Obrazy na stronie
PDF
ePub

such individuals as commoners would strengthen the connexion of classes, and constitute a desirable Union of feeling and interest between the houses of parliament. The third point, the eventual creation of new Irish peers, would be necessary for the prevention of too rapid a progress towards the extinction of the peerages.

Lord Mulgrave moved for the omission of that clause, which allowed the Hibernian peers to sit in the House of Commons for any of the shires and boroughs of Great Britain, with a proviso that they should cease to enjoy during that time the privileges of the peerage. Such a regulation, he said, would tend to break down the bulwark between the peers and the commons, and consequently the barrier between the crown and the people to introduce a confusion of ranks, and promote democratic disorder.

The chancellor defended the clause as reasonable and constitutional. Why, he asked, would it be more degrading for an Irish peer than for the eldest son of the first peer of this kingdom to be tried as a commoner; and would it not be a great hardship for a number of the peers of Ireland to be deprived of the chance of becoming legislators?

The earl of Caernarvon opposed the clause, because it seemed to have a jacobinical tendency; and the earl of Darnley recommended, in this respect, an adherence to the stipulations of the Scotish Union.

Lord Mulgrave's motion for omitting a part of the article was negatived by 50 against 7.

On the 30th of April, a debate arose from a motion of lord Holland, tending to give the Catholics a pledge or prospect of the abolition of the disabilities, to which they were still subject both in Ireland and in Great Britain. In this country a regard to justice dictated such relief: in the other, it was not only a matter of justice, but was essential to public tranquillity, and would contribute to reconcile the minds of the majority of that people to the new project. Notwithstanding he considered the policy of the Union doubtful, and some of its provisions, particularly with regard to representation, alarming innovations, yet if he thought that the emancipation of the Catholics were to accompany the Union, it would soften much of his hostility to the project. If he himself then considered the restoration of the rights of the Catholics so strong a recommendation, what must be the feelings of those, who were so much more nearly interested in it? It had been said, indeed, that it was not worth while to attempt reclaiming those, who were disaffected in Ireland. If any minister did not think it worth while by wise and liberal measures, to conciliate those who were disaffected, and to bring them back to their duty, such a minister would be unfit to be trusted with the con

duct of public affairs: it was an object of the highest importance to strengthen his majesty's government by conciliating the affections of all his subjects. But it might be said it would be better to wait. He, on the contrary, thought that the present was the moment to remove all the doubts, which the Catholics might entertain, and to render them friendly to the measure, by shewing them candidly the advantages they would gain. It would thus tend to confirm those who hesitated in their opinion, and to reconcile those who might be hostile to the Union. It had been said, that the emancipation was a mere pretext employed to delude the people of Ireland; but its being successful as a pretext, was a proof of how much importance it was to take it away. the late rebellion, which however he never would be induced to call a Catholic rebellion, so many would not have been led away by it, had not the restraints, under which the Catholics laboured been considered as grievances. It was a grievance to be estimated in its operation on men's minds; not by the injury it did, but by the insult which it supposed.

In

Lord Borrington thought the agitation of that question was unseasonable, and therefore moved the previous question.

The marquis of Landsdown did not disapprove the motion, though he differed from the mover on the subject of the Union. After a frequent and close deliberation, he was convinced of the wisdom and policy of the general measure, and thought it highly honourable to the projectors. The chief blemishes, he thought, were to be found in the confined mode of election for some of the boroughs; but these were specks in a brilliant sun.

Earl Fitzwilliam justified the motion as conciliatory and highly expedient: but lord Musgrave said, that, as the parliaments of both kingdoms had already agreed to the postponement of the Catholic question, which, they conceived, would be more temperately and wisely discussed after an Union, it was unnecessary and improper to prejudge the topic. Lord Hobart and the earl

of Liverpool were for the previous question.

The earl of Moira declared that the objections, which he had urged to an Union were in a great measure superseded by the late determination of the Irish parliament; and he was ready to admit that the points of detail were founded, for the most part, on just and equitable principles. Apprehending that the present motion might obstruct the success of the scheme, he wished it to be withdrawn or discountenanced.

Lord Grenville was of opinion, that the question would be best determined by the united parliament, and that the decision of that legislature, even if it should be erroneous, would be attended with much less inconvenience than a similar decision would

produce, if pronounced by the two parliaments under the present system.

The motion was then superseded by the previous question.

As the woollen-manufacturers of Great Britain were alarmed at the prospect of great loss and injury, if a free exportation of the raw material to Ireland should be allowed, petitions were presented to both houses against that part of the commercial article; and witnesses were examined at the bar in support of the allegations of the petitions. The minister notwithstanding, on the 1st of May, urged the committee to adopt the resolution, which was done accordingly.

Mr. Peele and Mr. Wilberforce spoke in favour of the peti

tions.

Mr. Pitt maintained, that, if any transfer of manufacture should result from the permission of exporting wool, it would be gradual and inconsiderable; that any void, which it might occasion, would be much more than filled up by the great increase of our trade in this article; that we had no reason to apprehend a scarcity of the commodity, or dread the rivalry of the Irish in the manufacture; and that his friend's proposal would be an unnecessary deviation from that liberal principle of a free intercourse, which was the intended basis of the Union.

When the report was brought up on the 2d of May, dr. Laurence vehemently opposed it: but upon no new grounds.

The means of promoting the measure were not, in his opinion, the most laudable or constitutional; and the boasted majority did not include the most respectable portion of the parliament. A considerable number of those, who had voted for the scheme were palpably influenced by the crown; and the freedom of deliberation was checked by the presence of the army. He moved that the business should be postponed for three months.

Mr. Morrit rested his confidence of success on the happiness to both countries which followed the Union with Scotland.

The honourable Mr. Ryder admitted, that a complete or perfect Union could not at first be expected; but he did not consider this objection as a sufficient reason for desisting from an attempt, which might be in some degree successful; still did he think it prudent finally to relinquish it.

Mr. Bankes was still of opinion, that the scheme would be inefficacious as a measure of Union, and particularly hazardous from the dissatisfaction with which it would be received by the Catholics, whose views of power it would ultimately disappoint, even though the imperial parliament might accede to their present claims.

Colonel Wood and sir Richard Car Glyn supported the general principle of the measure. Sir William Young contended that

delay would be dangerous, and that nothing but an Union would render the two countries permanently prosperous and happy. He did not believe, that the Irish Catholics were generally adverse to the Union. On the contrary, he stated, on the authority of one of themselves, lord Kenmare, a nobleman of the greatest virtue and patriotism, that the most respectable classes of them were inclined in its favour. Mr. Nicholl did not approve every part of the plan; but, conceiving that it would enable the government to relieve the Catholics with safety, and that it would thus allay the bitterness of religious dissention, he was willing to promote its

success.

The house then ordered the second reading of the reported resolutions a division took place, in which 26 voted against it, and 208 for it.

On the 5th of May, the scheme was again debated in both houses. Lord Grenville was pleased to find, that only one class of manufacturers complained of the commercial article, and still more pleased to observe, that even their jealousy was ill-founded. The committee adopted the commercial clauses and the remaining regulations.

*Various motions were made in the House of Commons for the supposed improvement of the plan. Dr. Laurence moved for some alterations grounded on his former suggestions relative to the parliamentary article, which were negatived. Mr. Grey proposed clauses calculated to render the Irish members independent of the crown, and to reduce their number in case of a diminution of that of the British representatives. Sir William Dolben moved, that all new peers should entail a sufficient estate to secure the independence of their successors. Mr. Tierney wished for a recommitment of the resolution respecting trade, that the woollen manufacturers of this country might receive an indulgence similar to that which would be granted to the cotton manufacturers of Ireland. All of which were negatived.

An address was voted on the same day, importing that the commons had observed with unspeakable satisfaction the general conformity of the articles transmitted from Ireland with those which they had voted in the preceding year, and that they were now ready to conclude with the Irish parliament an Union upon that foundation. This address was communicated to the peers; and, after a comparison of the resolutions of one house with those of the other. On the 7th, the permission granted to Irish peers to represent British counties or boroughs was again debated. Lord Romney proposed that all who should thus degrade themselves should be obliged to wave for life the privileges of the peer

[ocr errors][merged small]
[ocr errors]

age. The earls of Caernarvon and Fife, and several other peers, opposed it, as tending to violate the constitution, and produce a confusion of rank and interests; each question was carried by like majorities in favour of the ministry.

When it was moved, that the peers should join in the address, lord Bolton* spoke decidedly in favour of the Union. He entered fully into the merits of the propositions of 1785, against which, he said, the Irish had conceived an ill-founded prejudice. A similar prejudice existed against the present offers of Great Britain; but he trusted that it would not prevent the accomplishment of a project, which would be advantageous to this country, and highly beneficial to Ireland. Earl Fitzwilliam objected to several of the articles, and maintained that the plan tended to a separation rather than to an Union. Earl Camden and the marquis Townshend, supported the Union. The Earl of Westmorland attributed the distractions of Ireland to the then existing system of government, or to the injudicious measures of administration, and was convinced that an Union was the only remedy for the evils under which she had long groaned. The earl of Darnley concurred with lord Westmorland. lord King and lord Holland maintained, that the measure was more likely to aggravate than cure the existing evils. The marquis of Downshire (lord Hillsborough in England) repeated many of the observations, which he had urged in the Irish House of lords against the measure. The marquis Townshend observed, that those persons who had opposed the octennial bill, were the very persons who opposed the measure of Union, and from the same motive; because it would diminish their influence. The house divided on lord Grenville's motion, which was to insert the words lords spiritual and temporal in the blank space left in the address, communicated to their lordships by the commons; when there appeared 54 for and 7 against the motion. On the 9th, the joint address was presented to his majesty. The plan was then transmitted to ireland; and each parliament proceeded to carry into effect the articles by a bill.

Although the Anti-unionists had been so constantly baffled, they persisted in disputing every inch of the ground. As a separate bill was thought necessary for regulating the election of the representatives of Ireland in the imperial parliament, lord Castlereagh moved for leave to introduce it before the general bill of Union. Having noticed the inclination, which the house had shewn to various modes of parliamentary representation, in preference to an uniform system, he stated the leading principles, on which the selection of cities and boroughs had been adjusted—namely, a re

Formerly Mr. Orde, secretary to the lord lieutenant in Ireland.

« PoprzedniaDalej »