The life, trial and conversations of Robert Emmet, Esq., leader of the Irish insurrection of 1803 : $b also, the celebrated speech made by him on the occasion — John Shaqi
The life, trial and conversations of Robert Emmet, Esq., leader of the Irish insurrection of 1803 : $b also, the celebrated speech made by him on the occasionAnonymous
History
The life, trial and conversations of Robert Emmet, Esq., leader of the Irish insurrection of 1803 : $b also, the celebrated speech made by him on the occasion
The consequences are the same as heretofore: discontent and
remonstrance, and a proclamation to all Europe, showing how easy it
would be to dismember the United Kingdom. No loyalty will reconcile
rational beings to preserve an evil which they can exchange for a good;
so that those who make Ireland poor and enslaved, set before her, above
all other men, the advantages of separation. What can create a desire
for this remedy but ill-treatment? And so long as this treatment lasts,
how shall that desire discontinue? They stand in the relation of cause
and effect, and will for ever go on, or cease together.
It was the opinion of Emmet, that the legislative union was a measure
more suited to facilitate the despotism of the ministry than to
strengthen the dominion of England. Since the abuse of power has always
followed excess, no less in nations than individuals, a restraint upon
human actions is salutary for all parties, and the impediment that shall
stop the career of ministerial tyranny, will be found to work best for
the stability of the connexion. If this operate to the good of Ireland,
she will observe it for its utility, an Irish parliament being then its
best preservative. If, on the contrary, it be made, as at present, to
sacrifice the many for the few, it will be viewed as a curse by the
Irish people—an evil that must be got rid of rather than a good to be
embraced and cherished.
At present we see those persons who deny a parliament to Ireland on
which to rest her peace and happiness, self-poised and self-protected;
we see them sedulous to change the state of the question, and to
represent the repeal of the legislative union as a schism in the
government. They would limit the people of Ireland entirely to England
for benefits—whence, then, have come their wrongs? An Irish parliament,
on the contrary, would be a bond of liberal connexion; it would settle
every question of domestic policy at home, prevent strife and
recrimination between both countries, secure to the affairs of Ireland,
a degree of attention which however necessary, they do not and cannot
obtain among the weighty concerns of a different people, in a foreign
legislature. It would remove the old opprobrious evil of legislation
without representation; for wherever this is partial and foreign, it is
inadequate: as relates to Ireland, it is worthless mockery. Why was a
borough-constituency vicious, but because it sent men to make laws for
the people who did not represent the people, who were returned by a
different body, and intent upon serving themselves and their employers.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account