Ireland -- History -- Rebellion of 1798; Women -- Ireland -- Biography
Such scorn as is poured from it in the new-born “patriotism” of the
Beresfords, the Fosters, the Whaleys, the Saurins, the Verekers, who had
already alienated every right through which an Irishman could call
himself a free man! “You are called on to oppose this Union, to preserve
your rights. Now I ask the men who call on you what rights you have to
support? I ask parliament what right _they_ have not wrested from you?
They adjure you to support the constitution. Alas! for that
constitution, originally a shadow, now embodied a substance of
corruption. You are called on to resist—_what_? Not _oppression_, it has
been _protected_. Not _injustice_, it has been _legalised_. Not
_cruelty_, it has been _indemnified_.... Is it for the _Convention_, the
_Insurrection_, the _Indemnity Acts_, that you are to resist the
annihilation of the parliament that passed them? While these Bills stand
recorded on their Journals parliament ought to know that the country
cannot dread their extinction. And if the minister of England wishes to
use any argument but military force for the accomplishment of this
measure, let him present that statute-book to the people, and ask
them—‘Why should you wish the duration of this parliament? do you not
feel that I am omnipotent in it? are not my mandates written here in
blood?...’
“I shall not dwell more on the advantages than I have done on the
justice of this measure. I do not believe that one advantage will result
from it, or from any other convention between Ireland and Great Britain
which the English minister proposes, and which the English mercantile
interest approves of: no convention or community of interests ever will
be equitably conducted where both parties are not equally able to assert
their own rights, and to resist the innovations or injustice of the
other.... _I know that our part of the treaty will be signed and most
strictly performed, and that the English part of it will be filled up
how and when it suits the interests of the minister._”
When the order came from the Castle to the State prisoners in Kilmainham
on March 18th, 1799, instructing them to be ready for embarkation the
following morning, Mary Anne Emmet, “at a late hour the same evening, on
hearing of the order, proceeded immediately to the Castle, and demanded
an interview with the viceroy for the purpose of ascertaining the fate
that was destined for her brother. She presented herself to the viceroy
with the spirit that seemed to be characteristic of her race. Lord
Cornwallis was moved even to tears at the earnestness of her
supplication, the anxiety exhibited in her looks, the strength of
feeling, the energy of character displayed in the effort she had made.
He treated her with kindness, and assured her that ‘no harm should occur
to her brother.’... Miss Emmet returned to her family, and the
intelligence she brought, little as it was, relieved the minds of her
parents of much of their alarm.”[90]
Footnote 90:
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account