ward in 1785. I am not now going to enter into a difcuffion of the merits of that meafure. The beft that can be faid of it is, that it went as far as circumftances would permit to draw the two countries to a clofer connexion. But those who think that the adjustment of 1782 was final, and that it contained all that was necessary for the establishment of the connexion between the two countries upon a firm bafis, can hardly contend that the Commercial Propofitions. of 1785, were neceffary to prevent the danger of feparation between the two countries, and to prevent the conflicting operation of independent legiflatures. Yet, if I am not miftaken, there will be found, upon a reference to better records. than thofe in which Parliamentary Debates are usually stated (I mean a statement of what paffed in the difcuffion upon thofe propofitions fourteen years ago, made by fome of the principal parties themselves), that the Chancellor of the Exchequer in Ireland, in a Debate upon the Irish propofi tions, held this language-" this infatuated country (Ireland) now gives up thefe propofitions, fhe may look in vain for the offer at fome future period." No, here the Right Ho nourable Gentleman is mistaken, they have had the offer of the fame advantages more complete, and in all refpects better calculated to attain their object, which he has now exerted all his influence to reject. "But, continues he, things cannot remain as they are." This was his language fhortly after that measure of 1782, which is now, upon his authority, stated to have been a final adjustment, and confequently to render the préfent measure unneceffary. That: Right Honourable Gentleman goes on to ftate that "commercial jealoufies must encreafe with independent legislature," that

without united intereft the political Union will be fubject to many checks which will threaten the connexion." [Some Gentlemen on the Oppofition fide called out bear! béant] -I am very glad to find thefe fentiments fo readily adopted -Gentlemen will have the goodnefs to obferve, that I am not now quoting thefe expreffions as pledges given by that Right Honourable Gentleman that he would fupport a propofal for a Union between the two Countries, but I am adducing them to prove that the fituation the two Countries were in after the final adjustment of 1782, was fuch in that Right Honourable Gentleman's opinion, as led to the danger of a feparation between them. I am not now arguing that a Legislative Union is the only meafure which can poffibly be adopted, but I am contending that the adjustment of 1782, was never confidered as final by thofe who now fate it to

be

be fo as an argument against the confideration of the present measure. How the Honourable Gentleman on the other fide of the House will get rid of this authority I do not know, but I must observe, that it is an authority which he feems much more inclined to treat with respect now than he was formerly.-But, Sir, it does not stop there. What is the evil to which he alludes? Commercial jealousies be tween two Countries acting upon the laws of two independent Legislatures, and from the danger of those Legislatures acting with jealousy to each other.How can this evil be remedied? By two means only; either by fome compact entered into by the Legislatures of the two Countries refpecting the mode of forming their commercial regulations, or elfe by blending the two Legiflatures together; these are the only two means.. I defy the wit of man to point out a third. In fpite of the authority I have been quoting, it hap pened that, urged by doctrines borrowed from this fide of the water, the Parliament of Ireland were convinced that it would be improper to admit of any compact to restrict the power of the Legislatures on commercial fubjects. We have then the authority to which I have alluded, that these jea loufies will threaten a diffolution of the connection. We find that an attempt to restrict by mutual compact failed. The refult then is, that we must remain in the fituation which the Honourable Gentleman defcribes as containing the feeds of feparation; or, we must resort to a restriction upon the two Legislatures by compact, which has been tried and failed; or, we must refort to a remedy on a larger fcale,

I mean, a Legislative Union between the two kingdoms.

Sir, I have perhaps dwelt longer upon this part of the fubject than was neceflary, because I believe there is no man who has afked this question, was the adjustment of 1782a final one? who is not prepared to answer in the negative. But with all the weight of thefe authorities, I have further to add, that experience on the fubject has been decifive, that in the fingle occafion which occurred to feel the effects of jarring legislatures we did feel them, and might have experienced the moft baneful confequences, if we had not been delivered by a circumftance to which no one can look back without the deepeft gratitude. Every Gentleman will fee that I refer to the regency. The two Legiflatures, acting on that occasion upon different principles, vested the public authority upon different tenures in the two Countries. They certainly might with equal confiftency and juftice have led to the appointment of different perfons; and can any man,

after

after that inftructive example, hesitate to fay, that the fecurity for the stability of the connection between the two countries is infufficient, partial, and defective? In one kingdom the office of regent was to be held by one tenure, and in the other by an oppofite one, and thus the link of connection was completely deftroyed. Such an act would have been politically and practically the cause of difcord and feparation, and must have impaired the fecurity of the Empire. If then a queftion has arifen of fo very dangerous a tendency in the fhort space of fixteen years, and that we have found the actual fyftem established between us to have failed in promoting that connection, in the neceffity of which there is no diversity of opinion, I afk, are or are we not authorized, are we.ot rather compelled by the irrefiftible dictates of our duty and our own conviction, to provide against any future contingency? But entering fomewhat deeper into this moft ferious confideration, and looking at the diftinct powers of confidering of peace or war, of difcuffing foreign treaties and alliances on any fuppofed or real grounds of national advantage, which in their unqualified extent muft be allowed to belong to the Parliament of Ireland, will any Gentleman tell me that the decifion of the Irish Parliament might not be one way, and that of the Parliament of Great Britain another? Will any Gentleman undertake to affure us that the Parliament of Ireland would not give different advice to their Sovereign from the Parliament of Great Britain. Will it be advanced that questions of fuch moment should not occur on which the independence and even the existence of either kingdom might be at stake? I believe, Sir, no man will be found bold enough to advance fuch affertions. Are we contented with faying that the fuppreflion of party diftinctions is fufficient? Are we fatisfied with providing a partial cure for the evils and grievances which are so justly complained of? No, Sir! I wish to fpeak out largely for all that are involved in the refult of this great queftion. Ifincerely wish I could difcufs with every man in Ireland his refpective intereft, with a juft reference to the profperity of all. Suppofe the Parliament of Ireland should think the present war unjuft? do Gentleman mean to fay that fuch a difference of opinion could not exist between us? I fhould be glad to have an answer to these confiderations which have been already admitted as just by every man, and even by the Honourable Gentleman whom I have only heard on the subject as a warm friend to perpetual connection. Admitting then this principle, the question is, have we or have we not fufficient grounds

No. 19.

4 Y

grounds to proceed in ftrengthening the ties of union between both countries? We are now engaged in a contest the most awful and important that has ever called for the combined exertion of wisdom, magnanimity, and perfeverance. If then we have a weak point expofed to the open attack and infidious arts of the enemy, and which has been actually attacked in both thefe ways by the enemy, I should fay, let that point be fortified. Ifhould fay fo more decidedly from the nature of the ftruggle in which we have fo gloriously opposed the horrors of revolution with increasing spirit and proportionate perfeverance. I fhould fay fo because we are involved in a conteft of order and regular Government against confufion and anarchy, of morality against boundless and favage licentioufnefs, of religion against impiety, of virtue and focial happiness against vice of the most deteftable kind, and the violation of every social duty, of property against plunder and depredation. These expreffions have been treated as idle declamations, but they are now practised and attefted by the bleeding wounds of devaftated Europe; yet realized as the language has been, it is too feeble to paint in their genuine colouring all the horrors and all the miferies of revolutionary fuccefs. Is there a man who does not feel calculated to augment the ftrength of the Empire, and thereby to enfure its fafety.-Is there then in the actual crifis of public affairs any man that will not feel that to bind Great Britain and Ireland together in a clofer Union against the fatal inroads of France, is a benefit of important and inestimable, not only to ourselves but to the whole world, that even commercial advantages, local confiderations, political importance, muft all fink and appear weak in comparison of that great and indifpenfible object. But even these confiderations will fuffer no abatement from the prefent measure, for they will be greatly increased, while we shall unite to form an infurmountable barrier against the inordinate and fanguinary power of the enemy. I do feel, Sir, that the Irish have a pride in being partners with Great Britain in this great conteft. If they have that pride, they must feel the neceflity of doing every thing to increase the ftrength of the whole Empire. Sir, I need not state that the measure is calculated to produce that effect. There is not in any of the courts of Europe, any ftatefman, so ill read; there is not a man fo little acquainted with the interefts of Great Britain, who will not tell you, that if there be an Union, the ftrength of the empire will be increased in a degree which no other event could produce. There is

not

not a writer, who has not ftated, that it would be for the ftrength of the whole. Does any man, if he could ask the agents of the enemy what would diffolve their hopes, not fee that the answer would be, that while the enemy were labouring to effect a feparation, the connection became more folid and more clofe? Sir, if it were necessary to go further into the fubject, it would be obvious in what degree this must tend to ftrengthen by fortifying the weakest part, and to contribute to the fafety of Ireland more particularly; -that in proportion as the whole collective force is placed under one point, is confufion obviated-and that the Government would thus be ftronger against all enemies. This, however, is a point which is too felf-evident to require any argument.

Another very important confideration is, that the means, by which we have been enabled to refift the unequalled and eccentric efforts of France is, the great commercial resources which we poffefs; a measure then, that muft communicate to fuch a mighty limb of the empire as Ireland is, all the commercial advantages which Great Britain poffeffes; which will open the markets of the one country to the other; which will give them both the common ufe of their capital, muft by diffusing a large portion of wealth into Ireland, confiderably increase the refources, and confequently the ftrength of the empire. But it is not merely in this point of view that I think the question ought to be consideredwe ought to look to it with a view to the permanent interest and security of Ireland. When that country was threatened with the double danger of hoftile attacks by enemies without, and of treason within, from what quarter did the derive the means of her deliverance? from the naval force of Great Britain-from the voluntary exertions of her military, not called for by law-and from her pecuniary refources, added to the loyalty and energy of the inhabitants of Ireland, of which it is impoffible to fpeak with too much praise, and which fhews how well they deserve to be called the brethren of Britons. Their own courage might perhaps have ultimately fucceeded in repelling the dangers by which they were threatened, but it would have been after a long conteft, and after having waded through feas of blood. Great Britain has always felt a common intereft in the fafety of Ireland, and that common intereft was never more obvious than when the common enemy made her attack upon Great Britain through the medium of Ireland, and when their attack upon Ireland went to deprive her of her connection

4 Y 2

with