Notes:
[Footnote 125: Mr. Froude says four great families-the Fitzgeralds of Kildare, the Boyles, the Ponsonbys, and the Beresfords-returned a majority of the House of Commons ("English in Ireland," ii., 5); and besides those peers, the arrangement for the Union proved that the influence of the Loftuses and the Hills fell little short of them.]
[Footnote 126: Such a system actually had existed in France, where articles of ordinary trade could not be transported from one province to another without payment of a heavy duty; but Colbert had abolished that system in France above one hundred years before the time of which we are speaking.]
[Footnote 127: "History of England," vol. v., c. xxiii., p. 57.]
[Footnote 128: "The English in Ireland," ii., 39.]
[Footnote 129: Fronde's "English in Ireland," ii., 345. He does not name the author whom he quotes.]
[Footnote 130: Ibid., ii, 42.]
[Footnote 131: See p. 164.]
[Footnote 132: Mr. Froude imputes to Grattan a singularly base object. "Far from Grattan was a desire to heal the real sores of the country for which he was so zealous. These wild, disordered elements suited better for the campaign in which he engaged of renovating an Irish nationality."-English in Ireland, ii., 448. But, however on many points we may see reason to agree with Mr. Froude's estimate of the superior wisdom of Fitzgibbon, we conceive that this opinion is quite consistent with our acquittal of the other of the meanness of deliberately aiming at a continuance of evils, in order to find in them food for a continuance of agitation.]
[Footnote 133: Froude, "English in Ireland," i., 304.]
[Footnote 134: See especially a letter of Mr. Windham's. quoted by Lord Stanhope ("Life of Pitt," ii., 288).]
[Footnote 135: Mr. Archdall, in his place in Parliament, denounced the term as utterly inapplicable. "Emancipation meant that a slave was set free. The Catholics were not slaves. Nothing more absurd had ever been said since language was first abused for the delusion of mankind."]
[Footnote 136: The first beginning of the insurrection was at Prosperous, County Kildare, May 24. General Lake dealt it the final blow on Vinegar Hill, June 21.]
[Footnote 137: Mr. Sheridan, Mr. Tierney, and Lord William Russell led the denunciations of the government in the English House of Commons. A protest against Pitt's refusal to dismiss the Lord-lieutenant, Lord Camden, the Chancellor Fitzgibbon, and the Commander-in-chief, Lord Carhampton, was signed by the Dukes of Norfolk, Devonshire, and Leinster; Lords Fitzwilliam, Moira, and Ponsonby, "two of them Irish absentees, who were discharging thus their duties to the poor country which supported their idle magnificence."-The English in Ireland, iii., 454.]
[Footnote 138: "Constitutional History," iii., 451 seq.]
[Footnote 139: Massey's "History of England," iv., 397 (quoting the Cornwallis correspondence).]
[Footnote 140: Lord Stanhope's "Reign of Queen Anne," p. 89.]
[Footnote 141: In the House of Commons by 158 to 115; in the House of Lords, February 10, by 75 to 26.]
[Footnote 142: An amendment pledging the House to maintain "an independent Legislature, as established in 1782," was only defeated by 106 to 105.]
[Footnote 143: In the House of Commons the majority was 158 to 115; in the House of Lords, 75 to 26.]
[Footnote 144: This estimate, which was but a guess, proved very inaccurate. The first census for the United Kingdom, which was taken the next year (1801), showed that Ireland was considerably more populous than its own representatives had imagined. The numbers returned (as given by Alison, "History of Europe," ii., 335, c. ix., sec. 8) were:
England..................................... 8,382,484
Wales....................................... 547,346
Scotland.................................... 1,599,068
Army, Navy, etc............................. 470,586
-----
Total...................................10,999,434
Ireland..................................... 5,396,436
So that the proportion of population in Great Britain, as compared with that of Ireland, only exceeded two to one by an insignificant fraction.]
[Footnote 145: See his letter to the King, dated January 31, 1801, quoted by Lord Stanhope in the appendix to vol. iii. of his "Life of Pitt," p. 25.]
[Footnote 146: Mr. Fox, called on by Mr. Alexander to explain his expressions (in the debate relative to Mr. Pitt's funeral), by which he had declared his disapprobation of the Union, and his concurrence in opinion with Mr. O'Hara that it ought to be rescinded. Mr. Fox repeated his disapprobation, but disclaimed ever having expressed an opinion or entertained a thought of proposing its repeal, that being now impracticable, though he regretted its ever having been effected.-Diary of Lord Colchester, February 17, 1806, ii., 39.]
[Footnote 147: It may be remarked that in another respect also political critics have pronounced the Union defective. Archbishop Whately, whose long tenure of office in Ireland, as well as the acuteness and candor which he brought to bear on every subject he discussed, entitle his opinions to most respectful consideration, held this view very strongly. In several conversations which he held with Mr. W.N. Senior, in 1858 and 1862, he condemned the retention of the Lord-lieutenancy as "a half measure," which, however unavoidable at the time when "no ship could be certain of getting from Holyhead to Dublin in less than three weeks," he pronounced "inconsistent with the fusion of the two peoples, which was the object of the Union," and wholly indefeasible "in an age of steam-vessels and telegraphs." And, besides its theoretical inconsistency, he insisted that it produced many great and practical mischiefs, among which he placed in the front "the keeping up in people's minds the notion of a separate kingdom; the affording a hotbed of faction and intrigue; the presenting an image of Majesty so faint and so feeble as to be laughed at and scorned. Disaffection to the English Lieutenancy is cheaply shown, and it paves the way toward disaffection to the English crown." And he imputed its continued retention to "the ignorance which prevails in England of the state of feeling in Ireland."-Journals and Conversations Relating to Ireland, by W.N. Senior, ii., 130, 251, and passim. And it is worthy of observation that a similar view is expressed by a Scotch writer of great ability, who, contrasting the mode in which Scotland is governed with that which prevails In Ireland, farther denounces the Viceroyalty "as a distinct mark that Ireland is not directly under the sovereignty of Great Britain, but rather a dependency, like India or the Isle of Man."-Ireland, by J.B. Kinnear, quoted in the Fortnightly Review, April 1, 1881. It is remarkable that in 1850 a bill for the abolition of the office was passed in the House of Commons by a large majority (295 to 70), but was dropped in the House of Lords, chiefly on account of the opposition of the Duke of Wellington. But it is, at all events, plain that the reasons, arising from the difficulty and uncertainty of communication, which made its abolition impossible at the beginning of the century, have passed away with the introduction of steam-vessels and telegraphs. Communication of London with Dublin is now as rapid as communication with Edinburgh, and, that being the case, it is not easy to see how an establishment which has never been thought of for Scotland can be desirable for Ireland.]