their imaginations with notions of government incompatible with the ancient inftitutions of their country, or any form which an incorporation of the two exifting conftitutions could affume, but which, from the peculiarly difordered ftate of Scotland at the time-chimerical as they were-they vainly hoped they might see realized; that all those and various other claffes of men, forming, perhaps, a majority of the whole, reckoning by tale inftead of weight, by numbers inftead of property, were the declared and active enemies of the Union, is, I believe, as certain, as it is, that, by virtue of the manly and fteady difregard with which the Adminiftration of that day treated their hoftility and violence, one of the most important and fortunate political tranfactions recorded in the annals of the world, was brought to a happy conclufion. I would recommend to any man who really has doubts on this point, the re-perufal and comparison of the contemporary authors who have written on the fub. ject, particularly the two moft remarkable among them, De Foe the able hiftorian and advocate, and Lackhart the defamer and libeller, of the Union.

Permit me to read a paffage from another writer of the time, Bishop Burnet, as the matter of it, I think, gives us ftrong encouragement to cherish the most favourable prospect of the iffue of the prefent ftill more important measure.

The Union,' fays he, of the two kingdoms was. a work of which many had defpaired, in which number I was one; and those who entertained better hopes,, thought it must have run out into a long negotiation for feveral years; but, beyond all men's expectation, it · was begun and finifhed within the compass of one. • The

The body of the people showed so much fullenness, that probably, had any perfon of authority once kindled the flame, they seemed of fuch combustible matter, that the Union might have caft that nation into great convulfions. The Duke of Queensberry despaired of succeeding, and one about him wrote to the Lord Treasurer < respecting the ill-temper the nation was generally in, ' and moving for an adjournment, that fo, with the help of time and good management, thofe difficulties, which feemed then infuperable, might be conquered *? He adds, the Lord Treasurer told me his answer was— that a delay was, upon the matter, laying the whole design afide t.'

Nay, Sir, in the Houfe of Lords, when the treaty came to be debated there, Lord Haversham appears exprefsly to have stated, and without being contradicted by any body, That though the articles of Union were ratified by the Scotch Parliament, yet the bulk and body ◄ of that nation feemed to be against it. Have not,' he faid, the murmurs of the people there been fo loud as to fill the whole nation, and fo bold too as to reach even to the doors of the Parliament? Has not the Parliament itself thought fit to fufpend their beloved clause • in their act of fecurity, for arming their people, during the feffion? Nay, has not the Government, by advice • of Parliament, iffued a proclamation, pardoning all flaughter, bloodshed, maiming, &c. that is committed upon any who are found in any tumults there? I do not < mention this to find fault with any thing done in Scotland, but only to fhow to your Lordships, that where fuch an unusual proclamation as this is fet out by the

*Burner's Hiftory of his own Times, vol. ii. p. 462.
† Ibid.

• advice

advice of Parliament, and cannot stay for the forms of

a law; when we know that, on extraordinary occafions,

a bill may be read three times in a day; fure, my Lords, it fhows a very great ferment, that requires fo very fpeedy an application *.'

To an infinity of evidence of this contemporaneous fort, might be added the refult of that evidence as it has been collected by every hiftorian who has written on the fubject in later times, but I will only mention a fhort sentence or two from one who, in declaring his opinion of the advantages the Union has produced to both countries, but efpecially to Scotland, expreffes himfelf in the following strong and glowing language: The • Union of the two kingdoms, into which the English entered with so much facility, and the Scotch with fo much K reluctance, was yet of infinitely higher advantage to the latter than the former. An infeparable connexion was thereby formed between them, by which Scotland was to experience and augment the happinefs, the glory, and the ftability of England. They were to be constant companions in profperity and misfortune; and if England is ever to perish like Carthage, Sparta, and Rome, its fifter nation will prolong the ftruggle, hold the for• tunes of the victor in suspense, and exert, in extinction

and death, that elevation of character, and that disdain of a mafter, which diftinguifh and ennoble the revolu⚫tions of her history t.'

We have been told that a majority of each of the three claffes who compofed the Parliament of Scotland voted for the Union. They did fo; but it is remarkable, if you * Continuation of Rapin, vol. xvi. p. 365. + Stuart's History of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 56.

take

take each of thofe three claffes, which were called Eftates, feparately, and fuppofe the concurrence of a majority of each neceffary, which perhaps it was*, that in each of the two Eftates of commoners that majority was but four, the rest of the total majority of thirtythree being compofed of twenty-five noblemen. On the other hand, if you fuppofe an abfolute majority per capita to have been all that was requifite, then that total majority fell fhort by four of the aggregate number of the votes in favour of Union on the divifions in the two Irish Houfes taken together, on the 22d of January laft, the first day the matter was agitated there f.

It has been stated in this place, in the very face of the proof I have mentioned, and the known facts to which I have referred, that the number of addreffes and addreffers in Scotland against the meafure was comparatively fmall, and the symptoms of active oppofition out of the Parliament fcarcely any. How muft the diligent and accurate spirit of investigation, which belongs to thofe who made that affertion, have deferted them in their inquiries on this occafion? Otherwife, could they have overlooked the vaft number of thofe addreffes, amounting to between 80 and 90‡ (while those against the commercial propofitions in 1785, which were thought fo numerous and proved fo formidable, were in all but 62 §), and the extenfive and diverfified defcription of the parties fubfcribing; barons, heritors, and freeholders of, I believe,

* Supra, p. 117.

In the House of Lords, on the division on Lord Bellamont's Amendment, the majority for the Union was 36, the numbers being 52 to 16.

According to De Foe (p. 329 to 457), just 85. § Parliamentary Regifter, vol. xviii. p. 212.

every county but one in that kingdom, burgeffes of almost every borough, fynods, prefbyteries, and parishes, in every diftrict of the country? In short, they were fo numerous, and fo various, that it was not without colour, that in a famous proteft, prepared by the oppofition of that day, it was afferted, That the fubjects of this nation of all ranks and qualities have generally fhown an utter averfion to any fuch Union as is contained in the articles now lying before the Houfe +.'

Then, Sir, as to the activity of the oppofition without doors, have the accounts; contained in the authors I have quoted, in Burnet, Lockhart, and De Foe; entirely escaped those gentlemen; of the riots at Edinburgh, the insurrection at Glasgow, the army of 7000 men in the Weft, ready and on the wing to advance to the Capital and dif perfe the Parliament $? Thank God, we have feen nothing of any attempt towards fuch treasonable methods of controlling the deliberations of the Irish Legislature on this occafion.

Is it worth while to answer the obfervation, that the addresses were in general (they were not all so) against the terms of the Union contained in the articles? Surely, it cannot be imagined, or at least till lately it could not have been imagined, that many persons would have been found to join in objecting to entertain or deliberate upon a mere general propofition of Union undefined by any specific terms whatever. But it is well known that the framers and inftigators of those addreffes objected princi

Lockhart, p. 298.

§ Ibid. p. 283.

pally