Imatges de pàgina
PDF
EPUB

66

ftrongly afferted. I find the Minifter declaring himfelf" to feel and know that the Parliament of Ire"land poffefs the power, the entire competence, to accept of, or reject" the propofed Union: "that "it is the undoubted right of the Irish legislature to reject, or to adopt fuch measures, as may appear to them injurious, or beneficial."* By admitting the competence of the Irish Parliament to decline the offer which is made them,

[ocr errors]

66

and the incompetence of a British Legiflature to impofe the measure on this country, does Mr. Pitt difclaim the final adjuitment of 1782? What more did we acquire by that fettlement than independence? or how can independence be more unequivocally recognised? what more did we shake off, or did Britain furrender, than the competence of her Parliament to control, or bind this country? and how could language more perfpicuously record this emancipation upon our part, or this furrender upon hers, than has been done by the expreffions of Mr. Pitt? The cafe is fo clear, that the plaineft questions form my premiffes, and the answers of every rational man will furnish my conclufions.

If it be not in his language that we can detect this denial of the fettlement of 1782, which you have thought proper to charge on the British Minifter, let us next enquire whether of his proceedings amount to an infraction of that folemn compact.

any

D

*Mr. Pitt's speech.

[ocr errors]

"That

66

[ocr errors]

"That fettlement," you fay, " established two grand pofitions: firft the admiffion of the Irish claim, to be legiflated for by no other Parlia' mént, but that of Ireland: fecondly, the finality impofed upon the two nations, regarding "all conflitutional projects affecting each other."

66

In undertaking to admit the facts on which your charge is grounded, as thofe facts are ftated by yourself, I of course did not bind myfelf to acquiefce in all your inferences, and conftructions. It therefore becomes neceflary that I fhould mention, to what extent I agree with your account of the arrangement of 1782.

I confider it to have established only one pofition, viz. that all attempts of the British Parliament to legiflate for this country fhould finally ceafe; and Ireland be thenceforth bound by no acts but thofe of her own Legiflature.

Shew me that Mr. Pitt's conduct has impugned this principle, and I fhall admit the justice of your charge against him: Prove to me that Union will contravene it, and I fhall withdraw my humble fupport from the measure.

Let us take a fhort view of the tranfaction of 1782 I accept of you, Sir, for my guide, in examining its parts.

It was a final adjustment: granted. But of what? Adjustment, fettlement, arrangement are terms of relation, and imply fomething pre-exiftent: fomething which is to be adjusted, fettled, or arranged. The tribunal which could

decide,

decide, where no queftion was before them, muft poffefs faculties which lie far beyond my comprehenfion.

What was in controverfy between Great Britain and this country? The competence of a British Parliament to legiflate for Ireland: a Parliament which contained no peer fitting in right of his Irish honours, nor any commoner reprefenting the property or population of this coun

try.

This was the matter in difpute; and the adjuftment confifted of a final furrender of the British claim. Upon this subject matter the settlement operated effectually; but upon what was not in controverfy it could have no operation at all.

What is your own account of the transaction? Meffages were fent from his Majefty to the Parliaments of the different countries, to come to a final adjustment, in order to remove the jealousies and difcontents of the Irish. This country, in answer, declared the only caufe of difcontent, which it was not able by internal acts to remove, to be. the interpofition of the British Parliament, (conftituted as I have defcribed,) in the legislative regulation of Ireland. The question thus propofed, the decifion followed: the British Parliament renounced its claim of interference: the ftated grounds of Irish jealoufy were removed; and the final adjustment was thus concluded, and enrolled.

Great Britain, indeed, having filenced Irish dif

content,

content, was defirous to promote imperial connexion. She wifhed to render more compre. henfive, and beneficial, the negotiation in which the countries had become engaged. She would fain have made the adjustment more conclufive: not indeed, by being more final upon the grievance flated, than it was already; (fince in this respect I admit the fettlement to have been as conclufive as finality itfelf;) but by embracing another, and a wider fubject, and fetting at rest an important queftion which was likely to arife. Great Britain first wifhed liberally to emancipate this country; and having done fo, was defirous that independent Ireland fhould, on terms to be regulated by mutual confent, incorporate her freedom with that of her benefactor, and perpetuate at once the liberties, and integrity of the empire.But in thefe views, it is your boaft that fhe was frustrated, by the ungracious filence of an Irish Parliament..

To return then from this glance, at the permanent and comprehenfive good which might have been accomplished, to the partial benefit which has been obtained, and to refume my enquiry, whether the present conduct of Britain be an attempt to repeal any conceflions which he has måde, let me ask you whether it be now propofed that the British Parliament fhould legislate for this country? It will not be answered that it is; unless by a feeble fophifm, which, before I have done, I may condefcend to notice.

Meantime

Meantime let me put a cafe, which my own queftion has fuggefted to me, and which feems to furnish a fair argument a fortiori.

I will fuppofe that the British Parliament should propose to us, to refume the yoke we had fhaken off in 1782. If they did, I fhould reject the measure, with as much indignation as would be compatible with my fenfe of the ludicrous nature of the propofal. But in refufing the degrading offer, I fhould admit that while the Minister, who made it, acknowledged the full compétence of the Irish Parliament to reject it, he could not be charged with violating the fettlement of 1782; and I fhould defpife the understanding, which refused to concur in this admiffion. The Minifter, it is true, would offer for our acceptance the very fame disgraceful system, which we had fo recently and fo radically reformed; and in doing fo, would grofsly infult our spirit and our fenfe: but ftill he would not meddle with our freedom: he would not infringe the adjustment of 1782. In a word, he would truft for the acceptance of his propofal, not to our dependance, but to our infatuation.

But does he make any fuch contemptuous propofal? no Or will any one of those principles, or reafons, which demonftrated that control to be a grievance, which was exercised by a Parliament in which no Irish Members fat, apply to fhew that it is incompatible with our freedom, to be governed by an imperial legislature, in which we are adequately reprefented? He is a weak

man,

[ocr errors]
« AnteriorContinua »