1

pass an Act, which had been drawn by Grattan and two others, which provided that all clauses in English Acts relating to oaths and declarations should be in force in Ireland. By this provision, the English Act of William and Mary, which excluded Roman Catholics from Parliament, was extended to Ireland. "Spirit of Swift, spirit of Molyneux," exclaimed Grattan, "your genius has prevailed; Ireland is now a nation!" But what a nation! if that term could be applied to a country inhabited by three discordant communities, between which there was no bond of union whatever.

Two

Some excellent Acts were passed in this session. granted further relief to the Roman Catholics, who were now allowed to purchase and bequeath lands as Protestants, to open schools, and to become guardians to children of their own denomination.2 Marriages celebrated by Presbyterian clergymen were legalised, and a body of Dissenters in Ulster, called Seceders, were granted the privilege of taking an oath by lifting up the right hand. The Bank of Ireland was established.5 As appendant to the new constitution, Ireland was to have a Mutiny and a Habeas Corpus Act of her own, and the independence of the Judges was secured." Poynings' law was modified in the following manner: All bills, approved of by both Houses of Parliament, and none other, were to be certified by the Lord Lieutenant for transmission to England under the great seal of Ireland "without addition, diminution or alteration," and such bills, if returned unaltered, were to pass in the Parliament of Ireland, but no Parliament was to meet, until a licence for that purpose had been obtained from the Crown under the Great Seal of Great Britain."

329

CHAPTER XVI.

THE SETTLEMENT OF 1782-SIMPLE REPEAL-REVOLT OF THE VOLUNTEERS AGAINST THE PARLIAMENT-THEIR CONVENTION - CONDITION OF IRELAND IN 1783 AND 1784 DEMAND FOR A COMMERCIAL UNION.

THE Settlement of 1782, which established a more incomplete connection between Great Britain and Ireland than had existed before, was as defective as the wit of man could devise. Under it, there was but one tie between the two countries, namely, the identity of the Executive. For we may leave out of account the power of refusing to place the Great Seal on an Irish bill, as the exercise of that negative would at once have caused a collision between the two kingdoms. The right of the Crown to refuse its assent to a bill which had passed both Houses had fallen into disuse in England, and it was not likely that it would be exercised in Ireland. After 1782, there was no unity whatever between Great Britain and Ireland save that of the Executive, and the two Parliaments might have differed on every important matter. Nothing was settled between the two nations, except that the legislative supremacy of the more powerful was given up, and every question between them was left to the humour or passion of the hour. The two Parliaments were equal and co-ordinate, without any paramount authority to regulate them, or reconcile their differences, and the Empire, though in theory one and indivisible, had two wills and two voices. There was no provision for securing uni

formity of action in affairs of Imperial concern, such as the regulation of trade and commerce between Great Britain and Ireland, their transactions and intercourse with foreign States, the declaration of war and its conduct, or the negotiation of peace. The Parliament in Ireland claimed perfect internal and external legislative powers, though it is hard to see how the expression "external legislation" could be applied to a Parliament which was unable to defend a single harbour of the nation it governed, or resent an injury done to an individual of that nation outside its borders or on the high seas. Yet, powerless as that Parliament was, there was hardly a matter in which it might not have thwarted or injured Great Britain. As Pitt said "a party in England might give to the throne one species of advice by its Parliament a party in Ireland might advise directly opposite upon the most essential points that involved the safety of both; upon alliance with a foreign power for instance; upon the army, upon the navy, upon trade, upon commerce, or upon any point essential to the empire at large."

The history of Scotland furnishes us with an example of the evils resulting from a partial and incomplete connection between a rich and powerful nation and one inferior in wealth and power. Scotland, though differing greatly from Ireland in possessing an ancient and independent crown of her own, had once stood to England in such a position. Both kingdoms acknowledged the same king, but their Parliaments were separate, and the only bond between them was the identity of the Executive. This relation produced constant irritation and national animosities which disturbed and weakened the Empire. The discontent of the Scots came to a head in the early part of the reign of Anne. While England was at war with France, the Parliament of Scotland manifested a strong inclination to the latter country, and passed an Act removing restrictions on the importation of

French wines. A year later it passed another, the Act of Security, which provided that, in case of the Queen's death without issue, the successor to the Scottish Crown should not be the same person that was possessed of the English Crown, unless before that event the rights and liberties of Scotland had been settled independent of English interests. The English Parliament retaliated by passing an Act declaring the natives of Scotland, with certain exceptions, aliens, unless their country should settle its crown on the House of Hanover, by the 24th of December in the next year. In addition, twenty-four men of war were fitted out with orders to seize all Scottish vessels trading with France. Everything portended a war, but fortunately both kingdoms saw that two independent Parliaments were incompatible with their common safety, and sank their differences in an incorporate union.

It is the nature of all such imperfect connections to generate jealousy, suspicion, and finally hostility, in the inferior country. The weaker nation, being subordinate in the Empire, is obliged to witness a perpetual ascendency and control in all its affairs. The Executive, being only responsible to the Parliament of the superior nation, necessarily partakes its sentiments, and carries them into every department of the concerns of the inferior country, and the latter is always conscious of a real dependence which produces chagrin and resentment. The sense of subordination irritates and begets a constant desire to throw off the predominant influence of the more powerful partner. Hence arise attempts of the inferior to assert itself, and to weaken the control which is the necessary consequence of its own inequality of power. Complaints are made of the superior encroaching on or denying the rights of the other, and obstruction is offered to the action of the Executive. Demand of redress succeeds demand, and concessions, instead of exacting grati

tude, are received as rights long denied, each, as it is granted, giving rise to a new claim. The leading men in the inferior Parliament, being excluded from the consideration of Imperial matters, become narrow and parochial, with views limited to their own country. Its constitutional claims occupy their attention so largely that they neglect both the welfare of the people they govern, and the wider interests of the Empire. Repining at the visible signs of their subordination, they strain every effort to raise their local Parliament to an equality with that of the superior nation, and to strike off link after link of their dependence, or, as they term it, to free their country from the yoke of foreign interference. The connection being partial, the interests of the two nations must in many respects be different. This difference further increases their alienation, and produces fresh causes for dissensions. Gradually the tie between the two countries is loosened, every trivial discontent is magnified into a cause of quarrel, and distrust and enmity take the place of loyalty to the connection. A relation of this kind inevitably leads, sooner or later, to one of three things-separation, war or incorporation.

All the tendencies and symptoms we have enumerated are to be found in the connection which had existed between England and Scotland, and in that between Great Britain and Ireland. They are inseparable from all partial and imperfect relations, and attend them as the shadow does the body. They were manifested by the Scottish Parliament and people before the union with England, and by the Irish Parliament and the small community it represented, both before and after 1782. In the latter country, they were aggravated by the nominal independence obtained in this year; for nothing causes so much heart-burning as an unsubstantial independence side by side with real subordination. If Ireland, instead of being a mere geographical expression,