BILL FOR SECURING THE DEPENDENCY OF IRELAND UPON THE CROWN.

On the fourteenth day of November, king George returned to England, and on the twenty-third opened the session of parliament with a speech, in which he told them that all Europe, as well as Great Britain, was on the point of being delivered from the calamities of war by the influence of British arms and councils. He exhorted the commons to concert proper means for lessening the debts of the nation, and concluded with a panegyric upon his own government. It must be owned he had acted with equal vigour and deliberation in all the troubles he had encountered since his accession to the throne. The addresses of both houses were as warm as he could desire. They in particular extolled him for having interposed in behalf of the protestants of Hungary, Poland, and Germany, who had been oppressed by the practices of the popish clergy, and presented to him memorials containing a detail of their grievances. He and all the other protestant powers warmly interceded in their favour, but the grievances were not redressed. The peerage bill was now revived by the duke of Buckingham; and, in spite of all opposition, passed through the house of lords. It had been projected by earl Stanhope, and eagerly supported by the earl of Sunderland; therefore, Mr. Robert Walpole attacked it in the house of commons with extraordinary vehemence. Here too it was opposed by a considerable number of whig members; and, after warm debates, rejected by a large majority. The next object that engrossed the attention of the parliament was a bill for better securing the dependency of Ireland upon the crown of Great Britain. Maurice Annesley had appealed to the house of peers in England, from a decree of the house of peers in Ireland, which was reversed. The British peers ordered the barons of the exchequer in Ireland to put Mr. Annesley in possession of the lands he had lost by the decree in that kingdom. The barons obeyed this order; and the Irish house of peers passed a vote against them, as having acted in derogation to the king’s prerogative in his high court of parliament in Ireland, as also of the rights and privileges of that kingdom, and of the parliament thereof; they likewise ordered them to be taken into custody of the usher of the black rod: they transmitted a long representation to the king, demonstrating their right to the final judicature of causes: and the duke of Leeds, in the upper house, urged fifteen reasons to support the claim of the Irish peers. Notwithstanding these arguments, the house of lords in England resolved that the barons of the exchequer in Ireland had acted with courage, according to law, in support of his majesty’s prerogative, and with fidelity to the crown of Great Britain. They addressed the king to confer on them some marks of his royal favour, as a recompence for the ill usage they had undergone. Finally, they prepared the bill, by which the Irish house of lords was deprived of all right to pass sentence, affirm, or reverse any judgment or decree, given or made in any court within that kingdom. In the house of commons it was opposed by Mr. Pitt, Mr. Hungerford, lords Molesworth and Tyr-connel; but was carried by the majority, and received the royal assent.