376 Ch. 22. 1778 IMPOLICY OF RESTRICTIONS and selfish policy of the commercial system, imposed various restraints upon the trade of Ireland to prevent its entering into competition with the trade of Great Britain; and these restrictions were justified on the ground that Ireland being less heavily taxed than England, would obtain an unfair advantage if she was allowed to enter the foreign market on equal terms. This reasoning, which had not yet been refuted by the facts and arguments of political economy, coincided with the spirit of monopoly, which sought not only to exclude all other people from any participation in the benefits of British commerce, but desired to render the trade of whole provinces subservient to the purposes of British merchants. I have elsewhere endeavoured to shew that resistance to this greedy and intolerant spirit, far more than any constitutional scruple, was the main cause of American independence. Ireland, lying under the iron grasp of her mighty neighbour, had no means of resistance, such as the vast, unwieldy provinces at the other side of the Atlantic could command; and it was only by a chronic state of rebellion, seldom breaking into open insurrection, that Ireland could vex her oppressor. Hardly any Irish product which competed with English manufacture was allowed either to enter England, or to be exported to any foreign market which received British goods. The consequence of this unnatural restraint was, that Irish industry languished; and the people of UPON TRADE AND COMMERCE. that beautiful and fertile island, reduced for the most part to the level of mere subsistence, remained in a hopeless state of depression and misery. So scanty were their resources, that the privation of a trade of a few thousand pounds a year which they had lost by the American war, had reduced them to the brink of ruin; and the apprehension that the inhabitants, in their despair, might abandon the soil and emigrate to a foreign land, began to be seriously entertained. 377 Ch. 22. 1778 duties. In these circumstances, Lord Nugent, an Irish Prohibitory peer, who sat in the House of Commons, proposed a measure of relief, consisting in the removal of certain prohibitory duties upon some of the staple articles of Irish manufacture. The measure was readily assented to by Lord North, and, with a few exceptions, obtained the acquiescence of the House of Commons. But when the bill became known throughout the country, it encountered a very different fate. All the manufacturing and trading towns treated the bill as an invasion of their vested rights, and a clamour was raised from one end of the country to the other. The table of the House of Commons was loaded with petitions against the bill. The great towns of Manchester, Liverpool, Bristol and Glasgow, took the lead in resisting this first step in the direction of free trade. They demanded to be heard by counsel. Those towns which were represented in Parliament, peremptorily instructed their members to oppose the Bill. 378 Ch. 22. 1778 sition. OBSTRUCTION OF CLASS OPPOSITION. The opposition of a class, however senseless or selfish, is generally successful in Parliament. The Class-oppo- experience of every man who has sat a few years in either House, will furnish many examples of measures, unquestionably beneficial to the public, which have been postponed, compromised, or altogether defeated, through influence which ought not to have prevailed. Even the Parliament of 1778, though, from the comparative closeness of its constitution, far less accessible to popular or class-influences than the Parliaments which have sat since the Reform Act, was, nevertheless, capable of being acted upon by a strong pressure from without; and this bill, recommended as it was by policy, if not by humanity, in regard to the sister-kingdom, and founded as it was on principles most conducive to the interest of the short-sighted and self-seeking traders, who threatened to become disloyal subjects if it were allowed to pass into a law, shared the fate of many other good measures. All the provisions intended to afford scope to Irish industry and enterprise were omitted, and some trifling concessions only were vouchsafed. Burke, with a courage and integrity rarely found among public men, supported a measure which he knew to be wise and just, although his constituency at Bristol required him, with menaces, to desist from a course which they considered detrimental to their particular interests. It was in vain that he demonstrated to them by unanswerable argument what their in COLD RECEPTION OF BURGOYNE. terests really were; that he explained to them how the duty of a member of Parliament required him to consult the interests of the whole country; that he defined the true relations of the constituent and the representative. Ignorance and prejudice, as usual, for the time prevailed; and at the ensuing general election, Burke was rejected from the representation of Bristol. 379 Ch. 22. 1778 Burgoyne. In the course of this session, General Burgoyne, Return of who had returned to England on parole, pending the adjustment of certain difficulties which had arisen with regard to the fulfilment of the treaty of Saratoga, made his appearance in the House of Commons. Having failed in the military enterprise which he had undertaken, and by his failure greatly retarded, if not ruined the British cause, he met but a cold welcome. He was not received at Court; he was denied the Court of Enquiry for which he applied; but, having the advantage of a seat in parliament, he appealed to the House of Commons from the decision of the military authorities. It was natural that General Burgoyne, actuated by the proverbial sensitiveness of military honor, should be impatient to seize the earliest opportunity of vindicating his conduct; but it was obvious that the General's personal vindication could not be separated from the whole history of the expedition; and all the papers relating to the expedition and the northern army were not yet before the House. Burgoyne, however, who was a ready and practised speaker, defended himself 380 Ch. 22. 1778 Resignation of Lord G. Germaine. LORD GEORGE GERMAINE. with skill and address; but, as a great part of his The failure of Burgoyne's expedition had, before this debate took place, led to Lord George Germaine's resignation. The preferment of Burgoyne to the command of the northern army had been followed by the removal of Sir Guy Carleton from the government of Canada. That distinguished officer, indignant at the slight which |