which it was suspended, the whole nation would be in the power of the minister. It was for their lordships therefore to consider the nature and magnitude of the vote they were called upon to give. If there were danger of invasion; if traitors really were in this country; we might oppose, to the one, our vast military force; and, to the other, our judicious laws. Whilst courts of justice sat in tranquillity; Whilst the laws of treason were comprehensive and vigorous; whilst the spirit of the people manifested itself in ardent expressions of loy. alty to the sovereign, and attachment to the constitution; where was the pretended necessity for adopting this measure? There was but one case in which it could be necessary; which was, if there actually existed these conspiracies, and some of the persons concerned in them were in custody, but could not be brought to trial without the risk of giving the alarm to the rest, then, and then only, the bill should have his support.

He took a rapid view of the state of Ireland; denied that the rebellion in that country justified new rigours in this; that had the government of Ireland ameliorated their condition, by removing their grievances, rebellion never would have broken out amongst them.

Whilst talking of the trials of Maidstone, he maintained, that Mr. O'Connor had been bonourably acquitted; and connecting this assertion with the argument, that, as no danger existed, as the people declared for their own government, the preamble stated a libel on their loyalty. He would acknowledge, that to preserve confidence between the governors and the governed was Essential; but it must be recollected, all firm confidence was mutual.

If governors required it, they must themselves set the example: but here the true policy was reversed; the governors showed distrust, and expected confidence. What was the state of our public affairs? Thanks to the rashness of our ene mies, to the bravery of our seamen, and, above all, to admiral Nelson, of whom he could not speak in terms too high;-thanks also to the admiralty for its arrangement of our naval force (for he had pleasure in acknowledging the merit which had distinguished that de partment of our executive government); thanks to all these, there was an end of every apprehension from the enemy: but this only tended to show still further, that there was no plea for the suspension of the bill.

Alas! the system of ministers was a system of terror; and they endeavoured to keep the attention of the public upon its own danger, instead of the incapacity or corrup tion of ministers. It was from this motive that they accused every man of being inclined to French principles who dissented from theirs, and this bill was a part of that system of alarm with which they wished to surprise the good sense of the English; but all this deception could not last long; the public would judge freely of the conduct of administration, and the bubble would burst, at last, with disgrace upon their heads. His lordship concluded with saying, "that when he considered the failure of the objects of ministers in public affairs, the zeal and loyalty manifested by the people, the treatment they had experienced, and the conduct which they had observed, he was astonished that their rulers should so calumniate them as to affirm that the bill was necessary!"

Lord

1

Lord Grenville said, that if the debate on this bill had depended on the opinion the gentlemen of the opposition entertained of administration, he should have no hope, perhaps no ambition, to convince the noble lord of the propriety of any of their measures. But although they had not beer. favoured with his approbation, they had repeatedly received the support of the house. On some minds, indeed, prejudice had so strong an effect, that even facts could not alter them; but there were also others on whom reasoning and evidence made considerable impression. As to the trials of persons acquitted at the Old Bailey, were we now to learn that the acquittal was a proof of innocence? So far was acquittal from negativing the reports of conspiracy, that it tended to confirm it. Was it not proved that there had existed, in this country, a certain description of people called the Corresponding Society? the object of which was, to pull down our government, to destroy our property, to introduce a new system of power on the model of the French republic, under the specious mask of parliamentary reform. With respect to another point brought forward against ministers, namely, their representing every man as a jacobin who did not agree with them; for his own part, he denied the charge; but had it been founded, had it been the desire of ministers to stigmatise them as being attached to French principles, he knew of no opposition who had, at any time, afforded them better opportunity. But on what evidence was the necessity of the bill maintained? (here lord Grenville quoted the proclamation in April last, which stated, that our enemies were aided and abetted

by persons in this country) this evidence last year was deemed (he said) so satisfactory, that a similat bill to the present passed unanimously. Had not the fact corroborated exactly the minister's prognostication? Was it not confirmed by the person so honourably acquitted at Maidstone? The house needed not to be informed that he alluded to O'Connor. Had not that traitor, since his honourable acquittal, thrown himself on the mercy of that gracious sovereign whom he basely had attempted to dethrone? Had he not detailed, upon his oath, a series of the deepest designs against Ireland, which were afterwards confirmed by a rebellion? Nor was this all; O'Coigly, one of his confederates, had also been convicted of treason; and it appeared, beyond a doubt, that a communication was to be made to the directory, not from any society in Ireland, but in England. All these things proved the assertion, that there had existed a conspiracy in this country-that it also existed in Ireland-and a design had long been conceived of separating the kingdoms from each other. As to the idea of the English conceiving themselves calumniated by this bill, it was as absurd to suppose it, as that they would think they were all called murderers, because a law had been made against murder. If the discontent of the people had been general against their government, he would not propose this measure; because, in such circumstances, little could be done by the imprisonment of a few. But he was persuaded the public would view the bill as ministers intended to use it, not for the destruction of their li berty, but its protection; a measure which was not to bring them into misery, but adopted, in ten

derness,

derness, for their future happiness and present security.

Lord Holland affirmed that he had not said absolutely, the verdict da jury disproved a conspiracy; but it had proved that, when minisfers came to parliament, and asked for extraordinary powers, they had taken up persons who were not guday of that conspiracy, or that there was none at all existing. This poist the noble secretary had been very ready to debate, but he had carefully avoided saying one word on the main subject-the state of the country. The reason recited in the preamble last year was, that the enemy was about to invade us. This was not now pretended; nor, had it been true, was it a reason for justifying the suspension of the habeas-corpus. As to the Maidstone trials, it was not yet evident that the Cspirators, in England, were either crons or powerful: it never had bern signed, and the French government would not have been so absurd as to act upon such a docuBest as the proof of meeting with co-operation. Of Mr. O'Connor he

saw no cause for being ashamed to repeat, that he had been bonourably acquitted at Maidstone; this did not infer that he had been so of a previous charge. His lordship had alluded to the disturbances of Ireland; were these any reasons for suspending the habeas-corpus here? The system pursued in Ireland had not produced effects to induce us to think that severe laws were the best remedy. Under all the attempts to repress evils by legislative severity, the rebellion had increased there; and if it were now checked, it was by the valour of our troops.

He conceived the object of this bill was to enable government to put off the trials of persons apprehended, lest those trials should be attended with disadvantage to the whole community. But government had much better consult (in his opinion) the tranquillity of the country, and the safety of the constitution, by removing grievances, and taking away colourable pretexts for rebellion.\ The house then divided. Contents Non-contents

26

1

THE

HE union with Ireland, on which we have ventured to deliver a cursory opinion, while it was yet a project, is certainly a subject of the highest magnitude and importance to both countries; and we cannot help expressing our surprise, that it has, not excited a greater interest and attention in the bulk of the nation. Whatever may be the consequences of this measure, in a commercial view, its political effects cannot be neutral; they will either be productive of great good, or of great evil. With respect to commerce, we do not anticipate any speedy consequences of great moment. Capital changes hands more readily than it changes local situation; the current of commerce is not easily diverted into distant channels, and manufactures are slowly established, and with difficulty removed. But the political change which this measure must effect, will be more speedy in its operation, and of much greater importance. Those who have speculated deeply upon the subject of parliamentary reform (a measure which we agree is full of hazard), will do well to

consider what was the nature and constitution of the Irish parlia ment, and to weigh well the effects which are likely to result from the change which will now be made in the constitution of the British house of commons. We believe we are not inaccurate when we state, that two thirds of the Irish house of commons were members for obscure boroughs, elected by a few nominal burgesses; but, in reality, nominated by some great man who was regarded as the owner or patron of the borough. Such a parliament was easily marshalled, was easily managed. By the present arrangement, the counties only, and the principal towns, are to return representatives; the borough system, therefore, and the aristocratical influence, are for ever at an end in the sister kingdom. On the other hand, nay not the admission of one hundred members, elected in the manner which we have noticed, be regarded as tantamount to the famous measure of reform, which, we believe, was patronised by lord Chat-. ham, of adding 100 county members to the British parliament? It is not the number of the members,

so much as the mode and the motives on which they have gained their seats, that will render them, difficult to be influenced by a minister; and that two bodies of men are more easily managed than one which is numerous and independent, we may easily prove from late experiments in a neighbouring nation. One effect, therefore, is obvious, from the measure of the union; that the constitution of the British legislature will certainly be rendered more popular; there will be a greater scope for the exertion of popular talents and democratical intrigue; and the influence of ministers will be proportionably narrowed. The limitation of the Irish peerage may also be considered as a step towards a measure which was proposed in a late reign, the limitation of the numbers in the upper house; and should the precedent ever be proceeded on, at any future time, Great Britain will behold a material change in its constitution: whether for the better or the worse we will not venture to predict.

From what we have stated, however, the reader will perceive, that the clamour which has been excited against the union, as hostile to liberty, has but little foundation; and we must add, that it is with little grace, or at least with little consideration, that it can be opposed by the advocates of parliamentary reform, and the avowed enemies of aristocratical influence. Independent, however, of these effects, we can ourselves foresee many advantages arising from a unity of government; and our readers will recollect, that, in giving our opinion on the measure, in a former volume, we rather doubted of its seasonableness than of its general policy.

In our next volume we hope to

present our readers with a satisfactory detail, from indubitable authorities, of the progress of this important measure in Ireland, and the real means by which it was effected. In the mean-time the question was ably debated in the British parliament; and from an attentive review of the arguments which were em ployed there on both sides, the reader will be enabled to form an opinion which will be tolerably accurate on the merits of the question at large.

The subject of a union with Ireland was introduced with some address into the British house of com. mons, on the 22d of January 1799, under the form of a message from his majesty, to the following effect: “GEORGE R.

"His majesty is persuaded that the unremitting industry with which our enemies persevere in their avowed design of effecting the separation of Ireland from this kingdom cannot fail to engage the particular attention of parliament; and his ma jesty recommends it to this house to consider of the most effectual means of finally defeating this design, by disposing the parliaments of both kingdoms to provide, in the manner which they shall judge most expedient, for settling such a complete and final adjustment as may best tend to improve and perpetuate a connexion essential for their common security, and consolidate the strength, power, and resources, of the British empire."

Mr. Secretary Dundas then moved, that this message be taken into consideration on the morrow.

Mr. Sheridan said, as his majesty's message would be taken into cons sideration on the following day, he took it for granted that the address, which would then be proposed, would contain an assurance, that

the