Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

in

fupply, but want to render your means fufficient for the fupply. You have been told that it was an English parliament that fixed your establishment at 12,000 men, and no more, that army King William's reign was thought fufficient, but a greater number might have endangered the liberties of England. 12,000 men were fufficient to oppofe King James, the lawful King of Ireland, who had not only a large party in the kingdom bound by their allegiance, but a much larger number, almoft the whole kingdom on his fide, from religious principles. A large army was then neceffary, but not at this time, when you have taken the catholics to your arms, when you are all on one fide; and is it because the occafion of having 12,000 men has ceased, that you muft have 15,000? Arguments founded on fuch propofitions are balderdash, unfit for a national affembly. This filly talk of gratitude to England; I have heard the fame in this house when were bending under her yoke. We hear every fellions of minifterial virtues; curfe on fuch virtues that undo the country!

you

A gentleman fays we chearfully made the augmentation; it paffed by a majority, but have majorities been always in the right ? Shall we, if we have a real affection for England, exhaust ourfelves without occafion in fuch a manner as to be unable to affift her when there is?

We are to have wars, and rumours of wars; one gentleman tells us the tempeft of war rages at the north pole; the Crimea is in arms, and the Black Sea is hoftile. England is not going to if it was the case, it must now be a maritime war, for the has no American provinces to conquer; but the calamitous condition of Britain will prevent a war though the defired it.

war;

We have heard from our late adminiftrations of economy, but all we have seen of that economy is the offices of an attorney and folicitor general to the Queen.

The retrenchment of the military eftablishment we are told is the laft that must be effected, because the only one efficient. Every thing is too late or too early. We are told of the diftrefs of England, and we are plunging in the fame ruin. If we fall into the diftrefs we were fome time fince in, fhall we go to England for relief; where a minifter amidst the ruin of his country ftands aghaft, but talks big? Shall we inherit ruin at home and reproach abroad?

The Volunteers who have faved the land, ardently call on you for œconomy and reform; if therefore by a direliction of your duty, you ftimulate them to innovations, blame yourselves; do your duty, and they will be quiet.

The people food at your back when you demanded your tights, now ftand at theirs. You have a number of young men among you, and it may be expected the old leaven will not be fo prevalent.

Let me not hear precedents adduced from times when you had no liberty, nor of a parliament trepanned into an augmenta

tion.

I fhall now leave my motion among you; let facts, but not fpeculation direct you, and you will find no other practicable retrenchment.

Mr. Grattan. I rife, Sir, to fpeak on this subject, which has been frequently before the House already. The question is, will you withdraw from the common caufe, that quota of troops which hitherto you have maintained?

Are the circumftances of the country fuch as you think demand it, and if you are crazy enough to think fo, will his majefty affent to that opinion?There never was a time when he could make reduction with a worfe grace, becaufe this country is now as eminently happy in trade, as Britain is the reverse.

66

In 1769, England poffeffed, almoft unrivalled, the trade of all the world. She poffeffed America, and owed one hundred and fifty millions lefs than the owes at prefent. Ireland had no trade at all, and her conftitution was denied; yet at that day it was thought wife to augment the army; and fhall we reduce it now when we have obtained a free conflitution-a free trade-when we have obtained a judges bill—a limited mutiny bill—an habeas corpus bill-when every thing that we have demanded, has been conceded? Shall we in that moment withdraw our quota of troops? Before fre obtained thofe advantages, we faid to Britain, that provided we would acknowledge our conftitutional and commercial rights, we would ftand or fall with her. And when they have been acknowledged to the full fatisfaction of every man, it is proposed to withdraw the fupport of our army. Suppose instead of faying we will ftand or fall with Britain, we had faid, and "when thofe things fhall be done, (when our rights Jhall be acknowledged and established) we will then in return, withdraw "from you the fupport of our army;"—and yet in effect, this is the propofal at prefent made. I do not entirely agree in all that has been faid of gratitude; we owe no gratitude but for the plantation trade, but this we owe to England, and to our own honour, that we should not depart from an old covenant. The navy of England protects our trade, and we, as an equivalent, pay 70,000l. a year to maintain the troops deftined to ferve in the plantations. This is not a dear purchase for partaking that which has cost England fo many millions. Has fuccefs made us niggardly, and fhall we become unkind to England, juft at the moment she has thewn kindness to us? We have indeed held out the language of magnanimity to England, and fhall we fail in the performance ?-no, there are many other places to make retrenchment; we grant a penfion lift of 80,000l. a year, yet complain of 70,000l. paid to an army-paid for the protection of the British navy. We may

66

indeed make very great reductions in the army extraordinaries. We may make great reductions in the revenue department, and in others. Thofe reductions will, I truft, far exceed the pay of our augmentation. Thefe are retrenchments that ought to be made-but the number of our forces ought not to be diminished. Mr. Conolly.-I am against a reduction of the army. The augmentation was my child, and I hope to fee it go on and profper. The queftion was then put, when there appeared,

Ayes
Noes

Majority against the question

58

132

74

Tellers for the ayes, Mr. Molyneux and the Hon. Denis Browne. Tellers for the noes, Sir H. Langrishe and Mr. O'Hara. Adjourned to Wednesday.

WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 5, 1783.

The committee of accounts fat, (Mr. Mafon in the chair) for fome time, and adjourned. After which the Speaker having taken the chair,

Lord Kilwarlin prefented a petition from the inhabitants of the town of Belfast.

Colonel Rofs, Sir Edward Newenham, Mr. Montgomery, and feveral other members, prefented petitions, praying parliamentary aid, which were received, read and committed.

Several reports were received, and ordered to lie on the table.

The proper officer presented at the bar an account of the beer and ale brewed for fome years past. Ordered to lie on the ta

ble.

Sir Edward Newenham moved to discharge the order on the petition, complaining of an undue election for the borough of Kilmallock, and to appoint the 4th day of February for hearing the fame.

Ordered accordingly.

Mr. Fitzgibbon moved that feveral perfons, burgeffes and petitioners of faid borough, fhould be ordered to attend the Houfe, on Monday the 2d of February.

The defaulters who were abfent at the call of the Houfe, on Monday laft, previous to the ballot for a committee, for trying the merits of the Dundalk election, were called over this day; some of whom, on fhewing proper caufes, on oath, were not cen

fured; the remainder, to a great number, were committed to the cuftody of the Serjeant at Arms.

After which the House being called, and the members told by Mr. Stratford, the doors were locked, and the committee ballotted for, to enquire into the merits of the petitions against one of the fitting members for the borough of Ennifcorthy, when the following members were chosen:

H. Meade Ogle, Efq;
Sir Thomas Ofborne, Bart.
Arthur Dawson, Efq;
Peter Holmes, Efq;
Conway R. Dobbs, Efq;
Charles Ruxton, Efq;
Sir Richard Butler, Bart.
Henry Loftus, Efq;

Ordered to fit to-morrow.

Right Hon. Barry Yelverton,
Edward Tighe, Efq.
John Forbes, Efq.
Lord Edward Fitzgerald;
Arthur Browne, Erq;
Denis Bowes Daly, Efq;
Charles O'Hara, Efq;

Ordered a writ for the borough of Ballinakil, in the room of Sir Annesley Stewart, Bart. who has made his election for the borough of Charlemont.

Sir Edward Newenham moved to difcharge the order, on the petition complaining of an undue election for the borough of Swords, and to defer it to a future day, for the convenience of the petitioners, as one of their principal witneffes was in England. The queftion was put, and there appeared

For the motion.--Ayes
Against the motion.--Ñoes

3

47

Tellers for the Ayes, Sir Henry Cavendish, and Sir Edward

Newenham.

Tellers for the Noes, Lord Delvin, and Mr. Beresford, jun. Adjourned 'till to-morrow.

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 1783.

The call of defaulters was this day continued, and such as did not appear, or for the non-attendance of whom proper excufes were not given, were ordered into cuftody of the Serjeant at Arms.

The order of the day for trying the petition of Robert Stewart, Efq; complaining of an undue election for the county of Down, the Houfe was called over, the names were drawn, and a select committee nominated in the ufual manner; the names of the committee were,

Henry Prittie, Efq;
Charles-Henry Coote, Efq;
Thomas Blakeney, Efq;
Lord Delvin,

Sir Thomas Fetherston,
Rogerfon Cotter, Efq;

Robert Jephfon, Efq;
Captain Thomas Loftus,

Honourable William Skeffing

ton,

Henry Alcock, Efq;
Arthur Achefon, Efq;
William Pennefather, Efq;
Abel Ram, Efq;

Sir Cornwallis Maude,
Denham Jephfon, Efq,

While the parties were nominating the committee, the order relative to the producing of the lifts of perfons objected to as voted on controverted elections within a limited time, was discharged, and another order, after fome converfation, fubftituted in its ftead.

in

Mr. Fitzgibbon moved, "That members who are difqualified any manner from ferving on committees on controverted elections, be difpenfed attending the Houfe at five o'clock on the days appointed to try the elections." Paffed in the affirmative.

Mr. Alexander Montgomery moved a refolution, "That in all controverted elections, to be brought before the Houfe, the petitioners, by themselves or agents, fhould deliver to the fitting members, petitioned againft, a lift of the perfons whofe votes they objected to, and their reafons for objecting, four days at least before the day appointed for hearing the merits of the petition; and that the fitting members, or their agents, do the like to the petitioners, or their agents."

Mr. Fofter faid, he had moved the former refolution, relative to this matter. He obferved the material difference was, the adding the objection; that he had drawn the refolution in the very words of the English houfe.

Mr. Montgomery, (of Cavan) faid its being from England could not be a fufficient reafon for embracing it, as it flood; he therefore would move the former refolution thould be refcinded, and the one now moved by the Honourable Member adopted in its

room.

Mr. Fofter obferved that the committees which were ordered to be appointed on Saturday and Monday next, could not poffibly comply with the refolution, and ought to be excepted therein.

He therefore moved a small amendment, purporting the refolution to operate on all petitions to be heard after Tuefday next. This being agreed to, the former refolution was refcinded, and Mr. Montgomery's of this day adopted.

Lord Delvin moved, “That the clerks of the House do in future give notice to all agents, concerned in contefted elections to be heard before committees, that they are to ferve lifts, &c. in due time, according to the above refolution; and that fuch agents as do not obey, be liable to the cenfure of the House.

« ZurückWeiter »