grievances of that country, at the time. complained of, with an adequate remedy, and that he certainly considered the measures then adopted as amounting to such remedy; but he neither at that time, nor at this, imagined, that the adjustment was to preclude any farther arrangement between the two countries, that different circumstances might require; much less that it was to be relied on as an unanswerable argument against the proposed union, which he thought to be, of all others, the measure best adapted to benefit Ireland, and to promote the general interests of the empire.

jurisdiction to the Irish House of Lords. The cords of connexion thus cut asunder, would any noble lord, a member of that ministry, venture to assert, that they meant to leave the affair in that loose and unsettled state? He appealed to the noble marquis, whether farther measures were not in contemplation to cement the two kingdoms in their relative friendship and interests. He called upon the noble marquis to declare, whether an idea was not entertained of sending over commissioners to this kingdom, to superintend the interests of Ireland? He had reason to believe, that that idea was not only suggested, but even proceeded on to a certain extent. Sure he was, that the arrangement left the two kingdoms in a state so very little short of absolute disconnexion, that there was an absolute necessity of some farther arrangement to draw the connexion closer, and combine their strength; and after the maturest reflexion, he was convinced that removing the seat of legislation from Dublin, and creating an imperial parliament to be held here, while it gave industry, commerce, prosperity, and wealth to Ireland, would essentially benefit the general interests of the empire.

The previous question being put, "Whether the said question shall be now put," it was resolved in the affirmative. The Resolutions were then read and agreed to, and their lordships were summoned for the 4th of April.

Debate in the Lords on the Address relative to a Union with Ireland.] April 11. The order of the day being read,

Lord Grenville said, that after the very able and full manner in which the subject of that evening's debate had been already discussed, it would be quite unnecessary for him to take up one moment of their lordships time. He should therefore content himself simply with moving the following Address:

The Marquis of Lansdown said, that, called upon as he was by the noble earl, he could only reply, as he had done before, that in 1782 the adjustment was con- "We, your Majesty's most dutiful and sidered to be conclusive as to the question loyal subjects, the Lords spiritual and of the independence of the Irish parlia- temporal, and in parliament assembled, ment; and after the address to his ma-humbly beg leave to assure your majesty, jesty was carried to the throne, request- that we have proceeded with the utmost ing his majesty to desire the parliament of attention to the consideration of the imIreland to state their grievances; and the portant objects recommended to us in message of the king to that effect was your majesty's message, respecting the condelivered to the Irish parliament, and pro-nexion between this country and Ireland. ceeded on by their address, it was consi- "We entertain a firm persuasion that a dered as a completion of the remedy then complete and entire Union between Great necessary. Certainly, once it had been Britain and Ireland, founded on equal in contemplation to appoint commissioners and liberal principles, on the similarity of to superintend the interests of Ireland in laws, constitution, and government, and this country, but that was in an early on a sense of mutual interests and affecstage of the business, and the noble duke, tions, by promoting the security, wealth, at that time lord lieutenant of Ireland, and commerce, of the respective kingdoms after the parliament of Great Britain had and by allaying the distractions which satisfied the sister kingdom upon every have unhappily prevailed in Ireland, must material ground of complaint, wrote over afford fresh means of opposing at all times word that he thought the measure of ap- an effectual resistance to the destructive pointing commissioners no longer neces-projects of our foreign and domestic enemies, and must tend to confirm and augment the stability, power, and resources of the empire.

sary.

The Duke of Portland said, that having the honour to hold the government of Ireland in 1782, he had no scruple to declare, that his wish was, to meet the

"Impressed with these considerations we feel it our duty humbly to lay before

1782; but however perfect the independence may be in principle, it must at all times and in the nature of things be mutilated, and most imperfect in practice. We cannot shut our eyes against the truths presented by the map of Europe, and by the notoriety of the relative situation, size, and population, of the two islands.

form her own decision; she must decide | for herself, through the medium of the deliberate wisdom of her parliament. I am aware, that the proposition at its first opening, has not had the apparent assent of the Irish House of Commons. A small majority of the members who were present declined the consideration of the measure, and some individuals refused even to know what it was. I will not attribute such a conduct to interested views, to false alarms to fabricated clamour, to unthinking precipitancy, or to a false punctilio and a mistaken sense of national pride. I wish to avoid, and I disclaim, every sentiment and every expression that may be harsh or invidious: but I must be permitted to say and I say it with satisfaction, that I know enough of the theatre of action, and of the principal actors upon that theatre, to do them the justice to believe, that their resistance will give way to the commanding voice of reason and of truth. Let it be shown by our dispassionate deliberations, that the union of the two countries will be attended with many benefits to Ireland; let it be recorded that we are disposed to confer those benefits to the utmost extent compatible with our own essential interests. Let this be done :-the calm hour of reflection will convince Ireland that the objections so hastily urged on her part are unsound and fallacious.

Has

What, then, in point of fact, is the independence of a country which has no means of defence, or security, or selfpreservation, but through the aid and protection of its more powerful neighbour? If two countries so circumstanced take adverse lines of conduct, a struggle must ensue, and either the weaker of the two must be over-ruled, or confusion, and all the evils of war must follow. If, on the other hand, there should prevail between the two a uniform system and uniform principles of conduct, in leading points of common concern, the weaker must be presumed to have thus far sacrificed, virtually and habitually, its exercise of independent power. Let us, my lords, apply this dilemma to the known and principal objects of national independence! Ireland, or can she have, the power of negociating, controlling, or even of rejecting treaties, notwithstanding that those treaties may involve the most essential interest of the British empire, of which I do not think it necessary, my lords, to she forms a part? Has she the means of attempt the examination of those objec- protecting her own commerce, or of estations. They have been amply confuted blishing colonies, or of making and holdboth in this country and in Ireland. The ing conquests? Has she any property, or unconstitutional doctrine which denies direct concern in the acquisitions made by the competency of parliament to effect a the fleets and armies of the sovereign? union, and to operate what (by an in- Has she, or can she have, any naval force? ference falsely conceived and idly expres- And is not the direction of her military sed) is called "its own extinction," was force necessarily conformable to the opiexploded even in the beginning of this nion of British ministers responsible only century. It has been revived in the schools to the British parliament? Has she, in of modern democracy by the admirers of short, or can she have, any control whatthe sovereignty of the people, and ac- ever, or any interference, or even any cordingly has the strongest claims to con- concern, otherwise than in a visionary and tempt and rejection. I propose, however, abstract claim, respecting the imperial before I proceed to the commercial con- transactions of peace and war, alliances, siderations, to examine the nature of that and confederacies? Has she, even in the independence, which, as some advisers of exercise of legislation, any access to the the people of Dublin assert, will be sub-royal sanction, otherwise than through Briverted and destroyed by the consolidation of the two legislatures. I think it important to ascertain the value of what Ireland is told she will lose, before I proceed to appreciate what it is that she will gain. I recognize that independence of the Irish legislature, abstractedly considered, as secured by the arrangement of §

tish ministers not amenable to her parliament, and under the great seal of the British chancellor ?

But I wave all these considerations; though they ought to be strong inducements to Ireland not merely to accede to the proposed union, but to seek and solicit it. I wave them all, and will suppose

British parliament still continued to assert and to exercise the claim to make laws for Ireland, as " being subject to the imperial crown of Great Britain." Ireland at that time held the functions of legislation more in ceremony than in substance. Her laws originated in the privy councils of the two kingdoms, and were prepared and ap proved by the English attorney general, And even when a law had passed through the Irish parliament, it was still liable to be corrected, changed, or suppressed by the British cabinet. Ireland was then also as subordinate in judicature as in legisla tion. We made her laws, and we interpreted them. Appeals from the decisions of her judges were to the courts of Westminster and to this House. It may also be recollected, that at the time to which I refer, the hereditary revenue of Ireland was almost sufficient for the support of government; and the Irish army was established under the British Mutiny bill; and afterwards under a Mutiny bill passed in Ireland, but made perpetual. I was not sorry that such a system should cease. It certainly did not allow to Ireland more than the name of the British constitution, or more than the semblance and mockery of a free government. But, my lords, I was not so short-sighted as to persuade myself that, because the Irish freedom, as it was called, took place, Irish prosperity would be the consequence, unless much more could be done. The

Ireland to have every advantage possessed by Great Britain, and in an equal degree. I will suppose the two islands to be similar, in size and population; in wealth, cultivation, and commerce; in conquests and in colonies; and to be placed upon the globe within a few leagues of each other. Still, however, with one executive power; and with separate and independent legislatures. Will any individual of sound mind assert, that the entire union of two countries such as I have described would be degrading or detrimental to either? And by what line of reasoning shall a different inference be drawn when the two countries thus nearly adjoining, happen to be utterly unequal in size and in force? I contend that the inferior of the two, so situated, never can retain its connexion, and at the same time possess either real independence or an uncontrolled and safe prosperity, otherwise than by uniting with its more powerful neighbour; and that its wish for union ought to increase in proportion to its inferiority in force. I might rest this assertion on the experience of Ireland herself. For it is not true that whilst Great Britain has gradually advanced in civilization of manners, and in every art, science, and improvement, which can give happiness, honour, and security, to nations and to individuals; Ireland possessing the same climate, a fruitful soil, and excellent ports, and a numerous people, to whom the Common Parent of all gave great acuteness and in-law of Poyning, degrading and galling as genuity, has nevertheless been at all times involved in comparative disorder, poverty, turbulence, and wretchedness? I might add, without exaggeration, that in the 600 years since the reign of Henry 2nd there has been more unhappiness in Ireland, than in any other civilized nation, not actually under the visitation of pestilence, or of internal war. And all these evils may be traced to the disjointed and jarring action of two unequal powers, closely adjacent to each other, possessing the same interests, and subject to the same crown, but with separate legislatures.

But why should I confine myself to times in which a persecuting policy was avowedly exercised against Ireland, upon principles of commercial jealousy? Let us now look to a period within the memory of most of us; the period immediately previous to the attainment of what Ireland was pleased to call a free trade and a free constitution. Many of your lordships were members of this House, whilst the

it might be, nevertheless united the laws and constitution of the two kingdoms; and the appellant jurisdiction of this House, justly and greatly respected by the Irish themselves, assimilated their ju risprudence to ours. When those links of connexion were broken, it was evident that Ireland must soon suffer disadvantages much greater than those which had so long depressed her. Neither prosperity nor tranquillity, nor safety were to be expected from a government founded in the pretensions of a small part of the commu nity to monopolize the representation, patronage, and resources of the whole. The insufficiency of such a system had been felt and lamented for a century, even whilst it was controlled, directed, and sup ported, by the Protestant parliament of this Protestant kingdom. Now that it was ceasing to be connected with that parliament, it became more than ever unsatisfactory to the bulk of the Irish nation, and utterly incompetent and unsafe with