GLC Logo
Homepage  |   About Us  |   Historians  |   Classroom  |   Events  |        

Indexed by: Subject | Author | Date | Document Type
Listed Under:  Ireland, Debates  |   Ireland, Legislation

Irish House of Commons, Monday, Feb. 26

Citation Information:"Irish House of Commons, Monday, Feb. 26," The London Chronicle, Wednesday, Feb. 26, 1800, Vol. 87.

THE LONDON CHRONICLE for 1800
IRISH HOUSE OF COMMONS
Wednesday, Feb. 26

In a Committee on the Bill to enable his Majesty to accept the voluntary services of the militia in regiments of the line,

Mr. O'Donnell strenuously opposed that paragraph which went to enable his Majesty to divide the Downshire regiment into two distinct battalions. He said it was a measure which formed part of the same system with that by which it was intended to disgrace one of the most illustrious and loyal Noblemen in this country, or in the Empire—he meant the marquis of Downshire—but which in the event recoiled upon the authors of it, and accumulated disgrace upon their heads. That Nobleman had been dismissed from the command of this regiment, which he had founded; and there was too much reason to believe that he was so, only because he could not be brought to join with the enemies of this country in voting away its constitution—or assist the Minister in the iniquitous project he had formed, and seemed resolved to persist in, against the sense of the public and the real opinion of that House.

Sir T. Parnell opposed the clause on the same ground on which Mr. O'Donnell had opposed it, as being evidently calculated to increase the patronage of the Crown, by creating new Military Offices, which most probably would be employed, as the influence of the Crown had already been, with regard to the great question, now pending in Parliament; and if the public could once believe that this were the real object of the measure, it would tend much more to weaken the force of the country than any military arrangement could strengthen it.

Lord Corry, Mr. Ponsonby, Col. Barry, and Mr. Osborne, all opposed the clause, as being manifestly calculated to procure an increase of the patronage to the Crown, to be exerted on the measure of Union.