"country. Yet surely it is sufficient to awaken "sentiments of indignation and compassion in "the coldest bosoms. These horrors are now

acting with impunity. The spirit of impartial 'justice (without which law is nothing better "than an instrument of tyranny) has for a time

disappeared in the county, and the supineness "of the magistracy of Armagh is become a "common topic of conversation in every corner "of the kingdom." His Lordship most evidently addressed the Armagh magistracy, under a conscious sense of their feelings and conduct being then pre-occupied by a power and influence different from, and superior to his own. What else could have induced him to add, "conscious of my sincerity in this public de"claration, which I do not make unadvisedly, " but as the result of mature deliberation, I defy "the paltry insinuations, that malice or party spi"rit may suggest. I know my own heart, and I "should despise myself, if, under any intimida

tion, I could close my eyes against such scenes, "as present themselves on every side, or my ears "against the complaints of a persecuted people."

Gosford

Such marked reprobation of the conduct of How Ld. the Orangemen from a nobleman of the respected appointcharacter aud peculiar situation of the late Lord ed goverGosford, is an object of interesting observation. Armagh. In the summer of 1791, whilst the political His upright spiF 2

nor of

power rit.

power of Ireland was left in the hands of the monopolizing managers of Lord Westmoreland's administration, they took deep offence at the Earl of Charlemont's partiality for the Protestant dissenters, and in order to thwart or disgust that noble Earl, they appointed Lord Gosford joint governor with him of the County of Armagh. Lord Charlemont's ancestors had, from the reign of Elizabeth, uninterruptedly enjoyed the government of that county. Considering this joint appointment of a co-governor as an insult and an offence, his Lordship resigned. Lord Gosford was, of course, considered a government man: but his honour and integrity were unassailable. His manly opposition to the wicked and dangerous system, which he well knew to be fostered by the ruling power of the state, gaye heinous offence at the Castle, which several of their underlings and dependants scrupled not openly to express. In the debate upon the Attorney General's resolutions, Mr. Archdall, an habitual supporter of government, boasted of his habits of intimacy with Lord Gosford, and scrupled not to denounce his Lordship's address most incautious, and such as on reflection he would not approve of.* He recommended therefore the

conduct

About eight years after this address had been made, the author had the honor of a very long conversation upon the subject with the late Lord Gosford, in which his Lordship

very

conduct of that nobleman, rather than his publication, as an object of imitation. In the course of the same year, as Mr. Coile was urging the Attorney General to redress his sufferings, he referred to Lord Gosford's address, in order to prove the injustice, which had prevailed in the country; when he was rebuked by that law officer, who warmly panegyrized the government for their conduct in Armagh, and severely censured the noble Viscount for having made himself much too busy, (he was Lord Lieutenant and principal conservator of the peace of the county.) Mr. Cooke also, in several conferences with Mr. Coile, presumed, in the like official tone of the Castle, to arraign that respected nobleman's conduct as extra-officious and unwarrantable.

not al

ways au

At that time the spirit of the government was Legislaplainly read in the acts of the legislature. The tive acts historian cannot, however, safely extract from them evidence of the facts, upon which they are thentic ground supposed to have been engrafted.* The Attorney for histoGeneral brought forward his four resolutions, and ry. the two bills founded upon them, as the mouth piece of the government and lest there should

go

explicitly confirmed all the sentiments expressed in that address; but added, that he probably should have done better by making it much stronger; and that Mr. Archdall was unauthorized to make that representation to the Commons.

* At Law, facts recited in an act of parliament prove themselves.

The debates in Parlia ment the only historical

source of informa

tion.

*

go down to posterity any authentic trace of the outrages of their protected exterminators, he cautiously kept out of the resolutions, and out of the acts, the very name of the County of Armagh, though at that time labouring under more turbulence and outrage, than any other part of Ireland. These resolutions and bills were expressly introduced for the purpose of giving extraordinary powers to the magistrate to put down extraordinary turbulency in the country; yet would it be impossible for the future historian to collect from the record of those acts of parliament, the slightest evidence of the county of Armagh having been at that time disturbed by an exterminating banditti, who drove the whole Catholic population of the county from their homes, merely because they professed the Roman Catholic Religion.

The debate in the House of Commons upon the passing of those bills is the chief historical

source

*Notwithstanding this studied caution to keep the name of Armagh, and any specific reference to those Protestant outrages out of the acts, yet it is evident, that as far as the indemnity of the magistrates went, the legislators had their eyes anxiously rivetted to the whole persecution of Armagh, up to that hour. They meant not to leave the Armagh maThe indemnity gistracy uncovered, even for a moment.

was made to operate inclusively from the 1st day of July, 1795, that notorious day, on which Mr. Mansell so successfully opened his extraordiuary mission at Portadown.

source of information for the truth of the Armagh persecution. The suppression of the very nature of the Orange delinquency by the Attorney General, spoke a language too clear to be misunderstood by any man of impartiality. The protecting tenderness for this Prætorian guard of the Protestant ascendancy went to complete impunity. Mr. George Ponsonby, in urging the amendment proposed by Mr. Grattan, said, that "the enormities, which the governor of that county had declared, exceeded any, that ever "disgraced any country, were such as the existing laws were not calculated fully to reach: they were of that kind, that a fair and im"partial Government should be glad to catch "at every opportunity to prevent. If Admi"nistration were sincere in wishing to protect "the unfortunate sufferer in that county, as "they were to punish offenders in other parts, they would not hesitate for one moment to adopt the amendment."

66

amend

ney Ge

That amendment was to make it obligatory (not Nature of leaving it optional, as the bill did) on the County proposed to pay the countryman, whether labourer or manu- ment to facturer, full compensation for his damages and the Attor losses to his person, family, or dwelling, suffered neral's in consequence of violent mobs. Mr. Grattan observed, that if the compensation were left optional to the grand jury, nothing would be done.

That

bill.