I admit, that men of the best fortunes and reputations, and of the best talents and education too, may
by accident show themselves furious and intemperate
in their desires.
by accident show themselves furious and intemperate
in their desires.
Edmund Burke
This way of proscribing
men by whole nations, as it were, from all the benefits of the Constitution to which they were born, I never can believe to be politic or expedient, much
less necessary for the existence of any state or church
in the world. Whenever I shall be convinced, which
will be late and reluctantly, that the safety of the
Church is utterly inconsistent with all the civil rights
whatsoever of the far larger part of the inhabitants of
our country, I shall be extremely sorry for it; because I shall think the Church to be truly in danger.
It is putting things into the position of an ugly alternative, into which I hope in God they never will be put.
I have said most of what occurs to me on the topics you touch upon, relative to the religion of the
king, and his coronation oath. I shall conclude the
observations which I wished to submit to you on this
point by assuring you that I think you the most remote that can be conceived from the metaphysicians
? ? ? ? 270 LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE.
of our times, who are the most foolish of men, and
who, dealing in universals and essences, see no difference between more and less, - and who of course would think that the reason of the law which obliged
the king to be a communicant of the Church of England would be as valid to exclude a Catholic from being an excisemain, or to deprive a mani who has
five hundred a year, under that description, fromn
voting on a par with a factitious Protestant Dissenting freeholder of forty shillings.
Recollect, my dear friend, that it was a fundamental principle in the French monarchy, whilst it stood, that the state should be Catholic; yet the Edict of
Nantes gave, not a full ecclesiastical, but a complete
civil establishment, with places of which only they
were capable, to the Calvinists of France, - and there
were very few employments, indeed, of which they
were not capable. The world praised the Cardinal
de Richelieu, who took the first opportunity to strip
them of their fortified places and cautionary towns.
The same world held and does hold in execration (so
far as that business is concerned) the memory of
Louis the Fourteenth, for the total repeal of that
favorable edict; though the talk of " fiundamental
laws, established religion, religion of the prince,
safety to the state," &c. , &c. , was then as largely
held, and with as bitter a revival of the animosities
of the civil confusions during the struggles between
the parties, as now they can be in Ireland.
Perhaps there are persons who think that the same
reason does not hold, when the religious relation of the
sovereign and subject is changed; but they who have
their shop full of false weights and measures, and
who imagine that the adding or taking away the
? ? ? ? LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE. 271
name of Protestant or Papist, Guelph or Ghibelline,
alters all the principles of equity, policy, and prudence, leave us no common data upon which we can
reason. I therefore pass by all this, which on you
will make no impression, to come to what seems to
be a serious consideration in your mind: I mean the
dread you express of " reviewing, for the purpose of
altering, the principles of the Revolution. " This is an
interesting topic, on which I will, as fully as your
leisure and mine permits, lay before you the ideas
I have formed.
First, I cannot possibly confound in my mind all
the things which were done at the Revolution with
the principles of the Revolution. As in most great
changes, many things were done from the necessities
of the time, well or ill understood, from passion or
from vengeance, which were not only not perfectly
agreeable to its principles, but in the most direct contradiction to them. I shall not think that the deprivation of some millions of people of all the rights of citizens, and all interest in the Constitution, in and to
which they were born, was a thing conformable to the
declared principles of the Revolution. This I am sure
is true relatively to England (where the operation of
these anti-principles comparatively were of little extent); and some of our late laws, in repealing acts
made immediately after the Revolution, admit that
some things then done were not done in the true
spirit of the Revolution. But the Revolution operated differently in England and Irelanld, in many,
and these essential particulars. . Supposing the principles to have been altogether the same in both kingdoms, by the application of those principles to very different objects the whole spirit of the system was
? ? ? ? 272 LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE.
changed, not to say reversed. Ini England it was the
struggle of the great body of the people for the establishment of their liberties, against the efforts of a very
small faction, who would have oppressed them. In
Ireland it was the establishment of the power of the
smaller number, at the expense of the civil liberties
and properties of the. far greater part, and at the expense of the political liberties of the whole. It was,
to say the truth, not a revolution, but a conquest:
which is not to say a great deal in its favor. To insist on everything done in Ireland at the Revolution
would be to insist on the severe and jealous policy of
a conqueror, in the crude settlement of his new acquisition, as a permanent rule for its fiuture government.
This no power, in no country that ever I heard of,
has done or professed to do, - except in Ireland;
where it is done, and possibly by some people will
be professed. Time has, by degrees, in all other
places and periods, blended and coalited the conquered with the conquerors. So, after some time,
and after one of the most rigid conquests that we
read of in history, the Normans softened into the English. I wish you to turn your recollection to the
fine speech of Cerealis to the Gauls, made to dissuade
them from revolt. Speaking of the Romans, - N' os
quamvis toties lacessiti, jure victoriae id solum vobis
addidimus, quo pacem tueremur: nam neque quies
gentium sine armis, neque arma sine stipendiis, neque stipendia sine tributis haberi queant. Cwtera
in communi sita sunt: ipsi plerumque nostris exercitibus prcesidetis: ipsi has aliasque provincias regitis: nil separatum clausumve. Proinde pacem et urbem, quam victores victique eodem jure obtinemus,
amate, colite. " You will consider whether the ar
? ? ? ? LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISEE. 273
guments used by that Roman to these Gauls would
apply to the case in Ireland, - and whether you could
use so plausible a preamble to any severe warning
you might think it proper to hold out to those who
should resort to sedition, instead of supplication, to
obtain any object that they may pursue with the governing power.
For a much longer period than that which had sufficed to blend the Romans with the nation to which of all others they were the most adverse, the Protestants
settled in Ireland considered themselves in no other
light than that of a sort of a colonial garrison, to.
keep the natives in subjection to the other state of
Great Britain. The whole spirit of the Revolution!
in Ireland was that of not the mildest conqueror.
In truth, the spirit of those proceedings did not commence at that era, nor was religion of any kind their primary object. What was done was not in the spirit
of a contest between two religious factions, but between two adverse nations. The statutes of Kilkenny show that the spirit of the Popery laws, and some
even of their actual provisions, as applied between
Englishry and Irishry, had existed in that harassed
country before the words Protestant and Papist were
heard of in the world. If we read Baron Finglas,
Spenser, and Sir John Davies, we cannot miss the
true genius and policy of the English government
there before the Revolution, as well as during the
whole reign of Queen Elizabeth. Sir John Davies
boasts of the benefits received by the natives, by extending to them the English law, and turning the whole kingdom into shire ground. But the appearance of things alone was changed. The original scheme was never deviated from for a single hour.
VOL. IV. 18
? ? ? ? 274 LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE.
Unheard-of confiscations were made in the northern
parts, upon grounds of plots and conspiracies, never
proved upon their supposed authors. The war of
chicane succeeded to the war of arms and of hostile
statutes; and a regular series of operations was carried' on, particularly from Chichester's time, in the ordinary courts of justice, and by special commissions
and inquisitions,- first under pretence of tenures,
and then of titles in the crown, for the purpose of the
total extirpation of the interest of the natives in their
own soil, -- until this species of subtle ravage, being
carried to the last excess of oppression and insolence
under Lord Strafford, it kindled the flames of that
rebellion which broke out in 1641. By the issue of
that war, by the turn which the Earl of Clarendon
gave to things at the Restoration, and by the total
reduction of the kingdom of Ireland in 1691, the
ruin of the native Irish, and, in a great measure, too,
of the first races of the English, was completely accomplished. The new English interest was settled with as solid a stability as anything in human affairs
can look for. All the penal laws of that unparalleled
code of oppression, which were made after the last
event, were manifestly the effects of national hatred
and scorn towards a conquered people, whom the
victors delighted to trample upon and were not at
all afraid to provoke. They were not the effect of
their fears, but of their security. They who carried
on this system looked to the irresistible force of Great
Britain for their support in their acts of power.
They were quite certain that no complaints of the
natives would be heard on this side of the water with
any other. sentiments than those of contempt and indignation. Their cries served only to augment their
? ? ? ? LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE. 275
torture. Machines which could answer their purposes so well must be of an excellent contrivance.
Indeed, in England, the double name of the complainants, Irish and Papists, (it would be hard to say
which singly was the most odious,) shut up the
hearts of every one against them. Whilst that temper prevailed, (and it prevailed in all its force to a
time within our memory,) every measure was pleasing
and popular just in proportion as it tended to harass
and ruin a set of people who were looked upon as enemies to God and man, and, indeed, as a race of bigoted savages who were a disgrace to human nature itself.
However, as the English in Ireland began to be
domiciliated, they began also to recollect that they
had a country. The English interest, at first by faint
and almost insensible degrees, but at length openly
and avowedly, became an independent Irish interest,
-- full as independent as it could ever have been if it
had continued in the. persons of the native Irish; and
it was maintained with more skill and more consistency than probably it would have been in theirs.
With their views, the Anglo-Irish changed their maxims: it was necessary to demonstrate to the whole
people that there was something, at least, of a common interest, combined with the independency, which
was to become the object of common exertions. The
mildness of government produced the first relaxation
towards the Irish; the necessities, and, in part, too,
the temper that predominated at this great change,
produced the second and the most important of these
relaxations. English government and Irish legislature felt jointly the propriety of this measure. The
Irish Parliament and nation became independent.
? ? ? ? 276 LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGR. ISHE.
The true revolution to you, that which most intrinsically and substantially resembled the English
Revolution of 1688, was the Irish Revolution of
1782. The Irish Parliament of 1782 bore little resemblance to that which sat in that kingdom after
the period of the first of these revolutions. It bore
a much nearer resemblance to that which sat under
King James. The change of the Parliament in 1782
from the character of the Parliament which, as a token of its indignation, had burned all the journals
indiscriminately of the former Parliament in the
Council-Chamber, was very visible. The address of
King William's Parliament, the Parliament which assembled after the Revolution, amongst other causes
of complaint (many of them sufficiently just) complains of the repeal by their predecessors of Poyllings's law, - no absolute idol with the Parliament of 1782.
Great Britain, finding the Anglo-Irish highly animated with a spirit which had. indeed shown itself
before, though with little energy and many interruptions, and therefore suffered a multitude of uniform precedents to be established against it, acted, in my opinion, with the greatest temperance and
wisdom. She saw that the disposition of the leading part of the nation would not permit them to act
any longer the part of a garrison. She saw that true
policy did not require that they ever should have appeared in that character; or if it had done so formerly, the reasons had now ceased to operate. She saw that the Irish of her race were resolved to build
their Constitution and their politics upon another
bottom. With those things under her view, she instantly complied with the whole of your demands,
? ? ? ? LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE. 277
without any reservation whatsoever. She surrendered that boundless superiority, for the preservation of which, and the acquisition, she had supported the English colonies in Ireland for so long a time,
and at so vast an expense (according to the standard
of those ages) of her blood and treasure.
When we bring before us the matter wlich history
affords for our selection, it is not improper to examine the spirit of the several precedents which are
candidates for our choice. Might it not be as well
for your statesmen, on the other side of the water,
to take an example from this latter and surely more
conciliatory revolution, as a pattern for your collduct towards your own fellow-citizens, than from that
of 1688, when a paramount sovereignty over both you
*and them was more loftily claimed and more sternly
exerted than at any former or at any subsequent period? Great Britain in 1782 rose above the vulgar
ideas of policy, the ordinary jealousies of state, and
all the sentiments of national pride and national almbition. If she had been more disposed (than, I thank
God for it, she was) to listen to the suggestions of
passion than to the dictates of prudence, she might
have urged the principles, the maxims, the policy,
the practice of the Revolution, against the demands
of the leading description in Ireland, with full as
much plausibility and full as good a grace as any
amongst them'can possibly do against the supplications of so vast and extensive a description of their
own people.
A good deal, too, if the spirit of domination and
exclusion had prevailed in England, might have been
excepted against some of the means then employed
in Ireland, whilst her claims were in agitation. They
? ? ? ? 278 LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE.
were at least as much out of ordinary course as
those which are now objected against admitting your
people to any of the benefits of an English Constitution. Most certainly, neither with you nor here
was any one ignorant of what was at that time said,
written, and done. But on all sides we separated the
means from the end: and we separated the cause of
the moderate and rational from the ill-intentioned
and seditious, which on such occasions are so frequently apt to march together. At that time, on
your part, you were not afraid to review what was
done at the Revolution of 1688, and what had been
continued during the subsequent flourishing period
of the British empire. The change then made was
a great and fundamental alteration. In tlie execution, it was an operose business on both sides of the
water. It required the repeal of several laws, the
modification of many, and a new course to be given
to an infinite number of legislative, judicial, and official practices and usages in both kingdoms. This
did not frighten any of us. You are now asked to
give, in some moderate measure, to your fellow-citizens, what Great Britain gave to you without any
measure at all. Yet, notwithstanding all the difficulties at the time, and the apprehensions which some
very well-meaning people entertained, through the
admirable temper in which this revolution (or restoration in the nature of a revolution) was conducted
in both kingdoms, it has hitherto produced no inconvenlience to either; and I trust, with the continuance
of the same temper, that it never will. I think that
this small, inconsiderable change, (relative to an exclusive statute not made at the Revolution,) for restoring the people to the benefits from which the
? ? ? ? LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE. 279
green soreness of a civil war had not excluded them,
will be productive of no sort of mischief whatsoever.
Compare what was done in 1782 with what is wished
in 1792; consider the spirit of what has been done
at the several periods of reformation; and weigh maturely whether it be exactly true that conciliatory concessions are of good policy only in discussions between nations, but that among descriptions in the same nation they must always be irrational and dallgerous. What have you suffered in your peace, your prosperity, or, in what ought ever to be dear to a
nation, your glory, by the last act by which you
took the property of that people under the protection of the laws? What reasons have you to dread
the consequences of admitting the people possessing
that property to some share in the protection of the
Constitution?
I do not mean to trouble you with anything to remove the objections, I will not call them arguments, against this measure, taken from a ferocious hatred
to all that numerous description of Christians. It
would be to pay a poor compliment to your understanding or your heart. Neither your religion nor
your politics consist 1" in odd, perverse antipathies. "
You are not resolved to persevere in proscribing from
the Constitution so many millions of your countrymen, because, in contradiction to experience and to common sense, you think proper to imagine that
their principles are subversive of common human
society. To that I shall only say, that whoever
has a temper which can be gratified by indulging
himself in these good-natured fancies ought to do a
great deal more. For an exclusion from the privileges of British subjects is not a cure for so terrible
? ? ? ? 280 LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE.
a distemper of the human mind as they are pleased
to suppose in their countrymen. I rather conceive
a participation in those privileges to be itself a rem
edy for some mental disorders.
As little shall I detain you with matters that can
as little obtain admission into a mind like yours:
such as the fear, or pretence of fear, that, in spite
of your own power and the trifling power of Great
Britain, you may be conquered by the Pope; or that
this commodious bugbear (who is of infinitely more
use to those who pretend to fear than to those who
love him) will absolve his Majesty's subjects fromi
their allegiance, and send over the Cardinal of York
to rule you as his viceroy; or that, by the plenitude
of his power, h'e will take that fierce tyrant, the king
of the French, out of his jail, and arm that nation
(which on all occasions treats his Holiness so very
politely) with his bulls and pardons, to invade poor
old Ireland, to reduce you to Popery and slavery, and
to force the free-born, naked feet of your people into the wooden shoes of that arbitrary monarch. I do not believe that discourses of this kind are held,
or that anything like them will be held, by any who
walk about without a keeper. Yet I confess, that,
on occasions of this nature, I am the most afraid of
the weakest reasonings, because they discover the
strongest passions. These things will never be brought
out in definite propositions. They would not prevent
pity towards any persons; they would only cause it
for those who were capable of talking in such a
strain. But I know, and am sure, that such ideas
as no man will distinctly produce to another, or hardly venture to bring in any plain shape to his owll mind, he will utter in obscure, ill-explained doubts,
? ? ? ? LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE. 281
jealousies, surmises, fears, and apprehensions, and
that in such a fog they will appear to have a good
deal of size, and will make an impression, when, if
they were clearly brought forth and defined, they
would meet with nothing but scorn and derision.
There is another way of taking an objection to this
concession, which I admit to be something more plausible, and worthy of a more attentive examination. It is, that this numerous class of people is mutinous,
disorderly, prone to sedition, and easy to be wrought
upon by the insidious arts of wicked and designing
men; that, conscious of this, the sober, rational, and
wealthy part of that body, who are totally of another
character, do by no means desire any participation
for themselves, or for any one else of their description, in the franchises of the British Constitution.
I have great doubt of the exactness of any part
of this observation. But let us admit that the body
of the Catholics are prone to sedition, (of which, as I
have said, I entertain much doubt,) is it possible that
any fair observer or fair reasoner can think of confining this description to them only? I believe it to
be possible for men to be mutinous and seditious who
feel no grievance, but I believe no man will assert seriously, that, when people are of a turbulent spirit, the best way to keep them in order is to furnish them
with something substantial to complain of.
You separate, very properly, the sober, rational,
and substantial part of their description from the
rest. You give, as you ought to do, weight only to
the former. What I have always thought of the
matter is this,- that the most poor, illiterate, and
uninformed creatures upon earth are judges of a practical oppression. It is a matter of feeling; and as
? ? ? ? 282 LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE.
such persons generally have felt most of it, and are
not of an over-lively sensibility, they are the best
judges of it. But for the real cause, or the acppropriate remedy, they ought never to be called into council about the one or the other. They ought to be totally
shut out: because their reason is weak; because,
when once roused, their passions are ungoverned;
because they want information; because the smallness of the property which individually they possess renders them less attentive to the consequence of the
measures they adopt in affairs of moment. When I
find a great cry amongst the people who specul. ate
little, I think myself called seriously to examine ilto
it, and to separate the real cause from the ill effects
of the passion it may excite, and the bad use which
artful men may make of an irritation of the popular
mind. Here we must be aided by persons of a contrary character; we must not listen to the desperate
or the furious: but it is therefore necessary for us
to distinguish who are the really indigent and the
really intemperate. As to the persons who desire
this part in the Constitution, I have no reason to
imagine that they are men who have nothing to lose
and much to look for in public confusion. The popular meeting -from which apprehensions have been entertained has assembled. I have accidentally had
conversation with two friends of mine who know
something of the gentleman who was put into the
chair upon that occasion: one of them has had money transactions with him; the other, from curiosity, has been to see his concerns: they both tell me he
is a man of some property: but you must be the best
judge of this, who by your office are likely to know
his transactions. Many of the others are certainly per
? ? ? ? LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE. 283
sons of fortune; and all, or most, fathers of families,
men in respectable ways of life, and some of them
far from contemptible, either for their information, or
for the abilities which they have shown in the discussion of their interests. What such men think it for
their advantage to acquire ought not, prima facie, to
be considered as rash or heady or incompatible with
the public safety or welfare.
I admit, that men of the best fortunes and reputations, and of the best talents and education too, may
by accident show themselves furious and intemperate
in their desires. This is a great misfortune, when
it happens; for the first presumptions are undoubtedly in their favor. We have two standards of judging, in this case, of the sanity and sobriety of any proceedings,- of unequal certainty, indeed, but neither of them to be neglected: the first is by the value of the object sought; the next is by the means through which it is pursued.
The object pursued by the Catholics is, I understand, and have all along reasoned as if it were so, in
some degree or measure to be again admitted to the
franchises of the Constitution. Men are considered
as under some derangement of their intellects, when
they see good and evil in a different light from other
men, - when they choose nauseous and unwholesome
food, and reject such as to the rest of the world
seems pleasant and is known to be nutritive. I have
always considered the British Constitution not to
be a thing in itself so vicious as that none but men
of deranged understanding and turbulent tempers
could desire a share in it: on the contrary, I should
think very indifferently of the understanding and
temper of any body of men who did not wish to
? ? ? ? 284 LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE.
partake of this great and acknowledged benefit. I
cannot think quite so favorably either of the sense or
temper of those, if any such there are, who would
voluntarily persuade their brethren that the object is
not fit for them, or they for the object. Whatever
may be my thoughts concerning them, I am quite
sure that they who hold such language must forfeit
all credit with the rest. This is infallible,- if they
conceive any opinion of their judgment, they cannot
possibly think them their friends. There is, indeed,
one supposition which would reconcile the conduct
of such gentlemen to sound reason, and to the purest affection towards their fellow-sufferers: it is, that they act under the impression of a well-grounded fear
for the general interest. If they should be told, and
should believe the story, that, if they dare attempt
to make their condition better, they will infallibly
make it worse,- that, if they aim at obtaining liberty, they will have their slavery doubled,- that their endeavor to put themselves upon anything which
approaches towards an equitable footing with their
fellow-subjects will be considered as an indication of
a seditious and rebellious disposition, -- such a view
of things ought perfectly to restore the gentlemen, who
so anxiously dissuade their countrymen from wishing
a participation with the privileged part of the people,
to the good opinion of their fellows. But what is to
them a very full justification is not quite so honorable to that power from whose maxims and temper so good a ground of rational terror is furnished. I
think arguments of this kind will never be used by the
friends of a government which I greatly respect, or
by any of the leaders of an opposition whom I have
the honor to know and the sense to admire. I re
? ? ? ? LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE. 285
member Polybius tells us, that, during his captivity
in Italy as a Peloponnesian hostage, he solicited old
Cato to intercede with the Senate for his release, and
that of his countrymen: this old politician told him
that he had better continue in his present condition,
however irksome, than apply again to that formidable
authority for their relief; that he ought to imitate
the wisdom of his countryman Ulysses, who, when
he was once out of the den of the Cyclops, had too
much sense to venture again into the same cavern.
But I conceive too high an opinion of the Irish legislature to think that they are to their fellow-citizens what the grand oppressors of mankind were to a people whom the fortune of war had subjected to their power. For though Cato could use such a parallel
with regard to his Senate, I should really think it
nothing short of impious to compare an Irish Parliament to a den of Cyclops. I hope the people, both here and with you, will always apply to the House
of Commons with becoming modesty, but at the
same time with minds unembarrassed with any sort
of terror.
As to the means which the Catholics employ to
obtain this object, so worthy of sober and rational
minds, I do admit that such means may be used
in the pursuit of it as may make it proper for the
legislature, in this case, to defer their compliance until the demandants are brought to a proper sense of their duty. A concession in which the governing power of our country loses its dignity is dearly bought even by him who obtains his object. All
the people have a deep interest in the dignity of
Parliament. But as the refusal of franchises which
are drawn out of the first vital stamina of the British
? ? ? ? 286 LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE.
Constitution is a very serious thing, we ought to be
very sure that the manner and spirit of the application is offensive and dangerous indeed, before we ultimately reject all applications of this nature. The mode of application, I hear, is by petition. It is
the manner in which all the sovereign powers of the
world are approached; and I never heard (except in
the case of James the Second) that any prince considered this manner of supplication to be contrary to
the humility of a subject or to the respect due to the
person or authority of the sovereign. This rule, and
a correspondent practice, are observed from the Grand
Seignior down to the most petty prince or republic
in Europe.
You have sent me several papers, some in print,
some in manuscript. I think I had seen all of them,
except the formula of association. I confess they appear to me to contain matter mischievous, and capable of giving alarm, if the spirit in which they are written should be found to make any considerable
progress. But I am at a loss to know how to apply
them as objections to the case now before us. When
I find that the aeneral Committee which acts for the
Roman Catholics in Dublin prefers the association
proposed in the written draught you have sent me to
a respectful application in Parliaiiient, I shall think
the persons who sign such a paper to be unworthy
of any privilege which may be thought fit to be
granted, and that such men ought, by name, to be
excepted firm any benefit under the Constitution to
which they offer this violence. But I do not find that
this form of a seditious league has been signed by
any person whatsoever, either on the part of the supposed projectors, or on the part of those whom it is
? ? ? ? LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE. 287
calculated to seduce. I do not find, on inquiry, that
such a thing was mentioned, or even remotely alluded to, in the general meeting of the Catholics from
which so much violence was apprehended. I have
considered the other publications, signed by individuals on the part of certain societies, -'I may mistake,
for I have not the honor of knowing them personally,
but I take Mr. Butler and Mr. Tandy not to be Catholics, but members of the Established Church. Not
one that I recollect of these publications, which you
and I equally dislike, appears to be written by persons of that persuasion. Now, if, whilst a man is dutifully soliciting a favor from Parliament, any person should choose in an improper manner to show his
inclination towards the cause depending, and if that
must destroy the cause of the petitioner, then, not
only the petitioner, but the legislature itself, is in
the power of any weak friend or artful enemy that
the supplicant or that the Parliament may have.
A man must be judged by his own actions only.
Certain Protestant Dissenters make seditious propositions to the Catholics, wlhich it does not appear that
they have yet accepted. It would be strange that the
tempter should escape all punishment, and that he
who, under circumstances full of seduction and full
of provocation, has resisted the temptation should
incur the penalty. You know, that, with regard
to the Dissenters, who are stated to be the chief
movers in this vile scheme of altering the principles of election to a right of voting by the head,
you are not able (if you ought even to wish such
a thing) to deprive them of any part of the franchises
and privileges which they hold on a footing of perfect equality with yourselves. They may do what
? ? ? ? 288 LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE.
they please with constitutional implulity; but the
others cannot even listen with civility to all invitation from them to an ill-judged scheme of liberty, without forfeiting forever all hopes of any of those
liberties which we admit to be sober and rational.
It is known, I believe, that the greater as well as
the sounder part of our excluded countrymen have
not adopted the wild ideas and wilder engagements
which have been held out to them, but have rather
chosen to hope small and safe concessions from the
legal power than boundless objects from trouble and
confusion. This mode of action seems to me to mark
men of sobriety, and to distinguish them from those
who are intemperate, from circumstance or from na,ture. But why do they not instantly disclaim and disavow those who make such advances to them?
In this, too, in my opinion, they show themselves
no less sober and circumspect. In the present moment nothing short of insanity could induce them
to take such a step. Pray consider the circumstances. Disclaim, says somebody, all union with the Dissenters; -- right. -- But when this your inlljunction is obeyed, shall I obtain the object which I solicit from you? - Oh, no, nothing at all like it! - But,
in punishing us, by an exclusion from the Constitution through the great gate, for having been invited to enter into it by a postern, will you punish by deprivation of their privileges, or mulct in any other way, those who have tempted us? -Far from it;
we mean to preserve all their liberties and immunlities, as our life-blood. We mean to cultivate them, as brethren whom we love and respect; - with you we
have no fellowship. We can bear with patience
their enmity to ourselves; but their friendship with
? ? ? ? LETTER TO SIR HERC ULES LANGRISHE. 289
you we will not endure. But mark it well! All our
quarrels with them are always to be revenged upon
you. Formerly, it is notorious that we should have
resented with the highest indignation your presuming to show any ill-will to them. You must not suffer them, now, to show any good-will to you. Know -- and take it once for all --that it is, and ever has
been, and ever will be, a fundamental maxim in our
politics, that you are not to have any part or shadow or name of interest whatever in our state; that
we look upon you as under an irreversible outlawry
from our Constitution, - as perpetual and unalliable
aliens.
Such, my dear Sir, is the plain nature of the argument drawn from the Revolution maxims, enfoaced
by a supposed disposition in the Catholics to unite
with the Dissenters. Such it is, though it were
clothed in never such bland and civil forms, and
wrapped up, as a poet says, in a thousand " artful
folds of sacred lawn. " For my own part, I do not
know in what manner to shape such arguments, so
as to obtain admission for them into a rational understanding. Everything of this kind is to be reduced at last to threats of power. I cannot say, Vce victis! and then throw the sword into the scale. I
have no sword; and if I had, in this case, most certainly, I would not use it as a makeweight in political
reasoning.
Observe, on these principles, the difference between
the procedure of the Parliament and the Dissenters
towards the people in question. One employs courtship, the other force. The Dissenters offer bribes,
the Parliament nothing but'the front negatif of a
stern and forbidding authority. A man may be very
VOL. IV. 19
? ? ? ? 290 LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE.
wrong in his ideas of what is good for him. But no
mall affronts me, nor can therefore justify my affronting him, by offering to make me as happy as himself, according to his own ideas of happiness. This the
Dissenters do to the Catholics. You are on the dif
ferent extremes. The Dissenters offer, with regard
to constitutional rights and civil advantages of all
sorts, everything; you refuse everything. With them,
there is boundless, though not very assured hope;
with you, a very sure and very unqualified despair.
The terms of alliance from the Dissenters offer a representation of the commons, chosen out of the people by the head. This is absurdly and dangerously large,
in my opinion; and that scheme of election is known
to have been at all times perfectly odious to me. But
I cannot think it right of course to punish the Irish
Roman Catholics by an universal exclusion, because
others, whom you would not punish at all, propose
an universal admission. I cannot dissemble to myself, that, in this very kingdom, many persons who
are not in the situation of the Irish Catholics, but
who, on the contrary, enjoy the full benefit of the
Constitution as it stands, and some of whom, from
the effect of their fortunes, enjoy it in a large meas-;ure, had some years ago associated to procure great and undefined changes (they considered theml as reforms) in the popular part of the Constitution. Our friend, the late Mr. Flood, (no slight man,) proposed
in his place, and in my hearing, a representation not
much less extensive than this, for England, - in
which every house was to be inhabited by a voter, in
addition to all the actual votes by other titles (some
of the corporate) whi6h we know do not require a
house or a shed. Can I forget that a person of the
? ? ? ? LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE. 291
very highest rank, of very large fortune, and of the
first class of ability, brought a bill into the House of
Lords, in the head-quarters of aristocracy, containing
identically the same project for the supposed adoption of which by a club or two it is thought right to
extinguish all hopes in the Roman Catholics of Ireland? I cannot say it was very eagerly embraced or
very warmly pursued. But the Lords neither did
disavow the bill, nor treat it with any disregard, nor
express any sort of disapprobation of its noble au
thor, who has never lost, with king or people, the
least degree of the respect and consideration which
so justly belongs to him.
I am not at all enamored, as I have told you, with
this plan of representation; as little do I relish any
bandings or associations for procuring it. But if the
question was to be put to you and me, -- Universal
popular representation, or none at all for us and ours,
-we should find ourselves in a very awkward position. I do not like this kind of dilemmas, especially
when they are practical.
Then, since our oldest fundamental laws follow, or
rather couple, freehold with franchise, - since no principle of the Revolution shakes these liberties, - since
the oldest and one of the best monuments of the Constitution demands for the Irish the privilege which
they supplicate, - since the principles of the Revolution coincide with the declarations of the Great Charter, - since the practice of the Revolution, in this point, did not contradict its principles, - since, from
that event, twenty-five years had elapsed, before a
domineering party, on a party principle, had ventured
to disfranchise, without any proof whatsoever of abuse,
the greater part of the community, - since the king's
? ? ? ? 292 LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE.
coronation oath does not stand in his way to the performance of his duty to all his subjects, - since you
have given to all other Dissenters these privileges
without limit which are hitherto withheld without
any limitation whatsoever from the Catholics, - since
no nation in the world has ever been known to exclude so great a body of men (not born slaves) from
the civil state, and all the benefits of its Constitution,
- the whole question comes before Parliament as a
matter for its prudence. I do not put the thing on a
question of right. That discretion, which in judicature is well said by Lord Coke to be a crooked cord,
in legislature is a golden rule. Supplicants ought
not to appear too much in the character of litigants.
If the subject thinks so highly and reverently of the
sovereign authority as not to claim anything of right,
so that it may seem to be independent of the power
and free choice of its government, - and if the sovereign, on his part, considers the advantages of the subjects as their right, and all their reasonable wishes as so many claims, - in the fortunate conjunction of
these mutual dispositions are laid the foundations of a
happy and prosperous commonwealth. For my own
part, desiring of all things that the authority of the
legislature under which I was born, and which I cherish, not only with a dutiful awe, but with a partial
and cordial affection, to be maintained in the utmost
possible respect, I never will suffer myself to suppose
that at bottom their discretion will be found to be
at variance with their justice.
The whole being at discretion, I beg leave just
to suggest some matters for your consideration:Whether the government in Church or State is likely
to be more secure by continuing causes of grounded
? ? ? ? LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE. 293
discontent to a very great number (say two millions)
of the subjects? or whether the Constitution, combined and balanced as it is, will be rendered more
solid by depriving so large a part of the people of all
concern or interest or share in its representation,
actual or virtual? I here mean to lay an emphasis
on the word virtual. Virtual representation is that
ill which there is a communion of interests and a
sympathy in feelings and desires between those who
act in the name of any description of people and the
people in whose name they act, though the trustees
are not actually chosen by them. This is virtual representation. Such a representation I think to be in
many cases even better than the actual. It possesses most of its advantages, and is free from many of
its inconveniences; it corrects the irregularities in
the literal representation, when the shifting current
of human affairs or the acting of public interests in
different ways carry it obliquely from its first line of
direction. The people may err in their choice; but
common interest and common sentiment are rarely
mistaken. But this sort of virtual representation
cannot have a long or sure existence, if it has not a
substratum in the actual. The member must have
some relation to the constituent. As things stand,
the Catholic, as a Catholic, and belonging to a description, has no virtual relation to the representative,-but the contrary. There is a relation in mutual obligation. Gratitude may not always have a very lasting power; but the frequent recurrence of an application for favors will revive and refresh it, and will
necessarily produce some degree of mutual attention.
It will produce, at least, acquaintance. The several
descriptions of people will not be kept so much apart
? ? ? ? 294 LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE.
as they now are, as if they were not only separate
nations, but separate species. The stigma and reproach, the hideous mask will be taken off, and men will see each other as they are. Sure I am that
there have been thousands in Ireland who have never
conversed with a Roman Catholic in their whole lives,
unless they happened to talk to their gardener's workmen, or to ask their way, when they had lost it in their sports, - or, at best, who had known them only
as footmen, or other domestics, of the second and
third order: and so averse were they, some time ago,
to have them near their persons, that they would not
employ even those who could never find their way
beyond the stable. I well remember a great, and in
many respects a good man, who advertised for a
blacksmith, but at the same time added, he must
be a Protestant. It is impossible that such a state
of things, though natural goodness in many persons
will undoubtedly make exceptions, must not produce
alienation on the one side and pride and insolence
on the other.
Reduced to a question of discretion, and that discretion exercised solely upon what will appear best for the conservation of the state on its present basis,
I should recommend it to your serious thoughts,
whether the narrowing of the foundation is always
the best way to secure the building? The body of
disfranchised men will not be perfectly satisfied to
remain always in that state. If they are not satisfied, you have two millions of subjects in your bosom full of uneasiness: not that they cannot overturn the
Act of Settlement, and put themselves and you under
an arbitrary master; or that they are not permitted
to spawn a hydra of wild republics, on principles of a
? ? ? ? LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE. 295
pretended natural equality in man; but because you
will not suffer them to enjoy the ancient, fundamental, tried advantages of a British Constitution, - that
you will not permit them to profit of the protection
of a common father or the freedom of common citizens, and that the only reason which can be assigned
for this disfranchisement has a tendency more deeply
to ulcerate their minds than the act of exclusion itself. What the consequence of such feelings must
be it is for you to look to. To warn is not to
menace.
I am far from asserting that men will not excite
disturbances without just cause. I know that such
an assertion is not true. But neither is it true that
disturbances have never just complaints for their origin. I am sure that it is hardly prudent to furnish
them with such causes of complaint as every man
who thinks the British Constitution a benefit may
think at least colorable and plausible.
Several are in dread of the manceuvres of certain
persons among the Dissenters, who turn this ill humor to their own ill purposes. You know, better
than I can, how much these proceedings of certain
among the Dissenters are to be feared. You are to
weigh, with the temper which is natural to you,
whether it may be for the safety of our establishment that the Catholics should be ultimately persuaded that they have no hope to enter into the Constitution but through the Dissenters. Think whether this be the way to prevent or dissolve factious combinations against the Church or
the State. Reflect seriously on the possible consequences of keeping in the heart of your country a
bank of discontent, every hour accumulating, upon
? ? ? ? 296 LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE.
which every description of seditious men may draw
at pleasure. They whose principles of faction will
dispose them to the establishment of an arbitrary
monarchy will find a nation of men who have no
sort of interest in freedom, but who will have an
interest in that equality of justice or favor with
which a wise despot must view all his subjects who
do not attack the foundations of his power. Love of
liberty itself may, in such men, become the means of
establishing an arbitrary domination. On the other
hand, they who wish for a democratic republic will
find a set of men who have no choice between civil
servitude and the entire ruin of a mixed Constitution.
Suppose the people of Ireland divided into three
parts. Of these, (I speak within compass,) two are
Catholic; of the remaining third, one half is composed of Dissenters. There is no natural union between those descriptions. It may be produced. If the two parts Catholic be driven into a close confederacy with half the third part of Protestants, with a
view to a change in the Constitution in Church or
State or both, and you rest the whole of their security on a handful of gentlemen, clergy, and their
dependents, - compute the strength you have in Ireland, to oppose to grounded discontent, to capricious
innovation, to blind popular fury, and to ambitious,
turbulent intrigue.
men by whole nations, as it were, from all the benefits of the Constitution to which they were born, I never can believe to be politic or expedient, much
less necessary for the existence of any state or church
in the world. Whenever I shall be convinced, which
will be late and reluctantly, that the safety of the
Church is utterly inconsistent with all the civil rights
whatsoever of the far larger part of the inhabitants of
our country, I shall be extremely sorry for it; because I shall think the Church to be truly in danger.
It is putting things into the position of an ugly alternative, into which I hope in God they never will be put.
I have said most of what occurs to me on the topics you touch upon, relative to the religion of the
king, and his coronation oath. I shall conclude the
observations which I wished to submit to you on this
point by assuring you that I think you the most remote that can be conceived from the metaphysicians
? ? ? ? 270 LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE.
of our times, who are the most foolish of men, and
who, dealing in universals and essences, see no difference between more and less, - and who of course would think that the reason of the law which obliged
the king to be a communicant of the Church of England would be as valid to exclude a Catholic from being an excisemain, or to deprive a mani who has
five hundred a year, under that description, fromn
voting on a par with a factitious Protestant Dissenting freeholder of forty shillings.
Recollect, my dear friend, that it was a fundamental principle in the French monarchy, whilst it stood, that the state should be Catholic; yet the Edict of
Nantes gave, not a full ecclesiastical, but a complete
civil establishment, with places of which only they
were capable, to the Calvinists of France, - and there
were very few employments, indeed, of which they
were not capable. The world praised the Cardinal
de Richelieu, who took the first opportunity to strip
them of their fortified places and cautionary towns.
The same world held and does hold in execration (so
far as that business is concerned) the memory of
Louis the Fourteenth, for the total repeal of that
favorable edict; though the talk of " fiundamental
laws, established religion, religion of the prince,
safety to the state," &c. , &c. , was then as largely
held, and with as bitter a revival of the animosities
of the civil confusions during the struggles between
the parties, as now they can be in Ireland.
Perhaps there are persons who think that the same
reason does not hold, when the religious relation of the
sovereign and subject is changed; but they who have
their shop full of false weights and measures, and
who imagine that the adding or taking away the
? ? ? ? LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE. 271
name of Protestant or Papist, Guelph or Ghibelline,
alters all the principles of equity, policy, and prudence, leave us no common data upon which we can
reason. I therefore pass by all this, which on you
will make no impression, to come to what seems to
be a serious consideration in your mind: I mean the
dread you express of " reviewing, for the purpose of
altering, the principles of the Revolution. " This is an
interesting topic, on which I will, as fully as your
leisure and mine permits, lay before you the ideas
I have formed.
First, I cannot possibly confound in my mind all
the things which were done at the Revolution with
the principles of the Revolution. As in most great
changes, many things were done from the necessities
of the time, well or ill understood, from passion or
from vengeance, which were not only not perfectly
agreeable to its principles, but in the most direct contradiction to them. I shall not think that the deprivation of some millions of people of all the rights of citizens, and all interest in the Constitution, in and to
which they were born, was a thing conformable to the
declared principles of the Revolution. This I am sure
is true relatively to England (where the operation of
these anti-principles comparatively were of little extent); and some of our late laws, in repealing acts
made immediately after the Revolution, admit that
some things then done were not done in the true
spirit of the Revolution. But the Revolution operated differently in England and Irelanld, in many,
and these essential particulars. . Supposing the principles to have been altogether the same in both kingdoms, by the application of those principles to very different objects the whole spirit of the system was
? ? ? ? 272 LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE.
changed, not to say reversed. Ini England it was the
struggle of the great body of the people for the establishment of their liberties, against the efforts of a very
small faction, who would have oppressed them. In
Ireland it was the establishment of the power of the
smaller number, at the expense of the civil liberties
and properties of the. far greater part, and at the expense of the political liberties of the whole. It was,
to say the truth, not a revolution, but a conquest:
which is not to say a great deal in its favor. To insist on everything done in Ireland at the Revolution
would be to insist on the severe and jealous policy of
a conqueror, in the crude settlement of his new acquisition, as a permanent rule for its fiuture government.
This no power, in no country that ever I heard of,
has done or professed to do, - except in Ireland;
where it is done, and possibly by some people will
be professed. Time has, by degrees, in all other
places and periods, blended and coalited the conquered with the conquerors. So, after some time,
and after one of the most rigid conquests that we
read of in history, the Normans softened into the English. I wish you to turn your recollection to the
fine speech of Cerealis to the Gauls, made to dissuade
them from revolt. Speaking of the Romans, - N' os
quamvis toties lacessiti, jure victoriae id solum vobis
addidimus, quo pacem tueremur: nam neque quies
gentium sine armis, neque arma sine stipendiis, neque stipendia sine tributis haberi queant. Cwtera
in communi sita sunt: ipsi plerumque nostris exercitibus prcesidetis: ipsi has aliasque provincias regitis: nil separatum clausumve. Proinde pacem et urbem, quam victores victique eodem jure obtinemus,
amate, colite. " You will consider whether the ar
? ? ? ? LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISEE. 273
guments used by that Roman to these Gauls would
apply to the case in Ireland, - and whether you could
use so plausible a preamble to any severe warning
you might think it proper to hold out to those who
should resort to sedition, instead of supplication, to
obtain any object that they may pursue with the governing power.
For a much longer period than that which had sufficed to blend the Romans with the nation to which of all others they were the most adverse, the Protestants
settled in Ireland considered themselves in no other
light than that of a sort of a colonial garrison, to.
keep the natives in subjection to the other state of
Great Britain. The whole spirit of the Revolution!
in Ireland was that of not the mildest conqueror.
In truth, the spirit of those proceedings did not commence at that era, nor was religion of any kind their primary object. What was done was not in the spirit
of a contest between two religious factions, but between two adverse nations. The statutes of Kilkenny show that the spirit of the Popery laws, and some
even of their actual provisions, as applied between
Englishry and Irishry, had existed in that harassed
country before the words Protestant and Papist were
heard of in the world. If we read Baron Finglas,
Spenser, and Sir John Davies, we cannot miss the
true genius and policy of the English government
there before the Revolution, as well as during the
whole reign of Queen Elizabeth. Sir John Davies
boasts of the benefits received by the natives, by extending to them the English law, and turning the whole kingdom into shire ground. But the appearance of things alone was changed. The original scheme was never deviated from for a single hour.
VOL. IV. 18
? ? ? ? 274 LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE.
Unheard-of confiscations were made in the northern
parts, upon grounds of plots and conspiracies, never
proved upon their supposed authors. The war of
chicane succeeded to the war of arms and of hostile
statutes; and a regular series of operations was carried' on, particularly from Chichester's time, in the ordinary courts of justice, and by special commissions
and inquisitions,- first under pretence of tenures,
and then of titles in the crown, for the purpose of the
total extirpation of the interest of the natives in their
own soil, -- until this species of subtle ravage, being
carried to the last excess of oppression and insolence
under Lord Strafford, it kindled the flames of that
rebellion which broke out in 1641. By the issue of
that war, by the turn which the Earl of Clarendon
gave to things at the Restoration, and by the total
reduction of the kingdom of Ireland in 1691, the
ruin of the native Irish, and, in a great measure, too,
of the first races of the English, was completely accomplished. The new English interest was settled with as solid a stability as anything in human affairs
can look for. All the penal laws of that unparalleled
code of oppression, which were made after the last
event, were manifestly the effects of national hatred
and scorn towards a conquered people, whom the
victors delighted to trample upon and were not at
all afraid to provoke. They were not the effect of
their fears, but of their security. They who carried
on this system looked to the irresistible force of Great
Britain for their support in their acts of power.
They were quite certain that no complaints of the
natives would be heard on this side of the water with
any other. sentiments than those of contempt and indignation. Their cries served only to augment their
? ? ? ? LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE. 275
torture. Machines which could answer their purposes so well must be of an excellent contrivance.
Indeed, in England, the double name of the complainants, Irish and Papists, (it would be hard to say
which singly was the most odious,) shut up the
hearts of every one against them. Whilst that temper prevailed, (and it prevailed in all its force to a
time within our memory,) every measure was pleasing
and popular just in proportion as it tended to harass
and ruin a set of people who were looked upon as enemies to God and man, and, indeed, as a race of bigoted savages who were a disgrace to human nature itself.
However, as the English in Ireland began to be
domiciliated, they began also to recollect that they
had a country. The English interest, at first by faint
and almost insensible degrees, but at length openly
and avowedly, became an independent Irish interest,
-- full as independent as it could ever have been if it
had continued in the. persons of the native Irish; and
it was maintained with more skill and more consistency than probably it would have been in theirs.
With their views, the Anglo-Irish changed their maxims: it was necessary to demonstrate to the whole
people that there was something, at least, of a common interest, combined with the independency, which
was to become the object of common exertions. The
mildness of government produced the first relaxation
towards the Irish; the necessities, and, in part, too,
the temper that predominated at this great change,
produced the second and the most important of these
relaxations. English government and Irish legislature felt jointly the propriety of this measure. The
Irish Parliament and nation became independent.
? ? ? ? 276 LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGR. ISHE.
The true revolution to you, that which most intrinsically and substantially resembled the English
Revolution of 1688, was the Irish Revolution of
1782. The Irish Parliament of 1782 bore little resemblance to that which sat in that kingdom after
the period of the first of these revolutions. It bore
a much nearer resemblance to that which sat under
King James. The change of the Parliament in 1782
from the character of the Parliament which, as a token of its indignation, had burned all the journals
indiscriminately of the former Parliament in the
Council-Chamber, was very visible. The address of
King William's Parliament, the Parliament which assembled after the Revolution, amongst other causes
of complaint (many of them sufficiently just) complains of the repeal by their predecessors of Poyllings's law, - no absolute idol with the Parliament of 1782.
Great Britain, finding the Anglo-Irish highly animated with a spirit which had. indeed shown itself
before, though with little energy and many interruptions, and therefore suffered a multitude of uniform precedents to be established against it, acted, in my opinion, with the greatest temperance and
wisdom. She saw that the disposition of the leading part of the nation would not permit them to act
any longer the part of a garrison. She saw that true
policy did not require that they ever should have appeared in that character; or if it had done so formerly, the reasons had now ceased to operate. She saw that the Irish of her race were resolved to build
their Constitution and their politics upon another
bottom. With those things under her view, she instantly complied with the whole of your demands,
? ? ? ? LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE. 277
without any reservation whatsoever. She surrendered that boundless superiority, for the preservation of which, and the acquisition, she had supported the English colonies in Ireland for so long a time,
and at so vast an expense (according to the standard
of those ages) of her blood and treasure.
When we bring before us the matter wlich history
affords for our selection, it is not improper to examine the spirit of the several precedents which are
candidates for our choice. Might it not be as well
for your statesmen, on the other side of the water,
to take an example from this latter and surely more
conciliatory revolution, as a pattern for your collduct towards your own fellow-citizens, than from that
of 1688, when a paramount sovereignty over both you
*and them was more loftily claimed and more sternly
exerted than at any former or at any subsequent period? Great Britain in 1782 rose above the vulgar
ideas of policy, the ordinary jealousies of state, and
all the sentiments of national pride and national almbition. If she had been more disposed (than, I thank
God for it, she was) to listen to the suggestions of
passion than to the dictates of prudence, she might
have urged the principles, the maxims, the policy,
the practice of the Revolution, against the demands
of the leading description in Ireland, with full as
much plausibility and full as good a grace as any
amongst them'can possibly do against the supplications of so vast and extensive a description of their
own people.
A good deal, too, if the spirit of domination and
exclusion had prevailed in England, might have been
excepted against some of the means then employed
in Ireland, whilst her claims were in agitation. They
? ? ? ? 278 LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE.
were at least as much out of ordinary course as
those which are now objected against admitting your
people to any of the benefits of an English Constitution. Most certainly, neither with you nor here
was any one ignorant of what was at that time said,
written, and done. But on all sides we separated the
means from the end: and we separated the cause of
the moderate and rational from the ill-intentioned
and seditious, which on such occasions are so frequently apt to march together. At that time, on
your part, you were not afraid to review what was
done at the Revolution of 1688, and what had been
continued during the subsequent flourishing period
of the British empire. The change then made was
a great and fundamental alteration. In tlie execution, it was an operose business on both sides of the
water. It required the repeal of several laws, the
modification of many, and a new course to be given
to an infinite number of legislative, judicial, and official practices and usages in both kingdoms. This
did not frighten any of us. You are now asked to
give, in some moderate measure, to your fellow-citizens, what Great Britain gave to you without any
measure at all. Yet, notwithstanding all the difficulties at the time, and the apprehensions which some
very well-meaning people entertained, through the
admirable temper in which this revolution (or restoration in the nature of a revolution) was conducted
in both kingdoms, it has hitherto produced no inconvenlience to either; and I trust, with the continuance
of the same temper, that it never will. I think that
this small, inconsiderable change, (relative to an exclusive statute not made at the Revolution,) for restoring the people to the benefits from which the
? ? ? ? LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE. 279
green soreness of a civil war had not excluded them,
will be productive of no sort of mischief whatsoever.
Compare what was done in 1782 with what is wished
in 1792; consider the spirit of what has been done
at the several periods of reformation; and weigh maturely whether it be exactly true that conciliatory concessions are of good policy only in discussions between nations, but that among descriptions in the same nation they must always be irrational and dallgerous. What have you suffered in your peace, your prosperity, or, in what ought ever to be dear to a
nation, your glory, by the last act by which you
took the property of that people under the protection of the laws? What reasons have you to dread
the consequences of admitting the people possessing
that property to some share in the protection of the
Constitution?
I do not mean to trouble you with anything to remove the objections, I will not call them arguments, against this measure, taken from a ferocious hatred
to all that numerous description of Christians. It
would be to pay a poor compliment to your understanding or your heart. Neither your religion nor
your politics consist 1" in odd, perverse antipathies. "
You are not resolved to persevere in proscribing from
the Constitution so many millions of your countrymen, because, in contradiction to experience and to common sense, you think proper to imagine that
their principles are subversive of common human
society. To that I shall only say, that whoever
has a temper which can be gratified by indulging
himself in these good-natured fancies ought to do a
great deal more. For an exclusion from the privileges of British subjects is not a cure for so terrible
? ? ? ? 280 LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE.
a distemper of the human mind as they are pleased
to suppose in their countrymen. I rather conceive
a participation in those privileges to be itself a rem
edy for some mental disorders.
As little shall I detain you with matters that can
as little obtain admission into a mind like yours:
such as the fear, or pretence of fear, that, in spite
of your own power and the trifling power of Great
Britain, you may be conquered by the Pope; or that
this commodious bugbear (who is of infinitely more
use to those who pretend to fear than to those who
love him) will absolve his Majesty's subjects fromi
their allegiance, and send over the Cardinal of York
to rule you as his viceroy; or that, by the plenitude
of his power, h'e will take that fierce tyrant, the king
of the French, out of his jail, and arm that nation
(which on all occasions treats his Holiness so very
politely) with his bulls and pardons, to invade poor
old Ireland, to reduce you to Popery and slavery, and
to force the free-born, naked feet of your people into the wooden shoes of that arbitrary monarch. I do not believe that discourses of this kind are held,
or that anything like them will be held, by any who
walk about without a keeper. Yet I confess, that,
on occasions of this nature, I am the most afraid of
the weakest reasonings, because they discover the
strongest passions. These things will never be brought
out in definite propositions. They would not prevent
pity towards any persons; they would only cause it
for those who were capable of talking in such a
strain. But I know, and am sure, that such ideas
as no man will distinctly produce to another, or hardly venture to bring in any plain shape to his owll mind, he will utter in obscure, ill-explained doubts,
? ? ? ? LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE. 281
jealousies, surmises, fears, and apprehensions, and
that in such a fog they will appear to have a good
deal of size, and will make an impression, when, if
they were clearly brought forth and defined, they
would meet with nothing but scorn and derision.
There is another way of taking an objection to this
concession, which I admit to be something more plausible, and worthy of a more attentive examination. It is, that this numerous class of people is mutinous,
disorderly, prone to sedition, and easy to be wrought
upon by the insidious arts of wicked and designing
men; that, conscious of this, the sober, rational, and
wealthy part of that body, who are totally of another
character, do by no means desire any participation
for themselves, or for any one else of their description, in the franchises of the British Constitution.
I have great doubt of the exactness of any part
of this observation. But let us admit that the body
of the Catholics are prone to sedition, (of which, as I
have said, I entertain much doubt,) is it possible that
any fair observer or fair reasoner can think of confining this description to them only? I believe it to
be possible for men to be mutinous and seditious who
feel no grievance, but I believe no man will assert seriously, that, when people are of a turbulent spirit, the best way to keep them in order is to furnish them
with something substantial to complain of.
You separate, very properly, the sober, rational,
and substantial part of their description from the
rest. You give, as you ought to do, weight only to
the former. What I have always thought of the
matter is this,- that the most poor, illiterate, and
uninformed creatures upon earth are judges of a practical oppression. It is a matter of feeling; and as
? ? ? ? 282 LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE.
such persons generally have felt most of it, and are
not of an over-lively sensibility, they are the best
judges of it. But for the real cause, or the acppropriate remedy, they ought never to be called into council about the one or the other. They ought to be totally
shut out: because their reason is weak; because,
when once roused, their passions are ungoverned;
because they want information; because the smallness of the property which individually they possess renders them less attentive to the consequence of the
measures they adopt in affairs of moment. When I
find a great cry amongst the people who specul. ate
little, I think myself called seriously to examine ilto
it, and to separate the real cause from the ill effects
of the passion it may excite, and the bad use which
artful men may make of an irritation of the popular
mind. Here we must be aided by persons of a contrary character; we must not listen to the desperate
or the furious: but it is therefore necessary for us
to distinguish who are the really indigent and the
really intemperate. As to the persons who desire
this part in the Constitution, I have no reason to
imagine that they are men who have nothing to lose
and much to look for in public confusion. The popular meeting -from which apprehensions have been entertained has assembled. I have accidentally had
conversation with two friends of mine who know
something of the gentleman who was put into the
chair upon that occasion: one of them has had money transactions with him; the other, from curiosity, has been to see his concerns: they both tell me he
is a man of some property: but you must be the best
judge of this, who by your office are likely to know
his transactions. Many of the others are certainly per
? ? ? ? LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE. 283
sons of fortune; and all, or most, fathers of families,
men in respectable ways of life, and some of them
far from contemptible, either for their information, or
for the abilities which they have shown in the discussion of their interests. What such men think it for
their advantage to acquire ought not, prima facie, to
be considered as rash or heady or incompatible with
the public safety or welfare.
I admit, that men of the best fortunes and reputations, and of the best talents and education too, may
by accident show themselves furious and intemperate
in their desires. This is a great misfortune, when
it happens; for the first presumptions are undoubtedly in their favor. We have two standards of judging, in this case, of the sanity and sobriety of any proceedings,- of unequal certainty, indeed, but neither of them to be neglected: the first is by the value of the object sought; the next is by the means through which it is pursued.
The object pursued by the Catholics is, I understand, and have all along reasoned as if it were so, in
some degree or measure to be again admitted to the
franchises of the Constitution. Men are considered
as under some derangement of their intellects, when
they see good and evil in a different light from other
men, - when they choose nauseous and unwholesome
food, and reject such as to the rest of the world
seems pleasant and is known to be nutritive. I have
always considered the British Constitution not to
be a thing in itself so vicious as that none but men
of deranged understanding and turbulent tempers
could desire a share in it: on the contrary, I should
think very indifferently of the understanding and
temper of any body of men who did not wish to
? ? ? ? 284 LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE.
partake of this great and acknowledged benefit. I
cannot think quite so favorably either of the sense or
temper of those, if any such there are, who would
voluntarily persuade their brethren that the object is
not fit for them, or they for the object. Whatever
may be my thoughts concerning them, I am quite
sure that they who hold such language must forfeit
all credit with the rest. This is infallible,- if they
conceive any opinion of their judgment, they cannot
possibly think them their friends. There is, indeed,
one supposition which would reconcile the conduct
of such gentlemen to sound reason, and to the purest affection towards their fellow-sufferers: it is, that they act under the impression of a well-grounded fear
for the general interest. If they should be told, and
should believe the story, that, if they dare attempt
to make their condition better, they will infallibly
make it worse,- that, if they aim at obtaining liberty, they will have their slavery doubled,- that their endeavor to put themselves upon anything which
approaches towards an equitable footing with their
fellow-subjects will be considered as an indication of
a seditious and rebellious disposition, -- such a view
of things ought perfectly to restore the gentlemen, who
so anxiously dissuade their countrymen from wishing
a participation with the privileged part of the people,
to the good opinion of their fellows. But what is to
them a very full justification is not quite so honorable to that power from whose maxims and temper so good a ground of rational terror is furnished. I
think arguments of this kind will never be used by the
friends of a government which I greatly respect, or
by any of the leaders of an opposition whom I have
the honor to know and the sense to admire. I re
? ? ? ? LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE. 285
member Polybius tells us, that, during his captivity
in Italy as a Peloponnesian hostage, he solicited old
Cato to intercede with the Senate for his release, and
that of his countrymen: this old politician told him
that he had better continue in his present condition,
however irksome, than apply again to that formidable
authority for their relief; that he ought to imitate
the wisdom of his countryman Ulysses, who, when
he was once out of the den of the Cyclops, had too
much sense to venture again into the same cavern.
But I conceive too high an opinion of the Irish legislature to think that they are to their fellow-citizens what the grand oppressors of mankind were to a people whom the fortune of war had subjected to their power. For though Cato could use such a parallel
with regard to his Senate, I should really think it
nothing short of impious to compare an Irish Parliament to a den of Cyclops. I hope the people, both here and with you, will always apply to the House
of Commons with becoming modesty, but at the
same time with minds unembarrassed with any sort
of terror.
As to the means which the Catholics employ to
obtain this object, so worthy of sober and rational
minds, I do admit that such means may be used
in the pursuit of it as may make it proper for the
legislature, in this case, to defer their compliance until the demandants are brought to a proper sense of their duty. A concession in which the governing power of our country loses its dignity is dearly bought even by him who obtains his object. All
the people have a deep interest in the dignity of
Parliament. But as the refusal of franchises which
are drawn out of the first vital stamina of the British
? ? ? ? 286 LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE.
Constitution is a very serious thing, we ought to be
very sure that the manner and spirit of the application is offensive and dangerous indeed, before we ultimately reject all applications of this nature. The mode of application, I hear, is by petition. It is
the manner in which all the sovereign powers of the
world are approached; and I never heard (except in
the case of James the Second) that any prince considered this manner of supplication to be contrary to
the humility of a subject or to the respect due to the
person or authority of the sovereign. This rule, and
a correspondent practice, are observed from the Grand
Seignior down to the most petty prince or republic
in Europe.
You have sent me several papers, some in print,
some in manuscript. I think I had seen all of them,
except the formula of association. I confess they appear to me to contain matter mischievous, and capable of giving alarm, if the spirit in which they are written should be found to make any considerable
progress. But I am at a loss to know how to apply
them as objections to the case now before us. When
I find that the aeneral Committee which acts for the
Roman Catholics in Dublin prefers the association
proposed in the written draught you have sent me to
a respectful application in Parliaiiient, I shall think
the persons who sign such a paper to be unworthy
of any privilege which may be thought fit to be
granted, and that such men ought, by name, to be
excepted firm any benefit under the Constitution to
which they offer this violence. But I do not find that
this form of a seditious league has been signed by
any person whatsoever, either on the part of the supposed projectors, or on the part of those whom it is
? ? ? ? LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE. 287
calculated to seduce. I do not find, on inquiry, that
such a thing was mentioned, or even remotely alluded to, in the general meeting of the Catholics from
which so much violence was apprehended. I have
considered the other publications, signed by individuals on the part of certain societies, -'I may mistake,
for I have not the honor of knowing them personally,
but I take Mr. Butler and Mr. Tandy not to be Catholics, but members of the Established Church. Not
one that I recollect of these publications, which you
and I equally dislike, appears to be written by persons of that persuasion. Now, if, whilst a man is dutifully soliciting a favor from Parliament, any person should choose in an improper manner to show his
inclination towards the cause depending, and if that
must destroy the cause of the petitioner, then, not
only the petitioner, but the legislature itself, is in
the power of any weak friend or artful enemy that
the supplicant or that the Parliament may have.
A man must be judged by his own actions only.
Certain Protestant Dissenters make seditious propositions to the Catholics, wlhich it does not appear that
they have yet accepted. It would be strange that the
tempter should escape all punishment, and that he
who, under circumstances full of seduction and full
of provocation, has resisted the temptation should
incur the penalty. You know, that, with regard
to the Dissenters, who are stated to be the chief
movers in this vile scheme of altering the principles of election to a right of voting by the head,
you are not able (if you ought even to wish such
a thing) to deprive them of any part of the franchises
and privileges which they hold on a footing of perfect equality with yourselves. They may do what
? ? ? ? 288 LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE.
they please with constitutional implulity; but the
others cannot even listen with civility to all invitation from them to an ill-judged scheme of liberty, without forfeiting forever all hopes of any of those
liberties which we admit to be sober and rational.
It is known, I believe, that the greater as well as
the sounder part of our excluded countrymen have
not adopted the wild ideas and wilder engagements
which have been held out to them, but have rather
chosen to hope small and safe concessions from the
legal power than boundless objects from trouble and
confusion. This mode of action seems to me to mark
men of sobriety, and to distinguish them from those
who are intemperate, from circumstance or from na,ture. But why do they not instantly disclaim and disavow those who make such advances to them?
In this, too, in my opinion, they show themselves
no less sober and circumspect. In the present moment nothing short of insanity could induce them
to take such a step. Pray consider the circumstances. Disclaim, says somebody, all union with the Dissenters; -- right. -- But when this your inlljunction is obeyed, shall I obtain the object which I solicit from you? - Oh, no, nothing at all like it! - But,
in punishing us, by an exclusion from the Constitution through the great gate, for having been invited to enter into it by a postern, will you punish by deprivation of their privileges, or mulct in any other way, those who have tempted us? -Far from it;
we mean to preserve all their liberties and immunlities, as our life-blood. We mean to cultivate them, as brethren whom we love and respect; - with you we
have no fellowship. We can bear with patience
their enmity to ourselves; but their friendship with
? ? ? ? LETTER TO SIR HERC ULES LANGRISHE. 289
you we will not endure. But mark it well! All our
quarrels with them are always to be revenged upon
you. Formerly, it is notorious that we should have
resented with the highest indignation your presuming to show any ill-will to them. You must not suffer them, now, to show any good-will to you. Know -- and take it once for all --that it is, and ever has
been, and ever will be, a fundamental maxim in our
politics, that you are not to have any part or shadow or name of interest whatever in our state; that
we look upon you as under an irreversible outlawry
from our Constitution, - as perpetual and unalliable
aliens.
Such, my dear Sir, is the plain nature of the argument drawn from the Revolution maxims, enfoaced
by a supposed disposition in the Catholics to unite
with the Dissenters. Such it is, though it were
clothed in never such bland and civil forms, and
wrapped up, as a poet says, in a thousand " artful
folds of sacred lawn. " For my own part, I do not
know in what manner to shape such arguments, so
as to obtain admission for them into a rational understanding. Everything of this kind is to be reduced at last to threats of power. I cannot say, Vce victis! and then throw the sword into the scale. I
have no sword; and if I had, in this case, most certainly, I would not use it as a makeweight in political
reasoning.
Observe, on these principles, the difference between
the procedure of the Parliament and the Dissenters
towards the people in question. One employs courtship, the other force. The Dissenters offer bribes,
the Parliament nothing but'the front negatif of a
stern and forbidding authority. A man may be very
VOL. IV. 19
? ? ? ? 290 LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE.
wrong in his ideas of what is good for him. But no
mall affronts me, nor can therefore justify my affronting him, by offering to make me as happy as himself, according to his own ideas of happiness. This the
Dissenters do to the Catholics. You are on the dif
ferent extremes. The Dissenters offer, with regard
to constitutional rights and civil advantages of all
sorts, everything; you refuse everything. With them,
there is boundless, though not very assured hope;
with you, a very sure and very unqualified despair.
The terms of alliance from the Dissenters offer a representation of the commons, chosen out of the people by the head. This is absurdly and dangerously large,
in my opinion; and that scheme of election is known
to have been at all times perfectly odious to me. But
I cannot think it right of course to punish the Irish
Roman Catholics by an universal exclusion, because
others, whom you would not punish at all, propose
an universal admission. I cannot dissemble to myself, that, in this very kingdom, many persons who
are not in the situation of the Irish Catholics, but
who, on the contrary, enjoy the full benefit of the
Constitution as it stands, and some of whom, from
the effect of their fortunes, enjoy it in a large meas-;ure, had some years ago associated to procure great and undefined changes (they considered theml as reforms) in the popular part of the Constitution. Our friend, the late Mr. Flood, (no slight man,) proposed
in his place, and in my hearing, a representation not
much less extensive than this, for England, - in
which every house was to be inhabited by a voter, in
addition to all the actual votes by other titles (some
of the corporate) whi6h we know do not require a
house or a shed. Can I forget that a person of the
? ? ? ? LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE. 291
very highest rank, of very large fortune, and of the
first class of ability, brought a bill into the House of
Lords, in the head-quarters of aristocracy, containing
identically the same project for the supposed adoption of which by a club or two it is thought right to
extinguish all hopes in the Roman Catholics of Ireland? I cannot say it was very eagerly embraced or
very warmly pursued. But the Lords neither did
disavow the bill, nor treat it with any disregard, nor
express any sort of disapprobation of its noble au
thor, who has never lost, with king or people, the
least degree of the respect and consideration which
so justly belongs to him.
I am not at all enamored, as I have told you, with
this plan of representation; as little do I relish any
bandings or associations for procuring it. But if the
question was to be put to you and me, -- Universal
popular representation, or none at all for us and ours,
-we should find ourselves in a very awkward position. I do not like this kind of dilemmas, especially
when they are practical.
Then, since our oldest fundamental laws follow, or
rather couple, freehold with franchise, - since no principle of the Revolution shakes these liberties, - since
the oldest and one of the best monuments of the Constitution demands for the Irish the privilege which
they supplicate, - since the principles of the Revolution coincide with the declarations of the Great Charter, - since the practice of the Revolution, in this point, did not contradict its principles, - since, from
that event, twenty-five years had elapsed, before a
domineering party, on a party principle, had ventured
to disfranchise, without any proof whatsoever of abuse,
the greater part of the community, - since the king's
? ? ? ? 292 LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE.
coronation oath does not stand in his way to the performance of his duty to all his subjects, - since you
have given to all other Dissenters these privileges
without limit which are hitherto withheld without
any limitation whatsoever from the Catholics, - since
no nation in the world has ever been known to exclude so great a body of men (not born slaves) from
the civil state, and all the benefits of its Constitution,
- the whole question comes before Parliament as a
matter for its prudence. I do not put the thing on a
question of right. That discretion, which in judicature is well said by Lord Coke to be a crooked cord,
in legislature is a golden rule. Supplicants ought
not to appear too much in the character of litigants.
If the subject thinks so highly and reverently of the
sovereign authority as not to claim anything of right,
so that it may seem to be independent of the power
and free choice of its government, - and if the sovereign, on his part, considers the advantages of the subjects as their right, and all their reasonable wishes as so many claims, - in the fortunate conjunction of
these mutual dispositions are laid the foundations of a
happy and prosperous commonwealth. For my own
part, desiring of all things that the authority of the
legislature under which I was born, and which I cherish, not only with a dutiful awe, but with a partial
and cordial affection, to be maintained in the utmost
possible respect, I never will suffer myself to suppose
that at bottom their discretion will be found to be
at variance with their justice.
The whole being at discretion, I beg leave just
to suggest some matters for your consideration:Whether the government in Church or State is likely
to be more secure by continuing causes of grounded
? ? ? ? LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE. 293
discontent to a very great number (say two millions)
of the subjects? or whether the Constitution, combined and balanced as it is, will be rendered more
solid by depriving so large a part of the people of all
concern or interest or share in its representation,
actual or virtual? I here mean to lay an emphasis
on the word virtual. Virtual representation is that
ill which there is a communion of interests and a
sympathy in feelings and desires between those who
act in the name of any description of people and the
people in whose name they act, though the trustees
are not actually chosen by them. This is virtual representation. Such a representation I think to be in
many cases even better than the actual. It possesses most of its advantages, and is free from many of
its inconveniences; it corrects the irregularities in
the literal representation, when the shifting current
of human affairs or the acting of public interests in
different ways carry it obliquely from its first line of
direction. The people may err in their choice; but
common interest and common sentiment are rarely
mistaken. But this sort of virtual representation
cannot have a long or sure existence, if it has not a
substratum in the actual. The member must have
some relation to the constituent. As things stand,
the Catholic, as a Catholic, and belonging to a description, has no virtual relation to the representative,-but the contrary. There is a relation in mutual obligation. Gratitude may not always have a very lasting power; but the frequent recurrence of an application for favors will revive and refresh it, and will
necessarily produce some degree of mutual attention.
It will produce, at least, acquaintance. The several
descriptions of people will not be kept so much apart
? ? ? ? 294 LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE.
as they now are, as if they were not only separate
nations, but separate species. The stigma and reproach, the hideous mask will be taken off, and men will see each other as they are. Sure I am that
there have been thousands in Ireland who have never
conversed with a Roman Catholic in their whole lives,
unless they happened to talk to their gardener's workmen, or to ask their way, when they had lost it in their sports, - or, at best, who had known them only
as footmen, or other domestics, of the second and
third order: and so averse were they, some time ago,
to have them near their persons, that they would not
employ even those who could never find their way
beyond the stable. I well remember a great, and in
many respects a good man, who advertised for a
blacksmith, but at the same time added, he must
be a Protestant. It is impossible that such a state
of things, though natural goodness in many persons
will undoubtedly make exceptions, must not produce
alienation on the one side and pride and insolence
on the other.
Reduced to a question of discretion, and that discretion exercised solely upon what will appear best for the conservation of the state on its present basis,
I should recommend it to your serious thoughts,
whether the narrowing of the foundation is always
the best way to secure the building? The body of
disfranchised men will not be perfectly satisfied to
remain always in that state. If they are not satisfied, you have two millions of subjects in your bosom full of uneasiness: not that they cannot overturn the
Act of Settlement, and put themselves and you under
an arbitrary master; or that they are not permitted
to spawn a hydra of wild republics, on principles of a
? ? ? ? LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE. 295
pretended natural equality in man; but because you
will not suffer them to enjoy the ancient, fundamental, tried advantages of a British Constitution, - that
you will not permit them to profit of the protection
of a common father or the freedom of common citizens, and that the only reason which can be assigned
for this disfranchisement has a tendency more deeply
to ulcerate their minds than the act of exclusion itself. What the consequence of such feelings must
be it is for you to look to. To warn is not to
menace.
I am far from asserting that men will not excite
disturbances without just cause. I know that such
an assertion is not true. But neither is it true that
disturbances have never just complaints for their origin. I am sure that it is hardly prudent to furnish
them with such causes of complaint as every man
who thinks the British Constitution a benefit may
think at least colorable and plausible.
Several are in dread of the manceuvres of certain
persons among the Dissenters, who turn this ill humor to their own ill purposes. You know, better
than I can, how much these proceedings of certain
among the Dissenters are to be feared. You are to
weigh, with the temper which is natural to you,
whether it may be for the safety of our establishment that the Catholics should be ultimately persuaded that they have no hope to enter into the Constitution but through the Dissenters. Think whether this be the way to prevent or dissolve factious combinations against the Church or
the State. Reflect seriously on the possible consequences of keeping in the heart of your country a
bank of discontent, every hour accumulating, upon
? ? ? ? 296 LETTER TO SIR HERCULES LANGRISHE.
which every description of seditious men may draw
at pleasure. They whose principles of faction will
dispose them to the establishment of an arbitrary
monarchy will find a nation of men who have no
sort of interest in freedom, but who will have an
interest in that equality of justice or favor with
which a wise despot must view all his subjects who
do not attack the foundations of his power. Love of
liberty itself may, in such men, become the means of
establishing an arbitrary domination. On the other
hand, they who wish for a democratic republic will
find a set of men who have no choice between civil
servitude and the entire ruin of a mixed Constitution.
Suppose the people of Ireland divided into three
parts. Of these, (I speak within compass,) two are
Catholic; of the remaining third, one half is composed of Dissenters. There is no natural union between those descriptions. It may be produced. If the two parts Catholic be driven into a close confederacy with half the third part of Protestants, with a
view to a change in the Constitution in Church or
State or both, and you rest the whole of their security on a handful of gentlemen, clergy, and their
dependents, - compute the strength you have in Ireland, to oppose to grounded discontent, to capricious
innovation, to blind popular fury, and to ambitious,
turbulent intrigue.
