danger to Protestant establishment or property. These, on the contrary, must acquire a tenfold and hundredfold secu genuine Protestant ascendancy of the united kingdom. The Protestant church and property may, on the other hand, be secured, without perpetuating the present humiliating and degrading exclusion of the Catholic part of the Irish nation. Such are some of the particularities in the condition of Ireland, which appear to me to add, in her case, many powerful inducements to those which, in every other instance, may invite neighbouring and friendly countries to a close and intimate union of their governments. tection, without derogating from what may appear to be a natural right of the Catholics The Catholics could not be supported in their claim of equality, with-rity in the Protestant parliament, and the out transferring to them that ascendancy which equality of rights must draw to the larger body, and which from that moment must expose the Protestants to dangers from which they ought to be protected. Such seem to be the practical difficulties in the way of abstract justice, while the government of Ireland continues merely local. An Irish parliament, in which the ascendancy is either Protestant or Catholic, and it cannot choose but lie on one side or the other, may be expected still, I fear, to gore and lacerate their country, by one or other of the horns of this dilemma: and I see no perfect remedy for Irish division, and its lamentable consequences, while these two enraged and implacable opponents are still shut up together, are still inclosed within the very theatre, on the very arena of their ancient and furious contention. I do sincerely think, that this divided and double condition of the Irish people requires something of an imperial aula, a legislature founded on a broader and more liberal basis, to administer impartial laws to all, and to reconcile security with justice. While one of these parties must judge the other, in whichever hand the fasces may be placed, I fear there is reason to expect only violence in the suit, and if not in justice, at least slow and imperfect justice in the deeree. My mind, I confess, cannot resist the conviction arising out of all these considerations, that the united parliament of Great Britain and Ireland will, in the peculiar circumstances of Ireland, constitute a better legislature, and a more perfect, because a more impartial parliament, for all Ireland, than any representation of a minor part or section of Ireland, in a separate, local parliament ever can. I am persuaded, that laws beneficial to the mass of the people of Ireland, and promoting its general prosperity and happiness, may be expected with greater confidence from the united parliament, in which local partialities, interests, and passions, will not divert the straight and equal current of legislation, than in an Irish parliament, where these stumbling. blocks must for ever bend or impede its course. In the united parliament, right may be done unaccompanied by wrong. Irish Catholics may be invested with their political capacities, without the slightest I confess, that to me these considerations furnish by no means the weakest recommendation of this measure. I look with peculiar satisfaction towards the prospect which it seems to open, I think, in truth, for the first time in the history of Ireland, of doing justice to one part of that nation without injury to the other, and of providing for the general prosperity and happiness, without bringing calamity on any particular part,' For I canuot consider the admission of fellow citizens to a participation of common franchises, as an injury to those who happen already to possess them; nor the loss, nor even destitution, of partial and exclusive dominion over fellow subjects as any wrong. The Protestants have a sacred right to their properties, to their religion, and to their own liberties; but the liberties of their Catholic brethren are no part of that property; they have no narrow corporate right, or none that I can wish to support them in, in the government of their coun trymen; nor can I see that the subjection of the Catholics must be an article in the charter of Protestant liberties. If the union, therefore, present a hope of meliorating the condition, and extinguishing the discontents of a great majority of the inhabitants of Ireland, without. exposing the rest to danger, but, on the contrary, adding the most substantial securities to all their legitimate rights, I must profess myself on that account, and perhaps I may say principally on that account, a warm friend to the measure; and I am free to confess, that if these were not to be the consequences, I should expect very little advantage from it. I am desirous, therefore, of declaring for myself, that I shall think the union much more perfect, much better adapted to all its beneficial ends, and the benefits to be expected from it, in such a case, I think incalculable, if the just claims of the Catholic Irish are provided for by an explicit article of the treaty itself. After having thus declared my own mind, and distinctly pronounced my own judgment on this great leading point, I think it right to add, that if any political peculiarities of the present time should render it impracticable to engross these wholesome provisions in the written treaty itself, I would rather restrain my wishes for the immediate accomplishment of this desirable end, than expose this great transaction to needless and unprofitable hazard, by unseasonable pertinacity or impatience. And I should look with confidence to a period when the object I have mentioned will result as a natural consequence, from the treaty, and when this desirable change will flow, with many other blessings, from the impartiality of the imperial and united legislature. If I were worthy then of offering to the loyal Catholics of Ireland the advice of an individual, who has no other claim to their attention than that of uniting a spirit of liberal toleration, and a strong favour towards common right as opposed to monopoly, of combining, I say, these sentiments with something of a practicable disposition which would not reject attainable good when a more perfect accomplishment of right is out of reach, I would implore their prudent acquiescence in a measure which must ultimately consolidate their interests with those of their country; which will bring, in its season, relief to the Catholics and security to the Protestants of Ireland; which will improve the wealth, the prosperity, the dignity, the manners, and the public and private happiness of their country; and which, conferring these blessings with one hand, will avert with the other the certain ruin, desolation, and slavery, which are at this moment impending over their native land. I wish to guard against one misinterpretation. When I prefer the united parliament to that of Ireland, as at present constituted, I should be much misunderstood, if I were thought to profess a distrust of the wisdom and justice of the Irish parliament in general, or to impute to it the slightest degree of incompetence to the general objects of its legislative duties. I profess, on the contrary, the highest and most unfeigned respect, both for the Irish parliament as a body, and for many of its members, with whom I have indeed little, or I might nearly say, no personal acquaintance, but whose character and talents, as public men, I have contemplated, as others do, with the respect and admiration they justly inspire. What I have hazarded on this subject, the delicacy of which I am not insensible to, amounts only to this: that in one great branch and member of Irish affairs, the present Irish parliament must be considered as a party, and in those concerns a major part of the people must now receive the law from an adverse and rival authority. Whereas, in the united parliament, the Irish members will furnish all the local information, and will possess all the weight and influence which the general affairs and interests of that country require; while those local or partial feelings which might warp the judgment of the best-intentioned Irishmen, on some subjects, might be moderated and temperated by the mediating impartiality of the imperial parliament. I would now consider one or two general objections, which I have observed to be most prominent in the opposition to this measure, and I shall begin with that which appears to have been the most operative and successful throughout Ireland, and to have had the greatest share in the rejection of this important and salutary proposal-I mean the notion, that a legislative union, however beneficial in its effects, to the interests of Ireland, is, however, in some way, derogatory to the honour and national independence of that country. The whole of this topic will be found to be an appeal from reason to feeling, and, indeed, from a just and genuine feeling to a blind and inconsiderate one. It is intended, like most of the objections on this question, to preclude the discussion of its merits; and what is peculiar to this particular objection, it is not only intended to elude the merits of the principal question, but seems to disclaim the discussion even of any proper and specific merits of its own: it is used, in truth, to disqualify those to whom it is presented for all deliberation whatever, by exciting the passions, and interposing the flame and dazzle of enthusiasm, between the eye and the object it is to examine. Those who employ this topic, have undoubtedly a considerable advantage; for, in the first place, many more are susceptible of strong. and lively feeling, than capable or willing siasm and zeal, by the many natural charms which, I understand, abound in that country, and by that to which I can, indeed, speak myself-I mean the many generous qualities which distinguish its inhabitants, and seem to endear that nation to those who compose it-I am willing also, to admit, that besides that solicitude for the happiness and well-being of the That to form an enlightened and deliberate judgment on any subject whatever. In the next place, the feeling applied to is in itself by no means unnatural; and so far from being culpable, or a subject of reproach, must, on the contrary, be classed with those affections which are the most beneficial to the world, and the most honourable to those who possess them. It is, in a word, a branch or mode of patriot-people who inhabit our country, which is ism, that virtue which embraces the whole range of our public duties, and which is an object of too much respect and veneration, when genuine and well-directed, not to challenge some indulgence even in its errors and delusions. I cannot, however, help suspecting, that those who avoid discussion, are not very firm or confident on the merits; and that passion is seldom exclusively applied to, when reason is on the same side. Enthusiasm is, indeed, in general, to be accounted but an unsafe and unfaithful guide. The guide is himself blind, and I know not how to search for truth with better hope of success, than by the light of such reason as Providence may have bestowed upon us. I should propose, therefore, to follow that course, and to consider dispassionately, even this passion. I would fairly and deliberately inquire, whether a sincere regard for the national dignity of Ireland does, indeed, oppose any solid objection to a legislative union with Great Britain? I shall waste but little of your lordships time in analyzing the nature and foundation of those local affections towards particular spots, which seem to circumscribe the general benevolence of mankind within the rivers, or seas, or mountains, which encompass that which we call our country. Perhaps that expansive love of our fellow creatures, which has obtained the general name of philanthropy, may have been compressed into narrower bounds, in order to augment its energy in the proper scene of its exertion; perhaps this large and diffuse motive may have been drawn home as it were, and retrenched within limits more commensurate with the size and sphere of human action. But no matter how or why, the love of our country certainly exists; it is the noblest affection of the human breast; and I have no doubt is of divine origin-I am to acknowledge that Ireland, both by its dimensions, its local position, and every other circumstance attending it, offers a fit object for that passion, the ardour of which may well be improved into enthu[VOL. XXXIV.] the proper and distinctive feature by gust which succeeds to conquest, and a vanquished Mercian or East Angle, ceased, even in his own life, to think himself degraded by being called an Englishman. The same truth has been evinced in Wales. Those who inhabited that principality in the early part of the reign of Henry 8th, felt their patriotism and national feelings bounded by the mountains of their country, beyond which, indeed, so far from discovering the objects of affection, they found only those of ancient animosity and habitual hostility. The same narrow bounds, however, no longer limit the public spirit and affections of those who have inhabited that part of our island since that memorable and fortunate era in the history of Wales. I believe I may venture to say, that none of your lordships who may have an interest in that country, and that no Welch gentle. man, or inhabitant of Wales, would thank a Welch patriot who should propose to restore the dignity and independence of that country, by separating it once more from England; that is to say who should forbid and prohibit every Welchman from presuming to consider himself as entitled to any participation in the affairs, in the enterprizes, in the greatness, consideration, or glory of that empire, of which his country is now a distinguished member. They would, no doubt, think the dignity of their countrymen strangely provided for by this second extermination: by driving them once more out of Engand, and cooping them up within the mountains of Wales, as the Saxon conquerors had done by their British ancestors. I shall not easily persuade myself, that a Welch gentleman will think an affront or indignity is put upon himself, or his country, because lord Nelson, for example, can take him by the hand as fellow subject; or because his countryman, Foley (captain Foley, of his majesty's ship Goliah), was enabled by the union of Wales, to lead the British fleet into action on the 1st of August, instead of heading some miserable predatory inroad across the Welch marches. I may speak with better authority of another country. Those who inhabited Scotland in the reign of king William; those who inhabited that part of Scotland with which I am best acquainted, and who looked from their windows on the hills of Northumberland, at a few miles distance, had their patriotism bounded by their ho rizon, or rather their eye had a wider range than this large and liberal passion. It is not so with those who inhabit that country in the reign of George 3rd, and this change, I am persuaded, was operated much sooner than some noble lords seem disposed to allow. A noble lord (Holland) referred, on a former occasion to a proceeding of this House in the year 1713, as furnishing some ground to sup pose that the two countries were not soon reconciled to the union. I am by no means disposed to deny, that the transaction alluded to might furnish a very fair argument to be used in debate on this topic. It certainly imported in its literal acceptation, the wish, at least, of some individuals, for a dissolution of the union, being an express motion for that purpose. It was negatived, indeed, by the House; but it was made by one of the sixteen Scotch peers, and supported, generally, though I do not know that it was unani. mously, by that body. I have no reason to complain, therefore, of this proceeding being used in argument, to the point for which it was adduced; but I must say, at the same time, that it does not appear to me as conclusive, as I am to presume it did to that noble lord. Your lordships' leisure will not admit of my entering minutely into all the particulars of this proceeding; but I must at least say, that it has by no means made the same impression on my mind, and I am not satisfied that the people of Scotland or of England, or the peerage of Scotland at large, or their representatives in this House who supported this motion, including even the mover of the question himself, were in earnest in desiring the separation of the united kingdoms. I do not think myself bound to believe, merely on the letter of a motion in parliament, any body of men, and especially that enlightened body to which I allude, capable of harbouring a design so absurd, and, if sincere, so wicked and detestable, as that motion imported, while I can find any other motive, or can imagine any other object more rational and less culpable, to account sufficiently for the proceeding. I find then, no difficulty in discovering abundant inducements for this motion, short of the absurd and incredible purpose which it expresses-I observe in the first place, that it was made in the House of Lords, and originated with the sixteen peers of Scotland. The Scotch peerage was undoubtedly the body whose interests and to coerce the minister on that point, not by the dissolution of the union, but by the intimidation which the very menace of such a fatal step might be expected to produce. The English peers who supported this motion had themselves been the authors and promoters of the union. But they were the opposition of the day, and it appears, could not deny themselves the satisfaction of using the opportunity which this Scotch question of the malt tax afforded them, of distressing the minister of the day, by the singular and rare union of the representatives of Scotland, even for a few hours, against the court. It lasted, indeed, no longer; and the opposition of the sixteen peers seem to have spent and exhausted itself in this single act, in which I can discern only a general expression of their own particular disgust, and a wish to stand well with their country by opposing the malt-tax. The opposition to that tax, and the attempt at least to modify it, as to Scotland, was the true occasion of this motion, and instead of so absurd and flagitious, but so important and momentous a design as that of dissolving the union, there appears to me to have been nothing deeper in the matter, than the wish on one hand to tease a minister, and on the other to obtain the reduction of three-pence on the bushel of malt, in a tax upon Scotland. I am a good deal confirmed in this view of the transaction, by observing that although this tax was renewed every year, and was objected to by the Scotch members in the House of Commons, I do not find a hint of any new intention to dissolve the union. Various other questions interesting to Scotland were discussed, without producing the slightest intimation of such a design; and I find one, very little posterior to that on which the noble lord has relied, so re were least consulted, and who were the worst treated by the union. But they had received fresh cause of complaint subsequent to that event. The abolition of the privy council of Scotland was, in my opinion, necessary to consolidate the union, by removing that remaining nucleus of a local government, and separate interest. But this measure affected, no doubt, the views both of ambition and of vanity, of the Scotch peerage and of the higher order of the gentry, though it very little concerned the people. The discontent of the peerage excited by that measure, had been yet more recently inflamed by the decision of this House in the case of the duke of Hamilton. His patent, as duke of Brandon, had been disallowed, and by that proceeding it seemed décided that a Scotch peer, after the union, should be incapable of receiving the independent dignity of a British peerage; a disability highly injurious to the peerage of Scotland, in its fondest aim, and reasonably offensive and disgusting to that body, already sore with prior provocations. If we consider this motion, then, as no more than the expression of the chagrin of this body; but especially if it be considered as a means employed to give weight in future to their just pretensions, we shall assign as weighty a motive for such a proceeding as has produced many others of great importance in parliament. These grievances were, indeed, expressly stated in the motion, amongst the reasons on which it was grounded. But the special occasion of this transaction was, the extension of the malt tax to Scotland. This tax was, in fact, felt to be oppressive on that country; and it was besides fairly questionable, whether the imposition of this tax, at that particular point of time, was not contrary to an article of the union. This objection applied, indeed, only to that particular period, and ceased after-markable, that I cannot help mentioning wards, but it was subject to question at the time. I think on the whole, that the Scotch members of both Houses were justified in standing out on this tax, and I think their union and exertion on that occasion did them honour, though I do not think the mode of opposition they chose judicious; I find, however, in the very occasion which gave rise to this proceeding a sufficient motive, and a much more natural and, indeed, justifiable purpose than that which the motion literally imported. It was intended to enforce the opposition of Scotland to the malt-tax, it. I mean the extraordinary bill, known by the name of the Peerage bill, which actually passed this House in 1719, but was thrown out, as might be expected, in the House of Commons. Neither the peerage of Scotland, nor the Scotch nation, have ever received, since the union, so signal a provocation as that bill appears to me to have offered to them. It proposed, in direct terms, the complete disfranchisement of the whole body of the Scotch peers, and stripped them even of the elective franchise which the union had left them, without any other |