parliament did not receive their validity from the great seal of England, deliberately put or withheld by the advice of ministers resident and responsible here, but from the touch of the Scottish sceptre, in the hands of the royal commissioner, a Scottish, not an English nobleman. For centuries, the two nations had waged cruel wars: for centuries England had never sent forth her armies to combat her foreign enemies, but her borders were wasted by the incursions of her northern neighbours. This afflicted island had seen half a million of her children perish by mutual slaughter. There appeared no option but a union, or a renewal of those horrible scenes, probably with increased animosity and fury. The two countries seemed to stand on the slippery brink of a bloody gulf. The parliament of Scotland had refused to recognise the succession of his majesty's illustrious house, unless their commercial grievances were previously redressed. The parliament of England had equipped a fleet to cruize against the trade of Scotland. But when had Ireland threatened us with invasion? When had she struck at our domestic security? When had she not largely recruited our armies and our navies from her population? Where had we conquered, that she had not fought and bled by our side? At what period of their history were the parliaments of the sister-kingdom so adversely committed? Had not the parliament of Ireland repeatedly bound the nation to stand or fall with the fortunes of Great Britain? And far from kindling, had not that parliament just extinguished a civil war? Sensible of her natural inferiority in strength and all resources, except her courage, Scotland had always willingly entertained the proposal of union, whenever there was an opening for it in the accidental circumstances of the two kingdoms. But when was the notion of a union ever started in Ireland, that it did not raise an immediate ferment? Whenever a new lord lieutenant was to be rendered obnoxious, was it not the hackneyed artifice of faction to propagate the rumour of such a project? The trade of Scotland was nearly annihilated, by what must be allowed to have been the illiberal jealousy of England: she had much to gain, and little to lose. Ireland was thriving fast: she had much to lose by this doubtful experiment. Let us now look more closely into the treaty of 1706. At what period did it become unpopular? Not till it had been some days under the consideration of parliament. Was it universally unpopular? By no means. The convention of burghs directly instructed by the burgesses, was nearly divided, but (setting aside the capital) the minority which was for the union paid much the larger share to the public contributions, and contained much the more numerous population. Several addresses in favour of the articles were signed, but kept back by the prudence of ministers, who wished not to agitate and distract the people. Much laudable grief was excited in the populace, by invitations to them to take a last view of the scepter that gave them laws, and the other ensigns of royal authority, which, since the person of the sovereign had been withdrawn from them, were regarded by them with fond veneration. Their consciences also were surprised and ensnared. Some were alarmed for the fate of their presbytery, in a parliament where only sixteen Scottish peers were opposed to twenty-six English prelates; and others, more scrupulous, doubted whether they could innocently consent to the establishment of episcopacy, though in another part of the united kingdom. But while the sense of the people at large was thus various, that of their parliament, summoned to consider that very measure, was clear and unequivocal. It was declared not merely by a considerable majority of the whole assembly, but a majority of every separate order in the state; a majority of the nobility, of the barons, of the burghs. On the other hand, what was the history of the present measure in Ireland, where there existed no symbols of royalty to be surrendered, no differenee of church establishment to disquiet the weak minded? It was short, indeed, but it was full. On the first hint of the design, grave merchants and rich bankers, branded it in a public declaration of unqualified resistance; it had been patronized only by a single city, seduced probably by the hope, possibly by the promise, of partial and local advantages; the doors of the House of Commons had been shut against it by a majority, less respectable in numbers than in the names of which it was composed, and the class of representatives by which it was distinguished. Was there any thing common in the conduct of the business before the parliaments of the different kingdoms? The articles of union with Scotland were first submitted to that parliament which even : Commons on the King's Message Our was to make the chief sacrifice of consti- animosities, alienate the affections of The question being put, "That the YEAS NOES Tellers. [Mr. Ryder. Mr. Perceval { General Fitzpatrick Dr. Laurence The House then resolved itself into the said committee, when it was moved to report progress, on an understanding that the House would the next day go at once into the committee. List of the Minority. Bird, W. W. Pulteney, sir W. St. John. hon, St. A. Wilson, R. Tufton, hon. H. TELLERS. Fitzpatrick, general Feb. 12. On the order of the day being read, for going into a committee of the whole House, to consider further of the King's Message, Sir John Sinclair said, he had been desirous of delivering his sentiments respecting the project of a union with Ireland, if it had not been understood that no farther discussion was to take place previous to the Speaker's leaving the chair. Mr. Sheridan said, he was not aware that any such understanding existed. It was true the minister had deprecated any further discussion that might prevent the House from going into the committee. He had indeed paid a singular compliment. to both sides of the House, for he had said as much as if from this side of the House nothing like argument was to be expected, and from his own friends nothing that could pass for an answer. He had endeavoured, indeed, to muzzle his majority, but perhaps there might arise a spirit of independent loquacity that would disappoint his anxiety for going into the committee. There were two points, how The House then went into a committee on the Resolutions; Mr. Douglas in the chair. ever, on which, being misunderstood, he wished to give some explanation. He not only opposed the union, at the present time, but he did not think the union at Mr. Bankes contended, that Ireland all necessary; on the contrary, he consi- was not in a condition to coalesce and dered it to be pregnant with danger to the unite with this country from the state of liberties of both countries. It had been her religious discords and political feuds. said too, that nobody had denied the com- To remove those disorders a union was not petency of the Irish parliament to con- the proper way. He rather thought that clude a treaty of union. The fact how the Irish parliament was the proper meever was, that from the distinction taken dium through which they should be remeupon this side between the power to make, died. The source of them lay not in the and the power to accept the contract, it government of Ireland, but in the prevawas unnecessary to argue that point. It lence of English faction and influence. was his opinion, at the same time, that He was supported in this position by the the Irish parliament had not, and could unanimous testimony of all people there. not, have the right to adopt any measure He would appeal to the Catholics, to Dr. so important as a union. Of the power he M'Nevin: even the United Irishmen themsaid nothing, but they could have no selves joined in that opinion. Throughright. What would have been the feel-out that country English faction was exeing of an English parliament, if it had been proposed at any former period to incorporate England with another power? What would have been thought if when Philip 2nd succeeded to the crown of this country, the English had been required to send their parliament to Madrid; or, had prince George of Denmark lived to succeed queen Anne, they had been called upon to send Lords and Commons to Denmark? Would they not have said that they had no right to do such a thing, that it was a measure beyond the intent and object of the trust confided to them? Having already expressed his opinion on the tendency of the measure, it was not his intention to attend the discussion in the committee, but when the Speaker left the chair, he should leave the House. He likewise gave notice, that it was his intention on some future occasion to bring forward a proposition respecting the doing away of the civil disqualifications in Ireland arising from religious distinctions. Mr. Martin said, he should have objected to the Speaker's leaving the chair had he not been convinced that there was no intention to force this measure upon the Irish people. He thought the present was perhaps the only opportunity of saving Ireland. With respect to what was called the final adjustment of 1782, he could not see how that adjustment could at all tie up the two nations from voluntarily coming to some farther agreement by mutual consent. If he conceived any thing like force was intended, he would oppose the question; but he hoped that farther discussion would render the subject better understood. crated. The Catholics of Ireland might hope hereafter to see a reformation in the representation of Parliament, and through that medium looked to a participation of honour and emolument, or, at least, to an alleviation of their burdens; but if the measure of union took place, all those hopes must be cut off, as by the united parliament, the door of redress must ever be shut upon them, especially as a test was one point to be established. The policy with which Ireland had been treated for many years was barbarous and narrow; for three centuries the people had been stationary in civilization. Before Ireland could be tranquil, before she could be brought to a state in which this country could coalesce with her, we should be obliged to alter the system on which we had for some time past shown a disposition to act. We must retrace our steps. He wished those who were for doing away all religious distinctions were present now. It was his fixed opinion that it was necessary to found our policy upon those religious distinctions, instead of totally abandoning them. Yet he believed there was something in the Catholic cause that might be united to the Protestants. Numbers of Catholics were in the yeomanry, militia, and other military corps. He thought a distinction might be made between the Catholics who were loyal, and those who stirred up and fomented rebellion. He thought that instead of a general sweeping overthrow of religious distinctions, a line might be drawn between those who had shown themselves worthy of confidence, and those who had proved themselves inveterate foes; and he thought that those who could produce certificates of good conduct might gradually be admitted to share the privileges of the Protestants. He had the authority of the committee of the Irish parliament for stating, that the Roman Catholic priests were the most active instruments of the late rebellion. Notwithstanding the conduct of the French to the pope, and to all religions, particularly the Catholic, these priests were so inveterate in their animosity to British connexion, that they were ready to promote the views of France for its destruction. It was not religion then, but dislike of the English name, by which they were actuated. Such men, therefore, ought not to be suffered to nourish animosity and to perpetuate rebellion. For this, and the other intestine evils by which Ireland was distracted, a union was not the remedy, as it did not go to any internal regulations. He did not attach to the argument of the frail connexion that on the present footing, subsisted between the two countries, that importance which some had given it. Ireland could not, under the present system, neutralize her ports, as had been contended; the prerogative of the executive power to declare peace and war increased the influence of government on the legislature, and afforded no inconsiderable security against any difference between the two countries in political questions of importance. It was to be considered too, that Ireland was unable to stand alone, and for aid she could look only to two powers, France and England. Was it possible, after what she had seen of the conduct of France, that she could expect more security under her auspices, than under the fostering care of Great Britain? The apprehension appeared so groundless, that he should not pursue it farther. There was another circumstance, however, on which the House should pause before it came to a determination. He had opposed the proposition formerly made for infusing, as it was called, fresh blood into the veins of the constitution, by the addition of new knights chosen from the counties of England. If he was adverse to the admission of men of such a description as they must have been, on account of their numbers, he must be much more hostile to the admission of a still greater number, chosen from among those who constituted the Irish House of ComSuch an accession would tend only to render the House of Commons tumultuous and disorderly.-Even sup mons. posing the measure carried with the una nimous consent of parliament, he couldnot see its efficiency, or how it could prevent the Catholics from joining the French three months after its adoption, if an opportunity should occur: but the agitation of the question in the present state of the country might be attended with much mischief. It could not diminish the number of enemies, on the contrary, it might make foes of those who were now our friends, and of course could bring no additional force or energy to the common cause. Mr. Speaker Addington rose. He said, that the occasions were few on which he was disposed to take any other part in the debates and proceedings of the House, than that which was called for by his official duty; on the present important question, however, he thought it incumbent upon him to express his opinion by his vote; and exhausted as the subject had been, he hoped for the indulgence of the committee, whilst he stated the grounds upon which that vote would be given. His view of the subject was, indeed, very different from that of his hon. friend, who had declared it to be his opinion, that the situation of Ireland was such as to render it not only inexpedient, but unsafe, to coalesce with her. Now it was upon the situation of that country, at the present moment, that he founded his conviction, not merely of the expediency, for of that he had long been satisfied, but of the urgent and pressing necessity of the measure in question; which, though considered by his hon. friend as in no degree tending to remedy those evils, which were universally acknowledged, he was convinced would, in the first instance, palliate, and ultimately eradicate them; would at once have the effect of allaying irritation and. animosity, and ere long, he trusted of extinguishing them for ever. His hon. friend was also disposed to think, that the legislature of Ireland was fully adequate to the redress of those grievances which require parliamentary interposition, and to the restoration of internal tranquillity. The supposition unfortunately was not warranted by experience: to the redress of some of the grievances complained of, and to the removal of some of the causes of irritation, the Speaker said its adequacy could not be doubted; but there were radical and inherent evils, closely interwoven with the state and condition of Ireland, and with the temper, the battle of the Boyne, and the surrender of Limerick (though the articles of capitulation in the latter 'instance prove, what was, indeed, manifested by the whole tenour of his conduct, that a spirit of intolerance and persecution made no part of the character of king William); the code of Popery Laws, which, however necessary for the security of persons of one persuasion, must be admitted to have ope feelings, and the prejudices of the great body of the people, which, though they were not occasioned by the separation of the two legislatures, he was convinced an incorporation of those legislatures could alone effectually remove. It was a melancholy, but, he feared, an incontrovertible truth, that the state of Ireland had, at no period of its history, with which we are acquainted, been such as to afford satisfaction to any mind, that could justly ap-rated with great severity on those of the preciate the blessings of a well ordered, a flourishing, and a happy condition of civil society. The bounty of Providence had, indeed, been displayed in that country by a fertile soil, and by abundant means of internal improvement and prosperity; its inhabitants had not been less distinguished than those of Great Britain, in corresponding stations of life, for eloquence, for literary and scientific acquirements, and for those talents and exertions which have established the naval and military renown of the British empire. Their form of government was the same as our own, but it wanted its true characteristics; it did not like ours, bestow and receive general confidence and protection: for it was not, like ours, connected by ties, which he trusted were here indissoluble, with the obvious interests, the feelings, and the sen-cated the throne of England): the forfeitiments of the great body of the people. The truth was, that, in contemplating the state of Ireland, even at a period of apparent tranquillity, it was impossible not to discover those seeds of animosity, which have unhappily been matured by circumstances into insurrection and rebellion. To account, in a great degree, for this animosity, it might, perhaps, be sufficient to state, that a large majority of the people were Catholics, and that four-fifths of the property was in the hands of Protestants, who are alone legally competent to hold the high offices of state, and to perform the functions of legislation. Hereditary feelings and resentments had, besides, contributed to keep these elements of internal discord in almost constant agitation. The extensive confiscations which took place at the commencement of the last century, when, after the suppression of the rebellion by lord Mountjoy, almost the whole province of Ulster became forfeited to the crown; the creation of numerous boroughs by James 1st; which, in effect, transferred the legislative authority from the Catholics to the Protestants; the Act of Settlement, and explanation: the severities exercised by Cromwell; the event of the [VOL. XXXIV.] other: all these circumstances could not fail to recur forcibly to the minds of the Catholics, to keep alive the sensations which they successively excited, and to make them look with irritation at power, when they saw it lodged in the hands of those whom they considered as their oppressors; whose religious opinions they conceived to be heretical, and who were in possession of that property which the Catholics supposed had been unjustly wrested from their ancestors. On the other hand, the horrible excesses to which the vindictive fury and bigotry of the Catholics were carried in 1641; the dreadful use they made of the power, which they acquired upon the usurpation of James 2nd (for the government of James 2nd in Ireland was an usurpation after he had abdi tures, the sequestrations, and and the attainders which then took place, had necessarily engendered those sentiments of apprehension and distrust in the Protestants of that country, which occasioned, and appeared to justify, the code of penalties and disabilities which was enacted at the commencement of the present century. Such, he feared, was a true representation of the state and temper of Ireland; and he was convinced that no remedy could be effectual, but such as would strike at the root of the evfl, would abate the struggles for power, would remove the impediments to civilization and internal improvement, and by which the Protestant and Catholic inhabitants of the two countries would become one people, under the superintending authority and protection of a united and imperial parliament. Mr. Speaker then stated, that about the year 1778, a material change of system took place: the extinction of the hopes of the House of Stuart, and the peaceable demeanour of the Roman Catholics, led to a repeal of the penal code, which bore upon them with peculiar hardship; and they obtained from the justice of the [2 G] |