demanded their rights, which had been ufurped from them, the fame tone, and on the fame vantage ground, as the Bill of Rights of England. They ftated their rights and privileges to be their unalienable birth-right; and they were accordingly acceded to them under the moft folemn fanctions that could be given; under the fanction of an Act of Parliament, of a Meffage from his Majefty, and of the Addreffes of both the Parliaments of Great Britain and Ireland. Had not this been done, and had not the people, as well as the Parliament of Ireland, confidered the fettlement as final and conclufive, and their independence to be completely eftablifhed, is to be fuppofed that their Volunteers would fo cheerfully have laid down their arms, which they had fo readily taken up for the purpose of obtaining it? Did they fuppofe that you were only laying by for an opportunity to to come and fay, the fettlement of 1782, inftead of connecting the two countries, can only produce difcord, and there is no remedy but a Union? Had the Irish at any time any rea fon to think that there was any thing in the fettlement of 1782, which was inimical to the good understanding between the two countries? Were they ever told that the time must come when there must be a revision of that which they confidered as a final adjustment? When an unforeseen cafe occurred in a cause in the Court of King's Bench, for which provifion was made, and the Bill brought in for the purpose fhowed the understanding on the subject, for it was a Bill to fettle fuch points as have arifen or may arife as to points of Legislation and Judicature, why did not the Right Hon. Gentleman fay then that he thought fo much neceffary to complete what was done in 1782? Can there be a ftronger argument that this was the opinion of all descriptions of perfons than the length of time which had elapfed, without the least idea being broached by the Right Honourable Gentleman, or any one elfe, that any further conftitutional point was neceffary to be urged in order to maintain the connexion which the Right Honourable Gentleman now fays is in danger of being deftroyed without a Union, But it was not only the people of Ireland that thought that adjustment final, the whole conduct of the Government of Great Britain fhewed that they were of the fame opinion.-To prove this, Sir, I need only refer to a Bill brought forward by the Right Honourable Gentleman himself, foon after the period alJuded to, for the purpofe of fettling all doubts that did or might exift between the two countries. There was not a word then faid by him that the independence granted to Ireland Ireland in 1782, was likely to destroy the connexion, unJefs it was followed up by fome other conftitutional queftion. In the year 1785, when the Right Honourable Gentleman brought forward his commercial propofitions, even upon that occafion, he did not fay that the adjustment of 1782 was infufficient. I remember very well the arguments with which he fupported the Propofitions. He began by reading the Refolutions of 1782, and threw it in our faces, that we had not followed up the measure by doing that which he was then doing. From this I collect that he thought he was doing all that remained to be done, after the adjustment of 1782, by bringing forward his Commercial Propofitions. He declared, that if he could fuppofe it would create the fmalleft jealoufy in the Irish people or Parliament, relative to their independence, that, great as the advantages were that he expected would refult from the propofitions being carried into effect, he would forego them all, rather than even risk it. This was a fecond proof given by this country to Ireland, that she was not mistaken in fuppofing that the adjustment of 1782 had fettled all Conftitutional differences between, the two countries. And yet, Sir, though he would not even rifk the railing fuch a jealoufy at that time, he now will obftinately perfift in pushing forward the present measure, and forcing it upon the Irish people in their hour weakness-Sir, I fay force it on them, for the declarations of the Right Honourable Gentleman and his fupporters, that they mean to ufe no force but that of reafon, is frivolous in the extreme. The Right Honourable Gentleman fays, the Irish cannot defend themselves against either their foreign foes or domeftic traitors, without the affiftance of our troops-they cannot obtain any commercial advantages without the confent of the English Parliament-that confent of Parliament you must not hereafter expect to have-thofe troops which have protected you we will withdraw;-and yet this is faid to be nothing more than the force of reafon;-added to this, that out of one hundred and fixteen placemen in the House of Commons, every man has been turned out who has fhewn virtue and refolution enough to follow the dictates of his conscience, and vote against an Union. If this is not force, I don't know what can be faid to constitute that power. In the fame pompous manner, the Right Honourable Gentleman proceeds to talk of the equality and independence of the Irifh Parliament, in treating with that of England.-Gentlemen on the other fide have appeared very much hurt that any comparison fhould fhould be made between the prefent measure and the conduct of the French with refpect to thofe countries which they had forcibly united to France. Sir, whatever Gentlemen may fay upon that point, I do not hesitate to fay, that I think the comparison is juft. We on this fide of the House are few in number, and in the difgraceful fituation of being out of office. I really am at a lofs to conceive upon what grounds it is that the Right Honourable Gentleman thinks that that period of a man's life which he fpends out of office is dif graceful to him. The Right Honourable Gentleman, and his friends about him, would no doubt approach their latter end with complacency in the recollection of a well spent life, in which there were fo few blots, and ftains of oppofition; but they ought to be content to enjoy this happiness without reproaching others with their misfortune in being excluded from the fatisfaction of an official career. But Gentlemen take fire at our making any comparison between their conduct and that of France-Whatever guilt there belongs to that comparison, I am ready to bear my fhare of it. Sir, I will maintain that there is by no means that diffimilarity between them and the Right Honourable Gentleman which would induce the House to believe, and in fhewing that the Right Honourable Gentleman is an imitation of the French, I honour my Honourable Friend for having felected that as the very worst measure of the kind which they have adopted. The Right Honourable Gentleman has upon this occafion exerted much of his eloquence; and if we were to be frightened with it, we should never attempt to answer him; for my own part, I confess I am not awed at it; for I have generally obferved, that when he finds his argument is weak, he exerts his powers of oratory to divert our attention from it. The Right Honourable Gentleman made a very flourishing defcription of the equality of the measure as taken up by two independent Parliaments upon terms of the most mutual benefits, and drew a frightful picture of the proceedings of the French in Switzerland-but I dare fay a French declaimer. would without much difficulty drawn an equally horrible one of the prefent meafure. Should we hear fuch a man fay, that a great and powerful independent nation had been in clofe connexion with a lefs powerful one; than in the hour of their trial and neceflity, the more powerful nation had aflifted the other with money, troops, &c. but that when they found them reduced to the greatest weakness, they come and declare we will withdraw our troops, and refufe you any further pecuniary pecuniary affiftance, unless you yield us up your independence, and become united with us. Such a French declaimer, Sir, I infift, might easily fhew that our proceeding is as truly Jacobin, and fraught with as much real tyranny, as the proceedings of the French in Switzerland. The Right Honourable Gentleman pretends, that he does not mean to urge this matter further than paffing these Resolutions, till fuch time as the Irish Farliament fhall be agreeable to adopt the measure propofed. We do not wish to compel the Irish Parliament; we only wish them to reconfider it when they are more cool and more capable of judging. You fay to them, you depend upon us for protection, and for every thing that is dear to you; you are intoxicated now, but when we think you are in a fituation to judge, then we will let you: that is to fay, we will never admit you to be in a state fit to judge till you agree with us. Is this giving the means of judging freely? I do fay, Sir, this is imitating the conduct of France. It makes no difference to fay, we intend to do them good: I fay, you have no right to do it by force. Does not the Minister give me room for fuppofing that he means to use intimidation or corruption, when I find that every placeman who does not agree with him is turned out of office? Is not this intimidation and corruption? I am very far from wishing to use words that are offenfive to any body. It is not right to impute motives to any Gentleman. But really, Sir, one cannot but recollect that many Gentlemen who now fupport that Right Honourable Gentleman, went over to him on pretence of fupporting Religion and Order, and yet that every one of thefe Gentleman have either taken a place, a penfion, or a job. I don't fay thefe places, &c. were the cause of their going over, but they were the confequence. I think they ought to have taken care not to have left the least ground for any imputation on their motives. But, Sir, it is easy to perceive the steps which he will take to forward the difpofition of the Irish Parliament on this head. He has got the means of corruption and intimidation in his power, and no man can be fo blind to what has already been done, as not to know they will be exerted to the utmost. Sir, I must beg leave to fay a few. words in obfervation of what has fallen from the Right Honourable Gentleman, relative to the tranfactions of Lord Fitzwilliam's adminiftration. I ftated, in the early part of this night's debate, from the authority of his Lordship's letter, that he had been authorised to accede to the total emancipation of the Catholics, and that in confequence of the hopes of the Catholics being b... defeated defeated by his Lordship's recal, originated all the calamities which have fince followed, of difcontents, infurrection, and rebellion, which in the fame letter are prophetically foreseen and foretold by his Lordship. The Right Honourable Gentleman fays, Catholic emancipation was not the object of the Rebellion-I know it was not, but it was made a very powerful inftrument in it. I am fully perfuaded, that if the conceffion had been given to the Catholics which was promised by Lord Fitzwilliam, the evils that have fince happened would have been avoided. Was it not notorious, that those who wished for the feparation of the two countries were alarmed at the idea of Lord Fitzwilliam's Plan being carried into execution? They were rejoiced at his recall, and they dread nothing so much as his return to Ireland. It was evident, therefore, that thofe who were anxious to foment the Rebellion were quite averfe to Catholic Emancipation. On a former occafion, Sir, when an enquiry was moved for in that business, the Right Honourable Gentleman refused to accede to it. His Lordfhip challenged an enquiry in the other House of Parliament, which was also denied. The Right Honourable Gentleman now fays, that "no fuch authority was ever given and therefore no fuch authority could ever be withdrawn.". The Right Honourable Gentleman and his Lordship are therefore at iffue on that point, and it is become highly neceffary to be known to which of them that dreadful refponfibility attaches, for having drawn down so many miferies and calamities on that ill fated country. And here, Sir, I am led naturally to recollect that the Right Honourable Gentleman denied those calamities were owing to the hopes of the Catholics being dafhed away. He fays it has been proved on the confeffion of a Gentleman, whom he diftinguished by the appellation of my Friend, and to whose character, he obferved, I gave teftimony at Maidftone. Sir, there are fometimes circumftances attending the mode and manner of delivering a very few words which make a confiderable alteration in the effect they have on those who hear them: and fuch appeared to me to be the tone and emphasis with which the Right Honourable Gentleman accompanied the words I now allude to. Sir, I wish with all my heart the whole of that business could be inquired to, I would court the difcuffion with great eager nefs; but as that cannot be, I beg to fay a few words on the fubject of my evidence at Maidstone. Mr. Arthur O'Con nor was there tried for high treafon, in being implicated in a paper which invited the French to invade this country. This was the only charge against him, and the only one on |