UNION. 



Rutliority, wliich was done firll by the reverfion of a fen- 

 teiice of the Irifli houfe of lords by the Eiigh(h houfe, as 

 a fuperior court of judicature, and then by a folemn declara- 

 tion of a right, not only to make fuch reveriions in all cafes 

 of appeal, but alfo that the king's majefty, with the con- 

 fent of the lords and commons of Great Britain in parlia- 

 ment, had power to make laws to bind the people of Ire- 

 land. When the prefent king, George III., afcendcd the 

 throne in 1760, two-thirds of the people of Ireland, de- 

 prefTed by fevere penal laws, not only were not reprefented 

 in the parliament by which they were taxed, but were con- 

 fidered as aliens, undeferving of any proteAion. The re- 

 maining third was reprefented by three hundred members, 

 of which about one hundred were chofen by counties or 

 large towns, and the remainder by boroughs, moft of which 

 had been conftituted in the time of the Stewarts, to create 

 a Proteftant majority of the houfe of commons, and had 

 become the property of a few individuals. The members 

 thus chofen fat for their own lives, or that of the fovereign ; 

 110 general cleftion taking place except on the demife of the 

 crown. The executive government was committed nomi- 

 nally to a viceroy, but elTentially to lords juftices, felefted 

 from the principal Hate officers of the country, who were 

 cntrufted with the condudl of what was called the king's 

 bufinefs, but which might with more propriety have been 

 called the bufinefs of the lords juftices. The viceroy came 

 to Ireland for a few months only in two years, and the 

 lords juftices in his abfence had the means of confolidating 

 an ariftocratic influence, which made them the neceftary in- 

 flruments of the Englifti government. As no afts could 

 pafs without the previous approbation of the king in his 

 Englifti council, it was ufual to agree with fome of the Irilh 

 leaders on a compromifc that die minifter would forward 

 their local objefts, provided they undertook to carry through 

 parliament thofe bills which he required. What could be 

 expcfted from fuch a fyfteni of government ? What but a 

 fyftem of peculation and opprcflion, fuch as perhaps was 

 fcarcely ever witncfted in any other country ? The objeft, 

 it may be faid the miftakcn pohcy of the Britifli govern- 

 ment, was, in the words of Mr. Pitt, " to debar Ireland 

 from the enjoyment and life of her own refources, and to 

 make her completely fubfervient to the intcrefts and opu- 

 lence of Britain ;" and whatever ivfiftanee might be occa- 

 fionally lliewn, the general tenor of conduft of the Irifti 

 parliament was to promote the deftruflive views of Britain, 

 which the members made conducive to their own individual 

 intcrefts. " The inevitable final refult of this unpropitious 

 combination," to ufe the words of Mr. Neweiiham in his 

 View of the Natural, Political, and Commercial Circum- 

 ftances of Ireland, publiflied in 1809, "was a very fcanty 

 and difproportionate acquifition of commercial wealth on 

 the part of Ireland, and an almoft utter extindion of a 

 fpirit of induftry therein. To cramp, obftruft, and render 

 abortive the induftry of the Irifti, were the objefts of the 

 Britifti trader. To gratify commercial avarice, to ferve 

 Britain at the expence of Ireland, or to facilitate the go- 

 vernment of the latter, were the varying objefts of the Bri- 

 tifti minifter. To keep down the Papifts, coft what it 

 would, and to augment their own revenues by the public 

 money, inftcad of urging tlie adoption of wife, liberal, and 

 patriotic meafures calculated to (luadrupl-- the rents of their 

 cftates, were the objedls of the reputed reprefentatives of 

 the Irifti people ; and to fecure themfclvcs from retaliations 

 on the part of the Roman Catholics, whom they were en- 

 couraged to perlecute and taught to dread, was the general 

 objeft of the Iridi gentry." To this deplorable lliitc of Ire- 



land, wc have to add the non-refidcnce of the principal lande4 

 proprietors, and the frequent diilurbances which under va- 

 rious pretences were raifed in difl'erent parts of the country. 

 In ftioit, Ireland was in a (late which could hardly be ren- 

 dered worfe, and which required fome fptpdv melioration. 



The meafure of a leglflative union had occurred to fe- 

 veral as the beft mode of rendering Ireland a valuablu part 

 of the Britifti empire. Oliver Cromwell, during the period 

 of his ufurped power, adually carried it into effedt : in the 

 reign of queen Anne, the Irifh houfe of lords petitioned for 

 fuch an incorporation ; and the great earl of Chatham is 

 faid to have regarded it as a favourite objeft. Now, though 

 he and others might have had the intereft of England imme- 

 diately in view, yet it is an undoubted faft, that the intcrefts 

 of both countries are fo clofely united, that it is impoflible to 

 make Ireland contribute to the welfare of Engla.nd without 

 promoting its internal profperity. The a-voiued objeft, it 

 is faid, was an objeft of taxation ; but he muft be a ftatcf- 

 man of a very different caft from lord Chatham, who could 

 expeft to derive revenue from an impoveriftied country like 

 Ireland, until he had awakened a fpirit of induftry, had civi- 

 lized, improved, and enriched the people. Thofe, how- 

 ever, who derived benefit from the fyftem then afted on, 

 fuch as the parliamentary leaders, were not backward in 

 exprefting their diflike of a union, and they were fupported 

 by thofe whofe vanity was pleafed by the name of an inde- 

 pendent legiflaturc, as well ashy thofe unfriendly to Britifti 

 conneftion. So odious was the meafure, that in 1759, at a 

 time when Ireland was threatened by a French invafion, the 

 bare fufpicion of its being in contemplation caufed a fpirit 

 of diftatisfaftion to break out with extraordinary violence 

 among the populace of DubHn. It was reprefented that 

 Ireland would be deprived of its parliament and independ- 

 ence, and be fubjefted to the fame taxes that are levied 

 upon the people of England. On this occafion both houfes 

 of parliament, cfpecially the lords, were grofsly infulted ; 

 the members were compelled to take an oath that tliey would 

 never confcnt to fuch a meafure ; and, at laft, military in- 

 terference was found neceffary to the reilor.-ition of order. 

 This mode of influencing parliament.iry proceedings by the 

 threatenings of a mob, which was not unufual at a much 

 later period in the Irilli capital, proves the neceffity of 

 fome change in the fyftem of legiflation. In the reign of 

 George III. many meafures were adopted which contri- 

 buted to give weight to the anti-union party, and which 

 certainly promoted the improvement and profperity of the 

 country. Parhaments were rendered oftennial, and their 

 feflions annual ; many penal laws were repealed or modified ; 

 agriculture was encouraged ; and a fpirit of induftry ex- 

 cited. In the mean time, Britain was weakened by its con- 

 teft with its American colonies ; and the demands of the 

 Irifti parliament, backed by 40,000 volunteers, procured a 

 liberation of trade from unjuft reftriftions, and the eft.iblifti- 

 nient of legiflative independence. This iudependerxe, how- 

 ever, was merely nominal ; the influence of the Britifti 

 miiiiller ftill direfted the meafures of the Irifti parliament 

 at a greater expence to the nation, and there were many 

 dillicuhies from the want of fome regular mode of con- 

 iidering the commercial intcrefts of both countries : " fome 

 general fuperiiiteiiding authority," as Mr. Fox faid, "to 

 embrace and comprehend the wiiole fvllein of the naviga- 

 tion of the empire." In 1785, Mr. Pitt .ittempted to re- 

 medy this evil by a commercial arrangement, which, wliilft 

 it held out great advantages to Ireland, ftipulated that fo 

 long as Ireland continued to trade wilii the Britilh colonies 

 and plantations, flic would adopt the r-gnlations of traiit: 



