to us in 1782, has, on the contrary, at the rifk of lofing this great measure, moft folemnly and explicitly recognised that independence,as Union is no "Conftitutional Queftion," but an imperial arrangement fubmitted to the wifdom of our Parliament, and which that Parliament is competent to reject, and above all, as I acquiefce in the propofition contained in his Majesty's answer to an addrefs in 1782, that "the conftitutional "connexion between Great Britain and Ireland, is effential to "the interefts and happiness of both nations,"*-I am, for these reasons, unable to discover how that pofition on which you fo rely, that the adjustment of 1782 was final--is at all material to the prefent queftion; and I am ready to adopt a measure, which, without repealing that recognition of the Independence of Ireland, feems calculated to give stability to its connexion with Great Britain.

In denying the fettlement of 1782 to have been final, it feems, that Mr. Pitt meant to affert no more than I do.-He could not mean to deny, that that arrangement put a final period to all British clains of legislating for this country, and all doubts refpecting Irish Independence. That he did not intend to difpute this, he has very unequivocally proved, by an explicit admiffion of the independence of our Parliament, and its competence to reject the measure which was fubmitted to its confideration. He feems merely to have deprecated a perverfion of this truth, to the purpofes of falfehood; and, while he admitted that the compact of 1782 was a final fettlement of all controverfies, to have denied that it was a final abolition of the inherent powers of Parliament: that it extinguished or abridged the deliberative or (internally) legiflative capacities of either kgislature; or debarred the Irish Parliament from the unalienable right of employing the fupreme authority of the State, towards attaining the permanent welfare of the Empire-This, I apprehend, was all that he denied ; and heartily do I concur in the denial: deliberately do I record my diffent from thofe, who

* Page 13.

n

J

Britifl who pronounce that, in accomplishing an Union, the B or Irish Parliament would violate the final fettlement of 1782. Imondlowco das graci—ísčţi to jasmslust sai dib Es might not fate accurately (as I have not the printed copy before me,) and therefore I do not attempt to state at all, the "Speech of the British Minifter: merely fuggeft, that he appears to have made no affertion, fubftantially different from nine, upon this quetion. The immenfe fuperiority of his taTents and political knowledge over mine, may have prevented him from treating the fubject as I have done. He, for instance, may have dwelt on the prefumption which arifes, from what paf din the British Parliament on the 17th of May 1782, that fome further meafures of constitution were then in the e contemplation of the British Legiflature.st 85vite tash oqsil dODI edino va ashladi 12. ⠀ bag.los I nadı svůulub bas By The fact (you tell us)" feems to be, that the resolution in respect to future measures had commerce, only, in view. "|| 3. „obsini ego exstaen doldiw jetobgend owɔ sat to soupt

In the above paffage you appear to admit fome further arrangements to have been in contemplation which, whether they were commercial, you can but conjecture, and we may be allowed to doubt. But fuppofe they were. Still the fact were.Still fupplies this inference, that the Compact of 1782 did not preclude the Parliaments of thefe countries from keeping up a friendly and federative intercourse, and entering into fuch new >compacts as circumstances might requireorqAndo why not into a political, as well as commercial Compacts? The Agreement of 17821had decided a point in issue; it had put an end to controversy, not to intercourse, between the countries; and they still, compatibly with the fpirit of that contract, were at liberty to enter on any new treaty, political or commercial, provided, sin concluding on abandoning it, the Irish Parliamenty wasɗallowed to exercife ass uncontroled a difcretion as as the British andy/in fhort, provided the bafise of the tranfaction was an acknowledgement of that independence which we established in 8. But the Addrefs of the Irish Commons to his Majefty, at that period, having (with truth) denied that " any other "alɔ729. to ensom sa Parliament

3

"Parliament hath authority in this country, fave, only the "Parliament of Ireland," therefore a Legislative Union would difturb the settlement of 1782 !-I deny the conclufion. It is only one of the numerous forms, in which the unproved and untenable affertion appears, that, after Union, the Supreme Authority would not continue vefted in the Parliament of Ireland; and can have no influence on any minds, but thofe which confound Diftinctnefs with Independence, and Union with Subordination. After Union, the power of legislating for this country would ftill remain vefted in the Parliament of Ireland, if, at this day, the Parliament of England be that of Yorkshire, or the Parliament of Ireland be that of Dublin; and, if the contrast between the number of Irish and British Representatives in the United Parliament, were less filly and delufive than I contend it is, ftill, of the inferiority on the part of Ireland I might say, as on another occafion you have done, that "if it created a theoretick difference in the confti"tution of the two kingdoms, which renders ours inferior, it

is one, not injurious to us, but necessary from our fituation in the Empire, and which fecures Union and Connexion on a firm and lafting bafis." With far more justice may this language be appropriated to the measure which I am fupporting, than to the more invidious, yet lefs effectual one to which you apply it.

Union would proportion Irish Legislative weight to the importance of this country, in point of territory, &c. and thus that inferiority, (which, when our interefts were identified, muft befides be uninjurious,) would be one arifing from our phyfical fituation, and derived rather from the law of nature than of convention; but the modification of Poynings' Law, which you extol,* for having put one of the co-ordinate eftates of the Independent Irish Parliament in abfolute dependence on the British Legiflature, this ftatute, I fay, without which

§ This answer will also apply to p. 8, where the same reasoning is infinuated in the following paffage:" While Ireland retains a Parliament, fhe has the means of redress,"

C:

you admit that the boafted arrangement of 1782 would have been imperfect, lamely and incompletely achieves its purpofe of ftrengthening the connexion, by delivering Irish Independence into the guardianship of a British Minifter, and thus proportioning our inferiority, not to our relative natural fiturtion, but to the poffible caprice, or ignorance, or wickedness, or ufarping policy of an Individual, or a Cabinet.I will admit, what it might be disrespectful to affert, that the arrange-ment of 1782 was imperfect; (and if so, its deficiencies were ill supplied by the statute which I have just noticed,) but it, in my opinion, laid a glorious foundation for that meafure, which I ftill conceive to be neceffary, towards permanently confolidating the ftrength and interefts of the Empire: it raifed us from that fubfervient fituation, in which England might have dictated to us the terms of Union; and by restoring or afferting the Independence of this country, it enabled us to treat on equal terms, and to dictate, in our turn, the only Union we would accept. I will not difparage that fettlement which fixed the Conftitution of this kingdom, by, on the one hand, forgetting that it has raifed us to a fituation, from whence we can treat fecurely and advantageously with the Sifter Country; or, on the other hand, by infisting that it has paralyfed our Parliament, and precluded them from directing those powers which a Supreme Legiflature muft poffefs, towards accomplishing what they deem conducive to the profperity of the Irifh People.

1.9"

But, if the work of 1782 was incomplete, why were not the meafures followed up to their completion?”* Why was not an Union then accomplished? many caufes may have prevented it. Perhaps this was not precifely the further meafure, which was in the contemplation of the ministry of that day perhaps the prejudices, or if you pleafe, the temper of the Irish people, were not then fuch as to promise a cordial reception of the measure: to have offered Union, when we demanded independence-might have feemed a fort of

jealous compromife, and brought a fufpicion upon the project, as if it were fomething lefs valuable than what our Parliament had afked. In the excited ftate of the Trifh mind, at that day, it might have been impolitick to have afforded them even a lefs pretext for jealoufy and discontent: nay, the cooleft Trifli patriotifm-if an Union had been then propofed might have plaufibly, at leaft, objected to the incorporation of the countries, -under the relative circumftances in which they food: might have demanded a recognition of Irifh independence, as a preliminary fecurity for our obtaining Union, on beneficial and honourable terms, and meantime required a trial of the effects of this independence, as a reafonable experiment, and one gratifying to the feelings of a proud and generous people. If any evils have arifen from independence, yet before it had existence, they could not be felt, and might not be forefeen. The trial, however, has now been fully made. It is fince 1782, that the Commercial Propofitions have been refused, that the tranfaction of the Regency has taken place, and that bills, for Parliamentary Reform, have fortunately been rejected, which, if they had paffled, (as they might have done) would have fapped the connexion, by deftroying the fimilitude of the imperial Parliaments, and giving Ireland a legislature, differently conftituted from that of Britain. It is fince 1782, that France has become a monster, devaftating Europe, and manifefting fuch diftinguished hoftility to Britain, as calls upon us, to confolidate the defenfive force of that empire, of which, you admit, we forma conftituent and infeparable part."* It is within the fame interval, that under French aufpices, feparatifm has flourished fo formidably in this country, and ripened to a 1. Rebellion, of which, (spite of the "perpetual pledge of amity,"t by which we were pronounced to have been indiffolubly coponected," in 1782,) the object was not to frengthen our connexion with Great Britain. It is fince 1782, that religious difcord has affumed a character of fo much animofity, as to. fuggeft, that whilft on the one hand, it may, in our prefent fituation,

€