'Before I left Ireland, I dreaded their disappointment-I doubted Mr. Fox's competency to gratify them. I knew his opinion of the union,- adverse to its principle, because Fox was the friend of liberty unfavourable to it, also, on account of the baseness of the means of accomplishing it; but, also, strong upon the difficulty of rescinding it. I foresaw, that, joined with Lord Grenville, his measures must be shackled, and his grand views for Ireland and the empire be much impeded.'-p. 365. Here, then, we learn, that whatever was Mr. Fox's opinion of the merits of the Union, it was strong upon the difficulty of rescinding it.' Let us go further: Nothing demonstrates more plainly the decision and manliness of Mr. Fox's character, than his conduct to the Catholics of Ireland on coming into office in 1806. He did not flatter them with any hope of immediate, nor did he insult them by any offer of partial relief. His dutiful feelings to a venerable sovereign, preventing him from rudely intruding matters upon him, on which it was understood he had a fixed and strong opinion. He, therefore, suggested to the Catholics, calmness and patience, in shape of a moderate delay; but added, that if they themselves brought forward their question, he would support it fully, even though he went out of office on that account. The Catholics relied upon him, and did not press their question. Nor would that confidence have been abused, which they reposed in him. In the year 1806, he hinted to me something relating to the test act, in respect to Ireland, which I have lately considered a good deal. Late events have shown me that this great man took a stronger and deeper view of their case, than many of the Catholics themselves do. I am quite sure that body have lost in him more than they were, or are even yet aware of. The revolution of 1688, which may be considered as a sort of confirmation of the Reformation in the time of Henry the VIIIth, seems to present weighty and serious obstacles to the manner of Catholic emancipation, since, by the act of union, it has become an English question. In suggesting to my Catholic countrymen, (which I have lately publicly done) the due consideration of the revolution in 1688, I have but followed the steps, as far as my judgment enabled me, of Mr. Fox. Lord Eldon, who always appears to me to speak like an honest man, has lately alluded to this revolution, and I considered his speech as the more worthy of attention, because Mr. Fox had himself difficulties and doubts on the precise mode and measure of Catholic relief, under the union. Let men take a manly and definite view of things. I acknowledge that vague and long declamations, however beautiful or sublime, do not satisfy me, on the great Catholic question. The parties ought to explain: one side should declare what they require precisely, and the other should state the obstacles, and the quantity which would satisfy, in case of their removal. Otherwise it appears to me the Catholics may be in the situ ation of the person waiting till the river ceases to flow: -Rusticus expectat dum defluat amnis,' &c. Now, Now, in this passage we are told, that under the Union (Mr. Fox's strong opinion upon the difficulty of rescinding which has been stated to us before), Mr. Fox had difficulties and doubts on the precise mode and measure of Catholic relief.' The revolution of 1688 (a Whig revolution) is brought to our view; and the incongruity of employing Whig influence in undoing any thing which vas done in that revolution instantly stares us in the face. But the revolution of 1688, as it is here very properly described, was 'a sort of confirmation of the Reformation;' its leading feature was a more complete deliverance of the nation from Popish government; and how shall any of those that profess themselves the friends of that revolution, and venerate the memory of William III, become conspirators for reducing us into our previous situation? 'On leaving Ireland, I had understood that the general feelings of the Catholics was to do nothing whatever to embarrass Mr. Fox. There was something so generous and almost romantic in this determination, that my esteem and affection for my countrymen were greatly heightened. It was a novel incident in politics, that above three millions of men should rest under their grievances, almost with pleasure; and with all the confi dence of the warmest friendship, rely upon one man for protection and redress; that they should stifle their groans, and, adjusting their chains, be careful that not one clink should disturb him in his great work of restoring peace to the world, and of preparing a system of home policy, capable of communicating happiness and strength, and liberty, to the British Isles! Such a sublime proof of disinterested attachment in the Irish Catholics, could not but impress every friend of Mr. Fox with gratitude. Impressed with a lively sense of the value of Ireland, I stated to Mr. Fox the necessity of immediate and effectual steps to relieve her; that the magistracy had been degraded by the introduction of improper subjects; that, though the Catholics had great veneration and even affection for him, they could not be expected to be devoid of natu ral feelings common to all men; and, though under his ministry, they were inclined not to press, their generosity and abandonment of themselves for a time, deserved every thing, and every ultimate bad consequence was to be apprehended for the empire, if the general state of Ireland was not redressed. As I felt sincerely and strongly, I spoke with the same freedom, and more warmth than in the garden of the Hotel de Richelieu; nor was Mr. Fox more displeased than he had been there at my speaking unreservedly. He said, however, very little. It was obvious to me, that in his own breast he concurred with me in admitting that a long arrear of redress was due to Ireland; but he seemed to feel indisposed to enter upon the subject; there was a mixture of benevolence and uncasiness in his countenance, which said, I do not blame you for speaking for your unhappy country, but you do not com prehend the difficulties of my situation. He told me, however, as some consolation, that a strong recommendation had come from the Irish government, just quitting office, (Lord Hardwicke) to renew the suspen sion of the Habeas Corpus bill this year, (1806) but that it had been rejected. It was very evident, from his manner, whom Ireland might thank for this boon, and I am quite satisfied that to this day she owes so much of the preservation of her liberties principally, if not entirely, to Charles James Fox. On this occasion, he said, that something was in contemplation relating to tithes. I did not think Mr. Fox's mind was at all at ease upon the subject of Ireland. He seemed to rely upon the Duke of Bedford's name and amicable disposition, but with all that candour and purity of soul, which so eminently set him above the dark and haughty statesman, the smooth and wily courtier, he did not affect to say, that much could be done. I could read in his mind all the answer he could give me, to be • θαρσείν χρη, φιλε βαττε, ταχ αυριον εσσετ' αμεινον, and I forbore to press him then; and when I afterwards renewed the subject, I found in him the same feelings. In fact, the Patriots, or Whig characters of Ireland, had contributed to make Mr. Fox's situation more difficult and more individually responsible for Ireland. It was manifest that Mr. Grattan and Mr. Ponsonby, and their friends, had made no conditions for her. I ever considered this as a fatal dereliction of her interests. Mr. Fox, overwhelmed as he was with foreign and domestic affairs, was neither called upon, nor was he able, to act every where, and * for every person. I am sure too, that, had Mr. Grattan and his friends expressly declared that they must know what terms of relief would be granted to Ireland, before they could support the new ministry, Mr. Fox would have found himself strengthened by the demand, andthat if no other man in the cabinet had listened with satisfaction to their proposals, he would. The Catholics, helpless as they were, having none of their body in the English parliament, acted a wise, as well as generous, part in relying silently upon Mr. Fox; but Mr. Grattan, having become an English member for Ireland, ought to have insisted upon positive measures of redress for her, and opposed even Mr. Fox's ministry, (as he has since that of the Prince Regent), unless its first measures were calculated to destroy the Pittite system there, and to restore liberty to his longoppressed country. I am certain Mr. Fox would not have been displeased at this conduct. He was not at all a man to shudder at a division in the cabinet, if he was on right ground; and, as he subsequently must, most probably, have gone out upon the Irish question, it would have spared him great labour and anxiety, (perhaps prolonged his invaluable life), if he had at the outset, and in defence of the liberty and happiness of Ireland, left the cabinet: the mercenary crowd who hovered round him, panting for situation, place, and pension, and who styled themselves, so improperly, his friends, might have been disappointed, but Fox, great at St. Anne's Hill, with his history, the poets, Droop not, my friend, a happier day and and a few sincere friends, if he did return to power, would have come in singly, and his ministry would then have been without alloy.p. 387. What were Mr. Fox's particular views, of the practicability of acceding to the claims of the Irish Catholics, we do not pretend to know, nor do we believe that Mr. T. is able to tell us; but that his mind was 'not at all at ease upon the subject of Ireland,' gives us no manner of surprise. We can even imagine, that there is, and we are sure that there ought to be, more than one mind at the present instant not at all at ease upon the subject of Ireland;' for the minds of none ought to be at ease, among those, who, in prosecuting, or abetting, an unprincipled Opposition, hold out prospects, which, upon their entering into business, they either never design, or too late find it to be impossible, to gratify. According to Mr.T. the view taken of this subject, by Mr. F., when in power, was this: the Union I cannot tell how to rescind, and Catholic Emancipation, under the Union, I cannot tell how to grant. This was ingenious, and, what is better, it was just. But, had the Union never taken place, Mr. Fox's difficulties, we will venture to affirm, would not have been smaller. The revolution of 1688 was a revolution equally in England and Ireland. The house of Brunswick, in acceding to the throne of Great Britain, did not acquire the kingdom of Ireland as a possession independent on the English people. Ireland was an English possession, to be governed upon English policy; to be governed upon principles subservient to the welfare of England, and therefore subject, in all views, to English controul. The princes of the house of Brunswick receive one crown, and not two crowns; and took, not two coronation oaths, but one coronation oath. That one crown conveyed to them the kingdom of Ireland, and that one oath determined the principles upon which Ireland was to be governed. The kingdom of Great Britain never intended, that its kings should enjoy the kingdom of Ireland as a kingdom so separate, as to admit of their pursuing, in its regard, such policy, either foreign or domestic, as the parliament of Ireland might think proper, whatever the possible amount of injury to Great Britain. Now, the parliament of Great Britain determined, and determined most wisely, that the kingdom of Ireland should be a Protestant kingdom, and not a Catholic one; it gave it therefore a Protestant church establishment, guaranteed by the foundation of a Protestant legislature. Such was the situation of Ireland before the Union; and this situation presented, as we think, quite as many real obstacles to Catholic Emancipation' as are presented now. We may add, in this place, a petition to our readers, that with a full consideration of the revolution of 1688 in their minds, they will pass in review those desperate insinuations (countenanced, perhaps, in much too high a quarter), by which the refusal of the Catholic demands demands has been wickedly attributed to the bigotry, not to say the imbecility and dotage, of a great and venerable sovereign, and in virtue of which, men, possibly of rank, but devoid of shame, have taught the petitioners to stand on tiptoe for his demise, or for any event which should afford a pretext for dethroning him, and placing his sceptre in more enlightened hands! Let our readers pass these matters in review, and then let them teach themselves, whether it is to be expected, or whether it would be to be endured, that any prince of the house of Brunswick, should prostrate the Protestant interests of the kingdom before the clamours of any portion of his Irish subjects? We speak here in sole reference to the constitu tional question; as a question of our national policy, we shall never be at a loss to meet it. · But neither the union, nor the revolution, nor any thing else, is to stand in the way of emancipation: The Irish nation,' says Mr. T. of which the great majority so much exceed the number of the settlers, that it may be justly styled and deemed a Catholic one, and must yet take its place in Europe as one, when England is taught wisdom by adversity, &c.' p. 364. What Mr. T. means, by the great majority of a nation exceeding the number of the settlers, we are not sure that we know; but we can perceive, that a sort of slang language is here employed, in which the word 'nation' is put for the Catholic part of the Irish people, and the word settlers' for the Protestant, and to this nomenclature we call for particular attention. But, the more important part of the sentence quoted is that which we have given in Italics, and in which we are told, that Ireland must yet take its place in Europe as a Catholic country, and that this event is to take place in the period (of course eagerly anticipated) of England's adversity! And adversity must indeed have fallen upon England, when Ireland shall take its place in Europe as a Catholic country! Shall the ocean save these islands from the civil tyranny which afflict the rest of Europe, and shall it not also keep them an asylum from the return of papal power (wielded by whatever hands), and a citadel for the sure dwelling and defence of the reformation? It is not only here, but in many other parts of these Memoirs, that Mr, T. indulges himself in language, that, while it alienates us from himself, and excites suspicion of his political principles,is at the same time little calculated to increase our respect for the memory of his deceased patron. Sometimes, we almost persuade ourselves, that he has grievously belied Mr. Fox, and we derive consolation from this thought; but sometimes also, he almost succeeds in convincing us, that he has done him no injus tice. If we could think, that Mr. Fox entertained all the senti ments which Mr. T.expresses for himself, our opinion of the former must |