Autograph Letter Signed from the Whig politician Thomas Spring Rice [later Lord Mounteagle] to E. Moran of the Dublin Evening Post, describing '5 long years [...] devoted to the one object namely Limerick', 'Irish affairs' and 'the Catholic cause'.

4pp., 8vo, and 2pp., 4to. Signed 'Spring Rice'. The first 4pp. are on a 4to leaf folded once to make 4pp., 8vo, and the last 2pp., 4to, are on the first leaf of a bifolium. In fair condition, on aged and worn paper. Addressed, on the reverse of the second leaf of the bifolium: 'Private | E Morgan | Dublin Evening Post Office | Trinity St'. Spring Rice begins by thanking Moran and 'Mr Conway' [Frederick William Conway (1782-1853), Moran's editor at the Dublin Evening Post] for their communications. He praises the latter warmly, before agreeing to 'take charge of the Petition respecting Corporations'. He asks if there is also 'one respecting the Treaty of Limerick & the Education question voted to me'. He outlines his 'short' case 'with respect to Limerick politics'. In 1818, when he first stood for parliament, Limerick was governed by 'a base & corrupt Orange corporation''. He describes his initial failure and subsequent election. 'This was in 1820. In the following year 1821 I had to contest a second Committee case, & I succeded in establishing for ever on Appeal the rights of the people at large, & in so doing laying a precedent got the emancipation of the other Borough in Ireland if they have spirit & perseverence to follow the example set to them.' He describes further activity on behalf of Limerick in 1822 and 1823. In the latter year he 'obtained a parliamentary charter which protects Limerick from future usurpation [...] Thus you see from 1818 to 1823 - during 5 long years my whole time has been devoted to the one object namely Limerick - [...] During my parliamentary life I have also endeavoured to work hard in Irish affairs generally & especially for the Catholic cause - not seeking to make that cause a means of adding to my own influence'. The rest of the letter attacks Samuel Dickson of George St, who had put up his name against Spring Rice in the election of 1826. Dickson is 'without very great pretentions either of mind family or stature [...] He tells of independence after having always voted for Lord Gort.' (Dickson, said to be an illegitimate son of Gort, eventually withdrew from the race.) Spring Rice concludes by stating that he has described 'the real state of the case - depending on the mere recital of facts historically given'.