he - Next says, is a kind of colony planted by England; and there he rests the right of England on conquest: to which we answer, she is not a colony-she is not a kind of colony-that she was not planted by England-that she was not conquered, and that if she were, she has compacts, charters, and laws, to do away what is called the right of conquest. I must observe, this grave and learned judge does not in this case exert himself within his own craft or mystery; he speaks on the History of Ireland, and the law of nations, and is erroneous in both. is introduced the thunderbolt of the law the English Minos-Lord Coke, a great authority, a friendto liberty, and the principal framer of the Bill of Right; but this leviathan does not combat here in the waters, he acts in another element; and though every element prepollent, is not sole monarch in this. He declares that Ireland is not bound by the English Parliament, and gives his reasons, viz. because she has a parliament of her own, and does not send representatives to the Parliament of England; and then he adds, not bound, except when she is specially named, which does not, however, remove the force of his reason, but leaves it to act against the exception, as well as against the general proposition; for she has not, when named, a parliament the less, nor a representative the more. He then in A quotes a precedent; it is, where England bound Ireland, when Ireland sent representatives to England; and he infers from thence, that England can bind Ire land when she does not; and finally, he rests his opinion on a law which goes to overturn the liberty of his own country, as well as of ours-the law of conquest: so is Vaughan-he sets in the gulph, in which his learned brethren, the other lights of the law are extinguished-conquest: so are they allthey all rest on this law. I have shown that Eng land has no title by the law of nature, no title by the law of covenant, no title by the law of usage. Will she claim by conquest? Henry 2nd renounced it he took by gift from the Pope-he made a covenant with the Irish chieftains-they acknowledged him their King, and he confirmed to them their petty governments: he made a covenant with the English settlers, they swearing allegiance to him, and he communicating to them the laws and liberties of England. No right of conquest extends to the posterity of the conquered—no right of conquest except in a just war: such is Locke. Conquest is not a title, but an occasion and oppor tunity for gaining one; and that title not good, except the war be just, and the government with the express, or tacit consent of the people: such is Burlemacqui. If the people do not voluntarily submit, the state of war exists: such is Vatel. The right of conquest is, extinguished by pacts, charters, and laws so are they all the authorities quoted against us, refute the idea of conquest. The judges in Pilkington's case, who allow the prescription for a parliament, give up the idea of conquest. Lord Coke himself, who affirms that Ireland has a parliament of her own, gives up the idea of conquest. The seven judges of Ireland who acknowledged that the Irish were a free people, to be governed only by the common law of England, and her own statutes, give up the idea of conquest. Let us hear England herself on the subject. What says the King, the conqueror? let us hear Charles the First. "Mr. Pim, in Lord Strafford's impeachment, speaks as follows: "The law is the safeguard of all private interests; without this, every man has a right to every thing, and this is the case to which the Irish were reduced by the Earl of Strafford; and the reason he gave, hath more mischief than the thing itself, viz. they were a conquered nation. There are few nations in the world have not been conquered; but if pacts and agreements do not restrain that, what people can be free? England hath been conquered-Wales hath been conquered, and by this reason will be little better than Ireland." Thus speaks Mr. Pim. What says the English House of Commons? it says, "That the realm of Ireland having been, time out of mind, annexed to the Imperial Crown of England, and governed by the same laws, the said Earl being deputy in that realm, to bring his Majesty's liege subjects: of that realm into a dislike of his Majesty's government, and intending the subversion of the fundamental laws, and settled government of that kingdom, and the destruction of his majesty's liege people there, did declare and publish, that Ireland was a conquered nation." Thus spoke the English House of Commons with regard to her Minister. How did Parliament act with regard to her King, in the face of the law of conquest? She resolved as follows: That there is an original compact between the King and the people; that James 2nd had broken that original compact, and that this breach, with his other offences, was an abdication of his Crown, and she deposed him accordingly; and she called on the Irish to aid her in the deposition. England called on the Irish to shed their blood, and they shed it accordingly, in deposing James 2nd, for having broken his compact with England; and will she now break the compact with Ireland, and set up here the law of conquest? Has she attainted the Irish for the treason of aiding James, who broke his covenant with England? and will she punish the Irish for not aiding England in breaking the compact with themselves? and will she employ her King, who owes his Crown to one compact, to break the other. Will she confiscate the Catholic property of James's abettors in Ireland, on the principles of covenant; and seize on the liberties of the whole realm on the principle of conquest; and commit, herself, that very same crime, a prodigy in the history of mankind unparalleled, and an exhibition of the thirst of power, in the frenzy of the human race unimaginable-commit herself that very crime for which she beheaded her Minister, and deposed her King? This brings the claim of England to mere vio lence: it is a right which Swift-I think it is Swift —has explained, the right of the grenadier to take the property of a disarmed man. I add, this man has now gotten back his arms, and begs to get back his property. Thus the question remaining, is a question of ability; and in considering this, you are not to contemplate alone the difficulties in your front; you are to look back to the strength in your rear. You have an immense force, the hope of a much greater, of different religions, but of one political faith, kept up for three years defending the country; for the government took away her troops, and consigned her defence to the people. Defending the government, I say, aiding the civil power, and pledged to maintain the liberty of Ireland to the last drop of their blood. Who is this body? The Commons of Ireland, and you at the head of them. It is more; it is the society in its greatest possible description; it is the property, it is the soul of the country armed. They-for this body has yet no adequate name-in the Summer of 1780, they agree to a Declaration of Right. In the Autumn of 1781, they hear that the French are at |