jesty's gracious recommendation, took place between the two kingdoms, in the year 1782, and which, by the declaration of the parliaments of both countries, placed the connexion between them upon a solid and permanent basis, has not produced the effects expected from that sclemn settlement: and farther, humbly to express to his majesty, that his majesty's faithful Commons having strong reason to believe, that it is in the contemplation of his majesty's ministers to propose a union of the legislatures of the two kingdoms, notwithstanding the said final and solemn duty, impressed, as they are, with the most serious apprehension of the consequences of such a proceeding at this time, to take the earliest opportunity humbly to implore his majesty not to listen to the counsels of those who shall advise or promote such a measure at the present crisis. and under the present circumstances of the empire." be admitted. It is a folly to say, that French principles have been the cause of the calamities which Ireland has lately sustained; but it is true that such misery facilitates the operation of the delusions practised to mislead the multitude. Remove the cause of that misery, and you best consult the general prosperity of the empire. A union would tend obviously to render the condition of Ireland still worse than it is, and to give an application and direction to property still less favourable to its interests. I cannot help adding one reflexion more on the argument of the Irish secretary, respecting the mischiev-adjustment, feel it to be their bounden ous consequences of the conduct of the English opposition. He might have known, that at least at present there was not much reason for apprehension. In another place, a certain noble marquis took an opportunity of congratulating the country in a whimsical anti-climax, not only that rebellion was subdued, but that party was extinguished. He said that party was dead and buried; and he thought proper to cut a few clumsy capers over its grave. He was pleased to say likewise, that party had always been faction. Against such a charge I must protest, and, as a friend to party in the honourable sense of the word, I am anxious to rescue myself from the imputation of being the abettor of a faction. For a person of no great importance, it requires a proper estimate of his own weight to know the place which he ought to fill, for the leader of a party, the talents which inspire confidence, and command respect, are requisite. Such men as the marquis of Rockingham and Mr. Burke, I cannot allow to be branded as the leaders of fac tion; and I cannot suffer myself to be ranked as a traitor to my king and country, because I have not deserted my friend. I respect too much what once were the principles of many of those who are now in his majesty's councils, to allow them to be stigmatized as faction. The banner of party is furled, but it is not beaten down. I trust that it will again be displayed, and that it will assemble round it the steady friends to true liberty, hos tile alike to despotic rule, and to wild innovation. Mr. Sheridan then moved an amendment, by adding, at the end of the Address, these words: " At the same time to express the surprise and deep regret with which this House now, for the first time, learns from his majesty, that the final adjustment which, upon his ma Mr. Canning rose and said:-If, Sir, my honourable friend, who proposed this amendment, had confined himself in his speech to the single topic which he an nounced as the main foundation of his objections to the address, that of the impropriety of the time at which the subject of the king's message has been brought forward, I should have felt that upon that topic alone I must have differed widely from him. But I confess, that the oppo sition which I feel myself bound to give to the amendment, rests equally on the more general grounds which my honour able friend has stated in the course of his speech; through which I shall endeavour, to the best of my ability, to follow him, assigning the reasons which induce me to take a view of the subject so different from that which he has taken. Before, however, I proceed to notice the arguments upon which the amendment is supported, I will first advert to the principal ground upon which is rested the opposi tion to the address; namely, the resolution entered upon the Journals of the House in 1782. To the same Journals I beg leave to refer for the refutation of the arguments urged by my hon. friend; and that reference will, I trust, completely do away the ground upon which those arguments have been built. It is true, indeed, that the words "final adjustment,' made use of in those resolutions; but if the House will but attend to what fol lowed in the same Journals, they will see "were that the resolutions there recorded, were immediately followed by another resolution evidently of a perspective nature, which declared the necessity of establishing some more permanent system, by which alone the tranquillity and prosperity of Ireland could remain uninterrupted, and continue to be improved. A due attention to this last resolution, must undoubtedly remove all imputation of impropriety from the measure now proposed, and all charge of inconsistency with the former proceedings of the House. The adjustment which my hon. friend contends to have been so "final," as to preclude all views of farther arrangement, appears, at the very moment that it was recorded on the Journals of Parliament, to have been accompanied by a declaration of the opinion of parliament, that something farther was absolutely necessary. But my hon. friend has laid great stress on the impropriety and danger of stirring such a question at a moment when Ireland is distracted and convulsed, and when the fate of the whole British empire is exposed to a crisis of the most trying and perilous nature. The House must surely remember, and my hon. friend should recollect, that for these three years past, those who are in the habit of opposing his majesty's ministers, have repeatedly been calling for inquiries into the state of affairs in Ireland, though such inquiries were not then brought within the view of the House in any regular mode, nor did they come supported by any recommendation from the throne. Nay, in the last session of parliament, it was stated as a high contempt shown to the House, that when his majesty was sending down a message to require of parliament to enable his majesty to avail himself of the offers of the English militia regiments to extend their services to Ireland, for the purpose of quelling the rebellion then raging in that country,-it was then stated as a high contempt of the House of Cominons, that his majesty's message, while it required this new power from parliament, contained no account of the general state of Ireland, no detail of the rise and progress of the rebellion, no call upon parliament to inquire how the mischiefs in Ireland had been occasioned, and how they might best be cured. Gentlemen then insisted on the propriety of an inquiry into Irish affairs, and into the causes of the rebellion. Now, it seems, they have no wish for any investigation, and all their curiosity has sub[VOL. XXXIV.] sided. Perhaps the proposal of such an inquiry might then be supposed to proceed from an innocent curiosity; for it may be recollected, that it was then stated in this House as a doubtful question, "Which were the rebels in Ireland?" But surely it is unfair to call for a message at one time as proper and necessary, and at another time, when it comes, to object to the moment as highly unseasonable, and not even so much as condescend to take the subject of the message into consideration. And now, Sir, with regard to the posture of affairs in Ireland, into an examination of which, though I am not at present disposed minutely to enter, I must nevertheless place it in a very different point of view from that in which it has been pictured by my hon. friend. Has my hon. friend inquired into the state of Ireland since late events have taken place; events which are now notorious, and cannot possibly be disputed? Is it not notorious that a rebellion has existed, and that it is now checked, though, perhaps, not effectually quelled? Is it not notorious that the object of the traitorous machinations which gave rise to that rebellion, was not any partial change of men or measures, but a total subversion of the existing government and constitution of the country, and the complete destruction of all con nexion between the sister kingdom and Great Britain? And, finally, is it not notorious, not only from the verdict of the Irish juries (into a comparison between the authority of whose verdict, with that of the verdicts of acquittal of English juries, so emphatically commended by my hon. friend, I will not enter, but will rather refer to other authorities, which will, perhaps, but show what authority these verdicts of acquittal can claim) authorities which can leave no doubt in the mind of any impartial man-which may, perhaps show, that legal acquittal is not always a proof of moral innocence, not only, Sir, from the verdicts of Irish juries, but from the avowals and confessions of the traitors themselves. Is it not notorious that conspiracies have existed in Ireland, which not only went to sap the founda tions of the constitution in Ireland, but which were most pointedly distinguished by an attempt to effect a total separation of that country from the British empire? Conspiracies, not for Catholic emancipation-not for parliamentary reform-but for the total subversion of all government, [Q] and for the complete separation of the two | countries. Is it then possible to know all these circumstances, and not to feel how deeply interested Great Britain is in the fate of Ireland? or, is it possible that, to avowals thus made by the self-convicted traitors, not in recantation of past errors, but with a determination to persist in them? Avowals made, not in entreaty for pardon for the evils they have done, but in regret for what they have left undone; to avowals of a design that would have laid in ashes the pride of that capital, for whose prosperity and pre-eminence such anxious alarms are now expressed; to avowals that, though their abominable schemes have been detected, they are not as yet defeated; to avowals that, though the first fruits of their labours were lost, their hope still survived that loss; to such avowals I must ask, is it possible to refuse credit? After the detection, therefore, of these deep and damned plots, is it not expedient, nay, a thing of urgent necessity, to examine into and adopt the most effectual means of counteracting the pernicious consequences that may still flow from them? consequences that not only affect the continuance of the connexion between the two countries, but which deeply strike at the prosperity and very existence of both. When such strong and obvious reasons evidently exist for entering into an investigation of these means, were that investigation even to be proposed only by a simple individual of this House, would it not have been more proper and decorous to point out some other plan that might appear equally feasible and effectual, or, at least, to hear what was the nature of the plan to be proposed, rather than pass it over with contempt? and coming, as it now does, from the highest authority, can we reject it in a manner which could scarcely be practised with regard to the most trivial and ordinary motion that could be made in this House? I am, however, far from being disposed to deny that the conduct of my hon. friend proceeds from the dictates of true patriotism, from a sincere and anxious regard for what he conceives to be the interest of Ireland. I, Sir, though not so nearly connected with that country, still feel the most ardent zeal for its interests and happiness; but in my opinion it would have been more consistent, not only with the love which my hon. friend professes for his native country, but also more recon eileable with the duty which he owes both to that and to this country, to point out what might have escaped his majesty's ministers in their earnest endeavours to hit upon some effectual remedy for the evils that confessedly exist in Ireland, or, at least, to have waited in the first instance, to know what are the particulars of that measure, which he is so anxious the House should reject without hearing. My hon. friend and the House must surely feel with how much anxiety they ought to look towards Ireland. The object is, indeed, most important: it is not the making of a provincial regulation, not the adjusting an internal difference, not the arrangement of a plan for the balancing of parties-the object is nothing less than to secure Ireland to us and to herself, and thereby to promote the happiness and security of the whole empire. In default, then, of any plan which my hon. friend's sagacity might devise, I must look to the collected sense of Ireland itself, and see what are the opinions on this important subject, entertained by those of that country who are acknowledged to be the most enlightened and best instructed, and who are most thoroughly acquainted with all its interests, both local and general. If these opinions were consulted and collected, I do not hesitate to assert that they will be found to favour the measure now in contemplation, and to pronounce it by far the least objectionable that could be devised; and here, Sir, I beg leave to disclaim any intention of availing myself of what my hon. friend has represented to be the ambiguous and equivocal wording of his majesty's messageand to declare plainly and fairly, that the measure, which I understand to be recommended for your consideration, is no other than an incorporating legislative union between the two kingdoms. In recommending, then, to the House to take this measure of an union into their most serious consideration, I should even be willing to put the rebellion out of the question. Rebellion can only be put down by force. But by what means are the agitations to be allayed, and the discords that rend that unhappy country to be silenced or reconciled? These party discords are well described in a pamphlet which my hon. friend has thought proper to treat with much harshness, and which he attributes to an hon. member of the Irish administration. My hon. friend has treated as absurd the arguments contained in this work that the ests. alternative, either that such a plan—that is, a plan of union must be adopted, or that some other must be devised for the fortification of the Protestant ascendancy. This fortification Dr. Duigenan would fain build on the reenactment of the popery code; but he admits that this would be unnecessary in case of an union between the two countries. According to him one or other of these alternatives must be adopted. Here, therefore, we have the creed of the Protestant party; it appears that they are willing to adopt an union, or in failure of it, to continue a struggle for every thing that was dear to them in rights and pre-eminence, and in religion. Union might be advantageous in an equal degree to opposite seats, and hostile interFor my part, Sir, I confess I can see nothing absurd in the argument. It seems to me not only possible, but highly probable that both Protestant and Catholic might gain by an arrangement which would gratify the ambition of the one, without endangering the safety of the other. That such could be the effect of an union, or rather that such is expected and acknowledged to be the probable effect of it, I am warranted in concluding by reference to the different claims and objections upon which the Catholics and Protestants stand opposed to each other at present. I prefer arguing from what each party has said for itself, to stating any opinion of my own, as to the propriety or expediency of giving or with holding what remains to be given to the Catholics, while Ireland continues separate from Great Britain. For the opinion of the Protestant party on this head, I will beg permission to quote a gentleman, a warm advocate for the Protestant ascendancy, whose book I have lately read with more pleasure and more instruction than any other that has been published upon the subject of Ireland. I speak, Sir, of the ability and ingenuity of the work. I beg to be understood as giving no opinion upon the questions argued in it. The gentleman to whom I refer, is Dr. Duigenan. This gentleman's book, in answer to Mr. Grattan, contains in my mind, the most complete statement of the causes and nature of the present distractions of Ireland. It is not only a very ingenious, but a very learned work (if that were any farther recommendation to it), it more completely demolishes his antagónist, than any controversial work that I remember ever to have read. I quote Dr. Duigenan's work with the less prejudice, as he is one of the few persons who had written upon the subject of Irish affairs of late without giving a distinct opinion for or against an union. Dr. Duigenan is well known to be decidedly hostile to the pretensions of the Catholics; he insists upon the necessity of their continued exclusion from a share in the legislature, or in any of the great offices of the state from which they are at present excluded, but confesses at the same time that that necessity of exclusion would be done away by the adoption of some plan similar to that proposed in his majesty's most gracious message. He states it as an unavoidable Ask now the other, the Catholic party, and what is their answer? Why, "let us have a union, or a continued struggle for that which you have hitherto denied us, viz. a repeal of the remainder of the penal code." Here, then, are two parties in opposition to each other, who agree in one common opinion. And surely if any middle term can be found to assuage their animosities and to heal their discords, and reconcile their jarring interests, it should be eagerly and instantly seized and applied. That an union is that middle term, appears the more probable when we recollect that the popery code took its rise after a proposal for an union; which proposal came from Ireland, but which was rejected by the British government. This rejection produced the popery code. If an union were therefore acceded to, the readoption of the popery code would be unnecessary. If it was in consequence of the rejection of an union, at a former period that the laws against popery were enacted, it is fair to conclude, that an union would render a similar code unnecessary; that an union would satisfy the friends of the Protestant ascendancy, without passing laws against the Catholics, and without maintaining those which are yet in force. Unless, then, some plan less liable to these objections is suggested, and better calcu lated to remedy the existing diseases of Ireland, there is a presumption in favour of that which persons best acquainted with the interests of Ireland, and best informed respecting the contentions that now disturb its internal tranquillity, are inclined to countenance and adopt. But then it is contended, that there is something in the present crisis which renders this an improper period to propose this measure. This surely is strange reasoning. If an union would quiet the agi liberty of the press; both of which have been pretty freely indulged in on the present subject. Every gentleman, I believe, is acquainted with the circumstance of several persons in Ireland having declared their sentiments on the subject freely, and without any appearance of being intimi dated by an armed force. A very respectable gentleman in Ireland, who fills the same situation which you, Sir, fill in this country with so much credit, and so much advantage to this House and to the public, has availed himself of the opportunity of delivering those sentiments out of doors which he could not do within, in a manner that does not savour of intimidation on one side of the question at least. But God forbid that such intimidation should prevail. It is natural, indeed, that Dublin, under the influence of the first impres sion, and of the first ardour that has been kindled by the agitation of a question so materially involving its peculiar interests, should be warm, if not intemperate, in the expression of its sentiments. Dublin is as yet loud in its reprobation of the measure; but other places of note and celebrity in Ireland, places that stand as high in commercial importance, are on the contrary as forward in bestowing upon it their most marked and decided approbation. tation of that country, and restore it to | rest, why should we wait till the struggle was over before we administer the remedy? Surely, if two combatants could be parted, it would be wrong to postpone the interference till the battle was over. Some gentlemen, indeed, are so fond of a boxing match, that they had rather see it fought out, than that the parties should be separated; but when it is recollected that the parties in this contest are two great national divisions, and that the prize they are contending for is the existence of the government and the connexion between the two countries, it surely must be a rash fondness for the sport, that would delay for a moment the plan of interference and reconciliation. What else is there in the circumstances of the present time which renders the measure improper? It cannot be that the continued efforts of France for the subjugation of Ireland have been detected and defeated;-because whatever delicacy there might exist in interfering between two national parties, there can be none in preserving Ireland from France. It is still the avowed design of France to attempt an invasion of Ireland, and to complete a separation of it from Great Britain; and surely my hon. friend is not disposed to bar any thing that may effectually interfere between France and her intended prey? Is he for waiting till France shall fit out another fleet, and disembark another army in Ireland, to meet with the same fate that attended her former rashness and audacity, before he would endeavour to reconcile and unite all parties; and thus consolidate the interests and the resources, and the strength of the whole empire? But something is insinuated of the deliberations of Ireland being influenced and intimidated by the armed force now in the country. My hon. friend has strongly insisted upon the intimidation which the presence of that armed force is likely to impress on the public mind in Ireland. It is by promoting such an union of interests and affections, as this measure will ensure, that we may hope to remove the necessity of keeping a large armed force in Ireland; and by removing that necessity, my honourable friend would remove one of the objects of his own censure and complaint. But, in truth, the effects of that intimidation which my hon. friend so much apprehended, are not easy to discover; it surely does not seem to affect either the liberty of speech, or the There is one topic in the speech of my hon. friend which has struck me with no small surprise, and that is, the panegyric which he delivered upon the vigilance and resolution evinced by the Irish parliament in detecting the late conspiracy, and in crushing the late rebellion. Such compli ments to the Irish parliament, from that side of the House, I was not prepared to expect, much less was prepared to hear that the armed force in Ireland was to be employed to overawe the proceedings of a parliament, to whose vigilance and activity co-operating with, and watching over the employment of that very force, for some months past, I am ready to say that the salvation of Ireland is to be ascribed. Is it then the parliament in Ireland that English soldiers are to coerce and restrain? A parliament fully armed with every constitutional power to control that or any other army? These, Sir, are insinuations against which I must loudly and pointedly protest. They are insinuations which, if not timely met and refuted, when they get abroad, would assume the form of broad assertions; and I should be now glad to hear if there is any man in this House, or out of it, who will take |