but one period in my whole life, (I mean the savage period between 1761 and 1767) in which they have been more harshly or contumeliously treated, than since the last partial enlargement. And thus I am convinced it will be by paroxysms, as long as any stigma remains on them, and whilst they are considered as no better than half citizens. If they are kept such for any length of time, they will be made whole Jacobins. Against this grand and dreadful evil of our time (I do not love to cheat myself or others) I do not know any solid security whatsoever. But I am quite certain, that what will come nearest to it is to interest as many as you can in the present order of things, religiously, civilly, politically, by all the ties and principles, by which mankind are held. This is like to be effectual policy: I am sure it is honourable policy and it is better to fail, if fail we must, in the paths of direct and manly, than of low and crooked, wisdom.

As to the capacity of sitting in Parliament, after all the capacities for voting, for the army, for the navy, for the professions, for civil offices, it is a dispute de laná caprind, in my poor opinion; at least on the part of those, who oppose it. In the first place, this admission to office, and this exclusion from Parliament, on the principle of an exclusion from political power, is the very reverse of the principle of the English Test Act. If I were to form a judgment from experience rather than theory, I should

doubt

doubt much whether the capacity for, or even the possession of, a seat in Parliament, did really convey much of power to be properly called political. I have sat there, with some observation, for nineand-twenty years, or thereabouts. The power of a Member of Parliament is uncertain and indirect: and if power rather than splendour and fame were the object, I should think, that any of the principal Clerks in office, to say nothing of their superiours, (several of whom are disqualified by law for seats in Parliament) possess far more power than nine tenths of the Members of the House of Commons. I might say this of men, who seemed from their fortunes, their weight in their Country, and their talents, to be persons of figure there; and persons too not in opposition to the prevailing party in government.

*

But be they what they will, on a fair canvass of the several prevalent parliamentary interests in Ireland, I cannot, out of the three hundred Members, of whom the Irish Parliament is composed, discover, that above three, or at the utmost four, Catholicks would be returned to the House of Commons. But suppose they should amount to thirty, that is to a tenth part, (a thing I hold impossible for a long series of years, and never very likely to happen,) what is this to those, who are to balance them in the one house, and the clear and settled majority in the other? For I think it absolutely impossible,

that

that, in the course of many years, above four or five Peers should be created of that communion. In fact, the exclusion of them seems to me only to mark jealousy and suspicion, and not to provide security in any way. But I return to the old ground. The danger is not there:-these are things long since done away. The grand controversy is no longer between you and them. Forgive this length. My pen has insensibly run on. You are yourself to blame, if you are much fatigued. I congratulate you on the auspicious opening of your Session. Surely Great Britain and Ireland ought to join in wreathing a never-fading garland for the head of Grattan. Adieu! my dear Sir-good nights to you!-I never can have any.

Yours always most sincerely,

JAK, 29th, 1795.
Twelve at night.

EDMUND BURKE.

A SECOND LETTER

ΤΟ

SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE.

I

My dear Sir,

F I am not as early as I ought to be in my acknowledgments for your very kind Letter, pray do me the justice to attribute my failure to its natural, and but too real, cause, a want of the most ordinary power of exertion, owing to the impressions made upon an old and infirm constitution by private misfortune and by publick calamity. It is true I make occasional efforts to rouse myself to something better but I soon relapse into that state of languor, which must be the habit of my body and understanding to the end of my short and cheerless existence in this world.

I am sincerely grateful for your kindness in connecting the interest you take in the sentiments of an old friend with the able part you take in the service of your Country. It is an instance, among many, of that happy temper, which has always given a character of amenity to your virtues, and a goodnatured direction to your talents.

Your speech on the Catholick question I read with much satisfaction. It is solid; it is convincing; it is

eloquent

eloquent; and it ought, on the spot, to have produced that effect, which its reason, and that contained in the other excellent speeches on the same side of the question, cannot possibly fail (though with less pleasant consequences) to produce hereafter. What a sad hing it is, that the grand Instructor, Time, has not yet been able to teach the grand lesson of his own value; and that, in every question of moral and political prudence, it is the choice of the moment, which renders the measure serviceable or useless, noxious or salutary.

In the Catholick question I considered only one point. Was it, at the time, and in the circumstances, a measure, which tended to promote the concord of the Citizens? I have no difficulty in saying, it was; and as little in saying, that the present concord of the Citizens was worth buying, at a critical season, by granting a few capacities, which probably no one man now living is likely to be served or hurt by. When any man tells you and me, that, if these places were left in the discretion of a Protestant Crown, and these memberships in the discretion of Protestant Electors, or Patrons, we should have a Popish official system, and a Popish representation, capable of overturning the Establishment, he only insults our understandings. When any man tells this to Catholicks, he insults their understandings, and he galls their feelings. It is not the question of the places and seats; it is the real hostile disposition,