« ForrigeFortsett »
of the connection will not, in the end, avail against the principles of liberty. Connection is a wise and a profound policy; but connection without an Irish Parliament, is connection without its own principle, without analogy of condition, without the pride of honour that should attend it; is innovation, is peril, is subjugation not connection.
The cry of disaffection will not, in the end, avail against, the principle of liberty.
Identification is a solid and imperial maxim, necessary for the preservation of freedom, necessary for that of empire; but, without union of hearts — with a separate government, and without a separate Parliament, identification is extinction, is dishonour, is conquest — not identification.
Yet I do not give up the country -- I see her in a swoon, but she is not dead -though in her tomb she lies helpless, and motionless, still there is on her lips a spirit of life, and on her cheek a glow of beauty —
“ Thou art not conquered; beauty's ensign yet
“ And death's pale flag is not advanced there.". While a plank of the vessel sticks together, I will not leave her - let the courtier present his flimsy sail, and carry the light bark of his faith, with every new breath of wind - I will remain anchored here -- with fidelity to the fortunes of my country, faithful to her freedom, faithful to her fall.
Lord Castlereagh said that it was contrary to the practice of parliament to enter into the discussion of the measure in that stage of the proceedings; that the second reading would have been the proper time to make these objections. He said that he did not believe that the convulsions that were prophesied by the honourable gentleman would be likely to take place; that he did not apprehend rebellion would be one of the consequences of the measure, therefore he did not entertain much apprehension from the honourable gentleman's prophecies on that subject. He censured the conduct of the gentlemen of the opposition as tending, to inflame the country by their prophecies of future treason and rebellion.
Mr. May spoke in favour of the motion. It was opposed by Sir John Parnell, Mr. Plunkett, Mr. O'Donnell, and Mr. P. Burrowes: they condemned the conduct of the noble lord, who, after an unbought majority of parliament had reprobated the measure, of union, presumed with intemperate and ill-advised obstinacy to persevere in that measure, slighting the sense of the legislature, abusing the power he possessed, and practising against the virtue and independence of parliament, and thus in less than twelve months he returns, with a venal and packed majority at his back, to force that very measure against the unbought opinion of the parliament and the people. The conduct of such a man was in
solent and audacious ; the bill was one of separation, it was a bill of robbery, it was a bill to put down the loyalty of the country and dismember the einpire. The noble lord has talked in high sounding terms of the ease with which he will quell another insurrection, should this measure occasion one; but little dependence can be placed on the prowess of the noble lord, for, while other men were displaying their courage and loyalty, the noble lord was lounging about the Castle, wickedly employed in plotting the destruction of his country.
Mr. Plunkett said that he reflected on the part which he had taken in opposing this measure as the proudest honour of his life ; it was that by which he would wish to be remembered by posterity, it was an inheritance he would be glad to transmit to his children. The recollection of the part he had taken, in common with the 120 honest men who had with incorruptible steadiness defended the liberty of their country against the machinations of the minister, would soothe him to the last moment of his existence.
Mr. Peter Burrowes denied the competence of parliament to pass the measure, in support of which doctrine he entered into an able and eloquent statement, and concluded in the following
“ I feel but little any portion of the noble lord's (Castlereagh) obloquy which may attach to me or my humble efforts, but I own I cannot repress my indignation at the audacious boldness of the calumny, which would asperse one of the most exalted characters which
any nation ever produced, and that in a country which owes its liberties and its greatness to the energy of his exertions, and in the
very house which has so often been the theatre of his glorious labours and splendid achievements. I remember that man the theme of universal panegyric, the wonder and the boast of Ireland for his genius and virtue ; his name silenced the sceptic upon the reality of genuine patriotism ; to doubt the purity of his motives was a heresy which no tongue dared to utier, envy was lost in admiration, and even those whose crimes he scourged blended exalted praises with the murmurs of resentment. He covered our unfledged constitution with the ample wings of his talents, as the eagle covers her young, like her he soared, and like her he could behold the rays, whether of royal favour or royal anger, with undazzled, unintimidated eye. If, according to Demosthenes, to grow with the growth and to decay with the decline of our country be the true criterion of a good citizen, how infinitely did this man, even in the moment of his lowest depression, surpass those upstart patriots, who only become visible when their country vanishes.
“ Sir, there is something most singularly curious, and, according to my estimation of things, enviable in the fate of this great man. His character and his consequence are, as it were, vitally interwoven with the greatness of his country; the one cannot be high and the other low, the one cannot stand and the other perish. This was so well understood by those who have so long meditated to put down the constitution of Ireland, that feeling that they could not seduce, they have incessantly laboured to calumniate, her most vigilant centinel and ablest champion. They appealed to every unguarded prejudice, to every assailable weakness of a generous but credulous people, they watched every favourable moment of irritation or of terror to pour in the detested poison of calumny.
“Sir, it will be found, on a retrospect of Ireland since 1782, that her liberties never received a wound, that a correspondent stab was not levelled at his character, and when it was vainly hoped that his imperishable fame was laid in the dust, the times were deemed ripe for the extinction of our constitution.
“Sir, these impious labours cannot finally succeed; glory and liberty are not easily effaced, Grattan and the constitution will survive the storm."
The House divided on the question that the bill be committed; Ayes 118, Noes 73; Majority. 45. Tellers for the Ayes, The Chancellor of the Exchequer and
Noes, Sir Lawrence Parsons and Mr. Plunkett. Lord Castlereagh then moved that the bill should be committed on the 30th. It was opposed by Mr. Grattan, who objected to the motion.
He should not, he said, pay much attention to the desire which the noble lord had expressed, that this measure should not be discussed; the Parliament still existed, and, as an independent member of Parliament, he would deliver his opinion. The noble lord had rested his defence of the bill on two grounds, for neither of which there was any foundation : the first was, that the opinion of the people was in favour of that measure, an assertion the very reverse of which was known to be the fact; and, secondly, the noble lord hau talked of his (Mr. Grattan's) prophetical treasons. In saying this, the noble lord, if he applied that to him, had obliquely uttered a most palpable untruth. If the noble lord had been a settled statesman he would have been inexcusable; his youth is his excuse: therefore he thus rebuked the noble lord with the forbearance which puerility called for, but still with the severity which presumption deserved. He should again claim the freedom of debate, and should upon every occasion state his sentiments upon this subject, as freely as he had ever done. He concluded with moving, “to substitute the first of August instead of Friday next.”
Lord Castlereagh said, he never would so far forget what was due to himself and to the House, as to enter into a personal altercation with any gentleman. The honourable gentleman had been pleased to pronounce an invective against him. He was ready to. admit that his public life was open to the comment of every gentleman who might examine, and, if he thought proper, condemn it. With respect to the language in which the honourable gentleman had thought proper to deny his statement, he should only observe that there was a kind of parliamentary inode of manifesting spirit, by denying in strong terms that which had never been uttered. If any incivility ever should be used to him in Parliament, it was not in Parliament he would reply to it: he had seen the unpleasant situation in which that House had been placed by being obliged to interfere between gentlemen that was a situation in which they never should be placed by him.
The House then divided on Mr. Grattan's amendment; -— Ayes: 87, Noes 124 ; Majority against the postponement 37. Tellers for the Ayes, Mr. Plunkett and Mr. O'Donnell.
Noes, Mr. May and Mr. Robert Johnson.
PROTEST AGAINST THE UNION.
June 6. 1800.
ON this day Lord Corry, with a view to leave on record the sen
timents of the people of Ireland against the Union, moved the following address to His Majesty, which, as it contains the principal objections made by the leaders of the opposition to this measure during the course of the session, has been thought worthy to insert.
“ We, Your Majesty's loyal and dutiful subjects, the Commons of Ireland, at all times sensible of the numerous and essential ad. vantages which we, in common with your subjects in Ireland, have derived under your auspicious reign, beg leave to assure you that. none have more impressed the hearts of Your Majesty's subjects than the adjustment at Your Majesty's gracious recommendation entered into by the Parliament of Great Britain and Ireland in 1782, thereby forming the most solemn compact which can subsist between two countries under a common sovereign ; that the result of that compact and adjustment was the encrease of our. trade and of our revenue, together with the liarmony of the two Parliaments and the support of the connection; that the said compact on the part of Your Majesty's Parliament of Ireland has been religiously and beneficially adhered to, insomuch that a final termination of all constitutional questions between the two nations took place, and the commercial points which at that time remained to be settled, have since, without agitation or ferment, been gradually and satisfactorily disposed of.
“ That under these circumstances it is with the deepest concern and the greatest surprise we have seen a measure propounded, under the name of Union, to set aside this most important and sacred covenant, to deprive this country of her Parliament in time to
come, and in lieu thereof to introduce an innovation consisting of a separate Irish government without an Irish Parliament, whose power is to be transferred to a British Parliament without an availing Irish representation therein, an innovation such as may impair and corrupt the constitution of Britain without preserving the liberties of Ireland, so that this country shall be in time to come taxed without being duly represented and legislated for by a body out of the realm, incapable of applying proper remedies, and re. mote from the means of knowing her wants, her wishes and her interests.
" That giving the name of union to the measure is a delusion; the two kingdoms are already united to each other in one common empire, one in unity of interest and unity of constitution, as has been emphatically pronounced from the throne by Your Majesty's former viceroy, bound together by law, and what is more effectual than law, by mutual interest, mutual affection and mutual duty, to promote the common prosperity of the empire, and it is our. glory and our happiness that we form an inseparable part of it.
" That this Union has stood the test of ages, unbroke by the many foreign wars, civil commotions and rebellions which have assailed it, and we dread the rash and desperate innovation which now would wantonly and unnecessarily put it to the hazard, an innovation which does not affect to strengthen the unalterable interest of each country in supporting the revolution that placed Your Majesty's illustrious family on the throne, for that interest cannot be increased by any law ; it is implanted in our hearts, it is interwoven with our prosperity, it grows with our growth, and strengthens with our strength.
“ Neither does it profess to create an interest in either country to preserve their connection together, because that interest already exists, and we know and feel that such connection includes all that is dear to us, and is essential to the common happiness and to the existence of both nations.
“ We therefore do, with all humility, implore Your Majesty's protection of that glorious revolution, and of that essential connection against the perseverance of Your Majesty's ministers in their endeavours to force this ruinous measure.
“ Their avowed object is a Union of the two nations, but the only union they attempt is a union of the two Parliaments, and the articles which are to attend their partial and defective union, are all so many enumerations of existing distinct interests in the two kingdoms, which it cannot identify, and which require separate Parliaments resident in each, duly to attend them.
“ In respect to Taxes, the purse of each nation is vested in its own House of Commons by the principles of the constitution; the security of our liberty, and the great constitutional balance of the powers of the State, lie in its being left there; but the articles acknowledge a separate purse, and a separate interest in that purse, by providing for a separate proportion of expence, separate modes and laws of taxation, separate debts, separate sinking funds, separate treasury, separate exchequer, separate accounts of re: