one defcription of perfons, and thofe perfons were well known to be the determined enemies of the propofed Union -can the fame spirit of refiftance be then expected from them should the rebellion break out again to any formidable extent? Even in the mind of thofe to whom the measure appeared fo falutary, he was at a lofs to fee what remedy could be derived from it, for the evils that are at present confeffed to afflict Ireland. From what did thefe evils chiefly arife, and what was it which produced this fpirit of rebellion in the general mafs of the people? Was it not, as had been obferved, a disunion of fentiment between the different ranks in the country, and from the difference of political and religious opinions? Could the propofed Union now ferve as a remedy for thefe evils? The good which eventually might be derived from the meafure itself could not compensate for the evils which it might occafion. Although the higher ranks might approve of it, would the lower defcriptions be fatisfied, because the higher orders were willing to be incorporated with England? Or, are all thofe evils that are now fo much exaggerated, folely to be afcribed to the existence of an independent Irish Legiflature? If fo, it is not properly to the Irish Parliament, but to the English influence, which guides that Parliament, that they are justly to be attributed. But will not this fame influence continue to prevail in the United Parliament? What remedy then can there be reasonably expected from the Union? None-the evils complained of would ftill remain, and in order to remedy them, it is neceffary to look to other objects; it is neceffary to keep together thofe by whom the fafety of Ireland has been preferved; it is neceffary to remove the odious distinctions that exift between ranks and certain religious perfuafions. But this never can be done without reftoring men to the exercise and enjoyment of their natural birthright; yet it is pretended by fome, that these defects will be relieved by the projected incorporation.This was the opinion but of a few individuals, which, however refpectable, could have no weight in his mind. Upon the fubject of the distinctions between the orders, would they be remedied by an incorporated Union! Had the Noble Lord faid any thing to induce the Houfe to believe that these diftinctions would be relieved by an Union? He had heard, indeed, fomething of an infinuation thrown out. But had the Houfe, or the People of Ireland, any thing of greater weight than this infinuation? If Minifters and their friends were were fincerely defirous to conciliate the Roman Catholics, what would they do?-Why, they would extend to them the benefits to which they are well entitled by their unshaken attachment to their country, and their well tried allegiance to their king. They would not continue to fhut the doors of that Houfe against the best and faireft characters which the nation could boast of, merely on account of their religious tenets. Would Minifters pretend to fay, that by admitting men of fuch known virtue and integrity to a feat among their Lordships, they would endanger the Proteftant Succeffion? Would the Proteftant Succeffion be endangered by the admiffion of fuch men of well known principles and property, to a feat in the Houfe of Commons? All this danger of the re-establishment of the House of Stuart was long fince done away. There was no fuch danger to be now apprehended from fuch men; and when a difference of opinion existed upon that point, it was not a religious, but a political difference. If the Catholics of Great Britain, who were comparatively few in number, and from whom no danger could be apprehended, were excluded from the enjoyment of conftitutional rights by the Parliament of this country, had the Catholics of Ireland, whofe numbers were fo great, any fresh caufe to expect favours from the fame. legiflature when increased by the representatives of the Irish Nation? In what light would the difpofition of Parliament towards the Catholics of this country appear, when fome of the best character and talents had the doors of that House fhut against them, although equally entitled by birth-right to a feat with any one of their Lordships. And what he here faid of the English Roman Catholics, it was his with fhould apply equally to the cafe of the Irish Roman Catholics. But to their claims the Irish Parliament was reluctant to pay any attention, and forry he was to obferve that in this particular it betrayed fuch narrow aud bigotted prejudices. The Noble Lord had faid that the tefts required in the army of Ireland and in the army of England were different. They were fo. In Ireland they had admitted the Catholics into the army; in England they were excluded. Would the Catholics then be conciliated by getting into a more narrow minded Legiflature? An incorporated Union did not promise that which they required-it put them rather at a greater distance. The main drift of the Noble Lord's argument, namely, that the Union would encreafe the ftrength of the Empire, and if now effected, flood upon no juft grounds. This effect it No. 29. 7 F could could not have at prefent, whatever might be the benefit hereafter to be derived from it. But the inconveniencies ftated as likely to arife from a separate legiflature, had existed from the most antient times. It was not from 1782 only, but long before that period, that all acts of imperial concern had been done by the Irish Parliament. The Noble Lord had obferved, that in queftions of peace or war the Parliaments of both kingdoms might, by a difference of opinion, give rife to the most serious dangers. But how had it happened that the danger attending fuch a cafe was discovered only at the present moment? His Majesty had equally made communications on those important fubjects to the Parliaments of both countrics, He had done fo in 1778, and a fimilar conduct was adopted in the war of 1756; and if a matter was propofed for difcuffion, the right of deciding upon it was neceffarily implied. What danger had arifen from this deliberation to the general interefts of the Empire? None. Where then was the neceflity of providing against fuch dangers now?-When an attempt is made to incorporate the Irish with the British Parliament, is it the wish of the Noble Lord to introduce into it the real representatives of the Irish nation? By no means. The perfons to be introduced would only represent the British Cabinet. Were a general election now to take place in Ireland, could that election he called free, which was influenced and overawed by an army? Could an election be free and constitutional in a country where the army with the sword in hand performed the functions of the Noble Lord on the Woolfack? Who are those that would be returned by fuch an election? Would they not be reprefentatives of the army, and not of the people? And is it then seriously proposed to embody fuch representatives with the British Parliament, and that in fuch a fituation of public affairs as the present? However reluctant the Noble Earl faid he felt himself to trouble their Lordships with any thing that perfonally regarded himself, yet he could not well refrain from touching on a certain point which he had hitherto omitted to obferve upon, though it had frequently been alluded to in a place of high authority. The circumftance he alluded to was the nature and tendency of the conditions upon which he had taken upon him the Government of Ireland. He was ready, indeed to confefs that he had never been required to retract any thing which he had been empowered to do when he ftood in the fituation of Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, yet he was bold to fay that the tranfactions of that period had laid the cause of all the calamitous confequences that had fince fallen upon that unfortunate country. There was a written record of his opinion on that subject, and from it he would beg leave to read a short history of that tranfaction. This Noble Earl then proceeded to read a paffage from [we believe] his letter to Lord Carlifle, which contained his fentiments respecting the conduct of Minifters toward him upon that occafion." If it has been stated that I never received orders to bring forward the queftion of Catholic Emancipation on the part of Government, I admit that statement to be true. But in juftification of the part I took at that period, and in my confcience, I believe the events that occurred have led to the evils that now exist, and have stamped the doom of that ill-fated country, it is neceffary that to these statements I fhould add a fhort hiftory of the tranfaction. Yielding to the argument of not wifhing to entangle Government in difficulties upon the fubject at that period, I admit that under orders clearly understood by me, not to give rife to or bring forward the queftion of Catholic Emancipation on the part of Government, I affumed the Government of Ireland. -But in yielding to this argument, I entered my proteft against refifting the question, if it should be brought forward from any other quarter; and I made most distinct declarations, that in cafe of its being fo brought forward, it fhould receive my full fupport. With thefe declarations I affumed the Government of Ireland. This I ftate upon my honour; I fhould not have introduced it, had I not deemed it neceffary to give this explanation." His Lordship returning to the fubject of the Union, said, that whether the object proposed was good or not, he should contend that the circumstances of the times, with a rebellion raging in Ireland, made it impoffible to incorporate it at the prefent moment; and in fact while Government were propofing to do it, they were forbidding the people to have any intercourfe with each other. For thefe reafons, convinced of the perfect impropriety of difcuffing the fubject at prefent, he should give his negative to the refolutions. Lord Grenville faid that he would long ago have entered. into an explanation of the tranfactions alluded to by the Noble Earl, but a fenfe of his public duty had hitherto prevented it. He was now ready to enter on that explanation, but the Noble Earl had faved him the trouble of making any. He understood him to have admitted it to be true, that he 7 F 2 had had never been called upon to retract what he had been directed to propofe; and that he went to Ireland with orders to avoid the difcuffion of the Catholic question. But the Noble Earl had added, that he had entered his protest against refifting the queftion, if it should be brought forward from any other quarter. Where that paper was, he knew nat. He could affure the Noble Earl he had no knowledge of any fuch proteft and declaration. His own recollection of the transaction was, that the Noble Earl went to Ireland to prevent the bringing forward the Catholic queftion on the part of Government; but if he could not avoid it, he was to collect the opinions of the people, and transmit them to His Majefty for further inftructions. Earl Fitzwilliam faid, he ftated clearly that he yielded to the opinion, that under the variety of difficulties then preifing on the Government of Ireland, it would not be expedient for Government to bring forward the meafure; but while he stated this, and he was forry it was not in the recollection of the Noble Lord, he entered his proteft, not in the shape of a paper, against affuming the Government of Ireland, but under the circumftance, that if the measure should be brought forward from any other quarter, he should give it his full fupport. Lord Grenville declared, that he had no recollection, nor knowledge of any fuch declaration. The Marquis of Lanfdorune faid that he moft cordially concurred in every thing that was afferted by the Noble Earlin favour and in praise of the Roman Catholics. He confeffed there were to be found among them fome of the beft characters, that would prove ornaments to that Houfe if they were admitted to the honours they ought to enjoy. This opinion he had frequently taken an opportunity to exprefs; but he did not wish to take the merit of propofing the question to himself, but remained filent upon it till he might have an occasion of sharing it with others who were equally well difpofed to befriend it. He must obferve, however, with the Noble Earl's leave, that this fubject had no relation to the question now before the Houfe, or to the fituation of the Irish Roman Catholics, though indeed the adoption of the propofed Union might ultimately tend to do the Roman Catholics the juftice they deferved. But now, as to a large and general question, he was by no means furprifed that at first fight it was objected to as improper to be difcuffed at the prefent moment. Meft undoubtedly fuch a measure should be |