« EelmineJätka »
Sohemus. Looks cannot make one of my courage Hell's sad inhabitants for anger cry'd,
And, by these signs, knew the Messiah dy'd;
Prodigious day; on which ev'n God did pray
[Herod stabs Sohemus thrice, who falls. Sohemus. By my compliance I thy throne have built,
My death's the justice due to that base guilt,
My ghost shall haunt thee out in every place,
ON THE DAY OF THE CRUCIFIXION.
Wonderful day; that title's due to thee,
For 'twas not strange, that both the heav'ns and
Oh may this day be in all hearts engrav'd; This day in which God dy'd and man was sav'd!
Seeing the sun at noon create a night.
FROM THE POEM ON THE DEATH
Oh how severely man is used by Fate!
Still when we study Cowley, we lament,
Though beauty some affection in him bred,
From God's all-powerful word receiv'd their birth:
THE DEATH OF ZANGER.1
[Solyman has caused Mustapha, his son and heir, to be slain for a crime of which he believes him guilty, and while gazing on the dead body, Zanger, another son, enters and declares
Solyman. Oh heaven! my guilt now makes it an offence,
To hear untimely of his innocence.
1 From last act of Mustapha, a tragedy.
Those who to death have made me send my son
[Stabs himself and falls at MUSTAPHA's feet. Solyman. Hold, Zanger, hold!
And where he took delight to live-he dies.
No Roman glory ever equall'd thine.
[Turns to MUSTAPHA.
BORN 1656 DIED 1698.
[William Molyneux, the first of the great | his degree, which he did in his nineteenth trio, Molyneux, Swift, and Grattan, that year, he was sent to London, where he entered commenced, continued, and brought to a per- the Middle Temple in June, 1675. At the fect end the battle of the Irish parliament for Middle Temple he remained for three years independence, was born in Dublin on the 17th engaged in the diligent study of the law, but April, 1656. His father was a gentleman not forgetting his beloved studies in the mathof good family and fortune, a master of the ematical and physical sciences, which had ordnance, an officer of the Irish exchequer, received such a mighty impulse just then and a man of intellect and culture. His owing to the many discoveries and exertions grandfather had been Ulster king-at-arms, of the members of the Royal Society. and had used his pen in the production of a continuation of Hanmer's Chronicle. Owing to his tender health William Molyneux was educated at home by a tutor till he reached the age of nearly fifteen, when he was placed in the University of Dublin, under the care of Dr. Palliser, afterwards Archbishop of Cashel. Here he was distinguished, as a biographer says, "by the probity of his manners as well as by the strength of his parts; and having made a remarkable progress in academical learning, and especially in the new philosophy, as it was then called, he proceeded to his Bachelor of Arts degree." After taking
In 1678 Molyneux returned to Ireland, where he soon after married Lucy, the daughter of Sir William Domville, attorney-general. As he possessed a private fortune, and being therefore under no necessity of earning a living, he continued his philosophical studies; and astronomy gaining a strong hold on his mind, he began in 1681 a correspondence with Flamstead, which was continued for many years with benefit to both. In 1683 he managed to bring about the establishment of a philosophical society in Dublin on the model of the Royal Society, and prevailing on Sir William Petty to become its first president,
he accepted the office of secretary. His labours | parliament, desiring to destroy the Irish wool
in connection with this society soon made Molyneux's learning and abilities well known. Being introduced to the Duke of Ormond, and after performing some literary labour for that nobleman, he was appointed one of the two chief engineers and surveyors of crown buildings and works. In 1685 he was elected a member of the Royal Society, and in the same year was sent to survey the fortresses on the Flemish coast. While on the Continent he travelled through Flanders and Holland, part of Germany and France, and paid a visit to the celebrated Cassini with letters of introduction from his friend Flamstead.
len manufactures, then in a most thriving state, introduced prohibitory laws to prevent their exportation. These enactments seemed to Molyneux not only cruel and unwise, but unjust and tyrannical, and he immediately set himself to produce his Case of Ireland Stated in Relation to its being bound by Acts of Parliament made in England. This appeared in 1698 with a manly yet respectful dedication to William III., and is a work almost perfect of its kind. A biographer whom we have already quoted says that it contains "all, or most, that can be said on the subject with great clearness and strength of reasoning."
On his return from abroad Molyneux published his first work of any importance, Sciothericum Telescopium, 1686, a description of a telescopic dial and its uses which he had invented. In 1687 Halley, with whom he had established a correspondence, sent him the proof-sheets of Newton's Principia as they were produced, and Molyneux, though struck with admiration and astonishment at the work, confessed himself, like many other astronomers of the time, unable to wholly understand it. In 1689, owing to the wars of William and James, he left Ireland and removed to Chester, where he busied himself in the preparation of a work which, under the revision of Halley, appeared in 1692 with the title of Dioptrica Nova: a Treatise of Dioptrics in Two Parts, During his residence in Chester, his son Samuel was born to him, and his wife died. As soon as tranquillity was restored in Ireland he returned thither, and in the year in which his Dioptrics was published, 1692, he was elected one of the members of parliament for the city of Dublin. This event, which seemed unimportant at the time, was the originating cause of the production of the great work by which the name of Molyneux will be for ever remembered in Ireland. In the parliament of 1695 he was chosen to represent the university, which he continued to do till his death, and a little later he was created Doctor of Laws. About this time also he was nominated one of the commissioners of forfeited estates, with a salary of £500 a year, but, as a biographer states, "looking upon it as an invidious office, and not being a lover of money, he declined it." In his place in the Irish parliament Molyneux now began to take notice of and study the fight for independence which that body had begun in 1690 by the rejection of a money bill which had not originated with themselves. In 1696 and 1697 the English
The work, which in size is little more than a pamphlet, created a great sensation in England. The English House of Commons, losing its head in a fit of irritation, declared, “that the book published by Mr. Molyneux was of dangerous tendency to the crown and people of England, by denying the authority of the king and parliament of England to bind the kingdom and people of Ireland, and the subordination and dependence that Ireland had, and ought to have, upon England, as being united and annexed to the imperial crown of England." An address was presented to William, who readily promised to enforce the laws binding the parliament of Ireland to dependence, and the book itself was committed to the hands of the common hangman, by whom it was glorified by being "burnt with fire." The reception his work met with caused little astonishment to Molyneux, who, in his preface, seemed to anticipate something like what occurred. "I have heard it said," he writes, "that perhaps I might run some hazard in attempting the argument; but I am not at all apprehensive of any such danger. We are in a miserable condition, indeed, if we may not be allowed to complain when we think we are hurt."
Before the great stir had subsided Molyneux journeyed into England to visit Locke, with whom he had kept up a most intimate correspondence for some time. This visit began in July, 1698, and lasted to September, and it was arranged that it should be repeated the next spring. But by the next spring the daisies were blooming unseen by the patriot philosopher. The fatigues of his journey brought on an attack of a disease from which he suffered (calculus), and after reaching Dublin his retchings broke a blood-vessel, and he died, after two days' illness, on the 11th of October, 1698. He was deeply lamented by all who
knew him, and all the more so because he died so young, when, in truth, a brilliant career seemed only just entered upon.
Locke was deeply grieved at Molyneux's death, and in a letter to our author's brother, Sir Thomas Molyneux, he says, "I have lost in your brother not only an ingenious and learned acquaintance, that all the world esteemed, but an intimate and sincere friend, whom I truly loved, and by whom I was truly loved; and what a loss that is those only can be sensible who know how valuable and how scarce a true friend is, and how far to be preferred to all other sorts of treasure." To another correspondent he says, "His worth and friendship to me made him an inestimable treasure. . . I should be glad if what I owed the father could enable me to do any service to the son. They cannot do me a greater pleasure than to give me the opportunity to show that my friendship died not with him." Writing in his Conduct of the Understanding, and before his friendship could have biased his judgment, Locke also speaks of Molyneux as "that very ingenious and studious promoter of real knowledge."
In addition to the works we have named, Molyneux wrote a reply to one of Hobbes's works under the title of Metaphysical Meditations on God and Mind, and a considerable number of articles and papers which appeared in Philosophical Transactions and elsewhere.]
A NATION'S RIGHTS.
(FROM "THE CASE OF IRELAND STATED.") All men are by nature in a state of equality in respect of jurisdiction and dominion: this I take to be a principle in itself so evident that it stands in need of little proof. "Tis not to be conceived that creatures of the same species and rank, promiscuously born to all the same advantages of nature, and the use of the same faculties, should be subordinate and subject one to another: these to this or that of the same kind. On this equality in nature is founded that right which all men claim, of being free from all subjection to positive laws, till by their own consent they give up their freedom, by entering into civil societies for the common benefit of all the members thereof. And on this consent depends the obligation of all humane laws, insomuch that without it, by the unanimous opinion of all jurists, no
sanctions are of any force. For this let us appeal, amongst many, only to the judicious Mr. Hooker.
No one or more men can by nature challenge any right, liberty, or freedom, or any ease in his property, estate, or conscience, which all other men have not an equally just claim to. Is England a free people? so ought France to be. Is Poland so? Turkey likewise, and all the eastern dominions, ought to be so. And the same runs throughout the whole race of mankind. Secondly, 'tis against the common laws of England, which are of force both in England and Ireland, by the original compact before hinted. It is declared by both houses of the parliament of England, 1 Jac. cap. i., That in the high court of parliament all the whole body of the realm, and every particular member thereof, either in person or by representation (upon their own free elections), are by the laws of this realm deemed to be personally present. Is this, then, the common law of England, and the birthright of every free-born English subject? And shall we of this kingdom be denied it, by having laws imposed on us, where we are neither personally nor representatively present? My Lord Coke in his fourth inst. cap. i. saith, that all the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and all the Commons of the whole realm ought ex debito justicia to be summoned to parliament, and none of them ought to be omitted. Hence it is called General Concilium in the Stat. of Westminst. i., and the Commune Concilium, because it is to comprehend all persons and estates in the whole kingdom. And this is the very reason given in the case of the merchants of Waterford foregoing, why statutes made in England should not bind them in Ireland, because they have no representatives in the parliament of England. My Lord Hobbart, in the case of Savage and Day, pronounced it for law, that whatever is against natural equity and reason, that act was void. Whether it be not against equity and reason, that a kingdom regulated within itself, and having its own parliament, should be bound without their consent by the parliament of another kingdom, I leave the reader to consider.
It is against the statute laws both of England and Ireland; this has been pretty fully discussed before; however, I shall here again take notice, that in the 10th of Henry the Fourth, it was enacted in Ireland that statutes made in England should not be of force in Ireland unless they were allowed and published
by the parliament of Ireland. And the like statute was made the 29th of Henry the Sixth, and in the tenth year of Henry the Seventh, cap. xxiii., Irish statutes. The parliament which was held at Drogheda, before Sir Christopher Preston, deputy to Jasper, Duke of Bedford, lieutenant of Ireland, was declared void, for this reason amongst others, that there was no general summons of the said parliament to all the shires, but only to four. And if acts of parliament made in Ireland shall not bind that people, because some counties were omitted, how much less shall either their persons or estates be bound by those acts made in England, whereat no one county or person of that kingdom is present. In the 25th of Edward the First, cap. vi., it was enacted by the parliament of England in these words, Moreover, from henceforth we shall take no manner of aid, taxes, or prizes, but by the common assent of the realm. And again in the statute of liberty by the same king it is enacted, No tollage or aid shall be taken or levied by us or our heirs in our realm, without the goodwill and assent of archbishops, bishops, earls, barons, knights, burgesses, and other freeman of the land.
Fifthly, it is inconsistent with the royalties præeminence of a separate and distinct kingdom. That we are thus a distinct kingdom has been clearly made out before. Tis plain the nobility of Ireland are an order of peers clearly distinct from the peerage of England; privileges of the one extend not into the other kingdom; a lord of Ireland may be arrested by his body in England, and so may a lord of England in Ireland, whilst these persons remain sacred in their respective kingdoms. A voyage royal may be made into Ireland, as the year book and Lord Coke tell us, and King John, in the twelfth year of his reign of England, made a voyage royal into Ireland; and all his tenants in chief which did not attend him in that voyage did pay him escuage at the rate of two marks for every knight's fee which was imposed, as appears by the pipe roll, which shows that we are a complete kingdom within ourselves, and not little better than a province, as some are so extravagant as to assert, none of the properties of a Roman province agreeing in the least with our constitution. 'Tis resolved in Sir Richard Pembrough's case, that Sir Richard might lawfully refuse the king to serve him as his deputy in Ireland, and that the king could not compel him thereto, for that were to banish him into
another kingdom, which is against Magna Charta. Nay, even though Sir Richard had great tenures from the king, for that was said must be understood within the realms of England. And in Pilknegton's case aforementioned Fortescue declared that the land of Ireland is and at all times hath been a dominion separate and divided from England. How then can the realms of England and Ireland, being distinct kingdoms and separate dominions, be imagined to have any superiority or jurisdiction the one over the other? 'Tis absurd to fancy that kingdoms are separate and distinct merely from the geographical distinction of territories. Kingdoms become distinct by distinct jurisdictions and authorities legislative and executive, and as a kingdom can have no supreme, it is in itself supreme within itself, and must have all jurisdictions, authorities, and præeminences to the royal state of a kingdom belonging, or else 'tis none. But that Ireland has all these is declared in the Irish statute 33 Henry the Eighth, cap. i. The chief of these most certainly is the power of making and abrogating its own laws, and being bound only by such to which the community have given their consent.
To conclude all, I think it highly inconvenient for England to assume this authority over the kingdom of Ireland. I believe there will need no great arguments to convince the wise assembly of English senators how inconvenient it may be to England to do that which may make the lords and people of Ireland think that they are not well used, and may drive them into discontent. The laws and liberties of England were granted above five hundred years ago to the people of Ireland, upon their submission to the crown of England, with a design to make them easy to England, and to keep them in the allegiance of the King of England.
The rights of parliament should be preserved sacred and inviolable wherever they are found. This kind of government, once so universal all over Europe, is now almost banished from amongst the nations thereof. Our king's dominions are the only supporters of this noble Gothic constitution, save only what little remains may be found thereof in Poland. We should not, therefore, make so light of that sort of legislature, and as it were abolish it in one kingdom of the three, wherein it appears; but rather cherish and encourage it wherever we meet it.