fuggefted a time for infurrection, and the intrigues of that government opened a probability of fuccour. But the agents of France had nothing to create; they found a vigorous fpirit of infubordination. They found confidence circumfcribed within narrow limits; the pale of property fomewhat wider; but then, an immenfe gulph between the rich man and Lazarus, beyond the confines of which, no attachment to the state was known; no feeling but thofe of outlaw on a doubtful frontier. Let me induce you to afcertain the fact, by paffing with me in a flight furvey of our modern history.

From the clofe of the Revolution war, by the furrender of Limerick, to the acceffion of George the Third, this country enjoyed, for near feventy years, a ceffation of hoftilities; no fterility; no ravages of famine, peftilence or enemy; no affignable caufe of backwardness, but what arofe from political circumftances. It is ufual to impute a great deal to the commercial reftrictions; but how many diftricts are there, equal in fize to Ireland, in which no interchange of commodities is known beyond the rude produce of the earth? And yet the boors or peafants are at peace with themselves, and with their fuperiors, and live in the coarfe comfort of ruftic competence, and fimple civilization. Here feventy years of calm, only prepared the way for thirty-five years of infurrection. There was in Munfter an annual rifing of White-Boys, from 1763, to 1776; whilft the propertied claffes were arrayed in arms, during the war of America, this other diforder ceafed; in 1785, it again broke out by the name of Right-Boys. From about 1786, to a recent date, under the very nose of Government, an open war was waged in the county

D

of

་ ས

of Armagh between Proteftants and Catholics, until the latter were completely rooted out, and fent through the land to diffeminate difaffection against the government, which had permitted thefe exceffes. In 1792 and 1793 there was a rifing in Louth, Meath, Limerick, Rofcommon, Leitrim, Weltmeath; befides Hearts of Oak, and Hearts of Steel, Peep of Day Boys, and Defenders, United-men and Orange-men. Were the example, or the contagion, or the intrigues of France, acceffary to thefe mifchiefs, thirty years before the revolution of France was thought of? Our Parliament has undoubtedly never been niggard of remedial penalties: jubeo eum, (like Moliere's Doctor) faignereri, atque refaignereri. But no preventative was enquired after. The difeafe re curred with unabated vehemence, and will never cease to recur, until the tenure of power be generally changed, and the objectionable occupants of fubordinate authority either varied, or correct ed; and until the government be rendered strong in behalf of the neglected peafant, againft thofe who immediately interfere with him. I feel that details are invidious; let us avoid them by studying the cafe of our country in the analogies of other nations. Why have Greece and Italy degenerated? Why does the Mameluke government

*From what we know of the conduct of the British Houfe of Commons, could it be fuppofed that open hoftility fhould be carried on for months, battles publickly fought, and notices given to perfons, under penalty of death, to quit their habitations, in any territory, fubject to its jurifdiction, without parliamentary inveftigation and redrefs?

"Let us exemplify this matter by a more recent change, compare the English of the prefent day with thofe under Henry III. Edward VI. Mary and Elizabeth. This people, now fo humane, indulgent, learned, free, and induftrious, fuch lovers of the arts and philofophy, were then nothing more than a na tion of flaves, inhuman and fuperftitious, without arts, and with out industry."-Helvetius's Treatife on Man.

[ 43 ]

government in Egypt produce the most wretched fubjects in the world? From thefe you may pafs to another question of as eafy folution. Why is the credulity of the Irifh open to receive impreffions from every impoftor who promifes to improve their circumftances? Why are they fo ready to exclaim-we may profit, but we cannot fuffer from a flate of turbulence?

Summary jurifdiction has crept upon us, until at length, the trial by jury is univerfally fufpended. To what extent the arbitrary difcretion of magiftrates is permitted, let thofe bills declare, by which they are indemnified and re-indemnified. We have peopled the navy with malcontents; we have colonized with them the outcaft fettlement of New-Holland; we now call in the aid of Pruffian difcipline to their correction: merely to keep the veffel of the ftate afloat, we have been conftrained to throw over board the most useful and valuable effects. As to the neceflity of these meafures, take conceffions the most ample, they only tend to ftrengthen my argument. The partition is flender between Governments who voluntarily employ force, and thofe to whofe exiftence force has become effential. I admit, that come whence it may, the fanaticifm of revolution was to be repreffed with vigour. My argument and my con clufions run in a very different direction. You do not wish to govern by violent means, but fo completely are the fubjects alienated from your government, that these means are not to be difpenf ed with. Then in the name of common fenfe, is this the eulogium of the principles upon which our flate is conftituted ?* Is it to ftand on this founD 2 dation?

In a very judicious pamphlet on this fübject, under the title of "A Friend to Ireland." I have noticed an argument, which may acquire fone currency from the manner in which it is put,

buc

[ 44 ]

dation? Great Britain has been affailed by the fame epidemic rage for innovation; yet fhe has not been conftrained to alter the landmarks of her conftitution; a well afforted diftribution of powers preferved the popularity of her government. Power is not judiciously balanced in this kingdom, and popularity never was fought for; enquire of that comprehenfive chain of disabilities that runs through your statute book, whether the favor of the people was ever efteemed or cultivated by the men who regulated this ifland. Afk it of your annals.

The

but when examined, will be found to make againft the cause it is employed to vindicate. The author touches us on a point, where we ought to be fenfible; the adminiftration of justice. He compares the conduct of the British Parliament, on the complaint made of the fentence against Mr. Muir, Mr. Gerald, and others, convicted of fedition, with the proceedings of the Irish Houfe in the matter of the Fiats iffued against Mr. Magee, and, the exhorbitant bail required of him. In the former cafe, the Judge, be fays, was applauded, in the latter only "not cenfured."

In the Scotch caufe, the judges were vindicated, as acting in frict conformity to the law of the land, and the House of Commons fanctioned their proceeding. In the Irish cafe, no perfon ventured to utter a fyllable in defence of the judge, and nevertheless he came off with impuninity The proceeding in Scotland, rather refembled the attachment caufe against Mr. Stephens Reilly, which came into Parliament, and was defended there on controverted authorities. There were other complaints made, before the cafe of Magee, again tthe adminiftration of juftice, but I do not find that the magifarates incurred cenfure. At prefent we hear no murmur of dif fatifaction on this head, thanks to the fortunate felection of judges, which is not a parliamentary prerogative.

Now, let me fay one word, for the different execution of the law in both countries. Here, it generally requires an armed force to take a poffeffion under legal authority. The great Douglas caufe, both on account of the rank of the parties, and the value of the eftate,-created the most univerfal intereft through Scotland. When the houfe of Peers made its decision, the decree of poffeffion was carried into effect by the Sheriff unaccomp.nied.

It was not until after the Union, that the use of torture in Scotland was abolithed by the united legidature.

The reprefenting body has lived near a century in open hoftility with the reprefented, and exhaufted against them the whole artillery of penal legiflation. To my mind, the inference is irrefiftible against the form of political establishment, that arofe under thefe difadvantages.

Which right of an Irish citizen will be abridged, which will cease to flourish, in confequence of an incorporating Union with Great Britain? Not the. trial by jury. Not the privilege of free inveftigaion. Not the fecurity of perfon and property. Let me put it to the confcience of any man, who is pleased to bestow a moment's notice on these remarks, will the fcheme of government they recommend, interfere in the most remote degree with his comforts, with his means of induftry, and with his independence? Will it impofe, fhould the measure take effect, fubferviency on any individual? Will he be lefs than he now is, mafter of his thoughts, or of his actions, of his pride, or of his property? Certain Gentlemen do not choose to forego their parliamentary fituations, and others wish to keep the avenue open for their ambition. Of all others, it is ungracious in thofe, who never winced at coercive feverities, to oppofe a measure offered as the bafis of conciliation, and as the means to prevent in future the lamentable neceíity of these examples.

I am aware that fome of my opinions may be liable to misconstruction, and in a political controverfy one is not to expect candour in every critic. Perhaps I fhall be reprefented as difpofed to pal liate the late rebellion, or to impute the blame of it, to either the executive, or fuperintending branches of government. Nothing can be further from my intention. I do not mean to blame either the present, or the late, or any particular Parliament; neither do I impute any where a deficiency