The chief opposition to Perrott's measures came from the Pale, and among the leaders were Sidney's old antagonists Richard Netterville and Henry Burnell. 'These popular fellows,' said Perrott, 'or good countrymen, as they would be gloriously termed, have been ever of this humour against all governors, and some of them, namely Netterville and Burnell, have been in the Tower of London for causes of far less moment than this is.'
[Sidenote: A fair system of taxation rejected.]
One great cause of opposition was a Bill proposing to equalise ploughlands, and to impose a tax of 13_s._ 4_d._ in lieu of cess on each ploughland throughout the whole country. The Pale had hitherto paid when Irish countries were not charged, and the native chiefs were now willing to come to an arrangement. But even in the counties which had always contributed there were many permanent exemptions, and still more fraudulent evasions. A new survey had thus many terrors, and, as is so often the case, threatened interests were more powerful than arguments founded on considerations of public policy. The Pale offered a lump sum of 1,200_l._ in lieu of all cess; but this was far less than had always been paid, and Perrott indignantly refused it. The chance of making the whole country voluntarily contribute to the expenses of government was thus unhappily lost. The Irish chiefs, who had come prepared to agree with the Lord Deputy, now left Dublin in far worse humour than they had reached it, and the plan of making them English subjects was indefinitely postponed. Religion was at the bottom of the whole difficulty, and one of the Pale patriots said, in open Parliament, that 'things did prosper in Henry V.'s and former kings' times when the mass was up.' Perrott was willing and anxious to punish his parliamentary opponents, but required orders from home first, 'because these kind of people by the mild dealing of England have ever found more favour there than hath been for the good of this State.'[139]
[Sidenote: Small results of the session.]
Parliament was a second time prorogued on May 25, and it did not meet again for eleven months. The only legislative results of the first session--or, more properly speaking, of the first two sessions--were an Act for the attainder of Baltinglas and his brothers, and an Act for the restoration in blood of Laurence, the son of the old Geraldine rebel James Delahide. A German nobleman who was in Dublin during the session is said to have been much struck by Perrott's stately appearance at the opening of Parliament. He had, he said, travelled through Germany, Italy, France, and England, but had never seen anyone so majestic, and he asked for his portrait to carry home with him. And this presence, coupled with substantial fair-dealing, no doubt made Perrott popular with the masses and with the Irish chiefs. With officials and members of council it was different, for they felt the weight of his hand. Had he been as courteous as he was anxious for the Queen's service, his fate might have been very different. A reformer can never hope to be really liked by those who desire the maintenance of abuses; but a soft hand is no less necessary than a stout heart.[140]