matter for our confideration, that by the terms of the Union there will be an eternal bar put to the claims of the English Catholics? You cannot admit their rights without allowing thofe of the Irish; and I contend you make the Union purposely to exclude the Irish Catholics. Is it no light confideration that one hundred members are coming here to fupport the honour of the English Parliament, after having facrificed their own Parliament? The Right Hon. Gentleman, in the language of his father, once talked of the admiffion of one hundred new knights to purify the blood, and to lend new vigour to the Houfe. Will these one hundred knights from Ireland produce that effect? Sir, I refpect Ireland, I was born there; but is it immaterial to confider what changes in the British Conftitution thefe Irish members may make? There will arife a physical impoffibility for them to communicate with their conftituents. I have read, that it has been afferted, that when once a Parliament has been chofen, the people have no more to do with it till a fresh election. I have read this monstrous doctrine, that the publication of debates is ruinous; that it tends to diffipate that ignorance so useful to regular Governments. I am fure this doctrine has been falfely attributed to particular Gentlemen. But if I had read it in a pamphlet, I fhould certainly have moved you, Sir, that it fhould be prosecuted by the Attorney-General, and burnt by the hands of the common hangman, as I did, when I formerly had the honour to move (the only time I ever moved any profecution of the prefs) a profecution of a pamphlet in which_this House was represented as not an effential part of the Conftitution. Such doctrines would go, not to lop off the branches only, but to cut up the tree by the roots. Nothing, however, will tend more to countenance these doctrines, than the phyfical impoffibility of the Irish Members to communicate with their conftituents.

"There is but one other question, which, however nice and delicate it may be, he is not a man who will at fuch a time fhrink from the difcuffion of—I mean the right of the Irish Parliament to do the fact. I muft admit that if we are parties to a treaty which admits the right of the Irish Parliament to do this, we must also admit the fame right to refide in the British Parliament: this would tend to make the King abfolute; to enable him not only to fend money out of the country to foreign powers, without the confent of Parliament, but to place the whole purse of the people in his hands, and to vest in him for ever a vigour beyond

the

the law. Am I to admit this? The Union with Scotland has been mentioned. Sir, a bad precedent, I confefs, only makes me more jealous. I do ask the Right Honourable Gentleman who tells us of the peril of fuch difcuffions, I ask him why I am put in a fituation, either to acknowledge this tyrannical power, and by inference that the fame power refides in the British Parliament, or elfe to deny that they have the power, and thus to countenance future feditions? If the Right Honourable Gentleman had acted confiftently, he would have found himself bound not to have brought this into difcuffion. Sir, with refpect to the power of the Irish Parliament to do the fact, I beg leave to observe, that I cannot make ufe of ftronger language than a vigorous ftatefman made ufe of upon a lefs occafion than the present. I have heard that ftatefman affert, that if it was attempted to overturn the charters of the boroughs, if the Lords and Commons affented to it, the King could not; that it would shake the crown upon his head, and that he could not affent to it. If this be true, Sir, if the King has not the power to affent to a measure with refpect to the right of election which might have paffed the Houfes of Lords and Commons; if, I fay, he cannot give his affent to fuch a measure, is it too much to fay the Irish Parliament are bound by the contract upon which they received their truft? If fuch could be the effect in a thing comparatively of lefs moment, what might be the effect in one so much greater as that of a Parliament voting itself a part of a foreign legiflature? If the Right Honourable Gentleman thinks there is a mischief in the difcuffion, he cannot now avoid it. He knows it must be difcuffed, and that the hour will come, when the people will re-affert their rights, and when the Honourable Gentleman himself will repent, with bitterness, the having brought the fubject forward. I have only, Sir, to obferve, that this queftion upon the Union does not apply to the exifting malady. Of the propofal in general, I think that as a remedy it is not fuited to the disease, on the existence of which it proceeds. Not merely now, but at all times I am averfe to it. Thofe, however, who only agree with me in difapproving of the time, may vote for the amendment which I fhall have the honour to propose. In Ireland the British Government has two formidable enemies, poverty and ignorance. I fhould receive it with a warm heart, and fupport it with fincere pleasure; but I fay the effect will be the very reverfe. I afk, why are Irifhmen different upon other foils to what they are upon their own? Why are they 4 Q2

in

in foreign countries fo remarkable for zeal, for energy and for activity? If they are the reverse of that in their native foil, the fault must be in the Government, and in the nonperformance, on the part of Gentlemen of property, of thofe conditions which are attached to the poffeffion of large property. A Union would tend obviously to render the condition of Ireland ftill worse than it is, and to give an application and direction to property ftill lefs favourable to its interests. As to the wretched condition of the peasantry, we have the authority of Mr. Arthur Young, one which, on fuch a fubject, will probably be admitted. I ftated laft year that 12,000 manufacturers were living upon five-pence per week, and upon rafpings of bread; and that many were literally perifhing with hunger. It is folly to fay that French principles have been the cause of the calamities which Ireland has lately fuftained: but it is true that fuch misery facilitates the operation of the delufions practifed to mislead the multitude. Remove the cause of that mifery, and you best confult the public tranquillity and the general profperity of the Empire. The Union I confider to be calculated to encrease the diforder. I have already mentioned, that the writer of the pamphlet I have alluded to, attributes much of the evil to the English Oppofition. I fhould have thought he might have difcovered that little apprehenfion need be entertained with refpect to them. A Noble Marquis, in another place, took an opportunity, fome time ago, to cut fome clumfy capers, to which I certainly have no objection, upon what he called the grave of that party. His Lordship contended, that not only there was no Oppofition, but that even party itself was dead in this country; and he boasted that he never belonged to any. To take a fubordinate share in a party requires a man to poflefs a modeft fense of his own talents;-to be at the head of a party, it is neceffary that a man should infpire confidence in those whom he is to lead. Sir, I refpect the memory of the Marquis of Rockingham and Mr. Burke, and the former principles of many of his Majefty's Minifters. I will not fuffer myself to be accufed as a factious traitor, because I will not be a deferter from my friends; nor will I, without retort, be charged as a traitor to my country, because I am not to be purchased by its corruptions. And, Sir, I hope though at prefent the banners of Oppofition be furled in feceffion, they will again be displayed, and that its Members will come forward and rally round the Conftitution when danger menaces its facred foundations; that they will prove worthy

of

of their principles, and of that liberty they value dear, by afferting and defending the independence of every legitimate, conftitutional Parliament, and the rights and liberties of every people. I beg leave to move the following amendment:

"At the fame time to exprefs the furprise and deep regret with which this House now, for the first time, learns from his Majefty that the final adjustment, which, upon his Majefty's gracious recommendation, took place between the two kingdoms in the year 1782, and which, by the declaration of the Parliaments of both countries, placed the connection between them upon a folid and permanent basis, has not produced the effects expected from that folema fettlement; and further humbly to exprefs to his Majefty, that his Majefty's faithful Commons having strong reason to believe that it is in the contemplation of his Majesty's Minifters to propose an Union of the Legiflature of the two Kingdoms, notwithstanding the faid final and folemn adjustment, feel it to be their bounden duty, impreffed as they are with the most serious apprehenfions of the confequences of fuch a proceeding at this time, to take the earliest opportunity humbly to implore his Majefty not to liften to the counfel of those who shall advise or promote fuch a measure at the prefent crifis, and under the prefent circumstances of the Empire."

Mr. Canning faid, had the Hon. Gentleman confined himfelf merely to the topic with which he fet out, namely, the propriety of bringing forward the fubject of the affairs of Ireland, at the prefent period, and not have gone into other confiderations, he should have deemed it unneceffary to have faid much: but the more enlarged fcope of his arguments rendered it neceffary he should more particularly reply to fome of them. Before, however, he fhould proceed to notice the arguments upon which the Amendment was fupported, he would now advert to the principal ground upon which was refted the oppofition to the Addrefs, namely, the refolutions entered upon the Journals of the House in 1782, relative to a fubject of fomewhat a fimilar nature to that now propofed for confideration. To the fame Journals would he refer for a refutation of the arguments urged by his Hon. Friend, and that reference would, he trufted, completely do away the ground upon which thofe arguments were bottomed. It is true, indeed, that the words “final adjustment," were made ufe of in the refolutions. alluded to; but if the Houfe would but attend to what followed in the fame Jour

nals,

nals, they would fee that, though this opinion was recorded and then approved of, it was immediately followed by another, which declared that the idea of establishing some more permanent fyftem was not relinquifhed, by which alone the tranquillity and profperity of Ireland could remain uninterrupted and continue to be improved. A due attention to this refolution must undoubtedly remove all imputation of impropriety from the measure now propofed, and all charge of inconfiftency against the former refolutions.

With refpect to the question of the time of making the propofition, the Hon. Gentleman had confidered it with a reference to the fituation of Europe in general, and of England and Scotland in particular. It was a little fingular to obferve the manner in which the Hon. Gentleman had commented upon the propriety of the interference of that House. It must be in the recollection of every Gentleman present, that for two or three years paft the Houfe had been repeatedly called upon to inveftigate the fituation of Ireland, and to interfere in its internal affairs. In the very laft Seffion of Parliament the Houfe was loudly called upon to examine into the affairs of Ireland. It was however then objected, that the King had not fent a meffage to Parliament; it was afked, triumphantly, by the Gentlemen on the other fide of the House, if there was a rebellion in Ireland, where was the meffage from the Crown by which Parliament was made acquainted with that circumftance? The answer to this question was obvious, and was given at the time. The fituation of Ireland, at that time dreadful, certainly required the vigorous interference of the Executive Power; but it was not neceffary that fresh powers fhould be granted by Parliament for that purpose. But Gentlemen ftill perfifted in the propriety of an enquiry into Irish Affairs, and into the caufes of the rebellion. Now, however, they had no wifh for any investigation, and all their curiofity had fubfided. If there was any foundation for the charge which had been brought against Ministers for not paying attention to that Houfe, in having omitted to advife his Majefty to fend a meffage, it furely could not be confiftent with juftice to accuse them now that they had adopted fo different a line of conduct. His Majefty had fent a meffage to the House, in which he called their attention to one of the most impor tant measures that ever was prefented for the attention of Parliament, and it was now proposed to treat it in a way that even the commoneft motion feldom experienced, viz. to pass it over wholly without notice.