CHAP. XXIII. 1831. were always received with the most vociferous applause, insomuch that not merely the timid and temporising, but even the firm and intrepid, began to think that a general convulsion was at hand. Mr O'Connell and the other members of the Catholic Association were in an especial 1 Ann. Reg. manner laudatory of the revolution at Brussels, which, 1831, 2, 3; Roebuck, ii. as leading to the overthrow of a government and the of Parlia- disruption of a kingdom by a rebellion fomented by the ment, 1831, Romish priesthood, was held up as a glorious object, worthy of general imitation.1* 2,3; Mirror 1209. 26. and in creased misery in Ireland. ii. 18, 19. "The proceedings and language of Mr O'Connell," Agitation says Mr Roebuck, "became every day more hostile and threatening he went about the country making violent harangues, gathering together numerous assemblages of the people, under colour of meetings for the purposes of petitioning, or of celebrating some feast or festival. At all of these meetings he did his utmost to excite his ignorant hearers, but always ending his speeches by some earnest recommendations to keep the peace, hoping thus Roebuck, to escape the law." 2 Such was the alarm generally excited by these proceedings, that the magistrates in the disturbed districts asked from the Lord-Lieutenant how they should act in regard to them, not from any difficulty in determining what was the law, but from uncertainty whether, or to what extent, the Government would enforce the law, or support the acts of the magistrates in carrying it into execution. The answer of the Lord-Lieutenant was sufficiently clear, and such as every lawyer knows to be the law, and every man of sense must see is an exposition of what is essential to the peace of the community.+ * Mr Sheil, not the least violent or able of Mr O'Connell's friends, said at this time: "If the Union is not repealed within two years, I am determined that I will neither pay rent, tithes, nor taxes. They may distress my goods, but who'll buy, boys ?—that's the word—who'll buy? Mind, I don't tell any man to follow my advice; but so help me God, if I don't do it, you may call me Sheil of the silk gown." "-ROEBUCK, vol. ii. p. 15. "The law recognises the fair and legitimate exercise of the right of petition, and protects them in the full exercise of that right; but it does not warrant any assemblies having a manifest and direct tendency to a violation of the XXIII. 1831. But meanwhile distress, the usual accompaniment of agi- CHAP. tation, which distracts the minds of the peasantry, set in with extraordinary severity in Ireland. Potatoes in less than usual quantities had been planted in Ireland, and such even then had suffered under the epidemic which afterwards made such fatal ravages in the country. Two hundred thousand persons were without food; and their sufferings were aggravated by great severity of weather, and want of clothing, food, and fuel. The peasants crowded in thousands into the towns, where they introduced contagion and death. When Parliament met in spring, one of their first measures was to vote £50,000 for the relief of the starving peasantry; but though this evinced a sympathy with their sufferings, it did no good except alleviating immediate want, for it was nearly all expended in forming useless roads, and making good roads 19, 20. bad ones.1 The declared object of all these movements was to procure a repeal of the Union, and unwearied were the efforts, innumerable the shifts, of Mr O'Connell to keep public peace, under whatever name, or for whatever professed object they are assembled. Therefore any assemblies of persons, whether collected under pretence of petitioning, or of public exhibitions of strength and skill, or under any other pretence whatever, if from their number, acts, place, or times of meeting, or other circumstances preceding or accompanying them, they excite in the minds of his Majesty's well-disposed subjects reasonable fears that the public peace will be thereby violated, and the lives and properties of the King's subjects thereby endangered; or if they be so constituted or conducted as to induce reasonable and well-founded apprehensions that the motives and objects of the persons so assembling are not the fair and legal exercise of constitutional rights and privileges, but the accomplishment of alterations in the laws and constitution of the realm by means of intimidation, and by demonstration of physical force, or by any other than legal and constitutional means; all these, and suchlike assemblies, however composed, or with whatever view collected, are illegal, and are by the law denominated unlawful assemblies.' And it is the duty of all magistrates within whose jurisdiction such assemblies are called together (being first satisfied of their illegal nature), by all lawful means within their power to prevent such meetings, and to suppress and disperse them."Ann. Reg., 1831, pp. 301, 302. It is impossible to state the law more clearly than is here done, and it was laid down in exactly the same terms by Lord Tenterden and the Court of King's Bench in Mr Hunt's case. They form a curious commentary on the meetings at Birmingham, Manchester, and Glasgow, by which the Reform Bill was carried, and the monster meetings by which for so many years the germs of improvement in Ireland were crushed. 1 Ann. Reg. 303; Roe 1831, 302, buck, ii. XXIII. 1831. prosecu O'Connell, who is al lowed to escape. CHAP. up the agitation for this object, without incurring the penalties of treason or sedition. The device usually adopted was to assemble the people in such numbers as 27. Agitation to intimidate Government by the display of physical for the repeal of the strength, and at the same time avoid an ostensible breach Union, and of the law by recommending peaceable conduct and obetion of Mr dience to the letter of the Lord-Lieutenant's proclamation. As fast as one meeting was proclaimed down, another was convened under a different name, or for a different avowed object; and in the interval letters were invariably published by O'Connell, recommending peaceable and ceaseless agitation, and promising a repeal of the Union in two years if his advice was implicitly followed.* At length Government, under the able and energetic advice of Mr Stanley, wearied with this interminable pacific warfare, determined on a prosecution, and an indictment was accordingly executed against him and several of his associates. The grand jury found true bills against them; and although they threw every possible obstacle in the way of the proceedings, they were successfully carried through. Mr O'Connell withdrew his demurrer, and actually pleaded guilty to some counts in the indictment. This was so unexpected a result that it naturally created a suspicion of some secret understanding or agreement with the Government. Mr Stanley, however, the Irish Secretary, upon being questioned on the subject in the House of Commons, emphatically "Let us be in no hurry. Events in England and on the continent of Europe are working for us. Every succeeding day weakens the supporters of despotism in every clime and country; each successive day strengthens the friends of cheap government and free institutions. Patience, my dear countrymen, and Ireland will achieve one more bloodless, stainless change. Since I was born she has achieved two such glorious political revolutions. The first was in 1782, when she conquered legislative independence; the second in 1829, when she won for her victory freedom of conscience; the third and best remains behind-the restoration of a domestic and reformed legislature by the repeal of the Union. This we will also achieve if we persevere in a legal, constitutional, and peaceable course. Let my advice but be followed. and I will venture to assert the Union cannot last two years longer."-ROEBUCK, vol. ii. pp. 22, 23. XXIII. 1831. Feb. 12. denied that there was any such understanding, and CHAP. declared in the most solemn way, "It is the unalterable determination of the law-officers in Ireland to let the law take its course against him." But in making that declaration that highly-gifted nobleman was not yet aware of the degradation which sooner or later awaits all who, for political purposes, ally themselves with popular demagogues-Mr O'Connell was never brought up for judgment! The Reform Bill was coming on in the House of Commons; a general election might at no distant period be anticipated; the support of the Catholic leaders in and out of Parliament might be required by Government, and the haughty spirit of Earl Grey yielded to the necessities of his situation. Nothing was done against O'Connell: he openly braved and abused the Government, but he and his party supported them in Parliament, and he and his associates were permitted to carry on for fifteen years longer their unchecked career of agitation, devastation, and ruin.1* On February 11, Lord Althorpe brought forward the budget, which, although not of much moment in a financial point of view, as its leading provisions were defeated "The Crown has procured a verdict against Mr O'Connell, and it will undoubtedly call him up to receive judgment on it.”—Mirror of Parliament, 1831, p. 281. Such were Mr Stanley's words, in which he was undoubtedly sincere, but he was overruled by the Cabinet. The excuse put forward for this discreditable act-viz., that the act under which O'Connell had been convicted expired before he could be brought up to receive judgment—is unfounded both in fact and in law. He pleaded guilty on Feb. 5, and the Parliament was dissolved on April 22; and every lawyer knows that though an Act of Parlia ment may be temporary in its duration, the punishment of a crime committed while it was in force may be inflicted or continue long after. In truth, the whole affair was a mere compromise of justice for expedience, or rather party ambition; and it was discussed as such in the cabinet of Dublin, and produced an estrangement between Lord Cloncurry and Mr O'Connell, and such a violent altercation between the former and the Attorney-General (Mr Blackburn), who insisted for punishment, that the Lord-Lieutenant was obliged to take a pledge from both it should go no further. "I strongly urged upon Lord Anglesea,” says Lord Cloncurry "the prudence of allowing Mr O'Connell to escape, as the infliction of a nominal punishment, which could only have endured a few weeks, would only have the appearance of impotent malice."-Lord CLONCURRY'S Recollections, quoted in ROEBUCK, vol. ii. p. 60, 1 Parl. Deb. ii. 494; Ann. Reg. 1831, 317. XXIII. 1831. 28. which is defeated. CHAP. in Parliament, was yet attended with very important results in a political, as that very defeat opened the eyes of Government to the necessity of conciliating their Radical The budget, allies, and had no small influence in the construction of the Reform Bill, now under the consideration of the Cabinet. The preceding year had been one of unsparing and unflinching economy, which had brought a considerable and real excess of income over expenditure. Lord Althorpe, basing his calculations on that year, estimated the national income in round numbers at £50,000,000, and the expenditure at £46,850,000, leaving an anticipated surplus of £3,150,000. Instead, however, of reserving this surplus, as it should have been, for the reduction of the national debt, it was resolved to take off taxes to more than the whole amount, and in lieu thereof to impose other taxes, which it was thought would be less burdensome to the people. The taxes taken off he estimated at £4,080,000, and the taxes to be imposed at £2,740,000, thereby reducing the anticipated clear surplus to £1,800,000 a-year! A woeful reduction, when it is re- collected that, when the new system of finance began, and 1 Mirror of present popularity was looked for instead of ultimate Parliament, good, the Sinking Fund was £15,000,000, at which level Ann. Reg. it might have been retained but for the immense reduction of indirect taxes forced on by the contraction of the currency.1 1831, 169; 1831, 125, 129. 29. of taxes to This was a sufficiently alarming state of finances, with Description a view to the ultimate solvency and resources of the counbe taken off try. But it was rendered doubly important with referand put on. ence to present interests, by the description of taxes which were proposed to be removed, and those which were to be imposed. The principal taxes which were to be taken off were those on tobacco, sea-borne coal, tallow candles, and printed calicoes; and no one could deny that the reduction of these duties would be a very considerable relief to the industrious classes of the community. But with regard to the new taxes to be imposed, there was |