The thrush, the lark, all leave our mimic vale,
No more we boast our Christmas nightingale,
Poor Rossignol — the wonder of his day,
Sang through the winter, but is mute in May.
Then bashful spring, that gilds fair nature’s scene,
O’ercasts our lawns, and deadens ev’ry green,
Obscures our sky, embrowns the wooden shade,
And dries the channel of each tin cascade.
Oh, hapless we, whom such ill-fate betides,
Hurt by the beam which cheers the world besides!
Who love the ling’ring frost, nice chilling show’rs,
While Nature’s Benefit — is death to ours,
Who, witch-like, best in noxious mists perform,
Thrive in the tempest and enjoy the storm.
Oh, hapless we! unless your generous care
Bid us no more lament that Spring is fair,
But plenteous green from the dramatic soil,
The vernal harvest of our winter’s toil.
For April suns to us no pleasure bring:
Your presence here is all we feel of Spring;
May’s riper beauties here no bloom display,
Your fostering smile alone proclaims it May.
EPILOGUE FOR AN UNKNOWN PLAY
To be spoken by a Woman of Fashion.
[A Fragment.]
THERE are some fragments of an Epilogue, apparently intended to be spoken in the character of a Woman of Fashion, which give a lively notion of what the poem would have been, when complete. The high carriages that had just then come into fashion are thus adverted to: —
My carriage stared at! — none so high or fine —
Palmer’s mail-coach shall be a sledge to mine.
* * * *
No longer now the youths beside us stand,
And talking lean, and leaning press the hand;
But, ogling upward, as aloft we sit,
Straining, poor things, their ancles and their wit,
And, much too short the inside to explore,
Hang like supporters half way up the door.
The approach of a “veteran husband,” to disturb these flirtations and chase away the lovers, is then hinted at: —
To persecuted virtue yield assistance,
And for one hour teach younger men their distance,
Make them, in very spite, appear discreet,
And mar the public mysteries of the street.
The affectation of appearing to make love, while talking on indifferent matters, is illustrated by the following simile: —
So when dramatic statesmen talk apart,
With practis’d gesture and heroic start,
The plot’s their theme, the gaping galleries guess,
While Hull and Fearon think of nothing less.
The following lines seem to belong to the same Epilogue: —
The Campus Martius of St. James’s Street,
Where the beau’s cavalry pace to and fro,
Before they take the field in Rotten Row;
Where Brooks’s Blues and Weltje’s Light Dragoons
Dismount in files, and ogle in platoons.
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF THE PROLOGUES AND EPILOGUES
THIS list is restricted to the First Editions of plays by other authors. It is most likely that all these were originally printed as broadsides, though no copies have survived, or (at least, to my knowledge) have been recorded.]
1. EDWARD AND ELEANORA (1775.) Edward and Eleanora: A Tragedy, Acted at the Theatre Royal in Covent-Garden. Altered from James Thomson. And now adapted to the English Stage by Thomas Hull. London. J. Bell. 1775.
2. SEMIRAMIS (1776.) Semiramis: A Tragedy: As it is Acted At The Theatre Royal in Drury-Lane. By George Edward Ayscough, Esq. London: Printed for J. Dodsley, In Pall-Mall. M.DCC.LXXVI. 8vo pp viii + 76.
3. SIR THOMAS OVERBURY (1777.) Sir Thomas Overbury: A Tragedy. Altered from the Late Mr. Richard Savage. As now performing at the Theatre-Royal in Covent-Garden. London. Printed by William Woodfall; And sold by Francis Newbery. The Corner Of St. Paul’s ChurchYard.M. DCC.LXXVII. [Price, One Shilling and Six-Pence.]
4. THE FATAL FALSEHOOD (1779.) The Fatal Falsehood: A Tragedy. As It Is A died At The Theatre-Royal, In Covent-Garden. By The Author of Percy. London: Printed For T. Cadell, In The Strand, M. DCC. LXXIX. (Price One Shilling And Six Pence.) 8vo. Pp viii+84.
5. THE MINIATURE PICTURE (1781.) The Miniature Picture: A Comedy. In Three Acts: Performed At The Theatre-Royal Drury-Lane. London: Printed for G. Riley, Bookseller, at the City Circulating Library, St. Paul’s Church-yard. M.DCC.LXXXI. 8vo. Pp. 92.
Pagination. Half-title: recto, The Miniature Picture: A Comedy. Price One Shilling and Six-Pence verso:blank.Pp.[i] — [x] title, etc.; pp. [9] +10-87, text; P- [88] “Books Printed for G. Riley.”
6. THE FAIR CIRCASSIAN (1781.) The Fair Circassian. A Tragedy. As Performed At The Theatre-Royal, Drury-Lane, By the Author Of Sympathy, A Poem. London: Printed For R. Baldwin, No. 47, Pater-Noster Row: MDCCLXXXI. Half title. The Fair Circassian. A Tragedy. [Price is. 6d.]
The Non-Fiction
10 Hertford Street, Mayfair, London — Sheridan’s home from 1795-1802
Richard Sheridan in later years
THE LEGISLATIVE INDEPENDENCE OF IRELAND VINDICATED
IN A SPEECH OF MR. SHERIDAN’S ON THE IRISH PROPOSITIONS, IN THE BRITISH HOUSE OF COMMONS.
TO WHICH IS ANNEXED AN AUTHENTIC COPY OF THE TWENTY RESOLUTIONS, ON THE IRISH COMMERCIAL INTERCOURSE; AS THEY PASSED THAT HOUSE, ON THE 30TH OF MAY, 1785
CONTENTS
THE LEGISLATIVE INDEPENDENCE OF IRELAND VINDICATED; IN A SPEECH OF MR. SHERIDAN’S ON THE IRISH PROPOSITIONS IN THE BRITISH HOUSE OF COMMONS. ON MONDAY, THE 30TH OF MAY, 1785.
AN AUTHENTIC COPY OF THE TWENTY RESOLUTIONS
THE LEGISLATIVE INDEPENDENCE OF IRELAND VINDICATED; IN A SPEECH OF MR. SHERIDAN’S ON THE IRISH PROPOSITIONS IN THE BRITISH HOUSE OF COMMONS. ON MONDAY, THE 30TH OF MAY, 1785.
MR. SHERIDAN rose, as the question was going to be put, and said, that as the persevering silence of Ministers made it impossible for him to guess whether they meant to admit the amendment in the fourth Proposition or not; and as they had pursued the same conduct in rejecting the amendment moved by a noble Lord near him, which he had the honour of seconding, he would take the opportunity of speaking to the Resolution generally as it had been framed, and defended by the Minister, before it should become still more objectionable, by extending the powers it was to lodge in Great-Britain over the sister kingdom. This, at least, Mr. Sheridan said, was a question on which Gentlemen were no longer to hear the desires and wishes of Ireland urged as arguments for their concurrence; it was a matter wholely and entirely new; it was so far from being any part of the offer made by Ireland, that it had never even been hinted at, or alluded to, in the Irish Parliament; it never had been once glanced at by Mr. Orde; it formed no part of the consideration recommended to the attention of the Parliaments of both kingdoms in his Majesty’s gracious Speech from the throne; it was not to be found in the questions referred to the investigation of the Committee of Privy-Council, and the Rt. hon. Gentleman himself (Mr. Pitt) in opening this business to the British Parliament had not uttered one word that tended to shew that this Proposition was essential to the settlement proposed between the two kingdoms. The question then was, whether the new Proposition, now in debate, contained matter fit to be proposed from the Parliament of this country to the Parliament of Ireland? In his conscience he thought it did not; — it was injurious to make the offer, and it was folly to believe it could be accepted; it was not enough to say that the Parliament of Ireland ought not or dared not agree to it; they had not the powers to accede to it; — it would be a concession beyond the limits of their trust; they would betray the confidence reposed in them, and the Irish nation would spurn at the bondage which their degenerate representatives had no authority to engage they should submit to. Much had been argued on a
former day relative to the extent and spirit of this Proposition. The event and conclusion of all those arguments from both sides of the House, warranted him now in asserting, that this Resolution went, in the fullest extent, to a complete resumption of the right of external legislation so lately exercised, but so solemnly renounced, by Great-Britain over Ireland. It was unnecessary to repeat those arguments. No Person would again attempt to maintain that this was a measure of experiment, or that it was in the power of Ireland to possess herself of the greatest present benefits from this country, which so many Gentlemen contended she would immediately obtain, as a transfer of British capital, and the establishment of British manufactures; and then, by refusing to place upon her Statute-book some act of this Legislature which she was bound to have adopted, void and annul the whole of this settlement, and revert unmolested to her present situation. A full explanation had been given on this subject, the conclusion from which went distinctly to this: that the present settlement was final and perpetual. That the contracting parties in this momentous business being presumed to act with perfect foresight of the consequences of their irrevocable engagements, neither party could depart from any article stipulated, without breach of faith. Such an infraction in the stronger power, would be an act of despotism and oppression, and would justify the utmost extent of resistance; in the weaker, it would be a direct attempt to disengage herself from all connection with or relation to the empire, and would authorize the vigour of coercion. This was the footing upon which the two countries must in future be understood to be united. Upon this view it would be an imposition on common sense to pretend that Ireland could in future have the exercise of free will or discretion upon any of those subjects of legislation, on which she now stipulated to follow the edicts of Great-Britain; and it was a miserable sophistry to contend, that her being permitted the ceremony of placing those laws upon her own Statute-book, as the form of promulgating them, was an argument that it was not the British, but the Irish statute, which bound the people of Ireland. For his part, if he were a Member of the Irish Parliament, he should prefer the measure of enacting, by one decisive vote, that all British laws, to the purposes stipulated, should have immediate operation in Ireland as in Great-Britain; choosing rather to avoid the ignominious mockery of enacting without deliberation, and deciding where they had no power to dissent; where setters were to be worn, it was a wretched ambition to contend for the distinction of fastening our own shackles.
If this was a fair construction of the purport and necessary consequences of the Resolution, was it a light and trifling consideration, when we reflected on the solemn and decisive manner in which the faith of the two countries had been engaged on this subject? whether Great-Britain should insidiously, by surprise, and collaterally, as it were, make a proposal, which would argue to her a repentance of the bounty, or rather of the justice, which she had done to Ireland; and which, if not accepted, would necessarily destroy for ever all confidence in that country towards Great-Britain on those great constitutional questions, which he had shewn were so near to her breast, and so valuable above all other advantages she had either claimed or acquired? It had been solemnly stipulated between the two kingdoms, that “the right claimed by Ireland, to be bound in all cases whatever, only by laws made by the King, Lords, and Commons of Ireland, should never more be questioned, or questionable.”
This Resolution did not question that right. No; certainly it did not; it only offered to bargain for it, and proposed conditions on which the right was to be relinquished for ever by Ireland. But who are the parties negotiating, and under what circumstances is the treaty carried on? A final commercial arrangement is declared to be necessary to the future good understanding between the countries; and this final arrangement it is declared by Britain to be an indispensable condition that Ireland should give up all legislative authority in matters of trade and navigation; and this condition is not fairly put forward in the outset of the treaty, but Ireland is treacherously encouraged to demand a benefit, and then a price is exacted greater than any favour Britain can bestow, while by the manner of granting it, Ireland is at the same time given to understand, that there can never be peace or cordiality between the two countries, till she acquiesces in the sacrifice. When a strong power, conscious of its superiority, treats with a weaker one upon such terms; it may not question indeed the right to the possession wished for, but it does more, it hints a menace on the consequence of withholding it; the letter of the compact is not infringed, but the spirit of it is violated. Here Mr. Sheridan said, he would not enter into a discussion, whether it was not reasonable in any Administration, at any time, to entertain an apprehension, that great difficulties might arise in the government of two countries, each possessing an independent legislature, especially in matters of commerce and navigation. To argue theoretically on such a situation, undoubtedly many apprehensions might be justifiable; but what had been the event? It had not proved them to be well-founded; but whatever fears were entertained on the subject, this he was sure of, that the only mode of treating with Ireland in a point of such magnitude, was by fair, explicit, and ingenuous plain-dealing. If the British Government really thought it essential to the future good understanding, and to the common interests of the two kingdoms, that the power of legislating to particular objects should be lodged in one kingdom, only for the common benefit of both, and of consequence in that kingdom which was the head of the empire, it should have been distinctly so stated in the front and outset of the first overture made to the Irish Parliament, as the basis of a permanent agreement. If then, upon due deliberation, and full communication with their constituents and with the country at large, the Parliament of that kingdom had thought it advisable, and had been authorised to treat for the surrender of those rights which they had so lately deemed the only safeguard, either of their commerce or of their constitution, and which they gloried so much to have obtained by their own virtues and spirited exertions; then undoubtedly whatever he might have thought of their prudence, he should not have held himself at liberty to make the same comments on the proceeding. Instead of this, all had been delusion, trick, and fallacy; a new scheme of commercial arrangement is proposed to the Irish as a boon, and the surrender of their constitution is tacked to it as a mercantile regulation. Ireland, newly escaped from harsh trammels and severe discipline, is treated like a high mettled horse, hard to catch; and the Irish Secretary is to return to the field, soothing and coaxing him, with a sieve of provender in one hand, but with a bridle in the other, ready to slip over his head, while he is snuffling at the food. But this political jockeyship, he was convinced, would not succeed; Ireland would spurn at any offer to which such a condition was to be annexed! she would now plainly see that this alarming condition, now indeed declared to be the essence and vital principle of the whole settlement, though introduced as an afterthought, as it were, and as a consequence of the tenor of the requisitions made by Ireland, was no doubt the first original object, and contained the seed and source of the whole business. He was the more confirmed in this opinion, from recollecting many passages in the Rt. hon. Mover’s speeches, since he first opened this matter; although it was not then thought prudent even to hint that such a stipulation should be part of the treaty, he constantly made it a topic of accusation against his Rt. hon. Friend (Mr. Fox) that he had permitted Ireland to assert the freedom of her constitution, unconditionally, and without reserving to Great Britain, a necessary controul over her trade and navigation. Here Mr. Sheridan went into a full defence of the conduct of his Rt. hon. Friend on that occasion, he reminded the House of the circumstances of the times, the situation in which Ireland then stood, and maintained that the declaratory statute which Ireland demanded to be repealed, was more disgraceful to the Journals of that House, and more a libel on the principles of this country, than injurious to the people it insulted; but was there a man in that House who would stand up and say, that conditions ought to have been made with Ireland, annexed to this concession, if a conces
sion it could be called? Was there a man who stated this to be his opinion at the time? If the Rt. hon. Gentleman who so frequently repeats this charge, has to plead in his excuse, that he was not THEN possessed of all that political foresight, and consummate sagacity which three years experience had given him, how came it, that his new ally, the Rt. hon. Gentleman by his side (Mr. Jenkinson) whose prudence and abilities were certainly not immature at that time, so far deserted his duty, as never to protest, while the measure was in its progress, against the indiscretion and rashness of a Minister, whom he had no reason to savour, nor once to warn him, that he was inconsiderately placing the two countries in a situation, in which it was impossible for them to stand, and inducing Parliament to relinquish a right, which it would be indispensably necessary, on the first opportunity to resume; fortunately for the peace and future union of the two kingdoms, no such miserable and narrow policy entered into the mind of his Rt. hon. Friend; he disdained the injustice of bargaining with Ireland on such a subject, nor would Ireland have listened to him if he had attempted it. She had not applied to purchase a constitution, and if a tribute or contribution had been demanded in return for what was then granted, those patriotic spirits who were at that time leading the oppressed people of that insulted country, to the attainment of their just rights, would have pointed to other modes of acquiring them, would have called to them in the words of Camillus, arma aptare atque ferro non auro patriam et libertatem recuperare.
But if he had been surprized at this sort of language coming from those Gentlemen, he had been much more astonished, at another Rt. hon. Gentleman’s declaration (Mr. Grenville) that when he had been in an official situation, in Ireland, he had wished for, and meditated a settlement between the two countries, upon the principle of the present proposed system. Had the Rt. hon. Gentleman forgot the second legislative act passed by this Parliament, in acknowledgment of the Constitutional rights of Ireland? Had he forgot that that act was a measure of his administration? and did he remember the solemn pledge, there given, to remove for ever all doubt that any power but the King, Lords, and Commons, of Ireland, should dictate in a legislative capacity to that country? The Rt. hon. Gentleman had stated, that this act had become absolutely necessary, for that Ireland, almost to a man, had conceived that the simple repeal of the 6th of George the First, had not restored to them the security of their constitution, which yet remained to be acquired, if this was the case, and a bargain were necessary, then was the time for the Rt. hon. Gentleman to have proposed his conditions, and not to have permitted those for whom he obtained this new acknowledgment, to have conceived him to have been the champion for a more solemn and explicit renunciation of the legislative claims of Great Britain over Ireland, if he had in his mind a reserve, that a settlement was even then necessary, which should reassert those claims, and degrade Ireland to her former state of servile dependance.
Delphi Complete Works of Richard Brinsley Sheridan Page 64
