next objection was, that Repeal would be followed by separation. Now, why should the people of Ireland wish to be separated from the people of England? Would it be for their interest to be so separated? No; it was for the interest of the people of Ireland to be on terms of the most intimate friendship with those of England. They knew that the market of England was the best they could find for their agricultural produce, and they likewise knew that England could produce manufactures cheaper for the Irish market than any other country, owing to her superiority in skill and machinery. The people of Ireland felt the advantage of British connexion, and they would therefore be madmen if they rejected it. The interest of the two countries was the best chain to bind them together, and far superior to any laws or any parchment. However this motion might be disposed of, he hoped that English Members would not be disposed, by any angry feelings which the discussion might generate, to turn aside from the consideration of the grievances of Ireland. Ireland was now standing at the bar of the House requesting Parliament to be allowed to legislate for herself. The House might say that that request it would never grant; but if it did, he would then implore Honourable Members as Christians, as men, and as Englishmen, to look at the distresses of Ireland and to pity and relieve them. Mr. RUTHVEN then moved the adjournment of the debate. [Cries of 66 'No."] (At this time, it wanted a few minutes to twelve o'clock.) Lord ALTHORP thought that though the hour was late, there was yet time for the Honourable Member to address the House that evening. Mr. RUTHVEN persisted in his motion.

Sir JOHN SEBRIGHT suggested that, if the Honourable Member was not in a condition to speak that night, he would perhaps give way, and allow some other Member to speak in his stead. [Cries of "Divide"

and "Adjourn."]

Strangers were ordered to withdraw, but previously to the gallery being cleared,

Lord ALTHORP rose, and said that if the adjournment were assented to, he trusted the Honourable Member for Dublin (Mr. Ruthven) would not abuse the courtesy shown him by speaking at greater length than was absolutely necessary to-morrow. [Hear.]

Mr. RUTHVEN said he would not trespass unnecessarily on the patience of the House.

The debate was then adjourned till Friday.

FRIDAY, 25th.

The Order of the Day having been read for the resumption of the adjourned debate, the Speaker called on Mr. RUTHVEN, who began by observing, That he was well aware that the question was not very acceptable to the House, and the difficulties under which he laboured were much increased by his want of capability to secure that attention which the importance of the subject demanded. He should, however, be guilty of a dereliction of duty, if he deserted or shrank from the discussion of a question which was spreading through every part of Ireland, as had been admitted by the Right Honourable Secretary for that portion of the realm. He should not advert to the historical facts which had been brought under the attention of the House by his Honourable and Learned Colleague, further than to say they involved matter which ought not to have been met (as had been the case) by rhapsodical rhyme and rhapsodical oratory. ("Hear," from a portion of the Irish Members.) On the contrary, the course which ought to be pursued by a great deliberative assembly entertaining so extensive and important a topic, was rather to deal with it by the exercise of plain common sense. He could not but deprecate the argument which had been raised with reference to the discussion of the question of Repeal at the dinners which, from time to time, were held for the purposes of charity and benevolence, and at which it was impossible to repress the natural disposition of the Irish people to demand repeal. Though he was ready to admit that Ireland did not present a very charming picture of happiness and prosperity, yet that she did not now do so, was attributable to bad government, which could not be improved until she had a legislature better informed as to her domestic wants than at present existed. This was felt by the Irish people, though the Coercion Bill of last year, which had been passed with an indecent haste disgraceful to a legislative body, could put down the cry for Repeal. The Irish people knew this, and they also knew that they were 8,000,000 of men. They were cognizant also of the fact, that they had no means in that House of enforcing what was due to their wants, but that they owed any prosperity they possessed to the mercy and generosity of England. Under such circumstances, it was not surprising that the demand for a Repeal, and the restoration of a domestic Legislature, should be made. Bad as the Parliament of Ireland was at its conclusion, the condition of the country was now still worse, even with the advantage of the control of public opinion over the British Senate. That public opinion would be directed to the restored Irish domestic Legislature an advantage not formerly possessed by the people of that country, for, on the contrary, all objects were achieved by the instrumentality of the corruption of the British Cabinet. At present, Ireland's wants were unknown, even by the political agent of the Cabinet, the Irish Secretary, whose duties called him more than half the year from Ireland, and who must necessarily be, to this extent, an absentee. The Irish people, he repeated, would never rest content until they obtained the restoration of their own domestic Parliament a boon

which, at present, he did not think likely to be granted to them, but of which, after what he had witnessed in respect to another great measure, Catholic emancipation, he did not despair eventually. The Union had been effected by the worst, most cruel, and corrupt means. The best blood of Ireland had been most unrelentingly spilt, and the Irish people still cherished the name of Lord Edward Fitzgerald, and held it as dear, and in as high veneration, as were those of Russell, Hampden, and Sydney, in this country. With the recollection of all these horrors, it was not surprising that every man, every woman in Ireland called for Repeal,-nay, every child was taught to lisp the word Repeal. ["Hear, hear," and a laugh.] He would content himself with reading two or three lines of the opinion held of the Union, by no less distinguished a statesman and patriot than Charles James Fox. Mr. Fox had said, "That the Union was vicious in its principle, abominable in its means, and, as a measure, the most disgraceful ever carried or proposed.' We had heard that Ireland was afflicted by jobs in the time of the Union. The Honourable Secretary had given us a description of the family of jobs. They bribed with judgeships and generalships, but Sir R. Walpole, in his day, managed better, for he paid Englishmen in hard cash. Nay, there was an Englishman, not very remote in point of time, who used to be paid 500/. for every session, and took his proceedings accordingly. 'Ireland did not seek a restoration of its Parliament as it was, but as it ought to be. [Hear.] They wanted a federal union on equal and independent terms. Would the influence of England be more safe in the hands of 300 of the best men in Ireland, in a Parliament of her own, than in the hands of a single man, the Secretary of Ireland? The Honourable Member then proceeded to observe, that, in his opinion, the imposition of an absentee tax was absolutely necessary. While the people of Ireland asked for bread, they received in return the bayonet. He questioned very much the correctness of the returns presented by the Honourable Secretary for the Treasury. In the city of Limerick, before the Union, there was but one pawnbroker, at present there were forty. Before the Union there were 40,000 men receiving 40s. a-week; at present there were but 10,000 men receiving 10s. a-week. There were 50,000 men in Dublin suffering great distress, who depended occasionally on charity to procure for themselves the necessaries of life. The valuation of houses before the Union was 794,000l., and in 1830 only 704,000l., showing a falling off of 90,000l. The returns with respect to linens, were as fallacious as they could possibly be. It costs nothing for a man to put down his name as exporting 10,000l. or 20,0001, in value yearly, instead of 600l. or 700l. England, if the Union were repealed, would flourish in peace and amity with Ireland; but as we were now circumstanced, it was impossible to expect peace or tranquillity. That could only happen when we became amalgamated with Ireland, and Englishmen became Irish-when they came to be looked on as friends instead of enemies and spies.

Mr. J. BROWNE expressed his gratification at finding the question of Repeal at length before the House, and hoped that the ample discussion it was now subjected to, would have the effect of putting an end to the mischievous agitation of the subject which had for some considerable time past prevailed in Ireland. The question, he declared, was not, as it had been represented by Honourable Members opposite, the question

of the Irish people; it was solely the question of the Honourable and Learned Member for Dublin. He did not believe that any portion of the well-thinking part of the population ever viewed the possibility of a repeal of the Union between the countries with any other feeling than that of dismay. He supported the amendment.

Sir D. K. SANDFORD denied that a petition, in favour of the repeal of the Irish Union, lately presented from the west of Scotland, conveyed the opinions of the people of Glasgow on the subject. He admitted that the petition was numerously signed; but observed, that this wa not astonishing, when it was considered that there were 45,000 Irish emigrants settled in the west of Scotland, 35,000 of whom were in Glasgow. He declared himself opposed to the Repeal of the Union, and stated that he held himself up as announcing the sentiments of a vast body of men in that part of the empire from whence he came. He maintained, that the speech of the Honourable and Learned Member for Dublin was rather that of a special pleader than of a statesman, and this because he (Mr. O'Connell) had not attempted to prove either of two propositions, one of which he was bound to establish, in order to show the slightest ground for acceding to his motion. The first was, that Ireland had enjoyed prosperity in an eminent degree before the Union; the second, that if the Union had impeded the prosperity of Ireland, the present time was the fitting one to try the dangerous experiment of Repeal. He remarked, in reference to the financial statements which had been introduced, that regiments of figures were mercenaries that might be pressed into any service. Accounts of imports and exports might show that there was prosperity in a country, but they did not show that it was diffused as a real well-wisher to it would desire. Absenteeism had been the subject of much animadversion. No man could be more sensible than he was of the evils inflicted upon Ireland by those who abandoned the sacred ties which ought to connect them with their country; but he scarcely needed to repeat what had been urged by others who had preceded him, that absenteeism did not commence with the Union. For ages it had been the curse and bane of Ireland. With a view of correcting the evil, a heavy tax was laid absenteeism in the reign of Richard II.; and in the reign of Henry VIII. it was proposed that absentees should be subject to a penalty, amounting to three-fourths of their property. Previously, and about the memorable epoch of 1782, the clamours of Irish society on the subject of absenteeism were loud and frequent. The Honourable and Learned Member for Dublin might find other causes than the Union for absenteeism—for instance, the increase of luxury, and the appetite for foreign travel. Had there been no increase of absenteeism with respect to England and Scotland? The same evils, however, did not result from absenteeism in Scotland as in Ireland, and why? Because, in the former country, the people were peaceable, and disposed to submit to the authority of the law. There were no agitators in Scotland. [Hear, hear.] There were none there who desired to make a trade of agitation. Was there anything in the circumstances connected with the Union between England and Scotland which ought to have rendered that measure more palatable than the Union with Ireland? No; on the contrary, the same justice had not been meted to Scotland as had been dealt out to Ireland. The same measure had never yet been meted out to Scotland. When the Reform Act was passed, Scotland

upon

did not receive the same justice as Ireland. [Hear, from the Irish Members.] He would always maintain that, considering her intelligence, and the amount of her contributions to the State, Scotland deserved better treatment than she received from the framers of the Reform Act. The benefits of the Union did not come all at once upon Scotland. She, too, had her period of distractions. There was a time when she had a Pretender to supreme authority, who agitated the minds of the people, and who had as gallant and devoted followers as ever were found in the train a political pretender; but whose objects, and the means by which it was proposed to attain them, it was impossible to admire in the same degree as their gallantry and devotedness. It was not until the causes of political agitation were removed, and internal tranquillity restored, that Scotland reaped full benefit of the Union. If the Honourable and Learned Member for Dublin required proof of the advantages which Scotland had derived from that measure, he had only to visit the country to obtain it, and he had no doubt he would be received there with the respect due to his talents and great political influence. At the time the Union with Ireland was under discussion, Mr. Pitt referred to the flourishing condition of Glasgow and other Scotch towns, as a proof of the advantages which were to be derived from the connexion of a poor with a rich country. But what would he have said if he had seen Scotland at the present moment? When Mr. Pitt spoke, the Scotch metropolis consisted only of some irregular streets, running up the black rock which was crowned with the castle, and could not have claimed the title it now possessed, of the Queen of the North." Having witnessed the advantages which Scotland had reaped from her union with England, he felt that he should not have fulfilled his duty if he had not raised his voice against a proposition which was pregnant with the greatest evil to both countries. [Hear, hear.]

Mr. H. GRATTAN said, that if he wanted an excuse for supporting the motion of his Honourable and Learned Friend the Member for Dublin, he should find it in the passing of the Coercive Bill by the present Parliament. [Hear.] The Union was said to be a contract. Admitting that it was so, had England fulfilled the terms of the contract? Ireland was promised the laws of England. He need not say that she had not obtained them. This it was of which Ireland complained. She felt that she was not treated as an equal. The Honourable Secretary had talked of the income and expenditure of Ireland,-of her imports and exports, -of everything in fact but her liberty. That word never escaped his lips. [Hear, hear.] The Honourable Gentleman seemed to have forgotten not only his country but the principles which he imbibed there. The Honourable Member then adverted to the recent procession of the Trades' Union being uninterrupted by the authorities, whilst a proposed procession of a Trades' Union to escort the Honourable and Learned Member for Dublin into that city had been prevented by a proclamation. This fact alone was sufficient to prove that the two countries were not governed by equal laws-si argumentum quæris, circumspice. Many Honourable Members who had spoken in the debate appeared to forget the services which Ireland had rendered this country previously to the Union. Ireland made extraordinary exertions before that epoch. In 1753 she paid off a large debt, and retained a surplus of 250,0001. In the reign of George III. she maintained an army of 24,000 men at