laws, throughout the United Kingdom. And lastly, in 1855, the local affairs of the metropolis were intrusted to the Metropolitan Board of Works,—a free municipal assembly,-elected by a popular constituency, and exercising extended powers of taxation and local management.1 Quarter The sole local administration, indeed, which has still been left without representation, is Courts of that of counties; where rates are levied Sessions. and expenditure sanctioned by magistrates appointed by the crown. Selected from the nobles and gentry of the county for their position, influence, and character, the magistracy undoubtedly afford a virtual representation of its interests. The foremost men assemble and discuss the affairs in which they have themselves the greatest concern: but the principles of election and responsibility are wanting. This peculiarity was noticed in 1836 by the commission on county rates; 2 and efforts have since been made, first by Mr. Hume,3 and afterwards by Mr. Milner Gibson, to introduce responsibility into county administration. It was proposed to establish financial boards, constituted of members elected by boards of guardians, and of magistrates chosen by themselves. To the representative principle itself few objections were offered; but no scheme for 4 1 Metropolis Local Management Acts, 1855, 1862. Toulmin Smith's Metropolis Local Management Act. 'The 2 The Commissioners said: No other tax of such magnitude is laid upon the subject, except by his representatives.' administration of this fund is the exercise of an irresponsible power intrusted to a fluctuating body.' 3 In 1837 and 1839.-Hans. Deb., 3rd Ser., cvi. 125. 4 In 1840, and subsequently. - Ibid., cviii. 738. carrying it into effect has yet found favour with the legislature. Counties represent the aristocratic, towns the democratic, principles of our constitution. Distinctive of counties and towns. character In counties, territorial power, ancestral honours, family connexions, and local traditions have dominion. The lords of the soil still enjoy influence and respect, little less than feudal. Whatever forms of administration may be established, their ascendency is secure. Their power is founded upon the broad basis of English society: not upon laws or local institutions. In towns, power is founded upon numbers and association. The middle classes,-descendants and representatives of the stout burghers of olden times,-have sway. The wealth, abilities, and public virtues of eminent citizens may clothe them with influence: but they derive authority from the free suffrages of their fellow-citizens, among whom they dwell. The social differences of counties and towns have naturally affected the conditions of their local administration and political tendencies: but both have contributed, in different ways, to the good government of the state. CHAPTER XVI. GOVERNMENT OF IRELAND BEFORE THE UNION: THE LEGISLATURE AND THE EXECUTIVE: — PROTESTANT ASCENDENCY: IRELAND A DEPENDENCY-COMMERCIAL RESTRICTIONS:-THE VOLUNTEERS:LEGISLATIVE AND JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE GRANTED 1782:-THE UNITED IRISHMEN AND OTHER ASSOCIATIONS-THE REBELLION OF 1798: THE UNION-ITS BENEFITS DEFERRED:-FREEDOM AND EQUALITY FINALLY ASSURED. WE have seen liberty steadily advancing, in every form, and under every aspect, throughout Progress of liberty in our political and religious institutions. Ireland. And nowhere has its advance been more conspicuous than in Ireland. In that country, the English laws and constitution had been established as if in mockery. For ages its people were ruled, by a conquering and privileged race, as aliens and outlaws.2 Their lands were wrested from them: their rights trampled under foot: their blood and their religion proscribed.3 Before George III. commenced his reign, the dawn of better days was brightening the horizon; yet, what was then the political before the condition of his Irish subjects? They Government of Ireland Union. were governed by a Parliament, whence every 1 Leland, Hist., i. 80, &c.; Plowden's Hist., i. 33. 2 Davis, 100, 109. For the earlier history of Ireland, see Plowden, i. 1-332; Leland, Prelim. Discourse; O'Halloran; Moore; and a succinct but comprehensive outline by Hallam, Const. Hist., chap. xviii. Catholic was excluded. The House of Lords was The Lords. composed of prelates of the Protestant church, and of nobles of the same faith,-owners of boroughs, patrons of corporations, masters of the representation, and in close alliance with the Castle.' The Commons. The House of Commons assumed to represent the country: but the elective franchise, narrow and illusory in other respects, was wholly denied to five-sixths of the people,2—on account of their religion. Every vice of the English representative system was exaggerated in Ireland. Nomination boroughs had been more freely created by the crown: in towns, the members were returned by patrons or close corporations: in counties, by great proprietors. In an assembly of 300, twenty-five lords of the soil alone returned no less than 116 members. A comparatively small number of patrons returned a majority; and, acting in concert, were able to dictate their own terms to the government. So well were their influence and tactics recognised, that they were known as the ‘Parliamentary undertakers.' 6 Theirs was not an ambition to be satisfied with political power and ascen Hardy's Life of Lord Charlemont, i. 102. 2 Primate Boulter admitted that there were five Catholics to one Protestant in the reign of George II.-Plowden's Hist., i. 269, 271; Grattan's Life, i. 64. 32 Geo. I. c. 19; 1 Geo. II. c. 9, s. 7. 4 Leland, ii. 437; Plowden's Hist., i. 109; App. xv. xvi.; Carte's Ormond, i. 18; Lord Mountmorres' Hist. of the Irish Parliament, i. 166, &c.; Desiderata Curiosa Hibernica, 308; Moore's Hist., iv. 164. 5 Massey (on the authority of the Bolton MSS.) Hist., iii. 261. See also Wakefield's Statistical and Political Account of Ireland, ii. 201. • Wilkinson's Survey of South of Ireland, 57; Adolphus' Hist., i. 161. dency: they claimed more tangible rewards,-titles, offices, pensions, for themselves, their relatives and dependents. Self-interest and corruption were all but universal, in the entire scheme of parliamentary government. Two-thirds of the House of Commons, on whom the government generally relied, were attached to its interest by offices, pensions, or promises of preferment. Patrons and nominees alike exacted favours; and in five-and-twenty years, the Irish pension list was trebled.2 Places and pensions, the price of parliamentary services, were publicly bought and sold in the market. But these rewards, however lavishly bestowed, failed to satisfy the more needy and prodigal, whose fidelity was purchased from time to time with hard cash. Parliamentary corruption was a recognised instrument of government: no one was ashamed of it. Even the Speaker, whose office should have raised him above the low intrigues and sordid interests of faction, was mainly relied upon for the management of the House of Commons. And this corrupt and servile assembly, once intrusted with power, might con- Parliament tinue to abuse it for an indefinite period. only on If not subservient to the crown, it was crown. dissolved: but, however neglectful of the rights and interests of the people, it was firmly installed as expired demise of 1 Plowden's Hist., i. 360, 375. See also analysis of the ministerial majority in 1784, in the Bolton MSS., Massey's Hist., iii. 265. 2 Plowden's Hist., i. 451; supra, Vol. I. p. 256. Plowden's Hist., i. 364, 378. 4 Plowden's Hist., i. 374; Irish Debates, i. 139; Grattan's Life, i. 97; Walpole's Journ., i. 399. 5 Hardy's Life of Lord Charlemont, i. 88. |