=Source.=--_Lord Macaulay's Speeches_, 1854.
_Speech of Lord Macaulay. Delivered in House of Commons, Feb. 6,
1833._
Ireland has undoubtedly just causes of complaint. We heard those
causes recapitulated last night by the honourable and learned
member,[6] who tells us that he represents not Dublin alone, but
Ireland, and that he stands between his country and civil war. I
do not deny that most of the grievances which he recounted exist,
that they are serious, and that they ought to be remedied as far
as it is in the power of legislation to remedy them. What I do
deny is that they were caused by the union, and that the repeal
of the union would remove them. I listened attentively while
the honourable and learned gentleman went through that long and
melancholy list: and I am confident that he did not mention a
single evil which was not a subject of bitter complaint while
Ireland had a domestic parliament. Is it fair, is it reasonable
in the honourable gentleman to impute to the union evils which,
as he knows better than any other man in this House, existed long
before the union? _Post hoc: ergo, propter hoc_ is not always sound
reasoning. But _ante hoc: ergo, non propter hoc_ is unanswerable.
The old rustic who told Sir Thomas More that Tenterden steeple was
the cause of Godwin sands reasoned much better than the honourable
and learned gentleman. For it was not till after Tenterden steeple
was built that the frightful wrecks on the Godwin sands were heard
of. But the honourable and learned gentleman would make Godwin
sands the cause of Tenterden steeple. Some of the Irish grievances
which he ascribes to the union are not only older than the union,
but are not peculiarly Irish. They are common to England, Scotland,
and Ireland; and it was in order to get rid of them that we, for
the common benefit of England, Scotland, and Ireland, passed the
Reform Bill last year. Other grievances which the honourable and
learned gentleman mentioned are doubtless local; but is there to
be a local legislature wherever there is a local grievance? Wales
has had local grievances. We all remembered the complaints which
were made a few years ago about the Welsh judicial system; but
did anybody therefore propose that Wales should have a distinct
parliament? Cornwall has some local grievances; but does anybody
propose that Cornwall shall have its own House of Lords and its own
House of Commons? Leeds has local grievances. The majority of my
constituents distrust and dislike the municipal government to which
they are subject; they therefore call loudly on us for corporation
reform: but they do not ask us for a separate legislature. Of this
I am quite sure, that every argument which has been urged for the
purpose of showing that Great Britain and Ireland ought to have
two distinct parliaments may be urged with far greater force for
the purpose of showing that the north of Ireland and the south
of Ireland ought to have two distinct parliaments. The House of
Commons of the United Kingdom, it has been said, is chiefly elected
by Protestants, and therefore cannot be trusted to legislate
for Catholic Ireland. If this be so, how can an Irish House of
Commons, chiefly elected by Catholics, be trusted to legislate
for Protestant Ulster? It is perfectly notorious that theological
antipathies are stronger in Ireland than here. I appeal to the
honourable and learned gentleman himself. He has often declared
that it is impossible for a Roman Catholic, whether prosecutor or
culprit, to obtain justice from a jury of Orangemen. It is indeed
certain that, in blood, religion, language, habits, character, the
population of some of the northern counties of Ireland has much
more in common with the population of England and Scotland than
with the population of Munster and Connaught. I defy the honourable
and learned member, therefore, to find a reason for having a
parliament at Dublin which will not be just as good a reason for
having another parliament at Londonderry.