REPEALERS AND RADICALS.
MR. O'CONNELL is fond of deriding the visionary and Utopian schemes of English Radicals. He points with exultation to his own mighty achievements—the results of his practical policy and the "instalment principle "—for the people of Ireland ; whilst the impracticable English Radicals, who decline the leading which he proffers under the form of alliance, are sneeringly asked what they have accomplished—how their party stands—what they have got ? They have been jockied out of a million sterling to pay the Irish tithe-debts : but they still sigh in vain, not only for the extended suffrage which nanny of them claim, but even for that protection in conscientious voting which they all need, under any franchise not worse than a shadow—a delusion. This is the ordinary burden of hie song; but Mr. aCcoseem. sometimes confesses the truth—that all his skill in managing the cause of Ireland, his support of Ministers, his " cringing " at one time and threats at another, and his cleverness in the creditable money transaction above alluded to, have procured no permanent advantage for Ireland, and that the accident of a change of Minis- try—one of the most probable occurrences in the near future— would leave his countrymen worse off than before the commence- ment of Isis career of agitation and cajolery for the maintenance of w hi gs in office. Thus, if English Radicals have obtained little 1 from the "Reform " Government, the Irish policy, it appears from Mr. O'Comsat.t.'s admission when it suits him to proclaim the actual state of the account between Ireland and the Whig offi- cials, has also been a failure, in all but patronage—and even as to patronage there is this week a howl of discontent. Both parties, then, the " hereditary bondsmen " as well as the Radicals, must look ahead: what are the plans of each for the future—what their chances of success ? which party discovers most practical wisdom in the selection of objects for exertion and pursuit ? Mr. O'Coresniu. finds it convenient to attach very different significations to the term " Radical," according to his purpose of the moment. At one time, all the Liberals, not mere Whigs, are Radicals ; and in that sense he professes to belong himself to the party. Lately he has seemed to limit the term to the " Physical Force" people, led by FEARGUS O'CONNOR; but in one of his recent speeches, he admitted that this was wrong, and that many who act with himself are true Radicals. So of the nickname " Tory-Racal" —it was originally applied to those Liberals who refused to support the Whigs in a course of Toryism to "keep out the Tories ;" but now, Mr. O'CONNELL is desirous of restricting it to the FEARGUS O'CONNOR section of the working classes, who deal in arms-bearing allusions, and broach politico-economical doctrines of which Mr. O'CONNELL'S original Tory-Radicals are among the stanchest opponents. The "Physical Force" people being a minority even in their own class, it would be absurd to make them the representatives of the Radical party. In the 'present argument with Mr. O'CONNELL, let the demandants of 'Universal Suffrage as a sine qua non be the genuine Radicals— let the GROTE9, MOLESWORTHS, LEADERS, and WARBURTONS be set aside—and even then it will appear, that in respect of the practicalness of their projects, and the probability of ultimate suc- cess, the Universalists have the advantage of Mr. O'Cosimr.. For their claim is not only just in itself, but it is morally certain that in process of time the masses will obtain the elective fran- chise, and with it the power to secure whatever mere legislation can give. Theirs is a goal, which if not in sight, exists, and may be reached. Their " bark " is not a "wanderer o'er eternity," which • . . . "anchored ne'er shall be;" but is steered straight in the direction of an accessible port. There are, in fact, few politicians who do not contemplate the time when general suffrage (the only practical meaning of universal, which in a literal sense is a misnomer) must be the basis of the electoral system. Before that time arrives, a better acquaintance with the laws which regulate the compensation of labour, and with other economics, will in all probability have demolished the mis- taken notions entertained by a portion of the Universalists on such subjects. But, whether this happen or not, the English Radicals are moving towards an object which perseverance awl union must put within their grasp sooner or later, whether safely or unsafely to the present monopolists. But to what end is Mr. O'CONNEL7, marshalling the Irish masses ? For the Repeal of the Union ! He tells his followers, the Catholic millions of Ireland, that unless certain demands— which, in reference to the state of British opinion, may be called ri- diculous as well as impracticable—be granted before the country is a twelvemonth older, he will bend all his and their energies to ac- complish a Legislative Disjunction. Other objects are then to be disregarded. A native Parliament in College Green is to be the alpha and omega of Irish agitation.* At a time when the desire to draw closer together the various and distant portions of the British empire, by means of actual representation in the Imperial Legislature, is becoming more general among reflecting politicians, Mr. O'CONNELL aims at depriving his countrymen of that advantage. He would give Ireland less weight in the Supreme Council of the empire than Scotland, or it may be than the West Indies or Australia shall hereafter obtain. Her interests would be comparatively unprotected in the assem- bly to which in the last resort every great question must be referred. "No such thing !" we fancy Mr. O'Cotesnit.t. may ex- claim : " While Scotland is swamped by an English majority, Ireland would make laws for herself, regardless of English interests or prejudices." Fair and softly. It is not in Otosisrem.'s plan to dissolve the allegiance of Ireland to the British Crown : he is profuse in assertions of devoted loyalty : he demands separate Parliaments under the same Sovereign. NVhat, then, is to prevent the rejection. by the Crown, of any and every measure passed by the Dublin Parliament? Observe—to refuse the Royal assent to a bill passed by an Irish Parliament, in opposition to the wishes of the Supreme Government and the majority of the British Parliament, is a very different thing from interposing the veto against a measure sent up from the Imperial Legislature of the United Kingdom as now constituted. In the British case, the rejection is too perilous to be thought of; in the Irish, it would be safe, might be expedient, and if occasion re- quired would certainly be resorted to. Well, suppose the Crown's veto exercised, where is the advantage of the separate Legisla- ture? Measures which the British Parliament approvedU might as well be carried in that assembly. Under the system of the Union, bills opposed by a majority of the English and Scotch Members, and which, in the case supposed of separate legislation, could not be sanctioned by the Government, may be carried by • . Mr. O'Coloirrr professes, indeed, that the immediate object of the new agitation is Justice and equality for Ireland ; but he continually holds up Repeal as the reward of popular exertion; kind, though it may suit his tactics to postpone the Repeal agitation from year to year, a separate Irish Parliament and a dissolution of the Union are proclaimed as the grand aim of his political life.
fact that the fate of their measures would ultimately be decided
Par- liament.
in London after all, would paralyze the efforts of the Dublin Par-
sures would be passed in the Irish Parliament adverse to the It is, however, more than a chance guess, that very few mea- sures voices of the Irish Members would go for nothing. And the
wishes of the Government of the day. We see nothing in the character of the leaders of the Irish parties, in 1838, to give as- surance that the influence which prevailed in the old Irish Par- liament would not again be practised, for similar purposes, with the same success.
"If all this is to happen," some flaming Milesian patriot may retort," Ireland will demand complete independence—separation of sovereignty as well as of legislation." She may demand, but (not to speak of the treason involved in the supposition) it is for the superior power of England and Scotland united, to grant or to withhold. As Ireland never was, so in all likelihood she never will be an independent nation—if she cannot be made a component part, she will be held as a dependent colony of Great Britain. Or, let it be proved to the satisfaction of the dominant power, that it would benefit Great Britain to erect Ireland into a separate kingdom, and the separation may be accomplished—but on no other condition.
For purposes of local self-government and district improve- ment, we can imagine a time when separate Legislatures or Councils, for different divisions of the United Kingdom, may be constituted. There might be a Council for each of the several districts of England embraced in the circuits of the Judges, another for Scotland, another for Ireland; and we can understand how each separate division might be benefited by the arrange- ment, without injury to the union of the whole. A local Legis- lature of that description, Ireland may one day obtain, when other sections of the two islands obtain it. But as to Mr. MON.. NELL'S plan of a separate national or sovereign Parliament for Ireland, under the King or Queen of Great Britain, the scheme is obviously an impracticable chimera ; compared with which, the furthest-going projects of the English Radicals are discreet, and the most distant prospect of their accomplishment near at hand. the Irish Members aiding the British minority. After the Repeal,
Previous page
