Between these nations would be more beneficial; and although the pains he has taken to fhew us the miferies, dangers, and difadvantages of our prefent fituation have perfectly fucceeded, he has not been equally fortunate in convincing us of the neceffity, the convenience, or the expediency of the prof fered Union. I entirely agree with the noble author in thinking that fomething is neceffary; but not an Union-A reform in parliament is neceffary -Catholic emancipation is neceffary-Modification of tythes is neceffary-Conclufion of the war is neceffary-Re-eftablishment of the British conftitution of 1688 is neceffary-Repeal of a multiplicity of new penal laws is neceffary-Many other things are neceffary-But, a Legislative Union between the two islands, is not neceffary-A Legisla tive Union will deftroy the goodwill of the two nations towards each other-A Legislative Union will annihilate the influence of the people, and emancipate minifters from the authority of the law. -In fine, a Legislative Union will place the whole power of government in the hands of a few gigantic defpots t. * The way to cure people of their fears, is not to frighten them farther, but to remove the causes of their fears. If the kingdom be difaffected, let enquiry be made into the motives of that difaffection. Cato's Letters, 3d Vol. p. 219. When the causes of general difcontent are removed, particular discoutents will fignify nothing, Page 220. It is the nature of power to be ever encroaching, and converting every extraordinary power, granted at particular times, and upon particular occafions, into an ordinary power, to be used at all times, and where there is no occafion; nor does it ever part willingly with any advantage. Cato's Letters, 3d Vol. p. 327. It It is abfurd to compare Scotland with Ireland.-së” Scotland and England make one island, in point of fituation, commercial advantages, foil, and climate, the latter is fuperior to the former. Ireland, on the contrary, in point of fituation, climate, foil, and capabilities for trade, is equal (in fome refpects fuperior) to England. I cannot perceive of what advantage it would be to Ireland to have a fervile, artful, and ambitious native of this country pursuing his own intereft in the British Cabinet, or how it would benefit this country to have him reproached with being an Irishman. Would this produce any commercial advantages to our cities? Would this occafion any civilization in our provinces? Would the prostituted talents of a selfish and crafty schemer redound to our honour or add to our prosperity ? even though the influence of this Irifhman in the British Cabinet were the burden of English jealoufy, the theme of constant invective, and sometimes of deep and ferious accufation." That England has often been accufed "of injuftice, unkindnefs, and prejudice against the united kingdom" of Scotland, a very flight inquiry will convince the noble author-but this is of no very material confe quence to Ireland.* *As to the cant word of Jacobin; I find it as difficult to comprehend, as the noble author finds the word Ireland. One time the advocates for rational liberty are called by this name; another time it is beftowed on the abettors of the worst of tyranny. To-day, I am told that the friends of the real British Conftitution are Jacobins; to-morrow, I fhall hear this appellation given to the partizans of the ferocious Roberfpiere. In fame places anarchy is called the work of Jacobins; in others, reform is delineated as their deed. As I know not in what light it may please the noble author to view this hacknied expreffion, I refrain from replying to his remarks on the subject. It is melancholy to talk of an Union by way of experiment. If the experiment fhould prove detrimental, what is the remedy?—The catalogue of horrors which the noble author gives in pages 58 and 59, is almoft the only part of his work which contains much truth; and how the Union is to remove all those miferies, is quite beyond the compre, henfion of my vulgar Irish understanding. I think the noble author perfectly right in recommending the complete emancipation of the Catholics; and I fincerely hope that the Parliament of Ireland will convince the world that they are not afraid of their Catholic brethren, and would rather share political privileges with them, than be engulphed in the vortex of a British Senate. I deny that it is "more prudent and more natural for this independent Parliament to melt into the Imperial, than to receive the Catholic Parliament:" it is " more prudent, more natural," and far more expedient, to admit their Catholic brethren, men who are interested in the welfare of Ireland, with themselves, and who will be doubly interested in it by fuch an arrangement, to a participation of their Legislative rights, than to facrifice those rights at the fhrine of a British Minifter, who has ever fhewn an antipathy to their country, who has plunged the British dominions in all the horrors of war, and deluged the earth with blood. The Catholic enemy to the Union expects emancipation from the Parliament of his native country; and, after all that has been accorded to him within the last ten years, he is well warranted in expecting a farther extenfion of privileges, From the British Parliament he has no reafon to hope for fimilar advantages, for if that Parliament would not grant emancipation to the handful of English Catho lics, why fhould we expect them to demonftrate more liberality and kindness towards the multitude who profefs that faith in Ireland? Again I muft exprefs my ardent wishes, that the Catholics may not be intimidated by artful threatenings of fufpected difloyalty; and I fincerely hope the day will foon arrive when all invidious diftinctions fhall be deftroyed; when the United Irifhmen" fhall not "remain to be put down, or to be put out by the Colonial Parliament, or by the Imperial;" and when peace, happiness, virtue, and profperity fhall again illumine Ireland. June 30th, 1799. THE END |