Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T04:12:28.475Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Edmund Burke and Charles Lucas

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 March 2021

Gaetano L. Vincitorio
Gaetano L. Vincitorio*
Affiliation:
St. John's University, Brooklyn 6, N. Y.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

While Edmund Burke was a student at Trinity College, his native Dublin was rocked by the agitation of the celebrated patriot and apothecary, Charles Lucas (1713–71), who wished to restore the ancient rights of the freemen of the city which was then governed as a closed oligarchy by the Board of Aldermen. Tension was heightened when one of Dublin's representatives to the Irish House of Commons died on 16 August 1748 and Lucas quickly issued the first of twenty addresses in support of his candidacy for the seat. Lucas pandered to the mob—his “most thoroughly beloved brethren and friends”—and begged them to believe he was and ever would be theirs “with the utmost Sincerity, true Respect, unfeigned Love, and boundless Gratitude.” He avowed the noblest intentions: “No man, let his Pretensions, or his Places, be what they will, loves his Country better than I. It is this that prompts me to attempt the Restoration of her Constitution to its natural Strength and Vigour.” His appeal was directed primarily to the Protestant freeholders of Dublin, who were struggling to supplant the clique dominating political life in the interests of the Viceroy and his “undertakers” with officials and a parliament representative of their views. Lucas wished to inspire these freemen to achievements as great as those of the citizens of Rome or Athens.

Type
Research Article
Information
PMLA , Volume 68 , Issue 5 , December 1953 , pp. 1047 - 1055
Copyright
Copyright © Modern Language Association of America, 1953

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 1047 note 1 To the Free-Citisens, and Free-Helders, of the City of Dublin, No. 19, 25 Sept. 1749, p. 36. Lucas also published a journal, the Censor, in 1749–50.

page 1047 note 2 No. 5, 31 Oct. 1748, p. 11.

page 1047 note 3 Ibid., p. 15. Lucas stated his political philosophy in the British Free-Holders Political Catechism (Dublin, 7 Oct. 1748).

page 1047 note 4 Life of Ed Burke, 2nd ed. (Lonon, 1800), I, 28. George Croly, Memoir of the Political Life of ... Edmund Burke (Edinburgh, 1840), I, 10, asserted Burke aimed a letter at Lucas, and was followed in similar language by Peter Burke, The Fublie and Domextie Life of ... Edmund Burhe (London, 1853), pp. 10–11. James Wills, Lives of Illustrious and Distinguished Irishmen (Dublin, 1843), v, pt. ii, 248, also stated Burke was anti-Lucas.

page 1048 note 5 Memoir of the Life and Character of ... Edmund Burke, 2nd ed. (Boston, 1854), I, 62–63; and Life of ... Edmund Burke, 5th ed. (London, 1854), pp. 30–31.

page 1048 note 6 Thomas Macknight, History of the Life and Times of Edmund Burke (London, 1858–60), I, 35; and Charles Wentworth Dilke, Papers of a Critic (London, 1875), ii, 324, doubted the existence of Burke's satires of Lucas. Both John Morley, Burke (London, 1879), and the Rev. William Hunt, “Burke,” DNB, iii, 345–365, did not mention the controversy.

page 1048 note 7 Early Life Correspondence and Writings of the Rt. Hon. Edmund Burke LL.D... (Cambridge, Eng., 1923), p. 181. See also pp. x–xi, 180–202.

page 1048 note 8 The date is erroneous. Dr. Paul Hiffernan answered the first Free Briton's Advice in the 14 Sept. 1/48 No. of the Tickler. See National Library of Ireland, Irish Newspapers Prior to 1750 in Dublin Libraries, University Microfilms (Ann Arbor, 1950), reel 21.

page 1048 note 9 Samuels asserted Burke penned The Naked Truth in Oct. 1749; two nos. of A Letter to the Citizens of Dublin in 1749; A Patriot's Letter to the Duke of Dorset Written in the Year 1731 also in 1749; and five arts. In Lucus' Censor which appeared from 22 July 1749 to 5 May 1750. These pieces are printed in full in Samuels, pp. 331–395. (The evidence for ascribing these writings to a single author is not convincing.) Samuels averred that the germ of the “myth” spread by Bisset that Burke was anti-Lucas lies in an erroneous interpretation of a passage in the first Letter to the Citisens of Dublin (pp. 195–196).

Free Briton's Advice, No. 1, in Samuels, p. 332.

page 1049 note 11 This is a weak argument, for elision was widely used in the 18th century.

page 1049 note 12 Edmund Burke as an Irishman (Dublin, 1924), pp. 37–42.

page 1049 note 13 Edumund Burke (Oxford, 1931), pp. 45–48. Others who followed Samuels include Bertram Newman, Edmund Burke (London, 1927), p. 5; Alfred Cabban, Edmund Burke and the Revolt against the Eighteenth Century (London, 1929), p. 105; Dixon Wecter, “The Missing Years in Edmund Burke's Biography,” PMLA, liii (1938), 1102; Sir Philip Magnus, Edmund Burke (London, 1939), pp. 7–8; and Thomas D. Mahoney, “Edmund Burke and Ireland,” unpubl. doct. diss., George Washington Univ., 1944, p. 2.

page 1049 note 15 In cases where Burke hid his identity, as in the Reformer and the Annual Register, there are sufficient indications of his responsibility. For example, his authorship of the Reformer is hinted in letters of Jan. and May 1748 (see Samuels, p. 160). Besides, Prior catalogue the Reformer and the Annual Register as Burke's (Edmund Burke, 5th ed., p. xxiv).

page 1050 note 16 12 July 1746 (Samuels, p. 98).

page 1050 note 17 25 Jan. 1745–46 (Samuels, p. 84).

page 1050 note 18 31 Jan. 1746–47, Leadbeater Papers, ed. May Leadbeater (London, 1862), ii, 62.

page 1050 note 19 Mar. 1746–47 (Leadbeater Papers, ii, 74).

page 1050 note 20 According to Samuels (pp. 390–391), Burke wrote these words in the 5 Aug. 1749 no. of the Censor: “No study is more generally pleasing tehan History; and in History nothing seems more useful to the multitude of readers than great and illustrious characters. When the pictures are well drawn they cannot but please, and leave lasting impressions, for they are too far removed from us, to raise other emotions than wonder and delight. They afford at the same time Precepts & Examples. They are silent teachers, whom we canhear without dread, and praise without envey.”

page 1050 note 21 21 Mar. 1746–47 (Samuels, pp. 128–129).

page 1050 note 22 Mar. 1746–47 (Leadbeater Papers, ii, 75). Samuels (p. 125) dates this letter 5 Mar. 1746–47.

page 1051 note 23 Roger McHugh, Henry Grattan (N.Y., 1937), pp. 17–18.

page 1051 note 24 Samuels (pp. 225–295) reproduced this record in its entirety.

page 1051 note 25 Debate on 2 June 1747 (Samuels, p. 263).

page 1051 note 26 It was printed by Joseph Cotter. Burke was acquainted with his daughter and successor Sarahm and mentioned a visit to the Cotters in Aug. 1747 (Samuels, p. 150). The possibility exists that if Burke had been the author of the anonymous tracts (printed by Oliver Nelson and William Johnston), he would have engaged Cotter to print them.

page 1051 note 28 Jan. 1747–48 (Samuels, p. 297).

page 1051 note 29 See Murray, Ch. 1, and O'Brien, Ch. 1.

page 1051 note 30 To Mr. Watts, 10 Aug. 1780, Correspondence of the Right Honourable Edmund Burke edd. Earl Fitzwilliam and Sir Richard Bourke (London, 1844), ii, 369.

page 1052 note 31 10 Mar. 1747–48 (Samules, p. 315).

page 1052 note 32 Catholic opinion in the Lucas controversy may be judged from the directions read to Catholics by priests before the election. Catholics were entreated to behave with the greatrst prudence and decency, and to avoid joining any mob, tumult, or meeting, “or even to appear about the Place of Election, as they have no Manner of Concern whatsoever therein.” 28 Oct. 1749, the Dublin Weekly Journal (Irish Newspapers Prior to 1750, reel 14).

page 1052 note 33 No. 2, 4 Feb. 1747–48 (Samuels, b. 302) and No. 7, 7 Mar. 1747–48 (pp. 316–317).

page 1052 note 34 Letter to Charles O'Hara, 30 Sept. 1772, Edmund Burks–Charles O'Hara Correspondence. These papers, the private property of Mr. Douai F. O'Hara of Anneghmore, County Sligo, Ireland, were microfilmed for Professor Ross J. S. Hoffman, who will presently publish them, and has kindly made them available for this study.

page 1052 note 35 Reformer, No. 4,18 Feb. 1747–48, p. 307.

page 1052 note 36 Burks described the note in a letter to Richard Shackleton dated 21 Feb. 1746–47 (Leadbeater Papers, ii, 66–69).

page 1052 note 37 No. 5, 25 Feb. 1747–48 (Samuels, p. 309).

page 1052 note 38 In the Tickler, No. 10, 14 Sept. [1748], Hiffernan attacked Lucas' supporter, “Being an Answer to the Free Briton's Advice” (Irish Newspapers Prior to 1750, reel 21).

page 1053 note 39 No. 6, 3 Mar. 1747–48 (Samuels, p. 312).

page 1053 note 40 Prior, Earned Burke, 2nd ed., i, 89–90.

page 1053 note 41 The guilds of Merchants and of Curriers, and the corporations of Cooks, Shoe-makers, Taylors, and Hatters—to mention a few—presented him with his Freedom. See Dublin Weekly Journal, June–Oct. 1749, Irish Newspapers, Prior lo 1750, reel 14.

page 1053 note 42 Burke was erroneously identified as the author by Richard Robert Madden, History of Irish Periodical Literature (London, 1867), i, 331, 335–336. Denunciations in the contemporary press show that the tract was the work of James Taylor, a well-known brewer and member of the Common Council of Dublia.

page 1053 note 43 Extracts from several letters show that an “uncommon spirit of persecution” prevailed against him (Gentlement's Magasine, xx [1750], 58).]

page 1054 note 44 Burke “seems to have kept terms from Easter 1750 to Hilary 1752.” Letter to the author from H. A. C. Sturgess, Librarian and Keeper of the Records, the Middle Temple, 25 Oct. 1949.

page 1054 note 45 To Matthew Smith, n.d., Prior, i, 65–66.

page 1054 note 46 See Ross J. S. Hoffman, “The Wentworth Papers of Burke, Rockingham, and Fitswilliam,” Proc. Amr. Philes. Soc., xciv (Aug. 1950), 353–354.

page 1054 note 47 Burke-O'Hara Correspondence. The O'Hara proprietor of these papers recorded Arthur P. Samuels' inquiry about than on 17 Feb. 1914. But young Samuels did not ban an opportunity to examine the letters before his untimely death.

page 1054 note 48 Peauibly the paths of Burke and Lucas crossed in Bath and London. Burke may have an opportunity to examine the letters before his untimely death.

page 1055 note 49 Letters to the Marquess of Granby, 5, 30 Apr. 1768, MSS. of His Grace the Duke of Rutland ..., H. MSS. C., 12th Report, Appendix, pt. v (London, 1899), pp. 303–304.

page 1055 note 50 Letter to O'Hara, 20 Nov. 1771.

page 1055 note 51 Gordon's attack on the Stuart Pretender was done in the manner and style of the anonymous Dublin writer. See Letters Taken form the General Evering Post Relating to the Present Rebellion [1745], letter no. 4, pp. 32–33. This was reprinted in Dublin as an 8-page pamphlet by Jamea Esdall, and entitled significantly, The Free Briton's Answer to the Pretender's Declaration. This tract is in the great Halliday collection of the Royal Irish Academy.

page 1055 note 52 I wish to acknowledge the valuable assistance given to me by Professors Ross J. S. Hoffman of Fordhem University and J. Burton Confrey of SL John's University.