tions-Mr. Sheridan opposes the minister, and proposes two resolutions-Mr. Sheridan renews his motion respecting the con- sent of both parliaments-Mr. Sheridan proposes a substitute for union-Conference of the two houses upon the subject of union -Mr. Foster's popularity for opposing the union-Adjourn- ment of the Irish parliament, in order to follow up the resolu- tions of the British parliament-Exertions of the Anti-unionists in the country-Parliament meets after adjournment-Lord Cornwallis uses personal influence to forward the union-The measure brought forward in the British house of lords-Confer- ence with the Commons-Proceedings of the Irish parliament: Motion in favour of Mr. Judkin Fitzgerald-Regency Bill- General measures for and against union-Prorogation of parlia- ment, and the lord-lieutenant's speech-Internal state of Ire- land-Efforts to oppose the union-How the Catholics acted as to the union-Effects of the preparatory steps for union-Con- sequences of the minister's majority-Meeting of parliament after adjournment-Message from the lord-lieutenant about union-The plan carried in the peers-Debated in the com- mons- Articles of union brought before the British parliament- Compensation for Borough property-Union bill passed in the THE HISTORY OF IRELAND FROM THE INVASION OF HENRY II. TO ITS INCORPORATE UNION WITH GREAT BRITAIN. BOOK III. COMPRISING THE PERIOD BETWEEN THE COMPLE- The Reigns of William and Mary, and William. Revolution and Ireland THE revolution, which changed the dynasty, and 1691. ascertained some rights of the British people, which had been infringed by the crown, is generally re- in England ferred to by the date of its commencement in Eng- different. land in 1688. As to Ireland, it was not effected, till the surrender of Limerick, which left William and Mary in possession of the whole kingdom. Ireland did not pass from the hands of James by any 1692. revolutionary measure, whether of abdication, invitation, or expulsion, but by force of arms. Hence William's title arose by right of conquest. This revolution, such as it was, opens to our view a new scene of Irish politics. Whatever civil advantages were gained or established by it in England, vainly do the Irish look up to it as the commencement or improvement of their constitutional liberty. Then, more than ever, was Ireland treated as a conquered country, its independence violated, its national consequence and dignity debased. It appears to have been the systematic policy of the British cabinet of that day, not only to trample on the rights of individuals, through their immediate governors, but to extinguish the very idea of an independent legislature in Ireland *. * Mr. Burke, viewing this situation of his country as a statesman and a philosopher, has left a masterly portrait of it. (Letter to Sir Her. Lang. p. 44.) "By the total reduction of the king. dom of Ireland in 1691, the ruin of the native Irish, and in a great measure too of the first races of the English, was completely accomplished. The new. interest was settled with as solid a stability as any thing in human affairs can look for. All the penal laws of that unparalleled code of oppression, which were made after the last event, were manifestly the effects of national hatred and scorn towards a conquered people, whom the victors delighted to trample upon, and were not at all afraid to provoke. They were not the effects of their fears, but of their security. They, who carried on this system looked to the irresistible force of Great Britain for their support in their acts of power. They were quite certain, that no complaints of the natives would be heard on this side of the water with any other sentiments than those of contempt and indignation. Their cries served only to augment their torture. Machines, which could answer their purposes so well must be of an excellent cons not ob Although the articles of Limerick had immediately 1692. received the sanction of the great seal of England, they Articles of were soon infringed in the face of the Irish nation. Limerick Two months had not elapsed, when, according to the served. testimony of Harris*, the avowed encomiast of William, the lords justices and General Ginckle endeavoured to render the first of those articles of as little force as possible. "The justices of the peace, sheriffs, and other magistrates, presuming on their power in the country, did in an illegal manner dispossess several of their majesties' subjects not only of trivance. Indeed at that time in England the double name of the complainants, Irish and Papists, (it would be hard to say singly which was the most odious) shut up the hearts of every one against them. Whilst that temper prevailed in all its force to a time with. in our memory, every measure was pleasing and popular, just in proportion, as it tended to harass and ruin a set of people, who were looked upon to be enemies to God and man; and indeed as a race of bigotted savages, who were a disgrace to human nature itself." *Harris's Life of King William, p. 357. + Ibid. 350. "Capel, Lord Justice, in 1693, proceeded as far as it was in his power to infringe the articles of Limerick." It appears also from a letter of the Lords Justices of the 19th of November, 1691, "that their lordships had received complaints from all parts of Ireland, of the illtreatment of the Irish, who had submitted, had their majesties protection, or were included in articles: and that they were so extremely terrified with apprehensions of the continuance of that' usage, that some thousands of them, who had quitted the Irish army, and went home with a resolution not to go to France, were then come back again, and pressed earnestly to go thither, rather than stay in Ireland, where contrary to the public faith as well as law and justice, they were robbed of their substance and abused in their persons." 1692. their goods and chattels, but of their lands and tenements, to the great disturbance of the peace of the kingdom, subversion of the law, and reproach of their majesties' government." William not natur rant There is no question, but that King William was ally intole infinitely more tolerant in his principles and dispo sition than the English and Irish protestants, who urged him to excesses of rigor and persecution against the conquered Irish. He abhorred the system; but was forced to yield. Although he had been most anxious to secure the sovereignty of the British empire by the final subjugation of Ireland, yet he was too much of the warrior, not to esteem those most whom he found it the most difficult to subdue. He did not, after having reduced Ireland by force of his own arms, consider it merely a conquest for the purposes of parliamentary appropriation. His Majesty's mind had not yet been accustomed to the restrictions, which the English constitution threw around the will of the sovereign. The tories flattered him more than the whigs, and he had thrown himself into the arms of the former. Differences between William and his English parliament. The relative feelings of William and his English parliament towards each other, and towards Ireland are more illustrated by the address presented to the King by the English House of Commons, and his Majesty's unsatisfactory answer to it, than by a volume of detail. Sir Francis Brewster, and some other persons had been induced to give very strong evidence before the English House of Commons of the various abuses then practised by the government of |