PrProgress Towards Parliamentary Independence (1762 – 1772)
Above: Progress Towards Parliamentary Independence
In 1762 a bill was passed in the Irish parliament to enable Catholics to lend money on the security of land : but it was suppressed in England : and in the following year it was rejected in the Irish parliament on the ground that it would tend to throw land into the hands of the Catholics. About this time the Patriots, under the powerful lead of Henry Flood, and aided by the growing eloquence of young Henry Grattan, attacked the pension list, which was a source of great corruption, and had grown to enormous proportions. Many thousands of pounds were given to persons who never had any connexion with Ireland. But these efforts were vain, for the pension;, so far from being abolished, grew year by year. The question of most interest at this time was the duration of parliament.
In England the utmost time was seven years : in Ireland parliament lasted as long- as the king wished ; and the preceding one had continued during tlie entire reign of George II; thirty- three years. This state of tilings led to great abuses; and in 1765 the Patriots introduced a Septennial bill, which was passed in Ireland but suppressed in England.
Lord Town send became lord lieutenant in 1767, and was at first popular from his gay convivial manner and his lavish distribution of favours. Charles Lucas had continued to issue books and pamphlets violently attacking the court party, de- nouncing Poynings’ act, and maintaining the right of Ireland to self-government. The corporation disfranchised him; and as he heard the house of commons were about to prosecute him he retired for a tune to England, where lie practised with success as a physician. He returned in 1760, and was elected member for Dublin in 1761.
He was the founder of the Freeman’s journal, which advocated the lights of the people and boldly upheld liberal principles. Some years after Ins arrival Lucas and the Patriot party re-introduced the Septennial bill, and had it carried (1767) but the term was changed in England to eight years. This “Octennial” bill was accepted by the Irish parliament, and caused great joy in Ireland. As a consequence ol the Octennial act it was necessary to elect, a new parliament, and the viceroy (lord Townsend) used bribes and corruption everywhere in order to secure a majority l”oi the government. He now became as odious as he was at fust popular. But with all his bribery he was not able to induce the individual members to relinquish the right to originate money bills in the commons. In October, 1769, the privy council sent over a money bill, which was rejected by the Irish house of commons, as in 1692, “because it had not its origin in tha I house”; lor they maintained the just doctrine that the representatives of the people had alone the right to tax the people.
On this lord Townsend had the commons sum- moned to the bar of tlie house of lords, where he lectured them sharply. He then ordered the clerk to enter his protest, which was done in the journal of the lords; but the commons were firm, and would not permit it to be entered in then journals. The excite- ment in Dublin on this occasion was almost as great as in the time of Wood’s halfpence. The viceroy7 prorogued the parliament now and several times subsequently so as to prevent a meeting till 1771. But he employed the interval in buying over several prominent members of the opposition by places and pensions, among others Sexton Pery, Hely Hutchinson, and lord Loftus. During all this time Dublin teemed with newspapers, letters, pamphlets, ballads, squibs, and satires against Townsend and the government, and the opposition gained in strength and determination. When the house met in 1771, addresses to the viceroy were adopted in both houses.
