fitted to legislate for Irishmen, than that of Ireland with its experience?

With respect to the general effect of intimidation, it did not rest upon presumption. Had not a threat been thrown out, in what might be considered as an official proclamation, that the troops which had been sent to Ireland might be withdrawn, that the money with which she was aided might be withholden, and the country left helpless and devoted? Must not the Irish, then, who have supported the connection, feel that they are not at li berty to choose? Such insinuations an Irish clerk or secretary had thought proper to throw out in his official pamphlet. The effect then upon the Irish must be, that it is impossible for them to come to a free discussion of the subject. Such hints from

persons in office, and the dismissal of the best friends of Ireland from office, warranted this inference, that if a person, whether in or out of office, should oppose the Union, he will be considered as a traitor to his country? What must be the effect upon the minds of the officers and volunteers throughout the kingdom? He was willing to believe, that the noble lord at the head of affairs in Ireland had been directed to do what had been alluded to, and that it was not of his own accord. But to talk of free will under such circumstances was only adding mockery to injustice, and insult to injury.

He contended that the adjustment proposed would only unite two wretched bodies; that the minds would still be distinct; and that eventually it might lead to separation. The king of Sardinia had lately consented to the surrender of his territory, and said it was right; but did any one believe that the consent was real? The case was the same with respect to Ireland. We could not have her real consent; we do not wish it, or would not have had recourse to corruption and intimidation. They had heard much abuse of French principles; but he recommended the abstaining from French practices. Let no suspicion be entertained that we gained our object by intimidation or corruption; let our Union be an union of affection and attachment, of plain dealing and free will; let it be an union of mind and spirit, as well as of interest and power; let it not resemble those Irish marriages which commenced in fraud, and were consummated by force. Let us not commit a brutal rape on the independence of Ireland, when by tenderness of behaviour we may have her the willing partner of our fate. The state of Ireland did not admit such a marriage; her bans ought not to be published to the sound of the trumpet, with an army of 40,000 men. She was not qualified for hymeneal rites, when the grave and the prison held so large a share of her population.

Some delay in this matter could produce no danger; and it was incumbent on the projectors of the plan to state the reasons, which rendered them so eager to press it. As they had not explained their motives, he had been obliged to have recourse to the castle pamphlet as to the proclamation of the Irish government. That author offered singular reasons for dispatch; a dread of the continued influence of the pope and the intrigues of the British anti-ministerial party. He had also a singular mode of quieting the Catholics, by making them desperate, by telling them that they had nothing to hope from their parliament. "Dissatisfaction (said the pamphleteer) would sink into acquies66 cence, and acquiescence soften into content."

A very

66 pretty sentence," said Mr. Sheridan," for a novel!" But what right had the author to assume, that when the Union should have taken away the rights of the Catholics, their dissatisfaction would sink into acquiescence? On the topic urged by the pamphleteer, respecting the expediency of making use of a time of war and embarrassment to accomplish the wishes of Britain, in return for the advantage taken by the Irish volunteers on a former occasion, and by the United Irishmen at a more recent period, he remarked, that the indignation of every man of honour must be roused by such an appeal to the spirit of revenge. Such arguments weighed so lightly against the disadvantages of the measure, that he could not but condemn the precipitancy with which it was brought forward.

Mr. Sheridan then stated the probable risque of changes in our political system, fron the introduction of 100 members into the British House of Commons; members who, having sacrificed the parliament of their own country, might not be scrupulously tender of the British constitution. He then disputed the competency of the Irish legislature to sacrifice itself and transfer its power to the British legislature.

Mr. Sheridan concluded with moving an amendment,* expressing the surprise and deep regret with which the house learned from his majesty that the final adjustment, which, upon his gracious recommendation, took place between the kingdoms in the year 1782, and which, by the declaration of the parliaments of both countries, placed the connection between them upon a solid and permanent basis, had not produced the effects expected from that solemn settlement; and also intimating, that his majesty's faithful commons, having strong reason to believe that it was in the contemplation of his ministers to propose an Union of the legislatures of the two kingdoms, notwithstanding the said adjustment, felt it to be their bounden duty, impressed as they were with the most serious apprehensions of the consequences of such

*7 Parl. Reg. p. 592.

a proceeding at this time, to take the earliest opportunity humbly to implore his majesty not to listen to the counsel of those who should advise or promote such a measure at the present crisis, and under the present circumstances of the empire.

Mr. Canning first answered the allegations of Mr. Sheridan with regard to the adjustment of the year 1782. That agreement, he said, was termed final in one of the resolutions then adopted; but, from a subsequent vote, it appeared that the idea of establishing some more permanent system never had been relinquished. An attention to the true import of that vote would remove all imputation of impropriety and inconsistency from the measure then proposed. The late numerous and momentous events in Ireland rendered England more particularly interested in whatever concerned that kingdom. A most foul rebellion had broken out in that country, which, by the wise and vigorous measures of government, had been checked, though not totally quelled; party heats and animosities still existed; factions still remained, whose leaders did not merely aim at the expulsion of this or that set of ministers, who aimed not at a partial reform of this or that political abuse, real or pretended; but whose views threatened the annihilation of the government and constitution of Ireland, and the total ruin of all connection between that country and this? The existence of the horrid conspiracy was proved by the avowals of self-convicted traitors, who were not penitent, but still entertained hopes of accomplishing the plots, which had been detected by the vigilance of parliament, and of the executive government, and which would have laid the capital of the country in ashes, and destroyed every thing that was valuable or dear to the inhabitants: after the detection then of these deep and damned plots, was it not a matter of urgent necessity to devise and adopt the most effectual means of counteracting the pernicious consequences that might otherwise flow. from them, consequences that not only affected the continuance of the connection between the two countries, but which deeply struck at the prosperity and very existence of both?

Hence, the high importance of the object was evident. It was not the making of a provincial regulation, the adjustment of an internal difference, or the arrangement of a plan for balancing parties; it was nothing less than to secure Ireland to us and to herself, and thus to promote the happiness and security of the whole empire. It would have been more fair and candid, more like a statesman and patriot, deliberately to examine the plan before he would reject it, and then, if he could suggest any other scheme by which such a desirable object could be attained, to state it for the consideration of the house. He had not, how

In

ever, said that he possessed any such plan; and therefore the house ought not to reject the discussion of that proposed to them. Mr. Canning defended the consistency of Mr. Cook's pamphlet ; and then referred to a work written by Dr. Duigenan, and observed, that one of more convincing argument and more sound truth he had never seen. The author, he thought, had confuted his antagonist, Mr. Grattan, in the completest manner. speaking thus of Dr. Duigenan, he did it without partiality, because he did not know whether that gentleman were friendly to the Union or not. The doctor was well known to be decidedly hostile to the pretensions of the Catholics, insisting on their exclusion from a share in the legislature, or in any of the great offices of state; but he admitted at the same time that the necessity of that exclusion would be done away by the adoption of an Union, which would secure the Protestant ascendancy, should they even grant the Irish Catholics complete emancipa

tion.

Here then were two parties in opposition to each other, agreeing, however, in one common opinion. But it was contended, that this was an improper time for proposing the measure; yet, if an Union would quiet the agitations of Ireland, why should the remedy be delayed till the mischief of a battle should have taken place. The present time seemed particularly proper for the scheme of Union; and one of the effects that would speedily result from it would be the removal of a considerable part of that armed force which excited the jealousy of the last speaker. That the deliberations of the Irish legislature had been influenced by the terrors of that army, or that the freedom of speech had been taken away, Mr. Canning was unwilling to admit. No evidence of such intimidation could be adduced; he justified the conduct of the ministry towards Sir John Parnell, whose opposition to a measure of such importance would render him a very unfit associate, and might excite doubts of the sincerity of

the court.

It ought to be considered, that some of the principles of the French revolution had made a great impression upon the inhabitants of Ireland, poor and uncivilized as the generality of them were, and distracted by religious feuds; and that the enemy still hoped to profit by the favourable dispositions of a part of that nation. To extinguish such hopes, to put Ireland out of danger, both from her foreign and domestic enemies, and in every point of view to improve her condition, were the objects of the proposed Union. It was not the fault of the people that the country was in such a situation; they wanted commerce, they wanted capital, they wanted a particular class of men to connect the highest and the lowest orders of society, so as to

harmonize the whole. But it was not a mere act of parliament that would accomplish these great and beneficial objects: it was only a connection with a country which had capital, which had commerce, which had a respectable middle class of men, that could effect the desired change.

It had been said, that for the space of three hundred years we had oppressed Ireland; but for the last twenty years the conduct of England had been a series of concessions. The Irish wanted an octennial parliament; it was granted. They wished for an independent legislature; they had their wish. They desired a free trade; it was given to them. A very large body of the people of Ireland desired a repeal of a part of the penal code which they deemed oppressive; the repeal was granted. The honourable gentleman had spoken as if nothing had been done for Ireland but what she extorted, and what she had a right to demand; he seemed to think that past favours were no proofs of kindness. It was undoubtedly expedient that these advantages should be given to Ireland, because her prosperity was the prosperity of England; but they were not privileges which she could claim as matters of right.

Mr. Canning concluded with recommending a strict attention to his majesty's proposal, as the only great and comprehensive view that had ever been taken of the affairs of Ireland, and with declaring his opposition to Mr. Sheridan's amendment, as it would debar the Irish from obtaining that relief which their necessities and their danger demanded.

Mr. Jones objected to the Union, chiefly, because it was unsolicited by the Irish, who were the best judges of its expediency, and was therefore ill calculated to allay their discon

tent.

After Mr. Sheridan, in explanation, had briefly supported the opinions which he had delivered, Mr. Pitt offered himself to notice, as a defender of the address, and of the general principle of the proposed Union. The address, he said, would only pledge the house to take into serious consideration a subject, which was earnestly recommended to its notice, and which was closely connected with the interest of the British empire. The mover of the amendment had deprecated all deliberation upon the subject, and even insinuated that the Irish parliament had not the power of carrying the result of its deliberations into effect, if it should determine in favour of an Union, without an appeal to the people. That position, if true, would be applicable to the parliaments of both countries, the rights and privileges of both being the same; would go to invalidate the acts of the last ninety years, and tend to annihilate the whole authority of the British parliament. To say that the ministers wished to sur