[To THE EDITOR OP TEE " SPECTATOR."] Sri., May I
ask space for a final word in answer to your correspondent "An Old Cromwellian" in the Spectator of March 19th P He has fallen into a mistake by overlooking one of the sections of the Act of Union. Article 4 fixes the Irish representation in the House of Commons at one hundred. Article 8 declares that the foregoing articles shall remain in force for ever. The fact that the Church Clause, Article 5, declares that the continuance and preservation of the union of the Established Churches shall be deemed to be a funda- mental part of the Act of Union appears to me to show an endeavour on the part of the authors of the Act to raise a subordinate provision to the degree of a cardinal principle, and not to countenance the interpretation your correspondent puts on it. The Act of Union is not the only instance in legislation of a futile attempt to bind future Parliaments ; and, in my view, the question to be decided depends, not on the letter, but on the substance and meaning of the Act. This, I contend, should be construed with regard to the nature of the transaction, which differentiates the Act of Union from other Acts of Parliament. It was a compact between two independent bodies by which one of them gave up their legislative rights and placed themselves in the power of the other in return for certain privileges. For the other body to exercise the power thus gained to abridge these privileges would appear to me to be a breach of faith. In the modification of the Act of Union by the passing of the Irish Church Act both the elements existed which I suggested in my first letter as essential to the valid creation of the Union, and to any alteration of its main principles. There was an express mandate from the constituencies, and a majority of the Irish votes in favour of the change.—I am, Sir, &c.,
CHARLES T. WATERS.
[We must close this correspondence, but note that our correspondent seems to think that the Act of Union ought to be inviolate on certain subjects, but not on others, though the latter may have been given a special sanctity in the Act. Surely this is unreasonable. The Disestablishment of the Irish Church, as well as other minor alterations of the Act, have already settled the question that this law, like all others, can be altered by Parliament —En. Spectator.]
Previous page
