beg leave to direct the attention of the House to the great and important consideration, that the parliament of this country has completely recognised, and solemnly established the independence of that of the kingdom of Ireland, which is as entirely distinct and as incapable of being controlled by us, as we arc independent of them. Yet the right honourable gentleman proposes an interference in the internal concerns of those who now have as much right to dictate to us, as we can possibly have to prescribe rules of conduct to them. Does it, Sir, become us now to say, that they are not qualified to act for the good of the people of Ireland, and that they are not entitled to the confidence of their constituents?- We who told the same people upwards of fourteen years ago, that they were completely adequate to promote the public happiness, that they were framed to secure the prosperity of the country, and what cannot be too often stated, that they were unchecked by any external control to deliberate and decide on the great business of legislation! If we speak thus to that parliament, (and such must be our language, if we give our assent to the address moved this night,) I confess, Sir, it does appear to me the most extraordinary and singular line of conduct that can be adopted by one independent parliament against another independent parliament.

But allowing, for the mere sake of argument, that we are authorised to dictate in the manner proposed by the honourable gentleman, is it reasonable that we should proceed in the way he has pointed out on the bare suggestions which he has stated to the House? Should we, supported by assertions alone, assume the power, which by his motion he seems to suppose we possess, of watching over, and superintending the parliament of Ireland? With regard to what may be termed the practical part of the right honourable gentleman's speech, though it is very far from my wish to enter into a discussion of the various topics contained in it, yet I only follow him to shew, that, by agreeing to his proposition, however you disguise it by any specious name, however you gloss it over by any artful expression, you do nothing less than attempt directly to control the legitimate au

thority of the parliament of another country, and to trespass on the acknowledged rights of another distinct legislative power. But, taking the honourable gentleman's arguments in a different point of view assuming for a moment that he has made out his case in an incontrovertible manner, and that he has fully proved to our satisfaction that the parliament of Ireland was, in the year 1782, in every respect competent to perform its functions, and is at this time directly the reverse, I wish to know what is the practical conclusion he draws from my admission; and in what manner does he propose to remove the evil which I thus suppose he has clearly made out? What remedy, Sir, does he attempt to point out? Does he give us a single idea to guide us in the execution of the task which he wishes to impose on us? It is our duty to enquire what the principles are on which he invites us to proceed; and what the precise limits are, within which the subject is to be confined. With respect to these questions—and I trust every gentleman will readily allow them to be questions, not only of great importance, but of absolute necessity, the right honourable gentleman has left us entirely in the dark; and he appears so little impressed with the urgency of them, that he has not even hinted at them in the whole course of his speech.

Having, Sir, noticed the first point to which the honourable gentleman has called the attention of the House, I now come to the other parts on which his observations have been made, relative to the divided state and jarring interests of Ireland. He has first dwelt on the discontents of the Roman catholics; and in the next place he has described at some length the grievances of the protestants of the northern parts. He has, in the redress which he proposes to make to both sides, admitted, that concessions ought to be made to both parties; and from the statements of the right honourable gentleman, who thus wishes to reconcile opposite claims, I am confirmed in my opinion that he only desires, and is eager to effect an alteration in the frame of the parliament of Ireland, as far as it may rise out of the pretensions of the catholics, and out of the demands of the inhabitants of the north. And here, Sir, I feel myself called on to

notice the declaration made by the right honourable gentleman, that he would not enter into the particulars of the respective discontents of both parties, and yet he immediately after, notwithstanding that declaration, laid before the House a minute detail of circumstances on which I will not now dwell, thinking as I do, that a discussion of that nature is more calculated to inflame the minds of many than to prove of any essential service. • When he came to mention the subject of religion, which has, according to his statements, produced many of the present discontents, he certainly did not seem very solicitous to preserve the church establishment, and though he does not wish to address the throne for the adoption of any particular line of conduct, it is something singular that he should recommend a measure that must affect a great mass of private property, and even injure the church itself.

Not deeming it necessary to trouble the House any longer on these particulars, and convinced as I am that neither we nor the crown can interfere to effect that which exclusively belongs to the parliament of Ireland, I shall make a few observations on what has fallen from the right honourable gentleman with respect to the rights of which the Roman catholics are possessed, and also on the subject of those additional rights which it is his desire they should yet obtain. He observes that the catholics ought to have the general right of voting, of sitting in the legislative assembly, and of filling the public offices. To this, Sir, I answer, that they are in the actual possession of every other right, but that they certainly do not possess the right of voting for members of parliament, unless according to qualifications. prescribed by law. This I conceive to be the mere state in which the catholics are placed. But, says the right honourable gentleman, enough has not been done to extend to them civil and religious liberties. Have not concessions of the most liberal kind been made to them since the revolution; and, during the present reign, has not every possible pledge been given to them of real affection and sincere zeal for their best interests on the part of the crown? But, Sir, it is curious to remark the detail which

the right honourable gentleman proposes, even admitting that the present subject is a proper one for us to recommend to the adoption of the executive government. In this detail there unquestionably arises an inconsistency, which he will find it no easy matter to do away. He first declares that he means to satisfy the catholics, by conferring on them the power of voting generally. But he immediately adds, that, by pursuing that measure, we shall not be able to give them any weight in point of political liberty; for, as he maintains that the elective franchise is so managed in Ireland, that it is entirely in the power of corporations to bestow or to withhold it, it would consequently be impossible for them to gain any material benefit, or to obtain any political influence, even if the law, which he himself wishes to be passed in their favour, were to take place. It therefore appcars evident, that the remedy proposed by the right honourable gentleman himself, must be inadequate to meet the evil which he so seriously laments. And it naturally follows, as I have before had occasion to observe, that the great end of his plan is to alter essentially the whole frame of the constitution of the legislature of Ireland. In other words, Sir, the right honourable gentleman proposes an investigation and a scrutiny into the pretensions of the catholics of the south, and of the protestants of the north, for the express purpose of laying down what he considers to be just principles; and then the parliament of Ireland must be new-modelled and revised, in consequence of his previous enquiry. But is it reasonable to call on the parliament of England to do that very thing which must not only be condemned by the parliament of Ireland, but is not entertained in the opinion of even a considerable number of persons? Yet, Sir, this question, which calls into doubt the existence of the whole constitution of Ireland, is to be brought forward on mere surmise, and without the shadow of authority. I say, it does not come within the constitutional right which we may possess, of controlling the executive government. It certainly does not come within the possibility of any right, which we can possess, of interfering in considerations which exclusively belong to a legislature totally separate from, and independent of us.

The other points which the right honourable gentleman has referred to, are lost, if possible, in more obscurity than that which I have just noticed. The various and clashing pretensions of the different parties are so extremely opposite, that it would be an arduous task to reconcile them. And if, in commending certain political principles which are acknowledged by the northerns, he has in his mind principles founded on the French doctrine of the sovereignty of the people, and intimately connected with those revolutionary tenets which have produced such vast mischiefs throughout Europe, I maintain, Sir, that it would be contrary to the duty of the parliament of Great Britain to entertain the motion of the right honourable gentleman, supported as it is by the speech which he has this night delivered. There are, Sir, none of his considerations on which we can prudently or safely pronounce; for there are none of them which may not excite such a flame as we shall never have it in our power to extinguish. They involve objects most delicate in their nature, and dangerous in their consequences. They embrace difficulties of a prodigious extent; and on which I shall not dwell, as they have been sufficiently described in the speech of the right honourable gentleman, so as to make us shudder with a just apprehension of the fatal and dreadful effects that must result from them. I must, therefore, Sir, consider the address proposed as a blind injunction, without any specific extent or means of execution. On this short ground I oppose the motion; and, with the conviction of the dangers that must arise from the adoption of it, with the solemn recognition of the independence of the parliament of Ireland, with a just sense of our duty that others may not in their turn be wanting to us, I cannot entertain a doubt but that the motion will be rejected by a considerable majority of the House.