"On the other hand, without anticipating the difcuffion, or the propriety of agitating the queftion, or faying how foon or how late it may be fit to difcufs it; two propofitions are indifputable: Firft, When the conduct of the Catholics fhall be fuch as to make it fafe for the Government to admit them to the participation of the privileges granted to thofe of the Established Religion, and when the temper of the times fhall be favourable to fuch a measure. When these events take place, it is obvious that such a queftion may be agitated in an United, Imperial Parliament, with much greater fafety, than it could be in a feparate Legiflature. In the fecond place, I think it certain that, even for whatever period it may be thought neceffary, after the Union, to withhold from the Catholics the enjoyment of thofe advantages, many of the objections which at prefent arife out of their fituation would be removed, if the Proteftant Legislature were no longer feparated and lo cal, but general and Imperial; and the Catholics themfelves would at once feel a mitigation of the most goading and irritating of their prefent causes of complaint." P. 38.

After explaining ftill further the advantages to be gained, and the evils that will be remedied by the meafure propofed, the Minifter fhows, by a comparifon of imports and exports, the commercial benefits that muft arife to Ireland, grounding his argument, in part, on the statements of Mr. Fofter, in the Irish Houfe of Commons, when the Commercial Propofitions were difcuffed. He alfo hows, that the increafing produce of her linen manufacture, and three fourths of her export trade, "are to be ascribed, not to her independent legislature, but to the liberality of the British Parliament."

He then proceeds to reply to the principal objections which have been urged against the measure propofed, namely, "That Parliament is incompetent to entertain it,"" That it would take away the Independence of Ireland,"-" That it would increase the number of abfentees, and depopulate many parts of the country," and, "That it would load Ireland with the debt and taxes of Great Britain." Each of thefe objections he diftinctly answers. As to the first principle, he infists that it would, if admitted, "hake every principle of legiflation." This he illuftrates by feveral ftriking inftances, in which the powers of the English and Irith Parliaments have been exerted to as great an extent, particularly in the Union with Scotland, the creation of new reprefentations of the Principality of Wales, and the Counties Palatine of England, and (in Ireland) the Parliament," without any Irifh delegation from its Proteftant constituents, affociating to itfelf all the Catholis electors, and thus destroying a fundamental diftinction on which it was formed." He urges this to the friends of Parliamentary Reform; which, whatever may have been thought of the propriety

of

of that measure, no one ever doubted the competency of Parliament to difcufs. He further traces this objection to the falfe and dangerous principle, "that there exifts in every government a fovereignty in abeyance (as it were) on the part of the people, ready to be called forth on every pretence, when it may fuit the purpofes of faction." On thefe principles, in which, he justly obferves, are contained the feeds of all the mifery and ruin which have fpread themfelves over fo large a portion of the globe, he makes the following animated remarks.

"Thefe principles, Sir, are, at length, fo well known and understood in their practical effects, that they can no longer hope for one enlight ened or intelligent advocate, when they appear in their true colours. Yet, with all the horror we all feel, in common with the reft of the world, at the effect of them, with all the confirmed and increafing love and veneration which we feel towards the Constitution of our Country, founded as it is, both in theory and experience, on principles dieftly the reverfe; yet, there are too many among us, who, while they abhor and reject fuch opinions, when presented to them in their naked deformity, fuffer them in a more difguifed fhape to be gradually infufed into their minds, and infenfibly to influence and bias their fentiments and arguments on the greatest and most important difcuffions. This concealed poifon is now more to be dreade i than any open attempt to fupport fuch principles by argument, or to enforce them by arms. No fociety, whatever be its particular form, can long fubfift, if this principle is once admitted. In every Government, there must refide Tomewhere a fupreme, abfolute, and unlimited authority. This is equally true of every lawful Monarchy-of every Aristocracy-of every pure Democracy (if indeed fuch a form of Government ever has exifted, or ever can exift)-and of thofe mixed Conftitutions formed and compounded from the others, which we are justly inclined to prefer to any of them. In all these Governments indeed alike, that power may by poffibility be abused, but whether the abuse is such as to justify and call for the interference of the people collectively, or, more properly fpeaking, of any portion of it, muft always be an extreme cafe and a queftion of the greatest and most perilous refponfibility, not in law only, but in confcience and in duty, to all thofe whọ either act upon it themselves, or perfuade others to do fo. But no provifion for fuch a cafe ever has been or can be made before-hand; it forms no chapter in any known code of laws, it can find no place in any fyftem of human jurisprudence. But, above all, if fuch a principle can make no part of any eftablished Conftitution, not even of thofe where the Government is fo framed as to be most liable to the abufe of its powers, it will be prepofterous indeed to fuppofe that it can be admitted in one where thofe powers are fo diftributed and balanced as to furnish the beft fecurity against the probability of fuch an abufe. Shall that principle be fanctioned as a neceffary part of the bett Government, which cannot be admitted to exist even as a check

spon

upon the worst! Pregnant as it is with danger and confufion, fhall it be received and established in proportion as every reafon which can ever make it neceflary to recur to it is not likely to exift? Yet, Sir, I know not how it is, that, in proportion as we are lefs likely to have occafion for fo defperate a remedy, in proportion as a Government is fo framed as to provide within itself the best guard and control on the exercise of every branch of authority, to furnish the means of preventing or correcting every abuse of power, and to fecure, by its own natural operation, a due attention to the intereft and feelings of every part of the community, in that very proportion perfons have been found perverse enough to imagine, that fuch a conftitution admits and recognizes, as a part of it, that which is inconfiftent with the nature of any Government, and, above all, inapplicable to our own.

"I have faid more, Sir, upon this subject than I should have thought neceffary, if I had not felt that this falfe and dangerous mockery of the Sovereignty of the People is in truth one of the chief elements of Jacobinifm, one of the favourite impoftures to mislead the understanding, and to flatter and inflame the paffions of the mass of mankind, who have not the opportunity of examining and expofing it, and that as fuch on every occafion, and in every fhape in which it appears, it ought to be combatted and refifted by every friend to civil order, and to the peace and happiness of mankind." P. 60.

The fecond objection he also answers at large, and infifts that, when two feparate countries unite in forming one extenfive empire, the individuals who compofed either separate fociety cannot, in any just fenfe, be faid to be lefs members of an independent country. This argument is fo admirably applied to the cafe of Ireland, that we will once more gratify our readers with the words of the Speech.

"But while I combat this general and abstract principle, which would operate as an objection to every union between separate states, on the ground of the facrifice of independence, do I mean to contend that there is in no cafe just ground for such a statement? Far from it it may become, on many occafions, the firft duty of a free and generous people. If there exifts a country which contains within itfelf the means of military protection, the naval force neceffary for its defence, which furnishes objects of industry sufficient for the fubfiftence of its inhabitants, and pecuniary refources adequate to maintaining, with dignity, the rank which it has attained among the nations of the world; if, above all, it enjoys the bleffings of internal content and tranquillity, and poffeffes a diftin&t Conftitution of its own, the defects of which, if any, it is within itfelf capable of correcting, and if that Conftitution be equal, if not fuperior, to that of any other in the world, or (which is nearly the fame thing) if thofe who live under it believe it to be fo, and fondly cherish that opinion, I can indeed well understand that fuch a country muft be jealous of any meafure, which, even by its own confent, under the authority of its own lawful government, is to affociate it as a part of a larger and more extenfive empire. But, Sir, if, on the other hand, it fhould happen that there be a country which, against the greatest of all dangers that threaten its

peace

peace and fecurity, has not adequate means of protecting itself with out the aid of another nation; if that other be a neighbouring and kindred nation, fpeaking the fame language, whofe laws, whofe cuftoms, and habits are the fame in principle, but carried to a greater degree of perfection, with a more extenfive commerce, and more abundant means of acquiring and diffufing national wealth; the stability of whose government-the excellence of whofe conftitution-is more than ever the admiration and envy of Europe, and of which the very Country of which we are fpeaking, can only boaft an inadequate and imperfect resemblance;-under fuch circumftances, I would ask, what conduct would be prefcribed by every rational principle of dignity, of honour, or of intereft? I would afk, whether this is not a faithful defcription of the circumftances which ought to difpofe ireland to a Union? Whether Great Britain is not precifely the nation with which, on these principles, a Country, fituated as Ireland is, would defire to unite? Does a Union, under fuch circumstances, by free confent, and on juft and equal terms, deferve to be branded as a propofal for fubjecting Ireland to a foreign yoke? Is it not rather the free and voluntary affociation of two great Countries, which join, for their common benefit, in one Empire, where each will retain its proportional weight and importance, under the fecurity of equal laws, reciprocal affection, and infeparable interefts, and which want nothing but that indiffoluble connection to render both invincible.

Non ego nec Teucris Italos parere jubebo

Nec nova regna peto; paribus fe legibus ambæ

Invictæ gentes æterna in fœdera mittant." P. 66.

The two remaining objections are more briefly, but we think very fatisfactorily anfwered. The improbability of depopulation or lofs of wealth to any part of Ireland, is not only proved by argument, but by our experience of the flourishing ftate of Scotland fince her Union with Great Britain. The proportion of taxes, Mr. P. flates, would undoubtedly be regulated, as it has been with regard to Scotland, upon a fair and juft principle.

The fpecimens we have given, render it almost fuperfluous to add, that this Speech is not only one of the ableft ever delivered in Parliament, but peculiarly interefting; as it fully explains the fentiments of the Minifter, by whom the important meafure, now in agitation, was propofed; a measure which, we yet hope, will receive that difpaffionate confideration, to which it is fo july intitled, from the beneficence of its object, the liberality of its principles, and (as we prefume to think) its falutary effects to the profperity of the whole British empire.

Subjoined to the Speech are the Refolutions propofed by Mr. Pitt, and an Appendix, containing extracts from the Journals of the British and Irish Parliaments, on the fubject of the Adjuftment with Ireland in 1782.

ART.

ART. XII. The Works of Horatio Walpole, Sc.

(Continued from vol. xii, page 532.)

WE proceed, though fomewhat tardily, from the interruption of more temporary matters, with our account of the late Lord Orford's Works. The fecond volume opens with a production fo univerfally known, that any account of it, at this period, would be fuperfluous and unwelcome. This is the Caftle of Otranto, which fucceeded, in its firft appearance, as a pretended tranflation from an old Italian original; and has contributed, very principally, to excite a tafle for Gothic tales, and preternatural agency.

No attempt towards any regular arrangement of the pieces Contained in thefe volumes, appears to have been made. Hif tory and the Arts, Criticifm, Biography, and Politics, are mingled in a way, which the adorers of variety muft infallibly admire, and which perhaps it was of little confequence to avoid. The Caftle of Otranto is followed by 2. An Account of the Giants lately (1766) difcovered. 3. Hiftoric Doubts. 4. Supplement. 5. Reply to Dr. Milles. 6. To the Rev. Mr. Mafters. 7. Paffeript. 8. Edes Walpoliana. 9. A Sermon on Painting. 10. Nature will prevail. 11. Thoughts on Tragedy. 12. On Comedy. 13. Detection of the Teft. Politique du Chev. Walpole. 14. Life of the Rev. Th. Baker. 15. Account of the Author's Conduct in his Places. 16. Letters to and from Minifters. 17. Defcription of Strawberry-Hill. 18. On Modern Gardening. 19. Counter-Addrefs to the Public, on the Difmiffion of Gen. Conway. Of these articles, No. 2 and 3 were publifhed long ago. In 4, 5, and 6, written in fupport of the Hiftoric Doubts, the author certainly difplays very eminent abilities for controversy. If he is more farcaftic and fevere than the occafion feems always to demand, his feverity is adorned by elegant and pointed wit; and his acutenefs in diftinguishing the true points of conteft, and difmiffing all fuch as are frivolous, appears to great advantage. His anfwer to Mr. Guthrie, in particular, has fo much neatness, that we are inclined to give a part of it, as a fpecimen of his farcaftic powers.

"The first marks of difapprobation were conveyed in the Critical Review. I was feverely reproved by that monthly court for not having taken due notice of Mr. Guthrie's Hiftory of England. The charge

He evidently fufpected Guthrie of writing the article in the Critical Review. Rev.

1