Letter from the author to Mr. Burne, relating to the political conduct
of the former at the period of the Union—Extracts from letters written
to the author by Lord Westmoreland—General reflections on the
political condition of Ireland at the present time—Hint toward the
revival of a curious old statute—Clerical justices—The king in
Ireland—The Corporation of Dublin—The “Glorious Memory”—Catholics and
Protestants—Mischievous virulence of party feeling.
The introduction of the following letter and extracts (though somewhat
digressive from my original intention in compiling this work) is
important to me, notwithstanding they relate to times so long past by;
inasmuch as certain recent calumnies assiduously propagated against me
demanded at my hands a justification of my conduct toward government at
the period of the Union. With this view the letter in question was
written to my friend Mr. Burne, whom I requested to communicate its
contents to my connexions in Dublin, or indeed to any person who might
have been prejudiced against me by those aspersions. Having, however,
reason to fear that only a very partial circulation of my letter took
place, I have adopted this opportunity of giving it full publicity by
mixing it up with these sketches:—
“Paris, Rue de Richelieu, 2nd May, 1825.
“My dear Friend,
“I am well aware that the reports you mention as to my
‘having broken trust with the government in the years 1799 and
1800’ had been at one period most freely circulated: but I could
scarcely suppose the same would be again and lately revived, to
do me injury on a very important concern. This has not been
altogether without its operation, and I feel it a duty to myself
unequivocally to refute such imputation. The fact is proved in
few words:—I _could_ not break my trust with the government, for
I _never accepted any trust_ from them. I never entered into any
stipulation or political engagement with _any_ government; and
every public act which I did—every instance of support which I
gave, resulted from my own free agency and unbiassed judgment.
“My first return to parliament, in the year 1790, for the city
of Tuam, was altogether _at my own expense_. I had before
stood a contested election for Ballynakill, formerly my
father’s borough. I was under no tie nor obligation to the
government: I had not then, nor have I ever had, any patron; I
never, in fact, solicited patronage: I never submitted to the
dictation of any man in my life: my connexion with government
therefore was my own choice, and the consequent support I gave
to Lord Westmoreland’s administration of my own freewill. I
liked Lord Buckinghamshire (Major Hobart) individually, and
lived much in his society: I respected Lord Westmoreland
highly, and he has always been very obliging to me during a
period of seven-and-thirty years whenever he had an
opportunity. During his administration I accepted office; and
on his recall, he recommended Lord Camden to return me to
parliament. Mr. Pelham did so for the city of Clogher; but
made no sort of _terms_ with me, _directly or indirectly_. In
the autumn of 1798 Mr. Cooke wrote to me, and I had two
interviews with him; on the second, I found that a Union would
probably be submitted to parliament; and I promptly replied,
that I must decline all further support to any government
which should propose so destructive a measure, at the same
time tendering my seat. He replied, ‘That I should think
_better_ of it.’
“Lord Cornwallis came over to carry this great measure; and I
opposed him, Lord Castlereagh, and the Union, in every stage of
the business, and by every means in my power, both in and out of
parliament. Lord Cornwallis was defeated: he tried again;—Lord
Castlereagh had purchased or packed a small majority in the
interval, and the bill was carried. In January, 1800, I received
a letter from Lord Westmoreland, stating that as Clogher had
been a government seat, he doubted if I could in honour retain
it. I had already made up my mind to resign it when required. I
mentioned the subject to Mr. Forster, the speaker, who thought I
was _not_ bound to resign; however, I acceded to the suggestion
of Lord Westmoreland, and accepted an escheatorship. But no
office in his Majesty’s gift—no power, no _deprivation_, would
have ever induced me to support the Union.
“I stood, at my own expense, a very hard-contested election for
Maryborough, Queen’s County, in which I was supported by Sir
Robert Staples, Mr. Cosby of Stradbally Hall, Dean Walsh,
Colonel Pigot, Mr. Warburton, (member for the county,) the
Honourable Robert Moore, (against his brother, the Marquess of
Drogheda,) &c., and by the tenantry of the present Lord
Maryborough. I was outvoted by a majority of three, the scale
being turned against me by Lord Castlereagh, who sent down Lord
Norbury, the crown solicitor, and several such-like gentry for
the purpose. With that election my political career concluded:
but I am happy and proud to state that, at its termination, I
retained the confidence and esteem of every body whose
friendship I considered it desirable to retain. Lord
Westmoreland bears the most unexceptionable testimony to my
straightforward conduct: I have been honoured by his friendship,
without intermission, down to the present day; and the following
extracts from his lordship’s letters to me, wherein he states
his desire to bear witness to my strict conduct in my
transactions with government, form the best refutal of all these
calumnies against me.
“Since the period of my retirement from public life two of my
then most intimate friends (namely, the present Chief Justice
Bush and the present Attorney-general Plunkett) have succeeded
beyond their most sanguine expectations, yet certainly not
beyond their just merits. No government could pass such men by,
at the bar, if they chose to claim offices. They took the same,
and as strong an anti-Union part as I did; but, after the Union,
my public pursuits were nearly at an end. Ireland lost all
charms for me; the parliament (the source of all my pride,
ambition, and gratification as a public man) had been bought and
sold; I felt myself as if nobody,—became languid, careless, and
indifferent to every thing. I was no longer in fact in my proper
sphere: my health rapidly declined; and I neither sought for nor
would have accepted any other government office in Ireland.
“Most of these facts, my dear Burne, you have been long
acquainted with; and this is solely a recapitulation of some
circumstances which I have no other means of making generally
known. You will use it as you think may best serve me; and it
only remains for me to repeat, what you already know, that I am
most sincerely
“Yours ever,
“JONAH BARRINGTON.
“John Burne, Esq., K. C.
“Merrion-square.”
Extracts of letters from the Earl of Westmoreland to Sir Jonah
Barrington (enclosed to Mr. Burne):—
“London, March 28th, 1795.
“My dear Sir,
* * * * * “I shall always be obliged to you whenever you will
have the goodness to let me know what is going on on your side
of the water, wherein I am convinced you will always bear a very
considerable part. I must at the same time assure you that no
man’s name is more in public repute than your own.
“Lord Camden left town this morning, and I have not failed to
assure him of your talents and spirit, which were so useful to
my government on many occasions; and which, as I am satisfied he
will find equally so, so is he equally disposed, I believe, to
give them that countenance they deserve.
* * * * *
“The state of Ireland since I left you is most wonderful, but
the reign of faction seems drawing to a close.
“I beg to be remembered to all friends, and am,
“Dear Sir, yours very faithfully,
“WESTMORELAND.
“To Jonah Barrington, Esq., one of His
“Majesty’s Counsel at Law, &c. &c.
“Merrion-square, Dublin.”
Much correspondence took place between his lordship and me after that
period, in which he was always equally kind.[38] Indeed, in that
kindness he never varied; and after knowing me seven-and-thirty years,
(the most important of all revolutions having during that interval taken
place in Ireland,) and after I had directly and diametrically opposed,
in parliament and out of it, his lordship’s opinion and acts upon that
great question;—the following extract of another letter from the same
nobleman (dated 1817) proves that he never has changed his opinion of my
honourable conduct toward the king’s government, (and permits me to
state his approbation of that conduct,) every part of which he must have
well known; since he had been, with very little intermission, a member
of the British cabinet during the entire period.
-----
Footnote 38:
He proposed, and superficially effected, a reconciliation between me
and Lord Castlereagh: it had no good practical effect for me, but
occasioned a very important episode in my history, which I may
hereafter mention, though not in the present work.
-----
(Abstract.)
“Paris, 19th August, 1817.
“Dear Sir,
* * * * *
* * * * “I have enclosed you a letter of introduction to Sir C.
Stuart, and will certainly speak to him as you wish, and shall
have great pleasure if it should prove of any convenience to you
or your family: and I assure you I have _always_ much
satisfaction in giving my testimony to the honourable manner in
which you have always conducted yourself in the political
relations wherein you have stood with me.
“I am your very faithful servant,
“WESTMORELAND.”
I also added the following, by way of postscript, to my explanatory
letter to Mr. Burne:—
“I think, my dear Burne, that after these testimonials, he must
be a daring enemy who will reassert the calumnies against me. I
apprehend that few public men can show more decided proofs of
honour and consistency than I, in the fair and disinterested
conduct I displayed when I found it necessary to oppose the
government. I must also observe, on a principle of gratitude,
that throughout the whole course of my public life I have
uniformly experienced from the government and ministers of
_England_, (let me here particularise Lord Stowell,) at all
times and on all occasions, whether supporting or opposing them,
the greatest kindness, justice, and considerate attention;
together with a much greater interest, in any concerns of mine
submitted to them, than I could possibly have conceived, much
less have expected.
“But his Majesty’s public functionaries in _Ireland_ were men of
a different bearing: after the _surveillance_ of a local
parliament was extinguished, the country was, as it were, given
over to them, bound hand and foot, and they at once assumed new
powers, which before they durst not even have aimed at. Every
grade of public functionaries bounded above their station; and
brevet rank was no longer confined to military officers. I
possess much knowledge respecting some of them, of the
communication of which they are not aware; and I am not inclined
to permit certain individuals to go down to their graves without
hearing my observations. When the proper time arrives I shall
not be silent.
“Again, dear Burne, yours,
“J. BARRINGTON.”
On reading over the foregoing postscript of the letter to my poor friend
Burne (who has lately paid his debt on demand to Nature), some
observations occur to me respecting Ireland herself, her parties, and
species of government, not uncongenial to the subject of that letter.
The justice of these observations each day’s experience tends to prove;
and I firmly believe many members of the British government at this
moment view the matter precisely as I do. They find it difficult,
however, to disentangle themselves from the opinions which have been so
frequently expressed by themselves heretofore, and which, had they been
equally informed then as now, would never, I apprehend, have been
entertained. The people of England, and also of some continental
kingdoms, are fully aware of the distracted state of Ireland, but are at
a loss to account for it. It is, however, now in _proof_, that
twenty-seven years of _Union_ have been twenty-seven years of _beggary_
and of _disturbance_; and this result, I may fairly say, I always
foresaw. The only question now asked is, “What is to be done?” and the
only comment on this question that it is in my power to make is, “a
council of peace is better than a council of war.” Much of the
unfortunate state of that country may be attributed to the kindred
agency of two causes—namely, fanaticism in Ireland, and ignorance (I
mean, want of _true_ information) in Great Britain. The Irish are
deluded by contesting factions, and by the predominance of a couple of
watchwords;[39] while the great body of the English people know as
little of Ireland (except of its disturbances) as they do of Kamschatka;
and the king’s ministers, being unluckily of different opinions, go on
debating and considering what is best to be done, and meanwhile doing
nothing. If they do not take care, in some time there may be nothing
left _them_ to do. This is now my decided sentiment. A spectator can see
the play much better than the gamester.
-----
Footnote 39:
An ancient law still appears among the statutes of Ireland to prohibit
the natives of that country from using the words _Crum-a-boo_, and
_Butler-a-hoo_, as being the watchwords of two most troublesome
hostile factions, which kept, at the period of the prohibition, the
whole nation in a state of uproar. In my mind, a revival of that
salutary enactment would not be amiss just now. A similar case (as
regards the existing state of things) may be easily made out; and, as
we lawyers say, “_like case like rule_.” As the statute is still upon
our books, there is a precedent at hand, and it will only be necessary
to amend it by changing the two terms _Crum-a-boo_ and _Butler-a-hoo_,
into _Ascendancy-a-boo_ and _Emancipation-a-hoo_! The penalty for
raising these cries might be the treadmill; and there can be little
doubt that so wholesome a measure would speedily tranquillise the
country, and save a good deal of _rope_, some _anatomising_, and the
turning _religion_ into a subject for _debating societies_.
-----
I firmly believe England now means well and honourably to the Irish
nation on all points, but I think she is totally mistaken as to
measures. Neither honourable intentions, nor Sunday-schools, nor the
four rules of arithmetic, nor _Bible societies_, can preserve people
from _starving_: education is a very good thing in its proper place, but
a sorry substitute for food; and I know the Irish well enough to say
they never will be taught _peace_ upon an _empty_ stomach. Work creates
industry, and industry produces the means of averting hunger; and when
they have work enough and food enough, are permitted to dance on
Sundays, and _fight_ once a year, they may be turned to _any thing_. I
speak, of course, of the lowest orders: the class immediately above
those is now very unmanageable, because it is supported by its starving
inferiors, who depend upon it alone for subsistence—the higher being
absent. The nature and materials of the present species of Irish
constitution appear to me totally unadapted to the necessities of that
country. The Union never should have existed, or it should have been
more _perfect_:—no _half-mounted_ government can ever rule Ireland.
It is but too obvious that the natural attachment which ought to subsist
between Great Britain and Ireland is _not increasing_, though on the due
cultivation of that attachment so entirely depends the strength, the
peace, and the prosperity of the United Empire; yet I fearlessly repeat
that, in my mind, the _English_ members of the imperial parliament mean
well by Ireland, and only require to ascertain her true circumstances to
act for her tranquillisation. Politically they may be sure that the
_imperium in imperio_, as at present operating in that country, is not
calculated to reform it. The protecting body of the country gentlemen
have evacuated Ireland, and in their stead we now find official clerks,
griping agents, haughty functionaries, proud clergy, and agitating
demagogues. The resident aristocracy of Ireland, if not quite
extinguished, is hourly diminishing; and it is a political truism, that
the co-existence of an oligarchy without a cabinet; a resident executive
and an absent legislature; tenants without landlord, and magistracy
without legal knowledge;[40] must be, from its nature, a form of
constitution at once incongruous, inefficient, and dangerous. Nobody can
appreciate the native loyalty of the Irish people better than his
present Majesty, whose reception in Ireland was enthusiastic: they
adored him when he left it; and amidst millions of reputed rebels he
wanted no protection: every man would have been his life-guard! I speak
not however of corporations or guilds—of gourmands, or city feasters:
these have spoken for themselves, and loudly too. His Majesty’s wise and
paternal orders were ridiculed and disobeyed by them the very moment his
back was turned! With such folks the defunct King William seems more
popular than the living King George.[41]
-----
Footnote 40:
I allude here more particularly to the _clerical justices_ of Ireland.
I believe I only coincide with some of the first English lawyers of
this day, in maintaining that clergymen should confine themselves to
_spiritual_ and _charitable_ duties, in doing justice to which ample
occupation would be afforded them.
Footnote 41:
I lately met rather a noted corporator of Dublin in Paris. Of course I
did not spare my interrogations as to the existing state of things;
and in the course of conversation I asked why, after the king’s visit
to Dublin, and his conciliatory admonitions, the corporation still
appeared to prefer the _Boyne Water_ and _King William_? “Lord bless
you, Sir Jonah! (replied the corporator) as for the _wather_, we don’t
care a rap dam about that; but if we once gave up ould King William,
we’d give up all our _plisures_! Only for the ‘glorious mimory’ we
would not have a toast now to get drunk with—eh! Sir Jonah? ha! ha!
ha!” To humour the corporator, I did not hesitate to join in the
hearty laugh which he set up in satisfaction at his own waggery.
-----
Sound government, and the sufferance of active local factions are, in my
view of things, utterly incompatible. Faction and fanaticism (no matter
on _which_ side ranged) ought to be put down to the ground—_gently_, if
possible; but if a _strong hand_ be necessary, it should not be
withheld. In Ireland it has now proceeded too far to be longer blinked
at. The British cabinet may be somewhat divided; but they will soon see
the imperative necessity of firmness and unanimity. It is shameful that
the whole empire should thus be kept in a state of agitation by the
pretended theological animosities of two contending sects—a great
proportion of whose respective partisans are in no way influenced by
_religion_, the true object of their controversy being “_who shall get
the uppermost_.” It is a struggle that cannot continue. There is a
“tide” in the affairs of empires as well as of individuals: every
_fever_ has a _crisis_. Ireland is in one now. I am no factionist, I am
no fanatic: I am the partisan only of tranquillity in the country where
I drew my first breath.
I learn from Ireland with great pleasure—indeed, I read of _general_
satisfaction being experienced at one of the ablest lawyers and most
decisive, moderate, and unbiassed public functionaries of England having
been presented as a head to my profession:—’tis a good beginning:—_ça
ira!_