Page:Biographia Hibernica volume 2.djvu/152

 148 FLOOD. tained, that the simple repeal of this declaratory act was no security against a similar claim, founded on the prin ciple of that act, being at some future time revived by England; and though three gentlemen only of the whole House of Commons of Ireland, concurred with him on this occasion, he had the satisfaction to see his doctrine approved and ratified by the minister and the parliament of England, who shortly afterwards passed an act, for ever renouncing this claim. On October 28th, 1783, the most violent altercation that ever passed in any parliament, took place between Mr. Flood and Mr. Grattan; and on the following Satur day, Nov. 1st, Mr. Flood gave a long detail of h i s whole political life, which highly interesting mass o f eloquence, together with the dispute, the reader may find i n the life o f Grattan. I n 1788, h e was chosen a member o f the British parliament for the town o f Winchester, and i n the subsequent parliament h e represented the borough of Seaford from 1785 t o its dissolution. He entered rather late into the British House of Com mons, and was never fairly tried there. He not only had t o contend with i l l health, but h e likewise well knew that his début was expected t o b e o f that grand and startling nature, which accompanies a country Garrick o n his first appearance before a London audience. This first exhibi tion (as might b e expected) was unsuccessful, and i n a l l Probability was the occasion o f his not speaking i n parlia ment for a considerable time afterwards. I t i s well worthy o f note also, that a t the period h e became a member, the House was completely divided into two distinct contend ing powers, led o n b y two mighty leaders; and h i s decla ration a t the onset that “he belonged t o n o party,” united a l l parties against him. His speech o n the India bill was, h e assured a friend, i n some measure accidental. The debate had been prolonged t o a very late hour, when h e rose with the intention merely o f saying, that “he would defer giving his detailed opinion o n the bill (to which h e was averse) until a more favourable opportu