we are called upon to discuss a bargain which we have not the power to conclude, and on the merits of which, one of the parties, whofe confent is abfolutely neceffary to give it effect, has declared diftinctly they will not liften to the very preliminary of the propofal; but to which, upon the inftant they object, as containing a principle which is inconfiftent with their most facred rights, at variance with the very effence of that fyftem of government, under which they fay, they have already thriven; in which the party will not entertain the first preliminary; that they conceive it to contain a principle. Sir, under fuch circumstances I fhould have thought that the Right Hon. Gentleman might have fpared us this debate, which at best is useless, and which may probably do that, which his Majefty's Meffage purposes to avert, may increase, I fay, thofe calamities, and add to those miseries, which the authors and advisers of this measure fay it is their object to fettle and compofe. It is therefore, Sir, that I join my voice to those who deprecate the injudicious and ill-advifed determination to commit this Houfe to a project, which every principle of policy, and every dictate of prudence, oppofes. Now, Sir, I fhould think that the very confideration of the ferment which the agitation of this fubject has occafioned in Ireland, would be fufficient to induce the House to fufpend, if not wholly to abandon, the measure for the prefent. I fay, Sir, that a fincere intention to do that which is the object of his Majefty's Meffage, ought to induce us to defift from entering upon a difcuffion of the prefent meafure. As to the principle upon which it is founded, the Right Hon. Gentleman contends there can be no doubt. All men, he fays, must be friends, at leaft profeffed friends, to the cementing and confolidating as much as poffible the connexion between the two kingdoms. I admit we are, but I hope with this limitation, that we are bound to preferve the purity and freedom of our own conftitution. Sir, to every measure under that limitation, every true Irishman, every true Englishman, must be a friend; and I hope I fhail not be thought to derogate from thofe feelings to which I lay claim, when I fay that much of my private happiness depends upon the maturing that connexion, which I hope will be indiffoluble. But what I defire is, a cordial, an harmonious connexion between the two countries. I wish for an Union; but when I say this, I mean fomething more than mere words. I wish for an Union of interefts and affections; an Union of zeal for the cominon fovereign of both. It is this fpecies of Union, and this only that can tend to increafe

creafe the real ftrength of the Empire, and give it fecurity against any danger. But, Sir, in an Union of Legiflatures, accompanied by a difunion of hearts, whofe principle contains within itself the germ and feeds of difaffection; in fuch an Union, I can fee only an increase of weakness, not an augmentation of strength; and instead of cordial and harmonious co-operation, we can only expect from it an aggravation of the evils which we deplore, jealoufy, diftruft, animofity, concealed refentment, waiting only for an opportunity to act with effect. Let us here apply this principle to the cafe now before us, and let us not be mifled by mere words, and by the skill of the Right Hon. Gentleman in putting them together, and by his telling us it is neceffary. The Right Hon. Gentleman has afferted that this measure is abfolutely neceffary, and well adapted for the fafety of Ireland under its prefent circumftances. This is an affertion which, I think, he has failed to prove. Before the Right Hon. Gentleman could get the length of a legislative Union between the two countries, it was neceffary for him to have shewn that fuch a measure was not only a fit one, but that there was fomething in the times imperioufly to call for it [a cry of bear! hear! from the Ministerial fide of the Houfe.] The applaufe, Sir, which I obferve this fentiment gains, was to be expected. I know that it has been endeavoured to make out this pofition, but I contend, that in the endeavour the Right Hon. Gentleman has failed. I fay, that it was neceffary for him to have made out this ground, before he propofed the measure. Great evils undoubtedly exift in Ireland -but, do they owe their origin to the Legislature of Ireland? Or are they likely to be removed by this propofed Union? Thefe are the two questions on which I will own the Right Hon. Gentleman has fairly put the matter, and on which depend the whole merits of the measure before us, and in that light do I mean to argue it.-To begin then, I would ask, are the evils of which the Right Hon. Gentleman complains as exifting in Ireland, and which call for remedy, arifing from the circumstance of Ireland poffeffing a feparate Legif lature? That Ireland has an independent legiflature is true. That with that legiflature great calamities have happened in Ireland is alfo true; but I know that the Right Hon. Gentleman is much too good a reafoner, that because these two things are co-exiftent, that therefore the one of them must be confidered as the caufe, and the other the effect. They may poffibly have reference to, or dependence on one another. Here, I am aware, he will contend, as was done

on

on a former occafion, that I am the advocate of the good conduct of the Irish Parliament; against this I will endeavour to guard.

I am aftonished to hear that the Parliament which has been the conftant theme of his panegyric, that the very Parliament which has been allowed by him to have faved the kingdom by its wisdom and vigilance, fhould be confidered by him as incompetent to provide for the happiness and fafety of Ireland. I am aftonished that the fpeech which praises the unparalleled magnanimity of its proceedings, fhould in a fubfequent paragraph propose its diffolution. I fay, Sir, it does furprise me that to that Parliament all the evils fhould be afcribed. When I have faid in this Houfe that the Parliament of Ireland was governed by corruption-when I have faid, and others have faid with me, that there was so much corruption in the Parliament of Ireland, that Peerages were granted to men who poffeffed Boroughs, the Members for which voted for Government-when we alledged thefe things, and what was a great deal more ferious than alledg ing, offered to prove them at your Bar, fhould the House give us leave to inftitute the enquiry; and when we found that, by the advice of the Right Honourable Gentleman, this House refufed to enter upon that enquiry, we protefted against his advice, although the House adopted it—but I think it is a little fingular, that he who accufes others of the trick of changing their fentiments for the purposes of the moment, fhould on the fudden himself turn round and change the whole of his tone upon this fame subject; that he whose fuppofed influence is faid to have directed the majority of that Legislature, but who certainly never did use any influence with that Legislature, but who happened to concur with him, fhould now fuddenly turn round, and not only speak with contempt of them, but also appear to be angry with any perfon who can poffibly fee any virtue in any one of their efforts, is certainly matter of astonishment even to those who are most accustomed to fudden changes of political opinions. But has the Irish Parliament fupported a fyftem of measures which the Right Honourable Gentleman disapproves? I ask this question: I defire to have an answer. -Is not the fyftem that has been adopted in Ireland, the very one which he would have recommended to an united Parliament? How then can one be the cause of the evil, and how can the other be the probable remedy ?-But I look to other reasons. It is not, I fay, the feparation of the legiflatures which has occafioned the evils. It has been No. 21. owing

owing to the conduct of Government, and for which I fay the Right Honourable Gentleman is refponsible, unless he can fhew that all the meafures of Ireland were forced upon him by the sturdy difpofition of the Irish Parliament, which he had no means of preventing, and which nothing can prevent but an Union. Nothing fhort of proof to this effect can justify the measure which is now before us. But is it true that any of the evils of which the people of Ireland complain, have originated from the obftinacy of their Parliament? Have they not rather originated from the obstinacy of Government; from the obftinacy and crooked fyftem of the Right Honourable Gentleman himself, and indeed of too many of his predeceffors? Look at the History of Ireland, and, I fay, you will find that if it had not been for the interference of British Councils, and of British intrigue, none, or at least, but few of the evils which are now fo much felt there, would ever have taken place-evils of which Government is the parent, and yet which are now made the reason for taking away all the femblance of liberty among the Irish people. There are feuds and religious animofities, and heats and diffenfions now in Ireland, and they distract that country. Who has excited them? [a prodigious cry of bear! hear! hear!] Who has created thefe feuds and religious animofities? Who has created thefe diffentions?-Who has endeavoured to fet up one party in that country against another; and which has brought it into fuch a ftate of diftraction? [Hear! hear! hear!] The Right Hon. Gentleman makes a plea of those very feuds, which he has engendered; he makes a plea of thofe very jealoufies which he himself excited. [Here a violent and reiterated cry of hear! hear!] He acts in the exact manner defcribed by one of our poets;

"The fecret mischief which I firft did brood,

"I fet upon the charge of others."

The mifchiefs which the Minifter does, he imputes to others. He raifes the hopes of the Catholics; he holds out to them the expectation of being relieved from grievances; he difappoints thefe hopes; he defeats this expectation; and then party appears, and religious diffentions are made the pretence. Is this the fact, or is it not? Sir, let us advert to the period, when Ireland was happy enough to escape for a time from British intrigue. I am not imputing this mode of conduct to the prefent Minifter alone; unfortunately the fyftem adopted towards Ireland by Minifters who preceded him was a fimilar one. But look at the periods when the

Irish nation had a temporary efcape from the influence of British intrigue; look at the period of 1782, in the glorious ftruggle which they made for their independence. Why, Sir, what was the cafe then? Were there any religious dif fentions? At that time, when the Reprefentatives of 143 corps met; when the Proteftants were most numerous in the north; when they met at Dungannon, did they confine themselves to the mere right of independence? On the contrary, at that meeting did they not exprefs their opinion in favour of religious toleration, in words which are remarkable: "They hold the right of private judgment on reli"gious opinions, to be as facred in others as in themselves; "and, therefore, as Irishmen and as men, they rejoiced in "the relaxation of the penal laws against the Catholics, a "relaxation fraught with the happiest confequences." In this there is nothing like animofity, or hatred of the enjoyments of others. These were the genuine feelings of men who were declared independent, and always will be, when they are left to themfelves. But this good and happy temper has been spoiled-other feelings have been artfully excited in that country. I fee what the Right Honourable Gentleman alludes to, when he wishes to direct the attention of the Houfe to the last part of the opinion which I have just read. He means to contend that all which thefe reprefentatives meant to exprefs their approbation of, was of the measures of relaxation then adopted; but I fay, Sir, it goes to the approval of the fyftem of general relaxation. But to come to a time more recent-to the year 1794. Lord Fitzwilliam went to Ireland, not inftructed indeed, that is a phrafe to which the Right Honourable Gentleman would object-but certainly authorised to grant emancipation to the Catholics. How was that received? By a difunion among the Proteftants?-No! with chearfulness. But there was then in Ireland a small party, confiderable neither in talents nor confequence of any worthy kind, to whom the Right Honourable Gentleman liftened; the fyftem was altered-the gleam of hope held out to the Catholics was deftroyed. Lord Fitzwilliam, who was authorised to hold it out, and had taken delight in a task fo agreeable to his feelings, was fuddenly recalled. From that moment every thing became gloomy. Difappointment begot difcontent-difcontent, averfionaverfion, hatred; all this afterwards broke out in these acts of violence, which occafioned what the Right Honourable Gentleman, the other night, was pleafed to call a lamentable but neceffary feverity. Measures were then adopted, and

5 12

feverities