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 measure, had some years ago associated to procure great and undefined changes (they considered them 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) which we know do not require a house or a shed.  Can I forget that a person of the 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 author, 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 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