1826.) Sketch from the Irish Bench. 487 
person|,as;he, was represented. © If he was: so, then he was) happily 
removed,from:,a troublesome: and turbulent world, to:one better’ suited 
to: his) disposition; -but af, he »were disloyal and: seditious; sucha man 
was better out,of the way than init.” The prisoner, we believe; was’ac- 
quitted.;,, These ‘periodical blood lettings,” (for so such: legal crusades 
against popery\and disloyalty were facetiously called) recommended the 
Solicitor-General) still more, to the notice of his employers; while his 
peculiar talents in the House of Commons were: of the: last utility to 
the .cause he adyocated.. The opposition benches were at: this time 
graced by|the; presence of Grattan, Ponsonby, Curran, anda long list 
of, public characters; alike distinguished by talents and integrity ; but 
the. ministry, unusually destitute of eminent supporters, and relying 
entirely upon, its, majorities, might have blazoned beneath its shield‘as 
an appropriate motto “numerisque fertur lege solutus.” At sucha time, 
a man of courage to check the current of invective was of great value ; 
aman of no very refined feelings to stand the brunt of indignant vitu- 
peration, and, to repay it with unqualified abuse, was esteemed a ser- 
viceable assistant; but the broad good-humoured jester who could 
disarm the house with a bull, or turn aside the:shafts of rhetoric with a 
pun, was above all price. In the angry politics of that day, Napper 
Tandy, an (unworthy) member of the Dublin corporation, wasconspicuous 
for the boldness with which he opposed the government, for his steadiness 
to his cause, and for his personal respectability. The Solicitor-General 
singled him out as the object of severe parliamentary animadversion: 
Mr, Tandy replied by an article in the newspapers, with corresponding 
acrimony; and a“ very pretty quarrel” thus arose. Mr. Toler, with 
infinite promptitude applied through his friend Mr. Cuffe (afterwards 
Lord. Tyrawley) to,obtain a meeting. It so happened that his adver- 
sary, anxious perhaps to arrange his family affairs before going into the 
field, suffered (a sufficient time to elapse before he accepted the chal- 
lenge to justify the challenger in removing the cause into another court, 
and bringing, the matter before the House, as a breach of | privilege. 
The affair became, a ministerial question. ‘Tandy was ordered: into the 
custody of the Sergeant at Arms, and Mr. Toler,—the peya nvdogA Kalo 
the hero of loyalty and the Guy Earl of Warwick of the papistical dun 
cow;—was promoted to the office of Attorney-General. Post hoc is not 
always propter hoc, nor will we take upon ourselves to swear that it was 
so in this instance: but as there can be no effect without a cause, we 
may safely conclude that there was some reason for the promotion, and if 
the reader can discover a better he is welcome to its application. 
 Honores,; says the proverb, mutant mores; but on the occasion of this 
promotion Mr, Toler was more himself than ever. The rebellion soon 
followed. ; and it would be hard to say whether the Attorney-General’s 
mildness.as a prosecutor, or his impartiality as a judge, were the more 
conspicuous.,, To the government of that day an effort has been 
attributed «to. goad the people into rebellion, in order to’ obtain a 
legislative wnion. Certain it is that but for the rebellion, the Union 
neyer \could,have: been brought even to a discussion; and it is equally 
certain, that,\the military executions and judicial severities of the 
times ;wene in fact. the means of hurrying the nation into an open 
resistance, of government. Neither can it be denied, that the shameless 
profligacy with which the Union question was afterwards carried through 
the Irish, Parliament, was ill calculated to wipe away the stain thus cast 
