"In this House I do not think it necessary to go into such detail of restriction:-No man here espouses his doctrine.-He was a solitary and unprevailing preacher; but absurdities might go abroad, and might be thought unanswerable, merely because they had not been thought worthy reprehension; and particularly when other per sons, that ought to have weight with the public, had not zeal enough for the cause, against which those calumnies were levelled, to disavow them, but thought they acted more wisely by giving them the authority of a silent implied approba tion. But,' (said the Attorney-general) you will separate the countries;—you attempt an act of legislation.'-I disdain the advantage of an Union that could be preserved only by our servility. Our Union was of common, of equal interest; and was to be supported by mutual justice and good faith.

The argument of the right honorable Member, that a Regent of England could supersede the Regent of Ireland, was an outrage upon our independence, and must excite the contempt of every Irishman.

"So far am I from thinking the two Houses competent to make any act previous to the Re. gency, it is my opinion they ought to make no act on the subject, even when the Regent is in pos

session of his functions.-A right hon. Member, for whom I have the highest respect, [Mr. Grat. tan] seemed to compare the present case to the Revolution; but the cases were different;-there the Throne was vacant, but here not;-there a restricted power was to be given to the Prince here an unlimited one ;-there the person to receive the Regal powers was purely elected; here he is received from the authority of an irresistible constitutional designation; there it was a compact made by negociation with the people ;-here it is a trust pointed out by the constitution.

"But the right honorable Member thinks the law necessary, to ascertain the period of the power to the continuance of the incapacity First, he must be completely Regent, before he can assent to such a bill:-and if so, he may refuse that assent. Are we then, without any se curity in case of His Majesty's recovery? Certainly not. The constitutional necessity that cre ates the Regent, limits his continuance. If the King be restored, his right to the Regal power revives with his capacity; and the exercise of it by any other individual, would be usurpation and treason. The case is provided for by an higher authority, the law of Edward III.

"We would not be wise in seeking to give authority to the first principle of the constitu

tion, and to the statutes that secured the Crown, by a compact with the Regent, which ultimately he might refuse to ratify, and justly refuse, when he was in possession of a power to which it was incident to assent or dissent at his discretion.As for my part, I think it that kind of apprehension which it is scarcely decorous to anticipate. No man could suppose even the possibility of such a danger, considering the part which that illustri. ous personage had already acted; but if it was at all to be looked at, the laws already in force had abundantly provided for it.-No new law could add to that provision.—I therefore hope the House will not adopt a measure that can have no possible operation. But as to a subsequent law, I have suggested these remarks merely for the considera. tion of gentlemen.-As to the present, I am decided. The House seems decided, with a very few exceptions, that an act is impossible and absurd, and that the Address proposed, is the only expedient that can be adopted."

MR. GRATTAN rose late in the debate, and thus spoke:

"MR. SPEAKER,

"I SHALL endeavour to recall the minds of gentlemen to the present posture of the debate ;-we have gained ground in the argument, the limitations are not defended-they are not, it is true, given up; they are alleged to be intended, and acknowledged to be indefensible; proposed, scouted, and adhered to-and in the contempt into which this part of the plan of the Castle has fallen, the vile insinuations of intended prodiga lity, and perverted bounty-(insinuations malici. ously whispered against a great personage)-have also fallen, and remain in the contempt they deserve. So far the plan stands condemned in the opinion of its principal supporters. But gentlemen who cannot defend their own measures, impeach ours, and they recur to that vile commonplace, and antiquated cant, ever resorted to by men concerned in unconstitutional attempts"the connection is in danger by our proceeding.” How? prove it by resorting to the line of succession? His Royal Highness, the heir apparent,

with irresistible claims to the Regency, the choice of Great Britain, and a middle term between the two nations? No; folly, presumption, do not attempt to call that nomination a step to separate from England. Is it then by appointing him with full regal authority? No; the railers on the subject of connection now affect an indifference on the subject of limitation: is it by appointing him at this time? Idle and trifling; what, so many months after the royal indisposition-after the business had terminated in Great Britain, in the choice at least of the same person. No; but then gentlemen, it is done by address-it is the mode against which they direct their indignation: and arguments, which were intended to be applied in favour of limitations, are now, and with equal folly, applied against proceeding by address ;-but the refutation of every objection to the address proposed, is to be found in the monstrous scheme which the enemies of this address have conceived, and would endeavour to impose on the country.

"A bill passed without a third estate, without an Irish Regent, and without any authority from the Irish Parliament, to give the royal assent; but the arguments advanced in the support of this plan, are worse by far than the plan itself. We have been told that the Regent named by the Par