CONSIDERATIONS 
 
 THE PRESENT STATE AND PDTDRE PROSPECTS 
 
 I U E L A IN D. 
 
 CAMILLE DE CAVOUR.’ 
 
 TRANSLATED FROM THE FRENCH, 
 
 A FRIEND TO IRELAND. 
 
 ! LONDON 
 
 LONGMAN, B^WN,. GREEN, AND LONGMANS, 
 
 i-AJTRSJOSTER-noW. 
 
 1S45. 
 
TEANSLATOR’S PREFACE. 
 
 The opinions of an intelligent foreigner on Irisli 
 afiairs can never be a matter of indifference to this 
 country. It is under this impression that the 
 following pages have been translated from the 
 French, and are now submitted to the public in an 
 Engbsh form. In executing my task, I have 
 contented myself with endeavouring to be feithful; 
 and if this object has been attained, I shall feel 
 that my time has not been mis-spent, but that I 
 have rendered some service, however slight, to the 
 country to which I belong, and to that to which, 
 I trust, England will long remain united. 
 
 At the same time I am too conscious of the 
 imperfections of style that may be detected in the 
 following pages, not to express my regret to the 
 author that my part of the task should not have 
 been performed in a manner more worthy of the 
 original. 
 
 It may be proper to add that this essay first 
 
iv teanslatoe’s pbeface. 
 
 appeared in December, 1843, and January, 1844, 
 in two successive numbers of the “ Bibliotbeque 
 Dniverselle of Geneva;” and that one of my in¬ 
 ducements for the present publication is the diffi¬ 
 culty of procuring original copies of a work entitled 
 to so much attention. 
 
 The first two paragraphs have been omitted, as 
 well as a few lines at a subsequent page, both 
 being of local interest. 
 
 Thahslatob. 
 
CONSIDERATIONS 
 
 PRESENT STATE AND FUTURE PROSPECTS 
 
 IRELAND. 
 
 The singular state of Ireland has attracted through¬ 
 out Europe the attention of all who take any interest 
 in politics. There is, perhaps, no one who has not 
 puzzled himself with the question of whither that 
 agitation, wliich an extraordinary man has been able 
 to produce, and which he directs with such wonder¬ 
 ful skill, is ultimately to lead ? The newspapers, 
 those faithful interpreters of whatever is uppermost 
 in the public mind, make Ireland one of their con¬ 
 stant themes for discussion. Usually so laconic 
 with respect to the affairs of England, they at 
 once open their columns to the reports of the most 
 insignificant meetings in favour of the Repeal of 
 
PHESENT STATE AXD 
 
 the Union; and Tve are regularly informed of the 
 minutest details of the great trial which O’Connell 
 and his associates are at present undergoing. What 
 does this riveted attention on this one subject 
 indicate ? Does it foretell the approach of a great 
 political crisis, one of those by which important 
 changes are effected in the social condition of a 
 nation ? And does the crisis itself forebode some 
 violent catastrophe, endangering the ancient fabric 
 of the British Constitution, which ages have re¬ 
 spected, and which European revolutions, far from 
 weakening, have rather tended to consolidate? 
 Considering the hopes and id-repressed delight of 
 certain journals, and of certain political parties, 
 when they speak of Ireland, one might be tempted 
 to believe that such is the case. The enemies of 
 England upon the Continent (and their number 
 is unfortunately very considerable) fancy that the 
 day of vengeance is at hand; her friends hesitate, 
 and begin to waver in the faith they have hitherto 
 entertained for a constitution which, more than any 
 other in the world, they considered as safe from 
 political shocks. 
 
 It must be admitted, that public opinion on 
 the Continent is not, in general, favourable to 
 England. Extreme parties, opposed in every thing 
 else, mute in violent hatred against that country. 
 Those who are more moderate are attached to her 
 in theory, but they entertain for her little real or 
 
FUTURE PROSPECTS OF IRELAOT. 
 
 natural sympathy. Some solitaiy instances may be 
 found of persons who, superior to popular passion 
 and prejudice, feel for the English that respect and 
 interest which is fairly due to one of the greatest 
 nations that has done honour to mankind, which is 
 due to a nation that has powerfully contributed to 
 the moral and material development of the world, 
 and whose civilizing mission is still far from bang 
 accomplished. The masses, liowevcr, are almost 
 every where hostile to them. 
 
 Let it not be supposed that this feeling is con¬ 
 fined to France. In that countiy it may be pro¬ 
 claimed in a more noisy end vehement manner; 
 but it is in reality common to all the nations of 
 Europe. From Petersburg to Madrid, in Germany 
 as in Italy, the enemies of hiunan progress, and the 
 partizans of political revolutions, alike conader 
 England as their most formidable adversary. The 
 former charge her with being the focus whence all 
 revolutions emanate—^the certain refuge—^the dta- 
 del, as it were, of propagandists and levellers. The 
 latter, on the contrary, with more reason perhaps, 
 look upon the English aristocracy as the corner¬ 
 stone of the European social edifice, and as the 
 greatest ohstacle to their democratic views. The 
 antipathy inspired by England amongst men of ex¬ 
 treme opinions ought to raise her in the estimation 
 of all who are friends to moderate reform, and to 
 the gradual and regular advancement of human 
 
PKESENT STATE AND 
 
 happiness; to all, in a word, who are on principle 
 equally opposed to society heiug violently convulsed, 
 and to its remaining stationary. But such is not 
 the case. Those motives which would lead them to 
 sympathise with England are met by a host of 
 prejudices, recollections, and passions, whose influ¬ 
 ence is in most cases irresistible. I do not pretend 
 to say that there are no good grounds for this 
 ill-will; I simply allude to the fact, in order to 
 accoimt for the absorbing interest which has been 
 evinced towards Ireland, at a time when it was 
 supposed that the agitation in that country endan¬ 
 gered the existence of the British empire. This, 
 certainly, is not the only cause of the sympathy 
 inspired by the Irish people on the Continent. It 
 would be a calumny on human nature to say so. 
 It owes its origin principally to that feeling of 
 generosity which induces men, as it does multi¬ 
 tudes, to take an interest in real suflTering and 
 undeserved misfortune. Nevertheless, it may be 
 asserted, without the fear of doing injustice, that 
 the hatred of the oppressors has not been without 
 its effect. Accordingly, men who care the least 
 for liberty and toleration are heard every day 
 exclaiming against English tyranny, and the melan¬ 
 choly lot of the Irish Catholics; whilst these same 
 persons can find no word of pity for members of 
 their own church in Poland, who are victims of 
 the religious persecution of the Emperor of Russia. 
 On the other hand, radicals are constantly to be met 
 
FUTURE PROSPECTS OF IHELAMJ. 
 
 with who declaim, with their customaiy vehemence, 
 against the crimes of which the political and reli¬ 
 gious aristocracy of Ireland are guilty, and yet say 
 nothing of the still more revoltmg iniquities of the 
 aristocracy of colour in that country which of all 
 others is the most democratical. 
 
 It is important to sift to the uttermost the real 
 causes of this demonstration in favour of Ireland, 
 for the purpose of guarding against the influence 
 they may exert on the mode in which the events 
 of that country and their probable consequences 
 should be appreciated. Any mistake in this respect 
 would he fatal, if a spirit of exaggeration tend¬ 
 ing to one and the same end, without distinction 
 of party, succeeded in impressing upon the people 
 of the Continent its own view of the dangere 
 with which England is tlmeatened. K the greater 
 number of the politicians of France were at length 
 imposed upon by the prophecies of the “ Gazette de 
 France ” and of the “ National,” then indeed the 
 preservation of peace, so much to he desired by the 
 world at large, hut especially hy those who, like my¬ 
 self, have greater faith in the march of mind than in 
 that of cannon for impro\'ing the condition of the 
 human race, would become every day more doubt¬ 
 ful, and would at last be impossible. From the 
 moment that the mass of mankind are convinced 
 that British power is weakened—that, undermined 
 at its foundation, the colossus is no longer capable 
 
PRESENT STATE AND 
 
 of maintaining, as in past times, gigantic strug¬ 
 gles -with allied Europe—all tlie elforts of states¬ 
 men, all the resistance of those who are anxious 
 for peace, will be insufficient to stop the tide of 
 popular passion. The opportunity will be consi¬ 
 dered favourable foraying vent to antipathy against 
 England, and for avenging ancient wrongs; and the 
 nations of Europe will be hurried into warlike 
 collision, as mischievous to the physical comforts 
 of the people as to their intellectual progress. 
 
 In q)ite of what I have just said respecting the 
 excessive prejudice which exists against England, 
 I cannot approach the subject I have undertaken 
 to treat of, without distinctly proclaiming my 
 gmpathy for that Irish people to whom centuries 
 have bequeathed so heavy a load of misery and suf¬ 
 fering. The desire not to be unjust towards that 
 powerful nation with whom they are united by a 
 tie they are anxious to dissolve, will not, I trust, 
 render me insensible to their grievances, or indif¬ 
 ferent to the causes in which those grievances 
 originate, and the importance which should be 
 attached to them. 
 
 Every one is familiar with the long and melan¬ 
 choly catalogue of Irish calamities. During eight 
 centuries that country has undergone every de¬ 
 scription of persecution and oppression. Them 
 first calamity was the barbarous conquest and 
 tyranny of the Anglo-Normans over the Celts. 
 
FUTURE PROSPECTS OF IRELAND. 
 
 7 
 
 Conquest was succeeded by wars and constant 
 insurrections, which renewed, at short intervals, 
 the disasters o£ the first invasion. Ireland during 
 the middle ages, though repeatedly conquered, was 
 never thoroughly subdued. Those powerful Nor¬ 
 man barons, whose sway had extended throughout 
 England, and who had obliterated even the shadow 
 of Saxon nationality, were unable to establish their 
 authority upon the same foimdation on the other 
 side of St. George’s Channel. The vast bogs with 
 which Ireland was covered, its extensive heaths 
 which stretch towards the west, especially in Con¬ 
 naught, offered for ages a safe refuge to the un¬ 
 subdued Celts, and enabled them to preserve, at 
 the price of poverty and every kind of sufiTering, 
 a savage independence. 
 
 From the conquest of Henry 11. to the r<agn of 
 Elizabeth the history of Ireland is one long series 
 of rebellions, always crushed and always reviving. 
 The English, during these times, were rather en¬ 
 camped than established in Ireland. Thdr wars, 
 however, never extended beyond the nearest pro¬ 
 vince to England, that of Leinster. Beyond these 
 limi ts they exercised a species of sovereignty, 
 which was for the most part restricted to occasional 
 incursions, undertaken as much in a spirit of revenge 
 as in a desire for pillage. These four centuries were 
 for three-fourths of Ireland nothing less than a 
 long-continued war, wliich, in spite of numberless 
 reverses, failed in accomplishing the complete sub- 
 
EEESENT STATE AND 
 
 mission of its inhabitants. It is perhaps during 
 these deadly struggles that the present energetic and 
 tenacious character of Irishmen was formed, — the 
 habits contracted during this period of incessant 
 warfare having produced that remarkable pertina¬ 
 city of disposition which has enabled them, after all 
 means of physical resistance were gone, to preserve 
 unimpaired down to the present day—thanks to an 
 invincible moral resistance!— their manners, their 
 faith, and their national character. 
 
 Notwithstanding the admiration excited by the 
 generous efforts of the Irish for the preservation of 
 their independence, one is forced to admit that it 
 would have been happy for them if they had been 
 completely subjugated from the reign of Henry II. 
 If the Norman barons had but once established 
 their dominion over the Celtic people of Ireland on 
 a solid basis, they would no longer have considered 
 themselves as the chiefs of an army encamped in a 
 conquered country; they would in time have be¬ 
 come attached to this new country, and would 
 have endowed her with the same beneficent insti¬ 
 tutions which, from the time of the middle ages, 
 secured to England her prosperity and glory. 
 Four centuries would have been more than sulfi- 
 dent to have effected the amalgamation of the 
 conquerors and conquered, and when the religious 
 struggles burst forth they would have been less 
 terribly embittered by the antipathies of race and 
 people. 
 
F0TDEE PROSPECTS OF lEELASD. 
 
 From the beginning of the reign of Elizabeth 
 religious persecution replaced the political persecu¬ 
 tion of the Lish people, or, to speak more correctly, 
 aggravated it. Steadfastly attached to the faith of 
 their fathers, they energetically repelled the intro¬ 
 duction of every change, which the English Go¬ 
 vernment, at one time by violence, and at another 
 by corruption, repeatedly attempted to effect. They 
 resisted openly under Elizabeth; and when con¬ 
 quered, they resisted silently under James I. and 
 Charles I.; they had as much to endure from the 
 haughty dominion of the last of the Tudors as from 
 the legal ingenuity and hypocritical cruelties of the 
 two first of the Stuarts. 
 
 As soon as the parliamentary revolution broke 
 out, the Irish thought the moment favourable for 
 avenging the long-continued evils that the English 
 had made them endure. They rose in a body to ex¬ 
 terminate their oppressors, and committed fright¬ 
 ful massacres. The horrible insurrection of 1641 
 was followed by wars still more horrible, and acts of 
 retaliation stiU more fearful; and the savage cruelty 
 of the republican generals, added to the legal 
 butcheries of Cromwell, effaced, if they did not 
 expiate, the crimes of the insurgents. 
 
 Under the Kestoration, Ireland, disappointed 
 in its legitimate hopes, was grievously agitated, but 
 did not resort to violence. She was instinctively 
 attracted towards the Stuarts, although Charles II., 
 more from weakness than wickedness, abandoned 
 
10 
 
 PEESEliT STATE AND 
 
 to the suspicious tyranny of the Protestants of 
 England his most faithful Catholic subjects. 
 
 After the Kevolution of 1688, Ireland made a 
 last effort to recover her independence. She 
 fought for her king, her religion, and her poli¬ 
 tical existence. But fortune, as formerly, was 
 agdnst her. Completely beaten at the battle of 
 the Boyne, she fell, once more powerless, and 
 deprived of aU means of resistance, under the yoke 
 of her oppressors. 
 
 The battle of the Boyne, and the siege of Lime¬ 
 rick, were the last events of those civil and reli- 
 ^ous wars by which, during six centuries, Ireland 
 had been distracted. English dominion firmly esta¬ 
 blished itself over the whole island in a manner that 
 was not to be shaken. Connaught itself, that last 
 refuge of the unsubdued Irish, was completely sub¬ 
 jugated. From 1690, war, and its violent conse¬ 
 quences, altogether ceased; but in its place came 
 legal tyranny, and judicial persecution,—worse evils 
 than the former, for they are just as oppressive, and 
 more degrading. 
 
 The reigns of IVyiiam III. and of Queen Anne 
 were employed in firaming, bit by bit, that mon¬ 
 strous system of legislation which goes by the 
 name of Penal Laws, and of which it was the 
 avowed object to keep down the Catholics in 
 poverty and abasement, by striking at once at 
 their religion, and at their political and civil 
 rights,—in a word, at every thing to which they 
 
were most dearly attached. I shall not here inves¬ 
 tigate that barbarous code. Ever since public at¬ 
 tention has been turned towards Ireland, the most 
 violent of its enactments have, on various occa¬ 
 sions, been recorded in the papers, and must be 
 known to my readers. 
 
 The consequences of this code were lamentable. 
 The cruelty that was committed was gratuitous; 
 for, Catholicism, far from being weakened, acquired 
 fresh vigour from the very hatred which eveiy poor 
 Irishman conceived for the reli^on of his oppres¬ 
 sors. Every attempt at conversion failed. The 
 English parliament, fancying they were labour¬ 
 ing in favour of the established church, only suc¬ 
 ceeded, by their unjust laws, in placing at the mercy 
 of rich Protestants, who were proprietors of the soil, 
 the Catholic population, by whom, in three-fourths 
 of the country, it was almost alone cultivated. The 
 penal laws, originating at first in religious fanati¬ 
 cism, lost by degrees their primitive character, and 
 became, in the hands of those by whom they were 
 administered, an instrument of political power. 
 During the greater part of the eighteenth century 
 the Irish peasant was reduced to live in a state of 
 bondage worse than that of the negroes in the 
 West Indies. 0\ving to this legislation, and to the 
 manner in which it was administered, it was more 
 difficult for Catholics to obtain justice from a 
 Protestant grand jiuy than it is now for a slave 
 of the French colonies to obtain justice from those 
 
12 
 
 PRESENT STATE AND 
 
 magistrates who are sent there from the mother- 
 country to execute the laws. During this period 
 Ireland presents the saddest picture that any civi¬ 
 lised community can afford,—the oppression, entire 
 and absolute, of the poor by the rich,—of him who 
 toils by him who possesses, — sanctioned by law, 
 and enforced by the dispensers of justice. 
 
 In reflecting on the influence which such a state 
 of things must have exercised over the relations of 
 the different classes of society, one is the better able 
 to understand the difficulties of the present position 
 of Ireland; and one easily perceives the true origin 
 of that deep-rooted antipathy and settled hostility 
 which still exists after all the penal laws have been 
 repealed, separating the peasant from the owner 
 of the land, and forming the most powerful 
 obstacle in the way of those who wish sincerely 
 to exert themselves in favour of the physical and 
 moral improvement of the country. 
 
 In reviewing the history of so much misery and 
 of such long-continued oppression, one is invo¬ 
 luntarily led to pass a severe judgment upon that 
 nation which has been, if not the author of it, at least 
 its accomplice, and to call them to account even 
 in these later times for the barbarity of which their 
 fathers were guilty. However moderate one’s opi- 
 mons, it is difficult to restrain the desire one feels 
 for the dawn of that day in which Ireland may 
 obtain not only justice but even revenge. When, 
 however, the generous emotions of indignation are 
 
rUTUEE PROSPECTS OF IREEAXD. 
 
 13 
 
 tempered by the calm judgment of reason, one is 
 forced to admit that the English, from the time of 
 William III. and of Queen Anne, are not so cul¬ 
 pable as they would a 2 )pear to us, judging them as 
 we now do with the superior light of the nineteenth 
 century. In persecuting the Catholics, in heaping 
 on their heads vexation after vexation, for the pur¬ 
 pose of rendering the exercise of their religion hu¬ 
 miliating and difficult, the politicians of those times 
 were not conscious of the crime they were commit¬ 
 ting against mankind. They did no more than 
 follow the opinions of their day; they applied with 
 rigorous fidelity the doctrines of intolerance, which 
 at that time in Europe no one dared openly to dis¬ 
 pute. Before condemning them with too much 
 severity, let it be remembered that they were con¬ 
 temporaries of those pious prelates who instigated 
 and obtained the revocation of the Edict of Xantes; 
 and that they lived in a time when the promul¬ 
 gation of the Black Code, which cannot now be 
 read without a shudder, was looked upon as an 
 act of eminent philanthropy. Let us condemn, 
 with all the force of that con\dction which has been 
 inspired by the information of the present day, the 
 cruel maxims and the false ideas which a centuiy 
 ago held the moral tvorld in subjection; but let us 
 be indulgent towards those whose greatest feult 
 it was not to know how to raise themselves above 
 the knowledge of their times, when the generally- 
 
14 
 
 PRESEST STATE AXD 
 
 received opinions, far from opposing their political 
 passions, served only to excite and encourage 
 
 K Tve compare the effect these cruelties and per¬ 
 secutions produce on us, the offspring of the nine¬ 
 teenth century, with the effect produced by them 
 on the most enlightened and civilised men of the 
 preceding age, we cannot withhold our meed of 
 praise at the great progress which has been going 
 on in the moral judgments of the world. 
 
 The more we reflect on this, the more must we 
 be convinced that this very progress should induce 
 us to be indulgent in our censures towards our own 
 times, and to endure with patience, and vdthout 
 too much lamenting over a past too little studied, 
 the obstecles, often very serious, and always to be 
 regretted, which stand in the way of effectual 
 changes in modem communities. 
 
 During the first half of the eighteenth century 
 the spirit of toleration made considerable advances 
 in Great Britain. It was impossible that the con¬ 
 temporaries of Locke and Hume should, with respect 
 to contending sects, be animated with the same per¬ 
 secuting zeal as that which inflamed the disciples of 
 Milton. Accordingly the penal laws to which the 
 Irish Catholics were subjected were regarded pretty 
 much in their proper light by the majority of the 
 enlightened men of the country, and their abolition 
 was urged with increasing vehemence by public 
 
FUTURE PROSPECTS OF IRFXAXn. 
 
 15 
 
 opinion, —that imponderable force which ever acts 
 with such maiwellous eft'ect upon the complicated 
 springs of the English constitution. 
 
 Although it is true that an Irish parhament 
 existed at that time in Dubhn, pohtical reforms de¬ 
 pended in reality on the will of England. In fact, 
 Irish legislation, in consequence of ancient statutes, 
 of which the most important was known by the 
 name of Poyning’s, a lord-heutenant of Heniy VII.’s 
 time, was so dependent on the government in Lon¬ 
 don, that it was, to say the truth, a mere instrument 
 in its hands. As long as the Stuart party pre¬ 
 served one spark of ritahty, every concession was 
 refused to the Irish Catholics, who were considered 
 as its most devoted adherents. As soon as this 
 party was quite extinct the Government erinced 
 towards them a more favourable disposition. But 
 it was only when the war of American independence 
 shook to its centre the power of Lord North’s mi¬ 
 nistry in 1778, that the partisans of reli^ous tolera¬ 
 tion were able to overthrow in part that monstrous 
 penal structure which out of hatred to Catholicism 
 had been raised m Ireland. 
 
 The influence of the American revolution was 
 not confined to the reform of the penal laws; it 
 operated espeeiaUy on the Protestant population of 
 Ireland. Until then this portion of the people had 
 patiently submitted to the political yoke of England, 
 mthout whose help it would have been impossible 
 for them to have maintained by force their religious 
 
16 
 
 PRESENT STATE AJT 
 
 supremacy and civil dominion over the Catholics. 
 They had consented to sacrifice their political rights 
 in exchange for those means 'which were neces¬ 
 sary to keep in subjugation the majority of their 
 fellow-countiymen professing a different faith from 
 their own. The excitement occasioned by the 
 events of this momentous struggle, aided by the 
 progress which the principles of toleration and 
 freedom had made, produced a change in the feel¬ 
 ings of Protestant Irishmen, and induced them to 
 ■vindicate their national independence. 
 
 Circmnstances were eminently favourable. The 
 English government, having employed all its re¬ 
 gular troops in the colonies, was obliged, in order 
 to protect Ireland from the invasion ■with which she 
 was threatened, to make an appeal to the higher 
 classes of the country, and to organise from amongst 
 them bodies of militia, wliich took the name of 
 United Volunteers. These bodies formed together 
 an imposing mass, which preserved the country 
 from foreign war, but at the same time enabled the 
 Irish to demand from the English parliament, in a 
 manner which could not be refused, the political 
 emancipation of their country. 
 
 The triumph of the volvmteers was accomplished 
 in 1782. The administration of Mr. Fox carried a 
 declaration to the effect that the English parliament 
 never had any right to make laws for Ireland, or to 
 interfere -with the independence of the Irish parlia¬ 
 ment. This was renoxmcing, ofGicially at least, all 
 
rurnKE prospects of ireuiot. 
 
 idea of supremacy and dommion. It involved the 
 complete emancipation of Ireland; the annulling 
 of the guardianship of England. 
 
 The demonstration of 1782 was essentially Pro¬ 
 testant. The part the Catholics played in it was 
 merely passive; they approved without effectively 
 contributing towards it. Nevertheless, the spirit 
 with which the volunteers had been animated was 
 too generous not to produce, at least at the moment 
 of triumph, some effect on the fate of the Catholics. 
 Accordingly, one of the first acts of the Irish par¬ 
 liament on becoming independent was to repeal a 
 part of the penal laws which the reform of 1778 
 had allowed to subsist. 
 
 However glorious may have been, for Ireland, 
 the peaceful revolution effected in 1782, its real 
 bearing should not be exaggerated. It was far 
 from securing the independence of the Irish nation. 
 The parliament of Dublin was, it is true, declared 
 sovereign and omnipotent, just as much as that of 
 England; but its internal constitution not having 
 been altered, its independence was in reality but a 
 shadow. In point of fact, the great majority of the 
 Irish House of Commons was composed of the re¬ 
 presentatives of rotten boroughs and corporations, 
 which admitted within their circle but few indi¬ 
 viduals, and all of them devoted to the Protestant 
 cause. Out of 300 members, the counties only 
 elected 24; towns of above 6000 souls, 50 at 
 most; the remainder were nominated by the great 
 
18 
 
 PRESENT STATE AND 
 
 proprietors of boroughs, most of whom lived in 
 England, where they were entirely dependent* on 
 the Gkjvemment. 
 
 It may he asserted, without fear of exaggeration, 
 that the Irish parliament, even after 1782, was of 
 all legislative bodies the most corruptible and the 
 most corrupted. Undoubtedly within it might he 
 found glorious exceptions, names above the slightest 
 taint, long careers untouched by suspicion; hut 
 these rare exceptions only render the more striking 
 the servility and corruption of the majority of that 
 body politic, of which they were in vain the ornament. 
 
 The United Volunteers, after having obtained 
 national independence, demanded parliamentary 
 reform; hut on this point, it must he confessed, 
 they showed far less ardour and unanimity. A large 
 proportion of them shrunk from invoking the great 
 principles of equity and justice, and entering upon 
 the career of internal reform; for they felt that 
 such a course must necessarily lead to the emanci¬ 
 pation of the Catholics, for which they were by no 
 means prepared. As, however, notions of tolera¬ 
 tion made every day fresh progress, it is probable 
 that the true Irish reformers would have ended by 
 triumphing over prejudice and religious antipathy, 
 if the French revolutionary war had not intervened, 
 and disturbed the steady development of liberal prin- 
 
 * It is presumed that the author does not mean that the pro- 
 
FUTORE FROSPECTS OF IREI.AM). 
 
 19 
 
 ciples in England. In truth, the politicians of that 
 country felt strongly the necessity of introducing 
 those changes into the English constitution which 
 were called for by the progress of the times. Mr. Pitt, 
 it is well known, although the minister of a long 
 little attached to innovation, declared himself as 
 early as 1785 in favour of a reform in parliament, 
 at once comprehensive and effectual. He would pro¬ 
 bably have carried it before the events in France had 
 turned his thoughts in another direction, had it not 
 been for the untoward illness of George III. and 
 the open hostility of the Prince of Wales. 
 
 If Pitt had realised liis plan for parliamentary 
 reform in England, he would doubtless have ex¬ 
 tended it to Ireland; and it would have been for 
 that countiy the greatest of blessings, for it would 
 have been impossible to have touched the political 
 structure raised by the Protestants on a narrow,' 
 false, and fictitious foundation, wthout recognising 
 the rights of the Catholics and emancipating them. 
 
 Had parliamentary reform and Catholic emanci¬ 
 pation been effected in Ireland before 1792, and 
 before revolutionary passions agitated that countiy 
 and revived the hatred of the sects and races 
 it contams, a long succession of sufferings and 
 misfortune would have been spared; the ter¬ 
 mination of which, alas! is not yet at hand. 
 Providence did not permit that these salutaiy 
 measures should take place at that time. She 
 destined Ireland to become, after a long course, of 
 
20 
 
 PEESENT STATE ASD 
 
 misery, a never-failmg source of anxiety and trou¬ 
 ble to her oppressors; for tbe purpose, as it should 
 seem, of furnishing a great lesson to the world, and 
 teaching nations, however powerful, that the crimes 
 and errors which they commit will, sooner or later, 
 recoil on themselves. 
 
 The French revolution came upon the Irish re¬ 
 formers at the outset of their efforts, and arrested 
 their course. In 1792 they still farther procured 
 the repeal of what remained of the penal provisions 
 which affected the Catholics, and they brought about 
 the concession of their right of voting at elections; 
 an immense concession, which would have led ne¬ 
 cessarily to complete emancipation, if the country 
 had continued to advance in the regular and peace¬ 
 ful path of regeneration, which had been opened by 
 the events occasioned by the American revolution. 
 
 The extravagance of the democratic spirit in 
 France, and the horrible excesses of 1793, produced 
 a complete re-action amongst the rich and enlight¬ 
 ened classes of England and Ireland. The volun¬ 
 teers were disbanded without opposition, or even a 
 protest from their leaders. Most of the reformers of 
 1782 became determined conservatives, as soon as 
 social order appeared to be threatened by the fright¬ 
 ful propagandist anarchy that the Convention pre¬ 
 tended to organise. Nevertheless, the events of 
 France, the effect of which had been to separate the 
 higher classes from the party of reformers, hun-ied 
 the remainder of that party into revolutionary 
 
FUTURE PROSPECTS OF IRELAND. 
 
 21 
 
 courses. The remnants of the Volunteers formed a 
 secret association, under the name of United Irish¬ 
 men, who endeavoured to unite all the lower classes, 
 without distinction of race or religion, for revo¬ 
 lutionary purposes. The ultra-democratical and re¬ 
 publican tendencies of this association—its avowed 
 intention of following the example of France, 
 estranged from it all those who from their know¬ 
 ledge, rank, or wealth, filled a place m any degree 
 distinguished in society. 
 
 The United Irishmen, blinded by their passions, 
 exaggerating their strength and numbers, and 
 above aU, relying upon effectual support fix)m 
 France, which, through the fault of the ralers of 
 that country, and from the interposition of the 
 elements, they did not obtain, attempted an insur¬ 
 rectionary rising in 1798. The result was not for a 
 moment doubtful. Without leaders, without orders, 
 without fixed plans, the insurgents were incapable 
 of doing more than commit fearful disorders, and 
 deal out terrible vengeance against those whom 
 they considered to be their greatest enemies— the 
 Protestants and the English. They nowhere suc¬ 
 ceeded in organising any serious resistance; and 
 as soon as the English army took the field, they 
 dispersed almost without striking a blow. 
 
 The repressive measures resorted to by the 
 Government were cruel; they more resembled 
 ferocious revenge than strict justice, reluctantly 
 enforced against misguided subjects. Nevertheless 
 c 3 
 
22 PRESENT STATE AND 
 
 the object was attained. The revolutionary spirit 
 was quelled, and the reforming party extinguished; 
 and all that remained of it, though not devoid of 
 splendour, was insignificant and powerless. The in¬ 
 surrection of 1798 furnished the great minister, who 
 at that time ruled the destinies of England, Mr. Pitt, 
 with the pretext and the means of bringing about a 
 measure which had long occupied his thoughts. In 
 that war of extermination which he was carrying on 
 with the colossal power of France, it is impossible he 
 should not have been struck more than once with 
 the dangers that England incurred irom the legis¬ 
 lative independence of Ireland; and that he should 
 not have eagerly desired to be able to effect a 
 union of the two parliaments of London and 
 Dublin. Public opinion in England declared itself 
 strongly in favour of this union, and parliament 
 furnished the minister with aU the necessary means 
 for its accomplishment. 
 
 There was one great diffictilty to be overcome: 
 it was necessary to obtain the consent of the Irish 
 parliament, and to induce it to pronounce its o-wn 
 sentence of death. Mr. Pitt thought he could carry 
 the question with a high hand; but he failed at 
 first. His original project for the legislative Union, 
 brought forward in 1799, was rejected by the Irish 
 House of Commons. The ministry had then re¬ 
 course to means which they had always found suc¬ 
 cessful in the parliament of Dublin; they resorted 
 to corruption on an enormous scale. They bought a 
 
FUTURE PROSPECTS OF IRELAND. 
 
 23 
 
 large number of rotten boroughs; they were prodigal 
 of places, titles, and pensions, and at the end of a 
 year they obtained a majority of 168 votes to 73, 
 sanctioning the amalgamation of the Irish parlia¬ 
 ment with that of Great Britain. 
 
 Let us pause for a few moments to examine this 
 celebrated measure, which has excited at all times 
 in Ireland such bitter complaints and such nolent 
 reci-iminations, and which is at this day the pretence, 
 if not the cause, of the agitation which shakes that 
 country to its very foundation. 
 
 The merit of this measure in itself must first be 
 separated from the means adopted for its accom¬ 
 plishment. There can be but one opinion in brand¬ 
 ing with infamy those who trafficked with the 
 independence of their omi country, who bartered 
 their rights and political influence for gold and 
 place, who sold their votes, and sanctioned an act 
 which their conscience condemned. But must we 
 blame, in an equal degi-ee, the government who 
 bought these corrupted men ? I should not hesi¬ 
 tate to do so if, by a fatal error, public opinion in 
 past times, and even in our ovm, had not in some 
 sort sanctioned, with respect to governments, t he 
 practice of a morality other than that which is 
 recognised by individuals; if it had not, in all 
 times, treated with extreme indulgence immoral 
 actions, which have brought about great political 
 results. If the character of Pitt is to be tarnished 
 for having employed parliamentaiy corruption on 
 
24 PRESENT-STATE AND 
 
 SO great a scale, we must treat, with equal seve¬ 
 rity, the greatest monarchs of former days,—Louis 
 XIV., Joseph n., and Frederic the Great; who, 
 to accomplish their ends, have committed far 
 greater outrages against the inflexible principles 
 of morality and humanity than ever can be laid 
 to the charge of the illustrious statesman who 
 effected the consolidation of the United Kingdom 
 of Great Britain and Ireland. 
 
 But whatever may he our judgment as to the con¬ 
 duct and merit of those who took part m the act of 
 Union, let ns examine the measure itself, and let 
 ns see if it was in reality unjust and iniquitous 
 towards Ireland, and if it deserves aU the animosity 
 it occasions, even in the present day, and aU the 
 vituperation that is lavished upon it by O’Connell 
 and the orators of the popular party. 
 
 For my own part, I frankly declare that I do not 
 think so. Pitt, in accomplishing the legislative 
 Union of the British Isles, was not influenced by a 
 narrow love of power. He by no means acted for 
 the exclusive interest of a political party or reli¬ 
 gious sect. It was not to subjugate Ireland, or to 
 impose upon her his despotic wiU, that he laboured 
 to unite, under the same roof, in Westminster, all 
 parliamentary power. If such had been his object, 
 it was not necessary to lay himself open to so much 
 obloquy to effect the union of the two countries; he 
 knew very well that the Irish parliament was com¬ 
 posed of such elements that it was in his firm and 
 
FUTURE PROSPECTS OF IRELAND. 
 
 25 
 
 skilful hands an obedient instrument. The insur¬ 
 rection of 1798 had taught the Protestants, who 
 alone formed the constituted authorities, that their 
 existence depended entmely on the support of Eng¬ 
 land; and that -tvithout the constant help of English 
 bayonets they would become victims to that spirit 
 of hatred and revenge wliich animated the great 
 majority of the Catholic population. 
 
 The consciousness of weakness accordingly ren¬ 
 dered the party, of which the Irish parliament 
 was exclusively composed, quite dependent on the 
 English cabinet. In order to hold it in complete 
 subjection, it was not necessary that Pitt should 
 recur to former methods of corniption. Intimi¬ 
 dation alone would have answered his purpose. 
 In compelling the Irish parliament to destroj' itself, 
 he exacted from them the onty act which could 
 meet tvith serious resistance: and as for himself, he 
 lost by it far more in parliamentaiy influence than 
 he gained. 
 
 The end wliich Pitt had in view was great and 
 noble. In uniting under the same government the 
 two islands, separated by St. George’s Channel, he 
 hoped to strengthen and consolidate British power, 
 which was, at that time, the butt of formidable attacks. 
 He realised the conception of one who possessed, in 
 the highest degree, the intuitive perception of 
 governing — of Cromwell, who, nearly 200 years 
 before, wished himself, also, to fuse into one 
 the parliaments of Ireland and of England. But 
 
PBESENT STATE 
 
 26 
 
 if his main object was to increase the strength 
 of government hy simplifying its wheels, he con¬ 
 templated also, I may venture to assert, doing 
 an useful act towards Ireland, by protecting her 
 from the absolute dominion of a blind and per¬ 
 secuting church. He wished to procure for the 
 Catholics, by means of a parliament of the United 
 Kingdom, complete political emancipation, which 
 never could have been obtained from the Irish par¬ 
 liament; and if he did not cany these generous 
 projects into effect, it is because he found in 
 Gieorge HI. an obstacle which he had not the 
 courage to overcome at a moment when the support 
 of the Crown was essential to him, for the purpose 
 of preserving the nationality of his country, threat¬ 
 ened as it was by the power of France. 
 
 A very false idea is in general entertained of this 
 illustrious statesman. It is a serious mistake to 
 represent him, like Lord Eldon or Prince Polignac, 
 as the partisan of every kind of abuse and oppres¬ 
 sion. Far from this being the case, Pitt was as 
 enlightened as the times in which he lived; the 
 son of Lord Chatham w^as not the friend of des¬ 
 potism, nor was he the champion of religious 
 intolerance. Endowed -with a powerful and com¬ 
 prehensive mind, he loved power as a means, not as 
 an end. He entered upon public life in declaring 
 war against the retrograding administration of 
 Lord Korth; and as soon as he was himself in the 
 ministry, one of his first acts w'as to proclaim the 
 
FUTURE PROSPECTS OF IRELAND. 
 
 27 
 
 necessity of parliamentary reform. It is true that 
 Pitt was not one of those ardent temperaments 
 who are enthusiastic on behalf of the great interests 
 of mankind, and who, when they are at stake, see 
 neither the obstacles in their way nor the mis¬ 
 chiefs that their zeal may occasion. He was not 
 one of those who wished to re-construct society 
 from its foundation on general principles and theo¬ 
 ries of human nature. With a cold and penetrating 
 genius, and uninfluenced by prejudice, he was 
 actuated alike by love of country and of fame. At 
 the beginning of his career he saw the defective 
 parts of the body politic, and proposed to correct 
 them. If he had continued in power during a 
 period of peace and tranquillity, he would have 
 been a reformer of the school of Sir R. Peel and 
 Canning, uniting the boldness and extent of views 
 of the one with the sMU and prudence of the other. 
 
 But as soon as he perceived the storm of the 
 French revolution lowering on the horizon, the dis¬ 
 cernment of a superior mind enabled him also to 
 foresee the excesses which demagogues would com¬ 
 mit, and the danger their principles would give rise 
 to in England. His plans of reform were at once 
 arrested, for the purpose of providing for the exi¬ 
 gencies of the crisis that was at hand. He was aware 
 that whilst revolutionary doctrines which threatened 
 to invade England, were being agitated, it would 
 have been imprudent to touch an}' part of the con¬ 
 stitution, and to weaken the respect entertained 
 
28 
 
 PliESENT STATE .VSO 
 
 for it by the nation, by attempting to restore the 
 Tvonn-eaten portions of that social fabric which 
 time had consecrated. From the day in which the 
 revolution, extending beyond the country from 
 which it emanated, threatened Europe at large, Mr. 
 Pitt had but one object in view—opposing France, 
 and preventing ultra-democratic doctrines from 
 setting foot in his orm country; and devotmg all 
 his energies to this paramount object, every other 
 consideration was sacrificed. 
 
 The conduct of !Mr. Pitt, as far as England was 
 concerned, cannot be too highly praised. In strug¬ 
 gling against France, and repressing democracy at 
 home, he preseiwed social order in England, and kept 
 civilisation there within that path of steady and pro¬ 
 gressive improvement which it has since continued 
 to follow -, for there is no one in these days, how¬ 
 ever moderately endowed with sense, whether he be 
 radical, or the open advocate for repeal, who would 
 venture to deny the fi'ightfiil consequences that 
 would have ensued from a democratic revolution in 
 Great Britain at the end of the last century. 
 
 In abandoning his views of reform, and becoming 
 conservative, in the largest sense of the word, Mr. 
 Pitt did not set himself up for the defender of in¬ 
 justice and oppression. The truth of this asser¬ 
 tion may, I think, be found in the Act of Union 
 itself, which has been the object of so much ani¬ 
 madversion and reproach. Let us examine its 
 principal provisions, and let us see if the English 
 
FUTUKE PROSPECTS OF IRELAXD. 
 
 29 
 
 minister did indeed abuse tbe unlinuted power, 
 which the terror occasioned by the insurrection of 
 1798, and the means of corruption he had employed, 
 placed within his reach, for the purpose of giving 
 England the lion’s share in the distribution of legis¬ 
 lative power he was effecting, and of treating Ireland 
 rather as a conquered country than as an integral 
 part of one and the same empire. 
 
 The principal provisions of the Union may be 
 summed up under the eight following heads: — 
 
 1. The two Mngdoms of England and Ireland 
 are henceforth declared to form but one, under the 
 title of The United Kingdom of Great Britain and 
 Ii’eland. 
 
 2. The succession to the throne of the United 
 Kingdom shall continue to be regulated by the laws 
 in force. 
 
 3. The United Kingdom shall be represented by 
 only one parliament, which shall take the name of 
 The Parliament of Great Britain and Ireland. 
 
 4. Twenty-eight temporal Irish j)eers, elected 
 for life by their own body, as well as four bishops, 
 succeeding in turn, shall be admitted into the 
 House of Lords of the United Kingdom; and 
 Ireland shall send one hundred members to the 
 House of Commons; viz. sixty-four members elected 
 by the thirty-two counties, one by the University 
 of Dublin, four by the cities of Dublin and Cork, 
 and thirty-one by the thirty-one most important 
 towns or boroughs. 
 
.30 
 
 PRESENT STATE AND 
 
 5. The church establishments of England and 
 Ireland shall be united and form but one, subject 
 to the same laws, the same doctrines, and the same 
 discipline as those of the church establishment of 
 England. 
 
 6. The subjects of both nations shall be placed 
 on the same footing in aU that relates to industry, 
 commerce, and navigation. 
 
 7. England and Ireland shall contribute to the 
 general expenses of the state in the proportion of 
 fifteen to two. This distribution shall continue for 
 twenty years: after which period the expenditure 
 shall be re apportioned by parliament. 
 
 8. The existing laws, and the coui-ts of justice, 
 shall remain in force as before, excepting that ap¬ 
 peals from the Court of Chancery in Ireland shall 
 come before the House of Lords of the United 
 Kingdom. 
 
 It is at once obvious, that as far as regards civil 
 provisions and the economical relations of the two 
 kingdoms, the Act of Union is not open to blame. 
 England and Ireland are placed by it on a footing 
 of perfect equality. If any sacrifice or concessions 
 have been made by one or the other, it is England 
 who has made them, since she consented to open 
 her colonies to Ireland *, and to share with her the 
 
 • It is a mistake to suppose that the colonies were not open 
 to Ireland previously to the Act of Union; or that that country 
 derived any peculiar advantage in this respect from that measure. 
 — Trans, 
 
FDTITRK PROSPECTS OF IRELAXT). 
 
 31 
 
 benefits of a monopoly, to which she alone was 
 entitled. 
 
 In a religious point of Anew, the Union was 
 less favourable to the Irish nation. I do not hesi¬ 
 tate to say that it has made her condition worse. 
 But it should not be foi’gotten that England treated 
 with the legally constituted authorities of Ireland, 
 composed exclusively of Protestants, who would 
 never have consented to dispossess themselves of 
 the power they exercised, if the whole of thdr reli¬ 
 gious pri\Tleges had not been guaranteed to them. 
 
 The points I have adverted to are but accessory: 
 the essential provisions of the Act of Union arc 
 those which regulated the share of political power 
 secured to each of the two countries, and the man¬ 
 ner in which the public burdens were apportioned 
 between them. 
 
 Out of 658 members, who composed the House 
 of Commons after the Union, Ireland was to have 
 100, and Great Britain 558. In the House of 
 Lords, Ireland obtained thirty-two representatives. 
 Lastly, her portion of the public burdens was 
 limited to two-seventeenths of the total expense. 
 Is that an iniquitous division, an abuse of power, 
 the humiliating conditions imposed bt' an insolent 
 conqueror over a conquered people ? A few mo¬ 
 ments’ reflection wiU be sutficient to contince us 
 of the contrary. 
 
 I admit that the number of representatives given 
 to the Irish peerage seems at first but small, espe- 
 
32 
 
 PRESENT STATE AND 
 
 cially if we consider the number of persons now 
 composing the House of Lords. But we must 
 remember that in 1800 this number was far less 
 considerable, and that this diminishes the apparent 
 inequality, when one considers that thirty-two Irish 
 Peers are now sitting amongst 400 English Peers, 
 notwithstanding this ob^'ious injustice, I cannot 
 find fault with this provision of the Act of Union. 
 In point of fact, the Irish peerage was much less 
 illustrious, much less distinguished than the Eng¬ 
 lish peerage. With some few exceptions, its num¬ 
 bers had been almost exclusively recruited from 
 amongst the most servile and devoted instruments 
 of English power. It had never performed one 
 popular act. Its suppression was a real service 
 to the country. The admission into the upper 
 House of a certain number of Irish Peers was far 
 from being a benefit to Ireland. Since 1800 they 
 have always formed the most tyolent and exag¬ 
 gerated portion of the Tory party, the most 
 strongly opposed to every species of concession or 
 reform. 
 
 The ministers who succeeded each other from 
 Mr. Pitt doAvn to the present time, have called to 
 the House of Lords a large number of Irish Peers. 
 They now exceed fifty, besides the thirty-two re¬ 
 presentatives of the Irish peerage. I much doubt 
 whether the true friends of Ireland have had rea¬ 
 son to congratulate themselves on this seeming 
 favour granted to their country. 
 
FUTURE PROSPECTS OF IRELAXD. 
 
 33 
 
 With respect to the composition of the House of 
 Commons, as it was regulated the Union, Ire¬ 
 land having 100 representatives, whilst 558 were 
 retained for England and Scotland, its politiail 
 influence was, with reference to that of Great 
 Britain, as 1 to 5-58. This is but little, if we 
 compare the respective populations of the two 
 countries. In 1800, England and Scotland were 
 estimated at 11,000,000 inhabitants. The popu¬ 
 lation of Ireland at that period is not exactly 
 kno-wn, but according to calculations the accuracy 
 of which there is no reason to doubt, it can scarcely 
 be reckoned at less tlian 4,000,000. The respective 
 populations were therefore as 4 to 11, or rather as 
 1 to 2'75, while their political influence was as 1 to 
 5'58. There was thus, according to tlie mathe¬ 
 matical mode of reasoning brought into fashion by 
 the French revolution, a flagrant injustice towards 
 Ireland. 
 
 There are however two things to be considerc<l, 
 which, in a great measure, justify the wrongs 
 which the framers of the Act of Union ma}' Ih; 
 charged with having inflicted oti Ireland. First, 
 as no census had yet, in 1800, been taken in 
 Ireland, the population of that countiy was sup¬ 
 posed to be less than it really was. An official 
 document published in 1785 reckoned the number 
 of inhabitants at 2,845,000 ; it was therefore 
 natural, that the statesmen whose task it was to 
 apportion political influence between the two conn- 
 
34 
 
 PKESEST STATE 
 
 tries, should adopt this number, which fixed the 
 populations of the two kingdoms in the relation of 
 1 to 3-86, as the basis of their calculations, thus 
 reducing by one-third the apparent injustice which 
 Ireland had to subirdt to. 
 
 But, in the second place, we must bear in mind, 
 that at no period has population been considered 
 in England as the only element on which the dis¬ 
 tribution of political rights should depend. Dur¬ 
 ing the middle ages, the principal office of the 
 House of Commons being to vote the supplies, 
 it was then composed exclusively of the repre¬ 
 sentatives of boroughs in a condition to bear tax¬ 
 ation. During several centuries, it was rather the 
 guardian of the purse of the country, than an in¬ 
 tegral part of the supreme power. It is true that 
 time and revolutions have brought about a con¬ 
 siderable change in this respect. Nevertheless, 
 traces of this principle are still found in the English 
 constitution, and even at the present day it ex¬ 
 ercises a certain amount of influence. 
 
 K, according to this pruiciple, the wealth of the 
 country, or what comes to the same thing, the ap¬ 
 portionment of the public burdens, had been taken 
 as the basis on which to distribute legislative power, 
 Ireland wonld have had no reason to complain, 
 since she contributed to the finances of the kingdom 
 less than an eighth part of the taxes, whilst she 
 obtained a sisth part of the re 2 uesentation. 
 
 By comparing all the figures I have given, it 
 
FDTDEE PROSPECTS OF IRELAND. 35 
 
 Avill be found that the number of representatives 
 allotted to Ireland by the Act of Union is in some 
 sort a mean between what woiild have fallen to its 
 share, taking in succession the numbers of the 
 population and the amount of the tax as the basis 
 of the apportionment of legislative power. 
 
 Notwithstanding aU that I have just said, I do 
 not stand up for the absolute justice or equity 
 of this important part of the Act of Union; but I 
 do not hesitate to affirm, that it is in all respects 
 consonant with those practical notions of political 
 justice and equity which were generally received 
 in England at the period of the Union; and I do 
 not in the least doubt but that perfectly impartial 
 arbitrators, if chosen from amongst politicians im¬ 
 bued with these English doctrines, had been c.alled 
 upon to fix the respective proportions between Ire¬ 
 land and England in the United Parliament, they 
 would not have treated Ireland better than Mr. Pitt 
 did. 
 
 From 1800 Ireland was governed, like the rest 
 of the British empire, by the three powers sitting 
 at Westminster. Did the great majority of the 
 countiy, especially the Cathohes, lose much by this 
 paheoht change ? and have they good grounds for 
 regretting their national parliament ? This can¬ 
 not be maintained. The parliament of Dublin, 
 as I have already said, was composed of exclu¬ 
 sively Protestant interests. Noririth.standing the 
 right granted to the Catholics in 1792 to vote at 
 
PRESENT STATE AND 
 
 elections, they never could have exercised any 
 influence in the House of Commons, for, -with 
 the exception of the counties, ivhich returned but 
 an insignificant part of the members of the House, 
 (60 from out of 300,) their right was altogether 
 illusory. In the twenty-six to^vns of any import¬ 
 ance which returned members, the right of election 
 was confined to the municipal coi-porations, in 
 other words, to all that the spirit of fanaticism 
 and prejudice has ever engendered of most violent 
 and exaggerated. As to the smaller boroughs, 
 which returned 184 members, they were entirely 
 dependent upon a few great men, who, disposing 
 of the majority of the House as they pleased, took 
 care to seU it to the English Government to the 
 best advantage for themselves. 
 
 This is not the sort, of assembly that the great 
 national party of Ireland wish to restore. I much 
 doubt whether they would consent to such a 
 measure, even though the repeal of the Union 
 were one of its conditions. If they did so, it would 
 be with the secret hope of soon crushing so anti¬ 
 national an assembly under the weight of popular 
 indignation. But if, in granting to Ireland the 
 restoration of her former parliament, the Englisli 
 Government placed at its disposal a numerous 
 army to repress any attempts at extra-legal reform 
 by the Catholic party, one may be satisfied that 
 there would be in Ireland a universal cry in favour 
 of the present state of things, which, however unsa- 
 
i'UTUKE PROSPECTS OE UiKL^VSD. 
 
 tisfactoiy, is infinitely preferable to tliat to wliicli it 
 Las succeeded. The former Irish constitution, it 
 should not be forgotten, was a monstrous assemblage 
 of injustice and iniquity, which, as it was not jws- 
 sible to reform, it was well to destro)'. Hence, all 
 things considered, I still look upon the Act of 
 Union, m spite of its defects, as entitled to the ap¬ 
 probation of mankind. 
 
 To combat this assertion, wliich ma}" apjjear 
 singular to all those who are satisfied wtli study¬ 
 ing history in tlie daily papers, tlie example of 1782 
 may be quoted ; and it maj^ be urged tliat, if the 
 Union had not taken place, the Catholics would 
 have obtained religious emancipation and parlia¬ 
 mentary reform by the same means as those which 
 the Volunteers resorted to vith success, in order to 
 wring from England the recognition of national in¬ 
 dependence. But this would be a complete mistake. 
 In 1782 Ireland was unanimous, and had justice, 
 power, and to a certain extent, law, on her side. 
 England, weakened by an unsuccessful war, had 
 herself placed arms in the hands of Ireland, and had 
 helped her to organize an imposing militaiy- force. 
 How, under these circumstances, could the English 
 Government refuse demands, which were supported 
 too by the public opinion of the whole countiu' ? 
 But, after the exifiosion of the French revolution, 
 and after the i-e 2 )ublican insurrection of 1798, the 
 Protestant party declared themselves, in a Ixidj', 
 against every species of refonn; and entire mastei’s 
 
PRESENT STATE 
 
 of parliament, they would long have rejected the 
 slightest concessions in favour of the Catholics. 
 
 Jlr. Pitt, to do him justice, considered the Act of 
 Union as the only mode of securing the religious 
 peace of Ireland, and establishing an equitable 
 political system. He had promised the Catholics, 
 as soon as the parliament of the United King¬ 
 dom met, to hiing in a hill to secure to them the 
 exercise of aU their rights. Catholic Emancipation 
 was in his eyes a necessary consequence of the 
 amalgamation of the two countries. UnhappUj', his 
 plans of conciliation and tolerance met with an 
 almost insurmountable obstacle in the obstinacy 
 and narrow prejudices of George the Third. True, 
 at first, to the real principles of parliamentary 
 government, he quitted office rather than aban¬ 
 don the performance of his promises to the 
 Catholics. But he was only half true to them. 
 "When liis former supporters succeeded liim in office, 
 he did not employ the immense parliamentaiy in¬ 
 fluence at his disposal to secure the triumph of 
 those principles of religious toleration which he had 
 proclaimed. Exclusively absorbed by the dangers 
 which threatened England from -without, he strove 
 to regain power, less for the sake of her domestic 
 interests, than to maintain -with greater energy and 
 effect the terrible struggle that he had led her to en¬ 
 gage in -with France. At this critical juncture, he 
 would not weaken any of the means at his disposal by 
 alienating the favour of his aged king, and he sacri- 
 
FUTURE PROSPECTS OF IRELANT). 
 
 39 
 
 ficed the Catholics to the success of his war polic^^ 
 England committed a most prodigious fault in not 
 granting emancipation to the Catholics as a neces¬ 
 sary consequence of the Act of Union. She would 
 tlius have succeeded in gaining their attachment, 
 or at least in rendering less unpopular with the 
 great mass of the Irish nation, a measure which 
 was calculated to shock their vanity. If it had 
 not healed all the wounds of Ireland, it would, at 
 least, have prevented them from festering. The poor 
 and suffering classes, instead of attributing all their 
 grievances to the parliament of England, would have 
 acquired the habit of regarding it in the light of a 
 just and protecting power, and they would have 
 waited patiently for what is far more necessaiy 
 than political rights, \tz. ecclesiastical and social 
 reform. 
 
 As long as the war with Napoleon lasted, parlia¬ 
 ment had as little time or thought to devote to 
 reform in England as in Ireland. The Aldiigs, 
 during their short tenure of office, did nothing for 
 the latter country. Wlien peace arrived, the im¬ 
 mense success the Government had met with gave so 
 much strength to the Tories, who assumed to them¬ 
 selves, not mthout some reason, all the credit of the 
 national glory that had been acquired, that ever)'^ 
 reform seemed indefinitely postponed. Catholic 
 Emancipation, which, in 1800, had been on the 
 eve of accomplishment, was in 1817 pronounced 
 impracticable. 
 
’RESENT STATE AND 
 
 . 40 
 
 J^evertheless, the fruitfiil germs of human ad¬ 
 vancement and freedom contained \vithin the 
 English constitution, although checked for a time 
 by the intoxication of victory, -were not long in 
 again shooting forth. The spirit of reform, stifled 
 by the absorbing interests ofrvar, and silenced in the 
 shouts of triumph, awoke with refreshed vigour, and 
 from ever}- side there burst forth complaints, increas¬ 
 ing in vehemence, against the glaring political ine¬ 
 qualities sanctioned by the constitution. The more 
 enlightened and sensible of the Tory party felt 
 how serious this agitation was, and thought the 
 time was come to do justice to some of the demands 
 of the popular party. Canning and his friends, 
 impressed with this comdction, introduced amongst 
 their party and the ministry a more liberal spirit, 
 and they warmly espoused the cause of religious 
 toleration. 
 
 During aU tliis period the Irish Catholics, in¬ 
 haling the breath of civil liberty, had greatly 
 increased in numbers, wealth, and information. 
 The leaders by whom they were guided were 
 aware, that the days of insurrection and revolu¬ 
 tionary violence were past, and that their only 
 well-founded hope was in a skilful and persevering 
 application of aU legal means which the English 
 constitution, to its honour be it said, places within 
 the reach of those who suffer, for the redress of 
 grievances. With this view, a committee was 
 foi-med in Dublin as early as 1810, to maintain 
 
FUTURE FKOSPECTS OF lliELAXD. 41 
 
 — whether by means of the press, or in au}’ other 
 legal manner — the rights of the Catholics. This 
 committee, during several years at first, under the 
 guidance of John Leogh, extended its ramifica¬ 
 tions throughout Ireland. It gi'ew up in silence 
 and obscurity ; and almost before the English Go¬ 
 vernment were aware of its existence it had orga¬ 
 nized in every part of the countr}' an immense 
 association, which included nearly the whole of the 
 Catholic population. 
 
 This celebrated association, known by the name 
 of the Catholic Association, kept in perfect disci¬ 
 pline by its skilful and celebrated chief, O’Connell, 
 suddenly in 1825 declared itself in a veiy striking 
 manner. Its imposing attitude, and the astonishing 
 power it exercised over the Irish multitude, created 
 a prodigious sensation in England. It succeeded 
 in organizing and maintaining so menacing an atti¬ 
 tude, without, however, passing the bounds of law, 
 that at the end of a few 3 'ears it placed the Govern¬ 
 ment in the alternative either of putting it do^ra bj- 
 force or disarming it by concessions. The chiefs of 
 the Tory pai'ty then in power, after long hesitation, 
 adopted this latter course. The Duke of AVelling- 
 ton and Mr. Peel, who, a few years before, had 
 separated from Canning rather than follow the 
 new path which he wished to take in the do¬ 
 mestic policy of the country, resolved to concede 
 all the demands of the Irish Catholics. Their 
 
42 
 
 PRESEKT STATE AND 
 
 conduct was wise and prudent rather than gene¬ 
 rous. And indeed, if they gave way, it was be¬ 
 cause they felt that if, in order to maintain Pro¬ 
 testant supremacy in Ireland, they had had recourse 
 to those violent measures, which had been in use 
 with the reformers of the sixteenth and eighteenth 
 centuries, the English nation would not have sup 
 ported them. 
 
 The Act of 1829, prepared by Mr. Peel, that 
 statesman who, above all others, is endowed with 
 the instinct of the moment, was complete. The 
 political incapacity under which the Catholics had 
 laboured during so many ages, was abolished. The 
 only offices they were interdicted from holding 
 were Regent of the kingdom, Lord-Lieutenant of 
 Ireland, Chancellors of England or Ireland, and 
 President of the General Assembly of the Church 
 of Scotland, — exclusions founded on substantial 
 considerations, which have in them nothing unjust, 
 or offensive to the feelings of the Catholics of Great 
 Britain. 
 
 Nevertheless, the Act of emancipation, extorted 
 rather by the fears than through the good-will of 
 Parliament, did not satisfy Ireland. Her inveterate 
 wounds required more searching remedies than a 
 mere political reform, which was considered mth 
 reason by the friends of Ireland much more as a 
 means for obtaining the redress of grievances than 
 as the end of aR their efforts. Accordingly, the 
 
EDTUBB PKOSPECTS OF lUELAND. 
 
 43 
 
 agitation, which was excited by the events of July 
 1830, began again with more intensity and vio¬ 
 lence than ever. 
 
 O’Connell, from that time all-powerful with his 
 party, entered upon a memorable struggle mth 
 Lord Grey’s government, which seemed to por¬ 
 tend serious consequences; but hardly had that 
 Government brought in their celebrated bill for par- 
 liamentaiy reform, when O’Connell desisted from 
 ever-y attack or indication of hostility. FuUy aware, 
 from liis wonderful insthict, how much the Catholics 
 were interested in the success of that measure, he 
 passed, ■with wonderftil dexterity, from an almost 
 factious opposition to unbounded devotion to the 
 AVhig party. 
 
 As long as the fate of the biU was doubtful. Lord 
 Grey never had more faitliful allies or steadier ad¬ 
 herents than the Irish Catholic members; and to 
 them is due a large share of the victory that that 
 minister, upheld by public opinion, gained over the 
 House of Lords. 
 
 The refonn bill did something for Ireland, and 
 especially for the Catholics. Ireland was ^ven five 
 new representatives, — one for the university of 
 Dublin, and four for toivns which had increased in 
 importance. But what is more essential, the right 
 of voting was extended. Till then it had been 
 confined, in boroughs, to municqral corporations 
 composed exclusively of fanatical Protestants. The 
 biU extended it to 10/. householders. This change 
 
44 
 
 secured to the Catholics a majority in most of the 
 electoral districts.* 
 
 Parliamentary reform alone could not, any more 
 than emancipation, diy up the sources of popular 
 agitation in Ireland. Lord Grey committed the 
 error of considering it as the limit at which the 
 efforts of the reformers ought to stop. This opinion, 
 true to a certain point with respect to England, 
 was for Ireland completely false. In the case of 
 the Irish Catholics especially, it could only be an 
 additional means for obtaining those changes in the 
 religious and social system which the state of the 
 countrj" so imperatively called for. Accordingly, 
 from 1832 agitation revived under a more threaten¬ 
 ing aspect than before. It was directed particularly 
 iio-aiTist tithes, that odious tax, which was as hateful 
 to the Catholic population from the humiliation it 
 entailed upon them as from the pecuniary sacrifices 
 it imposed. In this instance O’Connell was not 
 powerftd enough to keep the popular movement 
 within the bounds of the law. The peasantiy, ex¬ 
 asperated by miseiy, and irritated by being dis¬ 
 appointed in the hopes held out to them on this 
 subject, declared open war against the clergy. 
 
 * The observations of the author are confined to boroughs ; 
 but ev( n there the right of voting at elections was not ex¬ 
 clusively in the hands of the corporations. The changes pro¬ 
 duced by the reform bill, in favour of the Catholics, apply 
 to boroughs only; the Catholics had a great majority in most 
 of the counties before.— Trans. 
 
rUTUKE PROSPECTS OF IREEAXD. 
 
 45 
 
 The opposition to the collection of this impost was 
 so well organised, and so vigorously sustained, 
 that it became unpossible for tithe collectors to 
 get it paid, even with the aid of the police and 
 regular soldiers. In vain did Lord Grey’s govern¬ 
 ment have recourse to severe measures for the pur¬ 
 pose of putting an end to this general resistance. 
 The power’s mth which he was armed by the co¬ 
 ercion biU passed in 1833 did not enable him to 
 obtain for the clergy the pajnnent of what was due 
 to them; and when, in order to relieve the great 
 distress to which they were reduced, the Govern¬ 
 ment became themselves the collectors of the tithes, 
 the success was no greater. 
 
 The ministry were not unanimous as to the line 
 to be pursued towards the Catholics. A certain 
 number of the Cabinet were favourable to a sr-stem 
 of concession, and they succeeded so far in their 
 object as to lay before Parliament, simultaneously 
 with the coercion biU, a first measure for the re¬ 
 form of the Irish Established Church. By the 
 aid of this act, which, after a long straggle, passed 
 both Houses, the Catholics were relieved from the 
 payment of vestry cess, which the Protestants liad 
 had the right of levying upon the inhabitants of 
 their parish for the repair of their churches. The 
 funds ai’ising from this source were made good by 
 a deduction from the revenues of all ecclesiastical 
 benefices, and of two bishoprics, with some other 
 
46 
 
 PRESENT STATE AND 
 
 ecclesiastical offices, -whicli -were to be abolished 
 after the death of the then incumbents. 
 
 This measure was a great boon to Catholic 
 Ireland, less from the reform which it sanctioned, 
 than from the precedent it established. Govern 
 ment having once laid hands upon the sacred reve¬ 
 nues of the Church, could not but be drawn on, 
 by the very force of circumstances, to reduce those 
 revenues to the real wants of the small minority 
 which in Ireland professes the religion of the State. 
 
 Accordingly, the majority of the administration 
 were not long before they endeavoured to deduce 
 from the principles which had been established by 
 the bill of 1833, its logical consequences. They 
 declared in favour of Mr. Ward’s motion, which 
 consisted in a declaration that the State had a right 
 to appropriate the revenues of the Church to secular 
 purposes. Four ministers, who were rather Pro¬ 
 testants than Keformers, Lord Stanley, Sir James 
 Graham, the Duke of Kichmond, and Lord Gode¬ 
 rich, being unwilling to subscribe to this decla¬ 
 ration, withdrew from the Cabinet. Shortly after. 
 Lord Grey, who adopted with reluctance the Irish 
 policy of his colleagues, followed their example, 
 and resigned.* The withdrawal of the intractable 
 Whig partisans of the Established Church, led to 
 
 * There is no authority for asserting that this was the cmise 
 of Lord Grey’s resignation.— Trans. 
 
FUTURE PROSPECTS OF IREEAXD. 
 
 47 
 
 the foTmation of Lord Melbourne’s ministry, which, 
 with the exception of the short inteiwal of the 
 abortive Peel admmisti’ation, governed Great Bri¬ 
 tain during six years. The accession to power 
 of Lord Melbourne’s administration, which was 
 founded on the avowed object of removing all causes 
 of just complaint, was a great event for Ireland. 
 For the first time a government was seen breaking 
 up for having refused to give waj- to the popular 
 ■wishes of the Ii-ish, and a new Cabinet openly pro¬ 
 claiming their intention of treating with equal fa¬ 
 vour Catholics and Protestants. For the first time, 
 for centuries. Catholics were called upon to fill 
 the highest offices of the magistracy. The apjwint- 
 ment of Mr. O’Loughlin to the Mastership of the 
 EoUs, the second post in the courts of equity, and 
 that of Mr. Shed to the Privj' Council, marked the 
 advent of a new era for Ireland, from the date of 
 which religious distinctions Avere, as fur as the 
 liberals rvere concerned, entmely obliterated. 
 
 Lord Melbourne entrusted the administration of 
 Ireland to men of firm and conciliator}- character, 
 Avho knew how to gain the estimation and con¬ 
 fidence of the Catholics. The tAvo Lord Lieu¬ 
 tenants Avho succeeded each other during his 
 ministry. Lord MulgraA-e and Lord Fortescue, 
 exercised power for the true interests of the coun¬ 
 try. Thanks to their justice and impartiality, 
 Ireland enjoyed a degree of cahn and tranquillity 
 till then ntteidy unknoAvn. 
 
48 
 
 PRESEXT STATE AND 
 
 K Ireland owed mucli to these viceroys, she 
 owed still more to the especial representative of 
 the ministry, the Secretary for Ireland, Lord Mor¬ 
 peth, who, for sis years, employed aU the power 
 with which he was invested to blot out the traces 
 of rehgious discord, and heal the wounds of that 
 unhappy country. We may be allowed to express 
 a hope that the career of this statesman, the hope 
 of the Whig party, viU not terminate, mitil he has 
 been permitted to achieve, whether as minister, or 
 as lord-lieutenant, the work of peace and regener¬ 
 ation which he so meritoriously began under Lord 
 Melbourne’s auspices. 
 
 The legislative attempts of the administration to 
 better the condition of the Cathohcs were not so 
 successful as those of the executive. It was only by 
 giving up the application of the famous principle 
 of the appropriation, of the surplus revenues of the 
 Church, that they succeeded in carrying through 
 both Houses a law for the connnutation of tithes 
 into a rent-charge; and they had to return five 
 times to the attack before they carried the reform 
 of the municipal coii^orations of Ireland, and even 
 then they had to submit to several amendments 
 which diminished the practical eificaciousness of 
 the measure. 
 
 In spite of the concessions the Government were 
 obliged to make, the two laws above referred to 
 wei’e stni a source of great benefit to Ireland. 
 
FUTOBE PROSPECTS OF IRELAXD. 
 
 49 
 
 The law which commuted tithes into a fixed 
 charge upon land, at the same time reduced them 
 to three-fourths of what they were when paid in 
 kind. Besides this, the rent-charge fell directly 
 on the landlord, and thus put an end to the 
 obnoxious relations subsisting between the eccle¬ 
 siastical tithe coUectoi’, and the miserable Catholic 
 tenant. It may be that now, as foniierlj-, the tithe falls 
 ultimately on the fanner*; but as he does not pay it 
 directly, being merged, as it is, in his landlord’s rent, 
 it appears to be less humiliating and easier to bear. 
 Accordingly, since the new law on the commu¬ 
 tation of tithes has been in force, there has been 
 no disturbance in the agricultural districts, and the 
 clergy of the Established Church have received their 
 revenues without opposition or difficulty. 
 
 The refonn of the municipal corporations, al¬ 
 though far less complete than that which took 
 place in England and Scotland, was nevertheless 
 an immense triumph for the Catholics. These cor¬ 
 porations foi’med positive citadels, in which all 
 that was most violent and fanatical in the perse¬ 
 cuting and intolerant spirit of past ages had taken 
 refuge. In destroying their pririleges, and in giving 
 the right of voting to all whose property gave them 
 an interest in social order, the law secured to the 
 
 * Or rather on the consumer: it can only in this way be said 
 to fall on the farmer. The first eflfcct of reducing tithe is to put 
 the reduction into the pockets of the landlord, whose rent, on 
 any new letting, would be increased by that amount— Trans. 
 
50 
 
 PRESENT STATE AND 
 
 Catholics a preponderating influence in the affairs 
 of almost every town in the country. It was to 
 this law that the Catholics owed the satisfaction of 
 seeing their Ulustrious leader, O’ConneU, whom 
 they justly entitle their liberator, invested with 
 the first municipal dignity of the kingdom; and, 
 as mayor of Dublin, taking precedence after the 
 lord-lieutenant, and before all other public function¬ 
 aries, not excepting the chancellor himself. 
 
 During the continuance of the Melbourne minis¬ 
 try, the peace of Ireland was not disturbed. The 
 conduct of O’Connell, and of the other leaders of 
 the Catholic party, was at that time above all 
 praise; they renounced the tempting triumjDbs of 
 popular agitation, and took as much pains to pre¬ 
 serve tranquillity as they had before taken to foster 
 the notation which occasioned Lord Grey’s retire¬ 
 ment. 
 
 Shortly after Queen Victoria’s accession to the 
 throne, in October, 1837, O’Connell induced the 
 National Association to adopt the following resolu¬ 
 tion, which gives too faithful a picture of the dis¬ 
 position of the Catholic party at this period not to 
 quote the whole of it:— 
 
 “ The National Association, impressed with the 
 most lively gratitude to the Earl of Mulgrave (now 
 Marquis of Normanby) for his firm, manly, hu¬ 
 mane, and perfectly impartial administration of the 
 government in Ireland, and reposing unlimited con¬ 
 fidence in the sincere and unequivocal dispositions 
 
rUTURE PROSPECTS OF IRELAND. 
 
 51 
 
 of her Majesty’s present ministers to do justice to 
 Ireland, by jdacing her on a footing of equality 
 mth England and Scotland; but above all, and be¬ 
 fore aU, filled ivith the most respectful and dutiful 
 gi-atitude to her most gracious Majesty for the en¬ 
 lightened and patriotic policy which has distin- 
 gui^ed the commencement of her auspicious reign, 
 we do under these circumstances deem it a ijroof of 
 our confidence in the existing administration to 
 declare that this Association is dissolved, devolving 
 the carrying out of its purposes into fuU effect on 
 the Irish popular members in aid and support of 
 the Queen’s government.” 
 
 Tins TOse and loyal resolution, emanating from 
 O’Connell, forms a strange contrast to the hostility 
 and violence vdth which some years before he had 
 assailed England, and even the MTiigs themselves. 
 In this language we no longer recognise the man 
 who whilst he was the antagonist of Lord Grey’s 
 ministry carried his anger so far as to advise his 
 countrymen to abstam from the consumption of 
 any commodity subject to excise or customs’ duties, 
 and thus diminish the resources of government. 
 And jmt, in the midst of these apparent contradic¬ 
 tions, perfect consistency is observable in O’Connell’s 
 views. Employing a thousand different means which 
 he knows how to multiply, and varj' to infinit}' ac¬ 
 cording to the exigencies of the moment, he ever fol¬ 
 lows the same objects, — the political restoration of 
 his co-rehgionists and of his country. Out of consi- 
 
52 
 
 PEESENT STATE AND 
 
 deration for the consistency of lus principle of 
 action, history mil forgive his repeated changes, 
 and the very opposite judgments he has passed on 
 the same measures and on the same men. 
 
 I have thought it right to dwell on these changes 
 in the conduct of O’Connell, and of the party wliich 
 follows him with such blind confidence, not only for 
 the purpose of thro-nfing light on the past, but in 
 order to give a stiH clearer insight into the present 
 state of Ireland, and to set those persons right, who, 
 putting a literal interpretation on the vehement 
 protests and rash pledges in which O’Connell has, 
 during the past year, so lavishly indulged, look upon 
 that country as irrevocably engaged in deadly strife 
 with England. 
 
 The peaceable and orderly conduct of the Irish ever 
 si ce the formation of the Melbourne ministry, bears 
 ample testimony to the progress which that people 
 has made in the path of true civilisation. Govern¬ 
 ment had only to evince its good intentions towards 
 them, and to show that their convictions would be 
 respected, and their national feelings not offended, 
 for that same people, so turbulent and restive, to 
 evince at once respect for the laws, and endure 
 with patience those evUs of its social condition to 
 which it is not in human power to apply an instant 
 remedy. 
 
 If the MTiig ministry had been as strong in 
 England as it was in Ireland, if it could have com¬ 
 manded a majority in the House of Commons suffi- 
 
FUTURE PROSPECTS OF IRELAND. 53 
 
 ciently large to force tlie House of Lords to adopt 
 the remedial measures wliicli it had brought for¬ 
 ward ^^’ith the object of aUayuig the disorders of 
 Ireland, the grievances of that country would have 
 been in a fair way of being removed, and political 
 refonn would have been found to bring about, by 
 degrees, that social reform, which can alone restore 
 Irish society to a state of rest and prosperity. 
 
 Fate decided otherwise. The Melbourne ministiy, 
 instead of gaining, lost ground every day; its Irish 
 policy, temperate and impartial, did not suit the 
 opinions of the majority in England. In separatuig 
 from his former colleagues, Lord Stanley told them 
 ivith truth, “ I declare boldly, that the country is 
 not ripe for the Appropriation Clause, or for the 
 reform of the Established Church in Ireland.” 
 
 It is long before habits of oppression, deeply 
 rooted for centuries, are laid aside. Nations, as 
 well as individuals, reluctantly abandon ideas of 
 superiority and of dominion, which time has sanc¬ 
 tioned. Years must elapse before the Irish vnll be 
 generally considered in England as entitled to the 
 same rights, and desennng of the same attention, 
 as the proud descendants of the Saxons and Nor- 
 
 Notwithstanding the sympathy it obtained from 
 Ireland, the Melbounie ministry, faintly supported 
 by the Radicals, undemined by the Chartists, and 
 vehemently attacked by the Tories, who, strength- 
 
PRESENT STATE AND 
 
 . 54 
 
 ened in opposition by fresb accessions, had recon¬ 
 stituted their party on a wider basis, under the 
 name of Consen'atives, could not have long existed, 
 if the accession of Queen Yictoria had not afforded 
 a powerful auxiliary in royal power. The Queen 
 exerted her prerogatives to the utmost on its be¬ 
 half, and evinced in its favour a degree of energy 
 and fimmess very remarkable at the outset of a 
 reign entered upon at so early an age. Thanks to 
 this support, Lord Melbourne was enabled to wea¬ 
 ther more than one parliamentary storm, by which 
 his ministerial existence was endangered, but he was 
 at length fated to succumb before a decided majority 
 of the House of Commons. 
 
 The return of the Tories to power was a severe 
 blow for Ireland. In vain did Sir Robert, with a 
 view to mitigate its effect, look out from amongst 
 his adherents for the most discreet and conciliating, 
 to entrust to them the task of governing that 
 country. The personal merit of the new lord- 
 lieutenant and of the new secretary. Lord de Grey 
 and Lord Ebiot, was insufficient to allay the dis¬ 
 content and irritation caused by the dissolution of 
 the only government which had openly shown itself 
 favourable to the cause of the Irish. Most happily, 
 however, the change of administration having taken 
 place against the wishes of the Queen, and the Tories 
 having been forced, as it were, upon her by a ma¬ 
 jority of parliament, the Irish, on returning to the 
 
FUTUHE PROSPECTS OF IBELAED. 
 
 55 
 
 ranks of opposition, took care to make a proper 
 distinction between tbe person of the Queen and 
 her government. At the same time that they re¬ 
 newed their furious struggle Avith her ministers, 
 they maintained for the Queen a lively feeling of 
 attachment and gratitude, the strengtli of which 
 the agitation of the repeal of the Union has not yet 
 impaired. 
 
 With a Tory ministry, which had at its com¬ 
 mand a large majority in both Houses, O’Connell 
 was well aware that the cause of Ireland had no¬ 
 thing to expect from Parliament. Sir K. Peel, 
 brought back to power by a Conseiwative and Pro¬ 
 testant reaction, could do nothing for the Ca- 
 thohcs. There was even reason to fear lest his 
 party should impose upon him some molent mea¬ 
 sures ; such, for example, as the Registration of 
 Voters’ Bill, wliich Lord Stanley, when he was in 
 opposition, had more than once submitted to the 
 House, and the operation of which was to reduce 
 considerably the number of electors. In order to 
 prevent the adoption of retrograde measures, and 
 to force the ministry to follow up the work of 
 justice begun by Lord Melbourne, O’Connell, who 
 had lost all influence in Parliament, had only one 
 course to pursue, that of reviving popular agita¬ 
 tion, of recommencing the struggle out of doors, 
 and of reorganising an association sufiiciently power- 
 fill to uphold the rights of his counti^^ He did 
 not hesitate to adopt this course. Relinquish- 
 
56 
 
 PRESENT STATE AND 
 
 ing his post in the House of Commons, he returned 
 to Ireland, followed by almost all his Catholic col¬ 
 leagues, and resolved upon combating, with every 
 weapon which the English Constitution places 
 witliin the reach of the vanquished, the projects 
 of his adversaries. Looking at the question in an 
 Irish point of view, tliis determination was a rea¬ 
 sonable one. Xo one can blame O’Connell for 
 having declined a parliamentary contest, on such 
 disadvantageous terms, and for having changed 
 the field to one upon which he knew that the 
 cautious leader of the Government would not like 
 to meet him. It seems to me nearly certain that 
 if he had can-ied on his agitation within the limits 
 prescribed by the English Constitution, and if he 
 had confined himself to some specific and reasonable 
 object,—if, for instance, he had been satisfied with 
 demanding a reform of the Church, or a modifica¬ 
 tion of the laws of Lindlo, ,1 and tenant, —he would 
 greatly have impeded the march of the ministers, 
 he would have efiected a sudden reaction in public 
 opinion in England in favour of his own countiy, 
 and after a time he would have obtained new con¬ 
 cessions and fresh triumphs. But this wise and 
 prudent line did not suit him. Illiether it was 
 that, intoxicated by his foimer successes, he be¬ 
 lieved in the irresistible power of the means he 
 was bringing into play,—or whether he concq^ved 
 that, in order to stir up the masses eflectually, to 
 excite their passions, and to insure their entire 
 
rUTUUE PROSPECTS OF IRELAND. 
 
 devotion, it was necessaiy to present to their \'iew 
 great things for accomplishment,—at all events, 
 whatever the motive, he adopted an extreme course. 
 He had hardly arrived in Dublin before he un¬ 
 furled the banner of Repeal, and declared that he 
 would never cease to contend and agitate for the 
 restoration of the legislative independence of his 
 country until it was accomplished. 
 
 His powerful voice resounded from one end of 
 Ireland to the other. It aroused every political 
 and religious passion, and every feeling of nation¬ 
 ality, which for so many years lie had knovm how 
 to restrain. At the end of a few months the 
 whole of the Catholic jiopulation, together with 
 some Protestants who joined tlieni, formed a more 
 numerous and better organised Association than 
 that wliich, in 1829, extorted emancipation from 
 the Duke of 'Wellington and Sir Robert Peel. This 
 association obeyed its skilful leader with blind 
 devotion. It enables O’Connell to exercise, at this 
 very day, an unlimited authorit}- over seven-eighths 
 of his fellow-countrymen, whilst the support of the 
 Catholic clergy tends to maintain and extend its 
 influence. Until now O’Connell has acted with 
 great prudence. After he had marshalled his 
 forces, he resolved to parade them in public, by 
 assembling in different parts of the countrj- all 
 those who had enlisted under the flag of repeal. 
 "Was this display intended to intimidate Ivngland, 
 or was it the prelude to more decisive measures ? 
 
PRESENT STATE AND 
 
 We cannot say. The prosecution, which the Govern- 
 naent thought proper to institute against him 
 and his principal adherents, interrupted the course 
 of popular meetings, and prevented him from fol¬ 
 lowing up the judicial organisation which he had 
 projected, with a view of neutralising the in¬ 
 fluence of the established ma^stracy. The same 
 course seems to have made him delay the pro¬ 
 ject of re-uniting, from different parts of the 
 country, delegates who were to foinn a kind of 
 national assembly. True to his system of moral re¬ 
 sistance, he bowed before the authority of the laws, 
 and he suspended hostilities until after the decision 
 of the jury before which he was to appear. 
 
 So much boldness and pmdence on the pari; of 
 the Irish Catholics, and at the same time so much 
 energy and moderation on that of the rulers of 
 England, are matters of profomid astonishment to 
 continental politicians, who have but little know¬ 
 ledge of the principles upon which its admu-able 
 constitution is founded.- As long as the Govern¬ 
 ment was inactive, they foretold an approaching 
 revolution in Ireland, and the inevitable separation 
 of the two kingdoms. Ifow, perhaps, struck by 
 the feeble opposition with which the first efibrts of 
 ministers to put down agitation and arrest O’Con¬ 
 nell’s course have been met, they look with utter 
 despair on the cause of the Irish Catholics, and 
 consign them to vain struggles which can have 
 no effect in improving their melancholy lot. 
 
FUTURE I’ROSPECTS OF IRELAND. 59 
 
 I do not hesitate to say, that both these 
 modes of considering the question of Ireland are 
 equally erroneous. The extent of the agitation, to 
 which O’Connell at that time directed his energies 
 with so much boldness, has lately been much ex¬ 
 aggerated; but it would be as great a mistake 
 not to acknowledge how serious and threatening 
 may be its consequences. The diseases of Ireland, 
 which time has rendered only the more inveterate, 
 uill long continue a source of embarrassment and 
 trouble to England. Even if the most prompt 
 and efficacious remedies were appUed, even if all 
 parties concurred in their endeavours to seek them 
 out, many years must stiU elapse, and more than 
 one generation pass away, before all traces of dis¬ 
 cord and of cml and rebgious hati-ed can be 
 obliterated. 
 
 But such concurrence is hopeless. Passion and 
 prejudice are still too rife in England for any such 
 coincidence of opinion respecting Ireland; nor is this 
 the least of the difficulties which interpose to prevent 
 the steady improvement of the countiy. AYliat is 
 far more serious m my opinion is, the schism which 
 O’Connell has thought fit to create between his 
 party and the whole of the English nation. Until 
 now, the Irish Catholics had always reckoned on a 
 number of ai’dent and devoted partisans in Eng¬ 
 land, a number which was steadily increasing. If 
 he had placed himself above the political changes of 
 the day, it was easy to foresee that the time would 
 come when the filends of Ireland would conunand 
 
PRESENT STATE AND 
 
 an irresistible majority in parliament. By raising 
 the standard of repeal, O’Connell has broken with 
 his former allies. He has dared to defy England 
 and its united forces. He has confounded m one 
 general hatred 'ATiigs and Tories; the enemies of 
 all reform, and aU concession, and the most deter¬ 
 mined champions of civil and religious equality. 
 
 Europe in general has approv^ed of O’Connell’s 
 conduct, and appears to have concurred with him 
 in thinking that the legislative independence of 
 Ireland was the only effectual remedy for the 
 evils of that country. Is this opinion well found¬ 
 ed? I think not. I consider it, on the contrary, 
 as erroneous and fatal to any amelioration in the 
 condition of the Irish people. O’Connell could not, 
 as it seems to me, have adopted a more lamentable 
 course. Instead of encouraging him to persist in 
 it, the duty of all those who have the welfare of 
 Ireland at heart is to exhoi-t him to retrace his 
 steps, and resume, in concert with the liberal party 
 in England, the work of progressive reform which 
 he has already so greatly forwarded. 
 
 In order to prove what I have just stated, it 
 is necessary, first, to consider the social state of 
 Ireland, and to seek for the true cause of the 
 evdls she has to endure; then to examine the 
 remedies that may be expected from an Irish 
 legislature; and, lastly, to enumerate the great diffi¬ 
 culties which must be ovei-come before attaining 
 the Repeal of the Union, and the numberless dis- 
 
PUTtlEE PROSPECTS OF IRELAND. 
 
 61 
 
 advantages whicli would ensue from the accom¬ 
 plishment of that object. 
 
 The inquiry I am about to make may not be 
 followed by a complete solution of the difficulties 
 which the actual state of Ireland presents ; nor can 
 it dispel the obscurity in which her future prospects 
 are involved; but it may serve, I hope, to throw 
 some light upon this interesting question, and keep 
 within reasonable bounds the conjectures and hypo¬ 
 theses to which it has given rise. 
 
 If the e^'ils of Ireland could be attributed to her 
 pohtical state, there would be no great reason to 
 pity her, for their cure would be easy. She does, in 
 fact, enjoy at this very moment many more rights 
 than the greater number of civilised nations whose 
 lot is eminently prosperous. Her press is free even to 
 licence; personal liberty is religiously respected; 
 the right of combining is exercised to an extent 
 unknown elsewhere; in a word, Irishmen are in 
 possession of aU those political rights of which 
 Englishmen are so justly proud. Are they u-rong 
 then in complaining? Are their suiferings ima¬ 
 ginary ? No, they are but too real; but instead of 
 attributing them to political institutions, we must 
 look for their origin in the religious and social part 
 of the national system. Let us endeavour to in¬ 
 vestigate the real principle.s of this system. 
 
 Ireland, and especially Catholic Ireland, is an 
 exclusively agricultural country. The cultivation 
 of its soil is the chief, not to say only, resource of 
 
PRESENT STATE AND 
 
 the great mass of its population. This, under ordi¬ 
 nary circumstances, tvould he peculiarly favourable 
 to the maintenance of order and tranquillity; but it 
 is not so in Ireland. This soU, to which the Irish 
 are attached by paramount necessity, belongs 
 almost entirely to a foreign race, for whom they 
 have neither sympathy nor atfection; and with 
 whom they are not united by those thousand moral 
 ties which, in aU other countries, exist between the 
 occupier and the landlord. Wai’s of invasion, in the 
 first instance, and then religious strife, have, suc¬ 
 cessively, wrested the ownersliip of the soil from its 
 former possessors, and have placed it in the hands 
 of the conquerors and persecutors of the country. 
 The repeated confiscations of the seventeenth cen¬ 
 tury have, for the last 100 years, divided Ireland 
 into two hostile classes, those who possess and those 
 who till the soU. Its population consists of Pro¬ 
 testant landlords, on the one hand, who are into¬ 
 lerant and haughty, and who treat with contempt 
 those whom they have conquered; and, on the other, 
 of Catholic tenants, who are poor, ignorant, super¬ 
 stitious, and imbued with an inveterate hatred of 
 the despoilers of their country. 
 
 There is nothing analogous to this in Europe. 
 Russia herself, in this respect, is in a more satis¬ 
 factory state. The serf, no doubt, is there, accord¬ 
 ing to law, absolutely dependent on his master; his 
 rights are fewer, he is subjected to greater and 
 more arbitrary violence. But at least there sub- 
 
FUTURE PROSPECTS OF IRELAND. G3 
 
 sist between him and the higher classes of society 
 numberless moral ties, of winch in Ireland there is 
 no trace. The same blood flows in his veins, and 
 in those of Ins master; both raise their eyes to 
 heaven at the foot of the same altars. They speak 
 the same language; their national sympathies and 
 history are the same; and they have no reminiscences 
 to carry them back to changes that have occurred 
 in their relative positions. Xothing of this sort ex¬ 
 ists ill Ireland. There, the Catholic occupier consi¬ 
 ders the Protestant proprietor in the light of a cruel 
 foreigner, who has stripped him of liis property, 
 who has profaned his temple, and is still stained 
 with the blood of his fathers. In order to fonn an 
 idea of the misery and degradation into which Ire¬ 
 land was plunged by the t}Tanny of 'William III., 
 one must look for a comparison in those countries 
 of America in which slavery, in all its deformity, 
 still exists. 
 
 This hostility of feeling necessarily indisposed 
 Irish landlords to live on their estates. Accord¬ 
 ingly the greater number of them, feeling but 
 little interest in the embcUislunent or improvement 
 of their propei’ty, and, at the same time, haimted 
 by an apprehension of insecurity which they are 
 unable to dispel, dream of nothing but extracting 
 from it the largest returns, vdthout being called 
 upon to make hazardous advances. The misery of 
 Ireland has produced a class of men who forward 
 these %aews in a marvellous degree. They were 
 
64 
 
 PRESENT STATE AND 
 
 called middlemen^ and they rented, from absentee 
 noblemen and gentry, vast tracts of iU-cultivated 
 land, improvided with any Idnd of building or 
 means of cultivation. These tracts are di^dded into 
 small parcels; and ^vithout a single farthing being 
 spent upon them, they are underlet to the wretched 
 inhabitants, amongst whom might often be found 
 descendants of the ancient proprietors whom war 
 and confiscation had dispossessed of their land. 
 This subdivision was often repeated, and the same 
 land passed through several hands before it reached 
 the party who was ultimately to cultivate it; so that 
 it is not uncommon, even in the present day, to 
 find between the owner of the soil and the real 
 tenant, a succession of five or sis farmers dependent 
 the one upon the other. 
 
 This system of agriculture is undoubtedly the 
 worst that can exist. It unites all the objections 
 that can be urged to the minute subdmsion of land, 
 to those evils which are inherent in large estates. 
 It renders the division of labour, as well as any ad¬ 
 vance or improvement in agriculture, impossible, 
 and these defects are not redeemed by the zeal, 
 activity, and perseverance winch the possession of 
 property inspires. 
 
 The relative superiority of the two agricultural 
 systems, of large or small holdings, is a problem 
 which may long remain unsolved; but we ma}' at 
 once pronounce, without fear of error, that the 
 cultivation of land which is carried on by small 
 
FUTDJiE PBOSPECTS OF IREEAXD. 
 
 65 
 
 farmers, without caj^tal, intelligence, or interest 
 in the soil, is the most lamentahle that can be 
 conceited. 
 
 Nevertheless, as this kind of agi-iculture, how¬ 
 ever detestable, was peculiarly convenient to land¬ 
 lords, the Irish parliament and the courts of law did 
 not fail to encourage it. To afford still greater secu¬ 
 rity for the payment of rent, the aristocracy, who 
 commanded a majority in both houses, passed a law 
 by which the occupying tenant was made respon¬ 
 sible for the debts due from the intermediate tenants 
 to each other and to the landlord. Thus the Avi-etched 
 peasant, after having paid an exorbitant rent to the 
 party from whom he rented the field on which he 
 had so much difficulty to live, was often called upon 
 to discharge those debts which the head farmers, 
 who were unknown to him, had contracted with 
 the proprietor of the soil. This monstrous injus¬ 
 tice,—this scandalous abuse of power, which would 
 alone be sufficient to account for the agrarian dis¬ 
 orders of such frequent recurrence in Ireland, 
 existed down to 1830.* In that year an Act, 
 Iniown by the name of the Suh-lettina Act, declared 
 that every bond fide pajnnent, made liy a tenant to 
 the farmer from whom he held his land nith the 
 consent, tacit or expressed, of the proprietor, should 
 
 * The Sub-letting Act only partially removed this iniquitous 
 abuse of law : it can still be enforced over a vast extent of pro¬ 
 perty. The Landlord and Tenant Commission liave, in their re¬ 
 cent report to Parliament, recommended its abolition. — Trans. 
 
66 
 
 PRESENT STATE AND 
 
 be considered as a good payment which could not 
 be called in question. 
 
 The selfish interest of Irish proj)rietors, whose 
 especial object it was to be relieved from the imme¬ 
 diate snpermtendence of their estates, would have 
 sufficed to spread throughout the countiy the sys¬ 
 tem of management to which I have alluded; but 
 its, extension was singularly favoured by circtmi- 
 stances apart from the considerations of property. 
 The first of these was the introduction of potatoes, the 
 cultivation of which is eminently adapted to small 
 holdings. The second was that invariable tendency 
 which, it must be admitted, encourages an impo¬ 
 verished, ignorant, and brutalised population, to 
 multiply as fast as it finds means of subsistence, 
 however scanty. 
 
 This is not the time to discuss Malthus’s theoiy of 
 population, or to ascertain within what limits it is 
 really true that population tends to increase faster 
 than the means of subsistence. I beheve, like many 
 other political economists, especially Mr. Senior, 
 who has treated this subject with his usual supe¬ 
 rior ability, that the celebrated Malthus has exag¬ 
 gerated the degree of this tendency, i. e. of the force 
 which operates in favour of the increase of popula¬ 
 tion. Having had the gi’eat merit of being the first to 
 lay down the universality of this tendency, it is not 
 surprising that, dazzled by his discovery, he should 
 have assigned to it a greater amount of influence 
 than it was reaUy entitled to. But, whatever may 
 
F0T0RE PBOSPECTS 
 
 IREEAXD. 
 
 67 
 
 be tbe general law which regulates the balance of 
 forces accelerating or retarding the first advance 
 of population, it is not to be doubted but that, under 
 the peculiar circumstances of Ireland, the former 
 must have exercised a prejDonderating influence. 
 
 When a nation has been reduced to a state of 
 frightful misery, when it has been deprived of 
 all hope of improving its lot, and when the higher 
 classes and the government do nothing to raise its 
 moral condition, it is evident that the natural 
 tendency of the human race rapidly to ineretise will 
 meet with no other obstacle than such as arises 
 from a deficiency of subsistence. If, under these 
 circumstances, a system of agriculture be intro¬ 
 duced, which, like that in which potatoes fonn the 
 principal crop, is of a kind to produce from the soil 
 a quantity of food of an inferior quality, no doubt 
 but, to a certain extent, proportioned to the number 
 of arms emploj-ed upon it, population will increase 
 far more rapidly than wealtli,—so long, at least, 
 as there are fields to divide, and lands capable of 
 being converted to this new culture. 
 
 Mr. Senior, it is true, questions the truth of these 
 general conclusions. He maintains that, in spite 
 of the complaints urged on every side, the physical 
 condition of Ireland has improved during the last 
 fifty years. I cannot assent to his opinion; the 
 most undeniable evidence is against it. I shall 
 confine myself, in order to prove what I state, to the 
 quotation of a few lines from that remarkable Report 
 
68 PRESENT STATE AND 
 
 presented to Parliament in 1839, by tbe commission 
 appointed to examine into the means and facilities 
 for establishing rad-roads in Ireland. “ We have 
 perceived,” say the commissioners, “no symptom 
 of improvement in the condition of the people, 
 ■which is composed almost exclusively of -wi-etched 
 creatures in rags, li^ing in mud hovels. In King’s 
 County, as 'well as in other comities ■v\-hich we 
 have visited, there is a frightful excess of popu¬ 
 lation. In one barony, we have ascertained that 
 out of 1599 labom-ers, 668, that is two-fifths, are 
 constantly out of emplopnent.” A little farther 
 on the same commissioners add: “Amongst the 
 eflbcts of this rapid increase of population, without 
 a corresponding increase of remunerative employ¬ 
 ment, the most alarming, though, perhaps, the most 
 ob-dously to be expected, is a deterioration of the 
 food of the peasantry. It could scarcely be thought, 
 indeed, that their customary diet w'ould admit of 
 any reduction, save in quantity alone; yet it has 
 been reduced as to quality also. Bread was never 
 an article of common use amongst the labouring 
 poor, but it is now less known than ever. But 
 what is stdl more serious and lamentable is the 
 deterioration of that which is almost the only 
 article of their food, idz. potatoes. A new species 
 of potatoes, called the ‘ Lumper,’ has been brought 
 into general cultivation on account of its great 
 productiveness, and the facility -with which it can 
 be raised from an inferior sod. This root, at its 
 
rUTUKE 1>R0S1-ECTS OF IREL^VXD. GO 
 
 first introduction, was scarcely considered food 
 good enough for smiie, and does not possess the 
 farinaceous qualities of the better varieties of the 
 plant. It constitutes, however, the customarj' diet 
 of the inhabitants of many counties of Leinster, 
 and of the whole of the piwinces of Munster and 
 Connaught.” 
 
 With such decisive facts before us, it is impos¬ 
 sible to acquiesce in Mr. Senior’s opinion; and we 
 are foi'ced to the conclusion that the fatal system 
 of the subdivision of land, added to other causes 
 consequent upon the social condition of the country, 
 has had the effect, in connnon ■vvith the increase of 
 population, of adding to the misery and suflFering 
 of the great mass of the people. 
 
 All the evils I have just enumerated are aggra¬ 
 vated by the existence of a Protestant clergy, who 
 live in the midst of a population of zealous Catho¬ 
 lics, and share in the fruits of their labour with the 
 rich proprietors of the soil. This clergy has been, 
 for a length of time, not only a source of continual 
 irritation, but also an object of reproach. Their 
 rapacity, their unfeeling and irregular conduct, 
 had during the last century become proverbial. 
 They arc now greatly altered for the better, and 
 traces may be discerned of more humane and cha¬ 
 ritable feelings, united to greater regularity of con¬ 
 duct: but they stiU represent in the eyes of the 
 Catholics the cause of their miseries, and remain a 
 sign of the abasement and oppression which em- 
 
' 70 PRESENT STATE AND 
 
 bitters their sufferings, and makes them feel their 
 humiliated state. 
 
 To complete the picture of the principal griev¬ 
 ances ■which have afflicted Irish society, it tvill be 
 sufficient to add a few -words respecting the fatal 
 effects of that spirit of insubordination and re¬ 
 venge -which so much -wretchedness has engendered 
 amongst the lower orders. For nearly a century 
 Ireland has been the theatre of savage deeds and of 
 abominable cruelties perpetrated by the associations 
 ■who, at one time under the name of white boys, and 
 at others under that of white feet, or some other 
 denomination, frequently avenge on innocent in¬ 
 dividuals the outrages done to human natm-e by 
 the class of landed proprietors, or their merciless 
 agents the middle men. 
 
 These agrarian disturbances and sei-cile wars 
 augmented all the sufferings of the country -without 
 reliering one of them. Had they continued -with 
 their original violence, there would have been no 
 hope for the future; aU idea of impiwdng the con¬ 
 dition of the country must have been abandoned. 
 Thank Heaven, Ireland has, for some years past, 
 been delivered from this scourge of popular justice. 
 Illegal associations have been energetically resisted 
 by the chiefs of the Catholic party, and have almost 
 wholly disappeared. This is a symptom of moral 
 progress which we may hail -with joy as the da-wn of 
 better days. 
 
 Ha-ring reriewed the grievances of Ireland, let 
 
rUTURE PROSPECTS OF IRELAND. 
 
 US now examine what has hitherto been done by 
 way of remedy. During the whole of the last 
 century the time of the Irish parliament was en¬ 
 tirely occupied with keeping down the Catholic 
 population, without eraicing any sympathy as to 
 their condition. Such was the case too with the 
 parliament of the United Kingdom during the 
 first years which followed the Repeal of the Union. 
 Protestant prejudices and national antipathies pre¬ 
 vented the Irish peasantry from being considered 
 in any other light than that of mere brutes, con¬ 
 demned to till the soil to which the\' were bound, 
 for the exclusive benefit of a privileged class. 
 Nevertheless, as soon as notions of political re¬ 
 form and religious tolei-ation became prevalent 
 throughout England, and as soon as the Catholic 
 Association had made known the extent of power 
 and information which the Irish who had remained 
 faithful to their ancient religion possessed, all en¬ 
 lightened men in Great Britain began to interest 
 themselves about the condition of Ireland, and 
 devised means for its impi’ovement. Parliament 
 instituted several inquiries for the puiimse of 
 ascertaining the real state of the countr}', and 
 the cause of its grievances. These inquiries, con- 
 scientiousty carried on, brought about in succession 
 several remedial measures, the most important of 
 which I will briefly enumerate. 
 
 In the first place. Parliament endeavoured to put 
 
72 
 
 PRESENT STATE AND 
 
 a stop to that fatal system of the subdivision of hold¬ 
 ings, the mischievous consequences of which I have 
 already pointed out. With this view it passed the 
 Sub-letting Act before alluded to. This measure 
 was excellent in itself, and its beneficial results are 
 already evident. It is to this measure that must 
 be atti'ibuted in great part the comparatively small 
 progress winch has taken place during the last ten 
 years in the increase of the population, and which 
 the last census brought before the attention of the 
 public.* 
 
 Xevertheless, whilst legislating for the future, 
 the present condition of the small nu’etched occu¬ 
 piers was forgotten, and great nusery and great 
 disorders were the consequence. A certain number 
 of proprietors, no longer finding in the sub-letting 
 system that security which they sought, di'ove 
 away in a body the poor families, who, without any 
 other title than an yearly tenanc}q occupied their 
 land in small parcels. These miserable creatures, 
 without resources or asylum, often perished from 
 want, or were compelled to cross the seas, and seek 
 for some other country less cruel than that to which 
 they owed their birth. 
 
 The abolition of the tax for the repair of churches, 
 the suppression of several bishoprics and other 
 ecclesiastical benefices, the connnutation of tithes 
 
 * The last census was prohahly the first accurate census that 
 has been taken in Ireland. The one taken ten years previously 
 was hut an estimate, and that loosely made.— Trans. 
 
FUTUKE PROSPECTS OF IltELAXO. 
 
 73 
 
 into a fixed charge payable by the proprietor, were 
 beneficial acts, which occasioned decided improve¬ 
 ment m the religious condition of Ireland. 
 
 But of all that has been done during fourteen years 
 for this country, the measui’e which cannot hut effect 
 the greatest good, and which in the long run is des¬ 
 tined to bring about the moral regeneration of the 
 people, is unquestionably the establishment of a com¬ 
 prehensive system of popular education upon broad 
 and solid principles. The ^Tiig Administration, 
 coimnced that the only mode of raising the lower 
 classes from the melancholy condition in which 
 they wei’e jdaced was to develope their intelligence, 
 and scatter amongst them the seeds of knowledge, 
 came to the determination of founduig a large 
 number of prhnary schools, with the sole object of 
 instructing the children who attended them,—pro- 
 selytism being wholly excluded. Some attempts 
 had already been made to diffuse popular instruc¬ 
 tion. A society assisted by the Government had 
 been long since formed in Dublin, and was called, 
 from the street in which it held its meetings, “ the 
 Kildare Street Society.” The intentions of its 
 founders were entitled to praise, but as, -with a 
 large share of zeal for education, they were at the 
 same time infected with a spirit of Protestant pro- 
 sclytism, their efforts were not attended uith much 
 success. The Catholics regarded these schools 
 with mistrust, and in general kept aloof from 
 them. 
 
74 
 
 PKESEST STATE 
 
 The system of National Education founded by 
 the ^Vhig Ministry was of a different kind. AH 
 sectarian spirit and proselytism was carefully ex¬ 
 cluded; its object was to diffuse instruction and 
 morality, and to abstain directly or indirectly from 
 influencing the religious faith of the children. 
 Religious teaching forms no part of the duty of 
 the school-master. It is, however, obligatory upon 
 the children to receive such instruction from the 
 ministers of the particular religion to which their 
 parents belong.* To prevent this principle of re¬ 
 ligious impartiality from being infi’inged, the direc¬ 
 tion of these schools has been placed under a com¬ 
 mission composed of Catholic prelates, Protestant 
 prelates, and laymen of both religions, who are as 
 eminent for their acquii-ements as they are for their 
 spirit of toleration. 
 
 The success of tliis new plan of education has 
 been complete. The Catholics have accepted it 
 as a great boon, and they avail themselves of it 
 generally. These national schools are in all re¬ 
 spects entitled to great praise. The spirit by which 
 they are directed, the system in operation there, 
 and the results obtained, render them models for 
 imitation. They are infinitely superior to the 
 primary schools of England, and I much doubt 
 whether in Europe there are many which can bear 
 
 * It 15 not obligatory, but depends upon tlie will of tlie 
 parents. In no ease, however, is it permitted during the general 
 school hours. — Trans. 
 
FUTURE PROSPECTS 
 
 IRELAJTD. 
 
 a comparison. It cannot be doubted but that the 
 eilect of these schools uiU be to give the rising 
 generation of Ireland the benefits of an education 
 at once moral and intellectual, substantial and com¬ 
 prehensive. These ai’e the germs of improvement 
 which time wiU develope, and which will produce 
 fruits far more abundant than any which can be 
 expected from that political agitation whose object 
 or pretext is the Repeal of the Union. 
 
 Lastly, amongst the attempts made to better the 
 condition of Ireland, I must not forget to advert to 
 the law by which poor-rates, and the English system 
 of legal charity, have been introduced into that 
 country. I by iro means pretend that this system 
 is good in itself, nor that it is peculiarly appro¬ 
 priate to Ireland ; the questions which legal charity 
 gives rise to are, in my opinion, the most difficult of 
 all those which owe their origin to the progressive 
 changes in the ancient order of things. They are 
 far from being solved. Those who, relj'ing upon the 
 example of England, fancy that thej' may condemn 
 it altogether, fall into a serious mistake; for if legal 
 charity has produced some mischievous conse¬ 
 quences, it has had the merit of bearing open 
 testimony to the obligation that society has thus 
 admitted to be due towards its humblest menrbers, 
 and of suggesting a question on behalf of bene¬ 
 volence, ■which the progress of civilisation, it is to 
 be hoped, will sooner or later determine iu a satis¬ 
 factory maimer. 
 
76 
 
 PKESEST STATE AND 
 
 WTiatever may be the practical results in Ireland 
 of the new Poor Law, it ■will not the less remain 
 a striking proof of the benevolent intentions of 
 Parliament -with respect to the poor of that island, 
 and of the spirit of equity and justice with which 
 the representatives of the English nation are be¬ 
 ginning to be imbued. Even though it should 
 completely fail in the object which its authors had 
 in view, this law -will not the less deserve to be 
 quoted -with praise, as the first instance of a law 
 passed for the exclusive interests of the Catholic 
 population, and of a sacrifice imposed in their 
 favour upon the Protestant landlords. 
 
 The remedial measures that I have just briefly 
 enumerated are of slight moment, when they are 
 compared with the deep-seated evils under which 
 Ireland labours. Their effect, too, cannot be 
 speedy; time only can render them eflicacious and 
 productive. In the present day, although there 
 has been for some years especially a certain de¬ 
 gree of improvement, the state of the great body 
 of the population is not the less entitled to com¬ 
 miseration. It is therefore natural that aU the 
 friends of humanity should take a gi’eat and lively 
 interest in those remedies which maybe of a nature 
 to afford prompt relief. The first and foremost of 
 these remedies, can it be the repeal of that legisla¬ 
 tive union which for forty-four years has bound 
 together England and Ireland? Can one hope 
 that tins repeal, which O’Connell proclaims day 
 
FUTUKE PROSEECTS OF IRELAND. 
 
 after day amidst the applauses of an enthusiastic 
 multitude, -will cure the diseases of the Irish nation ? 
 Is it true, as the gi’eater part of the political -vniters 
 of the Continent would seem to helieve, that a par¬ 
 liament sitting in College Green in Dublin would 
 at once have the power of healing the social wounds 
 of Ireland, and of re-establishing the social edifice 
 upon foundations safe and equitable, well calculated 
 to advance, throughout aU classes, prosperity as yet 
 unknown ? This is the great question of the day, 
 and it is one which it is important to solve, in 
 order that we may ascertam if the anticijiations of 
 O’Connell and of his party are well founded and 
 reasonable, and that we may also decide if their 
 projects, which can never be carried by force, are 
 at least supported by the authoritj' of truth and 
 justice. 
 
 Let us begin by endeavouring to acquire a precise 
 notion of what O’Connell and the Irish Association 
 understand by arepeal of theUnion. In the firstplace, 
 the question has hitherto been confined to legisla¬ 
 tive independence, it has not been extended to poli¬ 
 tical. Queen Yictoria has no subjects more devoted 
 to her than the Irish Catholics, who, with all their 
 outcry for a national jiarliament, wish to preserve 
 inviolate in her person the splendid crown of the 
 British isles. Nevertheless, the parliament wliicli 
 they are so urgent in demanding cannot be the 
 same which existed befoi’e the Union. It would, 
 indeed, be but a poor favour’ rendered to his coun- 
 
78 
 
 PRESENT STATE AND 
 
 try, and to his party especially, if the Liberator 
 endeavoured to restore Ireland to the condition in 
 which she was in 1799. In spite of the illusions 
 which may he created by the brilliant recollec¬ 
 tions of the movement in 1782, we cannot but he 
 convinced that the majority of the Irish nation 
 was then much more oppressed, and had much 
 better grounds for complaint, than they have at pre¬ 
 sent. The old parliament of Ireland was, as I have 
 already said, a mere tool in the hands of the 
 Cabinet of St. James’s; it did no good except to 
 the proprietors of rotten boroughs and to the 
 jobbers in parliamentary influence, who made an 
 open traffic of the rights and liberties of their 
 countrymen. 
 
 But in spite of the political reminiscences alluded 
 to so often with regret by O’Connell, no one has 
 any thoughts of restoring the old constitution. 
 TVbat the Association wishes for is, the creation of 
 a national parliament, having for its basis Catholic 
 Emancipation, and the Reform Bill of 1832, in 
 which Catholic and popular principles should alto¬ 
 gether preponderate. After so many ages of depen¬ 
 dence and submission, the Catholic majority aspires 
 to exercise in its turn dominion and power. 
 
 But it is not enough, in order to dissolve the union 
 of the two kingdoms composing the British empire, 
 to declare that the Irish members and peers, in¬ 
 stead of meeting as now at Westminster, should 
 assemble in College Green. The relations between 
 
FUTURE rUOSPECTS OK lEELAXD. 
 
 tlie Executive and the Houses of the two countries 
 must also he regulated; it would be necessaiy to 
 ap23ortion between them the duties wliich they 
 would have to exercise in common. It is certain 
 that numberless difficulties ^R'esent themselves that 
 neither O’Connell nor any other Irish orator has as 
 yet endeavoured to solve. 
 
 If the 25art wliich parliament plaj-s in the En¬ 
 glish constitution were pm-ely an administrative one, 
 even if its authority did not e.xtend beyond that 
 of legislation, one could, though not ivithout 
 difficulty, comprehend the existence of two inde¬ 
 pendent legislatures, sitting, the one in London, and 
 the other in Dublin. But every one knows that 
 in England parliament exercises prodigious in¬ 
 fluence over the executive, — that foreign and 
 colonial policy are subject to its control, and that 
 nothing of importance is done without its sanction 
 and ajijiroval. Such being the case, how are these 
 high attributes to be divided between the legisla¬ 
 tures of the two countries ; how is the independent 
 course of each to be made to harmonise ? I cannot 
 believe that any mode of effecting this can be un- 
 agined which will bear a moment’s investigation. 
 The executive power cannot in any countr)-, and 
 still less in Great Britain, where so many various 
 interests demand its incessant attention, be subject 
 to two separate influences: a iilinister obliged to 
 jilcase at the same time an English and an Irish 
 majority would be an impossible being. To prove 
 
80 
 
 PRESENT STATE ANI 
 
 the contraiy, the state of Great Britain from 1782 
 down to the Union may perhaps he referred to, 
 during which time two parliaments, independent in 
 name, did in fact exist in London and Dublin. But 
 this is but a specious argument. Eveiy one knows 
 very well that that Irish parliament was dependent on 
 the English ministry, and that as soon as one party 
 got a majority at Westminster, it was sure, though 
 at some pecuniary sacrifice, to obtain complete com¬ 
 mand in the Irish parliament also. 
 
 Those who are fond of argument may adduce, 
 as a proof of the independence of the Irish par¬ 
 liament, the fact of the rupture which took place 
 between it and the English parliament on the occa¬ 
 sion of the temporary regency of the Prince of 
 Wales, at the period of George III.’s first illness. 
 It is known that at that time the English Houses, 
 imder the influence of Pitt, resolved to limit to a 
 very considerable degree the power of the here¬ 
 ditary prince, whilst the Irish Houses, in spite of 
 the efforts of government agents, persisted in in¬ 
 vesting him with aU the prerogatives of royalty. 
 The fact is undoubted; but it is, in my opinion, far 
 from proving the power of the Irish parliament. 
 It is only another- indication of its subserHent 
 character, which induced it to make dangerous 
 concessions for the purpose of gaining popularity 
 with the Eegent, upon whom, sooner or later, 
 the supreme power would devolve. It is impos¬ 
 sible seriously to maintain that, with an inde¬ 
 pendent legislature, Ireland can continue to exert 
 
FUTUKE rUOSPECTS OF mELAXI). 
 
 81 
 
 the smallest influence upon foreign or colonial 
 policy. This is the first sacrifice which a repeal of 
 the Union would impose on that countiy. Has the 
 Liberator well weighed to what it leads ? Has he 
 considered how humiliating it would he for his 
 country to follow in the orbit of the all-powerful 
 political star of Gi’eat Britain, udthout exercising 
 any influence of any kind over its course ? How 
 disadvantageous it would be to her to renounce 
 every political tie 'with the immense colonial posses¬ 
 sions of England, and those vast tracts of countiy 
 wliich are as necessary for the puqwse of absorb¬ 
 ing the surplus of population, as they are useful 
 to Great Britain in carrjdng off the excess of 
 manufactures. 
 
 For my own part I am persuaded that the Irish 
 people have too much pride, and too high a sense of 
 their omi importance, to consent ever to play so 
 dependent and secondary a part in politics as that 
 to which a separation of the two countries would 
 reduce them, even though they were at that price 
 to obtain an independent parliament. 
 
 Some persons have thought they could reconcile 
 everytlung, by creating and placing over the two 
 parliaments a third supreme assembly, whose duty 
 would be confined to deciding upon questions of 
 external and colonial policy. Enamoured of this 
 notion, Mr. Sharman Crawford, who represents the 
 opinions of the Protestant Radicals, offered to add 
 his own efforts to those of the Liberator, if he 
 
I'KESKNT STATE AKD 
 
 would consent to modify Ms plans of absolute in¬ 
 dependence, and substitute in tbeir place a kind of 
 Anglo-Hibemian confederation. It is easy to per¬ 
 ceive that tHs plan is stiU more difficult of execution 
 than those wMch we have already examined. How, 
 in fact, is it possible to reconcile the action of three 
 legislative assemblies and of three executive powers, 
 wMch within certain bounds must be indepen¬ 
 dent of each other ? In a country that maintains 
 external relations of so varied a kind, there are 
 scarcely any measures of foreign or colonial policy 
 wMch have not a direct influence on the pohcy at 
 home. When war is declared, taxes must neces¬ 
 sarily be imposed; when treaties of commerce are to 
 be made, alterations in the customs’ duty are indis¬ 
 pensable ; and there are many treaties which involve 
 changes in the cml code. With aU this, how is an 
 Anglo-Irish congress to bring about the execution 
 of its mandates through parliaments almost as 
 powerful as itself ? It would not be possible. The 
 representative inacMneiy, already so complicated 
 and so slow, would not work with its springs 
 tripled, and with three parliaments instead of one. 
 All the energ}"^ of Pitt, and all the genius of Can¬ 
 ning, would be incapable of managing it, and they 
 themselves would be forced to abandon the idea 
 of directing and maintaining interests so important 
 and so varied as those wMch unite Great Britain 
 with almost every point of the globe. 
 
 The instances of the Swiss or American confede¬ 
 ration cannot be adduced as evidence of the practi- 
 
FUTURE PROSPECTS OF IRELAND. 
 
 cability of an Anglo-Hibemian confederation; first, 
 because the foreign atfairs of those countries are 
 as few and simple, as those of England are numer¬ 
 ous, important, and complicated; and, next, because 
 they have no great number of colonies to keep up 
 in a position of semi-dependency as delicate as it is 
 difficult; because they have no empire of a hundred 
 million of inhabitants, like that of India, to govern, 
 and because, lastly, in the United States there are 
 no continental neighbours to fear ; and Sivitzerland 
 is too feeble to adopt any decided course of action 
 witli respect to the giant powers by which she is 
 surrounded. It is, besides, impossible to compare 
 a confederation formed by a large number of states 
 amongst which there is not one which is stronger 
 than aU the others united, with one which it is pro¬ 
 posed to establish between the colossal power of 
 England and tlie inferior strengtli and resources 
 of Ii’eland. 
 
 It is easy to understand that in a numerous con¬ 
 federation the different interests of the respective 
 states balance each other, and are grouped together 
 in a manner favourable to all conjoined. But when 
 only two nations are to be considered, the feeble 
 will always have to submit to the will of the 
 stronn-er. The congress which it is intended to 
 establish could do nothing more than make known 
 to Ireland the will of England. 
 
 In whatever way the question is considered, one 
 comes to the conclusion, that, in dissolving the 
 
PRESENT STATE AND 
 
 ' 84 
 
 Union, England must make up its mind either to 
 keep Ireland in a state of subjection and depen¬ 
 dence, which would he worse for her than what at 
 present exists, or that it must be left to follow its 
 own course; and in that case we must admit with 
 Sir Robert Peel, that, “ in order to retain Ireland 
 after the repeal of the Union within the same orbit 
 as that of the British empire, nothing less than the 
 omniscience and omnipotence of the Supreme Power 
 who maintains the harmony of the planetary sys¬ 
 tem would he required.”* 
 
 But to turn from the difficulties which the repeal 
 of the Union gives rise to with respect to foreign 
 and colonial policy, and supposing them to he alto¬ 
 gether removed by a miraculous interposition of 
 Divine Providence, let us consider whether the be¬ 
 nefits which Ireland may hope to attain from a 
 national government are as considerable as the 
 Liberator and his followers sup^sose. 
 
 • The following is probably the passage to -wbich the author 
 alludes: it is the concluding passage of a speech delivered on 
 the 25th April, 1834:—“Beware how you act in the presump¬ 
 tuous confidence that you can restore, by artificial devices, the 
 equilibrium that has thus been disturbed—that you can launch 
 the new planet into the social system — can set bounds to its 
 librations—can so adjust the antagonist forces which are to de¬ 
 termine its orbit, that it shall neither be drawn bach into violent 
 contact with the mass from which it has been severed, nor 
 flame through the void of space a lawless and eccentric meteor. 
 To do this is far beyond the grasp of your limited faculties—-far 
 beyond any intelligence save that of the Almighty and Omnis¬ 
 cient Power which dirided light from the darkness, and ordained 
 the laws which regulate in magnificent harmony the movements 
 of countless worlds.”— Trans. 
 
FUTURE prospects OF IRELAND. 
 
 85 
 
 One is at first led to believe that tbe finances of 
 Ireland ivould greatly gain by the repeal of the 
 Union; those who put a literal interpretation upon 
 O’Connell’s assertions cannot but suppose that that 
 country bears a share of the public burthens quite 
 out of propoi'tion with its population and wealth; 
 and that it would accordingly experience great relief 
 if it had only to provide for its own wants out of 
 its own resources. This is, however, a complete 
 delusion. In a financial point of view Ireland has 
 been by no means unjustly treated; and if left to 
 herself, it is probable that she would be forced to 
 increase her present taxes or to impose new ones. 
 Let us see what she actually pa)^s. 
 
 The Union has imposed on her two-seventeenths 
 of the expenditm’e of tbe United Kingdom. This 
 distribution, if it be not in her favour, is at least 
 just. Since then her proportion has diminished. 
 In an ofdcial document, published in 1834, is to be 
 found the foUoiving distribution of the produce of 
 the taxation of the two kingdoms: — 
 
 Great Britain. 
 
 Customs 
 Excise - 
 Post Office 
 Stamps 
 Taxes 
 
 Total 
 
 £19,353,324 
 
 13,061,852 
 
 1,970,361 
 
 6,825,679 
 
 4,662,256 
 
 £45,873,472 
 
 Ireland. 
 
 £1,757,143* 
 
 1,966,183 
 
 240,471 
 
 466,170 
 
 £4,429,967 
 
 * It is necessary to observe that a portion of tbe foreign 
 commodities liable to duty and consumed by Ireland, comes 
 G 3 
 
I'EESEST STATE ASU 
 
 Hence it follo-prs that Ireland bears an eleventh 
 part of the public burthens, -which is much less 
 than the share imposed upon it by the Act of 
 union. 
 
 It -will he observed that the imposts known 
 under the name of taxes is left in blank under the 
 head of Ireland. They were in faet abolished in 
 that kingdom in 1825, wlulst in England they were 
 continued. 
 
 Since the year to which the numbers which I 
 have quoted refer, Great Britain, in consequence of 
 the affairs of Canada and the Chinese expedition, 
 has been led into extraordinary expenses, and has 
 been obliged to have recourse to additional taxation. 
 Sir Eobert Peel had the courage to propose and 
 carry through parliament a tax upon incomes, but 
 out of consideration for Ireland she was exempted. 
 Thus, in the present day, the proportion that I have 
 adverted to is still farther reduced in favour of that 
 country. 
 
 These undeniable facts are sufficient to absolve 
 England from the charge of having taken advantage 
 
 tliroogh England, after liaving paid the duties there. In 
 order, therefore, to make an accurate comparison between 
 the burthens of the two countries, it would be necessary to keep 
 an account of what these duties produce. This would entail a 
 very complicated enquiry. Nevertheless, according to calcula¬ 
 tions, which mast be conadered as sufficiently correct, they may 
 be estimated at 500,000?. This income would alter the propor¬ 
 tion referred to in the text, and would make the share of public 
 burthen falling on Ireland one-tenth. 
 
FUTUKE PKOSPECTS OF IRELAND. 
 
 87 
 
 of her strength for the purpose of crushing Ireland 
 by the weight of taxation; they prove, on the con¬ 
 trary, that in questions of finance this latter coun¬ 
 try has been liberally dealt ivith. 
 
 Let us now consider what would be the position 
 of Ireland if left to herself. Supposing that the 
 existing taxes remained as they are, she would, ac¬ 
 cording to the above table, have at her disposal a 
 revenue of 4,429,967^., which, in order to be able to 
 keep an account of the commodities wliich she con¬ 
 sumes, and which at the present day pay the custom¬ 
 house duties of England, I shall call in round 
 numbers 5,000,000Z. Out of these 5,000,000?. the 
 interest of that portion of the debt of the LTnited 
 Kingdom which falls upon Ireland must be pmd; 
 for certainly, if she chooses to separate, she ought 
 to carry off uith her a part of the burthens which 
 she bears in common with England. O’Connell is 
 continually comparing the amount of the Irish debt 
 with that of England at the time of the Union, for 
 the j)urpose of proving the injustice that has been 
 done to his country. Let us suppose that there is 
 every wish to repair it, and that Ireland were ac¬ 
 cordingly relieved fi’om the obligation of contri¬ 
 buting towards the pa}Tnent of ancient debts. By 
 ancient debts, I mean those which have been con¬ 
 tracted before the commencement of the revolu¬ 
 tionary war ivith France. This would be not onty 
 an equitable principle, but one even favourable to 
 Ireland, for she, too, had an ancient debt; and 
 
PRESENT STATE AND 
 
 in allowing her to participate in the advantages 
 that the vast colonies of Great Britain secure to the 
 mother country, it would only have been reason¬ 
 able to require that she should contribute to the 
 burthens which their conquest has entailed: to ask 
 for more would be worse than absurd. The Libe¬ 
 rator himself can have no such idea, unless indeed 
 he supposes that he will one day be in a condition, 
 at the head of a victorious army, to dictate fresh 
 laws to conquered England. 
 
 According to this principle, England would be 
 alone charged with the 239,350,148Z. which she owed 
 in 1783. The amount of the public debt, including 
 exchequer bids, reached in 1836, to 787,638,816/., 
 leaving 548,288,668/. to be divided between the 
 two countries. In placing sixty nuBions to the 
 debit of Ireland no injustice would be committed; 
 impartial arbitrators would deal with her more 
 severely. These sixty millions of debt would cost 
 her nearly two millions in interest, which would 
 reduce that part of her revenue available for the 
 public service to three millions. This is but a very 
 insignificant net revenue for a country of eight 
 millions of inhabitants. Every state in Europe 
 spends in proportion to its population twice, three 
 times, or even six times as much. It would be 
 quite insufficient, if Ireland wished to have at her 
 disposal ever so small a military force, and keep up 
 the police and magistracy upon the same footing as 
 they are now established. One of the first conse- 
 
FUTURE FKOSTECTS OF IRELAKD. 
 
 89 
 
 quences, then, of Repeal -would be to force the par¬ 
 liament of Dublin to increase taxation. 
 
 But it may be said, it is not so much the amount 
 of the taxes from which Ireland sufters as the man¬ 
 ner in which they are assessed. Wlien, however, we 
 observe the principal sources from which the public 
 revenue is derived, we shall be convinced that the 
 burthens of the state fall almost exclusively upon 
 the richer classes, and upon that which may be 
 called the vicious part of the population. 
 
 The customs’ duties form nearly half the re¬ 
 sources of the state. Now the duties upon colonial 
 commodities, sugar • and tea especiall}', are those 
 which constitute almost the whole of their produce. 
 In reducing these duties the middle class might, 
 perhaps, be relieved, but as to six-sevenths of the 
 population, they would not derive the slightest ad¬ 
 vantage from the reduction, for the use of these 
 articles is whoUy unknown to them. 
 
 Together -with the customs, the produce of the 
 excise forms almost the whole of the public re¬ 
 venue of Ireland: now it is known that the duty 
 upon spirits constitutes four-fifths of this produce; 
 and no one, as far as I ain aware, ever dreams of 
 calling for a reduction in this branch of the re¬ 
 venue. 
 
 It is therefore certain that the repeal of the 
 Union could not produce any advantageous change 
 either in the amount of taxation or in the manner 
 in which it is imposed. But the erils of Ireland 
 
90 
 
 rHESEST STATE AND 
 
 are not caused by any abuse in tbe financial sys¬ 
 tem: it is therefore of little consequence that a 
 national government should not be in a condition 
 to improve it, provided it can but lay hands on the 
 true source of mischief, and introduce a thorough 
 change into the lamentable system, social as well 
 as religious, of the country. 
 
 I have already spoken of the constitutional vices 
 of the Irish community, which may be summed up 
 under two distinct heads; first, the supremacy of 
 a religion odious to the majority of the people; 
 and next, the deplorable condition to which the 
 agricultural population is reduced from the faulty 
 distribution of property, from the hostile feelings 
 which separate the several classes of society, and 
 fi-om the too rapid increase of an impoverished po¬ 
 pulation. Let us see what a national parliament 
 could do to remedy these tilings. 
 
 In the first place we must represent to ourselves 
 what such a parliament would be, what the spirit 
 which would pervade it, and the parties out of which 
 it would be formed. It is eiddent that if Eepeal 
 took place, it would be due to the successful efforts 
 of the popular and Catholic party, and conse¬ 
 quently that the fii-st independent legislature 
 would he almost exclusively composed of members 
 of that party. What other result could the Pro¬ 
 testants expect ? The destruction of the municipal 
 corporations has secured a majority to the Catholics 
 in almost every toivn, and the right of voting 
 
PUTUnE PKOSl'ECTS OF IKELAKU. 
 
 .91 
 
 which belongs to all farmers paying ten pounds a- 
 year secures a similar triumph in four-fifths of the 
 counties every time that great national interests 
 are at stake. It is no exaggeration therefore to 
 suppose that three-fourths of the members of a 
 House of Commons, the offspring of llepeal, would 
 be Catholic democrats. 
 
 Their conduct in regard to the English Church 
 would not long remain doubtful. Tliey would 
 refonn it, or rather they would destroy it, root and 
 branch. O’Connell pretends that the actual rights 
 of li\dng incumbents would be respected. I niucli 
 doubt it. The Catholics, intoxicated with the 
 success of their long-continued struggles, are not 
 likely to act ■ndth much forbearance and deli¬ 
 cacy towards a clergy whom they consider as the 
 primary cause of the humiliations and sufferings 
 tvhicli the members of their omi church have for 
 centuries endured. The protestations of O’Con¬ 
 nell inspire me with little confidence. Constant 
 to the object he has in view, he makes no scruple 
 of changing his mode of action, and of laying aside 
 the engagements which stand in his way, forgetting 
 one day the promises of the former. For my ovui 
 part, I should consider the Protestant clergy ven- 
 fortunate, if, after repeal, the revolution were car¬ 
 ried on simply in a legal manner, and that the 
 masses abstained from acting as they acted a few 
 years since in Spain with regard to the convents. 
 
 Nevertheless the reform of the Established 
 
92 
 
 PHESEXT STATE AND 
 
 Church is so essential to the well-heing of Ireland, 
 that one ought not to he too scrupulous as to the 
 means by -which it should be accomplished, and I ac¬ 
 cordingly do not hesitate to declare, that if the repeal 
 of the Union were indispensable for that object, I 
 could do no otherwise than -wish for repeal, however 
 inexpedient in other respects that measure might be. 
 But this, fortunately, is not the case. The radical 
 reform of the Established Church is not only com¬ 
 patible with the maintenance of the Union, but it 
 is even a probable event, provided the violence of 
 the Catholic party do not arrest the progress of 
 public opinion in England, which is now operating 
 in its favour. The Whigs attempted this reform; 
 they were, however, in too great a hurry, and they 
 failed. But they have not abandoned their tash; 
 on the contrary, the future leaders of the party 
 are much bolder now than they were in 1835, 
 and it seems to me a certain symptom of the faU, 
 sooner or later, of the Establishment in Ireland, 
 that a member of Mr. Ward’s importance should, 
 with the concurrence of a numerous party, bring 
 this year before the consideration' of Parliament 
 amotion which tended to nothing less than the 
 suppression by [a stroke of the pen of the whole 
 artificial structure of the Church establishment in 
 Ireland. The reform of the Established Church 
 will take place one way or another. Under a na¬ 
 tional parliament it might be more sudden and 
 more complete; but it would also probably be 
 
FUTUBE PROSPECTS OF IRELAND. 
 
 imbued with violence, injustice, and perhaps -nitli 
 cruelty: under the Union it iviU take place slowly, 
 and by regular and legal means. I can understand 
 the first mode being preferred; but, however great 
 our taste for revolutions, it is impossible to conceal 
 from ourselves how much humanity suffers from the 
 disastrous consequences which sudden and violent 
 measures bring in their train. 
 
 The religious question furnishes the partisans 
 of Eepeal ndth plausible arguments, but it is 
 not so with the political question. At all events 
 such is the conclusion we necessarily come to, after 
 a thorough investigation and honest comparison of 
 the remedial measures that a national parliament 
 might adopt, ivith those which have already been, 
 and probably — provided no violent comndsion 
 occurs — will in future be taken, by the parlia¬ 
 ment of the United Kingdom. 
 
 In order to raise the working agricultural class 
 from the melancholy condition in which they are 
 placed, two kinds of remedies may be mentioned. 
 Efforts may be made to improve their lot by regu¬ 
 lar, legal, and peaceable means; or else, by adopting 
 a bolder course, attempts may be made to strike at 
 the root of the evil by violently changing the laws 
 which regulate the distribution of property, by at 
 once emancipating the farmers from dependence 
 on the landlord; or, to speak plainly, by effecting 
 an actual social revolution which would restore to 
 the present Catholic population the estates of which 
 
94 
 
 PRESEST STATE AXD 
 
 tlieir ancestors were despoiled by civil war and 
 repeated confiscations. 
 
 The former alternative may be adopted with 
 more or less success, either by an Irish Parliament, 
 or by one such as at present exists. The latter is 
 possible only inasmuch as the Eepeal of the Union, 
 or rather, a complete separation from Ireland, 
 would leave to the popular party an open field for 
 action. I will not discuss their relative merits: 
 not that I think that no one would prefer the latter 
 course; on the contrary, I beheve that it would suit 
 the taste of all extreme parties, and of all who are 
 inimical to Great Britain, whether they wear the 
 cap of liberty, or are invested with a coronet. Their 
 motives would, no doubt, be difierent; but both 
 would rejoice to see that country a prey to revolu¬ 
 tionary storms: the radicals from the very prin¬ 
 ciples of their nature; the enemies of reform, in 
 order to satisfy the intense hatred they bear to 
 England, that fatal hot-bed, as they suppose, in 
 which opinions subversive of the ancient order of 
 things are safely engendered, for the puqiose of 
 afterwards over-running the world, and achieving 
 its conquest. But as it is not my intention to 
 address myself to either of these extreme parties, 
 I consider it useless to stop to examine a system 
 which, whatever may be its ultimate results, is 
 founded on injustice and proscription, and on the 
 violation of the laws of humanity and morals. 
 
 In adverting only to peaceable and legal reme- 
 
FUTURE PROSPECTS OF IRELAND. 
 
 95 
 
 dies, I propose to review in succession the principal 
 measures which may improve the condition of the 
 Irish people. They may be arranged under five 
 different heads, according to the respective objects 
 in view. Popular instruction, commerce and in¬ 
 dustry, public works, legal charity and emigration; 
 and lastly, the improvement of the laws which 
 regulate the distribution of property, and the rela¬ 
 tions between landlord and tenant. 
 
 I. —Popular Instruction. 
 
 Education is the first thing wliich Ireland re¬ 
 quires. This alone can raise and enlighten the 
 moral and intellectual character of that people, 
 whom ages of oppression and miseiy have degraded 
 to the level of the brute creation. This alone, by 
 creating habits of prudence, can arrest the mis¬ 
 chievous increase of population, and diminish the 
 lamentable disproportion between the number of 
 inhabitants and their means of subsistence. The 
 Irish are quick and intelligent; they are anxious 
 for instruction, and they learn with facility. It 
 would not be far from the truth to say that the best 
 government for Ireland would be that which dis¬ 
 seminated the greatest amomit of information 
 amongst the poorer classes, and which contributed 
 the most effectually to dispel the thick darkness 
 under which they have hitherto existed. 
 
 I have already alluded to the laudable efforts of 
 
. 96 
 
 PKESEST STATE AKD 
 
 the Whig ministers for the establishment of an 
 extensive system of national education, upon a plan 
 extremely tolerant and rational. The success of 
 this plan, received with favour and sympathy by the 
 Catholics, has exceeded the expectations of its 
 founders. The national schools have multiplied 
 with rapidity, and their numbers, ah’eady very 
 considerable, are stUl every day increasing. 
 
 The good which they are doing is immense, for 
 they are conducted upon a plan which leaves 
 nothing to be desired by the most ardent partisans 
 of popular education. Thanks to the formation of 
 a certain number of normal schools, which are 
 models for imitation, the day is not far distant 
 when there will be no difficulty in establishing, in 
 every part of Ireland, primary schools sufficient for 
 the intellectual wants of the people. The prospects 
 held out by this great undertaMng have not been 
 endangered by the Conservative partj^ coming into 
 power. When it was first set on foot, the fanatical 
 adherents of the Established Chui’ch opposed it with 
 violence; and it required all the energy of Lord 
 Melbourne’s Administration not to draw back from 
 the new course upon which they had entered. Now, 
 however, the benefits derived from these national 
 schools are so great, and so universally acknow¬ 
 ledged, that Sir Robert Peel would do as much for 
 their furtherance as Lord John RusseU himself. 
 
 Would a national parliament hasten this intel¬ 
 lectual advancement? We must be permitted to 
 
FUTURE PROSPECTS OF IRELAND. 
 
 doubt whether it would. The system now in force 
 is founded on a complete absence of proselytism, 
 and on a thorough impartiality between different 
 religious creeds. The men under whose direction 
 it is placed are justly considered as amongst the 
 most enlightened, sensible, and moderate of the 
 Catholic and Protestant clergy, and they include 
 some of the most eminent also from amongst the 
 laity of the country. It cannot be supposed that 
 such woidd still be the case if the supreme power 
 were transferred into the hands of the Catholic 
 democracy. It is evident that they would be in¬ 
 duced to place the . national schools—all such at 
 least as belonged to those districts in which the 
 Pi'otestants form but a small minoz-ity — under the 
 sole direction of the clergy. Such a contingency 
 might be looked upon as certain by all who trust 
 to the lessons of history, and remember what are 
 the tendencies of religious partisans as soon as they 
 have acquired political ascendency: and this would 
 be a great misfortune for the country, and it woidd 
 tend to I'etard the progress of education. 
 
 No one is more ready than I am to render lull 
 justice to the Catholic clei’gy of Ireland. I honour 
 their sincere faith, their zealous charity, their un¬ 
 bounded devotion to their duties; but I cannot ad¬ 
 mit that they possess the necessary qualifications for 
 successfully conducting popular education. Their 
 profound ignorance, their numerous prejudices, their 
 exaggerated political principles, render them ill- 
 
PEESENT STATE AND 
 
 suited to perform the duties -which devolve upon the 
 masters of primary schools, or to open the minds of 
 children, and raise their pupils in the scale of moral 
 dignity. If the national schools were intrusted to 
 the clergy, they would soon sink from the degree 
 of perfection they have already attained to the level 
 of the schools of Belgimn; instruction would he 
 devoid of intelligence, and the benefits derived 
 from it by the lower classes would be but slight. 
 
 As the merit of the system now in force cannot 
 be called in question, it may perhaps be pretended 
 that an Irish parliament would devote a larger an¬ 
 nual sum to popular teaching than is now bestowed 
 upon it: and this is possible. But it is equally 
 true, that if the popular party showed one-fifth part 
 of the zeal, which they now display in the pursuit 
 of an unattainable object, in urging an increase of 
 that sum, they would obtain from the Parliament 
 of England, whatever party might be on the Trea¬ 
 sury bench, more money than would be sufficient 
 to found schools in every parish. 
 
 II-CoiDIEECE AND InDTTSTET. 
 
 What have they to expect from the legislative 
 independence of Ireland ? "What peculiar facilities 
 would the Irish government have for encouraging 
 these two sources of national prosperity ? Imust con¬ 
 fess I am not aware of any. Some persons may, per¬ 
 haps, think that by adopting a system of protection, 
 and closing its ports to England, several branches of 
 
FUTUEB PROSPECTS OF IRELAND. 
 
 manufactures might be made to flourish in Ireland. 
 But this is absurd. A custom-house war between 
 two islands separated by St. George’s Channel 
 would be fatal to both, although England would 
 sulFer much the least of the two. Ireland, from its 
 essentially agricultural character, finds in Great 
 Britain the most favourable outlet for its pro¬ 
 duce. On the supposition that the condition of the 
 lower classes were to improve as much as can be 
 ivished, and that they were consequently to require 
 a larger quantity of articles of consumption, Ireland 
 would still produce, however slightly her agri¬ 
 culture might share in the general improvement 
 that has been assnmed, an excess of agricultural 
 produce which would have to be exported. If 
 England were to shut her ports, what would become 
 of Irish butter, oats, and corn? Forced to sell 
 them at a loss on the Continent, the agriculture of 
 the country would soon be reduced to the greatest 
 distress. 
 
 England, on the contrary, would not lose much 
 in exchanging her manufactui’es for the com of 
 Canada and of the Baltic, and for the butter of 
 Holland, instead of exchanging them, as at present, 
 ■with the produce of Ireland; and even if she had to 
 submit to some losses, they would at all events be 
 less than those of her rival. It is, then, matter 
 of proof that to establish fiscal barriers between 
 England and Ireland would be an act of madness. 
 
 Besides this, Ireland certainly cannot at present 
 
' 100 
 
 TEESEST 
 
 DATE AXD 
 
 aspire to become a manufactm-ing country. The 
 necessary elements are wanting — capital, and the 
 first raw materials. The Repeal of the Union would 
 not give it iron or coal, and still less would it fur¬ 
 nish the amount of capital required for any great 
 manufactural expansion. With the help of boun¬ 
 ties, monopolies, and other ruinous protections, a 
 factitious system of manufacture might, perhaps, be 
 introduced; but even if such an object were desir¬ 
 able, it may weU be doubted whether it would not, 
 sooner or later, become a fresh cause of increase to 
 the sufferings of the working classes. 
 
 III.— Public Works. 
 
 Of all the measures which have yet been pro¬ 
 posed for Ireland, that which would afford, if not 
 the most complete, at least the most prompt relief, 
 would be undertaking great public works, sufficient 
 to employ a portion of that labour of which agri¬ 
 culture has already too much. The Irish, weR paid 
 and well fed, are eminently fitted for work which 
 requires great muscular strength—they are excel¬ 
 lent labourers. The public in France have had an 
 opportunity of observing this in the manner in which 
 the labourers, brought across the Channel by the 
 directors of the railroad from Paris to Rouen, per¬ 
 form their work; and they were nearly all Irishmen. 
 Hence the execution of works, such as canals, har¬ 
 bours, and railroads, would be carried on under 
 
FUTURE I’ROSPECTS OF IRELAND. 101 
 
 advantageous circumstances in Ireland, since ma¬ 
 nual labour, which is the principal part of these 
 works, is there abundant and cheap. But an avail¬ 
 able working population is not the only requisite 
 for undertakings such as I have alluded to: in order 
 to turn this population to account, it is essential that 
 the main spring should not be wanting, viz. money 
 — capital. The great difficulty is in procuring it. 
 Would this difficulty be lessened after Ireland had 
 obtained an independent legislature? I cannot 
 think so; for whether private companies were called 
 into requisition, or whether the Government took 
 upon itself the expenditure required, in either case 
 capital would be stUl less ready to seek emploj-ment 
 in Ireland than it is at present. The country itself 
 does not possess much: if it -wished to undertake 
 great works it must necessarily have recourse to 
 English capitalists; and these, who are already not 
 very solicitous to invest their money on the other 
 side of the Channel, would probably peremptorily 
 refuse to run any risk in a country from which they 
 ■will have become altogether estranged. If Repeal 
 took place it would be long before the Protestant 
 gold of London would place any confidence in the 
 good faith of the democratic parliament of Dublin. 
 It is therefore probable that this measure would 
 impede rather than assist in the execution of these 
 public works in which Ireland is so deeply interested. 
 
 If, on the other hand, the Union is maintained, 
 and the feverish agitation of Repeal subsides, it is 
 
' 102 
 
 PEESEUT STATE ASD 
 
 certain that the projects already formed hy Lord 
 Melbourne’s administration mU he revived, and that 
 the Government -will bestow on Ireland a network 
 of railroads similar to that with which England is 
 covered. 
 
 Sir E. Peel has already declared, that if he 
 opposed the propositions of his predecessors, who 
 wished that the state shoiild undertake the execution 
 of this project, it was solely because he preferred 
 leaving the field free to individual exertion; but 
 this not having answered his expectations, he was 
 disposed to reconsider his original opinion. After 
 this declaration, I should not be disinclined to be¬ 
 lieve, that in the next session the administration will 
 make some effort in favour of railroads in Ireland. 
 
 God grant that the determination they may be 
 induced to come to may be great, comprehensive, 
 and vigorous, and worthy of the nation which they 
 govern; and that the plans they adopt, embracing 
 the whole country, may, in some way, produce 
 a favourable revolution in the rate of wages. Eail- 
 roads, independently of the temporary advantage of 
 creating a prodigious demand for labour, would 
 greatly facilitate the work of regeneration, which it is 
 the part of popular education to accomplish. In anni¬ 
 hilating distances, in bringing Connaught, uncivil¬ 
 ised as it stiff is, to the entrance of Dublin, in placing 
 individuals from every part of the island within 
 reach of each other, in affording them opportuni¬ 
 ties and facilities for seeing and knowing each other. 
 
FUTURE PROSPECTS OF IRELAND. 103 
 
 railroads would tend to diminisli those prejudices of 
 race, and those sectarian antipathies, which have 
 done so much mischief to the countiy. 
 
 Lastly, raUroads would bestow great commercial 
 importance upon Ireland. If one of those miracu¬ 
 lous means of coimnunication traversed the island 
 from east to west, and placed St. George’s Channel 
 in immediate communication with the western coast, 
 washed by the Atlantic, if the distance which 
 separates the walls of Dublin from the harbours of 
 Connaught could be accomplished in eight hours, 
 Ireland would become, as a matter of necessity, the 
 high road between the two hemispheres, and its fu¬ 
 ture prospects would be glorious. The consequences 
 arising from such an undei’taldng would be incal¬ 
 culable, not only for her, but for the whole world. 
 The navigation of the Atlantic, starting from the 
 extreme points of the county of Clare, and being 
 thus rendered more easy and less e.xpensive, would 
 rapidly increase. Imagine what, before long, would 
 be the relations between iimerica and Europe if 
 only a seven-days’ passage dmded the one from 
 the other! 
 
 If the English nation were soon to execute a work 
 which could not but lead to such splendid results, 
 they wiU have done much to repair the injus¬ 
 tice which their ancestors have committed towards 
 Ireland, and to remove the formidable barrier 
 raised by the hatred of centuries between the two 
 islands. 
 
. 104 
 
 PRESENT STATE AND 
 
 IV. — Emigration. Poor’s Rates. 
 
 A ivell-de-vised system of legal charity, assisted 
 by emigration on a large scale, ivould, no doubt, 
 bring real relief to the class of agricultui-al laboui’ers. 
 In forcing landlords, on the one hand, to take an 
 interest in the condition of the poor of theii’ parish, 
 and in diminishing the number of MTetched crea¬ 
 tures ivbo are now struggUng with each other for 
 a spot of ground to cultivate, or for wages that 
 are insufficient, the result would necessarily be an 
 increase of their wages and a diminution of their 
 rent. 
 
 K these measures were accompanied by an ex¬ 
 tension of the present system of education, and if 
 the Government, the clergy, and the higher classes, 
 were to employ every means of influence ivithin 
 their reach, for the purpose of opening the minds, 
 and raising the moral character, of the lower classes, 
 a permanent improvement could not but ensue. 
 Irish labom-ers with knowledge would acquire jiru- 
 dence, and, emerging from the gi’ovelling state in 
 which they have so long lingered, they would make 
 an exertion to raise themselves in the social scale, 
 and reach that more prosperous condition which the 
 same classes in England and on the Continent have 
 already attained. 
 
 The efficaciousness of such remedies once ad¬ 
 mitted, it follows that the Repeal of the Union 
 would be a great gain, provided it were certain 
 
FUTURE PROSPECTS OF IRELAND. 
 
 105 
 
 that an Irish legislature made any effort to apply 
 them with sincerity and vigour. But it is not easy 
 to suppose that they would follow so rational a 
 course. The popular party has always shown the 
 greatest repugnance to the principle of legalised 
 -charity, such as has been enforced in Great Britain. 
 
 When Lord Melbourne’s government endeavoured 
 to introduce the system of poor’s rates into Ireland, 
 O’Connellopposed it ivith his accustomed vehemence; 
 and he has since thwarted its working by every means 
 in his power. It is therefore reasonable to suppose, 
 that if the government of Ireland fell into his hands, 
 one of his first objects would be to get rid of poor’s 
 rates, and to upset all that has hitherto been done 
 for the purpose of adaj)ting the English poor law to 
 that country. 
 
 The expedient of emigration would be more in 
 accordance with the taste of the popular party. 
 An Irish parliament would not oppose it; but if 
 they did avail themselves of it, they would meet 
 ■with almost insurmountable difficulties. Notwith¬ 
 standing all the exertions of statesmen, and all the 
 suggestions, more or less ingenious, of political 
 wl’iters, no one has yet succeeded in sohfing the 
 problem of how to transport across the ocean, unless 
 at an enormous expense, large bodies of men and 
 women. Those colonies whei-e it is still possible to 
 secure a happy existence to any number of emi¬ 
 grants are the most distant. Canada is beginning 
 to overflow with a population dependent upon ma- 
 
106 
 
 FBESENT STATE AND 
 
 nual labour for subsistence: and those who arrived 
 there last have encountered a competition just as 
 fatal as that from which they had fled in Europe. 
 Xothing but the vast continents of Australia are 
 capable of receiving and employing mth advantage 
 the tide of emigration ; and, unfortunately, the ex¬ 
 pense of conveying a family from Ireland to New 
 Holland is double that which is required for the 
 passage to Canada. 
 
 Under these circumstances, in what way can Ire¬ 
 land, left to its own resources, undertake any plan 
 of emigration on a large scale ? Here, even more 
 than in railroads, the want of adequate capital 
 would make it impossible. Besides, even in the 
 event of sufficient funds being found, it would still 
 be necessary to apply to England, and beg that she 
 would receive the refuse population; and Ireland, 
 after maintaining a deadly struggle with hei’, would 
 have to humble hereelf before her haughty rival. 
 If she consented to do so, I do not see what purpose 
 Eepeal will have served; at all events, it wfll not 
 have had the effect of raising the moral dignity of 
 the coimtry. 
 
 V.—Eeforsi of the Laws affectixg Landed 
 Propeett. 
 
 The above investigation of the four first of the 
 measures which I have considered as the only possible 
 remedies for the evils of Ireland tends to prove 
 that the Repeal of the Union, far from assisting, 
 would render their operation difficult and dangerous. 
 
FUTURE PROSPECTS OF ffiELAND. 
 
 107 
 
 The last question, the most important of all, re¬ 
 mains to he examined, namely, what possibility 
 there maybe of bringing about abetter distribution 
 of property, and of improving the relations between 
 landloi’d and tenant. 
 
 I must first remind the reader that I lay aside 
 all discussion of hypotheses founded upon acts of 
 spoliation and revolution. We must start with 
 these premises — that the Irish parliament would 
 respect existing rights, and that it would reject the 
 tempting but unjustifiable idea of avenging upon 
 the present generation of Protestants the crimes of 
 their ancestors,—that they would content them¬ 
 selves with regulating and modifying the rights of 
 property as at present established, without shaking 
 their foundations. Within this limited sphere there 
 is stni much to be done. 
 
 M. de Beaumont, in his remarkable work on Ire¬ 
 land, has shorni that almost all the grievances of 
 that country may be traced to a mischievous aristo¬ 
 cracy. It is, indeed, evident, that in a countiy in 
 which property is the basis of almost aU power, 
 nothing can be more fatal than that the class of pro¬ 
 prietors on the one hand, and that which constitutes 
 the great body of the people on the other, should 
 belong to dilferent races, and opposite religions, ri¬ 
 valling, and inimical to, each other. It can never be 
 too often repeated, that this is the fatal source of the 
 many evils which corrupt and vitiate all the political 
 and social institutions of the countiy. No greater 
 
PRESENT STATE AND 
 
 service, therefore, can be rendered to Ireland than to 
 change this injurious state of things, by endeavouring 
 to substitute, for the present class of Protestant pro¬ 
 prietors, Catholic proprietors who would in all 
 respects command the sympathy of the great body 
 of the people. 
 
 The absolute and unreserved confiscation of the 
 property of Protestants, its forced sale, and other 
 measures of this nature, would be the means by 
 which an assembly, such as that of the French 
 Ifational Convention, would at once attain their ob¬ 
 ject; but such abominable expedients are revolting 
 to all honest minds. It remains, therefore, to be 
 seen how far a modification of the civil laws which 
 relate to the rights of property may answer the 
 purpose in view. 
 
 The laws which regulate the transmission and 
 distribution of property in Ireland are analogous 
 to those of Great Britain. Their principal object 
 is to prevent its alienation, and to keep it in the 
 same families, undivided, on the death of the owner. 
 I will not enter on the discussion of the general merit 
 of these laws: numerous arguments may be alleged 
 in their favour; and there is the example of England 
 before us to give them the greater weight. But, 
 however advantageous they may be to a community 
 established entirely on English principles, it is im¬ 
 possible to deny that, in Ireland, they have produced 
 the fatal effect of maintaining a most lamentable 
 state of things. Their reform would therefore be 
 
FUTURE PROSPECTS OF fRELAND. 
 
 109 
 
 desirable; for, however much one may be in favour 
 of the aristocratic principle, it must be admitted 
 that the greatest ser^dce to be rendered to the 
 Irish would be to deliver them from their Protest¬ 
 ant aristocracy, leaving them to create a Catholic 
 one afterwards, if they thought fit to do so. 
 
 If the law did not fetter the transfer of property, 
 it woidd, in all probability, change hands more i-a- 
 pidly than might at first be expected. The Irish 
 Protestants cannot, in fact, be supposed to cling 
 to their estates with that tenacity which distin¬ 
 guishes Englishmen. Those who never reside on 
 their property, or, if they do so, are surrounded by 
 a population who evince implacable hatred in return 
 for the contempt which is heaped upon them, cannot 
 be attached to it by any veiy powerful moral ties. If 
 they found it would be for their advantage to part 
 with it, they would not keep it long. It is therefore 
 probable, that, if property were as easily alienated 
 in Ireland as it is in Fi’ance, a constant cliange 
 would be taking place, by which it would be passing 
 from the hands of Pi-otestant landomiers to those 
 of Catholic caf)italists. 
 
 The wealth of the Catholic population has greatly 
 inci’eased during the last century: the state of de¬ 
 posits and of funds placed in different banks prove 
 that the greater portion of the circulating capital 
 belongs to them. They ai-e, therefore, in a con¬ 
 dition to purchase land, and to regain, by peace¬ 
 able means, those possessions which were tom from 
 
no 
 
 PRESENT STATE AND 
 
 their ancestors; and if this be not done, it is be¬ 
 cause the law interposes almost insurmountable 
 difScnlties. 
 
 In order to overcome these difficulties it would 
 be sufficient to abolish the law of entail and the 
 right of primogeniture, to admit of the division of 
 intestate property, and to facilitate the acts and 
 formalities which are required for the sale or di¬ 
 vision of land. These are, it must be confessed, 
 very serious matters in the opinion of the English. 
 They are measures which are looked upon as re¬ 
 volutionary; and no concession of any such nature 
 would be very readily made by the existing par¬ 
 liament. But would an Irish parliament be so 
 much more disposed to adopt them ? This is far 
 rom certain; for although they are measures of 
 vital importance, not a single voice has been raised 
 on their behalf in Ireland; nor can we, amongst 
 the innumerable speeches of O’Connell, find one 
 word that has any reference to them. Notions 
 favourable to reforms in the civil law are more 
 advanced in England than in Ireland. There is 
 now in England a numerous j)arty who persist in 
 bringing them forward on all occasions. One of 
 the leading members of the House of Commons, 
 Mr. Ewart, two years ago, proposed the abolition 
 of the right of primogeniture; and in the discus¬ 
 sion to which this motion gave rise I do not think 
 that one Irish member spoke in its favour. I should 
 be rather inclined to believe, that although O’Con- 
 
FUTURE PROSPECTS OF IRELAND. 
 
 Ill 
 
 nell indulges sometimes in flaslies of absolute de¬ 
 mocracy, he is at the bottom, in regard to laws 
 regulating the transfer of property, imbued with 
 aristocratic notions; so that I should be less sur¬ 
 prised to see an Irish parliament adopt -violent and 
 revolutionary measures against Protestant proprie¬ 
 tors than to see it effect any real reform in the civil 
 law upon those princijiles of equality which the 
 French code has sanctioned. 
 
 Under these circumstances, 1 believe, I may a-ffirm 
 that, even -with respect to any improvement in the 
 ci-vil law of Ireland, more is to be be expected from 
 the Parhament of Great Britain than from an Irish 
 one. The opinion which I have just expressed, -with 
 regard to entails and primogeniture, -utU astonish, 
 and perhaps shock, those who imagine that the 
 ancient institutions of Great Britain, undermined 
 on every side, have no other support than its aris¬ 
 tocracy ; and that if this be touched, there is some 
 danger of the whole fabric being involved in ruin. 
 The instances of those great reforms which have 
 taken place within twenty years ought to convince 
 such people of their error. Nevertheless, as these 
 reforms have changed the political and religious, 
 rather than the cml laws, by which the aristocratic 
 foimation of society is stiU maintained, they may 
 have some right to dispute their authority. This I 
 readily admit; and I -adll not therefore avail myself 
 of the ai’guments which even these reforms afford. 
 But though I am -willing to acknoAvledge the pro- 
 
112 
 
 PRESENT STATE AND 
 
 digious part wMch the aristocracy has played, and 
 still plays, in the English constitution, I altogether 
 deny its supposed identity -with the Irish aristo¬ 
 cracy. Ho-w can two things so dissimilar be 
 compared? "What resemblance is there between 
 a nobility which, by its information, its talents, 
 and devotion to the true interests of its country, 
 has ever been justly entitled to the place which 
 it occupies at the head of the English nation, 
 and a class of selfish proprietors, strangers to the 
 country to which they belong, and hostile to the 
 people they govern ? jSlo, certainly ; the English 
 aristocracy is no more identical with the Irish aris¬ 
 tocracy than the arm which remains vigorous and 
 healthy is identical with that which is infected with 
 gangrene. 
 
 To improve the relations established by law 
 between landlord and tenant, between the minority 
 to whom the soil belongs and the majority by whom 
 it is cultivated, is one of the most difficult problems 
 which the legislator has to solve. In Ireland these 
 relations are as bad as possible: they are, as I have 
 already said, the first great cause of the evils of the 
 country. By universal consent they call for thorough 
 reform. 
 
 But if the evil be great, so is its remedy difficult 
 and even dangerous. There is reason to fear that in 
 wishing to regulate the respective conditions of land¬ 
 lord and tenant the right of property itself may be 
 attacked. This is a danger against which a legis- 
 
rUTUEE PROSPECTS OP mELAND. 113 
 
 lature governed by a Catholic democracy would have 
 some trouble in guarding itself. I confess I should 
 not have much faith in the impartiality of such an 
 assembly when a question came to be decided be. 
 tween rich Protestants on the one side and a 
 Catholic population on the other. We must not 
 be deceived by O’Connell’s protestations; he him¬ 
 self would be powerless in arresting the torrent 
 of popular passion excited by real suffering and 
 the hatred of centuries. If the Repeal of the 
 Union took place, and if Ireland could treat 
 Protestant proprietors according to her own viU 
 and pleasure, it is almost certain that serious at¬ 
 tacks would be made against their rights, and 
 that the principle of property would be battered 
 down, however great the risk to social institutions 
 generally. 
 
 These are serious considerations, sufficient in my 
 opinion to make every sincere person hesitate, how¬ 
 ever much he may be actuated by thoughtless 
 generosity, before he utters prayers for a Repeal 
 of the Union, intending that that measure should 
 not be the prelude to violent and revolutionary 
 courses. 
 
 These reflections upon the danger of the reforms 
 so essential in the relations of landlord and tenant, 
 by no means prove that nothing can be done. It 
 is, on the contrary, certain, that a government, 
 enlightened, vigorous, and impartial, could bring 
 about great and gradual changes for the better. 
 
114 
 
 PRESEST STATE AND 
 
 For several centuries, all lam were framed for the 
 exclusive advantage of landlords. These times of 
 injustice are happily far removed. The object is 
 now to obliterate those traces which they have left 
 behind. It is a laborious task; hut it has been 
 already begun by more than one statesman, and 
 will, I trust, be in future prosecuted with ardour. 
 A great social revolution has been effected in Ire¬ 
 land. It takes its date from that day in which 
 Lord Hormanby, in an answer to the complaints 
 laid before him by the landowners of one of the 
 counties respecting the disturbances of the poorer 
 classes, openly proclaimed that sacred maxim, “That 
 property had its duties as well as its rights, and 
 that the one could not he violated without en¬ 
 dangering the other.” These are admirable words; 
 they mark the approach of a new era for Ireland, 
 and announce that the dominion of force must give 
 way to the reign of humanity and justice. 
 
 Lord Melbourne’s administration, by introducing 
 poor’s rates into Ireland, and by laying down the 
 principle that landlords are bound to attend to the 
 wants of the lower classes, has pushed as far as 
 was within his province the application of Lord 
 Hormanhy’s doctrine. The new poor law has not 
 met with much success, owing no less to the want of 
 the incidental measures, which ought to have accom¬ 
 panied it as a matter of course, than to the violent 
 and almost factious opposition it encountered from 
 the popular party. But, whatever may he its 
 
FUTURE PROSPECTS OF IRELASD. 
 
 115 
 
 immediate results, it will not be the less entitled 
 to the prodigious merit of having for the first time 
 established in Ireland this principle, that society 
 has the right, and that it is its duty, to impose 
 sacrifices on the wealthier classes, in return for the 
 benefits secui’ed to them by the maintenance of 
 social order. 
 
 Without infringing the right of property, there 
 ought to be no difficulty in efiecting some ame¬ 
 lioration in the relations between landlord and 
 tenant. Such at aU events is the opinion of en¬ 
 lightened men of aU parties. Mr. Crawford, a 
 popular Irish member, announced last session his 
 intention of bringing in a bUl with that object; and 
 Sir K. Peel, far from oi^posing it, declared that the 
 Government was disposed to second any measure 
 which, without endangering the rights of property, 
 would give to the occupier a greater duration of 
 tenui’e, and would secure to him a share in the 
 increased value of the land arismg from his own 
 improvements. The close of the session having 
 prevented Mr. Crawford from carrying out his 
 intentions, the Government appointed a commis¬ 
 sion for the purpose of investigating the state of 
 the relations between landlord and tenant in Ire¬ 
 land, and of preparing a measure for efiecting all 
 such reforms as are within the legitimate province 
 of the legislature. The upright and honourable 
 character of the person who was placed at the head 
 of this commission — the Earl of Devon, is the 
 
' 116 
 
 PRESENT STATE AND 
 
 best guarantee of the sincerity of the English 
 cabinet. I do not mean that ministers -would be 
 disposed, as certain members of extreme opinions 
 might -wish, to go the length of requiring an in¬ 
 definite prolongation of leases, — -which -would be 
 equivalent to depriving the proprietor of all his 
 rights, in order to transfer them to his tenant at 
 the price of a -fixed indemnity; —but I do believe 
 that they -would lend themselves to any reform not 
 absolutely incompatible -with the spirit of English 
 legislation. 
 
 Would an Irish Parliament be more competent 
 to bring about these reforms ? Certainly not. 
 
 In order to prevent these reforms from exceeding 
 the bounds of reason and justice, and to ensure 
 their being useful -without becoming revolutionary, 
 they require in the legislator a degree of mo¬ 
 deration, prudence, and impartiality -which could 
 not be expected, for many years at least, in a House 
 of Commons such as the Repeal of the Union 
 -would create. This assembly, subjected to the 
 control of the popular -wUl, and swayed by -violent 
 passions, -would be but an indifferent judge and a 
 partial arbitrator in any question raised by the 
 tenant against his landlord. There would be 
 reason to fear lest the verdict which wotdd be re¬ 
 turned should be marked -with a spirit of retali¬ 
 ation and revenge, that might become just as 
 fatal to Ireland in future times as the spirit of 
 oppression and intolerance has hitherto been in 
 those that are past. 
 
FUTURE PROSPECTS OF IRELAND. 
 
 117 
 
 The conscientious investigation upon which I 
 have entered seems to me sufficiently to prove, that 
 the advantages derivable from all national legis¬ 
 lation are far from counterbalancing the mischief 
 and danger that Ireland would incur from the 
 Eepeal of the Union. One ought not therefore to 
 hesitate in deciding at once against that measure, 
 and in condemning the fruitless agitation of which 
 it is the pretext, were it not for one last argument, 
 which is constantly urged in its favour, and which 
 assumes so specious a form that it imposes upon 
 many impartial persons. This argument is founded 
 upon the constant absence of large numbers of rich 
 landowners. It is in declaiming against the evils 
 of absenteeism that O’Connell and his j)Rrty endea¬ 
 vour to prove, that an Irish parliament, which would 
 bring back, by fair means or by foul, rich absentees, 
 would be an incalculable benefit to Ireland. 
 
 The argument is an important one, and deserves 
 to be the more seriously considered, as it has com¬ 
 monly been treated very lightly by the political 
 writers of the Continent. 
 
 I am far from denying the injurious conse¬ 
 quences of absenteeism in general. I believe, on 
 the contrary, that they are of two kinds, the one 
 moral, and the other politico-economical. 
 
 The constant absence of a considerable portion 
 of the richer classes, is a serious evil for any 
 country. It is impossible to over-estimate the 
 advantages of every kind which arise from proprie- 
 
tors residing habitually on their estates. Of all 
 aristocracies, the most popular is a landed aristo¬ 
 cracy, — one which takes up its abode m the midst 
 a rural population. Such an aristocracy has more 
 moral dignity than the aristocracy of a court. It 
 is much more powerful, more energetic, and more 
 generous in character than a monied aristocracy, 
 which owes its origin to commerce, and resides in 
 towns. But that which constitutes a real landed 
 aristocracy, is not the simple possession of a lai'ge 
 extent of sod; it is, much more, the influence which 
 personal communication carried on from genera¬ 
 tion to generation, has enabled large proprietors 
 to acquire over the population of the country. 
 This intercourse is productive of happy conse¬ 
 quences for all classes of society, —for the highest 
 as well as the lowest. It furnishes the rich with 
 an opportunity of employing their wealth to noble 
 purposes; and it secures towards the poor a 
 greater amount of kindly feeling and humanity 
 from those on whom their lot depends. When 
 society is established upon a solid foundation, and 
 when no anomalous ingredient is to be found in its 
 elements, the presence of landowners on their 
 estates can have none but happy results. 
 
 But if, on the contrary, from any cause what¬ 
 ever, hostile feelings or inveterate antipathies 
 exist between the landed aristocracy and the mass 
 of the people, the presence of the former can lead 
 to no good. In order to counteract the moral con- 
 
sequences of absenteeism, it would not be enough 
 to oblige the Protestant aristocracy to live on their 
 estates; they must first be animated with more 
 humane and benevolent feelings towards their Ca¬ 
 tholic tenantry; and they must be impressed with 
 as ardent a desire to improve their condition as 
 they have hitherto shown for the purpose of keep¬ 
 ing them in a state of dependence and oppression. 
 As long as this salutary change remains unaccom¬ 
 plished—as long as landlords are looked upon in 
 the light rather of the oppressors of their country 
 than as its natural protectors, I do not hesitate 
 to say, that absenteeism, whatever may be its po¬ 
 litico-economical effects, ■\viU, in a moral point of 
 view, be a good rather than an evil; for there are 
 no pecuniary sacrifices comparable to the mischiev¬ 
 ous consequences occasioned by the existence of a 
 wealthy class, corrupted and tyrannical, living in 
 the midst of a population full of ignorance, passion, 
 and hatred. 
 
 But even supposing that the residence of land- 
 owners on their estates were as useful as O’Connell 
 would pretend, how is an Irish parliament to ac¬ 
 complish this object ? I can just conceive that by 
 coercive measures, which I am far from approving, 
 he may compel Irish landlords not to quit the island; 
 stiU itwiU be utterly impossible for him ever to dream 
 of obliging them to reside upon their estates. This 
 would require lettres de cachet of a novel description, 
 which would condenm gi’eat proprietors to play the 
 
120 
 
 PRESENT STATE 
 
 part of benevolence, during a portion of the year, 
 for the benefit of their tenants. Such an idea is 
 too abstird to make it -worth -while to waste one 
 moment in discussing it. 
 
 Let us proceed, then, to the consideration of the 
 politico-economical consequences of absenteeism. 
 
 I -will begin by observing, that it is not Ireland 
 alone which complains of the injury done to the 
 resources of a nation by the absence of a portion of 
 its wealthier inhabitants. England has made the 
 same complaints. During the years which followed 
 the establishment of the general peace, public opi¬ 
 nion had its attention fixed on the danger the 
 resources of the country incurred from the increas¬ 
 ing emigration to the Continent; and it has more 
 than once been a question of arresting the tide by 
 fiscal and coercive measures. Nevertheless, expe¬ 
 rience, and the discussions which have taken place 
 on this subject, ha-ving demonstrated how much 
 the fears that had arisen were exaggerated, public 
 opinion gained confidence, and declamations against 
 absenteeism have sunk to the level of the vulgar 
 eloquence of the demagogue. 
 
 The remarkable -writings of several political eco¬ 
 nomists have greatly contributed to this result. A 
 complete examination of the effects of absenteeism 
 upon the production and consumption of wealth 
 has clearly proved, that in most cases it does not, 
 in this respect, produce any injurious tendency. 
 The first -writer who has sifted this subject to the 
 
rUTUEE PROSPECTS OF IRELAKD. 
 
 121 
 
 bottom is Mr. M'CuUoch, the learned editor and 
 commentator of Adam Smith; and he was the first 
 who maintained, in his celebrated examination be¬ 
 fore the House of Lords, that absenteeism was not 
 amenable to any of the faults laid to its charge. 
 The truth of these opinions has been generally 
 admitted by the politico-economist schools; and 
 however strange they may at first appear, they 
 are nevertheless, within certain bounds, perfectly 
 accurate. Like all, however, who make discoveries 
 in moral science, he has endeavoured to extend too 
 far the principle he has discovered. Subsequently a 
 political economist of no less celebrity—Mr. Senior, 
 has restricted this principle within juster limits. 
 Nevertheless, as it seems to me that these limits 
 are not yet defined accurately, I beg to be allowed 
 to enter, so far at least as this point is concerned, 
 upon this discussion; and I trust that, in consider¬ 
 ation of the importance of the subject, and its no¬ 
 velty for some of my readei’s, I shall be excused for 
 trenching, for a short time, upon the proHnce of 
 political economy. 
 
 The following is Mr. Senior’s theor}-:—We must 
 first make a distinction, he says, between those 
 countries which export the raw produce and those 
 which export manufactured articles. In the former, 
 the rich man who lives abroad will defray his ex¬ 
 penses, directly or indirectly, out of the raw pro¬ 
 duce of his country. Thus it is evident that an 
 extravagant Irish nobleman pa3's the large expenses 
 
122 
 
 PKESENT STATE AND 
 
 he incurs in London, or on the Continent, with the 
 com, the pigs, and the butter which his country 
 produces, and which England consumes. If this 
 nobleman resided in Ireland, a part at least of this 
 _ produce would be exchanged for Irish labour, and 
 would consequently be consumed by the workmen 
 of the country, who would have more butter and 
 bacon to mix with their potatoes. If, however, this 
 same lord were to return home with exclusively 
 English tastes, and if he were determined to take 
 none but Englishmen into his service, sending to 
 England for all that he required, the gain to Ireland 
 would be but small. Its com, and pigs, and butter 
 would be eaten by English, or exported in order to 
 pay for English goods. In accordance with this 
 evidently correct reasoning, Mr. Senior comes to the 
 conclusion, that absenteeism in those countries 
 which export raw produce, must have an injurious 
 effect upon national wealth, and influence in an un- 
 fevourable manner the rate of wages; and con¬ 
 sequently that it would be desirable for such coun¬ 
 tries that the idle rich should spend their income 
 therein, provided they had not contracted the habit 
 of employing none but foreign labour. 
 
 "With respect to those countries which export 
 manufactured goods, the case, according to Mr. 
 Senior, is different. The rich man, being unable 
 when abroad to pay his expenses by means of the 
 produce of his land, will exchange this produce for 
 manufactured goods, which, exported into the coun- 
 
FOTUEE PROSPECTS OF IRELAND. 
 
 123 
 
 try where he resides, will there discharge his debts. 
 This operation does not take place directly: it is 
 effected by bankers, apparently by simple ex¬ 
 changes of paper. It also often happens, that the 
 produce of the absentee’s countrj^, instead of be¬ 
 ing exported to the country in which he lives, 
 goes to pay the debts that this latter has contracted 
 with a third country. Nevertheless, among the 
 thousand complicated transactions of commercial 
 exchanges, it is easy to reduce the effect of the ex¬ 
 penditure of the rich in foreign countries to the 
 operation above stated. Such being the case, the 
 country of these rich absentees will have lost 
 nothing. The income of the rich will have been 
 exchanged for the labour of his own country; and 
 the only effect wUl have been, that the produce of 
 this labour, instead of being unproductively con¬ 
 sumed by him in his own country, -will have been 
 employed in other services, equally unproductive, 
 which he wiU have required from the foreigners 
 amongst whom he lives. 
 
 This second reasoning of Mr. Senior is in the main 
 true; but the consequences he has deduced from 
 it are too extensive. If the countrj’ in question 
 exported only such objects of luxury as are not 
 usually consumed by the working classes, the ar¬ 
 gument would be ill all respects correct. As long 
 as the expenses of the English on the Continent are 
 paid for in China vases and blood horses, England, 
 so far from losing, rather gains by the bargain; for 
 
124 
 
 PBESENT STATE AND 
 
 the expenses of the absentee, increasing the demand 
 for objects of luxury, encourage the development of 
 those branches of industry which secure the best 
 wages and the highest profits. But if the country 
 exports such manufactured goods as are used by 
 the working classes, cheap stufts for instance, I 
 cannot understand why a different effect should 
 he attributed to absenteeism from that which it 
 produces in those countries whence raw produce is 
 exported. 
 
 The rich man, no doubt, whether he remains at 
 home or goes abroad, will equally exchange his in¬ 
 come for manufactured articles, in the same way as 
 has been stated in the foregoing hypothesis. But 
 in the case in which the manufactured goods are of 
 that kind which are used by the working classes, it 
 is probable that he would not consume them him¬ 
 self. He would exchange them a second time for 
 services intended to satisfy his refined wants. It 
 may be objected that the same income cannot be 
 twice consumed. This is true; but it must not be 
 forgotten, that if the income of the rich man serves 
 to pay those whom he employs, such as his game- 
 keepers, his grooms, and lus tailor, this kmd of 
 consumption, although unproductive in a politico- 
 economical point of view, nevertheless enables his 
 fellow-countrymen who are thus paid, to procure 
 for their own use the objects of first necessity, 
 which in the case of the absence of the rich man 
 would have been exported abroad. 
 
FUTURE PROSPECTS OF IRELAND. 
 
 125 
 
 Absenteeism, under these circumstances, does 
 not create a new demand in foreign countries for 
 manufactured goods,—it only changes its place. It 
 was formerly the servants, the workmen, and the 
 tradesmen of the absentee’s country which required 
 them; it is now the servants, the workmen, and 
 the tradesmen that he employs away from home, 
 who derive the advantage. 
 
 Serious doubts with regard to the truth of Mr. 
 Senior’s theory are at once raised by simply asking 
 if it he possible that absenteeism should have a dif¬ 
 ferent effect in a country which exports oxen, and 
 in that from which candles, made from the fat of 
 these same animals, is exported. In the one case, 
 as in the other, the exportation diminishes the 
 quantity of various objects destined to pay the 
 wages of the worldng classes, and must conse¬ 
 quently tend to lower them. 
 
 In applying these principles to Ii’eland, one is 
 forced to admit that absenteeism is in her case a 
 cause of impoverishment; for that countiy is one 
 of those which exports, almost exclusively, either 
 raw produce, or manufactured articles intended for 
 the consumption of the lower classes. 
 
 It is, then, by no means doubtful, hut that an 
 Irish parliament would do a very useful thing if it 
 succeeded in retaining in Ireland all those rich 
 proprietors who live abroad. But how is it to ac¬ 
 complish that object? Is it to be solely by indi¬ 
 rect means,—by making a residence in Dublin as 
 
' 126 
 
 PSESENT STATE AUD 
 
 interesting and agreeable as one in London ? I 
 much doubt the efficaciousness of this plan. It 
 is difficult to change the habits and influence the 
 tastes of the wealthier classes. The attraction which, 
 even after the Eepeal of the Union, would draw them 
 to England, would continue to be more powerftil 
 than all the temptations which a Dublin life could 
 offer. As for the interest of politics, I rely little 
 upon this for keeping absentee proprietors at home. 
 They almost all belong to the extreme Tory party, 
 and would lose all their influence in an Irish 
 parliament. They would never form more than a 
 small minority in the House of Commons; and as 
 the House of Lords would have become unimpor¬ 
 tant, I do not think they would show much eager¬ 
 ness or assiduity in there exercising their legislative 
 functions. 
 
 But it may be urged, that if the great landed 
 proprietors, not being very anxious to avail them¬ 
 selves of the advantages of national independence, 
 persist in living away fi’om their country, recourse 
 win be had to coercive measures. This is more easily 
 said than done. I presume it is not intended to ad¬ 
 minister the receipt in vogue with the Emperor of 
 Russia to force the nobility to return to his em¬ 
 pire, viz. the sequestration of income, and even 
 the confiscation of property. This would be too 
 violent, and too contrary to the habits and no¬ 
 tions of our age. Roue but a few alehouse dema¬ 
 gogues would venture to advise such a measure. 
 
FUTURE PROSPECTS OF IRELARD. 
 
 127 
 
 More cannot be attempted than imposing a tax 
 upon the incomes of absentees; and this, which 
 appears so simple at first, would be very difficult, 
 not to say impossible, in practice. 
 
 How, in point of fact, is absence to be defined ? 
 Win the absence of a few months be sufficient to 
 make a man liable to the tax ? Will the presence 
 in Ireland of the whole family, or only the head of 
 the family, be insisted upon ? And, again, what 
 description of establishment wUl be required ? The 
 mere enumeration of these questions is enough to 
 show how next to impossible it is to dispose 
 of them. Unless a system of inquisitorial and vex¬ 
 atious measures were established, it would be out 
 of the question to impose a tax which would not 
 be, in aU cases, eluded. It is impossible to say 
 that no one shall ever be permitted to indulge in 
 temporary absences; and what limit is to be placed 
 on them ? Thanks to railroads and steam-boats, 
 which have placed Dublin mthin twenty-four 
 hours of London, the wealthy Lislunan, although 
 living in the latter town with his family, might 
 show himself as often as might be necessary to 
 exempt him from the tax. I repeat it, that with¬ 
 out the adoption of some odious system, repugnant 
 to all our notions and to every principle of justice, 
 coercive measures for the purpose of obliging great 
 Irish landed proprietors to live in their own country 
 would be perfectly illusory. 
 
 Besides all this, there is one important consider- 
 
PRESEKT STATE AND 
 
 ation 'wMcli has not heen generally attended to, 
 hut which is nevertheless sufficient to destroy all 
 hopes founded upon the return of absentees. It 
 is often forgotten that the greater part of the 
 land owned by non-resident proprietors belongs to 
 Englishmen, to peers of Great Britain, and influen¬ 
 tial corporations. One cannot dream of obliging 
 them to renounce their character of Englishmen, 
 that they may live in Ireland. It would be necessary 
 then to pass a special measure to subject them to 
 the absentee tax. This would be an actual com¬ 
 mencement of spoliation, to which these corpora¬ 
 tions and landowners would not be inclined to 
 submit. They would call to their defence the as¬ 
 sistance of their own government, that of England, 
 which certainly would not be refused. What would 
 happen then? A civil war. This would be for 
 Ireland the height of folly, for not only would she 
 have to contend against physical force infinitely 
 greater than her own, but against her would be 
 arrayed moral influence, law, and justice. 
 
 It must be acknowledged that absenteeism is an 
 evil; but the remedies which O’Connell and his 
 party wish to apply, through the instrumentality 
 of Repeal, far from curing, would only aggravate 
 the mischief. 
 
 I trust I have now performed the most important 
 part of the task which I have undertaken, by show¬ 
 ing, from the inevitable consequences of Repeal, 
 how little likely that measure is to answer the ex- 
 
I'UTUllE PROSPECTS OP IREL^VND. 
 
 129 
 
 pectations of those who conscientiously believe 
 that on its success depends the well-being of Ire¬ 
 land. If the investigation I have made is at all 
 to be depended upon, we may predict with cer¬ 
 tainty that the advantages resulting from that 
 measure would be far fi-om outweighing the mis¬ 
 chiefs and dangers to which it would give rise. 
 One cannot therefore but lament that it should 
 have become the one end in view,—the single 
 point of attraction -with the popular party of Ire¬ 
 land. But even supposing that I should be mis¬ 
 taken, and that I should have omitted some of 
 the benefits which might be anticipated from a 
 national legislature, would it stiU be right to bestow 
 praise on the part that O’Connell has taken, and 
 that almost the whole of Catholic Ireland has adopted 
 with so much energy, and with such apparently 
 unshaken determination ? Certainly not; for before 
 encouraging the Irish patriots to persist in the 
 perilous path upon which they have entered, it is 
 necessary to know, not only whether the object 
 they have in view be a legitimate one, but also 
 whether it be not surrounded with insurmountable 
 difiiculties, and whether it can reasonably be ex¬ 
 pected that either by persuasion or force they will 
 succeed in breaking the link which unites them to 
 England. Now this is what no man of sense, after 
 a few moments’ reflection, can suppose. 
 
 How, in fact, is the Repeal of the Union to be 
 bi'enght about ? Is it to be by legal meaiis ? But 
 
' 130 
 
 PJiESEJIT STATE AKD 
 
 for that purpose it -Nvill be necessary to obtain tbe 
 consent of parliament, where an overwhelming majo¬ 
 rity will join in refusing it. By force then ? — by 
 the fears that Ireland flatters herself she inspires? 
 But who can suppose that England will recoil be¬ 
 fore the threatening attitude of those forces which 
 O’Connell has succeeded in organising! Those 
 who entertain such an opinion are entirely ignorant 
 of the character of the English people, and of the 
 principles by which its government is guided. It 
 is true that the English are by no means sensitive; 
 they act with as much prudence as firmness; when¬ 
 ever an absolute necessity occurs, they hnow how 
 to give way, although at the expense of their 
 self-love and vanity; but the moment that the 
 real secret of their power and the elements of 
 their existence are at stake, they are the most de¬ 
 termined people that ever existed, and are capable 
 of the most gigantic and persevering exertions. 
 
 The Eepeal of the Union is properly considered 
 by all parties in England, as a question of life or 
 death. All have expressed their opinion with equal 
 vehemence against the separation of the two king¬ 
 doms. Though not agreed as to the manner of 
 governing Ireland and of restoring tranquillity, 
 they are unanimous as to the necessity of keeping 
 it by every possible means incorporated with Great 
 Britain. Let it be remembered that the mildest, 
 the most hmnane, the most liberal, the most sincere 
 man of the Whig party, — Lord Spencer, unhesi- 
 
I'UTUKE 1-UOSl‘ECTS OE IKELAXU. 
 
 131 
 
 tatingly declared, when he was minister, that before 
 consenting to a Eepeal of the Union he would 
 advise Parliament to incur a war of extermin¬ 
 ation. After this, one may judge whether it be 
 probable that any English cabinet, so supported 
 by the entire nation, would ever yield to the 
 threats of O’Connell. 
 
 Some persons, deluded by a false historical 
 analogy, bring forward the example of what passed 
 in 1829, at the time of Catholic emancipation, in 
 order to prove that it is not impossible to extort, 
 by fear, important concessions which have long 
 been denied to entreaty. The comparison however 
 does not hold good. In 1829, the Irish fought 
 for a cause, the justice and equity of which were 
 evident; and they were su^iported, if not by a 
 majority of the English people, at least by an 
 imposing minority, in whose ranks were numbered, 
 not only the whole of the Whig party, but also the 
 most distinguished and enlightened of the Tories. 
 The Duke of Wellington did not recede from his 
 former opinions solely on account of the mena¬ 
 cing attitude of the Catholic Association; he gave 
 way because, as a skilltul leader, he saw that his 
 forces were not prepared to follow him in a 
 deadly struggle. He had, indeed, at his disposal a 
 majority in both Houses; and he might, no doubt, 
 have rejected any direct motion in favour of the 
 Catholics; but it would have been difficult, and 
 almost impossible for him to have obtained, in the 
 
' 132 
 
 PRESENT STATE AND 
 
 House of Commons, extraordinary powers to re¬ 
 press, by force, the fearful agitation that O’Connell 
 had organised. 
 
 The present circumstances are very different. 
 There exists in England, both in parliament, and 
 throughout the country, a unanimous feeling against 
 Eepeal. This measure is equally scouted, both by 
 the fanatical partisans of things as they are, and by 
 the most ardent friends of reform. This general 
 concurrence is not the result of national interest 
 alone: it must also be in great part attributed to 
 that loyal and conscientious opinion, which looks 
 upon the dissolution of the tie that unites the 
 British Isles as a project at once odious and cri¬ 
 minal. Ministers, whoever they may be, will always 
 find parliament prepared to arm them with all 
 necessary legal powers, and to place at their dis¬ 
 posal an amount of physical force sufficient to 
 maintain in Ireland, either by law or by force, 
 public order as at present established. 
 
 The steady legal agitation, such as O’Connell has 
 organised, is then destined to be, and to remain, 
 unproductive. The promises and boastings of the 
 Liberator may still hold out delusive hopes amongst 
 the Irish Catholics; but sooner or later these illu¬ 
 sions will be dispelled, and the popular party will 
 end by requiring an account from their chief of the 
 results obtained by such mighty efforts, and so 
 many sacrifices. What, then, will be the course 
 taken by this great man, who exerts so powerful 
 
FUTUKE PROSPECTS OF IRELAND. 
 
 133 
 
 an influence over the destinies of Ireland ? Aban¬ 
 doning the road on which he has travelled, and 
 which leads to nothing, will he appeal to the last 
 argument of an oppressed people, and have recourse 
 to insurrection and civil war? I cannot think so. 
 O’Connell is too skilful, too enlightened, and has 
 too much good sense to engage seriousty in a deadly 
 struggle with England. The chances are too un¬ 
 equal. I am aware that some persons are of a 
 very different opinion. They believe that on the 
 day in which O’Connell unfurls the banner of Irish 
 independence, and makes an appeal to the physical 
 force of the nation, a popular movement wll take 
 place that will carry all before it. They say, that 
 in the present age it is no longer possible to put 
 down eight millions of men who are determined to 
 conquer or die. But this is another of those illu¬ 
 sions that an intimate knowledge of the elements 
 composing the population of the British empire 
 is not long in dispelling. 
 
 In the first place, let us remember, that Ireland 
 is not unanimous; that it includes a numerous and 
 powerful class, whose interests induce them to 
 cling to the Union, and to whom Repeal is a 
 question of life or death. The Protestants form 
 but a small numerical minority in that country; 
 but they are strong from being wealthy, energetic, 
 and well organised. At the first ciy of insur. 
 rection they would rise in a body, and, aided by 
 
 K 3 
 
-134 
 
 PEESEiJT STATE AND 
 
 regular troops, they would unhesitatingly attack 
 the congregated masses of Catholic insurgents. 
 
 With respect to popular commotions, the English 
 are essentially different from the French. In 
 France the use of arms is general; all classes of 
 society are impressed with a military character, 
 which is even more decided amongst the inferior 
 classes than it is amongst the higher. Conscriptions 
 have taught an enormous majority in that country 
 the art of fighting. There is not a village in which 
 a company or detachment may not he organized in a 
 single day. Street engagements are accordingly 
 dangerous in France; the people have more than 
 once come off victorious m them. In Ireland, as 
 well as England, on the contrary, the people are 
 not military, either by nature or hahit. They 
 know nothing about the army. They supply it 
 with soldiers, but these, once enrolled, do not return 
 to the ranks of the people. There, the appearance 
 of an armed force acts like magic upon the 
 multitude; and small detachments have hitherto 
 been sufficient to disperse meetmgs which seemed 
 the most alarming. However much we may exag¬ 
 gerate to ourselves the courage of Irish soldiers, 
 and notwithstanding the boastings of O’Connell, 
 there is no one acquainted with Ireland who can, 
 for an instant, suppose that the mass of the people 
 there would be in a condition to offer any serious 
 resistance to regular troops. 
 
 The living strength of Great Britain is formed 
 
FUTUEE PEOSPECTS OP lEELAND. 
 
 135 
 
 by the middle and higher classes of the nation. 
 Their energy is of a very different kind from that of 
 the same classes on the Continent. No revolution, 
 no attempt at insurrection is possible, provided the 
 majority of those of whom they are composed do not 
 take part against the Government. Now there is 
 nothing less probable in Ireland. If civil war were 
 to break out there, on one side would be found 
 large and tumultuous bodies of peasants incapable 
 of discipline, commanded by a small number of 
 Catholics taken from the higher ranks of soci¬ 
 ety, and on the other, the higher and middle 
 classes, backed by the whole of the strength at the 
 disposal of Government. The chances would, in 
 truth, be too unequal. The popular party, in re¬ 
 sorting to violence, would encounter certain de¬ 
 struction. 
 
 There is one contingency, and only one, which 
 might possibly turn the scale in favour of Irish in¬ 
 surrection, and restore the balance; and this would 
 be, an unsuccessful foreign war, exhausting the 
 resources of England. In this case, I confess, the 
 Irish might try insurrectional^ means with success. 
 But ought this extreme case to enter into the 
 consideration of rational men ? Could any praise 
 be bestowed on a party whieh founded its chances of 
 success upon the humiliation of its country ? No, 
 under no circumstances whatever. If Repeal were 
 purchased at the price of the humiliation of England, 
 it would cost too much to the cause of humanity; 
 
' 136 
 
 PRESENT STATE 
 
 and no one who is sincere would have it on such 
 
 But I may he asked, what are the inferences which 
 we are to draw from all the facts and arguments that 
 have been adduced, for the purpose of determining 
 the actual state of those questions upon which the 
 fate of Ireland depends. In the first place, I am 
 firmly convinced that the Eepeal of the Union will 
 not be carried. But I may be asked what then 
 win. happen? — what is to be the upshot of the 
 present crisis, and what the winding up of the 
 drama in which O’Connell has played so extra¬ 
 ordinary a part ? I have neither the inclination nor 
 the power of entering upon the wide field of con¬ 
 jecture and prophecy. I have already said, that to 
 no one is it given to dive into the mysteries of 
 futurity. The social horizon is extremely limited; 
 men of the greatest capacity have in vain endea¬ 
 voured to pass the barrier by which it is bounded. 
 Nevertheless, without indulging in any rash hypo¬ 
 thesis, I may, perhaps, take upon myself to conclude 
 these observations, already too long, by asserting 
 that it is probable that the present ministry, as 
 well as their successors, will continue to carry on 
 in Ireland the system of improvement and reform 
 which Lord Melbourne was the first to adopt upon 
 a comprehensive scale. The hard words and vio¬ 
 lence of O’Connell and his party, as long as he 
 keeps within the bounds of law, will not arrest the 
 course of the English Government. Long accus- 
 
rUTUEE I’EOSl’ECTS OE lUELAND. 
 
 137 
 
 tomed to the extreme consequences of political 
 liberty, the Government is not peculiarly sensitive. 
 It is as little influenced by empty threats, as by 
 an apprehension of appearing to yield from weak¬ 
 ness when the time for concession has arrived. It 
 will pursue the work of regeneration in Ireland. Its 
 course will be measured and cautious, perhaps even 
 excessively slow; but it will be steady, and there will 
 be no receding. In support of this assertion, I 
 shall content myself with referring to the moderate, 
 liberal, and generous conduct of Sir Robert Peel’s 
 cabinet towards Canada. IMiat he has done for 
 that distant colony he will do for Ireland. After 
 having conquered Canada by the force of arms, he 
 has been willing to conciliate her with large conces¬ 
 sions. In the same way, if he should succeed in 
 gaining a legal victory over O'Connell, or if he 
 should be obliged to repress by physical force 
 still bolder attempts than those already made, he 
 will not the less strive to satisfy all such demands 
 on the part of the Irish, as he may believe to be 
 compatible wth the interests of Great Britain and 
 the exigences of his party. 
 
 What wiU be the final result of these progressive 
 and well-considered reforms ? Will they succeed in 
 completely healing the womids of Ireland, and in 
 thoroughly amalgamating the feelings and interests 
 of that country and those of Great Britain ? These 
 are serious questions, which the future can alone 
 determine. I trust and ardently desire that thev