extol the generosity of the country on that occasion. In reply to what was said of the mischievous consequences of retracting the pledge given to the catholics in Ireland, allusion had been made to the confessions of the conspirators in that country, and of a person in particular, described as his (Mr. Sheridan's) friend, and a reference to the testimonies at Maidstone. This was a subject, the discussion of which he was desirous rather to take up than avoid. He had seen many attempts made out of doors at least to implicate those who gave evidence at Maidstone in the guilt of Mr. O'Connor. Had those who are supposed to influence the ministerial press of this country been distinguished by the least candour, they would have drawn a quite different inference from that occurrence from that which they had laboured to enforce. It was evident from the very paper, a connection with which was the guilt imputed to Mr. O'Connor at Maidstone, that the persons who gave evidence to his character were those least likely to favour the designs of France, and who had the least to expect had their projects succeeded. It proved that there was one spirit and one feeling in the country, to resist the attempts of the enemy. Such was the comment which that event naturally suggested; but a quite different construction had been studiously given to it. He should confine himself to the evidence he himself had given on O'Connor's trial. He did not retract that evidence, and he called upon a learned gentleman who had been present at the trial, to point out any inconsistency in his conduct. He knew that Mr. O'Connor always spoke in strong terms of any interference of foreign force in the affairs of England, and his mind seemed so much impressed with the superior grievances of Ireland, that he would not admit that, on the comparison, England had any cause whatever to complain. He might have differed from Mr. O'Connor respecting the remedy that was to be applied to the situation of Ireland; but upon that point he was not called upon to say anything. The learned gentlemen, the attorney and solicitor-general, both as lawyers and as gentlemen, had forborne to put to him any question respecting that point, because it had nothing to do with the particular charge at Maidstone, and because they were not disposed to perplex him by any irrelevant question. Mr. O'Connor never had made him his confidant. He knew too well his opinion respecting foreign interference, to give any reason to suppose that it was a thing which he (Mr.

O'Connor) could encourage. With respect to the provocation of Ireland to pursue any particular mode of resistance, he should say nothing; it was enough to say, that he never could permit Ireland to be seized on as a post from which this country could be attacked. He might pity the hardships of Ireland, but, as an Englishman, he could never suffer the enemy to obtain such a favourable point from which to direct their attack against our existence as a nation. Such was his answer to the insinuations thrown out, and which, from the manner and tone, he had reason to suppose, were in a particular manner levelled against himself. To return to the subject then-to the fatal policy which dictated the recall of Earl Fitzwilliam, was to be attributed the calamities by which Ireland had been distracted. It was a matter of no light importance. Those who advised that fatal step were responsible for its consequences. The retraction of that concession which Earl Fitzwilliam was authorised to support, had prepared the catholics for the share they had taken in the late disturbances. Ministers had been challenged by the noble earl to deny that the point was arranged, and that he went over with conciliation to the catholics as a leading object of his policy. But it was said, that the emancipation of the catholics was not the object of the conspiration; but could it be denied that the discontents of the catholics was the instrument by which the conspirators promoted their own purposes? the conspirators had shown that they feared concession as likely to frustrate their hopes, and rejoiced in the irritation which the disappointment had produced. They were apprehensive of the return of Earl Fitzwilliam, as calculated to give that satisfaction to the catholics as would disappoint their views. He concluded with urging the danger of continuing the agitation of the question at the present moment. The house divided—for the speaker leaving the chair 131; against it 19.

FEBRUARY 28.

UNION BETWEEN IRELAND AND GREAT BRITAIN.

The order of the day for the house to go into a committee upon his Majesty's message respecting the Union with Ireland, was read.

MR. SHERIDAN said, sir, I certainly do not rise for the purpose of detaining the house any length of time, but I cannot agree with the hon. baronet that there was an understanding on

the part of gentlemen on this side of the house, that they were not at full liberty to oppose your leaving the chair. There was, indeed, an exhortation from the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Pitt) opposite, not to give that opposition, but I should not have suspected the hon. baronet of being very desirous to obey that exhortation. The manner, too, in which the right hon. gentleman put that point, conveyed a sort of whimsical compliment. He stated, that many gentlemen had not yet spoken who might be desirous of delivering their sentiments, but he strictly charged his friends and supporters not to reply to anything they might urge. Why should they not reply? It is but an ill compliment to them to suppose they could not say anything deserving a reply, nor is it much better to his own friends. I suppose, however, the right hon. gentleman will adhere to his own compact; and though he has thus muzzled his majority, yet I shall not be surprised if some of them should exert an independent spirit of loquacity in the teeth of his restraint. But, sir, I merely rise to say a single word to two points which have been subject to discussion in the course of the measure before us. I do it before the house goes into the committee, otherwise I shall have no opportunity, for the moment you leave the chair I shall leave the house, and leave the gentlemen to adjust the details of the measure just as they please and judge proper. The first point, sir, is this-It has been asserted that, during the whole course of debate upon this subject, no one member has asserted that union, abstractedly considered, may not be good for Ireland, if it could at any future period be carried with mutual harmony and good intent. Sir, I rise most decidedly to contradict that, and to state it as my opinion, though now the attempt would be attended with multiplied dangers; yet, at no time, it would be a desirable measure that it must endanger the separation of the kingdoms, and not increase the happiness of either, and in the end must be attended with dangers to the constitutional liberties of both. The other point, sir, upon which I wish to explain my sentiments is this-an hon. gentleman has assumed that no one has ventured directly to assert in this house, that parliament was not competent to give sanction to a legislative union. Sir, I have hitherto most cautiously avoided going into that topic, but at the same time I have formed the most decided opinion upon it. Notwithstanding all that has been said to the contrary, I main

tain that there is a broad and visible distinction in the cases of the two parliaments; the one incorporating, and the other surren dering its independence. I have no hesitation in saying, that I think parliament is not competent to surrender an independent legislature; and I now publicly avow my opinion, or hereafter it may be urged as a thing universally admitted, when the question may be the surrender of some of our own dearest and most valuable privileges. It may be brought as an argument hereafter, when such admissions may be of dangerous tendency. I, therefore, now, do not hesitate to say, that the parliament of Ireland have not and cannot have the right to surrender their independence. They cannot do it consistent with their duty to their constituents. It is not reconcilable to the trust upon which they hold their places. With respect to the precedent of Scotland, which has been urged as conclusive, it has a most distinguishing feature; they were summoned for the purpose expressly of considering and debating the specific question of union. I. however, will not give my assent to add a second bad precedent, because there is one already existing. But, sir, the question may be put in a stronger way, in which it will come more home to the bosoms and feelings of Englishmen. Suppose the question was, that we should be called upon to surrender our independence, and be united to another kingdom. What would be our feelings in that case? Suppose George, Prince of Denmark, had succeeded to that kingdom, or that Philip had succeeded to the crown of Spain during his connection with Mary-if at either of these times it had been a question at Madrid, or Copenhagen, to unite this kingdom with either of them, what would the people of this country have said? Unquestionably they would, without hesitation, have told their parliament that they had no right to surrender them and their independence. Sir, I shall add no more, but I thought it proper to say thus much, that my opinions might not be mistaken. One word more, sir, and I have done; I think all civil incapacita tions on account of religious distinctions ought to be done away, and on some future day I shall submit that proposition to the house.

MAY 21.

COLD-BATH FIELDS PRISON.-COLONEL DESPARD.

Sir Francis Burdett moved, "That the report on the state of the Cold-bathfields prison be re-committed." Mr. Sheridan seconded the motion.—Mr. Wilberforce Bird, Sir William Young, Mr. Buxton, and Colonel Elford followed.

MR. SHERIDAN observed, that the hon. gentleman who spoke second in the debate, in the early part of his speech said, "if the house would look at the report, it would be seen immediately, that the resolutions it contained were so founded upon evidence, that it ought to be adopted in every one of the resolutions;" before he sat down he gave up the detail in that respect, and alleged what could not be admitted, that there were others more able than himself to execute the task. He had listened, he said, with great attention to three hon. gentlemen, all of whom were of the committee, whose report was now before the house; but he was bound to say, that what they advanced, instead of supporting the report, and satisfying the house that it ought to be adopted, they satisfied him that the report ought to be rejected by the house, and that a farther inquiry ought to be entered into.

It was a little awkward, he said, for those who complained of him for not always attending the house upon the discussion of public business, to conduct themselves as they did towards him. If it was a fault in him for being absent in general, some persons might think it was an amendment in him to attend; but nothing would satisfy these gentlemen with regard to him; they blamed him for absenting himself, and took care never to bid him welcome when he came. The hon. gentleman had said of him (Mr. Sheridan) that he came at no important period, or on a point of moment, to support his friend. He considered the question extremely important and highly interesting to the people of this country; and whenever he saw public principle abandoned, or humanity outraged, and especially when he saw iniquity protected by the names and authority of members of that house, and the house itself called upon to give its sanction to such conduct, he should think the state of things critical; and, whether he neglected his duty in some other particulars or not, he should not neglect it upon this, but would come forward, and he was proud to say, he would support his hon. and worthy friend, whose motion was now before the house.