Mr. O'Connor's own 
 family swore informations; but communications were after- 
 wards made to her, and it was found impossible to procure her 
 attendance. But let us now turn to the testimony of the wood- 
 ranger; observe his swearing: am I mistaken in saying that 
 he admitted he was, to the best of his recollection, eleven times 
 in "aol? He is produced to deny the charge that he was privy 
 to the admission of the robbers through Mr. O'Connor's gate. 
 Yet what is Mr. O'Connor's own case through his own wit- 
 nesses? That the ruffians rapped at the gate where M'Keon 
 slept, not, perhaps, upon the threshold, but certainly in the 
 house. That, upon the gate being opened by his sister-in-law, 
 
SPEECHES. 199 
 
 two men familiarly come in by virtue of their known right of ac 
 cess ; that four or five other men rushed in along with them, laden 
 with numerous bags, which they carry into the demesne. And 
 you are to credit that this very extraordinary circumstance is not 
 told to M'Keon that night? Why, Gentlemen, if a collateral 
 issue was sent up to you as to the truth of that fact, and you 
 were told that nine or ten ruffians had rapped at the door, 
 that M'Keon's sister-in-law had let them in, and that they 
 rushed by her, carrying in a parcel of bags, could you find that 
 M'Keon did not hear of it until the next day? And if he did 
 know it, is not all his testimony this day false ? Is not the 
 case clear, that he was an accessary after the fact to this rob- 
 bery, and participated in a division of the spoil ? If you be- 
 lieve this, you must believe him guilty; and if him, then his 
 master also. They must stand or fall together, for they are 
 embarked in the same bottom. But, Gentlemen, try this a 
 little further. M'Keon was told by that woman, at two o'clock 
 on the day after the robbery, that a number of men laden with 
 bags forced open the gate, and that the mail had been robbed 
 early on that day. Can you credit, that if he were so told, and 
 was innocent, he would not have the curiosity to search the 
 demesne and ascertain the fact? The whole plunder, it seems, 
 was within a mile of the mansion-house, and it could not have 
 escaped his vigilance ; but we find no search made. M'Keon 
 lias sworn to you that it was his regular business and habit to 
 search the demesne every Saturday evening. Was it because 
 he was told on Saturday that there was plunder in the demesne, 
 that he, on this occasion, discontinued the usual search ? Was 
 it for fear of stumbling on the spoil, or was it not because mea- 
 sures had not been yet arranged what to do with these indicia 
 of guilt, and it would have been premature to make a disco- 
 very ? It is impossible to account, consistently with that man's 
 innocence, why he did not make the search. Recollect the 
 time, mode, and circumstances attending the discovery of the 
 
200 SPEECHES. 
 
 bags, which were found in great quantities, unconcealed, and 
 scattered over a large space of ground. About two o'clock on 
 Saturday M'Keon heard the plunder was brought into the de- 
 mesne ; there was no search that day, or at any time ; but on 
 the ensuing morning, the 4th of October, an accidental meet- 
 ing takes place between M'Keon and Mr. O'Connor's son, and 
 they jointly stumble upon the spoil. This, to be sure, is some- 
 what improbable, but is the subsequent conduct more likely or 
 natural? One would imagine that this was the moment for a 
 general outcry, when the spoil was first discovered. One would 
 imagine the persons who found it would have raised the hue 
 and cry through the country. But no such thing; M'Keon 
 tells the story to a gardener, who tells it to the maid, who tells 
 it to Mr. O'Connor. He, Gentlemen, is so clear of all suspi- 
 cion, so much above the vulgar want of corroboration, that he 
 docs not condescend to give you the satisfaction of producing 
 either his son, the gardener, or the maid. It would really seem 
 as if Mr. O'Connor had discovered a new code of evidence as 
 well as religion. 
 
 Gentlemen, the testimony of these witnesses is condemned 
 by their own improbability and inconsistency. I asked M'Keon 
 whether he had heard of any person being suspected of the 
 mail robbery at the time when he found the plunder. He de- 
 nied it, and said he had never heard of any person being even 
 suspected till Michael Owens and Richard Waring were taken 
 up, in consequence of some of the goods being found on them. 
 This answer was not casually got out by the ingenuity of exa- 
 mination, but deliberately given. Now, Gentlemen, did you 
 attend to the testimony of that woman? She said she disclosed 
 upon Saturday to M'Keon, at about two or three o'clock, that 
 Michael Owens had come with a party laden with bags, and 
 that they were the persons who plundered the mail. No doubt 
 they were the same ; but is it possible that you can give credit 
 to a man who, though told the next day that a particular person, 
 
SPEECHES. 201 
 
 whom he knew, had come with the plunder, said lie had heard 
 nothing against him for four or five days after? 
 
 Gentlemen, every part of this case is badged with circum- 
 stances of suspicion, though not sufficient to cast blame upon 
 the jury who acquitted Mr. O'Connor. They were right in 
 their verdict, because they had not before them half the evi- 
 dence which we have, and upon a reasonable doubt it was their 
 duty to acquit. 
 
 Upon this evidence, Gentlemen, an issue is to go to you, 
 important I admit, but principally so by reason of the effect 
 your verdict will have in purging the character of Mr. O'Con- 
 nor, or confirming those suspicions which arc afloat concerning 
 him. Its chief virtue and value must be its efficacy in giving 
 to him for the future a letter of recommendation to the various 
 parts of this country and of England. If such be the motive 
 of this prosecution, as unquestionably it is, he appears before 
 you with the strongest inducements to tell falsehood that ever 
 acted upon the mind of a witness. If he be not credited, his 
 character is for ever blasted; but, if he succeed, he will trum- 
 pet forth to the world that a jury has convicted of perjury the 
 infamous witnesses put forward by enemies, who wished to put 
 down a man of such weight and such virtue. It is for that op- 
 portunity that he now solicits your verdict. God forbid that, 
 if he be entitled to it, he should not have it, and that you 
 should not rejoice in his exculpation. But, Gentlemen, others 
 have rights as well as Mr. O'Connor; even persons tainted with 
 the crimes of this prisoner, however inferior in rank to their 
 accusers, are equally entitled to the benefit of the law; and, if 
 the evidence against the prisoner be not most satisfactory, you 
 ought not to convict him, even though Mr. O'Connor should 
 fall a sacrifice to the rash experiment he has made, and to the 
 necessary conclusion of your reason and conscience. 
 
 It is an anomaly, I admit, that a man of high rank in so- 
 ciety should be guilty of an offence such as Mr. O'Connor was 
 
202 srEECiiF.s. 
 
 charged with. It is an occurrence not frequently to be found 
 in the present state of society, that men should so far forget 
 their rank and condition as to associate with plunderers and 
 robbers, and support them by perjury. I admit that it is most 
 unlikely that a man of education should be so flagitious; but 
 yet it is within the scope of nature; and, when a man of rank 
 and education becomes once corrupt, he is more corrupt and 
 depraved than any other. — Comiptio optimi est pessima. We 
 have known, within no long period of time, a person as highly 
 educated and as respectably connected as Mr. O'Connor con- 
 victed of a crime equal, perhaps superior, to the atrocities im- 
 puted to him. If such monsters exist, it is well that they be 
 unmasked. 
 
 You, Gentlemen, have a painful duty to perform. You 
 will, no doubt, diseharge it with justice and firmness; and, if 
 Mr. O'Connor and his associates have not satisfied you of their 
 innocence, and that the traverser did not swear falsely when 
 he accused them, you will find a verdict of not guilty, even at 
 the hazard of falling under his censure, and being put forth to 
 the public as conspiring with the other juries, and his great and 
 powerful enemies, to tarnish his character and frustrate his 
 pious and patriotic exertions.* 
 
 * Upon Mr. O'Connor's moving to the table to be sworn, a circumstance occurred 
 which created an extraordinary sensation in the Court. The Clerk of the Crown was 
 about to swear the witness, when Mr. Burrowes interposed, and, addressing Mr. 
 O'Connor, inquired if he believed in the contents uf that Booh ? He replied that he 
 did not. It has been seen, in the progress of his address, how the advocate availed 
 himself of ibis singular disclosure. 
 
203 
 
 VALENTINE LORD CLONCURRY v. SIR JOHN BENNETT 
 PIERS, BART. 
 
 My Loud, and Gentlemen of tiik Juuy, — I must own Unit 
 
 1 have never risen in a Court of justice under more discou- 
 raging circumstances than the present, and, consequently, that 
 I never before experienced more apprehension in entering on 
 the defence of a client. 13ut my terrors do not arise from the 
 turpitude of the cause in which I am embarked, nor the delin- 
 quency of the party whose case I am about to state to you ; 
 but from a host of prejudices against his character that have 
 been fabricated and raised by calumny and misrepresentation, 
 for the purpose of pre-occup ying your minds with a persuasion 
 of his guilt, and which, combined with the artful and eloquent 
 statement made to you by my friend the Solicitor-General. I 
 much fear have been too successful. Of all the enemies to calm 
 discussion and rational investigation, prejudice, whether arising 
 from pity or anger, is the greatest. It is, therefore, with good 
 reason that I deprecate its effects on your minds, and beseech 
 you, by the regard which you owe to your own consciences, and 
 your duty to the parties before you, to eradicate from your 
 minds every idea that is not grounded upon fair and decisive 
 proof, and to efface every impression that has not been allixed 
 by the infallible seal of legal evidence. I expect this effort 
 from you, Gentlemen of the Jury, for I know you; and had I 
 not that acquaintance with the strength and candour of your 
 minds, were I addressing persons of an inferior description, 
 whatever my opinion might be of the merits of the case, I own 
 I should give up mv client in despair, not as a sacrifice to im- 
 partial justice, but the victim of prejudice and passion. Gen- 
 tlemen, I mean to state, not to defend, the conduct of Sir John 
 
204 SPEECHES. 
 
 Piers. That conduct is in itself highly reprehensible. I will 
 go further, and allow that his intentions may have gone the 
 full length of what he has been accused of having perpetrated. 
 But, whatever may be the judgment of Omniscience in this 
 case, however the adulterer in his heart may be the object of 
 divine retribution, we must not forget our station here, but 
 recollect that it is according to the law of the land that you are 
 sworn to give your verdict; that law which, in crimes of this 
 nature, gives no compensation for the mere meditation of the 
 ollencc, but requires the fidl and unequivocal proof of the con- 
 summation of the iniquity before it decrees any damages to the 
 party injured, however otherwise aggrieved. 
 
 Let me recall to your minds, Gentlemen, another matter 
 equally important to a just and judicious discharge of your 
 functions here this day. Remember you are members of a civil, 
 not of a criminal tribunal; you arc summoned here this day, 
 not to punish delinquency, but to yield a reasonable compen- 
 sation for losses sustained. If you consider yourselves in any 
 other point of view, — if, quitting your character of jurors in a 
 civil action, you think proper to wield the axe of avenging 
 justice, — you forget, nay, you violate your oaths, and thereby 
 expose yourselves as objects of the vengeance of your God. 
 
 As the matter strikes me (and, if I mistake, the Bench will 
 correct my error), you have two separate issues to try. The 
 first is to determine whether the parties accused be really 
 guilty, not of the intention, but of the very act of adultery 
 itself. If you have a reasonable doubt upon that head, your 
 own conscience, the charity inculcated by the religion we all 
 profess, as well as the spirit of our laws, require you to acquit 
 them altogether. But should you determine otherwise ; should, 
 contrary to my opinion, the evidence in this case adduced ap- 
 pear to you so strong, so powerful, so irrefragable in its nature, 
 as to leave not a shadow of uncertainty upon your minds, then, 
 and not till then, must you take into consideration the quantity 
 
SPEECHES. 205 
 
 of damages which the party aggrieved deserves as a compen- 
 sation for the injury inflicted, and not at all the quantity of 
 punishment merited by the author of the crime. These are 
 ideas and distinctions which should be kept steadily fixed in 
 your minds, that you may, with a clear conscience, acquit 
 yourselves of that duty which, under the solemn and awful 
 sanction of an oath, you have this day undertaken to discharge. 
 But, Gentlemen of the Jury, there is a third party to whom 
 I wish to direct your attention, whose situation, to men, to 
 gentlemen, to Irishmen, should render her an object of pecu- 
 liar interest; a party who is not regularly before the Court, 
 though more deeply involved in the event than cither of the 
 others ; who has no advocate, save yourselves, to plead her cause, 
 or to defend her from obloquy, from infamy, from destruc- 
 tion ; and who now, by my voice, entreats you to reflect well 
 before you, by an irrevocable sentence, consign her to eternal 
 shame, and misery worse than death. Your hearts have already 
 named her, and to the powerful recommendation of your hearts 
 1 now leave the abandoned, repudiated, and perhaps calum- 
 niated wife. 
 
 My Lord, I will not here rely upon the opinion expressed 
 in ancient and modern books of authority, namely, that nothing 
 short of ocular proof of the crime can be received in a cause of 
 criminal conversation ; that the parties must be detected nudus 
 cum mida. I know, my Lord, that later decisions, which su- 
 persede these authorities, have admitted circumstances as equi- 
 valent to proof; but then, my Lord, I must insist that those 
 circumstances must be of the most unequivocal nature, that 
 they must bear no other than a criminal interpretation, that 
 they must be such as to leave no doubt; for if anything short 
 of this is received, the matrimonial connexion is but a tempo- 
 rary tie, a flimsy bond, that may be dissolved at the very first 
 touch of whim, caprice, or temporary alienation of the parties. 
 
 In this view of the subject I shall recur to my notes, under 
 
206 speeches. 
 
 the control both of the Bench and the jury, and endeavour, by 
 a just and impartial analysis of their contents, to see if they 
 furnish any evidence of that kind which should authorize you 
 by your verdict to ruin two parties without making, in fact, 
 any real compensation to the third. But nothing shows more 
 the debility of the evidence produced by the plaintiff than his 
 beinfr obliged to mention in his statement such circumstances 
 as these: that, forsooth, Sir John withdrew earlier than usual 
 from the gentlemen; that he went to the drawing-room, where 
 his behaviour to Lady Cloncurry was, what? — why, indeed, 
 attentive, but respectful. What more? — that he made a decla- 
 ration of love to her at a harpsichord. All this, if proved to 
 a demonstration, would not weigh a feather in the scale of evi- 
 dence ; but what are we to think, when we find them not even 
 attempting to prove one tittle of it? In the same situation 
 exactly arc we to place all those accounts of persecution with 
 letters, those repeated declarations of mad passion, those fren- 
 zied purposes of banishment or death ; all those flowers, culled 
 from the circulating library, appear only in the eloquent solici- 
 tor's statement, and, reared by artificial means, were not able 
 to bear the less genial atmosphere of a court of law. But let 
 us come at once to the first, perhaps the only piece of evidence 
 that gives even a colour of probability to the whole cause. 
 This is the testimony of Signor Gabrielli. But what does the 
 testimony of this Italian, even should you think it deserving of 
 credit, prove? Why, indeed, that Sir John put in his head 
 where this fellow was perched upon a scaffold daubing the 
 ceiling; that he closed the door; that he afterwards heard 
 two other doors closed; and that, after all this, he heard — no- 
 thing. Gentlemen of the Jury, does this new importation from 
 Italy expect to infect you and me with his own pruriency of 
 imagination? Does he mean to persuade us that hearing no- 
 thing is a proof that something bad is going on; that closing 
 the doors of an apartment, in very cold weather, is necessarily 
 
srEECiiES. 207 
 
 a prelude to lewdness and adultery ? But why did he not 
 come down from the scaffolding where he was perched, to 
 satisfy himself whether his suspicions were well or ill-founded ? 
 Did he do so? No; he remained, if you believe him, hovering 
 in the air, prosecuting his work ; and when he at length came 
 down, it was indeed only to get some paint. Gentlemen, on 
 your oaths do you believe this Italian? Do you believe that 
 any man, of any nation, has so much phlegm as to remain 
 calmly prosecuting his work, while he suspects that such a 
 scene is going on in the very next apartment? No, you can- 
 not: and the irresistible inference to be drawn from this Siff- 
 nor's evidence is this, that the whole is a fabrication; or, if 
 true, that his suspicions of a criminal intercourse between the 
 defendant and Lady Cloncurry had no existence at the time, 
 and were only conveniently taken up when it became his inte- 
 rest to second the designs of his patron. But let us change the 
 scene, and, leaving our little Italian evidence, follow the whole 
 party to College-green, where the Solicitor-General promised 
 us wonders, but very prudently left those said wonders to be 
 detailed by the more appropriate organs of the witnesses that 
 ■were produced. I applaud my learned friend's delicacy upon 
 that occasion ; he did not wish to offer any offence to the deli- 
 cate ears of his brethren at the Bar; or rather, as I do most 
 iirmly believe, he did not wish to insult your understanding 
 and common sense, by an anticipated detail of circumstances 
 nugatory in themselves, or else so improbable as not to meet 
 the assent of the most credulous. But we are arrived at Col- 
 lege-green, and what happens there? Why the lady's face 
 has been violently flushed, therefore she must have committed 
 adultery, — and not only adultery, but with my client: but all 
 this happened in a house full of servants ; the doors very seldom 
 secured, the hall-door standing open. 
 
 Now, Gentlemen of the Jury, is all this to be reconciled 
 with the conduct of such a veteran in intrigue as Sir John 
 
208 SPEECHES. 
 
 Piers is represented to be? ■ * * * 
 
 A gentleman's voice was heard in the house the very same clay ; 
 the inference is irresistible ; sho had been guilty of adultery that 
 very day, and the gentleman, her paramour, Avas my client. 
 
 *********** 
 
 Why, Gentlemen of the Jury, there is not one of you, how- 
 ever grave in aspect, sedate in demeanour, and chaste in con- 
 duct, that may not be convicted of adultery by this kind of 
 logic. All this is told us by Signora Gabrielli, the waiting- 
 maid of Lady Cloncurry ; the person who, if there were any 
 guilt, ought to know most about it, and who knows least. 
 Mrs. M'Dowell is next produced, and there is scarcely a tittle 
 of originality in her. It appears to be all imitation, servile 
 
 imitation, of her friend, Signora Gabrielli. * * 
 
 ********* ** 
 
 She states that her mistress talked to Sir John in an unknown 
 lanfua^c. And mark the conclusion she draws from all these 
 premises. She did not understand what her mistress and Sir 
 John were saying ; therefore, they were talking about adultery. 
 
 * ********** 
 
 And you are to believe in the guilt of the parties because it 
 has not been proved. But, then, their attitudes; how are we 
 to account for their attitudes? I question, Gentlemen of the 
 Jury, whether it would be very easy for each of you this mo- 
 ment to account precisely for your own. But I will not infer 
 your guilt from that circumstance. Suppose the ministering 
 spirit of Don Cleophas this instant to throw off the roofs of 
 every house in this city, and to give us a full view of the inte- 
 rior of each, many, and various, and fantastical, would be the 
 attitudes that we should see. And yet, were Ave to call upon 
 each person to give us a direct reason for his being found sit- 
 ting, standing, kneeling, lying, or leaning, rather than in any 
 other attitude, and infer their guilt, and the guilt of adultery 
 too, from their incapacity to satisfy our curiosity, what greater 
 
SPEECHES. 209 
 
 absurdity would there be in this than what Mrs. M'Dowell 
 wants you to commit in giving your verdict of conviction upon 
 such evidence as she has this day furnished you with? But, 
 supposing both parties inclined to the commission of adultery, 
 is it probable that they would have chosen such a house and 
 such a situation for their criminal indulgence? Might they 
 not have repaired to any one of those numerous places of assig- 
 nation in which our city abounds, where their intercourse 
 would have been perfectly unknown? Would not this have 
 been the course taken by such an adept as my client is repre- 
 sented to be? If, then, Gentlemen of the Jury, you have no 
 right to infer the commission of adultery, the actual consum- 
 mation of the crime, at any one of those periods mentioned by 
 the several witnesses, what right have you to infer it at all? 
 The inclination of my client to the crime may be manifest ; 
 but it is not the inclination to, but the perpetration of the 
 guilt, that you must be convinced of before you can convict 
 the parties. Who, again, are the witnesses? Such as any 
 husband, who wishes to get rid of his wife, could easily pro- 
 cure ; nay, such as would present themselves without any soli- 
 citation : servants, dependents, sycophants, who kept the secret 
 in their own sordid bosoms until they saw the wife repudiated, 
 banished, driven forth a wanderer, and likely to become their 
 mistress no more. Why were not some of the persons of rank, 
 in whose company they have been at Lyons, at Castle Brown, 
 or in Dublin, produced to give evidence of familiarity passing 
 between Sir John Piers and Lady Cloncurry ? Why are we 
 referred to the testimony of those who, when they enter the 
 state of servitude, lose, as has been emphatically said, the one- 
 half of their worth. If there be any virtue in which servants 
 are more deficient than another, any that seems almost incom- 
 patible with their station, it is truth. And yet it is upon the 
 veracity of such a description of persons you are to rely if you 
 find a verdict this day for the plaintiff. The next and last 
 
 p 
 
210 SPEECHES. 
 
 piece of evidence that is produced is a letter in the handwrit- 
 ing of my client, addressed to Lady Cloncurry. This proves 
 much ; that is, it proves all that I have admitted, namely, that 
 an intercourse of affection did subsist between Sir John Piers 
 and that lady. But then, Gentlemen, it proves no more. It 
 does not prove one tittle with respect to their actual crimina- 
 lity. " Tell me what it is he knows, or is it only suspicion." 
 These are, Gentlemen, the suspicious terms upon which 
 they expect you to found your conviction. But suspicion is, 
 of all others, the worst ground for conviction ; the very term 
 implying doubt, uncertainty, which is incompatible with the 
 nature and essence of conviction. But can we put no con- 
 struction on these expressions but an implied confession of 
 adultery? Is there nothing short of that, that Sir John Piers 
 might be apprehensive of reaching the ears of a husband ? 
 Might he not very fairly say, " Tell me, does he know that 
 I have made a declaration of love to you ; or is it only sus- 
 picion ? Tell me, does he know that I have written to you, 
 given you my hair, presented you with my picture ; or is it 
 only suspicion ?" Might not any of these circumstances have 
 been the objects of the knowledge, as well as of the suspi- 
 cion, of Lord Cloncurry? And if they might, why, Gentle- 
 men of the Jury, should you be called upon to put a violent 
 and a forced construction on a passage in a letter, when it so 
 naturally admits of another, and less guilty explanation? Be- 
 sides, consider that the circumstances of the letters, the locket, 
 and picture, were much more likely to come to the knowledge 
 of Lord Cloncurry than the actual commission of adultery, and 
 therefore were much more likely to be the subject of Sir John 
 Piers' anxiety, expressed in this unrestrained communication 
 with the object of his guilty passion. But I have, I think, said 
 enough on this part of the question to show you that the evi- 
 dence is insufficient to support the declaration, and to warrant 
 you in finding a verdict against my client. But, supposing 
 
SPEECHES. 211 
 
 (which I do merely that I may turn to the second object of my 
 investigation) that you differ from me on this head, and feel 
 yourselves determined to adopt the flimsy evidence produced 
 by the plaintiff, let us then consider the quantity of damages 
 which your duty requires you to allot to the injured party. 
 Again and again, Gentlemen of the Jury, let me impress it 
 upon your minds that you are not impannelled in that box to 
 punish. This Court, as it now stands, under its present com- 
 mission, is not a Court of criminal jurisdiction. You are here 
 to give a compensation for the loss of a woman who, if she 
 committed adultery, committed adultery the very first moment 
 she found herself alone with her paramour. Give, Gentlemen, — 
 l consent with all my heart, — the value of such a woman, and 
 it will reduce the high-sounding sum of £100,000 to 100,000 
 farthings. So enormous, so unnatural, so monstrous did the 
 idea of seduction appear to the Solicitor-General, who stated 
 the case, that he had recourse to violence, to a rape, to account 
 for her overthrow. On your oaths, Gentlemen, do you believe 
 she was ravished? Let us ngain summon up our little Italian 
 sprite, and consult him with respect to his opinion on this 
 question. Did he insinuate that his mistress was ravished? 
 He heard, after the billiard-room door was shut, the closing of 
 two others ; but did he hear a struggle, a shriek, a call, a mur- 
 mur, a breath that bespoke resistance? No, Gentlemen, all 
 was still as death, until the painter began to make a noise, and 
 then indeed her ladyship ran in, glowing with blushes, not to 
 implore the assistance of the Italian, but to deprecate the inter- 
 vention of her husband. This, Gentlemen, is the exertion of 
 brutal strength, the achievement of brutal passion, that you are 
 called upon to avenge; this is the artful, smooth, insinuating, 
 gradual seduction, that you are called upon to punish. I am 
 not instructed to go into an investigation of the lady's cha- 
 racter cither previous or subsequent to her marriage; but, in 
 the absence of Sir John Piers, I think it my duty to observe 
 
 p 2 
 
212 SPEECHES. 
 
 upon what appears on the very face of the evidence. Lord 
 Cloncurry and General Morgan meet casually at Nice. A sud- 
 den proposal of marriage from the gentleman is as suddenly 
 accepted, or rather grasped at, by the lady, only sixteen years 
 of age. His Lordship escapes to Home, but he is rapidly pur- 
 sued by the General. Like Caesar, " the Alps and Pyrenees 
 sink before him." He overtakes the fugitive in Rome ; a capi- 
 tulation ensues: " take my honour," says the General, " and I 
 will take your's." The terms are accepted, and the whole con- 
 cludes like a dramatic performance of two acts, with the pre- 
 mature catastrophe of a marriage. 
 
 Now, Gentlemen of the Jury, will you think it an extrava- 
 gant supposition on my part, if I think, from the extreme 
 hurry of the whole of this business, coupled with the lady's 
 subsequent conduct, that is, if you believe the story of II Sig- 
 noraGabrielli, that her family had such an opinion of the young 
 lady's character as to think that the sooner she was disposed of 
 the better. After two years' residence in a country where, to 
 use the expression of my friend the Solicitor-General, morals 
 are not in the highest state of refinement, she arrives in Ireland, 
 and is introduced to my client. What is the consequence, if 
 you bolicve the evidence? She falls in love at first sight. 1 1 is 
 attentions to her were respectful, says the Solicitor, when in 
 company, but the very first moment they find themselves alone, 
 they make up for the restraint in which that company kept 
 them. Lay your hands to your hearts, Gentlemen, and say, do 
 you believe such an adventure could have happened to a 
 modest woman, bred up in religious habits, of a retired dispo- 
 sition ; or does it not rather look like one who sought the cm- 
 braces of men, as much as she was sought by them ? Can you 
 doubt that a similar catastrophe would have taken place if Sir 
 John Piers never had existed? But I will do justice to the 
 plaintiff's counsel and witnesses; they have not represented 
 her as a woman of pious education, of religious habits; and 
 
SPEECHES. 213 
 
 their abstaining from touching on these points cannot be with- 
 out some reason. Perhaps it was thought that too religious 
 an education would have hurt the dignity of her mind, would 
 spoil her for fashionable intercourse, would make her appear 
 as a baby, as an idiot. There is no disputing about tastes ; 
 everything appears according to the light in which we view 
 it ; and those who are illuminated by the beams of the new phi- 
 losophy, may probably despise the milder lustre of Revelation. 
 I give only my opinion on this head; if your's concur with 
 mine, you will find little difficulty in determining on your ver- 
 dict; and should you be inclined to give any, they will be but 
 moderate damages to the plaintiff. 
 
 THE KING v. EDWARD SHERIDAN, M. D.* 
 
 My Lords, and Gentlemen of the Jury, — It is no common- 
 place exaggeration to assert, that the question upon which you 
 are to decide is serious and interesting in the extreme, and 
 claims your utmost attention. His Majesty's Attorney-General 
 more than insinuates that the peace of the country, and the 
 stability of its government, depend upon your verdict. In this 
 I agree with the Attorney-General, and I add to the catalogue 
 of things at hazard (what does not much appear to excite his 
 sensibility) the invaluable right of petitioning. But I totally 
 differ from His Majesty's Attorney-General as to the mode in 
 which your verdict may affect these great concerns, for it is 
 the firm conviction of my mind that if you shall, in the person 
 of Mr. Sheridan, attaint the Catholic body of Ireland of trea- 
 sonable practices, all these great objects will be more than 
 hazarded. I well know with what inferior weight of talents 
 and influence I make this contrasted assertion ; but I feel, I 
 confidently feel, that this inferiority, great and formidable as 
 
 * See Memoir, page 77. 
 
214 SPEECHES. 
 
 it is, is more than counterbalanced by the weight of the cause 
 I advocate. Before I enter upon that cause I must, I will 
 freely remark upon what occurred under every eye, and there- 
 fore under your own, while you were impannelling. I confess, 
 Gentlemen, I was astonished to find that no Roman Catholic 
 was suffered to enter that box, when it is well known that they 
 equal, if not exceed, Protestant jurors upon other occasions, 
 and when the question relates to privileges of which they claim 
 a participation, and you possess a monopoly. I was astonished 
 to see twenty-two Protestant jurors, of the highest respecta- 
 bility, set aside by the arbitrary veto of the Crown, without 
 any alleged insufficiency, upon the sole demerit of suspected 
 libercdity. I was astonished to find a juror pressed into the 
 box, who did not deny that he was a sworn Orangeman ; and 
 another who was about to admit, until he was silenced, that he 
 had prejudged the cause. Those occurrences, at the first aspect 
 of them, filled me with unqualified despair. I do not say that 
 the Crown lawyers have had any concern in this revolting pro- 
 cess ; but I will say, that they ought to have interfered in coun- 
 teracting a selection, which has insulted some of the most loyal 
 men in this city, and must disparage any verdict which may be 
 thus procured. But, Gentlemen, upon a nearer view of the sub. 
 ject, I relinquish the despair by which I was actuated ; I rest 
 my hopes upon your own integrity, your deep interest in the 
 welfare of the country, and the very disgust which yourselves 
 must feel at the manner and motive of your array. You did 
 not press forward into that jury-box, — you did not seek the 
 exclusion, the total exclusion, of any Roman Catholic; you, no 
 doubt, would anxiously desire an intermixture of some of those 
 enlightened Roman Catholics, whom the Attorney-General 
 declared he was certain he could convince, but whom he has 
 not ventured to address in that box. The painful responsibility 
 cast upon you is not of your own seeking, and I persuade my- 
 self you will, upon due reflection, feel more indisposed to those 
 who court and inflame your prejudices, and would involve you 
 
SrEECHES. 215 
 
 ia an act of Jeep responsibility, without that fair intermixture 
 of opposite feelings and interest, which, by inviting discussion, 
 and balancing affections, would promise a moderate and res- 
 pected decision, than toward me who openly attack these pre- 
 judices, and strive to arm your conscience against them. You 
 know, as well as I do, that prejudice is a deadly enemy to fair 
 investigation; that it has neither eyes nor ears for justice; that 
 it hears and sees everything on one side only ; that to refute it 
 is to exasperate it ; and that, when it predominates, accusation 
 is received as evidence, and calumny produces conviction. 
 
 One claim I add to your justice, which you cannot, you 
 will not refuse. Listen to the evidence and the arguments with 
 patient attention, and read the indictment and the Act of Par- 
 liament upon which it is founded with the minutest care ; they 
 will not, I presume, be withheld from you. Upon the law of 
 the case, and the true construction of that Act, I shall now pro- 
 ceed to comment. 
 
 The Act, my Lords, is very short, and nothing is more easy 
 than to extract a just and perfect definition of the crime it de- 
 clares, and enacts to be a high misdemeanor; that definition is 
 "representing the people, or any portion of the people, under pre- 
 tence of petitioning for, or otherwise procuring an alteration of 
 matters established by law in Church or State." All persons 
 who are in any way, or under any name, deputed to, or who 
 assume such a character, are guilty under this Act ; and persons 
 any way electing or appointing such assemblies, namely, assem- 
 blies assuming or exercising a right to represent the people, are 
 also guilty. The great question, therefore, will arise upon the 
 true meaning of the term represent in this Statute. Now I con- 
 ceive that to represent any man, or body of men, both in com- 
 mon and legal parlance, means to fill his or their place, and to 
 possess his or their power, to the exclusion of the body repre- 
 sented during the representation. The representative acts in 
 his own name, and is invested with all the powers of the body 
 
216 SPEECHES. 
 
 represented; he differs from an attorney, or a man deputed to 
 do a particular act in a defined way ; the latter is a mere in- 
 strument acting under orders, and in the name of his principal. 
 Such is the meaning, unquestionably, of representatives of 
 the people in Parliament, and from this meaning spring their 
 principal attributes and qualities ; they possess the public rights 
 of the people, and exercise them in their own name, without 
 any obligation to obey or even to consult their constituents. In 
 the same sense is representative used as contra-distinguished 
 from attorney in all legal relations; the personal represen- 
 tative, the real representative, are persons having and exercising 
 rights of their own in their own name. If this meaning be 
 adopted, it is not difficult to understand why to represent the 
 people, or any portion of them, should be a crime at common law, 
 and declared to be such. It is evident that to give or to assume 
 such a right would be to encroach upon the exclusive privileges 
 of the House of Commons ; and no man can doubt, but that to 
 assume the character, or exercise the functions of any department 
 in the State, legislative, executive, or judicial, is, and always was 
 a high misdemeanor ; but it never yet was conceived, that to de- 
 pute a man or number of men to perform a defined, preconceived, 
 legal service, for and in the name of the persons deputing, was 
 an encroachment upon the rights of Parliament, and more par- 
 ticularly when that very se vice was to propose a petition to 
 that very Parliament. That the Legislature uses the word 
 represent, in defining the crime, as I explain it, appears conclu- 
 sively from this, that, knowing that the House of Commons 
 must fall under the definition, they expressly except it: " Save 
 and except the knights, citizens, and burgesses elected to serve 
 in the Parliament thereof." So that from the legal and consti- 
 tutional meaning of the word represent, from the excepting 
 the House of Commons from the enactment, and from the legis- 
 lative avowal that the evil to be guarded against was a pre- 
 existing crime, it most clearly follows that the appointment of 
 
SPEECHES. 217 
 
 deputies bond fide to prepare a petition to Parliament, and for 
 no other purpose, cannot be within the Act. I entreat those 
 who assert the contrary, to inform the public, whether every 
 act of deputation for the purpose of communicating with the 
 Parliament falls within the Act, or where they draw the line. 
 The Attorney-General has not drawn any line ; will he say, that 
 to depute a few to prepare a petition, or materials for a petition, 
 is criminal ? Will such a deputation become criminal, if they 
 consume one, two, three, or how many days, in executing their 
 commission? Will it be criminal in the mercantile bodies of 
 Dublin, Cork, Waterford, and Belfast, should each appoint 
 persons to confer upon the general business of trade, and to pre- 
 pare a petition to Parliament upon the subject? The Attorney- 
 General has not furnished any boundary or criterion ; and if he 
 succeeds in his construction of the law, no man can say where 
 the spoliation of a great popular right (I am not ashamed to 
 use the word, much as it has been abused) will stop. 
 
 But we are told that the magistrates are directed and em- 
 powered by the law to disperse the assembly declared and 
 enacted to be illegal ; and we arc triumphantly asked, how can 
 they ever act if false pretence, or encroachment upon parlia- 
 mentary privileges, be the criterion of guilt? How can they 
 be supposed to know the false pretence or criminal pursuit? I 
 decline not this test of the meaning of the Statute, and I an- 
 swer, that it is no great evil in the mind, at least of any man 
 who is not a law officer, that great difficulty should obstruct 
 the right of dispersing men who are acting peaceably, and who 
 furnish no pretext for such dispersion, but suspected guilt, 
 and imaginary evil result. If they commit any seditious act, 
 or menace the public peace by riotous or disorderly conduct, 
 the magistrate may disperse them. If they are associated as 
 usurpers, in the slightest degree, of parliamentary right, he may 
 also disperse them. In the latter case he must, and he ought 
 to act at his peril ; and I hope I never shall live to see the day 
 
218 speeches. 
 
 when the tranquillity of the country shall be secured by more 
 extended powers. But has the Attorney-General illuminated 
 the intellect of the magistracy upon this subject? lias he de- 
 fined, for their practical guide, what species of delegates they 
 may disperse, and when they should abstain ? Are they war- 
 ranted to attack the Quakers' meeting? Are they warranted 
 to disperse the Presbyterian Synod in Ulster? Are they war- 
 ranted to violate the sanctuary of every deputed chamber of 
 commerce in Ireland? Can there be no conference upon subjects 
 of common interest between persons widely separated, through 
 the medium of agents or committee men (I dread not the 
 phrase), without a previous license from Government? I know 
 not how this may pass in Ireland, but how will this exposi- 
 tion of the common law be relished in England ? for it is clearly, 
 and is avowed to be, a common law question, applicable there 
 as well as here. The Attorney-General has not explained this, 
 which I wish he may do ; I shall not consider it an interrup- 
 tion. What explanation the Solicitor-General may give, when 
 he shall have the last word, fearless of reply, I cannot anticipate, 
 but certain I am he cannot, in his way of construing the Act, 
 ascertain the right and duty of magistrates without placing the 
 most precious of our reserved civil rights under their feet. 
 
 Gentlemen of the Jury, we are surfeited with visionary no- 
 tions and republican declamation. We have lost our relish for 
 the old, I hope not obsolete, principles of liberty so cherished 
 by our ancestors. From the abuse of things of the highest 
 worth we begin to forget their value. This, Gentlemen, is a 
 most dangerous state, and a most permanent evil. Every im- 
 portant invasion of right has been founded upon an abuse of 
 that right, and has succeeded through the apathy created by 
 such abuse. Let us not fall into this vulgar error; let us give 
 to the Government and the people their legitimate rights, and 
 not suffer either to transgress. Few are the rights reserved to 
 the people, or which can be reserved, under a stable constitu- 
 
SPEECHES. 219 
 
 tion. The Legislature must be sovereign. To ascribe to it actual 
 omnipotence is nonsense and impiety, but to ascribe to it rela- 
 tive omnipotence is rational. No power can question or resist 
 its acts, while it exists, but consistent with this acknowledged 
 supremacy are the reserved popular right of a free press, and an 
 unshackled right of petitioning. They are the great pedestals 
 of our free and balanced Constitution; impair either, and it 
 totters; withdraw either, and it falls, and crushes the people 
 and their liberties. Do I say that these privileges are incapable 
 of abuse, and should not be controlled in their exercise by law? 
 No, but I say that each should be exercised without previous 
 restraint. Let every man publish at his peril; let no man dare 
 exercise any previous control over him ; but if he publishes a 
 public or private libel let the law punish him. In the same 
 way suffer nothing to impede the formation or presenting a 
 petition ; but if, under the pretext of petitioning, men should 
 assemble and violate the law, vindicate the violated law; but 
 do not, as His Majesty's Government boasts to have done, suf- 
 fer the offenders to escape, but attack the privilege which has 
 been abused. Much has been said about the Act of Charles II., 
 in England, against tumultuous petitioning. This Act grew out 
 of the licentiousness in the reign of Charles I., and, in my opi- 
 nion, was intended to be repealed by the Bill of Rights. But 
 does it not implicitly recognise and recommend petitioning 
 through delegates ? Is not delegation the best remedy of tumul- 
 tuous petitioning? and will it be said that the people shall nei- 
 ther petition in numbers nor through delegates, who may collect 
 and communicate their wishes? This cannot be said by any 
 honest statesman. It is always useful to know even the tran- 
 sient sentiment of the people, though it may not always be wise 
 to adopt it. But there are, and ever will be, statesmen who 
 wish to have it stopped ; who always claim popular approba- 
 tion, but never will, if they can avoid it, suffer their pretensions 
 to be brought to any test. There never was a state empyric, 
 
220 SPEECHES. 
 
 who forced a bitter potion down the throats of the people, who 
 did not say he did so to gratify their craving appetite. To guard 
 against such mockery and insult is amongst the uses of the right 
 of petitioning. In short, qui facit per alium facit per se, and 
 conversely, every man, being answerable for the acts of others 
 authorized by him, may depute others to do legal acts; so 
 may many men appoint one or more deputies for defined 
 legal purposes ; so may many, having a common object, ap- 
 point deputies to confer with other deputies upon the same 
 object; without this, many salutary pursuits might be abso- 
 lutely frustrated; the concerns of agriculture, the concerns 
 of trade, the concerns of charity, the concerns of religion, 
 might be sacrificed. Neither can the exercise of this right de- 
 pend upon the number or variety of the persons deputing, or 
 the persons deputed. Such circumstances might, possibly, in 
 some imaginable cases, be an ingredient to be left to a jury, 
 with other evidence to satisfy them that the purpose avowed 
 was a pretence, and that the real object was to represent the 
 people, or any portion of them not to petition Parliament, or 
 to execute any defined preconceived object. But if men should 
 be elected, or assume to represent the people, or any portion of 
 them, for general purposes, and if petitioning should be found 
 by a jury to be a mere pretext, — or if such usurpation of the 
 exclusive right of the House of Commons should, under any 
 pretext, take place, — then the assembly so elected, or usurping, 
 would be an illegal assembly from their very constitution, in- 
 dependent of any Act, and guilty of a high misdemeanor of a 
 treasonable nature, and liable to heavy punishment. This is 
 enough for security, and not too much for freedom. 
 
 I come now to another principal ingredient in the crime, as 
 defined in the Act and the indictment, but which the Attorney- 
 General treats as mere form, — I mean the allegation that the 
 assembly, such as it was, was to be constituted wider the pre- 
 tence of petitioning Parliament. He contends that pretence 
 here means purpose; and that the crime was complete, even 
 
SPEECHES. 221 
 
 though petitioning was the bond fide purpose, and the sole pur- 
 pose. I cannot think that any of you, Gentlemen, unless in- 
 fluenced by his authority, can submit to his reasoning. If he 
 be so confident in this opinion, why did he not use the words 
 " for the purpose," instead of "under the pretence," in the indict- 
 ment? Why, my Lords, did he not give us an opportunity of 
 demurring to such an indictment, or seeking to arrest the judg- 
 ment, with a right of going to the dernier resort, if your Lord- 
 ships should decide against us ? If this argument be valid, such 
 an indictment must be valid, for, although it is good pleading 
 to plead in the language of an Act of Parliament, it is equally 
 good pleading to use equivalent language. Surely it cannot 
 be intended to persuade you, Gentlemen of the Jury, to find 
 the allegations of the indictment in one sense, and to pronounce 
 the judgment of the law upon them as if found in another 
 sense, and in this great question to leave the traverser without 
 any appeal, though the common sense of all mankind should 
 cry aloud in his favour. I say, Gentlemen, if you do find him 
 generally guilty, your verdict will be conclusive that he, and 
 all with whom he was connected, acted under the pretence, — ■ 
 obviously meaning the pretext or false pretence, — of petitioning 
 Parliament. If you believe it to be so, do not hesitate to con- 
 demn. But, if you cannot infer it from the evidence, do not 
 hesitate to acquit. This will be equal justice. 
 
 How has the Attorney-General proved his exposition of the 
 word pretence? He contends that pretence means claim, true 
 or false ? I admit that pretence is sometimes used in this rare 
 acceptation, and that Milton makes one of his devils (I do not 
 recollect whether it be the chief devil) use the phrase "just 
 pretences ;" but I assert that, in this Statute, it does not mean 
 claim. Claim imports some right asserted on one side, and 
 disputed on the other. Pretence, in this Statute, obviously 
 means the motive alleged to influence the act, the object the 
 person pretending says he is pursuing, and, when so used, it 
 
222 SPEECHES. 
 
 invariably imports either a " suppressio veri" or a " suggestio 
 falsi" either it holds out a motive or object of pursuit not at 
 all in contemplation, or it conceals some other motive or object 
 which solely, or at least principally actuates the party. 
 
 This is still more undeniably so, when the language used 
 is " under pretence ;" and I think I might safely give up the 
 question if the Attorney-General shall produce a single passage 
 in any English author, where such words are used without 
 importing cither falsehood or disguise. I cannot, Gentlemen, 
 avoid making this general remark. The Legislature is about 
 to define a high misdemeanor. It uses a word having, at 
 least nineteen times out of twenty, a criminal meaning, but 
 having rarely a neutral or innocent meaning. Is it to be pre- 
 sumed that, when so used in defining a crime, it is to be taken 
 in its rare and innocent sense, and not in its usual and crimi- 
 nal sense? I much fear, Gentlemen, if you were to find the 
 traverser guilty, the word pretence could not be construed 
 upon the record in any other than a criminal import when 
 punishment should be applied to the crime. But, my Lords, 
 the Attorney-General has cited three Statutes upon which he 
 relics. He refers you to 32 Hen. VIII. in England, the same as 
 15 Car. I. in Ireland. This is an Act to prevent the sale of 
 " prctensed rights or titles" by persons not having possession. 
 And he cites Lord Coke to show that, in expounding that Sta- 
 tute, it was not considered as material whether the right sold 
 was a good or bad title. Lord Coke could not have otherwise 
 decided without manifest absurdity. But can the Attorney- 
 General seriously contend that " pre tensed title" in that Sta- 
 tute, and pretence in the present, have in their meaning any 
 alfinity to each other? Does he really think that the word 
 pretence, in the Act under discussion, means claim, and that 
 the Legislature referred to persons who should assemble to as- 
 sert their right or title to petition ? Was such a right ever 
 disputed? could it be presumed it would ever be disputed? 
 
speeches. 223 
 
 No. The Legislature obviously meant to refer to persons who, 
 holding out the false and affected purpose of exercising an un- 
 questionable and unquestioned right, should really and in fact 
 assemble for other dangerous and disguised purposes. Such is 
 the meaning which every plain understanding must extract 
 from this Statute, and it would be a sad necessity if a legal or 
 judicial mind should be compelled to construe it in a sense far 
 from its so obvious and manifest import. 
 
 Neither do I feel any force from the epithet false, applied 
 to pretence in the Statute punishing the obtaining goods or 
 money upon false pretences. Nothing is more common than 
 to add by epithet what is comprehended in the principal and 
 substantive word. Wilful and malicious murder, wilful and 
 corrupt perjury, are combinations in daily use, and occur in 
 every indictment upon the subject; yet no man could doubt 
 but that murder and perjury would imply these epithets when 
 used without them, either in Statutes or in any other writing: 
 " Expressio corum quw taciti insunt nil operatur." The Statute 
 of Car. II., against tumultuous petitioning, appears to me to be 
 as little illustrative of the Attorney-General's meaning as the 
 others. It enacts, " that no person or persons shall repair to 
 His Majesty, or both or either Houses of Parliament, upon pre- 
 tence of delivering any petition accompanied with an excessive 
 number." 
 
 In the case here stated the pretence, from the very nature 
 of the subject, must be false, for it is impossible to conceive the 
 accompaniment of an excessive crowd necessary to the mere 
 delivery of a petition. Therefore, it is quite reasonable to infer 
 a violation of the Act from such accompaniment. But can the 
 same reasoning apply to preparing a petition, preparing mate- 
 rials upon the subject, discussing the subject, and collecting the 
 sentiments of those who are most interested upon it. But, my 
 Lords, and Gentlemen of the Jury, all this reasoning is super- 
 fluous upon my part. The Legislature, as if presaging that in 
 
224 SPEECHES. 
 
 after times some effort might be made to curtail the privilege 
 of petitioning under the pretence of this Statute, have shielded 
 that noble privilege against all possible misrepresentation ; for 
 in the final section it is enacted, " provided that nothing herein 
 shall be construed in any manner to prevent or impede the un- 
 doubted 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 Attorney-General has founded an argument upon this 
 proviso, being in the fourth and last section of the Act, and 
 not in the first section, where the crime is defined. As I can- 
 not comprehend this distinction, I shall not attempt to combat 
 it; but I will appeal to the common sense, or the professional 
 sense, of all who hear me, whether words could be devised 
 more perfectly and comprehensively protecting a right from 
 impairment or diminution. Try it by this criterion. Suppose 
 it was agreed by every member of Parliament to leave the 
 right and the exercise of the right of petitioning uncontrolled, 
 and to provide a clause for the purpose, and suppose this clause 
 was proposed as sufficient for the purpose, could the most jea- 
 lous and suspecting advocate for popular rights reasonably ob- 
 ject to it? If he did, would he not be considered as factious 
 and unreasonable? But attend to the words, " nothing in the 
 Act shall be construed in any degree to impede the undoubted 
 right to petition" Can it be said that deputation cannot afford 
 any facility to the exercise of the right of petitioning? On the 
 contrary, is it not manifest that in many cases (and in none 
 so strongly as in the present), without the aid and instrumen- 
 tality of agents or deputies, or committees, — I care not what 
 name is used, while the purpose is innocent and laudable, — this 
 invaluable privilege would lose more than half its value ? And 
 is it not equally manifest that to take away such facilities in 
 the exercise and enjoyment of such a right, would be in some 
 degree to impede it ? This appears to me to be too plain to 
 
SPEECHES. 225 
 
 need further enforcement or illustration. But, suppose the Sta- 
 tute obscure or doubtful, in such cases the history of the times 
 and the evil to be remedied are always looked upon as the 
 best interpretation of the true meaning. 
 
 What was the evil which, in 1793, induced the Attorney- 
 General, and the Government of that day, to introduce this 
 bill ? In stating it I am vindicating the memory of that At- 
 torney-General and of that Government from the misconstruc- 
 tion and the misapplication of the Act, by their successors of 
 the present day. There existed, shortly previous to the enact- 
 ment of that law, a body representing the whole province of 
 Ulster in the illegal and dangerous sense which I have ascribed 
 to the term. They sat at Dungannon; they acted and resolved 
 in their own names as general representatives of that province. 
 They abstained from no subject, legislative or executive. They 
 did not confine themselves, or pretend to confine themselves, to 
 any defined preconceived object. They did not pretend to seek 
 even a subsequent adoption or ratification of the measures or 
 resolutions they adopted. Their avowed purpose was to destroy 
 or new model all or most of the ancient and venerable depart- 
 ments of the State and Constitution. They would annihilate 
 the boroughs, purge the House of Lords of ecclesiastical inter- 
 mixture, extend the elective franchise to the whole iabble, in- 
 terfere with the executive in the prerogative of making peace 
 and war, and, in short, control and dictate upon every subject. 
 In the name of God can any man say there is any resemblance 
 between an assembly such as I have described and a Catholic 
 committee such as I acknowledge is now in existence, for the 
 sole bond fide purpose of preparing a petition for the subsequent 
 ratification and adoption of individuals of their body. If the 
 truth of the alleged purpose be doubted, let that question be 
 left to any jury, however selected for their prejudices, provided 
 they be, like you, men of sense and integrity. This represen- 
 tative body of Ulster had actually convoked a representative 
 
 Q 
 
226 SPEECHES. 
 
 body of the whole people of Ireland, to sit at Athlone, upon the 
 exact principles of their own formation. It was against this 
 portentous and unconstitutional assembly that the Convention 
 Act was provided, and not against any Catholic committee 
 either then in existence or meditated, as I shall hereafter more 
 fully demonstrate. But I shall first lay before you the resolu- 
 tions of the Ulster Convention, held at Dungannon, taken from 
 a pamphlet published at the time by Mr. Joseph Pollock, now 
 Chairman of the County of Down. Pie was himself a member 
 of that Convention, and, his mind being awakened to a sense 
 of the unconstitutional nature and dangerous tendency of that 
 assembly, he publicly and manfully warned the Parliament and 
 the nation against them. Listen, I entreat you, to their resolu- 
 tions; they were passed on the 15th of February, 1793, while 
 Parliament was sitting: 
 
 " Resolved, That it is the constitutional right of the people, 
 and essential to the very being of their liberty, to be fully and 
 fairly represented in their own house of Parliament. 
 
 " That the present state of the representation in the House of 
 Commons is partial and inadequate, subversive of the rights of 
 the people, and an intolerable grievance. 
 
 " That it appears to us, that several Lords spiritual and 
 temporal, as well as Commons, direct the return of more than 
 two hundred members of the Irish House of Commons, being 
 not one-third of the representation of the people. 
 
 " That it is the opinion of this meeting, that all boroughs 
 should be disfranchised, and representation established on fair 
 and rational principles, by extending the elective franchise 
 equally to persons of every religious persuasion ; by elections 
 frequently repeated, and by a distribution of representatives, 
 proportioned to the population and wealth of the country. 
 
 "That, deeming a complete parliamentary reform essential 
 to the "peace, liberty, and happiness of the people, we do most 
 solemnly pledge ourselves to each other, and to our country, 
 
SPEECHES. 227 
 
 that we will never abandon the pursuit of this important subject, 
 but zealously and steadily persevere, until a. full and fair repre- 
 sentation of the people shall be unequivocally obtained. 
 
 " That a power be vested in a committee, consisting of 
 thirty persons, for the purpose of re-convoking this assembly 
 (a9 occasion may arise) until the constituent body is pleased to 
 return another representation of the province. And that, on 
 a recommendation by letter to William Sharman, Esq., at 
 Moira, signed by seven of the Committee, he shall, by circular 
 letter to the rest, procure the sense of a majority; and if the 
 measure of a provincial meeting be by them approved of, he 
 shall forthwith issue a summons in the name of the Committee 
 for that purpose." [Here follow the names of the Committee]. 
 " That the above-named Committee be authorized to com- 
 municate with the other provinces of this kingdom, at this im- 
 portant crisis, and to consult proper means of calling a National 
 Convention at a future day, should circumstances render such a 
 meeting unavoidably necessary. 
 
 " Resolved, — That we behold with indignation an intention 
 of embodying a Militia in this kingdom, a measure which 
 only has ministerial influence for its object, which we deem bur- 
 densome and totally unnecessary. 
 
 " Resolved unanimously^ — Thatitis with infinite concern we 
 behold this kingdom likely to be involved in the horrors and 
 expenses of a foreign war ; a war by which, as a nation, we can 
 gain nothing; but, on the contrary, must expose our commerce 
 to depredation, and our country to unprovoked hostility." 
 
 That the meditated Athlone Convention, and not the Ro- 
 man Catholic Committee, was the object as well as the cause 
 of this Act, will fully appear from the debates upon it. Mr. 
 Wolfe, the Attorney-General of the day, and Mr. Hobart, the 
 Chief Secretary, the framers and introducers of the Act, ex- 
 pressly disclaim any reference to the Catholic Committee, or 
 any intention to interfere with the right of deputation for any 
 
 Q2 
 
228 SPEECHES. 
 
 limited, preconceived object; and, although the Opposition of the 
 day did oppose it as touching upon the right of petitioning, it is 
 much more reasonable to take the sense of the House from 
 those with whom a vast majority agreed and voted, than from 
 the jealous construction of a few opposition members. [Here 
 Mr. Burrowes was proceeding to read passages from the debates 
 upon the Convention Act, when the Chief Justice observed, 
 that such debates were not admissible evidence, and, therefore, 
 ought not to be stated.] 
 
 Mr. Burrowes proceeded — My Lords, I submit to the opi- 
 nion of the Court, and shall no further mention those debates; 
 but I shall refer you to contemporary evidence at once admis- 
 sible, and, to my understanding, conclusive upon the subject. I 
 mean the Act of the 33rd of the King, the very Act from which 
 the Attorney-General read the affecting detail of remaining 
 Roman Catholic restrictions. This Act, containing such liberal 
 concessions to the Roman Catholic body, was passed in the same 
 Sessions with the Convention Act, and, perhaps, received the 
 royal assent the very same day. It was the result of a petition 
 framed by the Catholic Committee. Roman Catholic deputies, 
 avowed members of that Committee, negociated again and 
 again with the Irish Government, and with the English Go- 
 vernment, particularly with Mr. Pitt and Mr. Dundas, upon the 
 subject; they were introduced to, and graciously received by 
 the King himself, about that period. It was then deemed wise 
 and constitutional to hold intercourse with men who understood 
 and could truly communicate the sentiments and feeling of 
 their community. I shall read the recital of that Act: — 
 "Whereas various Acts of Parliament have been passed, im- 
 posing on His Majesty's subjects, professing the Roman Catholic 
 religion, many restraints and disabilities, and from the peaceable 
 and loyal demeanour of His Majesty's Popish or Roman Catholic 
 subjects, it is (it that such restraints and disabilities be discon- 
 tinued." Now 1 ask is not this recital decisive evidence, that 
 
srEECHEs. 229 
 
 the Legislature did not consider the Roman Catholic Conven- 
 tion, through whose mediation the very Act passed, an illegal 
 or unconstitutional assembly? Or is it to be conceived, that 
 they would pass an Act with such a recital, and immediately 
 after denounce the body through whose mediation it was ob- 
 tained ? Such a supposition would not be more derogatory to 
 the character of the Roman Catholics, than to the truth and 
 consistency of Parliament. The Attorney-General cannot con- 
 ceive any use in delegation ; he says it would require only a 
 capacity of writing a few lines, praying a repeal of the Test 
 Acts, which any individual might perform, to bring the Catholic 
 demands fully before Parliament, where, no doubt, however 
 introduced, they would receive a full and candid discussion. 
 My Right Honourable and learned friend is one of the worthiest 
 and ablest men living ; but I will take the liberty of telling him 
 that he is in a state of more than Bceotian darkness as to either 
 the history or present state of his Roman Catholic brethren ; 
 he would not otherwise speak as he has spoken, or act as he 
 has acted. I will tell him, that something more than the simple 
 process he recommends is, was, and always will be necessary 
 to a discussion of the claims of a people seeking a restoration 
 of privileges of which they have been deprived. I will tell him 
 that if the Roman Catholics of Ireland confined themselves to 
 the simple mode which he recommends, they would not now 
 be a people, or Ireland a nation. I will give him a very sum- 
 mary review of the proceedings of the Roman Catholics, in 
 order that he may judge from experience whether delegated 
 committees were serviceable. From the Revolution to the 
 accession of Geo. II. the Roman Catholics were mute ; they did 
 not address the Crown or the Parliament for any amelioration 
 of their state, they merely made faint efforts to resist each ad- 
 ditional penal law. During that period they were in a con- 
 dition more abject and grovelling (to borrow a phrase from 
 a learned and eloquent friend of mine) than the beast that 
 
230 SPEECHES. 
 
 browzed upon the land which they cultivated by their labour. 
 Their silence, — their declining to address the Crown or the 
 Parliament, during that period, — was frequently commented 
 upon, as indicating a dissatisfied and stubborn spirit. It was 
 so construed by the Tories, during the reign of Queen Anne, 
 and by the Whigs, during the reign of George the First, and 
 furnished both with a pretence, amongst others, of adding 
 largely to the Penal Code. Upon the accession of Geo. II., 
 in 1727, it was deemed advisable to break this silence, and 
 silence this pretence; and accordingly Lord Delvin, and the 
 principal of the Roman Catholic gentry, presented a most loyal 
 and duteous address from the Catholic body to the then Lords 
 Justices, to be presented to the throne. It never has been found 
 an easy task for the oppressed to please his oppressor. To this 
 loyal address no answer was given ; no public notice was ever 
 taken of it; possibly it never reached the King's hand, and, if 
 it did, it might have touched his heart. But it did not pass 
 Avholly unnoticed and without effect. Primate Boulter, in a 
 letter to Lord Cartaret, professes much alarm at this first act of 
 the Catholics as a community; he seems to consider it as a 
 most portentous phenomenon ; and immediately after, in the 
 very same year, by the 1 Geo. II., c. i), sec. 7, they were de- 
 prived of the elective franchise. The following year a bill was 
 introduced to prevent Roman Catholics from acting as solici- 
 tors. Several individuals in Cork and in Dublin raised a 
 subscription to defray the expense of opposing this bill ; an inter- 
 dicted priest gave information of this foul conspiracy (as it was 
 called) to bring in the Pope and Pretender. The transaction 
 was referred to a Committee of the House of Commons, who 
 actually reported that £5 was collected, and resolved that it 
 appeared to them that, under the pretence of opposing heads 
 of bills, sums of money had been collected, and a fund estab- 
 lished, by the Popish inhabitants of the kingdom, highly detri- 
 mental to the Protestant interest; and they resolved to address 
 
SPEECHES. 231 
 
 the Lord Lieutenant that he might issue his proclamation to all 
 magistrates to put the laws against Popery into execution. This, 
 I presume, is the precedent upon which the Attorney-General 
 has founded his advice to His Majesty's Government to issue 
 his proclamation to magistrates to disperse Roman Catholics 
 who should assemble as delegates for the purpose, or under the 
 pretence, of petitioning. So far the Roman Catholic concerns 
 proceeded without any committee or delegation ; with what 
 success is too well known. In the year 1757, upon the appoint- 
 ment of the Duke of Bedford to the viceroyalty of Ireland, the 
 prospect of the Roman Catholic people began to brighten, and, 
 at the same period, a Committee was formed to act for them, 
 and, from that hour to the present, they have at all times, when 
 they approached Parliament or Government for any relaxation 
 or favour, acted through the intervention of persons delegated 
 at different times, and in different ways, and varying as to rank 
 and numbers. These committee men, or delegates, openly 
 acted for, and in the name of the Roman Catholic people ; 
 conferred with successive Governments; were principally instru- 
 mental, by their zeal, industry, and talents, in procuring every 
 relaxation of the penal code ; and never, until this day, incurred 
 the suspicion or displeasure of any Government. In 1757, 
 under the auspices of the Duke of Bedford, and with his con- 
 currence, a most satisfactory public declaration of religious 
 opinions, as far as they related to civil duties, calculated to dissi- 
 pate the false notions at all times entertained upon the subject, 
 was made and published by the whole Roman Catholic clergy 
 of Ireland. Immediately after was the first Roman Catholic Com- 
 mittee formed, with the entire approbation of the same Viceroy, 
 which assembled and met in the Globe Tavern, in Essex-street. 
 Amonsr the first committee-men were some well known to lite- 
 rature, Dr. Curry, O'Connor the antiquarian, and Mr. Wysc, 
 of Watcrford. This Committee was shortly after enlarged, 
 according to a plan of more extended delegation, proposed by 
 
232 SPEECHES. 
 
 Mr. Wyse. In 1759 the Duke of Bedford delivered a message 
 to Parliament from the King, desiring them to provide against 
 invasion. How the Roman Catholic people felt, or would act 
 upon such an event, was a matter of serious expectation to all. 
 If there was any reason to doubt it, the liberal and enlightened 
 policy of the Duke of Bedford removed all doubt ; and, upon 
 the first alarm of the invasion of Conflans, the Roman Catholic 
 Committee prepared a loyal and animated address, which was 
 submitted to their body at a public meeting in Dublin, and was 
 signed by above three hundred merchants and others, and was 
 then presented to John Ponsonby, the Speaker, by Messrs. 
 Crump and M'Dermott, committee-men, to be transmitted by 
 him to the Lord Lieutenant. A most gracious answer to this 
 address was returned, and published in the Gazette. The 
 Speaker summoned the two delegates to the House of Com- 
 mons, and, at his instance, the address was then read. Mr. 
 M'Dermott, in the name of his body, thanked the Speaker for 
 his condescension, and the Speaker replied in flattering lan- 
 guage. 
 
 From the first formation of a Roman Catholic Committee 
 to this day, it was either continued, or was called into existence, 
 whenever any subject of discussion arose between that body 
 and Government or Parliament. Every relaxation of the law 
 which was obtained is principally ascribable to their zeal, acti- 
 vity, and perseverance. The Attorney-General is well ac- 
 quainted with the truth of the maxim, " lex vigilant ibus, non 
 dormientibus, inservit ;* and he may rest assured that the maxim 
 is as true in politics as in law. The first territorial acquisition 
 of the Roman Catholic body was not very splendid. By the 
 11 & 12 Geo. III. they are enabled to take fifty acres of unpro- 
 fitable bog for sixty-one years, with half an acre of arable land 
 adjoining, provided that it should not be within one mile of a 
 town, and that the lease should be void if half the lands should 
 not be reclaimed within twenty-one years. In 1777 they ob- 
 
SPEECHES. 233 
 
 tained, through their Committee, a most important concession, 
 the right of taking leases for long terms of years, and of devis- 
 ing their lands. In 1782 their Committee again acted; their 
 claims, their condition, and their conduct, were brought into 
 public and full discussion. Several disabilities were removed, 
 and they were placed on a footing of perfect equality with their 
 Protestant brethren, in respect of the right of acquiring the 
 disposing of lands. From this concession political equality 
 appears to me to follow as a certain corollary, however for a 
 time it may be thwarted or postponed. In 1792 this modernly 
 denounced Committee were again in activity, and the Bar was 
 thrown open to the Roman Catholic body, with, however, a 
 most impolitic proviso, that no Roman Catholic should be ap- 
 pointed a King's Counsel ; that is, precaution was taken, when 
 they were invited and received into a profession which, above 
 all others, improves popular talents, and gains popular influ- 
 ence, that they should be in habitual, and, as it were, regimented 
 opposition to the Crown, upon all questions of prerogative 
 which might arise in our Courts ; and that even the King should 
 not be empowered to entitle himself to the permanent service 
 of any one of them, be his talents ever so splendid, his learning 
 ever so pre-eminent. But when did pride or prejudice ever 
 reason? In 1793 the Roman Catholic Committee made their 
 last successful effort. I have forestalled much, indeed almost 
 all, that I intended to say upon that Committee and that 
 period. It consisted of delegates from all the counties, and was 
 somewhat more numerous and more fully attended than the 
 former Committees, principally because it had been asserted, 
 as it is still asserted, that the Roman Catholic people at large 
 felt no interest in Roman Catholic emancipation. A foul and 
 unnatural calumny upon the good sense and sensibility of an 
 intelligent and feeling nation! 
 
 I shall again refer you to that affecting catalogue of priva- 
 tions which the Attorney-General read with such visible invo- 
 
234 SPEECHES. 
 
 luntary public sensation ; and I shall tell you that that cata- 
 logue details but a small portion of privileges from which 
 the Roman Catholic people are shut out. The orders of Coun- 
 cil, to which they are left subject, have a most extensive 
 operation, and they are in effect deprived of the enjoyment of 
 almost every privilege given to freemen in corporate towns, in 
 a kingdom where corporations abound, and where those exclu- 
 sive privileges are so vigilantly asserted. They are also subject 
 to several important disabilities not connected with the Test 
 Acts. For instance, no Roman Catholic, though he should 
 possess half, or the whole Bank of Ireland stock, can be a direc- 
 tor of the Bank of Ireland. These restrictions and exclusions 
 meet the Roman Catholic in every quarter of Ireland, and 
 affect his interest, and hurt his feelings, in a thousand ways not 
 known to my right honourable friend. But suppose it other- 
 wise ; suppose the higher orders alone interested in the present 
 Catholic question ; suppose the higher orders alone labour un- 
 der disabilities; can the Attorney-General know so little of 
 human nature as not to feel that the lower orders will make 
 common cause with the higher orders of their sect, even in 
 matters of mere pride and speculation ? In my opinion, if the 
 only difference between the Protestant and the Catholic were, 
 that the latter should be prohibited from wearing lace upon 
 their clothes, or having livery servants, this ridiculous and in- 
 vidious distinction would be felt by the meanest peasant, and 
 might, at some unlucky crisis, produce the most disastrous con- 
 sequences. I, therefore, do assert, that no candid man, who 
 understands the Catholic question, and the state and condition 
 of the Catholic people, can think it a mere form to petition, or 
 deny the utility of delegation, toward effecting the laudable 
 purpose and constitutional object of their pursuit. Suppose 
 it were true that all restrictions might be removed by the re- 
 peal of the Test Act, and that such repeal might be effected 
 by a single line, does it follow that no measure ought to be, or 
 
SPEECHES. 235 
 
 can be legally adopted, to induce the Government or Parlia- 
 ment to enact that short and simple bill? Is it impossible that 
 ignorance might exist as to the variety and extent of the very 
 restrictions, and misrepresentation or misunderstanding pre- 
 vail, as to the grounds upon which they were imposed, and the 
 probable consequence of their removal? Gentlemen of the Jury, 
 such things arc not only possible, but certain ; and although 
 Protestant liberality has made great advances in modern times, 
 although rooted prejudices have been dislodged, although the 
 Roman Catholic of this day has received, from the Protestant 
 of this day, concessions calculated to obliterate, and which 
 have almost obliterated all recollection of past animosities, all 
 reflection of the barbarous and civil dissensions which disgraced 
 our ancestors, and embittered their lives, — although much has 
 been done, much more remains to be done; and, until that 
 shall be done, we cannot feel the confidence of an united people ; 
 the enemy will not feel the terror with which such a character 
 will ever strike the invader. Instead, therefore, of impeding 
 the object of this delegated Committee, it ought to be the 
 anxious wish of every good Irishman, and every loyal subject, 
 to give it full success; to wipe away at once, at this most 
 interesting moment, all restrictions and distinctions ; to invite 
 our Roman Catholic brother to a full participation of every 
 civil right, and to bind him by interest, gratitude, and affec- 
 tion, to unite with his heart and hand in defending our com- 
 mon rights, our common country, and our common Consti- 
 tution. 
 
 In dismissing this subject, so barren in evidence and so 
 pregnant in observation, I had nearly forgotten an important 
 topic. I really think that, if the Convention Act Avcre se- 
 riously and liberally construed, that the admitted object ol 
 Catholic pursuit would, in itself, exclude them from the ope- 
 ration of the law, and that they ought not to be considered or 
 treated as men seeking an alteration of " matters established 
 
236 SPEECHES. 
 
 by law in Church and State." Recollect, Gentlemen, that they 
 are not seeking to innovate or destroy, — they seek not to pull 
 down the common constitution of our common ancestors, — they 
 seek not to annihilate any, even the lowest department of the 
 State; they only require to be received and treated as joint 
 proprietors and co-heirs of our noble Constitution ; they 
 seek to widen its basis, and add new pillars and supporters 
 to the edifice of liberty and law. In doing this, let it not 
 be mistaken that they look to any transfer of power, or any 
 direct or immediate investiture with any privilege. No, Gen- 
 tlemen, they merely seek capacity, and leave the right of 
 conferring it where it pre-existed. They seek to unshackle 
 the prerogative of the Crown ; they seek to give the electors 
 a wider range of choice; they seek to vindicate the best 
 principles of every free constitution, the connexion between 
 property and power. In every well-constituted State, pro- 
 perty and power are connected in all its departments; to 
 separate them is to sow the seeds of disease and agitation. 
 They gravitate toward each other with as fixed a law as 
 prevails in the physical world, and tranquillity cannot exist 
 under their forced and unnatural separation. They must — 
 they will finally unite. Either property will clothe itself 
 with power, or power will seize upon property. In a pure 
 despotism, there is but one proprietor. So that, in fact, the 
 Roman Catholics are seeking not only the grace, but the 
 shield of property ; not only what would ornament, but what 
 would secure their acquisitions. Can it be just, can it be wise, 
 at any time, or in any country, to disfranchise property and 
 rank of their legitimate and constitutional fruits ? Can it 
 be wise or politic to permit the great bulk of a nation to 
 accumulate property without bounds, and to acquire lands 
 and interests in lands without limit, and to close the avenues 
 to all the great honours and distinctions of the State against 
 them? Ambition is a passion natural to man, and if great 
 
speeches. 237 
 
 proprietors and their descendants be shut out from all le- 
 gitimate gratification of that in-eradicable appetite, they will 
 be tempted to courses and pursuits equally dangerous to the 
 community and themselves. In a country so mis-organized, 
 if ever there should arise a strife between the lower and the 
 higher orders, — if ever republican phrenzy should agitate the 
 country, — talent and wealth will be driven into the ranks of 
 folly and disorder, to discipline and lead them. These ob- 
 servations, at all times true, apply with augmented force 
 since the Union ; and from a consideration of the grand strife, 
 in which these united islands are engaged, it must be the first 
 wish of every honest subject to render that union universally 
 effectual, to the purpose of uniting every heart and hand 
 against the common enemy. Such was the avowed object 
 of the statesman who proposed that measure, of which Catholic 
 emancipation was intended to be a part. It is the anxious 
 wish of those who opposed it, and of none more than me, that 
 that object should be accomplished. Perhaps they would not 
 consider the merger of national independence as too great a 
 prize for so inestimable an attainment. But while the Roman 
 Catholics arc excluded from a participation of the offices and 
 honours and power of the State, can there be anything like 
 national amalgamation? Can the Roman Catholics of Ireland 
 be taught to feel, — is it possible, in fact, that they will feel, 
 that there is a fair legislative union between the nations? But 
 will they not be effectually told by every man who wishes to 
 inflame them, — will not their own feelings tell them, — that Ire- 
 land is more than ever provincial? Will not exclusive Pro- 
 testant legislation be felt by them as the disfranchisement 
 of Ireland? On the contrary, by giving full effect to the 
 pursuit for which Mr. Sheridan is sought to be convicted, we 
 render the nations really, and not nominally united. We 
 enable the Crown to animate the zeal, and reward the exertions 
 of his Roman Catholic subjects in every department. We 
 
238 SPEECHES. 
 
 take from the enemy a formidable reinforcement of irritation 
 and disaffection, and we interest and unite all the property, 
 talent, and feeling of the nation, in defence of the common 
 cause. I would appeal to my right honourable friend himself, 
 whether what I state be not founded in truth and nature. He 
 has earned an ample fortune and a high reputation. He has 
 children to inherit his acquisitions, and who are, no doubt, 
 emulous to tread in his paths. Would he be satisfied to leave 
 them his property bereft of the privileges properly incident to 
 it? Would he feel at ease if all incentives to legitimate am- 
 bition were extinguished, and their feelings were exposed to 
 dangerous ambition? I think he would not. I well know 
 that his rooted loyalty and strong reason would protect him 
 from treason, and even sedition; but he would pine under re- 
 straints that robbed his acquisitions of more than half their 
 value; and he would lament that he had not exerted his great 
 talents, and planted his family, in some other soil. 
 
 The Attorney-General has entered largely into a defence, 
 indeed a panegyric of His Majesty's Government in Ireland, for 
 their proclamation against (1 will say it, though he docs not 
 admit it) the Roman Catholic people of Ireland, and of this, 
 avowedly, State prosecution. I applaud his manly avowal 
 that he advised those State acts, though I cannot but lament 
 the gross indiscretion of such advice, from whatever quarter it 
 might originate. His own statement, in my opinion, condemns 
 both the justice and policy of the measure. He has stated 
 that a scries of seditious and inflammatory libels, too gross for 
 the seditious press of this city (to use his own language), were 
 daily and publicly uttered in a committee with whom he has 
 not so much as attempted to connect the present Roman Ca- 
 tholic Committee by any evidence. He expatiated upon the 
 patience and temper of the Irish Government in calmly wit- 
 nessing and submitting to such outrages, and waiting for the 
 voluntary death and dissolution of that assembly. He has more 
 
SPEECHES. 239 
 
 than insinuated that that assembly was bottomed in treason, 
 and has exerted himself mueh to alarm your fears and exeite 
 your prejudices by the picture he has drawn of their conduct 
 and designs. Gentlemen, is it possible to hear this without at 
 once seeing its irrelevancy and unfairness ? Is the present Com- 
 mittee to be condemned and punished for their mere existence, 
 because there was another committee in which individuals were 
 intemperate and seditious? He ought not to be listened to 
 while stating such enormities, which, if they existed, should 
 have called forth, and must have called forth, the vigour of the 
 law. But, to suppose his statement perfectly true and unex- 
 aggerated, what is the reasonable inference ? Not that a sub- 
 sequent Committee, of which the Fingalls, the Southwells, the 
 Barnwells, the Bellows, and the Byrnes, the Catholic Prelates, 
 and the Catholic Peers, those individuals and classes of the 
 Roman Catholic body in whom every previous Irish Govern- 
 ment placed unbiassed confidence, composed a part, should be 
 denounced and dispersed, independent of any act or the expres- 
 sion of any sentiment; but that the Government, which should 
 suffer such outrage to go unpunished (if any there were), and 
 should attempt to punish where no offence has been commit- 
 ted, oris likely to be committed, are themselves objects of the 
 justest condemnation. But there is a further and more alarm- 
 ing inference, one in which Catholic and Protestant Irishmen 
 and Englishmen are equally interested ; it is, that Government 
 is not persecuting the crime, buthunting down the privilege; that 
 they have no desire to punish any offender, be he ever so atro- 
 cious, but cannot endure that the privilege of petitioning should 
 assume such a shape as that the sentiment of the whole people 
 should be unquestionably pronounced. If this be their object 
 (as it unquestionably is), they have acted with judgment; they 
 have acted with candour. They have attacked the privilege 
 in its strongest hold : they have attacked it where it is most 
 defensible. They have hazarded defeat; but, if they obtain a 
 
240 SPEECHES. 
 
 victory, the privilege is for ever vanquished. The precedent 
 of this day will be pleaded against every species of delegation; 
 and when the concentrated force is routed, it will be easy to 
 disperse, misrepresent, and put down individual petitions. I 
 look to you, Gentlemen of the Jury, for protection against 
 such consequences. The Irish Government, instead of claim- 
 ing credit for their conduct, should, in my opinion, say (sinners 
 as they are) : " We have left undone those things which we 
 ought to have done, and we have done those things which we 
 ought not to have done." Their conduct resembles the con- 
 duct of an intoxicated bravo, who, being too much oppressed 
 by liquor to resent real or imaginary injuries or insults, as soon 
 as he becomes semi-sober and semi-vigilant, should rush forth 
 into the highway, and knock down every man he meets, peer, 
 prelate, or peasant. 
 
 1 fear, my Lords, I have committed an unwarrantable tres- 
 pass upon the public time. In doing so I have but followed the 
 example of my honourable and learned friend, who has said so 
 much upon general subjects, and so little upon the case of the 
 traverser, — whose gigantic statement is so disproportioned to 
 the pigmy proofs that followed it. I fear I have even exceeded 
 him in prolixity, which you will rather ascribe to his superior 
 powers of condensation, than to any desire upon my part to 
 dwell unnecessarily upon any topic. In truth, when I turn my 
 attention to the facts in evidence, my astonishment is increased, 
 that Doctor Sheridan was ever brought to trial. Shut out from 
 your minds the aspersions which have been cast upon other 
 men. Disengage your loyal feelings from that appeal which 
 has been so artfully addressed to them. Do the traverser the 
 jtistice of not presuming that he must have bad designs, be- 
 cause he is a Roman Catholic, and of not ascribing to him 
 every seditious act committed by, or ascribed to, every man of 
 his religion. Which of yourselves could bear this test? Try 
 him, as every man should be tried, by his own acts, established 
 
SPEECHES. 241 
 
 in evidence against him, and see what that evidence is. Two 
 witnesses were examined, who swore that Doctor Sheridan pre- 
 sided at a meeting of Roman Catholics, who elected five persons 
 to prepare a petition, and, they added, to represent them in a 
 Catholic committee; one of them afterwards retracted the word 
 represent, as 'forming any part of the resolutions passed, and 
 positively swore it did not; and the other swore that he could 
 not be certain that the word represent was used ; and they both 
 admitted, that they had the very resolutions in writing, and 
 gave them in writing to those who conduct the prosecution. 
 I do not think that the word represent can avail anything. If 
 delegates were appointed in a criminal sense to represent the 
 people, no use of language could vary the offence, or shelter 
 the culprit; and if the delegation was from its object innocent, 
 no phraseology could render it guilty. I strongly suspect that 
 those who managed this evidence, and kept back the writing, 
 are of a different opinion. But if the word were considered as 
 important, it is impossible that you, upon the evidence, can 
 assume that it was used. From those witnesses it appeared, 
 that no other business was then mentioned, but the business of 
 petitioning, and one of them swore, that he believed no other 
 business was in contemplation, and he believed that the peti- 
 tion, when prepared, was to be submitted to the individual 
 Catholics for their adoption and signature. If the evidence 
 stopped here, would the Attorney-General say that Mr. She- 
 ridan was guilty under the Convention Act ? We must say so, 
 for he has not drawn any line, and has levelled his argument and 
 his prosecution against all delegation or deputation for the 
 purpose of petitioning. That which is expressly protected by 
 the Act, would appear, as he construes it, to constitute the 
 offence. But the evidence has not stopped here ; Mr. Hud- 
 dlcston, whose evidence I do not mean to impeach, has proved 
 from memory the following Resolution, as having passed at an 
 aggregate meeting.: 
 
 R 
 
242 speeches. 
 
 " Resolved, — That the said Committee do consist of the 
 Catholic peers and their eldest sons, the Catholic baronets, the 
 prelates of the Catholic Church in Ireland, and also ten persons 
 to be appointed by the Catholics in each county in Ireland, 
 the survivors of the delegates of 171)3 to constitute an integral 
 part of that number, and also of five persons to be appointed 
 by the Catholic inhabitants of each parish in Dublin." 
 
 Now I do not think that those resolutions are sufficiently 
 proved by parole evidence (it appearing that they exist in 
 writing), to be received as the act of that aggregate body, so 
 as to affect persons not present; but I shall waive this objec- 
 tion. I boldly and confidently maintain, that there is nothing 
 in these resolutions, or in a committee formed upon them, se- 
 ditious, illegal, or violatory of the Convention Act; and, if all I 
 have said be not erroneous, I have already established, that 
 such an assembly is not, as it is contended to be upon the other 
 side, illegal, independent of any concealed or illegal pursuit, or 
 any libellous or seditious speeches used in it when assembled ; 
 and I repeat it, and it cannot be too often repeated and incul- 
 cated, that to decide otherwise will be vitally to injure the 
 right of petitioning, and totally to disregard the constitutional 
 saving of the Convention Act. 
 
 All the resolutions given in evidence, are precisely conform- 
 able to the functions invariably performed by Catholic commit- 
 tees since their formation ; and I cannot discover any part of 
 them denoting any bad object, criminal motive, or illegal pur- 
 suit. The resolution defining the constituent parts of the 
 Committee has been much relied upon, and grossly misrepre- 
 sented. How does this part of the case fairly stand? A com- 
 mittee is formed to collect information, to prepare a petition, 
 to suggest arguments in favour of that petition, to discover pre- 
 judices that impede, to obviate difficulties, to solicit support, 
 in short, in every rational and fair way to promote the success 
 of that petition. The disabilities sought to be removed affect 
 
SPEECHES. 243 
 
 the peers, affect the commons, affect those who reside in coun- 
 ties, in short, affect every order and department of the Roman 
 Catholic community ; and it is now objected, that there are de- 
 puties from every order; and it is further objected, that the 
 few persons who now survive of the Committee of 1793, so fa- 
 voured and cherished by the then Government and Parliament, 
 are members of the Committee. They are called Estates Ge- 
 neral, are represented as usurping all the functions of the Le- 
 gislature and Government. This is cruel mockery ! If such 
 be their constitution or their views, they are guilty of high 
 treason, and ought to be prosecuted as such. But shall this 
 be taken upon assertion ? Shall this assembly be deemed ille- 
 gal, because it has received an infusion of the peers and the 
 prelates, who have always been considered as a counterpoise to 
 the too great eagerness of popular pursuit? If the prelates and 
 the peers had been omitted, the clamour against the Commit- 
 tee would have been much louder, and much more plausible ; 
 but the utmost effect that the numbers and constitution of the 
 Committee can have, is to become an ingredient in a jury 
 question, if any jury question should arise, as to the real object 
 and pursuit of such Committee. Doctor Sheridan challenges 
 such a question to be left to any jury, but they do not venture 
 it upon the other side, but call for your verdict upon the ground 
 of general, unevidenced, and unapplied imputation, and a 
 gross misconstruction of the Convention Act. 
 
 Gentlemen of the Jury, — upon this inexhaustible subject 
 I have left much unsaid ; yet upon the grounds I have urged 
 I shall now leave it to your decision, only again imploring you 
 to read the charge which you are sworn to try, and to compare 
 it with the evidence which you have heard from the witnesses, 
 and not with the calumnies which have been anywhere ut- 
 tered. To find the traverser guilty, you must upon your oaths 
 find, in the very language of the indictment, the Catholic Com- 
 mittee intended to be appointed to be " a Committee of per- 
 il 2 
 
244 SPEECHES- 
 
 sons professing the Roman Catholic religion, to be thereafter 
 held, and to exercise a right and authority to represent the in- 
 habitants of Ireland professing the Roman Catholic religion 
 under pretence of preparing petitions to Parliament." You must, 
 in fact, convict the Roman Catholic subjects of this realm of an 
 offence approaching to high treason. You have no evidence to 
 warrant this ; and you cannot have any rational wish to create 
 or supply such evidence. The Catholic body of this day owe 
 their Protestant brethren of this day great obligations. Be- 
 lieve me they are deeply sensible of the debt, and are not the 
 less worthy to have that debt augmented, by the eagerness 
 they display to be fully emancipated, to be perfectly amal- 
 gamated with you in constitutional co-existence. No wise and 
 good man would wish, at any time, to disappoint this laudable 
 impulse. No man, not a maniac, would seek to disappoint 
 it, at a moment when all that is dear to us is in such peril, 
 that united enthusiastic efforts are necessary to common se- 
 curity. Gentlemen, your Roman Catholic brethren await a 
 verdict, which is to pronounce upon their principles and pur- 
 suits, with agonizing anxiety. There is not a city, town, vil- 
 lage, or hamlet in Ireland, in which the result is not at this mo- 
 ment looked for with breathless expectation. It is looked for 
 in England with little less anxiety. They cannot be indiffe- 
 rent to the truth or falsehood of the charge made by the Irish 
 Government upon the Roman Catholic subjects of Ireland. It 
 is looked for by the common enemy, with an anxious wish that 
 the accusation may be true ; they must derive the highest gra- 
 tification, and possibly the strongest motive to act, from a Pro- 
 testant verdict against the Roman Catholic people. Gentlemen, 
 pronounce a verdict of Not Guilty ; relieve your fellow-subjects, 
 and disappoint the common enemy. Do not, Gentlemen, ap- 
 prehend that so gratifying a result would be followed up by 
 intemperate joy, or dangerous exultation. No bad feeling can 
 mix with the pure delight which such an event would univer- 
 
SPEECHES. 245 
 
 sally diffuse ; but if there were danger of excesses from un- 
 bounded joy, those Roman Catholic noblemen and gentlemen 
 who are implicated in the charge will moderate the triumph, 
 and guarantee the tranquillity of the country. The gallant 
 Fingall will guarantee it. He stands before you to pledge his 
 high character for the conduct of his brethren. You know you 
 may trust him ; you know that in the hour of danger he lifted 
 his sword equally against the rebels of all persuasions ; he 
 despised false and perishable popularity ; he proved his title 
 to be received as a supporter of the throne, and he would not 
 sully that title, and he never has sullied it, by any seditious or 
 intemperate act. 
 
 May the God of truth and justice subdue your prejudices, 
 awaken your conscience, and enlighten your minds, to find that 
 verdict which will tranquillize the country, unite the people, 
 appal the enemy, and place these united islands in a state of 
 such a proud defiance, that no enemy will dare to pollute our 
 shores ! 
 
 FOR THE CHALLENGE IN THE CASE OF THE KING 
 v. KIRWAN.* 
 
 My Lords, and Gentlemen Triers, — I am the less dis- 
 inclined now to consume time, because I am sure the Attor- 
 ney-General will not conceive it right to go into the trial at 
 this hour of the day, if the challenge should be decided against 
 us. But even, if it were not so late, or if it were more so, I 
 would not discharge my duty if I did not make some observa- 
 tions upon the evidence. Whether the jury has been fairly 
 impanneled to try the issue between the parties, is as impor- 
 tant an inquiry as what verdict they should find ; because, if 
 
 * See Memoir, page 79. 
 
246 SPEECHES. 
 
 they be not an impartial jury it is idle and hopeless to exa- 
 mine what the merits are, which would be then altogether 
 out of the case. Gentlemen, you are sworn to try whether 
 this array of the Jury was made at the nomination of the so- 
 licitor for the Crown ; in short, the challenge is to this effect, 
 that the Crown Solicitor did procure, through management 
 with the sheriff, a jury to be returned, which would not stand 
 indifferent between the Crown and the subject. This is the 
 language of the challenge : but I do humbly rely upon it, that 
 the affirmative of that issue will be well maintained, even 
 although it should not be established that the entire of the 
 panel was arrayed at the selection, and by the management, 
 of the Crown Solicitor. If any practice, interference, or influ- 
 ence, ever so slight, appear to have been used in making that 
 array, it is not competent for a jury so tampered with to try 
 this cause. I go farther, and I say, if that interference was by 
 any underling — by any instrument — by any one acting in the 
 name of the Crown Solicitor, or his partner, even though he 
 did not know it, it would be an improper jury, even though 
 the Solicitor were entirely free from moral taint. If a clerk in 
 the office interfere in this matter, the employer must be answer- 
 able ; not to the extent of being punished, but of having this 
 array quashed. The question for the Triers to decide is, whe- 
 ther anything has been done, with respect to the arrangement 
 of this panel, by any person in the employment of the sheriff, 
 or the Crown Solicitor, although without their knowledge ; yet 
 being by persons in their employment, such as sub-sheriff, 
 or other person, a Jury so returned cannot stand indifferent 
 between the Crown and the party ; and this challenge ought 
 to be allowed. 
 
 Gentlemen, I conceive then, that the sole question for you, 
 as Triers, is, whether de facto the panel was tampered with, 
 through the agency of any person connected with the Crown, 
 or their solicitors, or the sheriff, or any person connected with 
 
SPEECHES. 247 
 
 the sheriff, who had the power to summon them. That is the 
 substance of the issue ; and it is no defence to say, that though 
 the Triers should believe that either of the Messrs. Kemmis 
 actually did not commission any person to interfere with the 
 sheriffs, still if he were interposed with, or if the sub-sheriff 
 were interposed with, or if any trick were put upon the sheriff, 
 or any management practised, incapable of being got at, the 
 indiffcrency of the jury is tainted, and they stand an unfair 
 jury. In that state of the facts, the Triers are bound to find 
 a verdict accordingly ; the consequence, of which will be, the 
 quashing of this array. I am stating those preliminary remarks, 
 to avoid the painful duty which devolves upon counsel, of 
 struggling against testimony, procured from men whom I 
 respect as much as any men in the community, and whose 
 testimony might be received as satisfactory, were it not that 
 persons act under the authority of their names, so as to affect 
 the purity of trial, and to which conduct those gentlemen 
 never would consent. If I am warranted in what I have been 
 stating, I will proceed to shew, that it is impossible for rational 
 men to doubt that this panel has been tampered with by 
 some persons acting from and through the office, in conjunc- 
 tion with somcp erson in the sheriff's office, framing the panel 
 intended to be returned, and altering it, according to the wishes 
 and dispositions of those who were desirous of a compliant 
 jury. First, what appears? That the sheriff, whose duty it 
 was, as the Crown Solicitor stated, to return the panel on 
 Thursday last, in order to give the traverser an opportunity 
 of investigating the grounds of challenge to individuals upon 
 the panel, as well as the Crown Solicitor, did not make such 
 return; it now appears, that some jurors have been returned, 
 who were not authorized by the venire; for the authority 
 given to him was to summon the Jury to appear upon the first 
 day of the Term, and several of the summonses were not issued 
 until after the return had expired. 
 
248 SPEECHES. 
 
 [Lord Chief Justice. — Mr. Burrowes, there is a mistake 
 with regard to that. I have examined the writ, and I find it 
 returnable on Monday, in fifteen days of St. Hilary, which is 
 this day.] 
 
 Then, my Lord, we were under a misconception, and I will 
 not further allude to it. But is this not an ingredient in the 
 case, not to be passed over, that the Solicitor for the Crown 
 importuned the Sheriff, day after day, before he should make 
 his return, to give a copy of the panel ; and that the sheriff, 
 though not bound by law to do it, offered to disclose the names 
 of the jury, provided that there was a consent with the agent 
 for the traverser, that both parties should have a copy of the 
 panel, and this offer was not communicated to the agent for 
 the traverser? From whence the undeniable inference is, 
 that the Solicitor for the Crown wanted to have an exclusive 
 knowledge of the individuals composing the jury. 
 
 [Lord Chief Justice. — That is not conformable to the 
 evidence, for the application made to the sheriff was for a copy 
 of the panel, which the sheriff refused, unless both parties 
 were to have it; and Mr. W. Kemmis told him he had no 
 objection that the other side should also have a copy of it.] 
 
 My Lord, does not his conduct amount to clear evidence 
 that he wished exclusively to have a copy of the panel, 
 and that he would not take it if there were to be a participa- 
 tion with the other side? For all the sedulity and anxiety of 
 the Solicitor for the Crown were at an end, the moment he 
 understood that the other side were to have a copy also. 
 
 Gentlemen, you are not to take the answer of the witness 
 against his acts. I rely upon his acts, as I would upon the 
 confession of the individual, as to the object which he had in 
 view ; he applied, it is true, to the sheriff for a copy of the 
 panel ; but when he is told that he cannot have it unless the 
 advantage be participated, he drops all further attempts to pro- 
 cure it; he does not communicate to the agent of the other 
 
SPEECHES. 249 
 
 side, the readiness of the sheriff to give a copy to both parties. 
 But, Gentlemen, what I have stated is a feather in the scale, 
 it is but dust in the balance, compared with what remains 
 behind ; and when investigations of this kind are set on foot, 
 you must be satisfied with circumstantial evidence, because, 
 Gentlemen, there is so much address, so much extraordinary 
 ingenuity and artifice practised in matters of this nature, that 
 it is never left in the power of any man, wishing for a fair in- 
 vestigation, to arrive at a detection of the guilt from positive 
 evidence. No instance has ever occurred, in which the Sheriff 
 or the agent has in open court acknowledged a tampering with 
 the jury: but it is from circumstances accidentally discovered, 
 bearing upon the point of inquiry, reinforced by negative evi- 
 dence, resulting from the suppression of evidence, and of ex- 
 planations in the power of the party to supply. 
 
 Gentlemen, in support of these remarks what does appear 
 most unquestionably, and beyond all doubt? That the Crown 
 Solicitor was in possession of nine-tenths of the panel at least, 
 as it has been arrayed, before it was legitimately divulged to 
 any person, or before it was possible for the agent for the tra- 
 verser to have a knowledge of a single individual upon it. 
 Gentlemen, I will go further, presently, and show you that the 
 panel was actually tampered with. What has appeared? It 
 has appeared that this gentleman, who has denied any direct 
 management with this jury, did, on Friday last, receive in the 
 Secretary's office, from a Minister of the Crown in this king- 
 dom, from his own hand, being sent for, for the purpose of re- 
 ceiving it, a list containing one hundred and fifteen names, 
 of persons who are all named in the panel, but which list, or 
 the panel, of which it is a copy, was not divulged until this 
 morning. There is a coincidence of one hundred and two 
 names. Is that a fact? I hear it said, but I suppose there was 
 a complete coincidence. I say, if there was, it would create 
 the strongest evidence to go to the Triers, to show that the 
 
250 SPEECHES. 
 
 Crown Solicitor, through the medium of a Minister in the 
 Castle, received the panel, which the sheriff states he refused 
 to disclose, and which, therefore, if you believe his testimony, 
 could not have been obtained, unless by some contrivance or 
 practice, which even the sheriff himself cannot develope. Is 
 the coincidence the effect of chance, or is it a miracle ? Will 
 it be possible for you, Gentlemen Triers, to hesitate for a mo- 
 ment in finding a verdict to quash this array, and give your 
 Catholic brethren the benefit of the laws of the country, — a 
 fair trial by a fair Protestant jury ? That is all we require. 
 
 What is the difference between the panel and the list? 
 The latter comprehends one hundred and twelve names, instead 
 of the whole number upon the former. The difference is so 
 slight that it cannot affect the weight of the evidence, much 
 less is it a ground for rejecting it altogether. If there had been 
 a complete identity, it is admitted, that if not the effect of de- 
 sign, it cannot be of a miracle; and if there be not an exact 
 identity, as there are degrees in miracles, it is not quite so 
 miraculous; but as far as there is a coincidence it must leave 
 you without any doubt that there has been some corrupt tam- 
 pering, some undue preference has been obtained through the 
 influence of some person ; the character of the Government 
 must be tarnished in this transaction, which cannot be de- 
 fended by the able and zealous advocacy of my learned friends 
 here, nor by any thing which they can assert here, and nothing 
 can clear away the imputation but a consent to let the panel 
 go, and give an opportunity for the return of another, which 
 may be above all rational suspicion. 
 
 Gentlemen, either of the two inferences result most unques- 
 tionably from the evidence. It is utterly impossible to compli- 
 ment any man by surrendering our understanding to his belief of 
 what is incredible. Either Mr. Kemmis's list actuated the return 
 of the panel, or the panel actuated it. The sheriff admitted that 
 the list which has been made out either governed the panel, or 
 
SPEECHES. 251 
 
 was taken from it; otherwise it is impossible to account for 
 their being so nearly identical as they are. This matter is not 
 denied, and, taking it either way, it is a scandalous violation 
 of that equality which ought to prevail in the return of a 
 Jury. But, Gentlemen, it is probable that the worst alterna- 
 tive is true. What has Mr. William Kemmis told you? He 
 got, at the Castle, a list of the Jury who were to try this cause, 
 before they were summoned. I say I am warranted to assume 
 that it was given before an individual was summoned. We are 
 not able to know when they were summoned, but proof has been 
 given of one being summoned only on Saturday last, from 
 which I have a right to infer that the panel was not summoned 
 until Saturday. 
 
 [Mn. Justice Daly.— The sheriff said that he issued his 
 summonses on Thursday, except one.] 
 
 My Lord, I am perfectly in possession of that, and will not 
 state the facts different from the truth. The sheriff said he 
 issued his summons on Thursday evening; but no proof has 
 been made when any individual was served. We have proved 
 a service upon one last Saturday, and that upon a man not in- 
 serted on Saturday. Therefore, the Counsel on the other side 
 have not satisfied you in this respect, and the utmost which 
 you can presume is, that the summonses in general were served 
 on Friday. 
 
 [Mr. Justice Day. — The panel was formed on Thursday.] 
 
 My Lord, I shall remark upon that in another part of the 
 case. The Triers, holding themselves indifferently between 
 the Crown and the subject, as I am satisfied they will, must 
 presume that Sir Charles Saxton had that list of the jury in 
 his pocket before any of them were summoned. But why ? 
 Because it was late on Thursday when he gave it. We have 
 proved a summons served on Saturday, and they have not 
 proved a service, even on Friday ; and Sir Charles Saxton, the 
 Minister of the country, upon whom the imputation was cast, 
 
252 SPEECHES. 
 
 has retired, scorning to exculpate himself by swearing that he 
 did not interfere improperly upon the subject; leaving it un- 
 certain where he got the list, from whom he got it, or for what 
 purpose, or why he gave it to Mr. Keinmis. But the transac- 
 tion speaks for itself, and the effect cannot be overwhelmed by 
 any talents or eloquence which may follow me. It is not pos- 
 sible to rescue the jury from the imputation which falls upon 
 them ; and if they shall ultimately try the cause, I do not envy 
 the prosecutors any verdict which may be pronounced. There- 
 fore, Gentlemen, you see that Sir Charles Saxton might have 
 had the list before the jurors were summoned, or even before 
 they were arrayed. He gave it to Mr. William Kemmis, whom 
 he sent for. The witness said he could not state the precise 
 business which he was sent for. But, Gentlemen, can you hesi- 
 tate to believe that he was sent for on account of this very par- 
 ticular business, when nothing else is proved to have been done ? 
 He goes to the Castle on Thursday, being sent for, and he re- 
 ceives a list of the Jury who are to be returned to try this im- 
 portant cause. Gentlemen, do you not believe that Sir Charles 
 Saxton had it some time before he sent for Mr. William Kemmis ? 
 Is not the inference palpable? Some distance of time must 
 have intervened between his obtaining the list and sending for 
 the Solicitor? We have been told that we might examine 
 Sir Charles Saxton ; but does it rest upon us, who allege a 
 tampering with the panel, to resort to such evidence, and leave 
 everything that might give colour to the transaction to the 
 cross-examination of the witness? No; every juror will say 
 that the party, whose conduct is impeached, should rescue 
 himself from the imputation ; and here they have suffered Sir 
 Charles Saxton to leave the Court without producing him to 
 be examined. We sent for him, I admit. Why? Because we 
 thought that, if we had not, he might, at the time of the inquiry, 
 be conveniently absent. But here he came ; was present dur- 
 ing great part of the inquiry, and departed without explaining 
 any part of this transaction. 
 
SPEECHES. 253 
 
 Gentlemen, upon this awful subject you stand in the situa- 
 tion of a jury, discharging similar functions, and I am appeal- 
 ing to you in that character. I consider that you cannot but 
 believe that the Secretary was put into possession of the panel 
 by some management or other. Now I will show you that the 
 panel was most probably altered and influenced according to 
 the list, which was obtained by the Secretary, either before Mr. 
 William Kemmis got it, or after. The Sheriff himself wonders 
 at the coincidence of the names. You, Gentlemen, have seen 
 various instances in which the order and position of the names 
 have been varied in the panel from the order in which they 
 stood on the list. There cannot be a doubt that the panel has 
 undergone some alteration, in consequence of that management 
 some way or other acting upon it. What did Mr. William 
 Kemmis say, respecting the numbers? He altered No. 4 in the 
 list which he got from the Secretary, to No. 36. Why? To 
 help him in his challenges. How that could be I cannot con- 
 ceive, nor would he explain. 
 
 Gentlemen, scrutinize this subject, the panel adopts 101 
 names in Sir Charles Suxton's list. Why ? The Castle ap- 
 proves of them. It adds fourteen new names. Why ? Because 
 they are suggested by the Castle. It alters the numerical order 
 of array. Why ? Because this alteration is recommended by 
 the Castle. Is this fancy or is it fact ? Mr. Kemmis's, or ra- 
 ther Sir Charles Saxton's list, has in eight or ten different in- 
 stances pencilled numbers annexed to particular names. These 
 numbers differ, and widely differ, from the numerical order in 
 which those names are placed in that list; And in every in- 
 stance this suggested change of order is adopted in the panel. 
 Gentlemen, these coincidences are not miraculous, though I 
 will admit them to be providential. They seem to have al- 
 lured the providence of God to bring scandalous frauds to so- 
 lemn detection, by furnishing evidence which human testimony 
 could not corroborate, or human artifice could not elude. 
 
254 SPEECHES. 
 
 But the numbers coincide with the order of the panel, and, 
 Gentlemen, if you know anything of the mode of framing a 
 panel, you must be aware, that it becomes a matter of conse- 
 quence to the parties to know, not only the individual returned 
 upon the panel, but the order in which they stand: for, if men 
 are set aside, with a view of arriving at better, that selection 
 of a jury can be facilitated by such an identification, as appears 
 in the present instance ; for although there be an alteration in 
 the change of position, yet the numbers correspond. It may 
 be stated, that the Crown has an indefinite right of setting 
 aside, and, therefore, a precise order would be no object to them. 
 But, Gentlemen, do not be deceived by that argument ; they 
 have the right, and they exercised it in such a manner upon a 
 former occasion, as to draw down upon them obloquy and cen- 
 sure; they set aside twenty-three of the most respectable in- 
 habitants of the city, in order to arrive at what they considered 
 a favourable jury, who disappointed them. They did not 
 like to exercise their discretion in the same manner; it is a 
 discretion founded in usurpation and, whether acknowledged 
 by law or not, it has become a practice, but should be used 
 with the utmost caution and fairness. 
 
 [Lokd Chief Justice. — The usage is as ancient as any in 
 our law.] 
 
 My Lords, I am now only arguing upon the motives of ex- 
 ercising it, with a view of showing that the Crown did not 
 wish to practise it as they had done before ; although it gives the 
 Crown the unequal advantage of selecting twelve out of a pa- 
 nel containing one thousand, they would not exercise it in 
 the barefaced manner in which they did upon a former occa- 
 sion, and upon that account it became necessary to interfere 
 with and alter the panel. There is, then, that other feature in 
 this case, that either the panel which has been returned this 
 day, suggested the list; or the list suggested the panel. The 
 latter is infinitely the most probable, and the coincidence can- 
 
SPEECHES. 255 
 
 not otherwise be rationally accounted lor. It appears that a 
 panel different from the present, but to what extent the sheriff 
 cannot say, was arrayed a week before the present one, in 
 the presence of the sub-sheriff, and equally with his joint as- 
 sistance. 
 
 [Mr. Justice Day. — Varying only in two names.] 
 My Lord, — he could only ascertain two names ; but he 
 could not say whether it was not materially different. The 
 sheriff was asked, whether he could say that this panel coin- 
 cided with his first list? He said he could not. Whether it 
 differed to the extent of twenty names? He said he could not. 
 Then, Gentlemen, what appears? The panel was arrayed by 
 the Castle Sheriff, and his sub-sheriff: — the latter is not pro- 
 duced to give any account of the matter; but it appears, that 
 a list of this panel, varying in a very few instances, came from 
 the Castle — from the Minister of the country. Is there not 
 more than suspicion, — is it not convincing proof that the ori- 
 ginal panel, formed a week before, was sent to the Castle, 
 for animadversion, to be varied according to suggestion? The 
 Crown Solicitor is not let into the secret ; the sub-sheriff is 
 not produced ; but a paper is produced, which came from the 
 Castle, and it is made to agree, in point of arrangement, with 
 the panel which is acted upon. Gentlemen, it is quite im- 
 possible for you to find a verdict, saying, that you are satisfied 
 this is a pure jury, — that it has not been procured by tamper- 
 ing, through the agency of the Crown Solicitor; or by some 
 instrument, anxious, per fas et nefas, to obtain a verdict, which 
 may obliterate the effect of that quieting and satisfactory ver- 
 dict which has been already pronounced. 
 
 Gentlemen, although you are not to decide upon the guilt 
 or innocence of the Roman Catholics, it is a question of much 
 importance to them, whether they shall have a fair and impartial 
 jury,or be tried by a jury procured by such tampering as has 
 appeared. I do say, that there is as much evidence before you 
 
256 SPEECHES. 
 
 as can be reasonably expected in any case, where palpable 
 tampering has taken place. A case occurred lately in the 
 Exchequer, where a juror, after he was returned in the pa- 
 nel, was requested to go upon the lands which were the sub- 
 ject of litigation, to make himself acquainted with the value of 
 it, and the Court set aside the verdict, without costs, because 
 they would not tolerate a finding where there had been any 
 interposition, management, or practice of any kind, by one 
 of the parties, with ajuror. It is true, SirCharles Saxton is not a 
 party in this cause ; his name does not appear upon the record, 
 but, Gentlemen, you know who he is ; that he is a Minister of 
 this country, deeply interested in this cause, acting for the 
 Crown in the most important affairs of the State. What busi- 
 ness had he in sending for the Crown Solicitor? — or in getting 
 a copy of the panel before the jurors were summoned? Do 
 you believe that he obtained it for a love of justice, with a view 
 to a fair trial of the traverser? It is manifest he could not; he 
 procured it clandestinely ; and although it is alleged that he 
 did so in order to enable the Crown Solicitor to make his chal- 
 lenges, yet there is ample ground to presume that it was for 
 a very different purpose. The panel was in the possession of 
 the sub-sheriff, and although he was here he was not examined. 
 Therefore, this case docs not rest upon suspicion ; there is more 
 — there is violent presumptive proof, upon which you, Gentle- 
 men, are bound to act, that this jury, in the language of the 
 challenge, has been impanneled under the nomination of the 
 Solicitor for the Crown, acting as the a^ent of Sir Charles Sax- 
 ton. Whether he was the confidential instrument, or was only 
 partially intrusted, the objection substantially applies ; and 
 you will exercise a sound judgment upon this solemn and 
 awful occasion, as honest men, independently between the 
 Crown and the subject : — your verdict will be the fair result 
 of your investigation, and I have no doubt the conviction of 
 your minds will be, that this panel has been tampered with. 
 
257 
 
 THE KING v. THOMAS KIRWAN, MERCHANT. 
 
 Gentlemen of the Jury, — I cannot admit, with His Majesty's 
 Attorney-General, that we have been skulking from the merits 
 and justice of this case. I appeal to the candour of every man, 
 who has attended this trial, whether the charge is not more 
 aptly applicable to himself. We have offered, and still offer, 
 to relieve you from the inviduous duty of deciding the question 
 of law, by taking your verdict on the fact, and leaving the law 
 to be definitively settled by the dernier ressort. It never was 
 more necessary to separate the law from the fact. Yet, though 
 not one of our oilers have been accepted, the Attorney-General 
 represents our conduct as shuffling and prevaricating. Do 
 you see any want of candour on our side? Do you not see 
 a glaring want of it on the other? My learned friend knows 
 that the opinion of the Court of King's Bench is with him, and 
 such is his perverted notion of true dignity, that he seeks the 
 sanction of a jury to uphold the Court in the point of law, 
 while he shrinks from the opinion of the twelve Judges, and 
 the House of Lords. Gentlemen, there is more of artifice than 
 pride in this course. He has more than misgivings as to the 
 probable consequence of a compliance with our candid and fair 
 offer. He dreads the opinion of the dernier ressort upon a 
 special verdict, and trembles for the fate of his prosecution 
 before that high tribunal, to whose decision every Catholic in 
 Ireland — to whose judgment my Lord Fingall — would bow the 
 head of obedience. He avows that it is the intention of the 
 administration, both at this side of the water and the other, to 
 put down the Catholics of Ireland. 
 
 [Mr. Attorney-General. — I said no such thing. I said 
 it was the intention to put down the national convention of the 
 
 s 
 
258 SPEECHES. 
 
 Catholics, which is, and ought to be, the endeavour of every 
 honest man.] 
 
 Well, then, to put down that convention, which he has 
 called an illegal assembly, but which I deny to be so; but 
 which I assert to be the constitutional organ of a deserving and 
 suffering people, commissioned to carry their complaints to the 
 Throne, and to Parliament. He denies what I thus affirm ; 
 but he, who has imputed a shuffling and disingenuous conduct, 
 himself skulks under the wings of this Court, and the expected 
 compliance of this jury, from that final Court, to which we 
 seek to carry this great question, surely not unworthy of the 
 highest tribunal. I again call upon him — I implore him, — I 
 implore the Court, which I address with reverence, — I implore 
 the jury, — all to concur in a special verdict, — to separate the 
 fact from the law, to leave the law to this Court, who cannot 
 want — who cannot wish the sanction of a jury upon a question 
 which they are told is foreign from their jurisdiction. In order 
 to remove all difficulty, in order to silence all pretence that we 
 do not avow what we have done, I offer to admit every fact to 
 which a particle of evidence has been offered — every fact which 
 the Attorney-General has any grounds for saying really took 
 place — let them all be found by the jury ; let the Attorney- 
 General prepare the special verdict himself; he shall not meet 
 any uncandid obstruction, he shall receive every assistance. 
 The jury will be relieved from difficulty. The Court may 
 pronounce the law from themselves, and by themselves ; the 
 judgment will be equally valid, equally effectual, in all re- 
 spects the same, except that it will be open to appeal, which 
 cannot but be gratifying to this Court, and which ought not to 
 be obstructed by the Attorney-General, if his object be (what 
 he avows) to vindicate the dignity of the law, and not what 
 some suspect, to answer a transient and a party purpose, and 
 obtain what may be miscalled a victory over the Catholic 
 people, and the Catholic pursuit. 
 
SPEECHES. 259 
 
 The Attorney-General, I find, will not consent to this fair 
 proposal. He will demand from you, Gentlemen of the Jury, 
 a general verdict, deciding upon the law, and precluding all 
 appeal. In doing this, he forces upon me a duty upon which 
 I enter with reluctance, but which I shall discharge with firm- 
 ness. It is not for any man who wears a bar gown, to shrink 
 from the discharge of any professional duty whatever. Diffi- 
 culties may interpose in his way ; and even though he may be 
 certain to encounter obloquy and misrepresentation on one side 
 or the other, possibly on both, from the unfortunate state and 
 temper of the times, whatever course he may steer, — his duty 
 is plain, his course is direct. Let him call into counsel his 
 reason and his conscience, let these counsellors be unbribed 
 and uninfluenced, let him obey their mandates inflexibly and 
 boldly, and he may rely, that the final judgment of this world 
 will probably be with him, but that, with infallible certainty, 
 he will stand acquitted before that Tribunal from which there 
 cannot be any appeal, because in it there cannot be any error. 
 I will follow such counsel, as I recommend to every man, stand- 
 ing in such circumstances as I do ; I obey the suggestions of 
 those monitors, who tell me that it is my duty to urge you, 
 Gentlemen of the Jury, to find a special verdict, as you un- 
 doubtedly have a right to do, and if you do not, to proceed to 
 argue in your hearing, and with a view to convince you, as 
 well as the Court, that, under a sound and rational construction 
 of the Convention Act, my client is entitled to a general ac- 
 quittal. 
 
 [Lord Chief Justice. — So far as the Court has already 
 decided upon the same subject, I should hope it will not now 
 be controverted.] 
 
 My Lords, I have considered this matter much and deeply. 
 I would not establish an indecorous precedent, to gratify any 
 man, or body of men. I admit the maxim of law, " Ad ques- 
 tionem facti respondent juratores — ad questionem legis respondent 
 
 s 2 
 
260 SPEECHES. 
 
 judices" but I assert that it has its limits and exceptions, like 
 every other principle and maxim of law. I deny that juries 
 are bound, on constitutional questions, to take the law from 
 every Judge who may preside. I assert that they are not 
 bound to act in violation of the plain suggestions of their own 
 understandings, upon subjects not difficult or abstruse, and in 
 which the rights and liberties of a nation may be involved. 
 We owe much of our freedom to the intellect and spirit of juries, 
 who, upon such subjects, act for themselves and for the nation, 
 when the Judges who presided mistook or misstated the consti- 
 tutional law of the land. I will not dwell upon times, when 
 a systematic attack was made upon every principle of genuine 
 and rational liberty, when Judges were dependent and time- 
 serving. I know, and I exult in the happy change which exists 
 in that respect in modern times; but I will say, that the time 
 never has arrived, and never can arrive, when the Judges should 
 be considered as in themselves a sufficient protection of the 
 people's rights, and that, to inculcate universal and passive 
 obedience in juries to the doctrines of the Court, would be to 
 deprive the nation of its best protection, upon great subjects, 
 and upon great emergencies. 
 
 I call your attention to modern times, and to a subject so 
 closely analogous to the present, that no nearer affinity can be 
 imagined. The liberty of the Press, and the right of petition- 
 ing, may be considered as twin privileges of a free people. 
 They are equally necessary, — they ought to be equally sacred. 
 For more than twenty years, in England, the whole Court of 
 King's Bench considered the question of libel or no libel to be 
 a question of law, and did express that opinion in every case, 
 and claimed exclusive jurisdiction upon the subject; and yet, 
 in every case, the counsel for the defendant appealed to the 
 jury to decide, as if it was completely and peculiarly within 
 their cognizance. In no instance was that opinion of the Court 
 submitted to, so as to preclude the counsel from referring to the 
 
speeches. 261 
 
 jury the question of libel or no libel, and rousing their con- 
 stitutional feelings upon a question of such importance. The 
 contest was conducted with candour and decorum, and it was 
 not considered as any aspersion upon the Court ; but the advocate 
 asserted his right, and struggled with the opinion of the Court, 
 until a declaratory Act was passed, deciding that the counsel 
 was right, and the Court in error, during that whole period. 
 It is entitled " An Act to remove Doubts respecting the Func- 
 tions of Juries, in Cases of Libel ;" and it recites that doubts 
 have arisen, whether, upon the trial for a libel, it was competent 
 to the jury to give their verdict upon the whole matter in 
 issue; and it enacts, that the jury may give a general verdict 
 of guilty, or not, upon the whole matter put in issue, upon 
 the indictment or information; and shall not be required, or 
 directed by the Judge, to find the defendant guilty, merely on 
 the proof of publication ; and it is provided, that the Judge may- 
 give his opinion and direction, in like manner as in other cri- 
 minal cases ; and it is also provided, that nothing shall extend 
 to prevent the jury from finding a special verdict, in their 
 discretion, as in other criminal cases; recognising the right of 
 the jury to find a special verdict in every case. Nothing can 
 be more analogous. In those cases, the alleged abuse of the 
 censorial power of the people was the subject of trial. Here 
 the right of petitioning is said to be abused, and it is denied 
 that you shall judge upon the subject. I do say, that neither 
 of these great reserved rights of the people can be safe, if they 
 are not in the custody of juries; and that you cannot afford 
 them protection, if you must obey every Judge upon the 
 subject. 
 
 [Mr. Justice Day. You need not contend for your right 
 Avhere we have been inviting you to the argument.] 
 
 My Lord, I thought it right to state the clauses of this 
 Act, after I had been interrupted. I beg to press that essential 
 part of the Act which authorizes the jury to find a special 
 
262 SPEECHES. 
 
 verdict, as in other criminal cases; and to press upon their 
 minds and consciences that, if they do not generally acquit, as 
 the former jury did, they should not be prevailed upon by a 
 general verdict to close the avenues to further inquiry against 
 their fellow-subjects, and upon so interesting a subject. 
 
 I shall proceed to argue the law of the case ; if I make an 
 impression, I am confident it will be yielded to ; whether I do 
 or do not, I hope that your Lordships will concur with me in 
 recommending a special verdict. 
 
 I will not go over the whole of the ground which I travelled 
 upon a former occasion, but I will suggest a few observations, 
 which appear to me to be not only forcible, but conclusive. 
 The indictment contains allegations which I need not now 
 state in detail to your Lordships. The Attorney-General has 
 fairly stated them. And, Gentlemen of the Jury, if you remem- 
 ber them it is sufficient for me ; and, in truth, the gist of the 
 crime can be stated in one proposition. The criminality of 
 the traverser is to be collected from the general nature and 
 character of that assembly, described by the resolutions laid in 
 the indictment. You are called upon to pronounce that the 
 meditated Committee was a body formed to be representatives 
 of the Roman Catholics of Ireland, under pretence of peti- 
 tioning. The Attorney-General states this Committee to be a 
 monstrous innovation, tending to the usurpation of the legiti- 
 mate functions of the Government of the country. But I say 
 it is not a representative assembly, according to the true import 
 of that word, and the meaning of this Act, upon any evidence 
 given before you. A representative assembly must be that to 
 which is imparted the reserved rights of the people, or any 
 portion of the people. It must be an assembly appointed for 
 general purposes, with the power of exercising that authority 
 at their own discretion, or usurping such power. But, at all 
 events, in order to constitute the representative character, it is 
 necessary that power or authority shall be imparted from the 
 
SPEECHES. 263 
 
 body electing to the body elected, to be exercised in their 
 own name, and according to their own discretion, or that such 
 power shall be usurped. Such is the import and meaning of 
 the word upon every occasion where it is to be found in any 
 of our legal or constitutional writers, and no attempt has been 
 made to show that it ever was used in the sense now contended 
 for by the Crown lawyers. Nothing is more intelligible than 
 the distinction between a representative and an attorney, or 
 delegate appointed to act as an instrument in performing some 
 defined service or duty. The Crown Lawyers well understand, 
 and do not deny this distinction, but contend, contrary to reason 
 and the cautious wording of the law, that it extends to every 
 delegation, however restricted, where the object is to petition, 
 as if the law was enacted solely extinguishing that right which 
 it declares shall in no way be impeded. 
 
 Gentlemen of the Jury, my argument has been much mis- 
 represented, but no attempt has as yet been made to answer it. 
 I said, that any assembly appointed for general purposes, or 
 assuming to represent the people for general purposes, would 
 be illegal; and I not only conceded so much, but referred to a par- 
 ticular assembly of that description, whose avowed objects made 
 it palpably illegal, and against whom the Act was directed. They 
 exercised general rights, and, in the character of representa- 
 tives of the people, they pronounced upon every political topic 
 which could occur; circumscribed by no boundary, but assum- 
 ing every power inherent in the people. That was the nature 
 of the Dungannon assembly, which met on the 15th February, 
 1793. Gentlemen, you arc to collect how they were appointed, 
 or what powers they usurped, from their very acts; for not 
 only were they illegal by their very constitution, but by assum- 
 ing those functions, and extent of popular rights, which it 
 would have been illegal to confer upon them, and which they 
 exercised in their own name, as the representatives of the 
 people. Gentlemen, that assembly resolved, " That it is the 
 
264 SPEECHES. 
 
 constitutional right of the people, and essential to the very 
 being of their liberty, to be fully and fairly represented in their 
 own House of Parliament ; that the present state of the repre- 
 sentation, in the House of Commons, is partial and inadequate, 
 subversive of the rights of the people, and an intolerable griev- 
 ance." " That it appears to us, that several Lords spiritual and 
 temporal, as well as Commoners, direct the return of more than 
 two hundred members of the Irish House of Commons, being 
 two-thirds of the representation of the people." " That it is the 
 opinion of this meeting that all boroughs should be disfran- 
 chised, and representation established on fair and rational prin- 
 ciples, by extending the elective franchise equally to persons 
 of every religious persuasion, by elections frequently repeated, 
 and by a distribution of representatives proportioned to the po- 
 pulation and wealth of the country." " That deeming a complete 
 parliamentary reform essential to the peace, liberty, and happi- 
 ness of the people, we do most solemnly pledge ourselves to 
 each other, and to our country, that we will never abandon the 
 pursuit of this important object, but zealously and steadily 
 persevere until a full and fair representation of the people shall 
 be unequivocally obtained." "That a power be vested in a 
 Committee, consisting of thirty persons, for the purpose of 
 rcconvoking this assembly (as occasion may arise), until the 
 constituent body is pleased to return another representation of 
 the province; and that, on the recommendation by letter to 
 William Sharman, Esq., at Moira, signed by seven of the 
 Committee, he shall, by circular letter to the rest, procure the 
 sense of the majority, and if the measure of a provincial meet- 
 ing be by them approved of, he shall forthwith issue a sum- 
 mons, in the name of the Committee, for that purpose." [Here 
 follow the names of the Committee.] " That the above-named 
 Committee be authorized to communicate with the other pro- 
 vinces of this kingdom, at this important crisis, and to consult 
 proper means for calling a National Convention, at a future 
 
SPEECHES. 265 
 
 day, should circumstances render such a meeting unavoidably 
 necessary." "Resolved, — That we behold with indignation an in- 
 tention of embodying a Militia in this kingdom, a measure 
 which only has ministerial influence for its object, which we 
 deem burdensome and totally unnecessary." "Resolved, unani- 
 mously, — That it is with infinite concern we behold this king- 
 dom likely to be involved in the horrors and expenses of a 
 foreign war; a war by which, as a nation, we can gain nothing, 
 but, on the contrary, must expose our commerce to depreda- 
 tion, and our country to unprovoked hostility." 
 
 Such was the assembly, and such the resolutions, which 
 produced the Convention Act. The Attorney-General of that 
 day, your Lordship's noble predecessor, who was amongst the 
 principal framers of that Act, and who proposed it in the House 
 of Commons, declared at the time, that the Dungannon Con- 
 vention, and such general representative bodies, were the ob- 
 jects of that law ; and he disclaimed its application to delegates 
 for defined purposes, and anxiously guarded against the im- 
 putation of conveying or implying, by the Act, any censure 
 upon the Catholic Committee, who were then in existence. 
 We all remember that revered character, — we know that he 
 loved the laws and Constitution better than life itself; the 
 glories that surrounded his last moments, and which rendered 
 his death as enviable as it was disgraceful to the monsters who 
 caused it, cannot soon pass away; his memory will live en- 
 tombed in the heart of every Irish lawyer, as long as the pro- 
 fession shall retain any dignity, or the laws, upon which he 
 shed such lustre, shall be held in any estimation. 
 
 If it shall be said, that his opinion was delivered as a de- 
 bater, and cannot be received as interpretative of the law, can 
 the same objection be made to the Act of Parliament passed in 
 the same session, almost on the very day, upon the admitted 
 solicitation of a Roman Catholic committee, constituted like 
 the present, — and which recites their peaceable and loyal de- 
 
266 SPEECHES. 
 
 meanour, as the very ground and title of their relief ? If the 
 history of the times, disclosed in the most solemn and authori- 
 tative way, can be received as explanatory of any law, this 
 Statute interpretation of the meaning of the Act ought to close 
 the question for ever, and consign the newfangled and uncon- 
 stitutional construction, now for the first time attempted, to 
 eternal condemnation. 
 
 But the Statute itself, by the exception which it introduces, 
 explains, beyond any rational doubt, what kind of assembly it 
 had in contemplation. After defining the assembly upon which 
 it intends to act, by the well-understood term " represent," 
 it saves out of its enactment " the knights, citizens, and bur- 
 gesses elected to serve in Parliament," and excepts " the Houses 
 of Convocation duly summoned by the King's writ." If the 
 Statute was intended to suppress simple delegation for the sole 
 purpose of petitioning, — if it did not use the term " represent" 
 in the sense which I have ascribed to it, — in its known, legal, 
 and Constitutional meaning, — if it did not apply its provisions 
 to assemblies similar to Parliament, representing the people in 
 a similar way, and in some degree encroaching upon their high 
 prerogatives, — why should it be found necessary to except 
 the House of commons, the legitimate representatives of the 
 people ? It has been stated, that the exception was and must 
 be considered as unmeaning ; that the House of Commons could 
 not be bound by any such enactment, be it ever so plainly in- 
 cluded within its provisions. This is not constitutional doc- 
 trine. The Legislature possesses a paramount authority. It 
 would be high treason to deny it. They can even alter the suc- 
 cession to the Crown ; God forbid they should exercise such a 
 power! but there is nothing to prevent it, if they thought fit ; 
 and, therefore, when they were enacting a law to prohibit 
 representative assemblies, it was thought necessary to except 
 even the House of Commons. The exception, therefore, plainly 
 indicates the character and quality of that body upon which 
 
SPEECHES. 267 
 
 the exception acts. What remains within the sphere and ope- 
 ration of the law must be of the same character as that which 
 is excepted from it. Thus, the term " represent," so studiously 
 selected to characterize the prohibited assembly, and the nature 
 of that assembly which is reserved by the exception from the 
 operation of law, conspire to establish the meaning of the Legis- 
 lature, and to put down the construction now contended for. 
 
 It has been said that, according to my construction, no as- 
 sembly could be illegal under the Act, unless it should usurp 
 legislative functions. This gross misconception is founded 
 upon a notion, that the House of Commons have no functions 
 that arc not legislative. Is it forgotten that they are the Grand 
 Inquest of the nation ? — that they exercise a constitutional 
 control over the prerogatives of the Crown ? In these re- 
 spects, as well as in their legislative character, they represent 
 the people. As representatives of the people, they pronounce 
 upon the expediency of peace or war, upon the conduct and 
 capacity of ministers, upon abuses affecting the common weal; 
 they impeach, — they prosecute, — they address the Throne, — 
 they do all these acts, and every function they perforin as re- 
 presentatives of the people. They have not a single quality 
 that is not derivative. Their legislative functions are conferred 
 without any reserve. If the people were to attempt to legis- 
 late, the Constitution would be at once dissolved. But it is not 
 the same with all the functions of Parliament. The people have 
 a right to exercise some of those communicated functions in 
 common with their representatives, and these I call the reserved 
 rights of the people. The right of petitioning, and a censorial right, 
 are the most valuable of these rights. No country can be free 
 when these rights cannot be exercised without impediment or 
 restraint. The people have a right, in common with their repre- 
 sentatives, to pronounce an opinion upon public men and public 
 measures, — upon peace and war, — upon public institutions, — 
 upon every thing by which they may be affected. They may 
 
268 SPEECHES. 
 
 petition the Parliament, or the King, upon any and all of these 
 subjects; they may do all these acts in common with their re- 
 presentatives. But they cannot appoint any other representa- 
 tives for legislative purposes, or for those purposes, save the 
 body appointed by the Constitution. Any body of men elected, 
 or assuming to exercise these reserved rights, encroaches upon 
 the privileges of Parliament, and violates the Constitution ; 
 they do an act similar to encroaching upon the royal prero- 
 gative, they are guilty of a high misdemeanour at common 
 law. This explanation was fully in contemplation of the Le- 
 gislature when the law was framed ; therefore, it was to pre- 
 vent the monstrous misinterpretation now contended for, that 
 the Act is, in its language and name, as far as relates to the 
 assembly in question, purely declaratory. Such it appears to 
 be from its title, — such from the language of its enactment; it 
 creates no new offence; it only enforces the law. The counsel 
 for the Crown may affect to misunderstand or to treat with 
 contempt this distinction and this reasoning ; they may affect 
 to misunderstand it, but, most certainly, they never have an- 
 swered or attempted to answer it ; they assert, without any 
 •reason, from the language of the law, from the object of the 
 law, or the consequences of the different construction, that all 
 deputation is illegal; they never have drawn any limit, nor 
 will they admit delegation in any degree. According to their 
 construction, a committee of five merchants, appointed to in- 
 vestigate subjects of trade, and to prepare a petition thereon, 
 would be an illegal assembly, liable to be dispersed by any 
 peace oflicer. According to their construction, such an as- 
 sembly would be illegal at common law. It would be illegal 
 in England, where this Act is not in force. But, having con- 
 tended that all delegation for petitioning is illegal, they declaim 
 against assemblies usurping the functions of Parliament, and 
 assuming the whole rights and powers of the people. Read 
 their speeches already in print, — recall to your mind what the 
 
SPEECHES. 269 
 
 Attorney-General has now uttered ; every sentence, every 
 word will show that the assembly described as portentous and 
 illegal is a general representative assembly, whether by elec- 
 tion or usurpation, such as I have admitted, at all times, to have 
 been illegal, and against which the Act provides. 
 
 The Solicitor-General, in his former splendid and delusive 
 speech, warned you against the danger of delegation, by calling 
 your attention to the National Convention of France, and the 
 horrors of the French revolution. Consult your reason, and 
 see whether lie can fairly call in aid that interesting event — 
 whether it is not a mere appeal to your feelings and your pre- 
 judices. In answer to him, I assert that the National Conven- 
 tion of France in no way resembled the Roman Catholic Com- 
 mittee; it originated in known, established orders of the State; 
 it did not purport, or affect to spring out of popular election; 
 it openly, and from the beginning, assumed and exercised 
 sovereign power. But what renders the comparison not merely 
 irrelevant, but completely subversive of what he would incul- 
 cate, is, that in fact the mischief of that assembly did not arise 
 from its power but its impotence; not from its sovereignty, but 
 its subserviency ; not from possessing and exercising the rights of 
 the people, but from being under the influence of societies 
 abroad, and accessible to all the variable violence of popular 
 feeling and popular phrenzy. In the same spirit is the argu- 
 ment urged, which calls your attention to the checks and regu- 
 lations imposed by the wisdom of the Constitution on the meet- 
 ings and deliberations of Parliament, the writ of election, the 
 power of dissolution in the Crown, the slow and guarded forms 
 of proceedings, the Sergeant at Arms to preserve order, the 
 very mace. No doubt, if this were a legislative assembly, such 
 or similar checks and regulations might be necessary ; but would 
 not this be reckoned the extremity of folly or fatuity, if urged 
 by common advocates? Does it not beg the entire question? 
 Does it not presume the body to be assembled for legislative 
 
270 SPEECHES. 
 
 purposes, or at least as general representatives of the people? 
 If there be any evidence of this, we submit at once. But do 
 not let a character be ascribed to us which we disclaim, and 
 punish us for want of those checks which are not necessary 
 to the character which we avow, and which we really bear. 
 Is it possible to express, how ridiculous it would be to establish 
 a doctrine, that no voluntary or occasional association, for pur- 
 poses legal and laudable, should be tolerated, unless convened 
 by the King's writ, dissoluble at his pleasure, and clogged and 
 incumbered with all the forms and ceremonies of a regular 
 Parliament? This, though urged with so much pomp and 
 gravity, is too frivolous for further observation. 
 
 Having said so much on the construction of the word " re- 
 present," I call your attention to the evidence. I dwell not upon 
 the admitted discredit of the witnesses by a former jury; I 
 dwell not upon their studied anxiety to cure defects in their 
 former evidence, and to persuade you that the word "represent" 
 was used in the resolutions in Liffey-street, at the very moment 
 when the body assembled were upon their guard not to give 
 any advantage, by inadvertent language. The Attorney-Gene- 
 ral has agreed to the criterion of guilt to which I refer you. I 
 agree with him, that the guilt or innocence of the traverser 
 must depend upon the character of the assembly to which the 
 deputies were sent, it is no matter by what resolutions, or in 
 what language couched. I admit, with him, that the character 
 of that assembly must depend upon the resolutions sworn to by 
 Huddleston. I enter not into his conduct, his character, or his 
 motives, or a discussion of the question whether a base and 
 infamous witness ought, in any imaginable case, be received, 
 to cast the onus of disproof upon any accused person. I shall 
 suppose all he has stated to be as true as Gospel ; but I contend, 
 upon the principles which I have urged, that the resolutions 
 sworn to by him attach no criminality upon the committee 
 about to be formed. What are these resolutions? The first 
 
SPEECHES. 271 
 
 resolution was, "That being impressed with the unalterable 
 conviction of the undoubted right of every man to worship his 
 Creator according to the dictates of his own conscience, we 
 deem it our duty thus publicly and solemnly to declare our 
 decision, that no Government can inflict any pain, penalty, or 
 privation, for obeying that form of Christian faith which, in 
 his conscience, he believes to be right." 
 
 Gentlemen, I need not comment upon this first resolution ; it 
 is perfectly innocent. The second resolution was : " Resolved, — 
 That we again petition the Legislature, for a repeal of the laws 
 affecting the Catholics of Ireland." Thirdly, " That in exer- 
 cising our undoubted right to petition, we will adhere to the 
 ancient forms of the Constitution, and the restrictions imposed 
 by modern Statutes." Manifestly declaring, in that proposition, 
 that they would exercise the right of petition in conformity to 
 and obedience of the Statute law, and the Convention Act among 
 the rest. They were advised by numerous and able lawyers, that 
 the appointment of delegates, bond fide to prepare a petition to 
 Parliament, was not within the Act; and being about to make 
 such an election, they pronounced a declaration that they will 
 conform to the law ; and then they resolve, " that the Committee 
 to be appointed to prepare the petition" (and here is what is 
 relied upon, as constituting the guilt in this case) " do consist 
 of the Catholic peers, their eldest sons, the Catholic baronets 
 and prelates, and ten persons chosen from each county, and five 
 from each parish in Dublin." It is contended, on the part of 
 the prosecution, that this deputation, although for the limited 
 and defined purpose of petitioning, and bond fide for that pur- 
 pose, is illegal, without a question to be left to a jury, as to the 
 motive, intention, or the use or necessity of such a committee 
 to the end proposed. I trust, Gentlemen, that you will not 
 adopt any such exposition of this Act. The Attorney-General 
 relies much upon their number, and the various orders of society 
 from which they are taken. I contend for it, that the Statute 
 
272 SPEECHES. 
 
 makes no distinction with respect to the offence, flowing out 
 of the numbers composing the assembly. It is the character 
 of the assembly, from whence alone the criminality is to be 
 inferred. I admit, that the numbers may be urged as a circum- 
 stance to show that the pretence of petitioning was false ; but 
 in that view it must always be a part of the consideration of a 
 jury, and never can conclude the question in point of law. 
 
 There are some objects of petition very simple in their na- 
 ture; there are others very complicated. If the object was to 
 petition to remove a bigoted or infatuated Minister, a man not 
 competent, in the opinion of the people, to guide the vessel of 
 the State, it would be a simple and easy task to prepare such 
 a petition; but there are other objects more complicated; and 
 never was there a subject so complex as that which was in 
 the contemplation of the Roman Catholic Committee. Gentle- 
 men, you know that the penal code was a grievous accumula- 
 tion of many years; that it consisted of every enactment which 
 prejudice, fury, and folly could suggest to any bigot, whose pas- 
 sions erected him into a legislator. I admit that a great portion 
 of that code has been repealed ; much, however, still remains. 
 Many, various, and galling, are the restrictions and incapacities 
 which still aiflict and degrade the Catholic body ; they affect 
 every class and order of the Catholic community ; and there 
 never can be imagined a case, where it would be more reason- 
 able that many should be occupied in investigating the subject, 
 and removing difficulties which ignorance and prejudice throw 
 in the way of relief. The introduction of peers, and baronets, 
 and bishops into their Committee, has excited much pretended 
 alarm, and caused much animadversion. Can the Irish Govern- 
 ment be ignorant, that it has been the wish of every preceding 
 Government to treat with the peers and the bishops? It was 
 always considered as a mark of respect to the Castle, to have 
 these exalted personages blended with the Committee with 
 whom the Government were to treat. One would imagine 
 
SPEECHES. 273 
 
 it would be decisive upon this point to state, that a Catholic 
 Committee, similar to the one which has been in contem- 
 plation, and actually constituted upon the same principles, 
 did exist in the year 1793; that they treated with the Govern- 
 ment here; that they treated with the Ministers of England; 
 and that individuals of them were introduced to the King 
 himself. 
 
 Gentlemen, it would be a bitter reflection upon your cha- 
 racter, as Irishmen, to presume you to be hostile to the prin- 
 ciple or pursuit of these committees. Persuaded I am, that 
 whatever your religion may be, or your zeal for that religion, — 
 whatever your natural, manly, and constitutional hatred of 
 slavish principles, — whatever your predilection for your own 
 creed maybe, — there is not a man of you who docs not rejoice 
 at the blessings which have flowed from the breaking down of 
 the penal code. Some of you are old enough to remember this 
 country in a state of the lowest degradation. Haifa century 
 back it was so squalid and contemptible, that any stranger, 
 whom chance or curiosity brought to our shores, entered into 
 it with terror, and left it with disgust. No historian, or tour- 
 writer, named Ireland, but in terms of reproach. The code 
 which caused this lamentable condition has been broken in 
 upon by Protestant liberality, going hand in hand with Catho- 
 lic zeal. It was a code calculated to degrade the Catholics, 
 not merely to the state of the beasts of the field, but beneath 
 them ; to deprive them, not only of every natural and civil right, 
 but of everything that could embellish or improve the nature 
 of man. Every inlet of knowledge was closed against them. 
 No Roman Catholic would be taught even the rudiments of 
 learning, but upon the terms of abdicating his principles, and 
 surrendering his conscience, by renouncing his faith. Harsh 
 measures were adopted to keep their minds as grovelling 
 as their personal condition was abject. Not a ray of light 
 could approach them, except such pilfered literature as per- 
 
 T 
 
274 SPEECHES. 
 
 secutcd pedagogues could convey, or such barbarous philo- 
 sophy as could be supplied from foreign universities, under the 
 severest prohibitions ; as if ignorance were an antidote to super- 
 stition, as if the light of science would extinguish the light of 
 the Gospel. 
 
 Gentlemen, this code has been broken in upon, and is in 
 rapid progress to final extermination. Sorry would I be that 
 its course to destruction should be interrupted. If we look 
 back to the period when the restrictions were removed, we will 
 find that ill-founded apprehensions were entertained from the 
 change. Some foolishly imagined that the Constitution could 
 not bear the shock. But what was the consequence? Popula- 
 tion has been doubled within thirty years; property has been 
 increased more than ten-fold ; both are of course in almost geo- 
 metrical progression; their progress cannot be checked, except 
 by measures too horrible to contemplate. Cold must be the 
 heart, and shallow the head, which would not rather enlist 
 them in the service of the State, at a moment when no hand 
 can be spared, and no heart should be alienated. It is pre- 
 ferable to do an act of substantial justice promply than postpone 
 it to a period when its value must be diminished. The secu- 
 rity of the Constitution cannot be impaired, the protection of 
 the empire will be secured. 
 
 Excuse this digression. The early and ardent conviction 
 of my mind, that the fate of the empire and the Constitution 
 is vitally blended with this subject, forces me almost involun- 
 tarily to discuss it, when, perhaps, the discussion may not, in 
 strictness, be relevant. I return to the argument upon the Con- 
 vention Act. 
 
 Gentlemen of the Jury, — It is stated by the indictment, 
 upon which you are called upon, generally, to pronounce that 
 every proposition in it is true, that a representative assembly 
 was to be convened, under pretence of preparing a petition to 
 Parliament. The indictment would be bad, and we would 
 
SPEECHES. 275 
 
 demur to it, and thereby confess all the other allegations, if the 
 word pretence had been omitted, or the word purpose substi- 
 tuted. This we signified upon the former trial; yet, though 
 the Crown lawyers have amended the indictment since, they 
 have not dared to make this amendment. Yet they contend that 
 pretence in the Act and in the indictment means purpose, whe- 
 ther true or false ; and they require you to find a general verdict, 
 which would imply that petitioning was a pretence, although 
 in your consciences you should believe that it was the bond 
 fide purpose, and the only purpose, for which a Committee was 
 formed. They will not even consent that you should find a 
 special verdict, lest you should find the purpose not to be 
 false, although they pretend that it is indifferent whether it be 
 true or false. This is the conduct of those who so liberally 
 lling around them the imputation of shuffling and want of can- 
 dour. 
 
 Gentlemen, this is an Act promulgated to the public in the 
 English language ; the public are bound to construe and to 
 obey it, at the peril of heavy punishment. I always under- 
 stood that words in common use are to be construed, in penal 
 Statutes, according to common acceptation. If it were other- 
 wise, laws would not be rules for conduct, but snares for punish- 
 ment. I would ask any man accustomed to read the English 
 language, whether, in ninety-nine places out of one hundred, 
 where the word 2)retence occurs, it does not imply falsehood or 
 concealment, a suppressio veri or snggestio falsi. If a person 
 were to say, " it is a pretence, a mere pretence," would any 
 man hesitate to understand him to mean a falsehood, not a real 
 and true purpose ? If a Roman Catholic were told, " he was 
 pretending to petition," or, " that he used petitioning for a pre- 
 tence," would any man doubt that falsehood would be thereby 
 imputed to him ? If he answered, " that he was not pretend- 
 ing," or "that it was not a pretence," would he not be considered 
 as disclaiming any concealed purpose ? If he swore to such 
 
 t 2 
 
27G SPEECHES. 
 
 reply, in any case attached in Court, would he not be convicted 
 of perjury, if it could be proved that he had another object in 
 view than that avowed ? Pretence sometimes, and but rarely, 
 signifies claim of property, or right; and when used in that 
 rare sense, it imports a claim, real or false, as claim always does. 
 But I do say, in its general vernacular meaning, when it is not 
 used to denote claim, it uniformly imports either a suggestio 
 falsi or suppressio ver't. This is not denied by the Attorney 
 or Solicitor-General. It is admitted that the word pretence, 
 in the Statute, must convey the meaning I have given it to 
 every mind but that of a lawyer or a judge. But it is con- 
 tended that the word pretence has a technical meaning, to be 
 found in the repositories of legal learning, quite different from 
 its ordinary and obvious meaning. What is the amount of all 
 this? The subject is bound to know the law, and obey the 
 law. Ignorance will not excuse him, misconstruction will not 
 excuse him ; heavy penalties await his disobedience. Yet the 
 law is so written, that the Avhole community must understand 
 it in one sense, and the Judges must administer and apply it in 
 another; and that a jury must condemn a man, and consign 
 him to heavy punishment, for giving the law the very same 
 construction which every juror would himself give it. Sorry 
 should I be that any foreign lawyer, amongst those whose 
 systems of jurisprudence, and administration of justice, we 
 hold in such contempt, should be present to witness such doc- 
 trine and such conduct; what would he think of our boasted 
 trial by jury? What would he conceive to be our notion of 
 the promulgation of our laws? Is not this an improvement 
 upon the sanguinary expedient of the execrable tyrant, who 
 used to write his laws in such small characters, and post them 
 up in such high places, that his subjects could not know them, 
 and, therefore, might afford a cruel nature constant means of 
 gratification, constant opportunities of punishment? Is not no 
 promulgation preferable to a promulgation calculated to mis- 
 
speeches. 277 
 
 lead ? Would it not be better to seal up the statute-book, or 
 publish our laws in a dead or an unknown language, rather 
 than publish them in a language calculated to delude and de- 
 ceive. 
 
 But, my Lords, and Gentlemen of the Jury, I trust no such 
 principle of exposition will be recommended from the Bench, 
 or adopted by the jury. The word pretence is not a word of 
 technical import, and your Lordships will tell the jury that 
 they ought to understand it in the sense in which any man of 
 good understanding must take it, in the Statute in which it 
 occurs. This, every man who hears me feels to be common 
 sense, and certain I am it will be decided here, or elsewhere, 
 to be common law. 
 
 To support their assertion, that jyi'ctence must \r\aan purpose, 
 true or false, the Crown lawyers have cited three Statutes, all 
 plainly distinguishable from this case, and surely not warrant- 
 ing the revolting inference that the term had acquired, by legal 
 use, a legal meaning, contrary to its obvious and vernacular 
 meaning, in a new and criminal law. 
 
 In the Act made to punish the procuring money or goods 
 upon false pretences, they infer, from the use of the epithet, that 
 the principal word would not imply it. If pretence implied false- 
 hood , why introd uce the epithet/a/se ? This is easily answered : 
 murder always implies malice, perjury always implies false- 
 hood and corruption ; yet malicious murder, and wilful and cor- 
 rupt perjury, are in daily use, and occur even in legal pleading. 
 Again : " Pretence" manifestly means claim, in that Statute, the 
 class of meaning in which no man can think it was used in the 
 Convention Act. Again: suppose the word false were omitted 
 in that Statute, still it would be supplied in construction, or it 
 would follow, that a man might be transported for demanding 
 or obtaining his own money, his own goods, without any false- 
 hood, or any fraud. 
 
 The Statute of Henry the Eighth, in England, and of 
 
278 SPEECHES- 
 
 Charles the First, in Ireland, to provide against the sale of pre- 
 tenced rights or titles, by persons not in possession., is equally in- 
 applicable as the former. In this Statute, pretenced manifestly 
 means claimed, and it has been conceded, without any detri- 
 ment to my argument, that where pretence means claim, the 
 claim may be well or ill founded. It would be childish to 
 argue seriously that pretence does not mean claim in the Con- 
 vention Act; no man can imagine it. 
 
 The Statute of Charles the Second, against tumultuous peti- 
 tioning, is equally distinguishable from the present. In that 
 Statute, pretence is construed to extend to all cases, because 
 the pretence must be false, from the very nature of the subject. 
 It never can be deemed necessary, that a number of persons 
 should accompany the presenting a petition to the King or to 
 Parliament, and to allege any such necessity must be false; but 
 it has been already sufficiently argued and illustrated, that dele- 
 gation may not only be useful, in preparing a petition, but, in 
 fact, in many instances, a petition could never be prepared, 
 without the aid and intervention of some species of delegation. 
 And this leads me to the last section of the Act, by which it 
 is enacted, " provided that nothing herein 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." 
 
 Is it not manifest, that this clause, connected with the word 
 pretence in the first section, jointly import that delegation, 
 when it is resorted to as a pretence for petitioning, is illegal; 
 but when it is really used to promote the real object of petition- 
 ing, is authorized. It looks as if the framers of the law antici- 
 pated the misconstruction now contended for, and formed this 
 provision for the very purpose of obviating it. This proviso, 
 surely, was not introduced to save the right of petitioning by 
 individuals, acting by themselves, and for themselves alone. 
 
SPEECHES. 279 
 
 No man asserts that such right was touched by the law, there- 
 fore it was unnecessary to save it. But the object being to re- 
 strain delegation, Avhen it might, and probably would lead to 
 public mischief, without preventing the use of it, when the ob- 
 ject of petitioning might be assisted by its use, the proviso was 
 framed to secure the latter object. Words could not be ima- 
 gined more calculated for this end, — " Nothing in the Act shall 
 impede the right." Is not the right impeded, if facilities in the 
 exercise of it be removed? Does not delegation, in many in- 
 stances, furnish such facilities? Does it not in this case pecu- 
 liarly? If this be denied, leave it to the jury. Let them 
 decide whether the Roman Catholics of Ireland resorted to a 
 Cunmittce, as a useful and necessary organ and instrument in 
 the process of petitioning, or whether this was a pretence to 
 ccver some other design. This is all we ask, but the Attorney- 
 Ganeral will not submit to the hazard of such an issue. He 
 cills upon the Court to pronounce all delegation for public pur- 
 poses, of every kind and degree, to be illegal; and he requires the 
 jury to sanction this doctrine by a general verdict, and inter- 
 cept the subject's right of appeal. 1 acknowledge that his 
 attack upon the privilege, in this respect, is not confined to 
 Roman Catholics, but that it impartially extends to deprive all 
 His Majesty's subjects, here and in England (for it is a declara- 
 tory law), of the best mode of exercising their best privilege. 
 
 My Lords, and Gentlemen of the Jury, can this be wise? 
 Can this be safe? Is it wise to suppress the committee and 
 convene the populace? Is it wise to call into activity aggre- 
 gate meetings, in every county in Ireland? Is it wise that the 
 people should assemble to discuss every particular of their in- 
 teresting and complicated case, whenever any doubt or diffi- 
 culty should arise upon it? Where shall they assemble? What 
 common in Ireland will be sufficient to contain them? Would 
 the Curragh of Kildare be sufficiently ample? Would the Irish 
 Secretary wish to hear the chorus of millions of voices urging 
 
280 SPEECHES. 
 
 complaint, and claiming redress? Is this the alternative His 
 Majesty's Government in Ireland seeks to promote? It may 
 be said, there is another alternative, — total abandonment of the 
 pursuit, silence, despair. Oh infatuated Minister, if such would 
 be the victory of which you would boast ! — if such would be 
 the tranquillity which you seek to achieve ! To such delusive 
 and foreboding silence, my vulgar taste would prefer the loud- 
 est and most discordant clamour. I would rather see the festi- 
 vity of the Castle interrupted daily by such clamour, than learn 
 that the Roman Catholic body of Ireland, in hopeless despond- 
 ency, had relinquished the constitutional pursuit of an object 
 so near to their hearts, and in which they are so powerfully 
 aided by the sympathy of their Protestant brethren. This is 
 a victory which the Irish Secretary cannot achieve. This is 
 an effectjWhichjhe cannot produce. The Roman Catholics of 
 Ireland have no other object of pursuit, and therefore they will 
 persevere. 
 
 Gentlemen, much has been stated respecting the conduct 
 of the Roman Catholic body, and particularly of Lord Fingall, 
 in resisting the law of the land. Gentlemen, that high and 
 distinguished man deserves other and better treatment. The 
 tongue of slander never before assailed him. The slightest im- 
 putation was never cast upon his loyalty, until the rude hand 
 of power scrawled a charge of sedition against him, upon the 
 records of this Court; a charge which no grand jury in the 
 land would have found, and which a petit jury will soon obli- 
 terate. Imputations have been thrown upon him, because there 
 was not an instant compliance with what was pronounced to be 
 the law, by this Court, upon the former trial. I scarcely think 
 it necessary to enter into a justification of that noble and loyal 
 personage. His past life, so well known, should have pro- 
 tected him. His services to his country and his king ought to 
 have been a shield of adamant against such a profanation of 
 his unspotted fame. But, in the name of candour, how does 
 
SPEECHES. 281 
 
 the matter stand? A proclamation issued, and lie did not bow 
 his neck to the mandate of the Secretary. His Lordship was 
 told by high legal authorities in both countries, that the law 
 supported a mode of petitioning which had been exercised for 
 years; his Lordship was not bound to believe that a proclama- 
 tion made law. He had a respect for it, but he sought for an 
 opportunity of ascertaining whether those who had framed the 
 proclamation had not mistaken the law, and he would have 
 betrayed, not only his Catholic, but his Protestant brethren, if 
 he had not put the question into a course of temperate investi- 
 gation. Has he acted intemperately in the mode of seeking 
 this investigation ? We have always been ready to confess the 
 facts upon the record. This was refused by the Crown law- 
 yers. Is it contumacy or treason to doubt their infallibility? 
 They forced on the trial of Doctor Sheridan, and the verdict 
 of twelve men found him not guilty. In a case as clear as the 
 present is said to be, that jury have virtually given their opinion, 
 that they would have done the act themselves. But they added 
 that the evidence was insufficient. I say the whole of my argu- 
 ment goes to that, for I contend, that, believing every thing 
 which the witnesses have said, the evidence is insufficient to 
 establish criminality within the Statute. Did the jury say that 
 they did not believe the witnesses? Will this be contended 
 by the Attorney-General, who demands your verdict now upon 
 the same evidence ? But the Court had declared the law, and 
 Lord Fingall ought to have submitted. No doubt, your Lord- 
 ship, upon a single argument, did deliver an opinion upon a 
 question of the first impression and consequence, deeply affect- 
 ing the rights of the subject, and from which his Lordship 
 well knew that many distinguished men differed. His Lord- 
 ship was advised, that nothing but the high respect which every 
 man must entertain for the opinion of a Court of Justice, dimi- 
 nished the confidence which was entertained, that an appellant 
 Court would give the law a different construction. Was he 
 
282 SPEECHES. 
 
 bound, under such circumstances, and with a verdict in his 
 favour, to relinquish the people, and their accustomed privi- 
 leges? Was he not called upon, by his duty to the public, 
 and to the laws themselves, so to act, that it might be decided, 
 without tumult or disorder, whether the Castle would submit 
 to the verdict, or, by interrupting the meeting at which he was 
 about to preside, supply him with means, by a bill of exceptions 
 in a civil action, which could not be denied to him if the Court 
 should differ from him, of bringing the question before the 
 dernier ressort ? He now meets the censure of the Attorney- 
 General. But, if he had acted otherwise, he would have en- 
 countered and deserved the contempt of his brethren, and the 
 reprobation of posterity. Well, the Committee does assemble. 
 That terriific body is encountered and dispersed by a single 
 peace officer. The constable's staff is held in reverence by 
 men, every one of whom believed he was acting illegally. 
 Lord Fingall is taken by the shoulder, he submits to the in- 
 dignity; although the petition would have been voted in ten 
 minutes, and the Committee dissolved, perhaps never to meet 
 again, there is no resistance or delay, — no inflammatory word 
 is uttered. The magic of a constable's staff at once stops every 
 proceeding, and silences every tongue. But in submitting to 
 this pollution something is gained, — something which the un- 
 candid conduct of the prosecutors, in refusing a special verdict, 
 has perhaps rendered necessary. Lord Fingall has purchased, 
 by the indignity, a right, of which he cannot be debarred by 
 power or by influence, of bringing the great question before 
 the dernier ressort. 
 
 Much has been said and insinuated against the former jury, 
 with all the waste of character in culling and selecting them. 
 Though so many respectable men were set aside and affronted, 
 to arrive at the men upon whom the Castle could rely, still 
 a refractory verdict was found, and you are called upon to 
 stigmatize that verdict, and, in effect, to attaint that jury. 
 
SPEECHES. 283 
 
 Gentlemen, if you have the i'eeling of Irishmen, — if you prefer 
 harmony to discord, — if you wish to see the country united and 
 unconquerable — you cannot feel prejudice against that verdict, 
 or any ambition to contrast yourselves with that jury. So salu- 
 tary, so healing a verdict never was pronounced. It tranquil- 
 lized the agonized emotions of the country in every quarter. 
 The glad tidings travelled to the extremities of Ireland with 
 the velocity of sound, impelled on the wings of the wind by 
 the acclamations of joy. In the capital all was harmony and 
 delight ; kindly affections softened every countenance, and 
 beamed in every eye. Protestant and Roman Catholic met 
 each other in the street, like affectionate brothers after a long 
 absence or a reconciled estrangement. The whole city of Dub- 
 lin appeared like one happy and united family. A foreigner, 
 ignorant of the language, who should walk the streets the 
 morning after the verdict was pronounced, could read in the 
 countenances of the people some happy event, some national 
 blessing. He must have the feelings of a demon who did not 
 enjoy this heart-moving spectacle. 
 
 Gentlemen of the Jury, I call upon you to respect that ver- 
 dict, — to respect the laudable pursuit of your fellow-citizens, 
 even though they differ from you in religion, — to respect the 
 high privilege of petitioning, which is at hazard; I call upon 
 you to acquit the traverser, if you believe, as you must believe, 
 that the only pursuit of the Roman Catholics was constitu- 
 tional emancipation ; and that their only motive in forming a 
 committee was to prepare a petition, and promote its success 
 by peaceable and constitutional means. If the Court shall con- 
 tinue to overrule my argument, and to decide that any species 
 of delegation for public purposes is illegal, and if you feel that 
 you are bound not to differ from the Court upon the law, then, 
 and in that case, I call upon you to find a special verdict, and 
 to leave it to the Court to draw the conclusion of law, and 
 pronounce the sentence of Guilty. You are told that you can- 
 
284 SPEECHES. 
 
 not understand the law, and have no jurisdiction to pronounce 
 it. Why then should you pronounce it? If you pronounce 
 upon the facts, there can be no failure of justice. The Court, 
 who are the organ of the law, will pronounce the judgment. 
 If judgment he pronounced in this way, your fellow-citizens 
 may appeal, the Catholic body may appeal. You have a right 
 to do this without any consent from the Attorney-General, — 
 without any consent from any quarter: the Court will tell 
 you that you have. Am I seeking, in urging this, to mis- 
 lead you? Am I exciting a war of jurisdictions ? Manifestly 
 the very contrary ; I am struggling to keep the jurisdictions 
 distinct. I do not call upon you, if your consciences at all in- 
 terfere, to assume to be the organ of the law ; but I am express- 
 in^ a hope, a reliance, that your consciences will interfere in 
 preventing you from becoming instruments of the Castle. You 
 can have no wish, by a general verdict, to obstruct the avenues 
 to the Court of Appeal. You ought not to gratify the At- 
 torney-General, high and respectable as he is, by screening the 
 opinion and advice he has given from constitutional revision, 
 and, if they deserve it, animadversion. No delay can arise from 
 thus placing the question in a train of final decision, and the 
 more so, as I am persuaded that punishment is not the object 
 of this prosecution. When the law shall be decided, the Ca- 
 tholics of Ireland will submit, however repugnant such decision 
 may be to their feelings and reason. They have been trained 
 to a patient submission to laws, of which no fair man could 
 approve. They never have, as a body, committed any act of 
 violence or intemperance. Even in the pursuit of that consti- 
 tutional liberty which they idolize, though they have been 
 zealous, they have not been intemperate. But if they had 
 somewhat exceeded, — if, in the ardour of pursuit of an object 
 so interesting, they had somewhat transgressed the boundaries 
 of frigid decorum, — such feelings ought to be rather hailed as 
 a qualifying indication than criticized with severity ; we ought 
 
SPEECHES. 285 
 
 to apply to tliein, and to their pursuit, the language and senti- 
 ment of the Roman historian: " Id demumsenseo, qui pro liber- 
 tate ? tarn acriler contenderimt, dignos esse, qui Romani fiant." 
 
 IN THE CASE OF THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE 
 JOHNSON.* 
 
 My Lords, — To justify this arrest, and to warrant your Lord- 
 ships to remand, an Act of Parliament, of the last sessions is 
 resorted to. If that Act of Parliament must be so construed, 
 abhorrent as such construction must be from the principles of 
 
 * On the 18th January, 180. r >, Mr. Justice Johnson was arrested at his own house 
 in the County of Dublin, under a warrant signed " Ellenborough," upon the charge of 
 having procured the publication, in London, of several slanderous libels against the 
 Government of Ireland, against the person of His Excellency Lord Hardwicke, the 
 Lord Lieutenant; Lord Bedesdale, the Lord Chancellor; and Mr. Justice Osborne, one 
 of the Justices of the Court of King's Rench. The warrant was endorsed by J. Bell, 
 a magistrate of the County of Dublin, and said to be so endorsed pursuant to the Sta- 
 tute 44 Geo. III. cap. 92, it being the first attempt to carry this Act into execution. 
 On the same evening a writ of habeas corpus, at common law, was sued out, return- 
 able immediate before the Chief Justice, who ordered the parties to attend, and the 
 return to be made on the next morning. The Chief Justice was assisted by seven 
 other Judges ; three, out of the eight Judges, were of opinion that Mr. Justice Johnson 
 should be remanded, three that he should be discharged, two declining to give any 
 opinion. The further consideration of this important case was, therefore, adjourned 
 to the Court of King's Bench ; there it was again argued, the Court was again divided, 
 though a majority (one of the Judges being absent) were of opinion that Mr. Justice 
 Johnson should be remanded : a new writ of habeas corpus was therefore sued out, re- 
 turnable into the Court of Exchequer. A majority of the Barons agreeing with the 
 Court of King's Bench, the prisoner was remanded. The question at issue was simply 
 
 this : A party arrested in Dublin sues out his habeas corpus. The return shows him 
 
 to stand charged with a merely bailable offence, and the Act under which the writ was 
 issued directs that bail shall be received. But Counsel for the Crown produce the 44th 
 of the King, and say : " You cannot be discharged on bail here, where you have been 
 apprehended; you must go to England in close custody, there to appear and plead, and 
 possibly (but very improbably) bo bailed." 
 
286 SPEECHES. 
 
 our laws and Constitution, the Legislature must be obeyed, 
 and we cannot be suffered to take refuge in judicial mis- 
 construction from the mandates of the supreme power of the 
 State. 
 
 Whether the Legislature has so clearly and unequivocally 
 expressed its will as to preclude all judicial interpretation in 
 favour of pre-existing rights of the most sacred kind, is now to 
 be argued and decided. What is the proposition which, in 
 order to justify this arrest, it is admitted must be received as 
 the perpetual law of those realms, enacted by this Statute? I 
 say perpetual; because, as the Act is not limited in duration, 
 this Court never can make the possible correction of it in future 
 any ground of their construction; and you must decide whe- 
 ther the Legislature intended that its subjects should exist for 
 ever under such a rule. The proposition contended for is: 
 " That whenever any man, of any rank, however low, shall ob- 
 tain a warrant from any magistrate, for any misdemeanor, 
 however petty, against any man, however high, he may cause 
 him to be arrested in any extremity of the United Kingdom, 
 and to be transmitted, at the public expense, without a right of 
 being bailed, to the kingdom where the offence is charged to 
 be committed, even though such person never had been for one 
 moment in the kingdom to which lie has been transmitted." 
 Such a proposition startles every man who hears it. The pecu- 
 liar hardship of my client's case is merged in the public mis- 
 chief, and I will not weaken his claim to a constitutional 
 interpretation of this Act, by dwelling upon his peculiar situa- 
 tion. It is equally his wish and his interest that this Act 
 should be discussed upon general grounds ; and, in respect of 
 him personally, I shall only say that, in rejecting the Attorney- 
 General's offer to waive the operation of the law in respect of 
 him, and accept of bail, he acted as became the subject of a 
 free State; and, if he had compromised this question, and sub- 
 mitted to a violent and unconstitutional interpretation of this 
 
SPEECHES. 287 
 
 law, in return Cor personal indulgence, he would bavc disgraced 
 his character as a Judge, and ought to be stigmatized. 
 
 In arguing this question, I will, in limine, admit that the 
 obvious and primary (I do not say necessary) meaning of the 
 enacting words establishes such a rule. The enacting words 
 arc sufficiently comprehensive to include my client's case, and 
 every case which I have stated ; and unless there be passages 
 in the Act Avhich, according to the rules of judicial construc- 
 tion, may explain and limit the extent of these words, my client 
 must be remanded. I admit, also, that the enacting words of a 
 law are not necessarily restrained by the title or preamble; but 
 that, on the contrary, the enacting words may extend to many 
 cases not mentioned in cither title or preamble ; and that judicial 
 interpretation, in pursuit ofthemanifestintentof the Legislature, 
 may extend a law to cases not strictly or literally within title, 
 preamble, or enacting words. I am so far from denying this, 
 that I conceive that the principal strength of my client's case 
 depends upon its admission ; because I mean to argue that, 
 from the whole of the Act, accurately examined and collated, 
 you never can say that it was the will of the Legislature that 
 such a rule should be established ; and it is not my interest, 
 nor am I warranted, to fetter judicial interpretation within 
 narrow and irrational limits. Upon two grounds I contend 
 that the Act does not embrace this case. First, I say, " That, as 
 to the transmission of persons from kingdom to kingdom, it 
 ought to be limited to persons charged with offences not bail- 
 able." Secondly, " That it only extends to persons who, having 
 committed an offence in any place where they were personally 
 present, have ceased in any way to continue within the juris- 
 diction where the offence was actually committed." Mr. Jus- 
 tice Johnson is only accused of a misdemeanor which is bail- 
 able ; and I have a right to assume (it being disclosed by 
 affidavit, and not contradicting the return), that he was in the 
 kingdom of Ireland when the alleged libel was published, by 
 
288 SPEECHES. 
 
 his procurement, in England, and ever since ; consequently, if 
 I establish either ground, he must be discharged. In constru- 
 ing this Act I am not ashamed to refer you to an elementary 
 book; and to a part of that book at which a diligent student 
 might arrive in the first day of his legal studies. The rules 
 or signs, as he terms it, by which the will of the Legislature 
 may be best explained in Acts of Parliament, are nowhere 
 laid down with more judgment and clearness than in 1 Black. 
 Com. page 59. These signs, according to that elegant and 
 luminous writer, are, 1st, The Words; 2nd, The Context; 3rd, 
 The Subject Matter; 4th, The Effects, or Consequences; 5th, 
 The Spirit and Reason of the Law. I have already admitted 
 that the first impression of the mere enacting words would 
 make against my argument; but if I succeed in proving that, 
 upon the whole four latter grounds of interpretation, they are 
 struggling on the other side against the will of the Legislature, 
 as well as against the will of the subject, you will, no doubt, 
 discharge him. Apply these principles to my first objection. 
 The Legislature manifestly makes a distinction between the 
 objects of the Acts in the arrest and transmission of offenders 
 from kingdom to kingdom, and from county to county within 
 the same kingdom. If no distinction was intended, the whole 
 object of the Legislature would be accomplished by the first 
 section, by merely substituting the words " United Kingdom" 
 for " Ireland," whenever the latter term occurs ; and the third 
 and fourth section would not only be superfluous, but the law 
 would be uniform, and free from the objections to which it is 
 admitted by the other side to be liable, and which, it is said, 
 loill be remedied by the Legislature. Upon the other side it 
 is admitted that a distinction is made. What is the distinction 
 according to their interpretation, and what according to our's ; 
 and let me ask you, in the first place, which is most probable 
 to have been the intention of the Legislature? They say that, 
 as between kingdom and kingdom every class of offenders is 
 
speeches. 28!) 
 
 included, as well as between county and county of the same king- 
 dom ; but that persons arrested in one kingdom, for bailable 
 offences committed in another, cannot be bailed, though as be- 
 tween county and county they may. We say that, as between 
 kingdom and kingdom, the law only acts upon offences not 
 bailable; that, therefore, the objects of the law cannot be bailed. 
 Their distinction repeals the Habeas Corpus Acts of both coun- 
 tries ; our's conforms to them : their distinction respects their right 
 of being bailed when its violation would be comparatively un- 
 oppressive, and annihilates it when it is most necessary. Accord- 
 ing to their distinction, we must suppose that the Legislature, 
 when, in the first section, they are providing for the arrest of 
 a person accused of a misdemeanor in an adjoining county, 
 are so tender of liberty as to provide that he shall be bailable 
 upon the very spot where he is arrested; but that, in the third 
 and fourth sections, they lose sight of every pre-existing right 
 and valuable personal privilege, and empower the transmission 
 of the same class of offenders from kingdom to kingdom, with- 
 out a right of being bailed; and that they have distinguished 
 the cases for the sole purpose of making this preposterous and' 
 inverted distinction. If it be said that the law would be im- 
 perfect if it did not act upon inferior offenders, as well be- 
 tween kingdom and kingdom as between county and county, 
 I answer, that it is a vain hope to frame any law which will 
 not be, in some particular, defective ; and that to exclude all 
 inferior offences would, upon the whole, be more practically 
 wise than to include them all ; inasmuch as the safety and peace 
 of each distinct kingdom might be considered as sufficiently 
 provided for by the pursuit and bringing back to punishment 
 of daring and dangerous criminals, while the flight and banish- 
 ment of inferior offenders, who would still be punished if they 
 should ever come within the jurisdiction, might be deemed suf- 
 ficient. I shall now proceed to show how the context of this 
 Act bears upon and establishes my distinction, but I shall first 
 
 u 
 
290 SPEECHES. 
 
 state how the law before this Act stood in relation to the arrest 
 and transmission of offenders from kingdom to kingdom. First, 
 no man could be legally arrested for any misdemeanor com- 
 mitted in another kingdom, consequently he could not be 
 legally transmitted. The case was entirely unprovided for, 
 and, perhaps, in wisdom, should ever remain so. In respect of 
 felons and traitors, the practice, and perhaps the law, was dif- 
 ferent. There existed a practice, founded upon the ancient pre- 
 rogative of the Crown, of arresting high offenders, accused of 
 offences not bailable, and transmitting them for trial from 
 kingdom to kingdom, and this usage was recognised and sanc- 
 tioned by the Habeas Corpus Act in England. The arrest was 
 always under a Secretary of State's warrant, and the prisoner 
 was transmitted by a King's messenger. No ordinary magis- 
 trate ever did or could grant such a warrant. It was a mere 
 State proceeding, optional on the part of the Crown, and the 
 authority was local and limited. That in respect of the arrest 
 and transmission of higher offenders there was some, but an 
 insufficient remedy ; in respect of inferior offenders none. 
 
 The pre-existing law being as I have stated, strongly illus- 
 trates the inference I derive from the preamble and context of 
 the Act ; and the object, spirit, and policy of the Act, and the 
 consequences of the different interpretations, in my opinion, 
 remove all doubt upon the subject. The preamble of the first 
 section, which establishes the law as between county and 
 county, recites, "Whereas it frequently happens, that persons 
 against whom warrants are granted by, &c., &c, escape into 
 other counties, &c. &c." Nothing can be more comprehensive 
 than the description of the objects of this Act mentioned here, 
 and in every part of this section. There is not a syllable to 
 restrain their generality. The description, both in the preamble 
 and enacting part, is precisely the same. The context con- 
 spires with the enacting words, and the spirit and reason of the 
 law are answered by a literal and comprehensive construction ; 
 
SPEECHES. 291 
 
 no bad effects can follow from it; no grand constitutional law 
 is indirectly repealed; no vital principle of personal liberty is 
 sacrificed. The letter, context, object, spirit, and policy of the 
 law are the same; and the Legislature, having, unquestion- 
 ably, intended to extend its provisions to misdemeanors, have 
 provided that the liberty of the subject should not be sacrificed, 
 and they have enacted a right of being bailed in bailable 
 offences, commensurate with the new power of arrest which 
 they have introduced. 
 
 Look now to the preamble, and examine the context of 
 sections 3 and 4, which provide for cases, between kingdom 
 and kingdom. How arc the objects of these sections de- 
 scribed? " And whereas it frequently happens, that felons and 
 other malefactors, in that part of the United Kingdom, called 
 Ireland, make their escape into that part of the United Kingdom 
 called Great Britain." Is it a violation of our language to say, 
 that these words import the higher and more enormous offen- 
 ders? If it be said that the term " malefactors" may be used 
 to designate any offenders, is it no answer to state that that 
 term is generally used to denote the higher offenders; that 
 "felons and other malefactors," according to the rules of con- 
 struction, mean malefactors of a like kind; and that if "male- 
 factors" be interpreted as comprehending all offenders, the word 
 " felons" may be rejected as surplusage ? But examine the con- 
 text further, in order to discover who are the objects of this 
 part of the Act: "Whereby these offences often remain un- 
 punished, there being no sufficient provision by the laws now 
 in force for apprehending such offenders, and transmitting them, 
 &c. &c." Is it not manifest from these words, that the offen- 
 ders within the contemplation of the Legislature are felons 
 and other malefactors, in respect of whom there pre-existed 
 some, but an imperfect provision by law, as to arrest and trans- 
 mission? In respect of inferior offenders, there pre-existed no 
 
 u 2 
 
292 .SPEECHES. 
 
 provision at all. In respect of the higher order of criminals, 
 there pre-existed an imperfect and insufficient provision. Does 
 it not follow that the Legislature most clearly meant to extend 
 the provision of these distinct sections to the latter description 
 of offenders, and not to the former? 
 
 But, it is said, the enacting words are universal, and not to 
 be restrained by the preamble. I admit they are not necessa- 
 rily to be restrained ; but I contend, that when the context, the 
 subject matter of the law, the effects and consequences of the 
 different constructions, and the spirit and reason of the law, all 
 (as in this case) conspire to limit the generality of the enacting 
 words, all those latter guides conjointly ought to govern. The 
 enacting words certainly are very general: "If any person^or 
 persons against whom a warrant shall be issued, &c. &c, for 
 any crime or offense against the laws in force inlreland, &c. &c." 
 If this description in the enacting part stood alone and unex- 
 plained by other words and by the context, a word could not 
 be said in support of my construction ; but I contend that it 
 is not unreasonable or unprecedented, in pursuit of the intention 
 of the Legislature, to construe " any person" to mean " any 
 such person as was before described;" and the words "for any 
 crime or offence against the laws," to mean "any such crime 
 or offence as was before described." By the Whiteboy Act, a 
 number of offences are made capital by words totally unlimited, 
 and by distinct sections. Innumerable instances have occur- 
 red of cases which have fallen manifestly within the enacting 
 words; yet the Judges have looked at the title, the preamble, 
 and the recitals of that Act, for its object, and have never con- 
 sidered any case within it, unless proof was previously made 
 that the particular county, where the question arose, was in 
 that rebellious, riotous state, which gave rise to the severe pro- 
 visions. Upon a similar principle was Ranwick William's 
 case decided, by which a monstrous offender, clearly within the 
 
SPEECHES. 293 
 
 letter of the law, was acquitted, because his case did not fall 
 within the evil intended to be remedied by the law under 
 which he was tried. 
 
 It has been argued, that by the 13 Geo. III., in the British 
 Parliament, a similar law was enacted as between England and 
 Scotland, with almost the same recitals and enacting words, 
 and that that Act extends to all misdemeanors, although no 
 provision is made for bail. I say that, if these two Acts be 
 collated, important differences will be found between them. 
 But it is unnecessary to waste time in this inquiry, because the 
 whole gist of the observation is assumed without any proof. 
 No single case has been adduced by which the 13 Geo. HI. 
 has been construed to extend to misdemeanors; and I say, 
 that it is more probable that such an extension of that law was 
 never attempted, than that it was constantly and universally 
 acquiesced in. Can it be credited, that where a Judge of the 
 land has construed the law not to extend to misdemeanors, 
 and where there is at least so much doubt upon the subject, 
 that no Englishman or Scotchman, jealous of his rights and 
 struggling for his liberty, would have taken the opinion of a 
 court of justice upon the subject? Such a supposition is un- 
 natural in the extreme ; and we ought rather to presume that 
 no Englishman or Scotchman was ever transmitted out of their 
 respective kingdoms for a misdemeanor under this Act. 
 
 It appears by this return, that the Court of King's Bench 
 have construed this Act against my argument. It cannot be 
 contended upon the other side, that this determination is bind- 
 ing upon you ; and I will not deny that it is a formidable pre- 
 cedent. It is, however, but the determination of a divided 
 Court, from which also one Judge was absent: and, in a new 
 case like tlxis, when the most valuable rights of the subjects of 
 the whole empire are involved, I should hope that your Lord- 
 ships will attend more to the argument than the authority. I 
 have a high respect for that Court: for the amiable and dig- 
 
294 SPEECHES. 
 
 nified person who presides in it, I feel more than respect. 1 
 met him with an early and instantaneous predilection, which 
 has ripened into habitual and almost involuntary esteem and 
 veneration. I could not if I would, I would not if I could, 
 detract from the weight of his authority by disparaging re- 
 flections. I shall not wound his feelings by praise, or the 
 feelings of others by censure. I shall only say (what the oc- 
 casion extorts), that if I were to look for any imperfection in 
 his character, I must search for it in the excess of some noble 
 and virtuous propensity, some amiable or admirable quality of 
 the head or the heart. I would say, that he has, perhaps, too 
 much of a quality of what most other men have too little ; you 
 perceive I mean that intellectual humility, that modesty of 
 mind, without which wisdom cannot exist, and even genius 
 loses much of its lustre. To the predominance of this quality, 
 I would, perhaps, ascribe this judgment; and I would add, 
 that, upon such a subject as this, he would be more liable to err 
 than upon any other. When the construction called for might 
 appear to be an extension of jurisdiction, an interference with 
 the functions of the Legislature, a sort of constructive legislation, 
 I should fear that the modesty of his nature might, perhaps, too 
 much control the suggestions of his powerful and comprehensive 
 understanding. But certain I am, that if you shall differ from 
 him, he will rejoice that the liberty of the subject has survived 
 this Act, and will fuel more gratified than rebuked. 
 
 Upon the second objection, namely, " that this Act only 
 applies to persons who, by change of place in any way occur- 
 ring, have ceased to continue in the jurisdiction where the of- 
 fence was committed," the case of my client is still stronger, 
 because his case does not fall within the necessary and obvious 
 meaning of the enacting words, and the context, object, spirit, 
 and meaning of the Legislature; and the consequences of the 
 construction contended for on the other side are still more 
 powerful in excluding his case under this head of objection 
 
SPEECHES. 295 
 
 than under the former. It has been, I think, incorrectly said, 
 though by high authority, that the object of this Act being to 
 prevent impunity in general, the recital of one mode by which 
 impunity is obtained, ought not, in any degree, to control the 
 extension of the remedy to other modes by which justice may 
 be eluded. Most manifestly the Act has no such comprehen- 
 sive object, as to correct every abuse by which impunity for 
 crimes might be procured. Many modes of eluding justice 
 may exist, and are in daily practice, to which the Legislature 
 had not the slightest notion of applying its provisions. Every 
 line of this Act shows that the sole object of the law, and of 
 those laws which it nearly copies, was to prevent the evasion 
 of justice by a removal out of the jurisdiction. 
 
 The 23 Geo. II. c. 5G, s. 11, in Great Britain, was the first 
 Act upon the subject. The preamble and enacting words of 
 this section are confined to persons escaping out of the juris- 
 diction " after a warrant issued to apprehend," and no provision 
 is made for bail in bailable offences. It was obvious that the 
 Act should have comprehended persons escaping out of the 
 jurisdiction before the issuing of the warrant, and residing or 
 being elsewhere. Accordingly, the 24 Geo. II. c. 55, after 
 reciting this section, proceeds: " And whereas such offenders 
 may reside or be in some other county, &c., out of the juris- 
 diction of the justice granting such warrant as aforesaid, 
 before the granting such warrant, and without escaping or 
 going out of the county, &c, after such warrant granted." 
 Now it is plain that the words, " without escaping after such 
 warrant granted," import that the persons in contemplation 
 have escaped before warrant granted. Such construction is 
 agreeable to the ordinary rules of interpreting language, and 
 is forced upon us by the obvious defect of the former Act, and 
 the nature of the subject. Now see whether the enacting 
 words may not without violence be construed to extend merely 
 to persons, who, having ceased to continue within the juris- 
 
296 SPEECHES. 
 
 diction where they have violated the laws and ought to he 
 tried, are fit objects of legal pursuit: " Be it therefore enacted, 
 that from and after, &c. &c, in case any person against whom 
 a warrant shall be issued by any justice, &c, of any county, 
 &c, shall escape, go into, reside, or be in any other county, &c, 
 out of the jurisdiction of the justice granting such warrant, it 
 shall and may be lawful for any justice of the county, &c, where 
 such person shall escape, go into, reside, or be, to indorse his 
 name," &c. &c. Now I conceive it to be a natural and 
 reasonable construction of these words, in an Act made mani- 
 festly for the pursuit of fugitive offenders, to interpret the words 
 " shall reside or be" to mean " shall become resident or exist- 
 ing." The contrary interpretation renders the words "shall 
 escape or go into" totally superfluous and unmeaning ; for if the 
 words " reside or be" apply to all cases and all modes of resi- 
 dence or existence, as is contended for, such words would mani- 
 festly include the cases of residing or being after escaping or 
 going into the places to which the process is extended. Such 
 an interpretation, also, would render the law ex post facto, when 
 it is expressly framed to commence from a certain date, and 
 must be considered as prospective. The date of the Act cannot 
 refer to the issuing of the warrant, but to the act of the object 
 of the law bringing himself within its operation. The objec- 
 tion that a law is ex post facto, never can be answered by ren- 
 dering its force dependent upon the act of a third person, 
 subsequent to the passing of a law. I conceive that the words 
 " reside or be" are introduced in order to extend the effect of 
 the law to all cases in which an offender is found out of the 
 jurisdiction in which he personally violated the law, without 
 distinguishing how, why, or under what circumstances he 
 ceased to continue where he had offended. It might be deemed 
 reasonable and just to bring an offender back to trial, whatever 
 might be the cause or occasion of his removal out of the juris- 
 diction, although it would be repugnant to the principles of 
 
SPEECHES. 297 
 
 justice to force him into a jurisdiction within which lie had 
 never been. 
 
 Such are the two English Acts introduced to regulate this 
 subject between county and county in England; and it has 
 been urged by the Attorney-General in another place, that the 
 first section of the Act we are construing is founded upon these 
 Acts, that the preamble of the present Act contains in substance 
 the same recitals, and that the enacting words are identically 
 the same. The preamble of the first section of the present 
 Act recites: "Whereas it frequently happens, that persons 
 against whom warrants are granted, &c, escape into other coun- 
 ties, &c. ; and it may also happen, that persons having com- 
 mitted offences in some county or place, may reside or be in 
 some other county or place, out of the jurisdiction, &c, where- 
 by, &c." The former recital comprehends the objects of the 
 23 George II., — namely, persons escaping after a warrant; 
 and the latter recital extends to persons ceasing to continue 
 within the jurisdiction after the offence committed, whether 
 they had left it before or after the warrant was issued. The 
 words " having committed," in the second recital, manifestly 
 mean "after having committed," and the words "may reside or 
 be" must mean, " may become resident or existing;" and there 
 is not a single sentence or word in any of the Acts to show that 
 the Legislature had in contemplation the case of a man residing 
 or being out of the jurisdiction, at the time the offence was 
 committed within it. If such interpretation be admissible, aa 
 to the law which provides as between county and county, with 
 what additional force does it apply to cases arising between 
 kingdom and kingdom ? The recital, in the sections providing 
 for the latter cases, is confined to " felons and other malefactors 
 escaping from one kingdom to another," and the enacting words 
 are precisely the same. 
 
 I have argued from the words, let me now argue from the 
 silence of the Legislature. If the law was intended to extend 
 
298 SPEECHES. 
 
 to constructive misdemeanors between kingdom and kingdom, 
 would it not have made a provision for bail? Would it not 
 have armed the prisoner with process to compel witnesses from 
 the place where he was when the fact was committed, and 
 where his defence would most probably arise, to attend his trial ? 
 Would it not have provided for the trial of accessaries in Ire- 
 land to felonies committed in England ? As the law stood before 
 this Act, and still stands, an accessary in Ireland to a murder 
 or felony in England could not be tried in either country. 
 This Act creates no new offence. It does not extend the juris- 
 diction of any Court. It merely facilitates process in bringing 
 offenders who were before subject to trial before a tribunal 
 which before had cognizance of their offence. It follows clearly, 
 that an accessary, resident in Ireland, to a murder or felony com- 
 mitted in England, cannot be arrested and transmitted under 
 this Act. To what end transmit him ? If he cannot be tried, 
 he must be discharged. You never could construe an Act ex- 
 pressly made to facilitate the arrest and trial of oifenders, to ex- 
 tend to persons who cannot be tried. Such persons, however 
 criminal in foro conscientite, are, technically speaking, guilty of 
 no municipal offence. They are in the situation of accessaries 
 in one county to felonies committed in another before the 2 & '6 
 Edward VI, English, and the 10 Charles I., Irish. They are 
 objects of total impunity. What follows? That if Mr. Justice 
 Johnson had procured a murder or felony to be committed in 
 England, while he resided here, you must discharge him with- 
 out bail; but, according to the argument upon the other side, 
 upon account of the slightness of his offence, you must trans- 
 mit him without bail. It would be an insult to the Legislature 
 to impute to it so impolitic and preposterous a distinction, and 
 in refusing to establish it you vindicate their character, instead 
 of usurping their power. Can you believe from any part of the 
 Act, or from all its parts collated and compared, that the Legis- 
 lature intended that no accessary to a murder or lelony, how- 
 
speeches. 299 
 
 ever atrocious tlie guilt, should fall within its provision, but 
 that every man who should procure a misdemeanor, however 
 venal, to be committed, should be subject to its severest pro- 
 visions ? — That the former class of offenders should triumph in 
 total impunity, and the latter languish under the bitterest per- 
 secution? 
 
 Upon the whole of this case, I conceive that Mr. Justice 
 Johnson is entitled to be discharged; because he is a subject 
 of a free state, entitled to personal liberty, which he has not 
 forfeited by any crime committed against the law of the coun- 
 try in which he lives ; because the law of the Imperial Parlia- 
 ment, whose supremacy he was himself so forward in establish- 
 ing, under which he is treated as a prisoner not bailable for a 
 constructive misdemeanor, is, in respect of him, ex post facto; 
 because felons and criminals escaping justice by flight, or re- 
 moved from the jurisdiction which should try them, appear 
 from the title, preambles, and whole spirit of the Act, to be the 
 sole object of the Legislature ; because the Habeas Corpus Acts 
 of both countries would, by a contrary construction, stand per- 
 petually repealed ; because, to support the arrest, you must be- 
 lieve that the Legislature, in one and the same Act, provided 
 for personal liberty where its violation would be comparatively 
 uninjurious, but left it totally unprotected where the most op- 
 pressive consequences would follow its invasion; that they 
 intended to leave accessaries to felonies and murders in total 
 impunity, and to pursue inferior offences, which the law does 
 not treat as accessorial, merely from their slightness, with the 
 bitterest vengeance; that in pursuit of justice they should for 
 the slightest offence transmit a man as a felon to a foreign coun- 
 try, without furnishing him with process to command the atten- 
 dance of witnesses, and that in a case where the jurisdiction 
 at home is full as competent and much more fit to try the 
 offence. Until this question is finally settled by judicial deter- 
 minations, I never can credit that the Imperial Parliament in- 
 
300 SPEECHES. 
 
 tended to leave the subjects of the united countries under a rule 
 so unequal, so mischievous, and so absurd. It might, perhaps, 
 be credited, that in violent times, under the predominance of 
 an arbitrary spirit, a Minister might press forward a law which 
 would leave the liberty of the subject at the mercy of the Crown. 
 But I cannot credit that any Minister, in any Parliament, 
 would empower any man to violate the liberty of every other 
 whom he might dislike, under the slightest protest; — would 
 defray the expenses of his malicious prosecution, and subject 
 a man, because he was charged with the slightest offence, to 
 inevitable punishment, more heavy than could be inflicted in 
 consequence of his confession or conviction of an offence of ten- 
 fold enormity. I therefore conceive that there is nothing in 
 the Act to warrant the detention of Mr. Justice Johnson, and 
 feel a confident hope that lie will be discharged. 
 
 AGAINST THE UNION.* 
 
 ON THE MOTION OF LORD CASTLEREAGH, FOR TAKING INTO CON- 
 SIDERATION THE RESOLUTIONS RECOMMENDING A COMPLETE 
 AND ENTIRE UNION BETWEEN GREAT BRITAIN AND IRE- 
 LAND. — 5th FEBRUARY, 1800. 
 
 Sir, — Frivolous and fallacious as the Right Honourable Secre- 
 tary's statement has been, I do not found my opposition to 
 going into a committee upon the peculiar demerit of the system 
 of Union which he has detailed. I openly avow that no terms 
 or conditions can ever persuade me to surrender the Constitu- 
 tion of Ireland; to transfer the supreme power of the State to 
 a country which has continued distinct from our's since the 
 creation, by boundaries which cannot be removed, and by feel- 
 
 * See Memoir, page 52. 
 
SPEECHES. 301 
 
 ings which cannot be eradicated. If an Union shall pass, as an 
 Irishman I shall be indifferent how many or how few deputies 
 shall be sent from this emasculated country. As long as the 
 Parliament which legislates for Ireland shall exist in the 
 bosom of a distinct country, — as long as a rival feeling shall 
 actuate the heart of that country, that is, as long as the heart 
 of man shall beat, this country, deprived of its domestic Par- 
 liament, will be the prostrate victim of British prejudice and 
 British oppression. This is sound theory, this is true history. 
 
 But it is contended that this measure does not establish 
 supremacy, or at all violate the settlement of 1782, when that 
 settlement was intended to be final. It was final, say they, to 
 the end of putting down British supremacy, but was not, and 
 could not be final in settling Irish constitution. The hands of 
 posterity could not be tied up from improving Irish constitu- 
 tion. Observe the flagrant falsehood of each proposition: first, 
 this is, in its nature, the direct opposite of a measure of reform. 
 Upon what ground did any man ever speculate upon reform ? 
 Because the representation of boroughs, being without an Irish 
 Constituency, were not as accessible as the genius of our Con- 
 stitution requires that this House should be to popular influ- 
 ence and popular sympathy ; because they were too accessible 
 to the influence of the British Minister. What change in the 
 representation does this measure effect: it substitutes 558 Eng- 
 lishmen, with English constituents, in the room of 200 Irish- 
 men, without any constituents, and it removes the sound part 
 of our representation to England, to be operated upon by 
 British intercourse, and to be exempt from the law of Irish 
 reputation, and the effects of domestic intercourse. 
 
 In comparing the Constitution before 1782 with that now 
 projected, let us for a moment throw out of our consideration 
 the British Legislature which is common to both, and confine 
 our views to that which is peculiar. This method, so useful 
 in mathematical reasoning, will facilitate our present compari- 
 
302 SPEECHES. 
 
 son. The question, then, will simply be, whether the Irish 
 Constitution, which we enjoyed before 1782, was more or less 
 effectual to control the British Legislature, than 100 intermixed 
 representatives. It appears clear to my understanding that 
 300 Irish representatives, acting in this country, having exclu- 
 sive power as to taxes, and seldom interfered with as to inter- 
 nal regulation, is a preferable contract to 100 of the same men 
 merged in the British Parliament. What follows from this? 
 That even if I were persuaded to demolish our present Con- 
 stitution, I would not substitute an Union. I would, therefore, 
 implore the Minister, if he be so inexorably hostile to the 
 settlement of 1782, — if he will trample down the temple of 
 liberty which we so fondly erected in that proudest period 
 of our history, to restore to us at least the ancient venerable 
 fabric of our forefathers, and not to turn the genius of the 
 Irish Constitution adrift, naked and unhoused in these stormy 
 and perilous times, to take refuge in the cottage of the peasant, 
 or the garret of the manufacturer. I warn the Minister that, 
 as there cannot be liberty tvithout law, there cannot be peace with- 
 out Constitution. But this measure, when it subverts the Irish 
 Constitution, menaces the British Constitution itself. As a 
 friend to the empire I deprecate it; as a man who thinks the 
 whole civilized world interested in the purity and preservation 
 of the British Constitution, I deprecate it. When the over- 
 grown influence of the British Minister shall be reinforced by 
 the addition of 100 members, who, from the nature of things, 
 must be nearly as subject to his iniluence as the representatives 
 of the Cinque Ports, where will be the balance of the British 
 Constitution? Where is the policy or the safety of narrowing 
 the basis, and widening the superstructure of that Constitution 
 in these revolutionary times? For I say that an Irish Con- 
 stitution in a British Parliament is a mockery, and that the 
 unwieldly edifice which the Minister is creating can in no way 
 repose upon the Irish people. But although what I have stated 
 
SPEECHES. 303 
 
 will not be admitted in its fullest extent, can any man deny, 
 that this is a most tremendous change? Nothing is so prolific 
 as innovation ; change succeeds to change, as wave to wave ; if 
 this new-fangled Constitution shall not work well, as assuredly 
 it cannot, where, I ask, will exist the corrective? Not in the 
 Irish nation. The united Parliament, that is, the British Par- 
 liament, will exercise that power ; and I know of no remedy 
 so simple, so natural, and so likely, as the amputation of that 
 excrescence which produces the evil; thus the purity of the 
 British Legislature would be restored, and that ascendancy, 
 after which Great Britain always panted, established without 
 control ; thus England would be restored to its Constitution, 
 and reinstated in its usurped domination. 
 
 Upon the incompetency of Parliament to pass this measure, 
 I shall not dwell ; if there be an irresistible truth in politics 
 and in morals, this appears to me to be one, namely, that tem- 
 porary trustees have no right to transfer the object of their 
 trust for ever, without the consent of those through whom and 
 for whom they held and exercised it; every argument to the 
 contrary is built upon a confusion of right with power, and an 
 inference, that because institutions originating in wrong have 
 from policy and acquiescence changed their nature, that every 
 act of the supreme power must be rightful. But if Parliament 
 be competent to pass this measure, the Parliament which shall 
 succeed it will be equally competent to annul, vary, or modify- 
 any of its terms or conditions. Any articles proposed or ratified 
 by us can at best be but recommendations to the United Parlia- 
 ment, which they may observe or violate at their discretion. 
 The dying recommendations, the testamentary advice of a 
 body, which acknowledges by the very act of voluntary depo- 
 sition its unfitness to manage those affairs, upon which it pre- 
 sumes to dictate to posterity for ever. Therefore it is that if 
 the Minister were to give a carle blanche to Ireland as to terms, 
 reserving to England a controlling Legislature, I should re- 
 
304 SPEECHES. 
 
 ject the offer as fallacious and fraudulent. But we are told that 
 the faith of nations will secure us; how the faith of nations can 
 apply to a question between the supreme Legislature and its 
 subjects, I cannot understand ; between distinct nations it is a 
 valuable pledge, because it may be sanctioned and enforced by 
 surrounding nations; but in this case to solicit such interfer- 
 ence would be rebellion, to grant it — war. The sanction, con- 
 sequently, of the terms of an union, must ultimately resolve it- 
 self into the feelings of a rival nation on the conscience of a 
 British Minister. Before 1782, when the Minister acknow- 
 ledges that we were oppressed most shamefully, and when the 
 misery of our condition, compared with the greatness of our re- 
 sources, was the astonishment of every writer who condescended 
 to notice it, we had equal claims upon the conscience and feel- 
 ings of thoso to whom we arc about to intrust our concerns for 
 ever; and in order to take chance of a change of conduct in 
 those who have been uniform for centuries, we are required to 
 surrender a Constitution from which we have made more ad- 
 vances in eighteen years, than any other nation in Europe has 
 done in a century. 
 
 But even if an incorporate Union were the wisest possible 
 arrangement for property, and if Parliament were manifestly 
 competent to pass it, does nothing depend upon the times, upon 
 the means which have been used, and upon the sentiments of 
 the public? In my humble judgment, these are considerations 
 to which the wisest and grandest schemes of policy ought to 
 be subservient. No measure can, in the abstract, be so excel- 
 lent as not to change its nature by reference to these circum- 
 stances. I feel that I am founded in asserting, that the time is 
 most inopportune, and the means the most profligate and re- 
 volting; and the public sentiment in the highest state of hosti- 
 lity to this measure. When I call the time inopportune, I fear 
 I differ from the mover of this measure, in the meaning of the 
 term. He possibly conceives that time most opportune, which 
 
SPEECHES. 305 
 
 furnishes him with most means of any kind, to carry the mea- 
 sure in any way. I consider it not in relation to the facility 
 of running the measure upon the nation, but the tranquillity 
 and permanence which are likely to ensue, if it were carried. 
 I therefore do not think the times opportune, because a nume- 
 rous English army happens to exist in the country ; or because 
 martial law is established ; or because military courts arc in- 
 trusted with the power of construing the Amnesty Act, and 
 deciding who are within its exceptions; or because we have 
 scarcely respired from our agonizing conflict, and are so ex- 
 hausted and faint-hearted that we loathe all political discussion, 
 and would almost prefer annihilation to exertion ; or because 
 we are so torn and stultified by domestic discord, that some of 
 us from private pique, would embrace common ruin. These 
 may be glorious golden opportunities to tempt an ambitious 
 and unfeeling Minister to rifle a great nation of her honour and 
 independence, but never can become the foundation of a lasting 
 and honourable connexion. 
 
 But permit me to state why the times are inopportune. They 
 arc inopportune because they arc tempestuous; because the 
 spirit of innovation is already too epidemic, and ought not to 
 be stimulated. 
 
 But if the times be inopportune, see whether the means are 
 not suitably incongruous to the end proposed. The pretended 
 object is to melt two nations into one people, by a measure 
 founded upon their free concurrence, and carried by the unin- 
 fluenced voice of their Parliaments. How does the Minister 
 proceed in this work of conciliation? He passes by the people 
 as live stock appurtenant to their Constitution, mere lumber, 
 to be included, perhaps, in a schedule annexed to the deed of 
 conveyance ; he brands as traitors and rebels all who presume 
 to deny the self-competency of Parliament to carry the tremen- 
 dous innovation. 
 
 But is the Parliament, to which he thus primarily and ex- 
 
 x 
 
300 SPEECHES. 
 
 clusively resorts, left to exercise an unbiassed judgment? I 
 shall not dwell upon this odious subject; I shall not compare 
 the Black List with the Red Book, or enumerate those who 
 lost or those who gained offices, or state their crimes or their 
 merits; I shall not anticipate those posthumous funeral honours 
 which await some who have undertaken for the extinction of 
 the Constitution of their country, if they shall succeed in their 
 pious labours, or allude to the phoenix Judges who are to spring 
 out of the ashes of the Irish Legislature: I do not like even to 
 think of those deluded men, who forgot they had a country, 
 probably because they thought their country woidd not survive 
 to remember them. I turn to a more grateful subject; the 
 virtue of this House triumphed over the Minister, and refuted 
 the calumnies which were levelled even more at your existence 
 than your fame; the measure was defeated, tranquillity was re- 
 stored, and what, if possible, was better, this Union was raised 
 in the public estimation, and endeared to the heart of every 
 honest Irishman. This was a consummation devoutly to be 
 wished ! — this was an accidental good flowing from the mis- 
 carriage of a bad measure, at which a wise Minister would have 
 exulted, and upon which he might have improved. What was 
 the conduct of the Minister? He suddenly changes, if not his 
 principles, his practice ; he appeals from the refractory compe- 
 tence of Parliament to the derided sovereignty of the people ; 
 the people became everything; the Parliament nothing; com- 
 pared with him, Tom Paine dwindles into an aristocrat. Can 
 it be credited in Europe, can it be credited by posterity, that 
 the Minister who has lavished so much treasure and blood in 
 combating republican principles in France, — to whose mind 
 Jacobinism is a compendium of every crime, — who cannot hear 
 the physical strength of a country mentioned without horror, — 
 that this Minister should dive into cellars and climb into garrets, 
 to solicit plebeian signatures against the Constitution of Ireland ; 
 that he should set on foot a poll for the populace of Ireland 
 
SPEECHES. 307 
 
 against its Constitution; that he should blacken the columns 
 of the Government prints with the names of day labourers of 
 the lowest description, attesting in favour of his Jacobinical 
 innovation. 
 
 What has been the result of this frantic canvass, which the 
 loyal men of Ireland, who put down the rebellion, contem- 
 plated in silent anguish, until they were forced into exertion? 
 Has the Minister in fact and truth entitled himself to say that 
 we, the representatives of the people, are called upon by their 
 voice to submit to him ? Quite the reverse. A loud and uni- 
 versal outcry issues from every quarter of Ireland against this 
 detested measure ; the City of Dublin, the University, the coun- 
 ties, the property, the popukcy, and talents of the nation, all 
 ranks and all religions, are all united in one grand and irresis- 
 tible confederacy against it. The public sentiment can no 
 longer be falsified, it forces itself upon the senses of every man 
 who can see or hear. No man can stir out of the pale of the 
 Castle, — no man can travel through any quarter of Ireland 
 without reading it in the anxious conflict of passions and feel- 
 ings depicted in every countenance he meets. These are solemn 
 moral manifestations of the active sentiment of a nation. These 
 are awful warnings, which the benignity of Providence inter- 
 poses between the projects of ministers and the irretrievable 
 mischief. May God avert. the storm and save the Nation ! 
 
 x 2 
 
.308 
 
 AGAINST THE UNION. 
 
 ON THE MOTION " THAT THE SPEAKER DO LEAVE THE CHAIR, AND 
 THAT THE HOUSE RESOLVE ITSELF INTO A COMMITTEE OF THE 
 WHOLE HOUSE, TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE KING'S 
 MESSAGE RESPECTING A UNION." — 14th FEBRUARY, 1800. 
 
 Sir, — I should feel myself unworthy of a seat in this House, if I 
 apologized, even at this late hour, and to this exausted assembly, 
 for speaking with the utmost freedom upon this vital question. 
 The approach of dissolution is a season peculiarly fit for truth 
 and seriousness; and if mischief shall arise from a free dis- 
 closure to public view of the circumstances in which we stand, 
 they alone are answerable, who, by setting this question afloat, 
 have torn the veil from objects which cannot bear, and ought 
 not to be submitted to public scrutiny. I own this measure 
 has not taken me by surprise. I have long anticipated it in 
 the preparatory steps of your Government; and I have many 
 friends who may recollect that I told them many years since, 
 that the solemn engagement by which the members of the 
 Whig Club (an institution to which I had not the honour to 
 belong) pledged themselves against an Union, was of more real 
 value than all the other comparatively trifling objects about 
 which they are occupied. The advocates for an Union must 
 admit two propositions ; — that an independent domestic Legis- 
 lature is, generally speaking, a good ; and that our independent 
 constitution has worked well. I do not exaggerate when I 
 say, that Ireland has more improved since 1782 than any na- 
 tion that ever existed, within so short a period. Sir, if we were 
 not eye-witnesses of our own gradual advancement, it would 
 strike us with astonishment. To any man who could put Ire- 
 
SPEECHES. 309 
 
 land as in 1782 in juxta position with Ireland in her present 
 state, as to population, wealth, agriculture, and commerce, the 
 difference would appear so astonishing as to be scarcely ascri- 
 bable to natural causes and natural means. I am, therefore, 
 well founded in saying, that the evils flowing from our inde- 
 pendence must be weighty and manifest indeed, to justify a 
 surrender of our Constitution. To those who say that it does 
 not subvert our Constitution, because we will still have our 
 representatives in the United Parliament, I shall only answer, 
 that upon the same ground of reasoning, if we were to send 
 deputies to the United Assembly of France, that Assembly so 
 intermixed might be called our representatives, and we would 
 just as much become thereby sovereigns of France as we shall 
 become (as a right honourable Gentleman has told us) sharers 
 of the sovereignty of England. To any man who agrees with 
 me in deeming it essential to our constitutional liberties, to 
 be legislated for and taxed by those deputies alone who are 
 chosen by Irishmen, and that residence in Ireland is also an 
 essential quality of our Constitution; it is to prove this to be 
 an essential change. No man can doubt that this Act virtually 
 and in fact re-established British supremacy. An honourable 
 friend of mine (Mr. Smyth) has said, that all our positions 
 upon this side of the House are unfounded, and all his own 
 self-evident; and, therefore, I presume it is, that he has not 
 condescended to refute the former, or prove the latter : he ap- 
 pears to me to have assumed two fatal fallacies, and to have 
 built his whole reasoning upon them. He says legislative in- 
 dependence necessarily leads to separation ; and that an union 
 of Parliaments necessarily creates an identity of feelings and 
 interests in the two nations : how these effects are to follow he 
 has not pointed out, nor can I conceive. As long as the crowns, 
 the source of active power, are united in one family, resident 
 in Great Britain, and as long as the same king continues an 
 integral part of each Legislature, separation appears to me to 
 
310 SPEECHES. 
 
 be impossible; the consolidation of the prerogatives of the two 
 crowns forms an anchor to the Constitution of such immove- 
 able weight as to be proof against all the storms and surges of 
 democracy. In the same manner that the royal negative pro- 
 tects the prerogative, does the union of the crowns preserve 
 the connexion of the countries: this at least is undeniable. It 
 cannot be dreaded that the countries will be separated by any 
 legislative Act; the King of Great Britain never can be sup- 
 posed to concur in such an Act. It appears to me that the 
 same ingenuity which infers such imbecility of connexion 
 from independent legislatures, could with equal ease, and equal 
 strength, prove that the separate estates of Parliament are in- 
 consistent with the security of the prerogative; and that, to 
 preserve the executive, you must invest it with the whole 
 legislative power. 
 
 The danger, then, to connexion from independence must be 
 extrinsic and operate from without. Will the people of Ireland 
 be better affected to a Parliament in Westminster than to a 
 Parliament in Dublin? Will they prize the Constitution more 
 after they have been compelled to sacrifice their liberties to it, 
 than while they were suffered to think that they might be 
 connected with Great Britain without being enslaved? As far 
 as it depends upon the feelings of Irishmen, and abstracted from 
 the operation of military despotism, which cannot last, in my 
 opinion the principle of connexion will perish with our inde- 
 pendence. It has been said that parliamentary debates tend 
 to excite sedition ; perhaps they may at times be intemperate, — 
 and I know of nothing human that is perfect, — but I contend, 
 that considerable advantages arise even out of the abuses of our 
 parliamentary institution. Even in the most despotic govern- 
 ments, the exterior forms and symbols of authority are neces- 
 sary to create respect, and attach the feelings and prejudices 
 of the vulgar to the power to which they are bound to submit. 
 He knows not the nature of our Constitution, he knows not 
 
SPEECHES. 311 
 
 human nature, who cannot see much benefit resulting from that 
 chair, from the very robes in which our venerable president 
 is clad, from the splendid dome under which we deliberate, from 
 the very bustle and tumult of this assembly, and even from 
 those conflicts which in certain respects we may have occasion 
 to lament. You cannot banish the political sentiment from the 
 human mind ; and if it has not a domestic and constitutional 
 want, it will be the more bold, visionary, and cnterprizing. 
 Therefore it is that 1 always conceived, that an opposition, 
 though it verged to faction, was extremely desirable in our 
 Constitution ; and if I were to connect our late popular ex- 
 cesses with the proceedings of this House, I would say, that 
 they were more promoted by our acquiescence than by our op- 
 position to the measures of Government; and that if our debates 
 had been more frequent and more impassioned, Jacobinism 
 would have been less prevalent without these doors. But I 
 cannot avoid observing how unreasonable it is to contrast our 
 independence with British connexion, at the very moment that 
 the latter probably owes its existence to the former. The 
 noble Lord has said, that the suppression of the rebellion is 
 to be ascribed chiefly to the vigour of Government? But I 
 say that the vigour of Government would not have availed, if 
 it had not been strengthened by an internal Legislature ; and 
 that both united would have failed but for the yeomanry of 
 Ireland, fighting under the obligation of a solemn oath to main- 
 tain the Constitution of Ireland, and feeling that they were 
 struggling for their own liberties and the rights of their pos- 
 terity. In that contest almost the whole property of Ireland 
 was anti-revolutionary ; but if it was conceived that we strug- 
 gled against one revolutionary party but to promote the long- 
 projected Union of another not less odious, the conduct of the 
 yeomanry and the issue of that conflict might have been widely 
 different. 
 
 My learned friend's second assumption, namely, that iden- 
 
312 SPEECHES. 
 
 tity ofinterest and feeling will necessarily follow parliamentary 
 union, is totally unproved, and even less tenable than the for- 
 mer. Can he conceive that a legislative union between England 
 and France, leaving a vast preponderance of power with the 
 latter country, would identify the interests and feelings of both ? 
 Could he even hope, that the ancient hostilities between those 
 countries would gradually subside under such an arrangement? 
 I do not say that the case is the same, but it is illustrative. 
 Two distinct countries cannot incorporate with any safety to 
 the inferior, unless an identity of interests and feelings shall 
 have preceded the incorporation. The Unionists seek that as 
 an effect, which is necessary to their measure as a pre-existing 
 cause. They cannot deny that the British portion of the Le- 
 gislature will be absolute, but they contend that the new re- 
 lation of identity of people will secure us against an abuse of 
 power. If they will prove it to me that there is sueh a pre- 
 disposition in the two countries, — if they satisfy me that Ireland 
 will stand towards England like Yorkshire or Cornwall, or any 
 other English county, — I shall acknowledge my error and em- 
 brace their project; but I cannot forget history, and overlook 
 the natural course of human aifairs out of compliment to their 
 speculations. My honourable friend is quite indignant that 
 we at this side of the House should dwell upon the past op- 
 pressions of Great Britain, which even the Minister acknow- 
 ledges and condemns. I answer, that however goading the 
 detail of British oppression may be, it is rendered necessary by 
 the attempt to reduce us again to the state under which we 
 languished for centuries. For centuries we were considered as 
 a distinct people, and treated as an abject province, insulted, 
 impoverished, and degraded by British legislation. In 1782 
 we threw off the yoke, and in eighteen years made advances 
 unparalleled in the history of any other country. Yet we are 
 now called upon to lay down the Constitution under which we 
 flourished, and submit to that supremacy by which we were 
 
SPEECHES. 313 
 
 scourged ; and to induce us to commit this folly, we are told 
 that the ancient feelings of Great Britain will at once vanish, 
 and that we will be precisely in the situation of an English 
 county. Sir, I would as soon believe that my honourable 
 friend could with his breath cool the earth heated by the col- 
 lected rays of a long summers sun, which evaporate as slowly 
 as they accumulate, as that the prejudices of centuries would 
 give way to the mere influence of a name. Why is Yorkshire 
 safe and free with but two votes in the British Parliament? 
 Why is Manchester safe without any ? Because there is no 
 contrasted interest or contrasted feeling between these places 
 and Britain at large ; and if there was a competition between 
 Yorkshire and any other English county, the residue of Great 
 Britain would form an impartial umpire between them. But 
 can any man deny that rival feelings exist, and that rival ques- 
 tions may spring up between Great Britain and Ireland ? Can 
 any man doubt but that an Englishman will look at Ireland, 
 and an Irishman at England, as a distinct country, even though 
 they should be commanded by an Act of Parliament to con- 
 sider the two islands as one and the same. I say that Ireland, 
 with its hundred intermixed members, can have less chance 
 against British prejudice than even under its Constitution be- 
 fore 1782 ; and the claims of any single county of England 
 must for ever prevail against Ireland, because the residue of 
 England will in future, as in past time, lean against us; and we 
 never will be considered and treated as Englishmen. To com- 
 pare Ireland with Yorkshire is to confound things widely dif- 
 ferent. If, indeed, England were surrounded by ten or a dozen 
 such islands as Ireland, and if the representatives of all these 
 inferior islands, united, should exceed the representatives of 
 England as much as the representatives of England exceed any 
 one of them, then a situation analogous to the counties of Eng- 
 land would arise, and the influence of England might be over- 
 borne by combinations. But it astonishes me, that Gentlemen 
 
314 SPEECHES. 
 
 do not see that the very idea of terms and conditions necessa- 
 rily implies future, as well as past distinctness, and amounts to 
 an admission that our hundred Members, merged in the British 
 Parliament, are totally inadequate to secure justice for Ireland. 
 When, to the considerations I have stated, I take into account 
 the hostile feelings generated by this foul attempt, by bribery, 
 by treason, and by force, to plunder a nation of its liberties in 
 the hour of its distress, I do not hesitate to pronounce, that 
 every sentiment of affection for Great Britain will perish if this 
 measure shall pass; and that, instead of uniting the nations, it 
 will be the commencement of an era of inextinguishable ani- 
 mosity. 
 
 The surrender of our Constitution is urged upon another 
 ground, if possible more strong than any I have stated, namely, 
 our religious dissensions. I admit the existence of this toil, 
 and I pant for its removal ; but before I embrace so desperate 
 a remedy, I desire to be instructed how, and by what pro- 
 cess, it will operate in producing the effect ascribed to it. It 
 is not reasonable that upon the mere word of a Minister, I 
 should apply this deadly medicine to a disease which for 
 many years has been abating, and which I suspect has been 
 kept lingering amongst us for the sake of the remedy. It is 
 a moral malady, and must be removed by moral means. Will 
 an Union extract the poison from those tenets which inflame re- 
 ligious bigotry, or will it diffuse charity and toleration through 
 the land? Will it alter an iota in any man's creed, or in his 
 practice? Will it quench Catholic ambition, or allay the spirit 
 of Protestant monopoly? The Minister answers those inqui- 
 ries by a metaphysical quibble. Says he, the Catholic, out- 
 numbering the Protestant, feels his claim to political equality 
 founded in manifest justice, and presses forward for its attain- 
 ment. The Protestant, from his inferiority, dreads that equa- 
 lity would lead to ascendancy, and therefore opposes Catholic 
 claims. But pass an Union, and instantly, as it were the effect 
 
SPEECHES. 315 
 
 of magic, we will be one people. The Protestants, therefore, 
 in the empire will out-number the Catholics, and consequently 
 Catholic Emancipation can be withheld without injustice, and 
 conceded without danger. Now I appeal to the common sense 
 of any plain man, will the feelings of the Irish Catholic acqui- 
 esce in this sophistry ? Will he feel his proportion, or his na- 
 tural claims, varied any more by a consideration of the Pro- 
 testants in England than of the Catholics in Spain ? Will he 
 not still feel Ireland to be his country, and if his relative num- 
 ber gives him any title to a participation of political power, 
 which the argument seems to admit, will that title be dimi- 
 nished when the principal Protestants of Ireland shall become 
 absentees ? Or will he become the better attached to the con- 
 nexion, because the political power of his country is trans- 
 ferred to England for the very purpose of extinguishing his 
 hopes for ever? He cannot forget that he owes the repeal of 
 every political restraint but one, to an Irish Parliament, and 
 that that one was originally imposed upon him by that very 
 Parliament to which we arc called upon to transfer our supreme 
 authority; so that the natural eflcct of this measure will be to 
 superadd national to religious prejudices; to split our inhabi- 
 tants into Protestants who will be considered as mere English, 
 and Catholics who will be considered as mere Irish, and who 
 will, therefore, be the more disposed to look to connexion with 
 some other nation, where this metaphysical comparison will 
 not operate to their degradation. 
 
 But suppose the Minister shall change what I understand 
 to be his immutable purpose, and admit them into the Impe- 
 rial Parliament, let it not be credited that even so the nation 
 will be tranquillized. I admit, that when all are prostrate 
 none can be ascendant ; but I add, that no numerous description 
 of men here will be satisfied. I deny that the Minister hopes 
 or desires, by this arrangement, to bury all religious distinctions 
 in the tomb of Irish independence ; he will still play party 
 
316 SPEECHES. 
 
 against party, and seat against seat. The revenue and the ma- 
 gistracy, which he may parcel out to-day among the Protest- 
 ants, and to-morrow amongst the Catholics, will, he hopes, 
 keep us divided, enfeebled, and degraded. Our political power 
 will be nothing ; and any transitory authority which may be 
 held or exercised by any description of us will depend upon 
 the mere will and caprice of the Minister. Sir, this is a con- 
 dition to which no class of Irishmen will voluntarily submit. 
 
 AGAINST THE UNION. 
 
 ON LORD CASTLEREAGIl's MOVING THE ORDER OF THE DAY "THAT 
 THE UNION BILL BE READ A SECOND TIME." — 26TJI MAY, 1800. 
 
 Sir, — There is nothing in the calumny or the menace of the 
 noble Lord which shall deter me from endeavouring to persuade 
 this House, even now, to relinquish this vile project; even now 
 to recede from that gulf, upon the brink of which we stand, 
 and which is about to close upon the constitutional liberties of 
 Ireland for ever. Sir, I shall not only discuss this measure 
 freely and boldly, but I shall confine my discussion to that 
 very topic which the noble Lord seems most to dislike, and 
 which he considers as seditious and inflammatory. I mean the 
 moral competency of Parliament to pass this measure, and the 
 moral obligation which will result to the subjects of this realm 
 to obey the dictates of any new-fangled power to which we 
 may delegate our delegated authority. If there be anything 
 solemn and serious at this side of the grave, it is, whether we 
 can rightfully accomplish the project of the noble Lord. Who- 
 ever says that this is a mere visionary question, or that it ought 
 not now to be discussed, resolves everything into lawless power. 
 He robs human laws and human society of their best cement 
 
SPEECHES. 3 1 7 
 
 and most efficacious sanction. Quid prosunt nance sine moribus 
 leges. If the conscience of a civilized nation be at war with 
 their Government, the most vigorous despotism will be as tran- 
 sitory as flagitious. 
 
 Sir, I am no republican ; I am no Jacobin ; I loathe the puerile 
 nonsense which has been falsely imputed to gentlemen on this 
 side of the House, that no law is binding which has not the 
 direct assent of the people ; no political opinion can be sound 
 or true which is inconsistent with all government ; and to rest 
 the validity of every law upon direct assent, or express popular 
 acceptance, would be to render every law invalid. The sub- 
 jects of every free State, by consenting to be governed by the 
 supreme power of that State, impliedly assent to all its legisla- 
 tive acts, and the legislative acts of those who shall succeed to 
 that power according to the Constitution ; but there is no ground 
 for saying, that they impliedly, or at all, consent to be governed 
 by the acts of any other body to whom their trustees may 
 choose to delegate their delegated authority: they have a right to 
 make laws, but not legislators. In a simple hereditary monarchy 
 the monarch would have no right to bequeath the crown, or, 
 during his life, to dispose of it at pleasure. In a simple aris- 
 tocracy the governing body, thoygh empowered to frame any 
 other law, would have no right to invest an individual of their 
 body with supreme power, or to make any other fundamental 
 change in the Constitution, without the consent of the subject. 
 How peculiarly applicable is this general truth to our free 
 Constitution, and how cogently does it appeal to the conscience 
 of the members of this House, who are mere temporary delegates 
 and trustees, occasionally, and for a time, appointed, to concur 
 with other powers in administering the Constitution. It is this 
 consideration which furnishes us with a true idea of that social 
 compact, which exists in every government founded in right 
 or justice; a compact, the record of which, though it cannot 
 be produced in parchment, is to be found amongst these eternal 
 
318 SPEECHES. 
 
 truths which exist in the eternal mind, and which cannot be 
 missed or misunderstood by any man who wishes to find it, 
 and who has no corrupt interest in misinterpreting it. It is 
 simply this: The people are bound by compact and by con- 
 science to obey the laws enacted by their legislators. The 
 Legislature is bound by compact and by conscience to legislate 
 for their good, to preserve their constitution, and to transmit 
 it to posterity. If the Legislature should be altered contrary 
 to the will of the people, all obligation to obey ceases, except 
 such as may result from the prudence of submitting for a time 
 to power which cannot be successfully resisted. Let no man 
 deny or deride that principle of mutual compact which I have 
 stated ; it is that divine principle (infinitely more than the mys- 
 tical alliance of Church and State) which consecrates human 
 laws, which binds the conscience of the subject in alliance 
 with the power of the State, which affiliates the governments 
 of earth with the sovereignty of heaven. 
 
 Many gentlemen affect not to comprehend this distinction, 
 who, where their corrupt interest does not bias their minds 
 and cloud their understandings, can easily comprehend distinc- 
 tions much more subtle and abstruse. Every lawyer knows the 
 difference between abuse an/1 excess of jurisdiction; every 
 lawyer knows, for instance, that if the Court of Exchequer 
 were to entertain pleas of the Crown, if the Court of Exche- 
 quer were to try and convict a criminal, even upon the clearest 
 evidence of his guilt, the Judges of that Court would them- 
 seves be criminal in the extreme. Difficult cases might occur 
 where the limits of jurisdiction might not be easily discernible ; 
 but in clear and palpable cases to exceed their jurisdiction, 
 under whatever pretence of public advantage, would be to 
 offend against their conscience and their country. In the same 
 way, bills enacted to reform our Parliament, to renovate its 
 principles, or to secure its existence, may be justifiably enacted 
 without the intervention of the people ; and cases might arise 
 
SPEECHES. 319 
 
 where it might be doubtful whether the magnitude of the con- 
 stitutional regulation or reform might or might not require the 
 sanction of popular assent. But when the measure goes directly 
 and for ever to extinguish the independent sovereignty of the 
 country, to obliterate every trace of its ancient hereditary Con- 
 stitution, to transfer the supreme power to another State, how- 
 ever great and respectable, and under whatever pretence, such 
 a measure, I say, is manifestly an act of tyranny and not of 
 right, and the people are only bound to submit to it from those 
 considerations which induce men to acquiesce for a season, and 
 until redress be practicable, under the most galling insults and 
 flagitious outrages. 
 
 This doctrine, we are told, leads to pure republicanism ; 
 for if the assent of the people be necessary in such cases, and 
 if they are to judge of the cases, they will perpetually interfere 
 with the supreme authority, under pretence that its acts alter or 
 invade the Constitution. Sir, this sophistry would go to deprive 
 the people of all rights, because such rights might be abused. 
 It is just as fair reasoning as if the people were to say that we 
 have no right to make any law, because that, under colour of 
 exerting that right, we, their Parliament, might subvert the 
 Constitution. But give me leave ,to ask, whether the partisans 
 of legislative omnipotence do not themselves admit, and even 
 advance a doctrine much more dangerous to Government than 
 any I have stated. They all admit that the supreme authority 
 even of the Legislature may be forfeited by abuse ; that the 
 people have a right to resume power which is exercised for 
 their injury. Whether the supreme power be exercised to the 
 detriment of the people must and will at all times be decided 
 upon by the people themselves ; and permit me to say that it 
 is much easier for them to decide upon excess than abuse of 
 authority, because it is easier to determine whether the Con- 
 stitution be subverted, than whether an ordinary law be detri- 
 mental. But, Sir, such persons only admit what it would be 
 
320 SPEECHES. 
 
 vain to deny. The right of the people to resume the sovereign 
 authority, either upon excess or abuse — either when all security 
 for liberty is taken away by usurpation, or when it is directly 
 assailed by tyranny, — is what cannot be called into action by 
 asserting it, or stifled by denying it. The sovereign rights of 
 a people are revealed to them by lights too clear, and enforced 
 by impulses too strong, to be obscured or long resisted. We 
 might as well hope by false reasoning, or a concealment of 
 fact and of truth, to vary or suspend any of the great laws of 
 nature, as imagine that anything, which any individual may 
 say or do, can prevent a great nation from feeling its rights, 
 and asserting them whenever it is able. Whenever usurpation 
 menaces the safety of a nation, whenever approaching tyranny 
 excites public alarm, the moral shock will be felt like an earth- 
 quake through every extremity of the land, and the people 
 will fly from their rulers as they would their houses, lest they 
 should fall upon and crush them. 
 
 Sir, if the measure of the noble Lord naturally leads' to 
 those tremendous consequences which I dread and deprecate, 
 there is nothing in his puny censure which shall deter me from 
 exposing its deformity, and anticipating its effects. I shall not, 
 to the last moment of my parliamentary existence, not until 
 the hand of tyranny shall stifle my voice, cease my endeavours 
 to awaken this House to a sense of the crime they arc about to 
 commit, and the horrid consequences which may await that 
 crime. 
 
 Sir, I feel but little any portion of the noble Lord's obloquy 
 which may attach to me or my humble efforts; but I own I 
 cannot repress my indignation at the audacious boldness of the 
 calumny which would asperse one of the most exalted characters 
 which any nation ever produced, and that in a country which 
 owes its liberties and its greatness to the energy of his exer- 
 tions, and in the very house which has so often been the theatre 
 of his glorious labours and splendid achievements. I remember 
 
SPEECHES. 321 
 
 that man being the theme of universal panegyric, the wonder 
 and the boast of Ireland, for his genius andjiis virtue. His 
 name silenced the sceptic upon the reality of genuine patriot- 
 ism. To doubt the purity of his motives was a heresy which 
 no tongue dared to utter; envy was lost in admiration; and 
 even they, whose crimes he scourged, blended^extorted^raisea 
 with the murmurs of resentment. He covered our then un- 
 fledged Constitution with the ample wings of his talents, as the 
 eagle covers her young ; like her be soared, and like her he 
 could behold the rays, whether of royal favour or of royal anger, 
 withundazzledunintimidated eye. If, according to Demosthenes, 
 to grow with the growth, and to decay with the decline of our 
 country, be the true criterion of a good citizen, how infinitely 
 did this man, even in the moment of his lowest [depression, 
 surpass those upstart patriots, who only become visible when 
 their country vanishes. 
 
 Sir, there is something most singularly curious, and, accord- 
 ing to my estimation of things, enviable, in the fate of this 
 great man ; his character and his consequence are, as it were, 
 vitally interwoven with the greatness of his country; the one 
 cannot be high and the other low ; the one cannot stand and 
 the other perish. This was so well understood by those who 
 have so long meditated to put down the Constitution of Ire- 
 land, that, feeling that they could not seduce, they have inces- 
 santly laboured to calumniate her most vigilant sentinel and 
 ablest champion ; they appealed to every unguarded prejudice, 
 to every assailable weakness, of a generous but credulous 
 people ; they watched every favourable moment of irritation or 
 of terror to pour in the detested poison of calumny. Sir, it will 
 be found, on a retrospect of Ireland since 1782, that her liber- 
 ties never received a wound that a corresponding stab was not 
 levelled at his character ; and when it was vainly hoped that 
 his imperishable fame was laid in the dust, the times were 
 deemed ripe for the extinction of our Constitution. Sir, these 
 
322 SPEECHES. 
 
 impious labours cannot finally succeed ; glory and liberty are 
 not easily effaced. Grattan and the Constitution will survive 
 the storm. 
 
 ON THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S MOVING THE SECOND 
 READING OF THE "REBELLION BILL." 
 
 MARCH 11th, 1800. 
 
 Sir, — The Bill which you are now called upon to pass into 
 a law is a literal transcript of the Act of the last session, 
 establishing martial law. The Solicitor-General has acknow- 
 ledged that it establishes dictatorial power, and amounts to a 
 temporary surrender of the Constitution of Ireland. Bold and 
 candid as the avowal is, I do not think it communicates to this 
 House the enormous extent of the powers we are called upon 
 to confide to the executive Government. I feel no indisposi- 
 tion towards our present Chief Governor ; if he had not at- 
 tempted to force an Union upon this country, I should have 
 venerated his character; and, as it is, I know no individual in 
 the empire under whose despotic rule I should prefer to live : 
 but my habits have not yet reconciled me to slavery, even 
 under the mildest tyrant, and I know that, if this Bill shall pass, 
 the most unqualified slavery will be the lot of every Irishman. 
 Let me briefly state to the Minister's majority the simple 
 amount of this unparalleled law, and then ask them whether 
 they, the representatives of the people, will carry it? I call 
 upon the Crown lawyers to interrupt me if I exaggerate or mis- 
 take its operation in any particular; and I pledge myself to 
 prove my statement, by merely reading the clauses of this com- 
 pendious system of despotism. 
 
 This Act empowers the Lord Lieutenant for the time being 
 to create a new tribunal, composed of any number of military 
 
SPEECHES. 323 
 
 men, of any rank; they may be field officers, subalterns, or 
 privates; they may be Irishmen, Englishmen, or Scotchmen; 
 nay Russian or Hessian troopers might, consistent with the 
 provisions of this Act, be invested with its high and transcen- 
 dant powers. What are these powers? A power over life, 
 limb, liberty, and property,— a power of arbitrary punishment, 
 extending to the highest infliction known to the laws of any 
 country. What are the offences within the cognizance of this 
 tremendous jurisdiction? Any act which they may conceive 
 immediately or remotely, directly or indirectly, to tend to 
 rebellion. Who are the persons subject to this jurisdiction ? 
 Every individual of this realm, from its highest to its lowest 
 member. Sir, I say that, while this tyranny exists, the repre- 
 sentatives of the people debate upon mere courtesy in this 
 House. It depends upon the discretion of the Viceroy whe- 
 ther we shall be tried as suspected persons, for the very senti- 
 ments which we may utter against the continuance of this very 
 Act. Suspected persons, without any limit, are liable to be 
 arrested and tried by this tribunal; and if they should exceed 
 the bounds of their jurisdiction, and act upon persons not within 
 the meaning of the Act, what redress is reserved to the most 
 injured man ? Every possibility of legal redress is studiously 
 removed, because it is enacted that the certificate of the Lord 
 Lieutenant shall be conclusive evidence to protect any of these 
 despotic judges who may be questioned in any Court for any 
 excess, however enormous, of which he may be guilty, under 
 colour of this extraordinary power. What then, in a word, 
 are you called upon to do? To empower the Lord Lieute- 
 nant to depute any man in the community whom he may elect, 
 to exercise an uncontrolled jurisdiction over the whole com- 
 munity, extending to life, without any prescribed form of trial, 
 any established law of evidence, any defined specification of 
 offence, any settled measure of punishment, and without any 
 control, provision, or punishment, for any imaginable enor- 
 
 y 2 
 
324 SPEECHES. 
 
 mity, unless it should please the Chief Governor to surrender 
 the instruments of his will to public justice. What are the 
 grounds and pretences for introducing this power, unparalleled 
 in any country where there ever existed a vestige of freedom ? 
 The recitals of the former Act, which you are again called 
 upon to declare and promulgate to the world, as notorious and 
 undoubted facts, are premises from which this extraordinary 
 power is to be derived as an inference, and justified upon the 
 score of necessity. Among the recitals it is stated, " that the 
 said rebellion still continues to rage in very considerable parts 
 of this kingdom, and to desolate and lay waste the country, by 
 the most savage and wanton violence, excess, and outrage, and 
 has utterly set at defiance the civil power, and stopped the 
 ordinary course of justice and common law therein." Whoever 
 penned this recital in the former session, well understood the 
 legal principle of martial law; though I do not admit that 
 even then the recital was warranted by the state of the country, 
 although the extension of martial law to the whole country 
 was by no means warranted by the recital. Martial law is the 
 creature of necessity, and only recognised and admitted by our 
 laws and Constitution, when no other law can operate. Even 
 a rebel taken in battle must be tried by the civil power, if the 
 rebellion has not closed the Courts of justice. Such is the 
 language and doctrine of Lord Hale, Lord Coke, Judge Black- 
 stone, and every legal and constitutional writer upon the sub- 
 ject. I appeal then to the conscience of every honourable 
 Member, whether he believes the recital to be true ; and I rely, 
 that no man of common veracity will assert it. Can we de- 
 clare that the ordinary course of justice is obstructed by re- 
 bellion, when every jurisdiction of the country acts with the 
 utmost freedom, when assizes have been held in every county 
 in Ireland since the last Act passed, and when commissions are 
 signed to send the Judges of the land into every county ? If, 
 then, the recital cannot be continued with truth, the enacting 
 
SPEECHES. 325 
 
 part has no justifiable foundation. Sir, I doubly detest this 
 measure, because it exemplifies the rapid and melancholy decay 
 of constitutional feeling in this country : — a few years hence, 
 and every man would shudder at the mere mention of such a 
 measure, even in a state of more formidable disaffection. We 
 recollect that when the rebellion was in a high degree of organi- 
 zation, and before it received any check, the feelings of the 
 public and of this House were shocked by the bare mention 
 of a measure in the Lords, to subject men who should tamper 
 with the soldiery to courts martial. Every man felt that, under 
 pretext of this single defined offence, military courts might in- 
 vade the jurisdiction of our venerable Courts; and a constitu- 
 tional Attorney-General of that day, to his immortal honour, 
 refused to lend his name and character to so unconstitutional 
 a proceeding. But if His Majesty's Ministers are dead to all 
 other considerations, I warn them not to pass an Act, which, 
 though it may facilitate, must in the end invalidate their fa- 
 vourite measure, an Union. If rebellion rages in the country, 
 is it possible to deliberate upon so vital a measure ? If dicta- 
 torial power be lodged in the hands of the Chief Governor, can 
 it be said that the people or the Parliament exercise a free 
 choice ? Sir, I say that if we pass this Bill, there will exist 
 upon the records of our Parliament evidence abundantly suffi- 
 cient to impeach and vitiate the Minister's project. This 
 dictatorial power is expressly to survive the intended existence 
 of our Parliament. An Union forced upon the nation is to be 
 upheld by martial law and military force. Ireland is to be 
 subdued by martial law, kept in subjection by military des- 
 potism. The Minister will find that this compendious system 
 of Goverment is not practicable, and the experiment, if he per- 
 severe in it, will shake even the empire. 
 
 To reconcile us to this measure, we are told that Lord 
 Comwallis himself reads the minutes of the proceedings before 
 he suffers any capital sentence to be executed. If he does, it is 
 
326 SPEECHES. 
 
 a favour, not a legal duty, and I am persuaded he acts to the 
 best of his judgment. But does not every man experienced in 
 trials know, that, to pronounce a just judgment, the judge must 
 be present at the trial. Much depends upon the manner and 
 conduct of the accuser and the accused, and upon the appear- 
 ance and demeanour of the witnesses. Can a fac simile of the 
 governing circumstances of a trial be communicated by a mere 
 recital — and sometimes a faithless recital — of the testimony of the 
 witnesses; or shall we submit to despotic power, because it is 
 exercised by the present possessor with temper and modera- 
 tion? An honourable Member (Mr. Ogle), whose feelings I 
 highly respect, but from whose reasoning I must dissent, votes 
 for this Bill on account of the state of Wexford, and because 
 its prison is crowded with prisoners. Sir, I have witnessed in 
 many instances the effects of trial by jury, and by court mar- 
 tial, in that county, and do assert that the former tranquillized, 
 and that the latter disturbed the county. Since the rebellion, 
 the gaol of Wexford has been twice delivered by juries of the 
 county, acting under the advice of able Judges, and no guilty 
 man escaped, and no innocent man was punished. The only 
 danger in that county sprung from the violent prejudices of the 
 juries against all men suspected or accused of treason or treason- 
 able practices ; but even that danger was effectually controlled 
 by the wisdom of the Judges who presided. General satisfac- 
 tion was given, and general tranquillity ensued. Upon the con- 
 trary, I know that certain opinions and principles of adjudica- 
 tion ascribed to courts martial, perhaps falsely ascribed, differ- 
 ent from those upon which the Judges of the land acted, have 
 diffused such terror, as that the inhabitants of whole districts 
 have fled from their houses. The people felt as if the Amnesty 
 Act was repealed. I cannot adopt this mode of trial, even 
 upon the ground of celerity, because I know that it is exceeded 
 by juries in all expedition that is consistent with justice: al- 
 though this tribunal is sometimes too rapid, it is too slow; its 
 
SPEECHES. 327 
 
 very precipitation often tends to delay, and time is lost in re- 
 tracing steps erroneously taken ; I have known weeks consumed 
 upon interrogations, which before a jury would not have con- 
 sumed a day. But whether it acts quickly or slowly, it has 
 this incurable imperfection, that its decisions never can satisfy. 
 It will always be considered as an engine of power, and not a 
 source of justice. I cannot see any necessity for conferring new 
 powers upon Government. With an arbitrary power, of im- 
 prisoning all suspected persons, and the common law right of 
 resorting to courts martial when judges and juries cannot act, 
 Government is sufficiently armed for every salutary end. But 
 if a new tribunal was necessary, why not create an ambulatory 
 commission, composed of professional men, who might pursue 
 the course of disturbance, and act instantly upon offences and 
 offenders, — who might administer laws which they understand, 
 according to the laws and usages of the realm ? I do not say 
 that such an institution is necessary, but it is less abhorrent 
 from our Constitution than one which supersedes all law, and 
 extinguishes every spark of civil liberty. 
 
 AGAINST THE UNION. 
 
 ON LORD CASTLEREAGH'S MOVING THE ORDER OF THE DAY FOR 
 THE THIRD READING OF THE UNION BILL. — JUNE 7th, 1800. 
 
 Sir,— I rise to discharge a solemn, and perhaps a final duty 
 in this House. I could not reconcile it to my feelings or 
 my conscience, to give a silent vote upon perhaps the last 
 occasion upon which I shall be suffered to act as the repre- 
 sentative of a free people, or to speak as the subject of a free 
 State. I oppose the final passing of this bill, because I deem 
 
328 SPEECHES. 
 
 it deadly to the liberty, the prosperity, and the peace of Ire- 
 land; because, in my opinion, it gives to England the purse 
 and the sword of this nation, without any national control, and 
 prostrates our resources and ourselves under the feet of a peo- 
 ple who will despise us as voluntary slaves, or trample upon 
 us as conquered enemies. Seeing in this foul transaction no- 
 thing of national consent, nothing of fair negotiation, nothing 
 of equitable arrangement, I cannot but contemplate it as future 
 ages will contemplate it, as the conquest of this island, — the con- 
 quest of the people by martial law, the conquest of their Parlia- 
 ment by bribery. If such were not my rooted conviction, I 
 should be the most profligate incendiary, and the foulest of 
 criminals, to utter the sentiments which I now boldly and 
 loudly promulgate to the world ; but seeing, after the most un- 
 prejudiced investigation of a question which is not new to me, 
 but which I have considered for years, in all its bearings and 
 all its relations, that the measure is deadly to everything that 
 is and ought to be dear to the heart of a free man, and know- 
 ing that it is about to be imposed on this nation by means 
 which ought to awaken indignation in every bosom not dead 
 to all sense of virtue or of honour, I should feel myself the 
 vilest of slaves and of cowards, if any private prudential consi- 
 derations restrained me from protesting in the strongest language 
 which my feelings can suggest, or my tongue utter, against this 
 national stain and unparalleled injury. Neither shall I apolo- 
 gize for the repetition of arguments, which, though unanswered 
 and unanswerable, have heretofore been unsuccessful ; although 
 I well know that truth, which, in the abstract, is always lovely, 
 is, of all things, the most odious to those whose feelings it goads, 
 and whose conscience it stings, without reforming their princi- 
 ples or influencing their practice. 
 
 Sir, I am gratified to read in the dejected and desponding 
 countenances of that wretched majority before me, that the 
 horror of dissolution, and a sense of guilt, have produced some 
 
SPEECHES. 329 
 
 symptoms of contrition,— that they have at least banished that 
 disgusting levity with which this great subject has been so fre- 
 quently treated. I am glad to see a degree of seriousness even 
 in a countenance in which the smile of derision and contempt 
 seemed to be engraven with an adamantine fixedness, which 
 puts me in mind of the line of Pope—" Eternal buckle takes 
 in Parian stone " I shall, therefore, proceed, with some faint 
 hope that even yet the conscience of this House may be awak- 
 ened, to discuss not the minute details or subordinate topics of 
 this measure, but its grand principle and prime effects. I re- 
 assert it, and I think I can prove it to every unbiassed mind, 
 that the grand object of this Bill is to place Ireland again 
 under the rod of British supremacy, and that it will be deadly 
 to our liberty, our prosperity, and our peace. 
 
 In reasoning upon political liberty, I wish to guard against 
 the imputation of opinions absurdly popular. I do not deem 
 it necessary to political liberty, that the people should have 
 any direct share in legislation. I do not think it necessary 
 to political liberty, that the form of Government should be 
 republican. On the contrary, I think many republican forms 
 are utterly inconsistent with it; and that there are but few 
 forms with which, by wise arrangements, it might not be made 
 to consist. Without affecting to define it with precision, 
 I think I may assume this negative proposition as undeniably 
 and universally true under any form, namely, that unless the 
 interest of the governing and governed be identified, there 
 cannot be political liberty ; and I think I may add, that unless 
 the men who make the law will themselves be subjected to and 
 affected by the laws they make, there cannot be any such iden- 
 tification. This, give me leave to say, is the test by which the 
 British Constitution, in its purity, arrogates and deserves prac- 
 tical pre-eminence above any Constitution which has been yet 
 tried ; and give me leave to add, that this principle is vitally 
 outraged by an Union. See how an Union operates upon this 
 
330 SPEECHES. 
 
 House. It leaves an hundred members as they were, and, in 
 place of two hundred Irish representatives of Irish constituen- 
 cies, it substitutes five hundred and fifty English representa- 
 tives of English constituencies; and this aggregate body legislates 
 in England, and (with an exception which cannot practically 
 control the reasoning) they all reside and have their property 
 and families in that country. Now I ask, will the five hun- 
 dred and fifty English representatives feel a common interest with 
 the subjects of this realm? Will they look to the day when 
 they will return into the mass of the people of Ireland, and be 
 themselves subject to the operation of any tyrannical law which 
 may be enacted for this ill-fated country ? Will they fear that 
 they themselves, or their children, may become the victims of 
 any scourge with which they may arm the executive in Ireland ? 
 No such thing. Never having so much as seen Ireland, — never 
 intending so much as to visit this hated, outraged, and calum- 
 niated land, — they will view with indifference, or with a proud 
 feeling of comparative superiority, the decay of liberty in a 
 country which they will ever consider and treat as distinct from 
 their own. To talk of identity, when the laws may be as diffe- 
 rent as those of England and Japan, is insulting nonsense. 
 Does any man believe, that the five hundred and fifty English 
 Representatives would have the same reluctance to abolish the 
 Habeas Corpus Act, or the trial by jury, in Ireland as in Eng- 
 land ? Is it not a part of the creed of the Unionists, that Ire- 
 land is not fit to enjoy the same laws Avith England? Can it 
 be supposed that when the magistrates shall be empowered to 
 transport the subjects of this country by a summary process,* 
 without the intervention of a jury, or when a few inferior mili- 
 tary officers, nominated by the Crown, shall be empowered to 
 inflict capital punishment on whom they please, for whatever im- 
 puted offence they please, by whatever mode of trial they please, 
 
 * In allusion to Mr. Attorney-General Toler's " Rebellion Bill," which had but 
 recently passed the House, and which Mr. Burrowes opposed in all its stages. 
 
SPEECHES. 331 
 
 without appeal, limit, or responsibility, — can it, I say, be sup- 
 posed that the people of England will submit, not to the same 
 law, but the same extinction of law, and bend under the same 
 yoke? No, they will endeavour, studiously endeavour to dis- 
 tinguish their civil state from our's. In contrasted laws they 
 will seek an antidote against united Constitutions; they will 
 flatter themselves, that the contagion of slavery will not spread 
 to them, and that what is done in Ireland, a country not fit for 
 freedom, will form no precedent for England, a country not yet 
 ripe for slavery. 
 
 Sir, it is no consolation to me, that such a hope must be 
 as fallacious as it is unworthy. It is no comfort to me, that the 
 one hundred knights whom we are transplanting will avenge 
 the wrongs of Ireland upon the liberties of England. That 
 deluded nation will soon discover that there is no paling out 
 the shoots of servitude when it has once taken root in a conti- 
 guous country ; that deluded people will repent that they ad- 
 mitted within the very sanctuary of freedom a body of men 
 who will prey upon the vitals of their Constitution, — who will 
 contaminate the sources of British greatness and glory, and 
 pollute and poison that body whom sordid avarice tempted to 
 receive them within their prostituted embraces. 
 
 No candid man pretends that our one hundred absentee 
 Members, chosen by Government sheriffs, and removed from 
 the influence of public opinion, will retain anything of the 
 ancient character of popular representatives. New ideas and 
 new doctrines are entertained about the British Constitution. 
 We have much to submit to, and everything to unlearn. It 
 is contended by courtiers, that the various parties in the British 
 Parliament, while each is dependent upon the Minister, will 
 each by intrigue advance the interests, and protect the rights 
 of the body to whom they belong. This is the doctrine of a 
 pedlar in politics, not of a statesman ; this is a theory of the 
 Constitution, which the infusion of one hundred Irish jobbers 
 
332 SPEECHES. 
 
 into the British Parliament will bring to perfection. When 
 the Minister shall have the landed interest,the moneyed interest, 
 the East India squadron, the Scotch squadron, and the Irish 
 squadron, each negotiating for its separate object, and all re- 
 gardless of general concerns ; where, I ask, will be the consti- 
 tutional shield of civil liberty ? No attack upon the rights of 
 the people at large, no violation of personal liberty, no invasion 
 of these principles of liberty which our forefathers revered, will 
 be resisted or repelled ; public wrongs will be compromised 
 for private services ; esprit du corps will be the utmost flight 
 of patriotism ; particular classes of men may, for a short period, 
 tlourish and fatten, but there will be an end of liberty and the 
 British Constitution. 
 
 One would imagine that Mr. Pitt was jealous of the glory 
 of his immortal father, and was determined that no such man 
 should have any theatre in future in which he might eclipse 
 his own puny fame, and rise by the ancient ways of the Consti- 
 tution to greatness ; one would imagine that he was resolved to 
 envelope the House of Commons by so impenetrable an atmo- 
 sphere of corruption, that the voice of the Constitution never 
 could again reach the people or the sovereign. If such be his 
 views, his means are perfectly suitable. 
 
 That this measure is deadly to the prosperity of Ireland, is, 
 I think, deducible from our loss of liberty. I shall not discuss 
 the terms of the Union, which are a provision for rapid and 
 infallible bankruptcy. I shall not dwell upon the infatuation 
 of supposing that, if the terms were beneficial, they would be 
 observed by a nation who is forcing them upon us, in violation 
 of her solemnly plighted faith, and upon whose faith alone 
 their preservation depends. My mind is decided upon this 
 principle, that commerce cannot long remain after liberty and 
 independence have fled. I would as soon call the slave, who 
 toiled in a gold mine, rich and prosperous, as the Irish manu- 
 facturer, when his home manufacture shall have lost the pro- 
 
SPEECHES. 333 
 
 tection of his home Parliament; but he is ignorant of* the 
 motives and principles which actuate the heart of man, who 
 believes that a spirit of industry and of exertion can survive 
 liberty. If the object of England be to pamper us, that she may 
 squeeze us, she will be deceived ; she will discover what she 
 ought to know without this experiment, that tyranny is as un- 
 thrifty as it is unjust. The ox will fatten that he may be slaugh- 
 tered, — the bee will collect treasures for which he will be 
 smothered, — such are the instincts of the brute creation ; but the 
 most uncultivated savage, or brutalized slave, has some fore- 
 cast, which will dissuade him from gathering what he cannot 
 enjoy, from accumulating what he cannot protect; what may 
 tempt the cravings of power, and operate even as a bounty 
 against his life. 
 
 Sir, I do not entirely agree with those who call this an ex- 
 perimental project. In respect to England, the change of her 
 Parliament is, undoubtedly, a most tremendous novelty ; but, 
 in respect to Ireland, it has been tried, and, give me leave to 
 add, condemned by experience. The British supremacy which 
 it revives, and for the revival of which it has been adopted, is 
 no novelty to us; we felt its influence for centuries. If inju- 
 ries and insults are so soon forgotten, — if nakedness and famine, 
 amidst the most abundant natural resources, be proofs of good 
 culture, — then, indeed, should we hasten to re-establish that 
 supremacy. Sir, I have already frequently proved that that 
 supremacy will be as complete, and even less controlled, 
 after an Union than before 1782, because the three hundred 
 members of this House, acting in Ireland, was a better control 
 than one hundred of the same men, intermixed with the British 
 Parliament, can in future be. 
 
 Sir, 1 am sick of hearing it asserted that we will imme- 
 diately become one people with the English, having a common 
 interest and a common feeling. No gentleman has condescended 
 to show how this miraculous effect is to be produced ; there is 
 
334 SPEECHES. 
 
 no union but an union of hearts which can produce it. I would 
 as soon believe that, by yoking a stronger with a weaker ani- 
 mal, you would instantly create a mutual sympathy between 
 them, or that by feeding the one you might fatten the other. I 
 very well know that the one might thrive and flourish, while 
 the other withered and decayed, until, indeed, putrescence and 
 infection extended from the latter to the former. God grant 
 that this may not be the issue of this compulsory identifi- 
 cation ! 
 
 If, then, this measure be deadly to the liberty and the com- 
 merce of Ireland, what bold man will undertake that we shall 
 have even the tranquillity of despotism ? Can it be relied upon, 
 that a nation which has tasted freedom, and made such advances 
 in commerce, will tamely submit to the plunder of their rights 
 and the rape of their Constitution? What drug can be admi- 
 nistered which will spread an oblivion of the time in which, 
 and the means by which, this project shall be accomplished? 
 The noble Lord has exulted that no party in Ireland has taken 
 up arms against this measure, and he spoke as if it would give 
 him but little pain to apply the bayonet against any crazy 
 and ill-timed resistance. If the noble Lord infers the assent 
 of the people from their tameness, he may rest assured he 
 would have had the same argument to the same extent if his 
 project had been to force a fraternization between Ireland 
 and Russia under similar circumstances. With the people 
 under his feet, with the treasury at his back, with dictatorial 
 power in his hands, and an immense army at his devotion, it 
 is astonishing that the expression of popular detestation has been 
 so loud and universal. My learned and valued friend, Mr. 
 Saurin, whose profound and luminous exertions will shed 
 a lustre upon the decline of that profession which even he 
 could not rescue from the common ruin, has been accused 
 of instigating the people to resistance in the first instance, 
 and then recanting the seditious doctrines he had inefFec- 
 
speeches. 335 
 
 tually preached. Sir, his language and his conduct have 
 been uniform. He never did stimulate the people to a fruit- 
 less struggle, and he never did recant or soften down any doc- 
 trine he had at any time advanced upon the subject. He warned 
 the Minister and the Parliament not to persevere in forcing 
 this measure upon the people of Ireland ; and he did uniformly 
 deny the competency of Parliament, without their consent, to 
 negotiate away and transfer the supreme power of the State 
 to another country. His language was so plain and impressive, 
 and the truths he uttered so simple and intelligible, that no 
 docile child could misunderstand, or unbiassed man resist them. 
 He did not contend that the assent of the people was necessary 
 to the validity of any other legislative act, nor did he at any 
 time deny that a subsequent adoption and ratification might 
 legalize establishments commencing in the rankest fraud and 
 foulest tyranny. 
 
 Such are the opinions in which I am proud to concur with 
 my learned friend; if a dungeon were open to receive me for 
 uttering so bold a truth, I would declare, that this measure, 
 even though it should pass through all the forms of the Con- 
 stitution, will not be therefore binding upon the conscience of 
 any man, not even of the slave who sold his suffrage to carry 
 it. Do I, therefore, pledge myself to resist it? What may 
 be the conduct of so obscure and humble a man as I am can 
 be but of little public moment, though to himself rectitude of 
 conduct, in trying times, may be invaluable. I shall only say, 
 that I have so just a sense of my own unimportance, and so 
 strong a feeling for the welfare of the country which gave me 
 birth, that, if I do not miscalculate the extent of my own cou- 
 rage, I shall be always ready to lay down a life of little value 
 upon the altar of my country. I know the inestimable value 
 of liberty to the improvement, to the comfort, to the happi- 
 ness, and to the morals of a nation. I know that it is a great 
 prize, and worthy of a great hazard. I am deeply impressed 
 
336 SPEECHES. 
 
 with the horrors of civil war, and feel that no conscientious 
 man, however cheaply he may estimate his own life, will be 
 prodigal of the blood of his fellow-citizens. I know that ill- 
 timed and ineffectual struggles for liberty but rivet the chains 
 of slavery the more firmly ; and that any man who embarks in 
 any enterprise, however justifiably, upon speculative principles, 
 without well weighing the time, the means, and the probable 
 consequences to the present generation, and to posterity, is a 
 bad citizen. Under the influence of such feelings and such 
 opinions, I shall entertain a confident hope that liberty and 
 tranquillity may be yet restored to this island ; and I shall, upon 
 every occasion which may arise, act as a conscientious man, 
 who considers himself as nothing, and his country as every- 
 thing ; who endeavours to discover his duties here, and looks 
 for his reward hereafter. 
 
 ON THE ADVANTAGES TO BE DERIVED FROM THE 
 INSTITUTION OF NATIONAL SCHOOLS IN IRELAND. 
 
 No man possessing a ray of reason, or a spark of benevolence, 
 could hear the Report which has been now read, without being 
 interested in the subject, without feeling the warmest gratitude 
 towards those excellent men who have prepared it. The sub- 
 ject is at all times and in all countries interesting, — in our 
 own country it is peculiarly so. 
 
 It can scarcely be considered as national vanity, for it most 
 certainly is national reproach to assert, that there never has ex- 
 isted a country for which nature has done so much, and institu- 
 tion so little, as Ireland. Without tearing open wounds which 
 every good man would rather cover and conceal, — without seek- 
 ing for the causes of our degradation in a retrospect calculated, 
 by the irritation it might cause, to reproduce the very evils we 
 deplore, — we can discover the principal and proximate cause 
 
SPEECHES. 337 
 
 in a disease which, however inveterate, is not incurable. Our 
 Committee, whose admirable Report has been heard with such 
 delight, have laid before us in one view, both the disease and 
 the remedy. Ignorance, and consequent irreligion, have dis- 
 figured the noblest work of God, and they have made a glori- 
 ous effort, — a successful effort, if well seconded, — to raise man 
 from the mire in which he grovels, — to render the bounty of 
 heaven available to him. This is genuine patriotism, this is 
 enlightened self-love, this is to pursue the noblest end by the 
 most suitable means, this is to attack the disease at its very 
 root, this is to confer the highest service, and to receive the 
 most gratifying reward, — not the clamours and revocable gra- 
 titude of a capricious multitude, but the exhilirating spectacle 
 of a nation rapidly improving in morals, industry, and religion. 
 
 Our sheep, our oxen, our houses, our very swine, are 
 deemed objects worthy of the most anxious cultivation. Soci- 
 eties are instituted, committees are formed to investigate their 
 qualities, to improve their breed, I might almost say, to edu- 
 cate them. Do I say this to blame it? No! It is laudable, 
 it is good husbandry, it is a subordinate degree of patriotism. 
 But can it be wise — can it be just — to cultivate the brute and 
 to neglect the man ? This would be, not only to sin against 
 reason and religion, but to violate the calculations of the m^"* 
 sordid interest. It requires but a very slight effort indeed of 
 reason to discover, that the produce and security of estates de- 
 pend principally upon the human animal. If he be idle, vi- 
 cious, and dishonest, our soil will be barren, or its produce 
 will be plundered ; the gibbet may thin the land, but it cannot 
 fertilize it. 
 
 The despot may tell us he will enact wise laws, and compel 
 universal obedience to them. Is he aware of the weakness and 
 perversity of human nature? Vain and presumptuous man! 
 to hope that he shall effectuate what even the eternal sanctions, 
 announced by the Almighty, fail to effect. The demagogue 
 
 z 
 
338 SPEECHES. 
 
 will say, give the people privileges, give them perfect liberty, 
 and they will soon become rational, industrious, and happy. 
 Preposterous inversion of the laws of nature ! Education is the 
 cause, not the effect of freedom ; the finest constitution in the 
 power of human wisdom to devise, could not be worn by sa- 
 vages brutalized by vice and ignorance; the most admirable 
 laws, with such a people, would be a dead letter. As well 
 might we commit the arms of a warrior into the hands of an 
 infant for self-defence ; but education, improving the moral 
 character of man, not only fits him for liberty, but ascertains 
 its attainment. A moral and enlightened people could not be 
 slaves It is morally, it is physically impossible. 
 
 Let not, then, despair of success chill that benevolent ar- 
 dour which actuates our Committee. They have not suc- 
 ceeded to the extent of their hopes. Men are more prompt to 
 praise than to co-operate. But how are we to estimate such 
 barren praise ? What are we to think of the individual who 
 can be indifferent in such a cause, — who can contemplate the 
 glorious work in operation, admit its utility, and yet refuse to 
 lend his aid to carry it forward ? Alas ! the convincing Report 
 we have just heard read establishes the justness of the reproach. 
 With what lamentably inadequate means have your Committee 
 had to struggle, and yet what extensive good have they not 
 already done ? The paltry pittance of £240 is doled out for such 
 an object, in twelve months, for the education of Ireland ! 
 Such is the mortifying acknowledgment. But let them not 
 despair ; let them recollect that though trite truisms, however 
 important, are often heard without interest, without emotion, 
 yet the effort ought to be continued — the benevolent truism 
 ought to be repeated and inculcated. Sound theory, sooner or 
 later, will ripen into practice ; there is no telling the moment 
 when wealth and power shall receive an active impulse from 
 benevolence and wisdom, and shall obey the dictates of their 
 own true interest; it may be to-morrow, it may be the next 
 
SPEECHES. 339 
 
 day, it may bo postponed for years; but it is so certain that it 
 will at some time occur, so probable that it will soon occur, 
 and of such immeasurable value -when it shall occur, that our 
 Committee may continue their labours with a perfect confi- 
 dence that they will terminate in success, of which the interest 
 they have this day excited gives the surest earnest. 
 
 ON THE INTERESTS OF EDUCATION. 
 
 Mr. Chairman, — In proposing a vote of thanks to the several 
 officers of the Society, a measure which cannot fail to meet 
 universal approbation, I beg to say, that I would not have 
 spoken upon the general subject but for the observations of the 
 noble Lord Cloncurry, who had just sat down. I give the noble 
 Lord perfect credit for sincerity in the objections he has urged. 
 I have long witnessed the conduct of the noble Lord, and 
 esteemed him as an active and useful magistrate, a zealous friend 
 to the poor, and, as a man, at all times ready to promote, with 
 his purse and his personal exertions, every object of national 
 improvement ; and I have no doubt but that the noble Lord 
 considers the education of the people of Ireland as foremost 
 amongst the objects which a good Irishman should endeavour 
 to advance. I, however, think the noble Lord is under the 
 influence of a pernicious error upon the present occasion, likely 
 to produce and extend the very evil of which he complains. 
 
 On the original formation of the Society, the principle 
 upon which it should be conducted was well considered by 
 some of the most enlightened and unprejudiced men in the 
 country. They all agreed that National Education should be 
 conducted in schools where children of all religious persua- 
 sions should intermix ; they felt that to encourage difficult and 
 conflicting Catechisms to be taught, would be to kindle reli- 
 
 z 2 
 
340 SPEECHES. 
 
 gious controversy, and to inflame prejudices, when it was their 
 prime object to allay them. They shrunk, however, from the 
 profanation of shutting out all religious instruction from schools 
 in a Christian country ; and, to escape the former evil, without 
 too great a sacrifice, they determined that the Holy Scriptures 
 without note or comment, should be read in the schools under 
 their patronage ; and to accommodate and gratify the Roman 
 Catholic body, they consented that the Douay translation 
 should be used; and they forbade all peculiar commentary, or 
 any instruction as to the peculiar tenets of any Church, during 
 the school hours. Many enlightened Roman Catholics agreed 
 in this principle. Several of the Roman Catholic clergy have 
 approved of it. Subscribers have multiplied, induced by the 
 wisdom of the plan, under the circumstances of Ireland ; and 
 the Government of the country has given it liberal and conti- 
 nued support, expressly granted on account of their appro- 
 bation of the principle which the noble Lord now so much 
 condemns. Education has flourished under the rule originally 
 adopted, and every year has added numerous converts from 
 amongst the Roman Catholic clergy and laity, to the use of 
 the Scriptures without note or comment. Yet it is at this mo- 
 ment that the noble Lord calls upon the Society to abrogate 
 resolutions upon the faith of which they have received their 
 funds. They cannot, they ought not to comply. I am well 
 known to be a zealous and attached friend to the Roman Ca- 
 tholics of Ireland. I feel that I deserve the confidence of that 
 body from my undeviating attachment to their interest. I shall 
 not be suspected, therefore, of recommending any system pre- 
 judicial to their interests. From the first dawning of my rea- 
 son, I saw the misery and degradation of my country, in the 
 depression of that body ; and I felt, and upon every opportunity 
 I showed that I felt, that until they could be fully emancipated, 
 Ireland could not be a nation. I exult that I have lived to 
 experience great improvement in that body, and in nothing 
 
SPEECHES. 341 
 
 more than in education. Almost every Protestant now abhors 
 a system oflaws, framed, as it were, for the very purpose of 
 brutalizing the great bulk of the people, of famishing their 
 minds even more than their bodies. Elaborate enactments 
 were invented, to shut out all knowledge from their minds, 
 except such pilfered literature as persecuted demagogues could 
 convey, or such barbarous philosophy as could be smuggled 
 from foreign Universities, under the severest prohibition, as if 
 the light of science could extinguish the light of the Gospel ; 
 as if the religion of the land could not bear the light. 
 
 I agree with the noble Lord that separate education would 
 be a great evil, and that great sacrifices ought to be made to 
 avoid it; but I cannot believe that so revolting a sacrifice as 
 the exclusion of the Scriptures from the schools is necessary. 
 I had long lived in this country regretting its divided state. I had 
 long wished that this institution should be established ; I de- 
 spaired of such an event, when my feelings were delighted with 
 the spectacle of a number of men, capable of viewing the sub- 
 ject in principle and detail, making the greatest sacrifices to 
 the noble pursuit. Gentlemen principally embarked in a pro- 
 fession where avarice and ambition, and duty alike, tempt to 
 an exclusive application of their time ; first claiming confidence 
 by their character, and then securing it by their conduct. The 
 attempt was noble, the obstacles deterring. I was pleased at 
 the experiment, but I almost despaired of it3 success. They 
 had individuals to work upon the most difficult to be ma- 
 naged. To educate the populace, without instructing the 
 Roman Catholics, who are to all intents the nation, would be 
 to defeat the object. The idea of keeping the populace in igno- 
 rance had long been abandoned ; it was no longer generally 
 believed that ignorance was a guarantee for obedience; that 
 prostration was the only fit attitude of loyalty. I did not com- 
 municate with them at the commencement of their labours. I 
 did not, I confess it, expect they would have gone the length 
 
342 • SPEECHES. 
 
 in liberality in which they commenced and proceeded; they 
 determined to educate the whole populace, and determined to 
 educate them together. If contented to educate a part, without 
 promoting union, their course would have been easy ; but they 
 preferred a course more arduous, but more useful. 
 
 Having adopted, on the soundest principles of morality and 
 policy, the determination to have intermixed education, then, 
 Ibdeed, an important difficulty started, against which they have 
 advanced, if not with complete and consummate success, with 
 Gt(i§iderable and growing advantage. 
 
 , . It was well known by every man that the Roman Catholic 
 clergy and people, especially the former, had a strong objection 
 to the universal reading of the Scriptures ; the gentlemen, there- 
 fore, had to determine whether they should have schools with- 
 out any instruction in religion at all, or, allowing it, to qualify 
 and limit it so as not to repel the great body of the people from 
 taking their benefit. I confess I think they did steer well be- 
 tween the two evils ; they adopted a course wise and well cal- 
 culated to procure intermixed education, and to avoid the 
 offence that has latterly been taken by the Roman Catholic pre- 
 lates as to the possibility of proselytism. They have embodied 
 this in a resolution, which must have been in existence when 
 Lord Cloncurry became a member, and which 1 am surprised 
 he did not read before he subscribed : " The leading principle 
 by which the Society shall be guided is to afford the same faci- 
 lities for education to all classes of professing Christians, with- 
 out attempting to interfere with the peculiar religious opinions 
 of any ; as it is conceived that schools best adapted to the wants 
 and circumstances of Ireland are those in which the appoint- 
 ment of governors, teachers, and scholars shall be uninfluenced 
 by religious distinctions, where the Scriptures, without note or 
 comment, shall be read, but all Catechisms and books or reli- 
 gious controversy excluded." Now, as I would construe these pro- 
 positions, the instruction must not be limited to a mere naked 
 
SPEECHES. , 343 
 
 perusal of any portion of the Scriptures; but the Scriptures might 
 be read according to the Douay translation, and the great prin- 
 ciples upon which all Christians agree might be explained and 
 inculcated, and the Christian virtues implanted in the youthful 
 mind, but peculiar tenets might be left to private and domestic 
 education, and the clergy of each peculiar sect. If an institution 
 were going now to be originated, what better could be proposed 
 as a plan for united education ? It is unintelligible to me how 
 any man could apprehend that this system would produce any 
 conflict of hostile feeling. Every sect might feel that there ,wa3 
 a deficiency which might be supplied by private supplemental 
 instruction. 
 
 I confess I am surprised at the terror which is sincerely felt 
 by some, but for sinister purposes affected by others, that a 
 universal circulation of the Holy Scriptures would inundate the 
 country with evil, unless they were ushered in and guarded by 
 the superintendence of human wisdom. I admit that some evil 
 must arise from the perverse interpretations which human folly 
 or human frailty might be tempted to adopt; nor would such 
 danger be limited to the perversions of the vulgar, the illiterate, 
 or the imbecile ; it might occur amongst the most mature and 
 the most cultivated. Unmixed good cannot exist in this world, 
 unless it would please the Supreme Being to change the system 
 of His moral government, and to render man impeccable by 
 depriving him of free agency; but if I could believe that an 
 universal diffusion of the Scriptures through all nations and all 
 ranks would produce more evil than good, even though left to 
 their own unassisted operation, I should be tempted to doubt 
 their divine origin, or the attributes of the Being from whom 
 they emanated. The general moral malady, that tainted every 
 thing in this country, was alienation of mind growing out of 
 religious differences. I have long contemplated with agonized 
 feelings the rancorous prejudices which equally disfigured both 
 sects; they shunned each other as they would infection. I 
 
344 speeches. 
 
 have known individuals of one sect, who have passed the 
 middle period of their lives without one hour's social intercourse 
 with any individual of another ; and when, by accident, they 
 found good sense, good principles, and good manners, where 
 they expected to meet everything that was revolting, they 
 seemed astonished at a discovery, which, if they sought for it, 
 they might have made in every district in Ireland. I would 
 meet these prejudices in the very cradle, and I would educate 
 the children together, that they might be taught to love and 
 respect each other. Proximity, without intercourse, is the 
 most deplorable state of human association. The prejudices 
 and antipathies of distant nations are tame and feeble com- 
 pared with those which actuate sects, who live almost in corpo- 
 real contact, while their minds are in a constant state of indo- 
 mitable alienation. They have no eyes but for blemishes, they 
 have no ears but for calumnies. The poison is greedily de- 
 voured by all, and the antidote, inquiry, is universally disre- 
 lished. From this malady has this country, within my expe- 
 rience, been greatly relieved. The Protestant and Roman 
 Catholic now meet as friends and brothers. In the great object 
 of general education, they arc equally active and anxious; and 
 I fear not that the emancipated Scriptures will soon assert their 
 rights. 
 
 EXORDIUM. 
 
 If the event of this day's trial were to depend on the exertions 
 of counsel, it would little avail my client that he is unequally 
 supported as he is. I rise, notwithstanding, in confidence that 
 he will obtain redress adequate to his wrongs. Artful and elo- 
 quent as the learned Gentleman has been who spoke to evi- 
 dence, I feel that, in this case, all his artifice and all his elo- 
 
SPEECHES. 345 
 
 quence will be unavailing; I feel that the superiority of his 
 talents are merged in the superior strength of my client's case, 
 and in the magnitude of his injuries. I well know that you 
 are susceptible of the impressions which talents like his are 
 suited to make, and that it is difficult for any judgment to repel 
 or withstand so fascinating a torrent; but I also feel that you 
 have sympathies for the distressed and the outraged which the 
 feeblest breath can awaken, and which never can slumber when 
 a fellow-citizen whose person, whose liberty, and whose cha- 
 racter have been violated, knocks at your bosoms and conscience 
 for justice and for reparation. Feelings like these are, in cases 
 like this, the legal as well as the rational measure of damages ; 
 and it is owing to their beneficent operation, that the injured 
 man, whose poverty leaves him no choice of advocates, can hold 
 up his head in a public Court against his proud and opulent 
 oppressor, who can always command the alliance of genius to 
 colour or to cover his enormities. Of one thing, at least, I am 
 certain, that you will give me a patient and attentive hearing, 
 while I endeavour to explain the nature of this action, to show 
 how amply it has been supported by evidence, to detect the 
 many misrepresentations of facts and fallacies of argument that 
 have been indulged in on the other side, and to satisfy your 
 reason and your feelings that the limits of damages laid by my 
 client in his declaration will not allow you to transgress in his 
 favour. 
 
 PERORATION. 
 
 On the whole of this case, an outrage of an alarming kind has 
 been committed. The property of foreigners has been seized 
 by the grasp of lawless power ; under colour of the Revenue 
 law, an act of piracy has been committed. Laws whose un- 
 
346 SPEECHES. 
 
 constitutional severity is the subject of daily and universal com- 
 plaint, and which menace the total extinction of civil liberty, 
 have been held insufficient to gratify the rage for revenue ra- 
 pine. A little officer of excise has presumed to do what in the 
 Legislature would, perhaps, be an act of unjustifiable presump- 
 tion, — to extend the boundary within which ships shall not sail 
 or commerce flow. The foreigner, who could not escape the au- 
 dacious pursuit of this puny pirate, has escaped the persecution 
 of the law. The Revenue Court has dared to decide against 
 the Crown, and an instance has occurred in which the acts of 
 a dependent closet-jurisdiction has not interdicted the functions 
 of a juror. The revenue criminal is brought before twelve 
 honourable constitutional citizens, and you are to decide upon 
 him. I do not fear you; you know how to value the sacred 
 rights of property, and, let me add, of personal liberty. You 
 feel indignant at the outrage, and are, therefore, qualified to 
 repair it. Government may stand between justice and the cul- 
 prit ; the Revenue may pay the price of its own disgrace ; 
 Mr. Wilby may be indemnified, or perhaps promoted; but 
 you, by a verdict proportional to the magnitude of the offence, 
 will record the sentiments you entertain of it. If ships may be 
 pillaged with impunity, houses may be pillaged also. The 
 same code under colour of which Mr. Wilby pursued and cap- 
 tured a ship, cargo, and its crew, on the high seas, would fur- 
 nish him with pretences equally colourable for invading the 
 habitation of the most respected citizen. Whether the Revenue 
 would protect him by land, as well as by sea, is not for me to 
 determine. The liberty of the subject is not totally dependent 
 upon that question, it is not totally dependent upon the dis- 
 cretion of the Revenue. As long as a remnant of your jurisdic- 
 tion is left, and that you feel like citizens, that you will feel and 
 act on this occasion like citizens I trust; and I have the fullest 
 confidence that you will find such a verdict as will do justice 
 to my client and honour to yourselves. 
 
347 
 
 THE LIBERTY OF THE PRESS. 
 
 There is no subject so trite, yet important, — so vulgar, and yet 
 so vital, as that subject upon which I must address you. The 
 Liberty of the Press, which is as necessary to the health and 
 vigour of our Constitution as the air which we breathe is to 
 human life, has been so familiarized, I would almost say, vul- 
 garized by frequent discussion, that its value is not duly appre- 
 ciated ; and I am afraid we have lost much of the reverence 
 which we owe to its paramount protection of our constitutional 
 liberties. 
 
 A free Press has ever been the object of hatred to arbitrary 
 power. It is natural that it should be so. It is the most for- 
 midable impediment to the advance of lawless ambition. It is 
 a control vested in the people to stop the encroachments of in- 
 ordinate power. It curbs and cures the excesses and defects of 
 the law of the land, by the law of reputation. It enables the 
 people to pronounce a judgment which cannot be resisted or 
 reversed; and is one of those reserved rights which no free 
 people can relinquish. If it does exist, there can be no perma- 
 nent tyranny in the land; — if it does not, there can be no 
 secure freedom. It is the organ through which the censorial 
 power of the people is exerted, and if it be silenced, further 
 opinion never can speak or be respected. It is not only neces- 
 sary to have this freedom of communication upon public sub- 
 jects sanctioned, but it should be cherished. It should be free 
 from the apprehension of danger. If it be coerced it perishes. 
 From its effervescent nature it cannot exist in any energy, or 
 be of any value, if it be confined within narrow limits, or sub- 
 jected to rigid regulations. There cannot be fulness if there 
 may not be overflowing. I know not, Gentlemen, what you 
 may feel upon those ex officio informations, which are growing 
 
348 SPEECHES. 
 
 into the regular practice of the Crown, and which fill me with 
 dismay. I know that there is a propensity in power to put 
 down whatever may animadvert upon its excesses, and I am 
 equally certain that the liberty of the Press will be effectually 
 undermined, and that those who dare not attack it at once and 
 by assault, may yet gradually deprive it of all its energy and 
 all its usefulness. The language of Crown lawyers upon this 
 subject is equally ridiculous and alarming. Juries are told that 
 the people of these countries ought to enjoy all the advantages 
 of legitimate discussion, but that public men and public mea- 
 sures ought not to be reproached ; their feelings must not be 
 wounded, or their reputation blemished, — discontent must not 
 be excited, nor the affections of the subject alienated from the 
 Ministers of the Crown. Good God, Gentlemen, what a delu- 
 sion is attempted to be practised upon our understandings by 
 such sentiments ! How can the Press at all act against the 
 machinations of bad Ministers, but by exposing their measures 
 and themselves to public odium ? How can this be done with- 
 out aspersing their characters and hurting their feelings ? How 
 can bad laws be repealed, or a bad administration of them be 
 restrained, but by exciting discontent towards such laws, and 
 reprobation of such Ministers ? Are not all abuses removed, 
 and all reforms effected, through the very operation of that dis- 
 content which is relied upon as the criterion of sedition? 
 
 In respect of the freedom of the Press, I am happy to live 
 in an age, in which the early attempts of this reign to extin- 
 guish it have been frustrated by one great constitutional Act 
 of Parliament, which places it where alone it can be safe, in 
 the jury box. I mean the Libel Act, which will immortalize 
 the memory of that great man, Charles Fox. A libel is now 
 no longer a matter of law, cognizable by the Court only, and 
 by the jury never. Every effort to control the Press must now 
 fail, unless juries shall become servile, unless they can be 
 culled and packed, willing and obsequious instruments of who- 
 ever chances to be in power. 
 
34!) 
 
 CHARACTER OF SERJEANT BALL, 
 
 ON MOVING THAT A MONUMENT SHOULD BE ERECTED BY THE 
 IRISH BAR TO HIS MEMORY.* 
 
 Yet, Gentlemen, what could I say, what could any man in my 
 place say in his praise, which is not already known to you all, — 
 which every man of you would not anticipate. There never 
 departed this life an individual who stood less in need of post- 
 humous praise ; the man who had no enemy living can have no 
 calumniator when dead. Without vices to attract the sympa- 
 thy and bribe the suffrages of the vicious, — without condes- 
 cension to conciliate the powerful and supercilious, — with 
 conduct which never countenanced frailty by example, — and 
 with a life which was a rebuke to all who were base, mean, or 
 frivolous. It is a subject of interesting speculation to consider, 
 by what charm, — certainly not of art, but of nature, — it oc- 
 curred, that no man ever uttered one syllable to his disparage- 
 ment; he is the only man whom I ever knew to whom it could 
 not be fairly imputed as a blemish, that he wanted the negative 
 testimony to his worth, which arises from the odium and vili- 
 fication of the worthless. 
 
 But, Gentlemen, it is not so much from a consideration of 
 him who is gone, as of those dear relations and affectionate 
 friends who remain behind, that we should offer this tribute. 
 Funeral honours, when justly and wisely bestowed, are benefits 
 to the living; it is fit that the wife who late adored him, and 
 now barely survives him, — it is fit that the children, some of 
 whom arc too young to understand or feel their loss, — should 
 have recorded evidence of his great eminence, and the high 
 esteem in which he was held by a liberal profession ; it is fit 
 that we should teach them that, whatever may be the accumu- 
 
 * Vide Memoir, page 96. 
 
350 SPEECHES. 
 
 lation of his talents and his industry, whether he has left them 
 in opulence or in indigence, they inherit from him what is 
 better than wealth, what vulgar prosperity could not purchase 
 or bestow, the favourable prepossessions of the good, the zea- 
 lous wish of every virtuous man, to assist them in their progress 
 through life, the patronage and protection of all that is feeling 
 and all that is worthy in this land. 
 
 But, Gentlemen, we have a nearer concern, a closer, I would 
 almost say a selfish interest in paying this tribute. In this 
 temple of justice was his life exhausted in furnishing a model 
 of professional excellence, calculated to improve the practice of 
 the Bar, and to raise its character in public estimation. Deep 
 and perspicuous, simple and interesting, zealous and candid, 
 modest and bold, he gave to every client the ablest exertion 
 which an honest and honourable advocate could bestow upon 
 his cause ; and he never inflicted upon any adversary a pang 
 of which a candid man could justly complain. Without fortune, 
 without patron, without vulgar intercourse, without the un- 
 worthy canvassing of partisans, without self-predication, with- 
 out servility, without overbearing, he gradually attracted uni- 
 versal unsolicited attention to his high natural endowments, 
 and the treasures of his extensive legal learning. It was his 
 peculiar lot, in a profession prone to emulation and all its evils, 
 to be followed without envy and passed without scorn ; and 
 when finally he passed all by, he rather wondered at than ex- 
 ulted in his success. His humility grew with the growth of 
 his celebrity, and his unassuming manners interested all men 
 in his well-earned elevation; and surely, Gentlemen, it cannot 
 but operate as an edifying example and an useful incentive to 
 those who are now on their way, or who hereafter may follow 
 him in an arduous and honourable profession, to learn, that 
 such a man, in such a way, attained a station in society to 
 which the favour of a court could never have raised him, and 
 from which the clamours of the populace could never have 
 deposed him. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 FROM THE ANTI-UNION PAPER.* 
 
 " Mortua quinetiam jungebat corpora vivia 
 Componens manibusque manus, atque oribus ora 
 Complexa in misero longa sic morte nccabat." 
 
 Virg. Mnew, lib. viii. 
 
 Mr. Pitt, at his entrance upon his long ministry, pledged him- 
 self as a man and a minister, to support a Parliamentary Re- 
 form. I was not amongst the number of those who imputed the 
 failure of the plan he proposed to insincerity. Circumstanced as 
 the Parliament then was, it was not at all impossible that a Minis- 
 ter, even an eloquent minister, should lose a measure. That he did 
 not immediately re-propose it, casts no imputation upon his sincerity. 
 In a case not calling for immediate redress, it requires but little 
 candour to allow some time for the search after a less exceptionable 
 system, some time for learning the sentiments of the nation, and 
 some time for making arrangements which might facilitate its suc- 
 cess in Parliament. 
 
 During this interval, the doctrine of the rights of man was re- 
 vealed in France in all its plenitude; Jacobinism and French frater- 
 nity were taking root even in England ; and the most tempestuous 
 passions were mixed with the most visionary speculations. In such 
 a ferment of the human mind and human feelings, Mr. Pitt con- 
 curred with many of the wisest and honestest men in England, in 
 opposing even the discussion of anything which bore the semblance 
 of popular innovation. Some very well-meaning men thought that 
 he carried this sentiment to an extreme, and that the most effectual 
 
 * Fide Memoir, page 55. 
 
352 APPENDIX. 
 
 antidote against revolution was reform. They thought it not un- 
 reasonable to exemplify the last quality of the British Constitution, 
 its recuperative energy, its powers of self-correction, at the very 
 moment when its defects were said to be incorrigible, and when the 
 pride of speculative sagacity was telling up the inventions of the 
 human mind against the conclusions of experience upon a sub- 
 ject of all others the most practical. Stare decisis became, how- 
 ever, the ministerial watch-word, and he would not suffer a Consti- 
 tution which had worked so Avell to be tampered with, even upon 
 the clearest evidence of manifest abuse and safe correction. 
 
 During the tempest of innovating fury, let us content ourselves 
 with fortifying and preserving the Constitution such as it is; after 
 the storm shall have passed away, we may exert ourselves in 
 amending it. Such was the language of the Minister, echoed 
 through every part of England, and such became the decided sense 
 of the nation. 
 
 It is amongst the worst and most general effects of revolutionary 
 projects, that they raise that power too high which they endeavour to 
 sink too low. Nothing, I believe, is so deadly to liberty as licentious- 
 ness, or to government as tyranny. The republican extravagance in 
 the reign of Charles I. was the principal cause, that Charles II. might, 
 if he sought it, have become despotic, and that a revolution became 
 necessary in the reign of his successor. The mind of man natu- 
 rally rushes to extremes. Such is now the horror of republicanism 
 in England, that not only all pursuit of popular reform is aban- 
 doned, but people in general behold with indifference the most va- 
 luable privileges of a British subject suspended at the will of the 
 Minister, and the influence of the Crown outgrowing the Consti- 
 tution. Most certainly there never was a time when it was so 
 unnecessary and at the same time so easy to increase that influ- 
 ence. This is a state of things, this is a temper of the public mind, 
 which seldom exists in a free country; but during the prevalence 
 of which it is in the power of a crafty minister to make that country 
 cease to be free. 
 
 Do we discover any such design in the present Minister? Do we 
 see him making preparations to rescue himself and his successors, 
 
APPENDIX. 353 
 
 and their measures, for ever, from all popular control and consti- 
 tutional responsibility ? Do we see the son of Lord Chatham making 
 atonement to the Sovereign for the presumption of his father, and 
 guarding the throne against the unsolicited intrusion of any offi- 
 cious adviser, and the disgusting necessity of attending in the 
 choice of servants to popular character, and popular recommen- 
 dation? I argue not against the Minister from his resisting the 
 discussion of all questions of reform, neither do I decide against him 
 from his various temporary violations of the best privileges of a 
 British subject, or from the war in which we have been involved, 
 the taxes which have been imposed, or the debt which has been so 
 enormously augmented, or even from the honours which have been so 
 profusely lavished, or the government patronage which has been ex- 
 tended by him, certainly beyond all past example, and possibly be- 
 yond all future cure. These things were suspicious and alarming, but 
 not decisive. But is there any degree of confidence or credulity 
 proof against the conviction which the proposed measure of an Union, 
 in addition to his other measures, must flash upon every rational 
 mind, that there exists a deep, subtle, and systematic design to 
 subvert the British Constitution; and that the anti-jacobin Minis- 
 ter, the Minister of kings, wishes to forget that he proceeded from 
 the people, and is determined never to return to the source from 
 whence he sprung? Reform was, perhaps, wisely postponed to a pe- 
 riod of tranquillity ; but why is the season of war selected to carry 
 an anti-reform measure, which must add more to the influence of 
 the Crown than the most democratic plan that ever was suggested 
 (not excepting the Duke of Richmond's) would have subducted 
 from it? 
 
 Is it possible that the people of England should be so engrossed 
 by a single sentiment as to be totally insensible to any other? Have 
 they not capacity to perceive two ideas at once? Can they not con- 
 template, at the same time, more than one part of that mixed system, 
 which has been the pride of their ancestors, and the admiration of 
 the world? Can they not at the same time be loyal and free? Must 
 the Constitution be effaced to admit the King into their hearts; or 
 if they feel for the Constitution as their ancestors felt, must their 
 
 2 A 
 
354 APPENDIX. 
 
 loyalty give way? Such singleness of worship is not due to any tiling- 
 human, and is treason against the sovereignty of the British Consti- 
 tution. I cannot presume such infatuation; and I look, my coun- 
 trymen! with confidence to the good sense of the people of England 
 for protection against the revolution with which you and they are 
 equally menaced. 
 
 What are the advantages held out to that people to induce them 
 to prostrate the Constitution of their ancestors under the feet of the 
 Minister? 
 
 This country, they are told, abounds with unexhausted, perhaps 
 untried sources of wealth. Its taxes as yet are light, and its debts, 
 compared with its resources, a trifle. In fifteen years, from the 
 period of its constitutional and commercial freedom, it has pros- 
 pered beyond the anticipations of the most sanguine. Ought young 
 Ireland to be suffered to lean on old England, and not divide the 
 burthen of debt and taxes under which she is staggering? Should 
 not the resources of that rising country be substituted for assessed 
 taxes, the sale of the royal forests, or, perhaps, of the Church lands? 
 Will not the whole wealth of that country, under any possible mo- 
 dification of a Union, beat the disposal of the British Parliament, to 
 be applied at the discretion of the British Minister, to relieve the exi- 
 gencies of the parent country? Do not the growing military propen- 
 sities of Europe, and particularly of France, demonstrate that enor- 
 mous standing armies must in future be kept on foot, for the protec- 
 tion of the empire; and can anything be more desirable than that the 
 population of Ireland should be rendered completely subservient to 
 that necessary purpose ? That the manufacturer and husbandman 
 of England should be spared, and the armies levied and paid for by 
 Ireland, and stationed in that country, where the empire is most 
 vulnerable, and from whence, upon any emergency, they can be so 
 readily transported to England or elsewhere? 
 
 The establishment of so great a military force as existing circum- 
 stances may probably in future require, is somewhat repugnant to 
 the genius of the British Constitution; and will not that necessary 
 evil be much mitigated, and reconciled to the feelings of English- 
 men, even by the remoteness of the military station, by keeping Ire- 
 
APPENDIX. 355 
 
 laud as an imperial barrack, and a nursery of seamen? Besides the 
 exchange of militia between the nations, which, after an Union, 
 will cease to be unconstitutional, and will become the constant 
 practice, will give to that body all the vigour of a standing army, 
 and will be a strong defence against the growth of faction and revo- 
 lutionary principles in such a country. 
 
 Oh infatuated and besotted English! if you are tricked out of 
 your liberties by such false pretences, such shallow artifices; if you 
 have forgotten the millions which, seduced by similar suggestions, 
 you squandered upon lost America; if you do not see that, if Ireland 
 could be chained down to such a state of slavish and impoverishing 
 dependence, the same arrangement which gives the purse and the 
 sword of that nation to your Minister, gives him uncontrollable 
 dominion over your liberties. 
 
 I repeat it, that these pretences are false, or at best but secon- 
 dary motives in the mind of the Minsiter. He already commands 
 the resources of Ireland, as much as is necessary for the general 
 good of the empire. It is the increased influence of the Crown in 
 the British Parliament, about which he is solicitous. When I per- 
 ceive one consequence from a proposed innovation, more certain, 
 more immediate, and more important than all others united, I can- 
 not credit that that consequence has been the inducement to the 
 measure. I would as soon believe the Minister that the opening 
 the Scheld was the real cause of the war with France, as I would 
 that the hundred votes which he will add to his following in the 
 British Parliament, is not his prime motive in proposing a Union. 
 
 But as it often happens that very different language is spoken 
 upon the same subject by the same party, upon different occasions, 
 I should not be much surprised at hearing it said, that the presumed 
 servility and dependence of the Irish representatives in the United 
 Parliament is a libel on the Irish nation, and that they will be in- 
 corruptible guardians of the interests and rights of their constituents 
 and independent members of the British Senate. 
 
 Upon the patriotism and independence of an absentee Legisla- 
 ture, under any circumstances, I should place but very little reli- 
 ance. Will there be anything in the appointment or condition of 
 
356 APPENDIX. 
 
 the Irish representatives in England, to distinguish them from those 
 of Scotland, or expatriated legislators of any other country? I shall 
 take the most favourable case; I shall suppose them elected from 
 the counties: I pass over the appointment of every returning officer, 
 and consequently the command of every return by the Minister; I 
 dwell not upon the mockery of a petition to Westminster, or to a 
 dependent and degraded parliamentary junto in Dublin. I suppose 
 the hundred members elected, transported, and stationed in the 
 British Parliament. What a formidable phalanx of Irish virtue to a 
 corrupt Minister! Surely the English nation will be stunned by 
 the declamations of Irish patriots in support of poor Ireland. I con- 
 fess I have very slight fears for the Minister upon that score, when 
 I reflect that the expenses of a London residence to a dissipated Irish- 
 man must be recruited at St. James's; that national prejudices will 
 be softened down by ministerial intercourse; that the whole patron- 
 age of Ireland, which the advocates for an Union have told you has com- 
 pletely weaned three hundred representatives from their constituents, 
 with whom they were in contact, may be applied to one hundred of 
 the same men with the ocean rolling between them ; that the example 
 of Scotland shows how persuasive a Minister always is to an absentee 
 Member of Parliament; and that as nothing can ever be obtained by 
 your x'epresentative for himself or his country, but through the 
 favour of the Minister, he will always be a most patriotic courtier. 
 O illustrious and immortal Chatham! — is it then, thus, your lineal 
 descendant, the inheritor of your fame, commutes his patrimony for 
 power? Is it thus he would realize your wise and grand concep- 
 tions? Is it thus he would pour new blood and fresh vigour into 
 that Parliament which gave birth to your talents, and sent you 
 forth the Minister of the Constitution of Great Britain, the scourge 
 of its enemies, the pride of its subjects, and the guardian of its liber- 
 ties? If one hundred additional votes had been in possession of the 
 Minister, could the voice of Lord Chatham have ever reached the 
 throne through the constitutional organ of the people's will? Could 
 a corrupt, incapable, and unpupular Minister, who was a favourite, 
 ever have been removed without a revolution? If one hundred addi- 
 tional votes be now given to the Crown, can the son of Lord Cha- 
 
APPENDIX. 357 
 
 tham, or any future Minister who shall be a favourite, be removed 
 without a revolution? Mr. Fox's last India Bill, it was said, would 
 have subverted the Constitution by stripping the Crown of patron- 
 age, which, it was computed, might have influenced one hundred 
 votes between the two Houses of Parliament. Can the Constitution 
 stand, when one hundred votes, in the House of Commons alone, are 
 at once added to the overgrown influence of the Crown? I do not 
 say that the people of England ought, at this crisis, to speculate upon 
 projects of reform, but if they solicit or submit to an anti-reform 
 measure of such portentous magnitude, they are no longer worthy 
 of the Constitution of their ancestors; and if they barter their liber- 
 ties for speculations of profit or gain, they are as unwise as they are 
 unworthy. 
 
 The commerce of England has arrived at its present unparalleled 
 prosperity under the culture and protection of that free Constitu- 
 tion, to the growth of which it so amply contributed, and by which 
 it has been so profusely repaid its early obligations. It cannot long 
 survive that Constitution. Let no man believe that trade can flourish 
 upon the ruins of liberty; the voice of history uniformly negatives 
 the supposition. Under any simple form of Government, which must 
 be more or less despotic, property must be insecure, and commerce 
 imperfectly encouraged and protected. In man the love of acquiring 
 and hoarding is not mere instinct. He will not, like the industrious 
 bee, collect treasures of which he may be plundered at pleasure, 
 and which may become a bounty against his life. 
 
 But it may be said that one hundred members is more than ought 
 to be allotted to Ireland upon an Union. I answer, that if the prin- 
 ciples of our present Constitution be observed, and that the new 
 system be designed for perpetuity, double that number would be 
 nearer the equitable proportion, which should be governed by the 
 relative population, territory, and wealth of the respective countries, 
 and not as these things now are, but as they probably will be, when 
 the commercial aptitudes of this country shall be fully ripened. 
 Can any man believe that it is seriously intended to call forth and 
 encourage the resources of this country, and give it in future a due 
 weight in the common Legislature, and also say, that one hundred 
 
358 APPENDIX. 
 
 members, out of six hundred and fifty-five, would be a due propor- 
 tion for the permanent state of Ireland? 
 
 But, as an Irishman, I waive this silly competition. Two hun- 
 dred absentee representatives would be too few for Ireland, and fifty 
 would be too many for the British Constitution. It is my solemn 
 opinion that, if the measure must be carried, every enlightened 
 Irishman should exert himself to reduce the number, and, if possible, 
 to avoid sending any. If we are to depend \ipon the liberality of 
 a foreign Parliament, let us not corrupt or degrade that Parliament 
 by so unwholesome an infusion. If our Parliament be attainted, 
 and must perish, let us have no such unrighteous resurrection. As 
 long as there remains in England a feeling for the high privileges of 
 a British subject, and that the Parliament be not totally enslaved, 
 there will be found feeling and enlightened men who will not be in- 
 different to the government of this country, who will think per- 
 sonal liberty in some danger there, if it be totally trodden down here. 
 But when an hundred Irish voices are added to the chorus of the 
 Minister, I should despair that any man should ever be heard in 
 support of British, not to speak of Irish liberties, if, indeed, any man 
 should be bold and sanguine enough to lift his voice in opposition 
 in such an assembly. 
 
 As to the silly notion that we shall be secure because all law 
 must be universal, and therefore equal, I answer, that if such a 
 rule shall inflexibly prevail, there is an end to the constitutional 
 right of Englishmen; and if it be violated Ireland is devoted to the 
 lash of despotism. 
 
 Are Englishmen ready to consent that the Habeas Corpus Act 
 shall be suspended in England; that government by proclamation 
 shall supersede government by law ; that the Press shall be silenced 
 at the pleasure of the Crown; or that they shall be liable to be 
 transported to Botany Bay, by inferior magistrates, without trial 
 by jury, whenever treasonable practices shall be discovered in Ire- 
 land, or imputed to that ill-fated country? Are Irishmen satisfied 
 that a foreign Legislature, — 1 beg pardon — a Legislature in a foreign 
 country, — shall give to them exclusively the blessing or the curse (it 
 will be differently denominated) of such laws and such government. 
 
APPENDIX. 359 
 
 No infatuation can tempt the English so to cling to us, that the 
 poinard which stabs our liberties must penetrate thcir's. The very 
 contrary will take place. In diversity of law they will seek an anti- 
 dote against identity of legislature; they will endeavour, by every 
 possible means of artificial distinction, to separate from us, and to 
 prevent the mortification which already begins to appear in our poli- 
 tical state from spreading to their's. 
 
 But it may be said that the laws to which I allude are tempo- 
 rary laws, and temporary laws may be different, though perpetual 
 laws, by the terms of the Union, may be decided to be always the 
 same. 
 
 Need I answer, that a law for one hundred years is a temporary 
 law, and that an annual law may be revived for an hundred years. 
 Is any man so giddy from youth, or from health, or from any other 
 cause, as to imagine, if an Union shall take place, that he will live to 
 see the Habeas Corpus Act restored, or a repeal of any of those tem- 
 porary Statutes under which the genius of our Constitution lan- 
 guishes, and the pressure of which she cannot long survive. The 
 very Union itself will furnish a cause, or pretence, for continuing 
 them, until slavery becomes the habit of the country. 
 
 But though it is clear that Englishmen will endeavour to sepa- 
 rate their political condition from our's, it is equally clear that they 
 will finally and soon fail. 
 
 Familiar contemplation of adjacent slavery will blunt that sensi- 
 bility which has been an Englishman's best protection against oppres- 
 sion. Will the Londoner, whom I have seen fired with indignation 
 at the interference of the military to seize a pickpocket, continue 
 the same political man, after he has been trained and habituated 
 to the military Government of his new countrymen in Ireland? I 
 smiled at the unsuitable and ridiculous explosion of civic pride, but 
 I considered it a glorious symptom. Similar intemperance, after an 
 Union, will not long continue to be the failing of Englishmen. Our 
 condition will not long continue unequal. The Irish senator who 
 cannot, or will not, defend the rights of his country, will avenge her 
 wrongs upon British freedom. That unwieldly fabric which the 
 Minister is rearing in Westminster, I contemplate as a monument, 
 
360 APPENDIX. 
 
 in which the rights and privileges of all the subjects of the empire 
 will be soon buried together. In the grave, at least, there will be 
 equality, but in the political grave, 1 fear, there will not be repose. 
 Is any man so timid, or so stolid, as to seek refuge from the storms 
 of jacobinism in the delusive stillness of despotism? How rash 
 is the pusillanimity of such a man ! How palpable the absurdity 
 of separating the representative from the constituent body of a 
 whole nation; of narrowing the foundation, and widening the super- 
 structure of our Constitution, in such stormy and troublesome times 1 
 Union is a captivating name. The temptation from influence to a 
 Minister is great. But let him beware that the seeds of jacobinism 
 lurk in every free country ; that they have already thrown out some 
 shoots in England ; that nothing so much tends to quicken and vivify 
 them as the encroachments of power; and, finally, that a Legislative 
 Union tending to despotism on the one side, may engender a na- 
 tional Union leading to anarchy upon the other. The subject be- 
 comes too great and too interesting. My mind shrinks from the 
 contemplation of these frightful extremes. I ily to the sanctuary of 
 the Constitution, and I invite my countrymen to follow me, and 
 defend it against the frenzy of a Minister, as well as the fury of a 
 mob. 
 
 CONVENTION ACT. 
 
 An Act to prevent the Election or Appointment of unlawful Assemblies, 
 under YRETEXCEof preparing or presenting public Petitions, or other 
 Addresses, to His Majesty or the Parliament. 
 " 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, 
 complaint, 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 seditiotis 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, 
 
APPENDIX. 361 
 
 by and with the advice and consent of the Lords spiritual and tem- 
 poral, and Commons in Parliament assembled, and by the authority 
 of the same, that all assemblies, committees, or other bodies of per- 
 sons elected, or in any other manner constituted or appointed to re- 
 present, 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, sheriff, justice of the peace, or other peace officer, and 
 they are hereby respectively authorized and required, within his and 
 their respective jurisdictions, to disperse all such unlawful assem- 
 blies, and if resisted to enter into the same, and to apprehend all 
 persons offending in that behalf. 
 
 " 2. And be it further enacted, that 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 appoint- 
 ment of any person or persons to be the representative or representa- 
 tives, delegate or delegates, or to act by any other name or descrip- 
 tion whatever as representative or representatives, delegate or dele- 
 gates of the inhabitants, or of any description of the inhabitants of 
 any province, county, city, town, or other district within this king- 
 dom, 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 offences respectively, being thereof con victed by due course 
 of law, shall be deemed guilty of an high misdemeanor. 
 
 " 3. Provided always, that nothing herein contained shall extend 
 or be construed to exterd'or to affect elections to be made by bodies 
 corporate, according to the'eharters and usage of such bodies corpo- 
 rate respectively. 
 
 2 B 
 
362 APPENDIX. 
 
 " 4. 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 Parliament, for 
 redress of any public or private grievance." 
 
 MR. POLE S CIRCULAR. 
 
 "Dublin Castle, Feb. \2th, 1811. 
 
 " Sir, — It being reported that the Roman Catholics, or some part 
 of them, in the county of , are to be called together, or 
 
 have been called together, to nominate or appoint persons as repre- 
 sentatives, delegates, or managers, to act on their behalf as members 
 of an unlawful assembly sitting in Dublin, and calling itself the 
 Catholic Committee, you are required, in pursuance of the provisions 
 of an Act of the thirty- third of the King, chap. 29, to cause to be 
 arrested, and to commit to prison (unless bail shall be given) all per- 
 sons within your jurisdiction, who shall be guilty of giving or hav- 
 ing given, or of publishing or having published, or of causing or 
 having caused to be given or published any written or other notice 
 of the election and appointment, in any manner, of such representa- 
 tive, delegate, or manager as aforesaid, or of attending, voting, or 
 acting, or of having attended, voted, or acted in any manner, in the 
 choice or appointment of such representative, delegate, or manager. 
 And you are to communicate these directions, as far as lies in your 
 power, forthwith, to the several magistrates of the said county of 
 
 "N. B. — Sheriffs are to act under the warrant of Magistrates, in 
 cases where the crime has been committed. 
 
 " By command of his Grace the Lord Lieutenant, 
 
 "W. W. Pole. 
 
 "To 
 
 &c, &c, &c." 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 MR. BURROWES OPINION UPON THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE 
 
 CONVENTION ACT. 
 
 Extracted from the Dublin Evening Post, August 17, 1811. 
 
 " We now publish a document of inestimable value at this criti- 
 cal moment. We have not procured it without importunity and 
 serious difficulty. It is not less than the deliberate opinion of one 
 of His Majesty's Counsel, a man of profound learning, deep judg- 
 ment, and untarnished integrity, upon the sound legal construction 
 of the Convention Act. Were we at liberty here to name this 
 gcntlcinnn, he would be instantly recognised by the public, as a 
 lawyer of the very highest authority and most extensive practice; 
 possessing more experience in the common law Courts than Lord 
 Manners, Mr. Downes, and Mr. Saurin, taken conjointly together, — 
 the confidential and respected friend of a Grattan, a Plunket, a 
 Bushe, a Newport, — of lofty genius, refined taste, and distinguished 
 sagacity. 
 
 " This opinion was taken, not by any of the Catholic body, but 
 by the Protestant Mayor of one of the first cities of Ireland, in con- 
 sequence of the late proclamation; and it deserves to be recorded 
 in letters of gold, not merely for its modesty and gentleness of 
 temper, its deep reach of thought, its logical and conclusive reason- 
 ing, and purity of language, but for the independence of soul and 
 uprightness, which bestow new splendour on the fame of the Irish 
 Bar. 
 
 " ' If I had not read the proclamation, and the Chief Justice's 
 warrant, I should, with great confidence, have declared it to be my 
 opinion, that, under a sound, legal, and constitutional construction 
 of the Convention Act, it is not illegal to assemble and appoint dele- 
 gates bona fide, to prepare a petition to the King or to Parliament, 
 or to publish notices of such election, or to act bona fide in the cha- 
 racter of delegates for such purposes, and such purposes only. 
 
 " ' I should consider the provisions of the Convention Act as 
 levelled solely against assemblies associated under pretence of peti- 
 
364 APPENDIX. 
 
 tioning, but really and in fact haying other objects in contempla- 
 tion, and pursuing such objects; and I would not infer the illegal 
 motive or pursuit from the mere delegated character. 
 
 " * And if I doubted as to this construction from the mere peru- 
 sal of the preamble and enacting clauses (which appear to me to be 
 very obscure), all doubt would be removed by the last section, which 
 provides 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," &c. I should consider this proviso 
 as leaving the right and the exercise of the right of petitioning pre" 
 cisely as they -stood before the Act; and knowing, as I do, that the 
 appointment of delegates might, in many imaginable cases, facilitate 
 the exercise of that right, I could not consider that right as impeded 
 by an universal and unqualified prohibition to exercise it through 
 the medium of delegates. 
 
 " ' Such still continues to be my opinion, and I cannot relinquish 
 it upon authority, which, though high and respectable, is not judi- 
 cial or binding; and the grounds of which I cannot even imagine. 
 
 " ' I consequently would not advise a magistrate to disperse any 
 body of men assembled to elect delegates such as I have described ; 
 and, if any information upon oath should be produced to him against 
 such persons, I would not advise him to grant any warrant to arrest 
 them, unless such facts (as would warrant an inference, and not 
 merely a suspicion, that the persons so delegated had other objects 
 in view) shall be positively and distinctly sworn to.' 
 
 " Such is the solemn and written opinion of one of the first lights 
 of the law, the authority of whose name bears a sway approaching 
 to conviction; guiding the Bar, and almost awing the Bench; deeply 
 and justly revered by both." 
 
 THE KND. 
 
This preservation photocopy was made 
 
 at BookLab, Inc. in compliance with copyright law. 
 
 The paper meets the requirements of ANSI/NISO 
 
 Z39.48- 1992 (Permanence of Paper) 
 
 © 
 
 Austin 1995 
 
DATE DUE 
 
 UNIVERSITY PRODUCTS, INC. #859-5503 
 
BOSTON COLLEGE 
 
 3 9031 025 96069 1