out to them as himself a rebel. What degree of ignorance, however gross, can justify this indecorous abuse of the word rebel? The annexation of it to the person of his Majesty revolts against every principle of affection and loyalty. Little indeed are the expectation or desire of promoting those necessary civil duties, amongst his Majesty's subjects of Ireland, discoverable in the following sentiments of this evangelizing statist: " Under such circumstances, it cannot be believed that

any honest and conscientious means have or will be taken by the priests of the Romish persuasion to make the lower orders of the people, composing their congregations, loyal subjects "of the Protestant Government of this country. And he strongly expresses his opinion, that Catholic doctrine is repugnant to the repose of mankind. This Noble Peer has not deigned in all his zeal to account for his pacificating mission. How shall they preach except they be sent ? (Rom. x. 15.) He will not, however, renounce the commendation of his evangelical labours. How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the Gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!

The author has given these few extracts from Lord Redesdale's letter to shew to the public the new bent of his Lordship's mind towards the bulk of the Irish nation, and what eagerness to gain and secure their affections to the British go

vernment,

vernment, now animates the Noble Keeper of his Majesty's conscience in Ireland. However illjudged (it is impossible to presume ill-intended), the exacerbation of past horrors may prove, it must all be laid to the account of conscience. That wide-expanded title admits under it an incalculable variety of articles. The fourth letter of this singular correspondence, however, contains; an item that the most pliant ingenuity will scarce. ly force into the account of conscientious convictions. It relates to the case of the Rev. Mr. O'Neil, a Roman Catholic parish priest, lately returned from New South Wales, His Lordship com, plains, "that a priest, proved to have been guilty, "of sanctioning the murders of 1798, trans"ported to Botany Bay, and since pardoned by "the mercy of Government, has been brought "back in triumph, and by the same superior, to "what in defiance of the law he calls his parish ;, " and there placed as a martyr, in a manner the most insulting to the feelings of the Protest

ants, to the justice of the country, and to that "Government to whose lenity he owes his re

demption from the punishment due to his crimes." The Irish public has long known, and the British public now knows, what the Chancellor ought to have known ere he committed such acrimonious. errors to paper, namely, that Mr. O'Neil never was found guilty of any crime, and consequently,

that he could not have been pardoned: that he was flogged, even to evisceration, for the purpose of extorting from him the secrets of the confessional; that he was sent out to Botany Bay against the express order of Lord Cornwallis; that he was called home by Lord Hardwicke, because he was an innocent man; and that, for the same reason, was he reinstated in his parish by his superior. A lamentable proof of the revival of the old system of encouraging and acting upon false reports! It had surely been wise, if Lord Chancellor Redesdale, like the great and humane Cornwallis, had checked this pernicious and wicked system, which so efficaciously stimulated the rebellion of 1798.

The doctrine of denying not only actual but possible loyalty to the body of Irish Catholics was imported by some unaccountable means into this country. To the astonishment of the British nation, his Majesty's Attorney-general (the brotherin-law of the Irish Chancellor) volunteered in the Imperial House of Commons, with reference to the Irish question, the following declaration : "That the House should be deeply impressed

with the expediency of guarding against the danger of alienating one part of the community, "whose affections they were sure of, in attempt. ing to conciliate another part, they knew they "never could possess." (Report of Parliamentary

Debate

Debate in Morning Post, August 12, 1803.) Little could such language tend to conciliate the affections of his Majesty's Protestant and Catholic sub jects of Ireland.

It is matter of notoriety, that at this hour out of 110,000 seamen of the British navy, full 70,000 are Irish, and most of them Roman Catholics; and few are aware of the large proportion of his Majesty's army composed of the same description of persons. The affections of such a prolific nursery for the public service, is not a matter of indifference to the welfare of the empire. Whenever the question of their emancipation shall be brought forward, it will remain to be seen, what part will be taken in it by those gentlemen in particular now in office, who have had the opportuni ty of practically knowing the effects of the various systems produced by the several administrations in Ireland, with which they have been connected, or on which they have depended, or do depend.

The same earnestness, which actuated the author in investigating and disclosing as much of the truth of Irish history as he could come at, induced him to submit the manuscript of this Postliminious Preface to the Minister, that he might render it in every shape unexceptionable in point of veracity. He accordingly had the honour of laying before him the manuscript, accompanied by the following letter,

SIR,

SIR,

Essex Street, Feb. 2, 1804.

When I was honoured with an interview on the 28th of September last, you assured me, that you lamented not having acceded to my offer of submitting the manuscript of my History to some perusal on your behalf. From the circumstances of that History's having given you both displea sure and offence, although you had not read one line of it, as you avowed to me on that same day, and from a most extraordinary, though not unac countable tenacity in Mr. Egerton, my bookseller, in checking the sale of the work, I have found myself necessitated, in justice to my reputation, to my family, and to the Irish nation, whom your conduct affects more than the writer of their his tory, to publish a Postliminious Preface. Inas, much, therefore, as that will form a part of the work which I wrote with your approbation, and in the strictest conformity with the spirit and tenor of my proposals expressed to you, both by word and writing, it is but consistent with the honesty, honour, and candour, which have guided my whole conduct towards you, to afford you an opportunity of perusing this part of the work in manuscript before the sheets are drawn off, pledg ing myself to correct any mistatement of fact, that your memory or knowledge may enable you to rectify before publication, and in which I may have erred. As an historian, I am little anxious about