whether an Union with Great Britain will be beneficial or not to Ireland, and (to prove the affirmative) fhows the confequences she would probably experience from a total feparation; the other alternative which the prefent ftate of the connection might produce. Among other topics, the dilemma arifing (in the prefent ftate of things) from the claims of the Catholics, and the neceflity of "fupporting the Proteftants in that afcendancy which feems neceffary even for their protection," is ably ftated and enforced. Thence the noble Lord infers, that the united parliament of Great Britain and Ireland will conftitute the beft, because the moft impartial, legiflature for Ireland. His Lordship is a strong advocate for the Catholics, and thinks (in case of an Union) their claims fhould be provided for by an article of the treaty itself; but, fhould not this be done, the accomplishment of their juft wishes will, he concludes, refult from the treaty, as a natural confequence. The objections to an Union are then stated and refuted, namely, that a Legiflative Union would be derogatory to the national honour and independence of Ireland, and that the refpective parliaments are incompetent to the meafure. Both thefe the noble speaker very amply and fatisfactorily anfwers. But, having fo fully flared the arguments of others to the fame effect, we will only add, that this Speech, although inferior in vivacity and energy to fome (on the fame fubject) which we have noticed, will be read with great fatisfaction by thefe who wish for further light and information on this great national measure.

ART. 40. Ireland profiting by Example; or, the Question whether Scotland bas gained or loft by an Union with England, fairly difcuffed. In a Letter from a Gentleman in Edinburgh to his Friend in Dublin. 8vo. 34 PP. 15. Milliken, Dublin. 1799.

This little tract is defigned to correct fome mifftatements of the condition of Scotland, in the pamphlets published against the projected Union with Ireland. In one of thofe pamphlets the author had ventured to fay, that, "fince the Union, Edinburgh is beggared and depopulated;" and another writer, who admits the improvement of Scotland, reprefents that "the has improved, notwithstanding the Union." for that Scotland has ever found in the British Legislature, not the foftering hand of a natural parent, but the neglect of a step-mother." To thefe affertions, the author of the Letter before us oppofes the moft authentic documents and incontrovertible facts, namely, the increase of revenue to the royal boroughs, from 14,3951. to 44,7831. per annum; the increase in the tonnage of shipping in Scotland, from 8,6181. to 154,8571. with fimilar increases in the linen and cotton manufac tures, in the revenue of the poft-office, and in the population of that kingdom. This Letter alfo refutes the affertion in the Irish Anti-union pamphlets, that Scotland is "borne down and crushed by the weight of her taxes," and that the malt-tax, in particular, was laid on in violation of the articles of Union. These affertions are shown to be the refult of prejudice and ignorance. To those who admit the improvement of Scotland in wealth and profperity fince the Union, but deny that the Union produced this effect, the writer anfwers, that "as Scotland be

fore

fore the Union was rather in a retrograde than progreffive state, and as fince that period her improvement has been continually progreffive, it is an extraordinary mode of reafoning, inftead of connecting thefe circumftances together, as caufe and effect, to regard them as hoftile and repugnant to each other." He remarks alfo on the confiftency of those writers, who having told us that Scotland has ever found in the British legiflature the neglect of a ftep-moth r," in a fubfequent paffage attributes her improvements chic fly to the wifdom and liberality of the British miniftry. To expofe, however, more particularly the falfhood of fuch accufations, this intelligent writer enumerates various benefits conferred fpecifically on Scotland, fince the Union, by the British parliament; he then afks the Irish pleudo-patriots, whether, in the various inftances above detailed, they trace the care of a natural parent or the neglect of a step-mother? and exhorts them to make the application to themselves, in deciding on the benefits or disadvantages of an Union with Great Britain.

This is certainly a fenfible, and a feasonable pamphlet.

ART. 41. A Letter to the Right Honourable William Pitt. Third Edition. 8vo. 48 pp. 15. Moore, Dublin; Robinsons, London. 1799.

A violent, but truly ludicrous, effusion of Life Jacobinism; the malignity of which is almoft loft in its nonsense and abfurdity. The writer (who figns himself William Drennan) at firft triumphantly proelaims Mr. Pitt's conduct, in propofing an Union with Ireland, as leading unavoidably, though unintentionally, to that reform or revolu tion which is reprefented as fo defirable; yet, towards the end of his Letter, he deprecates an Union, and labours to unite all parties against it. Among the arguments we have met with in favour of that great national object, few ftrike us more forcibly than those founded on the dead which all the Jacobins and United Irishmen feel at the proposal, This Letter, therefore, tends to confirm us in one ufeful leffon. In other refpects it is beneath notice, but for the wickednefs of its defign; being impotent in its attempts at argument, and ridiculoufly bombaftic in its language. We would advife this Doctor (as he is faid to be) when he writes again in oppofition to an Union, not to write in the hurry of his beart (as he expreffes it) but to caft a veil, however flight, on his real oject; which, to our apprehenfion, is manifeftly that of all United Ir fhmen, namely, the total feparation of Ireland from Great Britain, and the establishment of a Jacobin republic connected with France.

ART. 42. Detection of a Conspiracy formed by the United Irishmen : with the evident Intention of aiding the Tyrants of France in fubverting the Government of the United States of America. By Peter Porcupine. 8vo. 32 PP. 15. Wright. 1799.

Peter Porcupine here very amply evinces his watchfulnefs over the fafety of the country which he has made his own by adoption. This tract is lefs interefting to us than fome others which have proceeded from his pen; but it feems very fully to fhow how far the chain of mifchief has extended, and how diligently the links have been com bined from one part of the world to another,

ARTA

ART. 43. Pacification; or, the Safety and Practicability of a Peace with France demonftrated. With Remarks upon the Advantages of a Change of Miniftry, and the Dangers which threaten both Nations, by an obftinate Perfeverance in the War. 8vo. 40 pp. 19. Jordan. 1798. Quid dignum tanto, &c. is a queftion truly applicable to the pompous title of this pamphlet; and, we believe, almost every reader will give the fame anfwer as the poet. The author undertakes to prove two points ; "the probable advantages of a change of miniftry," and, " the confequent practicability of a peace." On the first of these he scarcely condefcends to argue, declaring, that "the probable advantages of a change of miniftry are fo plain and forcible, that, like a fell-evident propofition, no language can make them plainer." We are certainly of opinion that they are not made plainer by this writer; fince he only repeats, in loofe and general terms, the hacknied objections fo often urged, and fo otten refuted. Every failure in the operations of the continental war, over which our administration could have no controul, is afcribed to their mifconduct: the minifter is reprefented as having failed in all his financial arrangements; the ftate of Ireland, the embarraffments in the mercantile world (long fince remedied) and even private bankruptcies (by no means numerous of late, as every commiffioner of bankrupts can teftify) are imputed to them. Thefe will be fufficient proofs of the Spirit in which this pamphlet is written; though the language is certainly decent and temperate.

The practicability of a peace is, we are told, to arife from the removal of the prefent miniftry, because they are obnoxious to the French Directory; confequently, fome perfons must be appointed who are more agreeable to France. The reader will judge what kind of peace is likely to be obtained by that nation, which, as a preliminary, is content to choose its minifters according to the pleasure of its enemy. We might ask, whether we have not as good a right to require that the French nation fhould depofe the Directors, because they have not the confidence of England? Even this writer admits the fuppofed prejudice and refentment of the Directory against particular perfons, to be unjuftifiable in a public tranfaction. Yet he deems it not inconfiftent with the honour of his country to bow before it. Events feem happily at prefent to be anfwering fuch authors, more completely than it can be done by any pen.

ART. 44. Ejays on Civil Government, and Subjection, and Obedience, to the higher Powers. .12mo. 72 pp. 8d. Wigan printed, by

W. Lyon. 1796.

Thefe Effays (which appear to be the production of a pious and well-informed mind) are introduced by a Preface, figned Thomas Wood, and implying, from the context, that the writer is a clergyman at Wigan. Not being published in London, we had not heard of them. till a copy was fent to us.

The first Effay is, On the general Character or Description of a good Civil Government; the fecond, On the Duty of Subjects to their Sovereign; the third contains, the Reasons why we should be Subject

and

and Obedient to the higher Powers; and there is a Conclufion, fhowing what inferences arife from the authorities quoted, and principles laid down. With the best principles and intentions, this writer is, we think, too prolix. An abridgment of his work would be more likely to gain the attention of that class of men, for whose use it seems to have been chiefly defigned.

ART. 45. The Connection between Industry and Property; or, a Propofal to make a fixed and permanent Allowance to Labourers for the Maintenance of their Children. Addreed to the Society for bettering the Condition and increasing the Comforts of the Poor. 8vo. 20 pp. 6d.

Hatchard, &c. 1799.

The propofal of this writer is, "That a fixed national allowance fhould be made to every labourer, of one fhilling weekly, for every child under ten years of age; not as alms, not as a humiliating badge of incapacity, but as an honourable contribution of the fociety at large, towards the fupport of the rifing generation."

He objects to the prefent mode of relieving the poor, that the relief is diftributed, not in proportion to their wants, abftractedly confidered, but by a very different criterion, namely, a deficiency of earnings, and that this tends to deprefs, not to encourage, induftry. This fhort effay is evidently the work of a man of fenfe and benevolence, and contains a fuggeftion well worthy of being confidered, when any alteration in the mode of relieving the poor, or any laws for the general encouragement of induftry, fhall be in the contemplation of parliament. This writer alfo fuggefts, as many have done before him, that a perfect freedom should be allowed to labourers to engage themselves wherever they can beft find employment. This, if we mistake not, has been, in a great measure, effected by the act to prevent vexatious removals.

ART. 46. An Addrefs to the People of Great Britain, on the Doctrine of Libels, and the Office of Juror. By George Dyer, B. A. 8vo.

Printed for the Author. 1799.

Having hitherto confidered Mr. Dyer as a benevolent, but on fome fubjects a mifguided man, it was with pain that we perused a publica-s tion from his pen, which calls for our indignant and almoft unqualified cenfure. The chief object of this Addrefs was to induce the Jury, who were to try Mr. Wakefield on a late profecution, to acquit the culprit; and, alfo, generally to create a prejudice in the minds of Jurymen, in favour of all who may hereafter be profecuted for libels against the conftitution. Mr. Wakefield's guilt being now afcertained by a folemn verdict, and his fentence pronounced, it might feem unfeeling, as it is certainly unneceffary, to defcant on the magnitude of his offence. Few will doubt it, except a clafs of perfons, among whom the prefent tract completely ranks its author.

He firft ftates (after his own manner) the publication and general contents of the Bishop of Landaff's Addrefs to the Nation. Whether the reprefentation here given of that celebrated Address be just or not; whether the infinuations refpecting the motives of its author are or are

not

not deferved, we may fafely leave to every impartial perfon, who knows the contents of the wark, or the character of the writer. With Mr. D. all Prelates must be corrupt and dependent; and none of them, except "men of vulgar talents, and fhallow reflections," believe what they teach! Such is Mr. D.'s candid statement on the one fide. The Opponent (as he calls Mr. Wakefield) is faid to be a mere literary reclufe; his fpeculations are inactive, inhoftile, and feeble; his indecent reflexions on the Prelate are called unavoidable associations; and fome Coarfe language of Bishop Latimer, in a Sermon during the reign of Edward VI. is quoted as a juftification of all the inflammatory and feditious expreffions in Mr. Wakefield's Letter. The reft of Mr. D.'s reprefen ations are equally fair and just.

The fecond chapter contains an affemblage of all the trite objec tions to profecutions for libels; on which it is furely needlefs for us to remark, in an age when the neceffity of reftraining the licentioufnefs of the prefs is become fo evident; and when profecutions of this kind are conducted with every degree of lenity, compatible with public justice. We could not, in a fubfequent chapter, avoid fmiling at the comparison of Mr. Wakefield's tract with Barclay's Apology for the Quakers, with Harrington's Oceana, and other political tracts, written to enforce general principles, and evidently without any immediate defign to fubvert the conftitution, or deftroy the peace of the kingdom. The writer then expatiates on the powers and duty of Juries. To a great part of his remarks we have no objection, except that the defign of them is manifeftly to cajole the Jury who might have to decide on Mr. Wakefield's cafe, and thus procure a verdict in his favour. A very long extract from a fpeech of Mr. Horne Tooke is here inferted; for what purpose it is difficult to fay, unless it be to difplay the captioufnefs and pertinacity of that idol of a party, and the obfequious admiration of his votary.

All this, however, we could excufe, in pity to the mifguided author. But the two laft chapters deferve more ferious notice. The daring introduction of the hiftory of our Saviour, as a warning to thofe who fhould have to decide on Mr. Wakefield, is too flagitious to be read without indignation, by any perfon uncorrupted by modern depravities: and to what does it amount as an argument ?-but to this; that because our Saviour was unjustly styled a feditious perfon, therefore Juries fhould not venture to pronounce any one guilty of fedition. We cannot difmifs this article without recommending to Mr. D. (fome of whofe literary attempts breathe a spirit from which better things might have been expected) to reflect upon the tendency of principles, which lead him to fympathize with libellers, to panegyrize Jacobins, and to revile the religion of his country.

MISCEL