fing that religion, while the religion of a great majority of the people is different, it is not easy "to fay, on general principles, what fyftem of "church establishment, in fuch a country, would "be free from difficulty and inconvenience. By 66 many I know it will be contended, that the re"ligion profeffed by the majority of the people "would, at least, be entitled to an equality of

66

privileges. I have heard fuch an argument "urged in this House; but those who apply it "without qualification to the case of Ireland, for

get furely the principles on which English inte"reft and English connection has been established "in that country, and its prefent legislature is "formed. No man can fay, that, in the prefent "state of things, and while Ireland remains a Separate kingdom, full conceffions could be made

to the Catholics without endangering the ftate, "and fhaking the conftitution to its centre.”

Is not this as much as to fay, that, after an incorporate union fhall have taken place, thefe FULL CONCESSIONS could be made without endangering Ireland? Could these words be understood in any other way by the Catholics? and,

Are

Are they not an indirect offer, on the part of Mr. Pitt, to the Catholics to make these FULL CONCESSIONS, provided they would enable him to make them without endangering Ireland? But the language which he next employs is ftronger and ftill more in point. He immediately proceeds, "On the other hand, without anticipating the "difcuffion, or the propriety of agitating the "queftion, or faying how foon or how late it may "be fit to difcufs it, two propofitions are indifput"able-ift. When the conduct of the Catholics "shall be such as to make it fafe for the govern"ment to admit them to the participation of the

privileges granted to thofe of the established "religion, and when the temper of the times "fhall be favourable to fuch a measure: when "those events take place, it is obvious that such

a question may be agitated in an United Impe"rial Parliament, with much greater fafety than "it could be in a separate legislature. In the "fecond place, I think it certain, that even for "whatever period it may be thought neceffary, " after the union, to withhold from the Catholics "the enjoyment of those advantages, many of the "objections which at prefent arife out of their

"fituation

"fituation would be removed, if the Proteftant

66

legislature were no longer feparate and local, "but general and impartial."

The fpeech, from which the foregoing is extracted, was circulated gratis by government throughout all Ireland. It was confidered by the Catholics as a tender of emancipation; it was anxiously read by all who could read. At the Castle it was explained, to those who fought for explanation, as an unequivocal offer of every con ceffion; and, in the result, the Catholics opposed their own Parliament, and gave their support to Mr. Pitt; and, by the aid of this support, he was enabled to contend with a majority in the House of Commons, and to carry the measure.

We come now to the evidence to be collected from the Act of Union.

Many of the leading Catholics have not hesitated to declare, that the oath prefcribed by this act, to qualify members of Parliament on taking their feats, was framed under an arrangement, that, immediately after the measure was paffed,

they were to enjoy the privilege of fitting in Parliament. The act runs thus, "That every one

"of the Lords and Commons of Parliament of "the United Kingdom, and every member of the "Houfe of Commons of the United Kingdom, in "the first and every fucceeding Parliament, fhall, "until the Parliament of the United Kingdom fhall

66

otherwife provide, take the oaths as now en'joined to be taken." "Do not quibble with "us," the Catholics fay, "concerning terms and "formalities; it was clearly understood between 66 us, that if we co-operated to bring about the "union, as we actually did, you would effect the "emancipation. To give a colouring to this en66 gagement, you inferted in the articles of union

66

an intimation of a proposed change of the oaths "in our favour: when, behold! now you roundly "tell us, that this alteration never fhall take place, "and that we must make up our minds to wear "our fhackles till the end of time."*

The third head of evidence is Mr. Pitt's speech on explaining the cause of his refignation in 1801, and the letters of Pitt and Lord Cornwallis.

* Dr. Milner's Inquiry, p. 68.

"As

"As to the merits," Mr. Pitt faid, "of the quef"tion which led to my refignation, I am willing "to fubmit them to the Houfe. I and fome of

my colleagues in office, did feel it an incumbent "duty upon us to propofe a measure on the part "of government, which, under the circumftances "of the union fo happily effected between the "two countries, we thought of great public im

portance, and neceffary to complete the benefits likely to refult from that meafure; we felt this

opinion fo ftrongly, that, when we met with "circumstances which rendered it impoffible for "us to propofe it as a measure of government, we "felt it equally inconfiftent with our duty and "our honour any longer to remain a part of that

government. What may be the opinion of "others, I know not, but I beg to have it under"flood to be a measure which, if I had remained "in government, I must have propofed."*

Why must Mr. Pitt have propofed this measure? To this question one anfwer alone can be given, because his honour, as a statesman, was fubftantially engaged to the Catholics, that, if they fupported

FF 2

* Debrit's Debates, 14, 161.