this or some other pretext the Commons threw the Bill out on the third reading by a majority of thirty-five. Perrott looked upon this check as a disgrace to himself and a hindrance to the Queen, and prorogued Parliament for a few days. This enabled him to bring the Bill in again, but it was lost by a reduced majority, although Ormonde's friends, who had at first opposed, now voted with the 'ayes.' Partly by his rudeness, and partly by his determination to prevent jobs, the Lord Deputy had made many enemies, and six Englishmen turned the scale against the Bill. 'And thus,' said Perrott, 'they have not only overthrown the repeal of Poyning's Act, that should have set them at liberty to treat of that and all other things necessary for this State, but also dashed most of the statutes that were penned in Ireland and sent back confirmed from England, as, namely, that for the safety of the Queen.'[138] [Sidenote: Agitators.] The chief opposition to Perrott's measures came from the Pale, and among the leaders were Sidney's old antagonists Richard Netterville and Henry Burnell. 'These popular fellows,' said Perrott, 'or good countrymen, as they would be gloriously termed, have been ever of this humour against all governors, and some of them, namely Netterville and Burnell, have been in the Tower of London for causes of far less moment than this is.' [Sidenote: A fair system of taxation rejected.] One great cause of opposition was a Bill proposing to equalise ploughlands, and to impose a tax of 13_s._ 4_d._ in lieu of cess on each ploughland throughout the whole country. The Pale had hitherto paid when Irish countries were not charged, and the native chiefs were now willing to come to an arrangement. But even in the counties which had always contributed there were many permanent exemptions, and still more fraudulent evasions. A new survey had thus many terrors, and, as is so often the case, threatened interests were more powerful than arguments founded on considerations of public policy. The Pale offered a lump sum of 1,200_l._ in lieu of all cess; but this was far less than had always been paid, and Perrott indignantly refused it. The chance of making the whole country voluntarily contribute to the expenses of government was thus unhappily lost. The Irish chiefs, who had come prepared to agree with the Lord Deputy, now left Dublin in far worse humour than they had reached it, and the plan of making them English subjects was indefinitely postponed. Religion was at the bottom of the whole difficulty, and one of the Pale patriots said, in open Parliament, that 'things did prosper in Henry V.'s and former kings' times when the mass was up.' Perrott was willing and anxious to punish his parliamentary opponents, but required orders from home first, 'because these kind of people by the mild dealing of England have ever found more favour there than hath been for the good of this State.'[139] [Sidenote: Small results of the session.]