exported, to and imported from Ireland in that period." The queftion on th's motion was put and agreed to.

On the 19th of March, lord Grenville moved the order of the day to be read, for fummoning their lordships, for the purpose of taking into their confideration the various papers before them, relative to the fituation of Ireland. He entered at large into a recommendation of an union, and answered the objections that had been made to that measure. With regard to the fuppofed exifting bond of connection between the two countries, he was not afraid to fay it was abfolutely null: not that it was imperfect or inadequate but abfolutely null: if the two parliaments were fuffered to remain in their prefent ftate, if the countries clung together by no other bond than the prefent, the connection, he repeated, was abfolutely null. And if this was fuffered, many evils would be neceffarily entailed on their defcendants, if they did not fall on themfelves. He fhould move that the refolutions of the houfe of commons be read pro forma; he fhould then move that the houfe do agree with the refolutions of the house of commons, and laftly move that thefe refolutions be read before his majefty in the form of a joint addrefs from both houfes, with a humble requeft, that his majefty would lay them before the parliament of Ireland, at what time his majefty thould deem moft proper. Earl Fitzwilliam objected to the difcuffion of the fubject under the prefent alarming fituation of affairs, which he attributed to his never having received orders, when at the head of Irish affairs, from the government of Great Britain, to

bring forward the queftion of catholic emancipation.

The marquis of Lanfdown was forry that carl Fitzwilliam's fyftem for Ireland was not proceeded on. But he contended that there was no ufe in making a comparison between the proceedings of 1782, re- ! lative to Ireland, and thofe of the present time The former had for their object the feparation of the two parliaments; the latter had for their object the union of the two parlia ments. He had no doubt but that both the landed and commercial intereft would be benefited by an union, not only in fome local refpects, but on a general fcale. For thefe reafons, he was inclined to adopt all the refolutions alluded to by the noble fecretary of state, except that for the addition of one hundred members for the house of commons. However, if others were fatisfied, he should have nothing farther to fay.

Earl Camden reminded the house, that before the earl of Fitzwilliam left Ireland, there were difturbances in the county of Cavan, and that the kingdom was quiet for nine or ten months after: a proof that the public mind was not affected by the recall of the earl.-Lord Hobart, thought that an union was essential to the prefervation of a connection between the two countries, because, while three-fourths of the people of Ireland were catholics, a proteftant parliament could never he a fatisfactory government for the kingdom.

The marquis of Townshend faid, he would give his vote for the union, but there were many other things to be done before Ireland could recover from its prefent diftreffed fituation. There ought to be refident [Q2] magiftrates

magiftrates, in order to enforce a due obedience to the laws; one very great evil was, the itinerant clergy, who went about the country granting abfolution for the most enormous offences. But the grand and direful fource of the calamities of Ireland, was, the exceffive monopolization of the land, and the number of bankers, fquires, ftewards, tackfmen, and other perfons, between the landlord and the tenant.

Lord Moira faid, there was no perfon who would more heartily concur in the measure proposed than himself, were he fure that it was founded in the wifhes of a majority of the people of Ireland. But the oppofition to it was not limited to the Irish parliament only. It had been treated by the nation at large with an abhorrence amounting almoft to a phrenzy. What could be more calculated to add fuel to the flame than our perfevering in the propofal after it had been fo ftrongly reprobated?

Lord Holland, on the argument for an union, taken from the prefent profperity of Scotland, remarked that it was forty years after the act of union before the commerce of Scotland began to revive from the fhock it had received. There was another fubject, on which he could not avoid faying a few words.Nothing aftonifhed him more than the apathy with which the propofition, for adding one hundred members to the houfe of commons, was received. This invafion of the conftitution was looked to with the moft perfect indifference. This propofition, he faid, was alfo incompatible with the opinion of all those who wished a parliamentary

reform.

The earl of Kinnoull thought the proteftant afcendancy in Ireland

was abfolutely neceffary, as it was not to be fuppofed that a Roman Catholic parliament would not annul the forfeitures of the eftates of their ancestors. But that afcendency would be best secured by an incorporating union. The earls of Carlife and Weftmoreland, both formerly lords-lieutenants of Ireland, did not confider the arrangements of 1782, about which so much had been faid, as final, but merely as fuited to the circumftances of the times, and calculated to remove prefent grievances. The two countries did not intend to bind pofterity and to legiflate for future generations. The duke of Portland, too, faid, that the fettlement of 1782 had not been confidered by him, or any of the cabinet, as a final fettlement.

The refolutions, moved by lord Grenville, were then read and agreed to. And their lordships, having been fummoned, convened on the eleventh of April, when lord Grenville moved the address to his majefty.

Lord Auckland rofe with peculiar fatisfaction to give his fupport to an addrefs to his revered fove

reign of the two kingdoms, for the purpose of communicating their refolutions to the lords and commons of Ireland. Веfore he proceeded to the commercial confiderations, he exami ned the nature of that independence, which, as fome advisers of the people of Dublin afferted, would be fubverted and defroyed by the confolidation of the two legiflatures. He thought it important to afcer tain the value of what Ireland was told flie would lofe, before he proceeded to appreciate what it was that he would gain. He recong nized the independence of the Irish

nation,

nation, abftractedly confidered, as fecured by the arrangement of 1782. But we could not shut our éyes against the truths prefented by the map of Europe, and by the relative fituation, fize, and population of the two islands. What then was, in fact, the independence of a country, which had no means of defence, or fecurity, or felf-prefervation, but through the protection and aid of its more powerful neigh hour? If two countries, fo circumfianced, took adverfe lines of conduct, a ftruggle muft enfue, and either the weaker must be overruled, or confufion and all the evils of war muft follow. If, on the other hand, there fhould prevail between the two an uniform fyftem of conduct, in leading points of common concern, the weaker must be prefumed thus far, virtually and habitually, to have facrificed its exercise of independent power. This delemma lord Auckland applied to the point in queftion. Had Ireland, or could the have, the power of negociating, controling, or even rejecting treaties? Had the the means of protecting her own commerce, or of eftablishing colonies, or of making and holding conquefts? Had fhe, or could he have any naval force? And was not the direction of her military force conformably to the opinion of British minifters, refponfible only to the British parliament? Had the, in fhort, or could fhe have any controul whatever, any interference, or even any concern, otherwife than in a vifionary and abftract claim, refpecting the imperial transactions of peace and war, alliances and confederacies? Had fhe, even in the exercise of legiflation, any access to the royal fanction, otherwife than through British

minifters, not amenable to her parliament, and under the great feal of the British chancellor? But waving all thefe confiderations, and fuppofing Ireland to have every advantage poffeffed by Great Britain, and in an equal degree, ftill however, with one executive power, and with feparate and independent legiflatures: would any individual of a found mind affert, that the entire union of two countries, fuch as now defcribed, would be degrading or detrimental to either? It would be grating, lord Auckland obferved, to the feelings of all their lordships to ftate to Ireland that he was chained down, though by her own prejudices, to a weak and inefficient independence, fubject to inceffant collifions, and infeparable from misfortune and humiliation. It would be ungenerous, he faid, to make such a statement, if it were not in his power to present to her, at the fame time, a real and permanent independence, accompanied by a full participation of British opulence, British greatnefs, and British freedom, with its best companion, British fecurity. It was impoffible to open and contemplate the papers on the table without exultation of mind at fo brilliant an exhibition of the increafing profperity of Great Britain, and of her unexampled pre-eminence among nations. These papers would give their lordships, what had never before been attempted, the true valuation of our whole commerce, according to current prices and other documents, the accuracy of which was inconteftible. It appeared that the total value of our exports and imports, in the year 1798, was ninety-five millions fterling: above twenty-two millions [Q 3]

higher

higher than the average value of the four laft years of peace. But, not withstanding all the exemptions from duties and other encouragements indulged to Ireland, that country, with a population equal perhaps to one-third of the British population, had a trade equal to not more than one-ninth of the trade of Great Britain. It would be idle to imagine that, in a British parliament, this great queftion could be debated with flattery, and complaifance and referves, and on Irifh interefts only. The people of Ireland ought not to be kept in ignorance, that numerous and effential benefits are conferred on them without reciprocity: but that thofe benefits, without union, remain liable, on any eventual difagreement, to a fudden explotion, with the utter ruin of all the Irish interefts dependent on trade and manufactures. Could it be expected, that capitals and commercial credit fhould be tranfferred to a country, ftruggling under an anomalous, incompetent, and difturbed government, and maintaining a claim of right to adopt, at any time, adverfe connections and interefts. Nothing leis than an union could fatisfy thefe queftions. They would not, faid lord Eden, reft on the flimfey and undefined proteftation, fo often repeated and fo imperfectly realized, that "the affections of Ireland are unalienable, and that both kingdoms thall ftand or fall together. Let the union take place, and all commercial diftinctions, and all political jealoufies would be annihilated. What were the multiplied and ineftimable benefits which the propofitions and addrefs. held out to Ireland? The prefervation of her

66

actual advantages, the extenfion of capitals, the increased employments of her people, with the cultivation and foftening of their minds and manners; and, above all, the introduction of a middle clafs, one of the great wants of Ireland, and the moft important link of fecurity between the highest and loweft orders: ftill leaving to her the fame conftitution, the fame liberties, the fame laws, and the fame privileges, which he now enjoyed." My lord," faid lord Eden, in this awful period of crimes and calamities, anfidft the fubverfion of ftates and empires, the fabric of British liberty ftands unfhaken and unmoved. We offer to Ireland the full fecurity of our happiness and fecurity. And unlets Providence fhall have withdrawn from her all mercy and protecting influence, unlefs its difpenfations are to be fuch as to number her among the wrecks of nations, the will gladly and gratefully receive our offers, and will become an integral part of the united empire of Great Britain and Ireland.”

The bishop of Landaff, multa de fe predicans, gave his hearty approbation and cordial fupport to the propofed union. He was afraid left he fhould be confidered by their lordships as a man vexing the reluctant ear with a dull repetition of a tale that had, as it were, been thrice told. But his heart was fo much in that business, and his mind had fo long been accustomed to contemplate it as an object of the first political importance, that he muft intreat their lordhips indulgence whilft he explained his fentiments upon it.

From feventeen to fixtyone, his life had been pleasantly, and he hoped not unprofitably,

pent