Oh no, no, by British bayonets. By such, should there be a dissolution under such auspices must the general election be carried on, with an army not only in possession of the sword, but having the law in its disposal. Could Great Britain then have any thing but the representatives of an army? Was this the body which their lordships desired to have? Was this the period, in which it was wished to introduce such representatives?

His lordship said he should now proceed to state something personal to himself, and for the mention of which, he had to apologize to their lordships. A representation of the circumstances, under which he went to Ireland had been given, and it was upon that point, that he begged to give some explanation. "I have understood (said his lordship), that it has been stated "in another place, that during my administration in Ireland, I 66 was never required to retract what I had been directed by 66 government to propose. If it has been stated, that I never "received orders to bring forward the question of Catholic 66 emancipation on the part of government, I admit that state "ment to be true. But in justification of the part I took at that period, (and in my conscience I believe the events that oc"curred have led to the evils that now exist, and have stamped "the doom of that ill-fated country) it is necessary to these "statements I should add a short history of the transaction. "Yielding to the argument of not wishing to entangle govern

ment in difficulties upon the subject at that period, I admit, "that under orders clearly understood by me, not to give rise "to or bring forward the question of Catholic emancipation on "the part of government, I assumed the government of Ire"land. But in yielding to this argument, I entered my protest against resisting the question, if it should be brought forward "from any other quarter: and I made most distinct declara“tions, that in case of its being so brought forward, it should "receive my full support. support. With these declarations I assumed "the government of Ireland. This I state upon my honour. I "should not have introduced it, had I not deemed it necessary "to give this explanation."

Lord Grenville observed, in reply, that the noble earl admitted, that he went over with orders not to bring forward the Catholic question: but he had no recollection of any such protest and declaration, as were alluded to by the noble earl. Where was the paper? Earl Fitzwilliam replied, he was sorry the noble lord should not have it in his recollection, that he entered his protest, not on paper, but in his presence, against assuming the government of Ireland but under the circumstance, that if the measure

should be brought forward from any other quarter, he should give it his full support.

The Marquis of Lansdowne said, that he most cordially concurred in every thing that was asserted by the noble earl in favour and in praise of the Roman Catholics. He must observe, however, that this subject had no relation to the question immediately before the house, or to the situation of the Irish Roman Catholics, though, indeed, the adoption of the proposed Union might ultimately tend to do the Roman Catholics the justice they deserved. But now, as to a large and general question, he was by no means surprised that at first sight it was objected to as improper to be discussed at the present moment. Most undoubtedly, such a measure should be the work of peace and of time; it should be the result of dispassionate judgment and of calm consideration. It was not, however, the first question to be examined; there were other questions, the consideration of which should precede that of the Union; and one of them was, whether it was possible for the affairs of Ireland to go on as they were governed; the other, if an Union were to take place, what should be the nature of that Union. He enumerated the most remarkable events of the Irish history from the year 1767; and observed upon the case of Lord Edward Fitzgerald, that his posthumous attainder was an act of flagrant tyranny. From the late prevalence of disorder and calamity, he was confident, that such a government could not much longer subsist. The evils of the country required a speedy remedy; and an union promised a more efficacious cure than any other measure, which could be devised. It was at all times desirable, at that indispensable. The danger to which the British dominions were exposed rendered such a step necessary, to obviate irreparable mischief or prevent total ruin. The Orange and the Green, the Dissenter and the Catholic; the Dissenter, Catholic, and Churchman, when attacked by a common enemy, called out by instinct for an Union betwixt each other. What ought the three kingdoms, when menaced by an inveterate and powerful foreign enemy, what must they do but unite, or be divided and crushed?

He then adverted to the proceedings of the year 1782, not from an idea of connection between that topic and the subject under discussion, but because frequent reference had been made to that settlement in the debates of both parliaments. Its authors, he said, had no idea of effecting a legislative union; nor did they by any means declare against such a scheme.

In pointing out the chief requisites* of an union, he mentioned

The noble Marquis referred to a pamphlet of Dean Tucker, which he ob served in few pages contained more sense, as well as more patriotism upon this snbject, than the many volumes that had been written upon it.

the necessity of consolidating the armies of the two countries ;* for, unless there should be such an union of the military establishments as might afford an opportunity of saying with truth that there was only one army, it might be said, with regard to the affairs of the British empire, "Chaos is come again." The navy also should be one, furnished by the united zeal of the whole community; for it would resemble patch-work, if one part of the empire should supply a ship and a half, another a quarter, and a third a different quota. There should, at the same time, be only one system of law. Commerce was the next point to be considered; and this ought to be on an equal footing in both countries. The concerns of finance ought also to be assimilated: and, in short, the union, to be effective, ought to be substantial and complete. Some might say, that most of these points were already gained; but, as they were in danger of being lost by the jealousy of the two nations, he wished to render them permanent by an Union.

There was one point which was by no means settled, and which ought to be well settled before any Union could be of any avail....that was, the disposition of the people of Ireland. He knew not how far they might misunderstand their true interests, nor to what violence they might be led: upon this subject it was manifest that ministers had misled themselves; they were ignorant of the dispositions of the parliament of Ireland; for, if they had thought they would have been out-voted, they would not have brought the subject forward; but since it was clear, that if they knew so little of the parliament, they must know very little of the disposition of the people of Ireland of other descriptions. With regard to the Catholics, they were now in a state of irritability and vexation: their emancipation was a thing, which it was vain to attempt to stop; it was too late to try. They crawled upon all fours; they had been allowed to stand upon two: and it was idle to think that they would not look their governors in the face. The thing was gone by: it was silly to say, they were sorry that any thing was done for the Catholics; they ought to rejoice at it, and cheerfully finish all they had begun upon that subject. There was nothing to fear from it.

Those who thought there was, ought to look at the condition of the Pope....ought to look at the state of France; they would then see that there was no fear from any body of men, on account of the religion which they professed. That species of deception was gone. "The question, (said the noble marquis) is not what "religion we shall have, but whether you shall be permitted to

See what has been before said upon the inconveniency of the effects of the existing laws relative to the army.

"have any? It is not whether this, or that, religion shall be "destroyed? Under this situation of things, every good man " is called upon to join the standard of Jesus Christ....keep the "religion of Jesus Christ....any religion is better than none: at "all events unite to oppose and keep from entering among you "those who have no religion, and who are enemies to all."

A member, whom he did not know personally, (Mr. Dobbs) but whose speeches in the Irish house he admired, had said of the people of Ireland, " treat them fairly and justly, avow at "once your object, and if it be just, I will pledge myself for "their acquiescence." He would add to the speech of that sensible man, and say, do not come forward with your hesitating, "perhaps," or, " it may be," or, "we will consider," or any such ambiguity, but come boldly forward at once, and tell them sincerely what you intend doing. Speak to them as men that are free, and determined to be free. In all the affairs of life sincerity has succeeded nine times out of ten; and although the mass of the people of Ireland were to be pitied for want of edu cation, yet he knew, from the experience of forty years, that liberality was never ill requited by them.

There ought to be no tricking, no intrigue, in their proceedings; let them gain their point by manly and honourable dealing, not procure success by corruption, or enforce acquiescence by terror.

The present was an awful period....the contest was serious and alarming. If wisdom should not interpose, a rupture might arise between the rich and the poor, calamitous to both parties, but more particularly to the latter. The greatest prudence and the most vigilant caution were necessary to secure the British em. pire amidst the convulsions of neighbouring states. It was his earnest wish that great Britain and Ireland might stand like two rocks in the sea unmoved by storms, and that the inhabitants of both islands might form the most cordial and complete union for the preservation of property, law, order, morality and religion.

Earl Camden spoke chiefly in defence of his own administration of Ireland. He denied that the recal of Earl Fitzwilliam was productive of disorder or disaffection, and affirmed that the rigorous proceedings of the government were rendered necessary by that seditious spirit which existed independently of the Catholic question. He declared, that all the severities imputed to his administration, were preceded by acts of outrage, of insurrection, or of rebellion. He allowed, that his conduct in adopting active and vigorous measures, and apprehending some of the leaders, did accelerate the rebellion; but, as the same steps facilitated its suppression, he did not think that he could justly be blamed.

He then pronounced his decided opinion in favour of an Union for the benefit of both countries. There was one part of this subject, upon which he could not speak but with great delicacy, and that was, with respect to the Irish parliament. He had upon every occasion during his residence in that country, observed the energy and vigour of the parliament of that country; but still he felt himself bound to say, that he thought a better form of government necessary for Ireland, and therefore it was that he should give his assent to this measure.

The Marquis Townshend promised to vote for the measure; but he was apprehensive that every attempt to render the Irish nation happy, would be inefficacious, unless a due obedience to the laws should be enforced by resident magistrates....unless the itinerant Catholic priests should be prevented from giving absolution for offences, the stewards, and other agents of the landlords be checked in their career of oppression, and the morals of the lower classes of the people be improved by the care of their superiors.

Lord Clifton (Earl of Darnley in Ireland) declared his pre-. ference of a legislative Union to any other mode of connection, but doubted the practicability of the measure. The English, in general, he said, knew little more of the affairs of Ireland than of those of China; in the present case, they represented what was almost the universal sense of the nation as the voice of cabal or the cry of faction. The voluntary assent of the Irish, he feared, could not be obtained; and coercion would be highly impolitic and unjust. He therefore wished that the scheme might be suspended.

Lord Hobart, while he approved the conduct, which the Irish parliament had pursued for many years, was convinced that a legislature, constituted as that was, could not give satisfaction to the people. His meaning was, that a Protestant parliament could never satisfy a nation, of which three-fourths were Catholics. On this ground his determination to support the question of a legislative Union principally rested.

Lord Rawdon (Earl of Moira in Ireland) declared that no one would more heartily concur in the proposed measure than himself, if it should meet the approbation of the greater part of the Irish community: but, as it had excited general disgust and vigorous opposition, he was convinced of the danger of prosecuting the scheme. Even if the Irish parliament should be disposed to adopt it, the disinclination of the people ought to have been deemed a sufficient ground for relinquishing it: otherwise we might nourish in delusive security a secret fire, which might ultimately consume the vitals of the empire. If he should ad

Now secretary of state for the war department.