argument of intimidation would come with much more force, if the perfons who were the objects of intimidation. were to decide upon the queftion.-It was worthy of remark, that they had that night, for the first time, heard from Gentlemen on the other fide of the House of the vigilance and activity of the Government of Ireland. He admitted that for the purpose of reprefling that cursed rebellion (which would have lighted in the afhes of Dublin a torch to burn London) that troops were fent to Ireland; but did they furround the Parliament House? Did they intimidate the Members? Was there a man in existence who believed that the Parliament of Ireland was intimidated by English foldiers? Was it likely that if fuch an intimidation was attempted, that the Irish Parliament, with the powers which the Conftitution vested in their hands, would proceedto difcufs a queftion under the terror of an armed force ? He would admit merely for the fake of the argument, that the rebellion had arifen from the misconduct of the Parliament of Ireland. Suppofe that English troops had been fent over to quell it, and that the Irish Parliament faw their error, and withed to retract it, according to this mode of reafoning, they could not do it, because the English troops are in Ireland. As long as the rebellion exifted, an armed force was neceffary; if this argument was decifive, the Irish Parliament could not take any ftep whatever. But every man must feel that it was an argument which had no weight whatever. He wifhed to put this question broadly, because he knew that infinuations in that House were often fpread in a more palpable fhape through the country. He would ask whether there was any man in that House who thought that the Parliament of Ireland proceeded to the difcuffion of this fubject under the influence of military coercion? He put it thus broadly, to give it a distinct anfwer, and to prevent that which was merely an infinuation from being to-morrow repeated out of doors as an affertion. Upon thefe grounds he faw no objection to the time at which this meafure was brought forward, nor did he think the Hon. Gentleman would perfuade the Houfe to agree with him, unless he could produce a plan which was free from every objection of this kind, and which would allay the animofities and reconcile the parties in that country.

Take the opinions of the parties the most interested, and contraft what men of the moft oppofite interefts faid upon the fubject, and if it was found that they all agreed in one point, it furely was an argument that fome advantage would

most

moft probably refult from its adoption. After having gone through all the arguments upon the impropriety of the time, the Hon. Gentleman deviated into fone general arguments against the measure. The Hon. Gentleman had thought proper to compare a measure freely, deliberated by the legiflatures of two free and independent countries, to the forced incorporations of France. He wished to afk the Hon. Gentleman what features this measure had in common with thofe tyrannical incorporations of which France had been guilty? Was the making a common cause between two countries, fimilar in laws, in language, in manners, in habits-between countries connected by the dearest ties of blood, and bound together by mutual commercial benefits. Were thofe the characteristics of French incorporations? Did they offer to thofe unhappy people whom they compelled to incorporate with France, the bleflings of a free and almoft perfect Conftitution? Was there any thing in the prefent plan, which, like the French incorporations, impofed ruinous contributions and confifcations? Was the leaving the people of Ireland in the full poffeflion of all their wealth, their commerce, and only afking them for their fhare in the general contribution; was that like the conduct of France? were thofe the terms upon which the proceeded? were the countries whom the compelled to this incorporation fimilar to her in laws, in language, and in manners? was the fituation of those countries with refpect to France, the fame as that of Ireland to Great Britain? He would afk, was there a man of the Proteftant party in Ireland who might think that his fuperiority was deftroyed, and might confequently feel himself difcontented? was there a man among the Catholics who might think himfelf perfecuted, becaule he could not fit in Parliament, and hold certain great offices? Ireland would indeed be the paradife of real bleffings, if British connection could be extended there in a manner which might bring about a resemblance between the fituation of the people there and in this country. The most ftrenuous friends of reform in Ireland have frequently faid that they wanted only to be brought to a fituation nearer to that of England; and defired that they might not be marked by the appearance of a legiflature which was not the real reprefentation of the people. In short, they wished for the British Conftitution in all its parts. Was there a man in Ireland, except traitors, who faid, "take away your Conftitution altogether, we don't like it?" It does not fpeak our language; it is not congenial to our inveterate habits:

it

it does not accord with the ufual tone of our feelings. Does any one man of character and integrity call in France for fuch a change? no, none, undoubtedly, but the convicted traitors who have attempted the fubversion of that Conftitution which we cherish, and a diffolution of that connexion on which depend the fafety, the interefts, the profperity, and the existence of the two kingdoms. Was this the cafe between the people of Piedmont and France? did they fay, "we are tired of a king, give us your five directors-we dilike the enfigns of royalty-and give us a tri-coloured cockade; we diflike our Government, take away our king,his family, and those friends who have fupported him, and who would have prompted him to exertions, but unfortunately too late; no, the people of Piedmont have said no fuch thing. Whatever might be the refult of this question, he could not help observing that it was not candid to treat it in fuch a manner, to compare the difcuffions of two free and independent ftates, upon a plan calculated for their mutual benefit, with the unprecedented tyranny of France. He wished the Houfe to recollect what paffed in Piedmont, in the last act of the dreadful tragedy the French had performed in that country-a beloved monarch, for no crime against his people (to use the cant of modern Republicanifm), for no breach of faith with his new allies, was ignominiously driven from his dominions, for no other reafon than because the French wanted Piedmont for a retreat for their army in cafe it had been compelled to retreat from Italy, where that unhappy monarch as the laft degradation of human infamy, was obliged, on his knees, to beg the French to let him take his fon with him, whom the French wanted to keep as a pledge of his good conduct. Good God! to ask a pledge for his good conduct, after they had driven him from his dominions, and forced him, poor, powerlefs, and degraded, to feek refuge in Sardinia-to compel a fovereign who had been guilty of no offence, to God or man, to grovel on his knees, and fupplicate for permiffion to take his fon with him!

His Majefty had recommended to the confideration of Parliament the defigns of the enemy againft Ireland; that country was not in a condition to defend itself against the threatened attacks of foreign power, and confequently flood in need of the affiftance of Great Britain. It was a queftion certainly of ferious importance, whether that affistance could not be better given by an incorporation of the two countries. The measure was not forced upon Ireland, but given

for

for their confideration. Let the Irish legislature then receive the propofal of that of Great Britain. This was the preliminary step; and it was one which on the firft blush of it ought not to be objected to. The object of it certainly was, that in the end the Irish should merge for ever into the English legiflature.-Much as they had confidered the French Revolution, they knew but little of it, if they suppofed its effects would fpeedily pafs away. That principle which it inculcated of fetting the poor against the rich, must certainly make a confiderable impreffion in a country like Ireland (not from any fault of this country), where the inhabitants are in general poor and uncivilized, and where religious diftinctions prevail to fuch an extent. In fuch a country the feeds of the French Revolution must be sown deep indeed. It was not, he was afraid, the act of a day or a year which would deftroy its baneful influence. The government of France knew that wherever their principles were scattered, it would be difficult to eradicate them; they knew they had taken root in Ireland; was it not then likely that they would attempt to fofter and support them? was it not likely that they fhould endeavour to make that country the ftage of their action? it was to put an end to these hopes of our enemies-it was to put Ireland out of danger, both from her foreign and domeftic enemies, it was in every point of view to ameliorate her condition that this measure was propofed. It was not the fault of the people of Ireland, that the country was in that fituation; they wanted commerce, they wanted capital, they wanted thofe claffes of men who connect together the upper and the lower orders of fociety, and who thereby blended together and harmonized the whole. But it was not an Act of Parliament that would effect thefe great and beneficial objects; no, it was only a connection with a country which had capital, which had commerce, which had that clafs of men to whom he had before alluded, and who would tranfplant them into and diffuse them throughout that kingdom, that could effect that change. Other remedies had been tried, with only partial fuccefs. Manufactures had flourished, but the cottage remained in wretchedness. But if they had the teftimony of all parts, and from all parties, that this measure would produce thefe beneficial confequences, it was not fuch arguments as the Hon. Gentleman had used that would prevent the House from entering into a difcuffion of the fubject.

With regard to the mode of propofing this fubject, the

Hon.

Hon. Gentleman had ftated, that befides force, other means had been recurred to. Government had done that which feemed to the Hon. Gentleman moft alarming-moft horrible-they had actually turned a man out of place. The Hon. Gentleman preffed this argument very strongly, and feemed to think it must have a great effect upon those who fat on the Ministerial Bench to talk of turning a man out of his place. But what did the whole argument amount to? Sir John Parnell, undoubtedly a man of great worth and great abilities, entertained an opinion hoftile to this meafure. The opinion of fuch a man was certainly intitled to refpect, but to no more than those of perfons of equal worth and talents. What were the taunts which were thrown against the Gentlemen on the minifterial fide of the Houfe, if there was the flighteft difference of opinion among them, even though it fhould be upon an indifferent and unimportant fubject? and thofe Gentlemen who entertained à different opinion were accufed for fupporting an administration with whom they differed in opinion. If the oppofition in Ireland were as acute as the Hon. Gentleman, Sir John Parnell would have had a pleafant time of it, if he had gone down to the Houfe a Chancellor of the Exchequer, differing as he did from Government upon fo important a queftion, It would have been an impeachment upon the fincerity of Government if they had rifqued the lofs of a question on which they thought the welfare of the two countries depended. But it was not only the time of the propofition that the Hon. Gentleman oppofed, but the way in which it was done. If this propofition had come after a series of attempts on the part of England, to injure Ireland, it might then have fome appearance of unfairnefs, but was that the cafe? was this the firft remedy that England had proposed, or had the ever refused affiftance to Ireland? It had been faid, that for the space of three hundred years we had oppreffed Ireland. He had not been long in Parliament, and confequently had but little of the guilt of that oppreflion to anfwer for, but for the last twenty years the conduct of England had been a series of conceffions: they wanted an octennial Parliament; it was granted. They then wished for an independent legiflature, and their wifhes were complied with. They then defired a free trade, and it was given to them. A very large body of the people of Ireland wanted a repeal of part of the penal code which they thought opprefied them, and the repeal was granted. The Hon. Gentleman had spoken as if nothing had been done

for