m

IL

m

, W (

^1')
193 1

AN

HISTORICAL APOLOGY

FOR THE

IRISH CATHOLICS,

By WILLIAM PARNELL, Esq.

THIRD EDITION,
CORKECTED.

LONDON:
PRINTED FOR J. HARDING, No. 36, ST. JAMES'S -STREET.
1808.

C. Squire, Printer,
Farai^al's-Inn^Court, Holbom.

TO THE
DUKE OF BEDFORD.
My Lord, In inscribing this work to your
Grace, it is with difficulty that I suppress those
sentiments of private esteem-, xohich, if I were
to give them utterance, would appear more
warm than the occasion would justify.
I confine myself to the expression of that
gratitude for your Grace's wise and conciliating
Administration, and that regret for its termi
nation, which I feel in common with every
Irishman.

Avondale,
April, 1807. ? W. PARNELL.

TABLE OF CONTENTS.

Page
Preface  vii
Persecution, the real cause of disaffection, among
the Irish Roman Catholics  3
Proofs that rebellion occurred as frequently before
as after, the Country became Protestant  4
State of the Irish Catholics, during the reign of
Henry yill  17
Their situation in the time of Edward VI  2.5
 under the government of Mary. . 41
Conduct of Elizabeth towards them  56
First cause of the rebellions against Elizabeth .... 6:>
Second cause  ib.
Third cause  69
Fourth cause  78
Fifth cause  8S.
Causes of the increase of Catholic Bigotry in the
reign of Elizabeth  108
State of the Catholics under James I  119
Immediate cause of alienation of the Catholics. . 135

CONTENTS. Page
Conduct of Charles I. to the Irish People  142
Aversion of the present Catholics to the amy. , 134
General Observations on their present situation . . 160
Grievances under which they labour  164
Conclusion  ;  181 ^

PREFACE.

X HIS little work was written with no
view of promoting party interests, nor from
any consideration of the circumstances of
the day, but with the humble hope that it
might afford some instruction on those ge
neral topics of political science, which have
at all times sufficient importance to deserve
attention. The Author makes no apology for lite
rary defects, which He has not been very
anxious to avoid ; he is not exposed to the
ridicule of failure in a point where he has
attempted nothing.
His sole object has been to produce con
viction; his motive — to give security to
every Irishman in his Person and Property,
both of which must be exposed to risk, as
long as any civil diatiactions are inflicted on

viii PREFACE.
SO numei-ous a body as the Irish Roman
Catholics. In point of historical proofs, he has not
been unfaitMul froin th"e want of anxiety to,
avoid being so : In principle, he has cer
tainly not been partial to the Catholics; as
he has quoted entirely from Protestant
writers ; and if he has fallen into any mis
representation in the detiail, it must be con
sidered, that in bringing so many proofs, in
exposing so large a surface, it is difficult,
with the best intentions, not to have left
much liable 'to cavil, and something perhaps
totnerited reprehension.
Yet, as he never will enter into literary
controversy, he is anxious to anticipate
some sources of misrepresentation which
heforiesees, and which would be peculiarly
unjust, as they would receive countenance
from the very care he has taken to be cor
rect. He has always quoted from the earliest
authorities, and when possible, from eye
witnesses ; whereas an opponent might
tjuote, in coritradictioti, fronk later and more
bigoted authorities, an4 yet derive credit ;
because the sources of Irish History exist in

PREFACF. ix
such obscurity, that the public would re
gard the earlier and later authorities with
out any preference. ,
Thus, in many instances, where he has
quoted from Fynes Moryson, and Sir
George Carew, who were eje-witnesses of
the events they describe, a plausible contrA-
diction might be produced from the autho
rity of Sir R. Cox, although he wrote
much later, and derived his information re
specting the events of these times, from
Moryson and Sir George Carew them
selves. Thus, the Author has produced tlie au
thority of Sir J. Davis, for his description
of the Brehon laws of property ; as Sir J.
Davis was alive at the time those laws ex
isted ; and yet the authority of Sir James
Ware might be produced to contradict
this description, and might influence those
who do not know that Sir James Ware
wrote long after Sir J. Davis, and when the
old laws and customs of the Irish had fallen
into obscurity.
He is aware that many people will take
offence at the sincere and strong terms of~
reprobation with which he has mai ketl the
b

X PREFACE.
conduct of the I^ngl ish G<5vernment in Ire
land ; but, unless we' (Should see that con
duct again adopted, the censure will scaree-
ly be applied by any one' to tfce present
timis.^" ¦>:'Mt>l!'- ¦ '¦¦'*';
On the contrary, he hopes the description
-he: has given, will serve as a contrast, to
make the blessings of an improved govern
ment more dear to the feelings of tlie Irish
nation. t^'^'
He has drawn a picture in which the dis
tant view is gloomy and dark ; but the vast
ruins, the desolated landscape, and tlie
storm, pa§sinig sullenly away, will ^ive
more brilliancy to the WceEies of peace and
happiness, with which the pei^il of the fu
ture historian may enrich the foreground.
Religious concord will not always be
banished from Ireland. "J"!
The cause of the Irish Catholics rests not
^nly on the clear dictates of reason, justice,
aind humanity, but on very imperious de-
ijiands of policy.
It is true it has two very formidable op
ponents ; duliniess and malignity : but as
stupidity perplexes the efforts of rancour,
and iU-nature quakes folly odious ; the oprs

PREFACE. xi
position t<o the Catihoiic claims will become
ineffecfcijal' in the progress of its own ex
ertions. If it is true that the Catholics have
thrown impediments in their own way ; if,
notwithstanding their general good sense,
they have exposed themselves to the charge
of intemperance, it has arisen from being
placed at so great a distance from the seat
of political action, that it is almost impos
sible to form a just and clear judgment of
passing events. The/must necessarily see
through an intervening medium, which may
often present objects in a false point of
view. The Protestants, who felt all the danger
of the delicate situation in which the Ca
tholics were placed, with so much to wound
their feelings, to inflame their resentments
and precipitate their measures, cannot be
too grateful for their late disinterested for
bearance; and must rejoice that, at the
time so great a shock was . given to their
just and honourable expectations, they met
with a friend so sincere, and an adviser so
judicious as Lord Ppnsonby.

xii PREFACE. .
If the Author might also obtrude his
advice to the Catljolics, although he is
sensible there is very little occasion for it,
it would be contained in one short maxim .-
" Be angry, and sin not/'

HISTORICAL APOLOGY

FOR THE

IRISH CATPIOLICS.

^f^HE pleasure which is derived from ac
curate and conclusive arsfument, is still
farther encreased Avhen each link of reason
ing has its separate support in appropriate
and striking facts ; and it is exalted to the
highest degree which can afi'ect a refined
and humane mind, when the theory and
facts produce a conclusion in which the be
nevolent and gentle feelings may deeply
sympathize. Au argument may be correct, but it will
never be really interesting if deficient in
striking facts, or if its conclusions are
repugnant to the amiable sentiments of the
heart. This appears to be the reason why meta
physical speculations have never become

2 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
generally interesting ; because, from the
nature of the subject, the facts which sup
port them are scanty and trite.
In the same manner, when Buffon pro- ^ ^ ^
duces a series of very curioiis facts to prove
the existence of blunder, defect, and malig
nity, in place of skilful and benevolent con
trivance in the plan of created beings, we
feel no pleasure in the melancholy discovery,
and take no interest in the triumph of tlie
pragmatical naturalist.
The foUowinij aroument in favour of the
Irish Catholics, has so far a right to some
, claim on the public attention : the facts
which support it are new and striking, and
its result is favourable to the moderate and
benevolent affections.
The general conclusion which we shall at
tempt to prove', is simply this : That reli
gious sentiments, however perverted by bi
gotry or fanaticism, has always a tendency to-
moderation, if not indi^fference ; that it sel
dom assumes any great portion of activity
or enthusiasm, except from novelty of opi
nion, or from opposition, contumely, and
persecution, when novelty ceases : That a
government has little to fear from any reli-

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 3
gious sect, except while the sect is new ; give
a government only time, and provided it has
the good sense to treat folly with forbear
ance, it must ultimately prevail. When,
therefore, we find a sect, after a long lapse
of years ill-disposed to the government,
we may be certain that government has pro
tracted its union by marked distinctions, has
roused its resentment by contumely, or sup
ported its enthusiasm by persecution.
The particular conclusion we shall at
tempt to prove, is, that the Catholic religion,
in Ireland, had sunk into torpor and inacti
vity, till government roused it with the
lash ; that even then from the respect and at
tachment which men are always inclined tq
pay to government, there still remained a
large body of loyal Catholics, that these only
decreased iujiumber from the rapid encrease
of persecution ; and that after all, the effect
which the resentment of the Roman Catho
lics had in creating rebellions, has been very
much exaggerated.
On these grounds we close with the adver-
saries of the Catholic claims . Tkey say, it is the
nature of the religion which makes theCatho-
lics disaffected, and therefore the religion
b2

4 HISTORICAL AFOLQGY FOR
must be suppressed. TFe say, that even alloVi'-
ing that the principle of the religion is bad,
still, that if it were left alone, it would become
indolent and innocuous ; that it is the prin
ciple of persecution adopted against the re
ligion which makes the Catholics zealous
and disaffected, and that therefore the per
secution should be dropped.
It is difficult to know whether the facts
that are to be produced in support of this
opinion, will bring conviction to the mind
of the reader, but at all events they are
neither trite nor unimportant.
The first difficult fact those, writers (who
attribute Irish rebellions solely to the anti
pathy of Catholics to a Protestant govern
ment) have to encounter, is, that they were
just as frequent while the government was
Catholic, as when it became Protestant ; and
that the most formidable rebellion which ever
shook the English power in Ireland, broke
out thirty years before the reformation, and
continued with little intermission, until the
sera of the reformation.
¦ In the Reign of Henry VII. 1504, a
general confederation of the Irish prince^
took place, lieaded by Ulrick Burke, Tur-

' THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 5
loh O'Brien, Melrony O'Carol, &c. &c.
who collected" the greatest army that had
been in Ireland singe the conquest. They
fought a bloody and hard contested
battle with the Lord Deputy Kildare, at
Knocklow, in Connaught.
In Henry VIH's reign, before the re
formation, the English were defeated at
Monetrar, by an army under the command
of the Earl of DesmoiKrs son, Tirlagh
O'Brien, and M'William, (Ann. 1510.)
In the year 1513, M'William took the
Castle of Dunluse, and Ave read that "the
Irish met with very little opposition this
winter : they ravaged the country as they
pleased, but that they paid dear for it next
Spring." In 1514, we find the Deputy attack
ing the Irish chieftains, O'Moore and
O'Reyly. In 1516, the Deputy slew Shane
O'Tuathal, besieged Lemevan Castle, took
Clonmel, invaded Ulster, took the
Castle of Dundrum, conquered Fylemy
M'Gennis; and (as it was technically term
ed in those days) preyed Tyrone, The

S HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
citizens of Dublin were likewise defeated
in Imale.
In 1519, Con. O'Nial invaded Meath.
In 1521, we find mention of the Byrnes
being in rebellion.
The same year a confederate army of
the O'Mordris, O'Connors, and O'Carrols,
defeated the English.
In 1523, the Earl of Desmond, medi
tating- a rebellion, applied to the Fi-ench
King for assistance.
In 1523, O'Nial was in rebellion.
In 1528, we find the English power so
reduced, that they paid tribute (called
black rents) to the Irish chieftains, for pro
tection. O'Connor invaded even the Pale ;
the Lord Deputy was too weak to re
venge the injury, but withheld O'Connor's
pension ; O'Connor, in return, took the
Deputy prisoner.
In 1529, Kildare. by means of his daugh-r
tpr. Lady Slane, raised a great confede
racy among the Irish chieftains.
In the same year, a negociation between
the Emperor Charles V. apd the Earl of
Desmond, only proved ineft'ectual by the
Earl's death.

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 7
Fresh insurrections of the O'Tuathals,
O'Connors, and O'Carrols succeeded, and
were closed by the great rebellion of Lord
Thomas Fitzgerald ; which brings us to the
period of the refonnation.
Here then we present a considerable dif-^
ficulty to our opponents, who have attri
buted all the succeeding rebellions solely to
the antipathy of Catholics to a Protesant
goverjimeat; for they are bound to shew
that the causes Av^hich produced these rebel
lions, previous to the reformation, ceased
to operate, before they can reasonably as
sign the Avhole efiect of succeeding rebellions
to the influence of religion. Unless they
can plainh' make this appear, they must
haA^e grossly exaggerated the supposed in
fluence of religion in producing these un
fortunate events ; and it is even very pos
sible that this influence, Avhich they attri
bute to religion, did not at the time
exist. NoAv, Ave maintain this is the very fact ;
that the influence of the Roman Catholic
religion in producing insurrections, has been
without measure exaggerated; that it had no
iiach influence until long after the, reforma-

8 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
tion ; and that Avhen it did acquire that influ
ence, it Avas because it was persecuted, and
not because it Avished to persecute.
To place this in a clearer light, Av;e will
examine the relation which the Catholic'
religion had with events in Ireland from the
period immediately before the reformation,
to the great rebellion in the reign of Chas. I;
we will endeaA'^our to shew how little
connection it had with rebellions, • until
its animosity Avas awakened by the intem
perate and' injurious conduct of the Prote
stants, and to draw from nuinerous and
striking facts,, a' fresh proof (if fresh proofs
are wanting) that humanity, justice, tole
ration, and gentleness, are the wisest means
Avhich a gOA'ernment can use in coriecting
the religious errors of its subjects.

Prior to the Reformation in Ireland,
the Roman Catholic reHgion, stimulated
neither by scepticism, contradiction, nor
persecution, had long ceased to have any
influence on political events. It was re^^
garded by tlie. mass of the people with, a

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. D
v^tupid acquiescence approaching to indif
ference. The clergy, like all long esta-
bli.shed clergy, neglected their duties, and
so far from inspiring the enthusiastic attach
ment which they noAV do, were considered
as an oppressiA^e incumbrance. We have
the authority of Archbishop Brown for
stating, that their ignorance Avas extreme ;
and that they were frequently incapable of
performing the common offices of religion.
If we except the excommunication of the
adherents of Warbeck and Simnel by the
Pope, Ave meet Avith no instance of the
political influence of the Roman Catholic
religion immediately before the Refor
mation. Indeed, so complete seems to have been
its insignificance, that Sir James Ware,
though the most indefatigable of antiquaries,
.and possessed of everj'- facility of research,
could not ascertain accurately the name*? of
bishops before this period.
For instance, " One Thomas was con
secrated Bishop of Down and Connor.
(Ann. 1456.)
"One Thady was adAanced to these
Sees. (1469.)

10 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
" One Richard Wolsely seems to have
been Bishop, (Ann, 1502,)
" Qne Tiberias succeeded nex.t. (1526.)
"- One Thaddeus, a Franciscan Friar, is
said to have been provided to the Bisho-
prick of Dromore. (iDll.) ^
" Lawrence O'Galchor, Bishop of Ra-
phoe, was proceeded against for inconti
nence and other enormous crimes.
" One Donald sat in the See of Derry in
1423, I am of opinion he resigned, his See,
being made uneasy in it ; for Archbishop
Swain called him to task for incontinence
and other crimes, 'which being proved on
him, he was obliged to do penance.
" Donald was succeeded by John, against
whcim. a citation issued for homicide and
other crimes."
These specimens are sufficient to sheAV
that the Roman Catholic religion, like all
religions left alone, Avas far more inclined
to sink into lethargy t^ian rise to political
importance. If the contrary were the qase — if we
suppose that the Catholic religion Avas CA^en
at this period possessed of that inimical
spirit pf bigotry which has been repi'e-

THE HUSH CATHOLICS. ii
s«nted as incompatible with submission to
any authority that it cannot influence,
AA-hat must have taken place upon the
event of the reformation > A srcat and
new cause of disaft'ection being added to
former causes of notorious activity, more
frequent and more inveterate rebellions
would haA'e arisen.
But was this the case ? No — quite the
rcAerse : For it Avas immediately after the
reformation that the Irish Chieftains sub
mitted to the English government ; that
the ErUglish power Avas acknowledged as
legal, and that a degree of peace and good
order took place, Avhich had been un-
knoAvn since the first invasion of the En
glish. What then must Ave conclude from
this fact ?- — that there was no such feel
ing as Catholic bigotry at this period.
The truth is, the' Irish rebellions and
Irish submissions, had not at this period,
jior until iong after, any connection Avith
religious opinions. Later historians ihave
ascribed their OAvn feelings to fclaese times;
and because religion made a prominent
feature in tiie rebellions lof their days; they
imagined it must jhave ;been a cause of
lebellioin f rom iihe fir.5t date of tlie religious

12 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
schism. But co temporary writers never
inentioned religion as a cause of rejjellion,
till a long period after the reformation :
we plainly perceiA'^e to what cause they at
tributed the disaffection of the natives ;
their fears are always expressed against
the Irisliry, not against the Papists ; they
found the greatest opposition in national
pride, not in religion.
We shall be more candid than our op
ponents ; according to their mode of rea
soning, we might allege the submission
of the Irish chieftains in the reign of Hen
ry VIII. as a proof of Catholic loyalty;
but neither their rebellions nor their sub
missions had any connection with religion.
The cause of these submissions is curious.
It Avas simply the assumption of the title of
King, in place of Lord of Ireland, by
Henry VI H,
The title of Lord of Ireland was not
calculated to inspire the regal descendants
of Milesius Avith much respect; it was in
ferior to their own. Fortunately for the
Einglish power, the divisions of the Irish
septs had suspended the election of a na
tive King of Ireland, to Avhom, before the
coming" of the English, the Irish princes had

THE IRISH CATHOLICS, 13
been accustomed to pay allegiance. The
title had long been inabeyance, but as soon
as Henry revived it in his own person, the
Irish chieftains were led by their very pre
judices, and by a natural association of ideas,
to pay him homage.
The Irish princes resisted the feudal
supremacy of Henry, Avhile ntither his
rank nor his force was much greater than
their own ; but when he assumed the title to
Avhich their feudal allegiance had ahvays been
paid, and when he asked for nothing more
than feudal allegiance, they readily sub
mitted. Is it not then an exaggeration, arid extreme
perverseness to represent popish feelings as
having any considerable influence at this
time, AA'hen if they had, more general and
more exasperated rebellions would have an
nihilated the insignificant force of the En
glish? Where is that bond of union —
where that identity of purpose — where that
indefatigable zeal, and unmitigated hate,
which we are told ever marks the conduct
of Papists towards Protestants ?
- On the contrary, objects which Avere never
achicA'ed before by invasion, rapine and
destruction, Avere now accomplished almost

14 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
without an eftbrt. — O'Connor, O'Donnel,
O'Doyne, M'Mahon, O'Moor, M'Wil
liam, O'Rorke, M'Arty More, M'Arty
Reagh, M'Cormick, O'SuUivan, M'Don-
nough, O'Callagban, O'Byrne, O'Brien,
all independent princes, and governing
their several petty nations, acknow
ledged Henry as their liege Lord, and did
not hesitate to renounce the Pope's usur
pations, and to own the King's supre
macy. Sir Richai-d Cox tells us, that thei'e was
not a single chieftain who did not acknoAv-
ledge Henry's supremacy in Church as well
as State ; and quotes from Sir John Davis
with great naivete, for a violent bigot, that
the Irish made no difficulty in renouncing
the Poi^e, when they had once resolved
to obey the King. This involuntary testi
mony of an opponent is sufficient to prove
that religious feelings were at this time of
very secondary influence-
If the Catholic religion possessed any im
munity from the sedative influence Avbich
prosperity has on all establishments — if
after long habits of indifference, it could,
on the first alarm, rouse the minds of its
votaries to that zeal, which in gaaeral only

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. ij
arises from the fow^ endurance of persecution
— if it was the nature of popish feelings to
produce rebellions, this would have been
the time Avhen they would have shcAvn their
most marked influence ; when the govern
ment openly opposed the claims of the.
SoA'ereign pontiff, and usurped his titles —
Avhen' it dispossessed popish prelates, seized
on church lands, and demolished reliques ;
what plots and rebellions must not neces
sarily have followed !
Instead of this, aa'C find the Irish making
every submission that the English govern
ment felt it reasonable to require ; Avhert
once the civil claims between the contend
ing parties were satisfactorily arranged, Ave
find no stress laid on the religious claims ;
we find the Irish princes, even the great
O'Neil, accepting titles from the King of
Ireland, which they had ahvays despised
when offered by the Lord of Ireland. Peace
was for the first time universal : the
French King oftered his assistance to the
Irish princes in vain, and in vain endea
voured to excite them to revolt. The En
glish government for once appeared in a
creditable alliance Avith its Irish vassals —

is HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
the army reduced at home,, and an Irish
army assisting the English King at Calais.
Leland chai'acteriseS the loyalty of the times
as even outrageous.
When,_therefore, the adve^-saries of the
Catholics tell us that it is the nature oi tliat
religion to produce rebellions under a Pro
testant government ; and yet we find that
at the time when the Avhole nation were
Catholics — when they Avere particularly
uncivilized, and proportionally bigoted ;
that an open and unprecedented attack —
an unceremonious reversal of every thing
held sacred, Avas followed by no immediate
commotion ; and that a very short period
after, an unheard-of degree of peace and
loyalty succeeded, must Ave not conclude
that they have exaggerated the eftects of
Catholic principles, or ratlier that no dis
loyalty floAVS necessarily from such prin
ciples, but that the disloyalty Avhich has
since been considered as a chai acteristic of
the Catholics, has arisen from the very un
warrantable and very uuAvise severity Avith
which the Catholics have been treated >
So far it is clear that in Henry the
Eighth'^^ reign, religion had no important

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 17
influence in producing rebellions : yet it
was not to be expected that, hoAvcA^er lax
the a^ncient religion might have become, it
could be suddenly assailed in its fundamen
tal tenets, without producing a revulsion
in the minds of a very ignorant people.
Ea^cu if a general commotion had takeii
place, we should by no means be justified
in arguing that rebellion against the civil
power was a necessary eftect of Catholic
dogmas. In similar circumstances any sect
might have flown to arms, as the Prote
stants under the reign of James II. did, but
it is singular, hoAV little resist^ice was madci
to the reformation in Ireland. This resist-i
ance was virtually confined to a single indi
vidual. Archbishop Cromer.
The great majority of the prelates and of
the parliament, either favoured or made
no opposition to the reformation. The ge
neral ignorance of the nation Avas the greatest
obstacle to its progress ; yet that it gained
ground is evident, from the alarm felt by the
See of Rome, who thought it necessary to
send over a private commission to Cromer,
and to excite the northern dynast, O'Neil^
to commence hostiUties.

15 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
To suppose that no opposition would be
given to a great revolution in the national
religion, would be extravagant ; the clergy
of course were interested to oppose it. Prin
ciple, as well as habit, would influence many
of the laity to oppose it : but all things con
sidered the opposition was inconsiderable ;
it might have been entirely obviated by
judicious management; certainly it was
not conducted with that intemperance,
Avhich argues a peculiar tendency in the
Catholic religion to produce a rebellion
against a Protestant government.
In fact, the reformation during the reign of
Henry the Eighth was conducted Avith very
little violence toAvards the Catholic laity,
there consequently was very little reaction
from resentment or bigotry, and though
late historians describe the Priests as flying
from city to city to animate their fiocks to
rebeUion, yet as we find no facts to sup-»
port the assertion, we must conclude they
described what they thought probable, not
what really Avas the case.
We are noAV bound to shew what was
the cause of the rebellion A\hich followed the

THE IRISH CATHOLICS; W
submission ofthe Irish princes. This Cause
we imagine was a clear infraction on the
part of Henry, of the terms on Avhich the
submissions of the Irish were grounded;
and a well founded apprehension that their
power and independence were in danger of
fresh encroachments.
The Irish chieftains had acknowledged
Llenry the Eighth as their liege lord ; but
in the very indentures of submission, their
own prerogatives were acknowledged and
remained untouched. Thus O'SulliA^an,
suae nationis primus ; Mac Donough, de
Allow, suas nationis caput. Donaldus
O'Calaghan, nationis suae primus.
In these indentures are only reserved the
usual services or tribute payable to the liege
lord; the Chieftains were neither required
to pay taxes, to submit to the English, or
perforin any one duty of subjects. They
retained undisputed, the privilege of mak
ing war or peace among their several
nations, of raising troops, of levying taxes^
and the elective succession to their petty
thrones. Under these stipulations, they freely pro-
c 2

so HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
mise to annihilate the Pope's authority, and
every thing that supports it .*
So far was the English government, at
that time, from assuming any right of actual
sovereignty over the Irish princes, that the
legality of the appointment of Tanists (or
elective successors) was tacitly acknow
ledged by the Parliament of l543, which
enacts that the fines of petty larceny shall
be paid to the tanist of the country.
It had, however, long been the policy of the
Irish government to take every opportunity
of diminishing the power of the Irish chief
tains, and Henry was of too arbitrary a
temper to brook the independence of these
petty sovereigns. As yet, however, the
English force had not been sufficiently
strong to aim openly at their subjection ;
and therefore those artifices, which power
stoops to use when it cannot compel, were
adopted. Henry, or his agents in Ireland, saw the
advantage that Avould accrue from getting
the Irish Princes to appeal to his decisions;
* The words are — " Usurpatoris primaciem et au-
thoritatem Romani Episcopi anihilabunt, oinnesque sues
fautores, adjutores precipitabwnt et abolebunt."

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 21
and had an excellent excuse in their nume
rous and violent dissensions,, which seemed
to point out the necessity of an arbitrator.
The Irish chieftains were aAvare of the snare,
and said, " It is true we want arbitrators,
but if you please, we will name them our
selves :" accordingly, we find regular arbi
trators appointed, mostly bishops, but
particular stress laid that the Earl of Des
mond should be one; who, being iq the
equivocal station of a revolted English sub
ject, possessed of all the princely preroga
tives pf an Irish chieftain, would be par
ticularly on his guard against the encroach
ments of the English power, and the in
vasion of these Irish prerogatives, on Avhich
his own consequence had been entirely
founded. On these terms the Irish chieftains sub
mitted without any scruple respecting
religion. " But they soon resumed their
arms" — it is true, though not on ac
count of reUgion, but because all these terms
were violated or trampled on by the English
government. If we can shew this to haA'e
been the case, is it not sufficient ? Avhy mul
tiply causes unnecessarily ? why be at th^

23 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
pains to conjure up. the Pope, Avhere he
would not naturally make bis appearance >
On the contrary, Theobald de Boys was
sent to Ireland as ambassador, to make a
league with the Irish chief^tains, and met
with no success : a small Irish army attend
ed the King at Calais ; every thing remained
tranquil; until when? until Sir Anthony St.
Leger, (as a Protestant historian expresses
it) finding the kingdom quiet, determined to
keep it so.
Of those wbom he suspected, he impri
soned some, and obliged others to give
hostages ; but these measures were calculated
to produce only partial disaffection: he
proceeded to another measure which Avas
certain to excite every Irish chieftain in
opposition to the English Government.
Let us hear the account of this trans
action from the mouth of Sir Richard Cox^,
the apologist for every bad action perform
ed by a Lord Deputy.
f Sir Anthony St, Leger made it his
business Iq break the dependencies of the
Irish, iand to that end upon all references
to him, he took care that the weaker
party might depend on the government for

THE IRISH CATHOLICS, S3
protection; and that he should not rely
upon, or be under the subjection of any
other; and particularly on the 14th of July,
he made an award between O'Neil and
O'Donnel, whereby O'Donnel Avas freed
from depending on O'Neil.
, We shall not enquire Avhether this
Avas good policy or not ; its immediate
effect must have been, to alarm and irritate
the principal Irish chieftains. These, it is
true, acknowledged Henry as liege Lord :
but, by the same rule, they were liege
Lords thernselves in their own kingdoms,
and had each their dependent princes, over
whom their power was much greater than
that of the King of England over them.
They drew their revenues principally from
the chieftains dependent on them, and
therefore they could not see, without great
jealousy, a system adopted by the English
government which aimed directly at the
diminution of their power, and the im
poverishment of their treasures.
This system was perfidious as well as
unjust, because it had been expressly
provided in the indentures of submission, '
that, not the English governilient, but

U HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
that certain bishops and the Earl of Des
mond were to be the arbitrators of differ
rences arising between the Irish chieftains,
True, it is said, that the Lord Deputy made
the award on a reference to him ; but it is
plain, that the reference was made only by
the one party ; by the weaker who knew he
should be supported, not by the stronger
who knew he should be crushed.
We repeat again, that we are not con
sidering the policy of the measure ; it is
sufficient for .our argument that it would
appear most unjust and, vexatious to the
most powerful of the Irish chieftains ; and,
therefore^ that the rebellion which followed
was attributable to this circumstance, and
not to religion ; for, we read immediately
after, that, " now the spirit of rebellion had
again seized the Irish, and O'Neil, (the
victim of the Lord Deputy's policy)
O'Donnel, O'Doherty, and O'Callock, made
overtures to the Fraich King.
This appears to be a clear and satisfac^
tory reason for the disturbances in Ireland
at the end of Henry the Eighth's reign,
weare at least informed of no other; nor
should we hesitate to adopt it, because it

THE IRISH CATHOLICS, 25
has been overlooked and disregarded by
historians of later times ; for their heads
were so occupied Avith religious animosity,
that they referred every efiect to that cause,
whether it had any relation to it or not.

EDWARD VI.
''"INHERE is scarcely a pretext for sup
posing that the disturbances in Ireland
during the reign of EdAvard VI proceeded
from the influence of the Roman Catholic
religion. The English Lord Deputies made
.use of no precipitate measures of violence
against the Roman Catholics ; and, in con
sequence the Reformation proceeded with
out exciting any marked public discontent.
Later Protestant writers could not conceive
this to have been the case, and have given
florid descriptions of the prejudice and
terror, with which the nation surveyed the
progress of heresy and innovation. But
when we ask for facts, we find only one
solitary instance on which all this fiction is

•6 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
founded, namely, the opposition of Arch
bishop Dowdal to the translation of the
liturgy. Is there any wonder that an
Archbishop should be found to stickle for
doctrinal mystery ? Is it not rather surpris
ing that only one was found ? We read of
no chieftain rebeilling on account of religion,
nor even making it a pretext for rebellion ;
we see no apprehension of any thing of the
kind entertained by the government ; and
we must be convinced that historians are
guilty of an anachronism when they attri
bute the fear of popery (a prodigy of much
later growth) to these times. A decisive
proof that the government had no reason to
dread popery, and that the temper of the
times AS'as indifferent to either side of the
question, is, that the same year produced
bishops of both sorts ; on the ]Oth of May,
1550, Arthur Magennis, by provision of
the Pope, constituted Bishop of Dromore,
and the appointment Avas confirmed by the
King ; and on the 3d day of September,
Thomas Lancaster, a Protestant, Avas made
bishop of Kildare. In the remote provinces
of Ireland all the Bishops AA'ere CathoUcs ;

THE IRISH CATHOLICS, S7
nor was the opposition of Dowdal punished
by removal from his See, until he volun
tarily abandoned the kingdom. So little
idea was there of rebellion on account of
religion, that Cusack, in his letter to the
Duke of Northumberland, mentions this as
a period of the greatest tranquillity, highly
favourable to the legal reformation of the
kingdom. Yet, though government gave no general
cause of discontent to the Catholics, there
were many particular severities and insults
Avhich laid the grounds of religious animosi
ty. Archbishop Brown made war against
images and reliques, with more zeal than
prudence. The garrison of.Athlone, no
very conciliating reformers, were allowed
to pillage the celebrated church of Clon-
maccanaise, and to violate the shrine of a
great favourite of the people, St.Kieran.
The valuable furniture of the churches was
every where seized and .^ exposed to sale, so
that the Catholics might very well suspect
that the low estimation which the Protes
tants entertained for the sacred uses of
church decorations, arose from a keener
sense of their pecuniary value.

?8 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
Llowever, the time was not yet arrived
when religious bigotry had added its ter
rible influence to the other evils which
wasted Ireland. The causes of the distur
bances in the reign of Edward VI, were the
same as those in Henry VIII. with the im
portant addition of extensive confiscations.
The same policy, was adopted, the same
attempts to acquire a right to interfere in,
and to regulate the concerns of the ^rish
chieftains. We have seen that in the reign of Henry
VIII, the territories and revenues of the
powerful house of O'Neil, were curtailed,
by ordering O'Donnel to be independent of
him. This naturally produced discontent,
but as the head of the sept -ivas a man of
feeble character, no war ensued : Of course
another encroachment was made ; and in
the reign of EdAvard VI . Macguire, Roe
O'Neil, and several other chieftains, were
declared independent of O'Neil, and the
tribute (Bonnaught) paid to him, was seized
on by the English government !
O'Donnel, too, who had been declared
independent of O'Neil, found, like ^e horse
who craved assistance from the man, tliat

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. S9
a too poAverful ally is not easily shaken
off ; for his dependants were also declared
independent. The interference of the Eng
lish government seemed noAV to be generally
dreaded, as in this instance the dependants
were forced into their independence, both
parties being obliged to obey the order on
pain of forfeiting their estates.
This system of breaking the depen
dencies, as it Avas called, of the Irish chief
tains, Avas a very obvious means of lessen
ing their power, and converting the nomi
nal sovereignty, which the English held
over them, into an actual one. Other
means were also adopted.
Upon the death of a chieftain, the Eng
lish took every opportunity of imposing
their own rule of hereditary descent, in
place of the Irish mode of election. By
thus obtaining the power for a dependant
of their own, .they could either exercise an
absolute dominion over him, or make him an
instrument to oppose a more powerful riA^al.
Thus, on the death of Murrogh O'Brien,
Earl of Thomohd, the Baron of I bracken,
the next in succession by blood, was
obliged by the sept to nominate a Tanist.

30 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
Daniel O'Brien was appointed to this dig
nity, but was obliged to relinquish it by the
interference of the English ; and Leland
relates that this Avas the cause (not because
he Avas a Catholic) of the sanguinary and
successful war Avhich he afterwards waged
against the English.
An attempt was made by tlie English
government to undermine the power of
another dynasty by the same means.
The great Con O'Neil had beenpersuaded
by Henry VIII; to accept an English
title, the Earldom of TiroAven, which the
English chose to consider as a species of
enlisting, that ever after made the chieftain
subject to military discipline. The title
and the principality were entailed On an
illegitimate son. This, of course, was a
very obnoxious proceeding to the legitimate
sons, and to the Avhole sept, and the power
of the bastard, Matthew, rested entirely on
tlie support of the English. He, feeling
this, in order to pay his court, turned in
former against his father, who was seized
and imprisoned. Shane O^'Neil, the legiti
mate son, invaded the bastard's territory.
The lattery supported by the Lord Deputy,

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. si
took the field ; the armies met, and Shane
O'Neil obtained a complete victory. Yet
the deep enmity which Shane ever after
retained against the English, has seriously
been brought as a proof of the bigotry of
the Catholic religion !
It is plain that the resentment and jea
lousy of the Irish chieftains on account of
these encroachments, must have been in
exact proportion to their power and inde
pendence. The only right which the Eng
lish could claim so to interfere, was either
from force or from custom. That they
did not possess a force adequate to the
object is clear. The military strength of
the English, at the beginning of the reign of
EdAvard VI. does not appear to liaA^e
exceeded 3000 men, and these were almost
entirely Catholics. The extent of territory
which the English possessed was contemp
tible, being confined to the little district of
the Pale, and a fcAV sea-port toAvns ; for, Ave
read, that Sir Edward Bellingham was the
first man since the time of Edward III.
that enlarged the English territory beyond
the Pale: so that the' English government,
from the time of Edward HI. until tlse

59 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
reign of Edward VI. had not even the
right to the monarchy of Ireland which
floAvs from possession, but v^ere like the
rest of the chieftains, merely Loi ds of a
provinfcial district.
Neither could the English claim from
custom any right of controlling the different
interests of the Irish chieftains. For even
these encroachments were made under iii-
direct pretences, Avhile apparently the Irish
princes, and even the degenerate English
chieftains, were left in a prescriptive enjoy
ment of their savage independence, and
their mutual feuds. What can be a more
striking proof than that they retained the
right of making war, peace, and treaties,
without any dread or expectation of the
Lord Deputy's interference ? not to go
farther back than the reign Ave are speaking
of for instances, we find that " Manus
O'Donnel fought a pitched battle Avith Cal-
vagh O'Donnel, in Ulster, on the 7th of
February, 1547."
"In LoAver Delvin, Mac Maklin and
Fally, Avith their united forces, invaded
the country ofthe M'Coughlans.'"

THE IRISH CATHOLICS, 33
" The Earl qf Thomond Avas at open Avar
with his uncle, notwithstanding the Lord
Deputy had used his good offices to unite
them," " Richard Burke was at variance with
the sons of Thomas Burke: Richard was
taken prisoner, and many of his men slain."
"Nor were the contests less violent be
tween Richard Earl of Clanricarde, and
John Burke. The Earl besieged John's
castle, but Daniel O' Bryan came to John'-s
relief, and forced the Earl to raise the
siege," From these circumstances it is plain, that
the Irish chieftains ini the reign of EdAV, VI.
could not be expected, either from mo
tives of prudence or right, to esteem them
selves subjects to the English ; and Leland is
guilty of a gross misapplication of modern
ideas to former times, when he talks of the
disloyalty of the Irish chieftains. They were
not at that time subjects either </e jWe or
de facto. Their submission was merely feudal, and
Nominal : and consequently when the Eng
lish wilfully perverted this nominal acknow
ledgement of sovereignty into an actual

34 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
enforcement of subjection — ^when they pro*
ceeded to interfeire with the internal ar
rangement of each chieftain's petty empire
— to release his actual subjects from their
allegiance — to destroy his revenues, and
alter or abrogate the laws of bis nation,
and particularly the laws of succession,
can we not see' sufficient reasons for hi*
opposing the English (or if you will call
it so, rebelling) without referring to a
cause which does not appear to have
existed, namely, the Catholic hatred of
Protestantism ?
The English practised towards the Irish
chieftains exactly that species of fraud
which is frequent in bargains, when one
party enforces his own sense ofthe terms,
although he is aware that the other party
never understood the terms in that sense.
The Irish chieftains submitted as feudal
princes; the English knew that they did
so, but they chose to understand that the
Irish submitted as subjects. Like aH men,
conscious of duplicity, they acted with
inconsistency. Though they began to ca*
the Irish chieftains rebels, they felt they
were not so; and whenever these chief-

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 35
tains were induced to submit, their sub^
mission was always received as a compli-'
ment, not as a matter of right, and was
rewarded by titles and very considerable
grants of land. Nothing essential was
asked of them in return. Leland acknow
ledges that all their princely possessions and
rights were guaranteed to them ; and says,
that " so little did they apprehend that their
present engagements Would produce any
essential regulation of their territories, that
they still governed their followers by the
usual course of Brehon law*"
However unwarrantable by any prior
right, this interference was, and liOAvevei*
calculate^ to rouse the resistance of the
Irish chieftains, still it might at last haA'C
produced the general reformation of Ireland,
by establishing the English constitution and
laws, in place of the barbarous Usages of the
Irish, if such had been the real object of the
English. But the English of those days, if they re
garded the welfare of Ireland at all, re
garded it with a malignant' eye; their
objects were to gratify their avarice as well
as pride, to pilla,ge as well as to tyrannize
D 2

36 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
When they invaded the independent pri-
Aileges of the Irish princes, and chose to
consider their resistance as rebellion; had
they contented themselves with abolishing
the power and exactions of these princes,
and extended to their Avretched vassals, the
protection, the security, and perfect free
dom of the English constitution and English
law ; had they giA^en them that interest in
their lalids Avhich arises from the rule of lineal
descent, instead of the barbarous mode
estabhshed by the Irish Brehon laws ; they
would have fairly won from these chieftains,
the devotion of their subjects, and might
have despised the resentment of these an
cient dynasties, when bankrupt in the affec
tion of their followers.
Biit intent only on pillage, their usur
pation was so ruinous, that it gave to the
native tyrannies, grievous as they were, a
preference Av'hiCh animated every heart and
hand in their defence, and from this a^ra,-
the animosity of the Irish became more
Sfeneral and more virulent.
For the English not only invaded the
-privileges of the native princes, but they'
confiscated the Imids' of their rvassals.

• THE IRISH CATHOLICS. ST
Though the Irish chieftains exacted much
from their wretched followers, still it was
under the authority of certain laws, and
something was left ; the English SAVept away
every thing. - '
This gave the Irish clans a clear it)terest
in supporting' their chieftains, this Avas tlic
impulse that began, this gave the energy
that supported the ' succeeding rebellion.
What idle misrepresentation is it to suppress
a cause so intelhgible — so poAverfUl, and to
ascribe its efiect to religion !
It was in the reign of Edward VI. that
the solid foundation of the . succeeding
rebellion was first laid, by the confiscation
ofthe lands of Leix and Offalia, now in the
Queen and King's counties.
This important event is thus briefly re
lated by historians.
Upon the accession of Edward VI.
O'Moor, prince of Leix, and O'Connor,
prince of Offalia, drew the sword on pre
tence of some injury received. The Lord
Deputy defeated them,- ravaged their terri
tory, seized on the lands, and drove out
the old inhabitants. The chieftains
themselves Avere induced to surrender and to

S8 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
attend the Deputy to England, under the
tacit promise not. only of pai'dqn, but the
grant of the same favors and honors which
Henry VIII. had bestowed on the chief
tains who surrendered to him, Instead qf
this promise being fulfilled, they were
thrown into prison, their lands {i. e. the
lands of the whole sept) were declared
forfeited and granted to the very officers
who had induced tbein to surrender.
O'Moor died in prison, O'Connor atteiupt-
ing to escape was subjected to a strict and
severe confinement, The new proprietors
established their settlements by fire and
ssword, the most powerful members of
-these great septs were enlisted into the
army in England, while the insurrections
of the poorer proprietors were chastised
by the forces quartered in the country.
Two whole counties disposed of in this
cavalier manner, two principalitief» extin
guished at a blow, and two tribes reduced
to beggary, were sufficient causes to pror
duce a general alarm among every sept, as
Well as in all the chieftains in Ireland.
These circumstances appear sufficient tq
prove that a very small part of the origin

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 39
of these wars is to be ascribed to religion,
which, if we except the petty insurrection
of the family of Fitz-Eustace (and this is
not a very clear case) seems to have had
very little influence on events during this
reign. But we must be allowed to dwell
a little longer on the subject ; for where
ncAV principles are advanced, to account for
historical events of distant date, they
cannot be supported by too many illus
trations. Let it then be considered, that this in
vasion of the rights of the Irish chieftains,
and the resistance A^'hich it is here alleged to „
have produced, were not events peculiar to
Ireland, but had in fact flowed from a ge
neral crisis of political improvement, which
had taken place successively through every
state in Europe. In feudal times every
nobleman eryoyed the prerogatives, and in
several countries the title of king. Their
dependance on their sovereign was for a
long time merely feudal and nominal, while
their power over their vassals was arbi
trary and exclusive. As the power of the
crown increased, a struggle necessarily took
place, Avhich was the cause of wars through-

40 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
out thcAvhole of Europe. This was strictly
the case between the English government
and the old chieftains of English race> who
had become independent in Ireland. It was
nearly the same with respect to the Irish
chieftains, only with less appearance of
right upon the part of the English, as these
chieftains could at no time have ever been
considered in the light of subjects, their
surrender to Henry II. being of the same
nature as their surrender to Henry VIII.
merely feudal, reserving to themselves all
their princely prerogatives ; like the bequest
of Lewis XI. to the Virgin Mary, of the
whole and entire of his county of Boulogne,
saving and excepting the revenues.
What was the case at the same aera in
France? No one can attentively read the
history of the celebrated League, without
perceiving how much more influence the
ambition ofthe nobility had on events than
religion. For CA^en long after Llenry IV.
changed his religion, when this pretext was
removed, the Duke of Montpensier pro
posed to him, in the name of the principal
French nobility, that he should resign to
the governors of the provinces, the pro-.

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 41
perty of their governments, with an here
ditary right to them, requiring nothing from
them but a feudal allegiance *. This shews
the temper of the times, which ran entirely
in favour of aristocratic independence ; the
encreasing power of the Crown appeared
a novelty and encroachment, and was every
where resisted with as much enthusiasm as
the invasion of a foreign enemy. It only
appears more conspicuous in Ireland, be
cause the extreme weakness of the English
colony had allowed not only the Irish
chieftains, but its own subjects, to acquire
an independence that had now gained the
sanction of prescription.

MARY.

T

'HERE is a veiy remarkable and con
clusive proof that popish bigotry had
no great influence on the transactions of
* See also the treaty between Lewis XI. and the great
feudal Lords, in the Memoirs of Philip De Comines,

42 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
these times in Ireland, which is this ; that
when Mary, a popish princess^ was called
to the throne, and the Catholic religion
restored, rebellions continued just as fre
quent as ever.
Sir Richard Cox allows the fact, but is
so blinded by the idea, tha.t CA^ery rebeUion
must have arisen from religion, that he pro
fesses himself at a loss to account for it.
The following chieftains were engaged in
reiterated insurrections : O'Connor, O'Neil,
O'Carrol, Gavenagh, O' Madden, O'MoUoy,
O'Doyne, Mac Coughlan, Mac Geogban,
Fylemy Duff, O'Reilly, the Earl of Des
mond, and Daniel O'Brien,
These very chieftains who had acknow
ledged Henry's supremacy in Church and
State, revolted and agitated the whole coun
try under the reign of the most zealous
friend ofthe Catholic religion.
Surely, attachment to the Catholic re
ligion was not the ruling motive to which
we must refer the events of these times.
A still more striking proof that the Irish
Roman Catholics in Queen Mary's reign,
were very little infected with religious bi
gotry, may be drawn from their conduct

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 4?
towards the Protestants, when the Protes
tants were at their mercy.
Were we to argue from the represen
tations of the indelible character of the
Catholic religion, as pourti^yed by its ad
versaries, we should have expected that the
Irish Catholics would have exercised every
kind of persecution which the double mor-
tiA^es of zeal and retaliation could suggest.
The Catholic laity in 'all the impunity of
triumphant bigotry, hunting the wretched
Heretics from their hiding places — the Ca
tholic clergy pouring out the hbation of
human blood at the shrine of the God of
Mercy, and acting before high Heaven
those scenes which make the angels weep.
But on the contrary. Though the re?^
Jigious feelings of the Irish Catholics, and
their feelings as men, had been treated with
very little ceremony during the two preced
ing reigns ; they made a wise and moder9,te
use of their ascendancy. They entertained
no resentment for the past ; they laid no
plans for future domination.
Even Leland aUows tha.t the only instance
of popish zeal, was annulling grants which
Archbishop Brown had made, to the mjury

44 HISTORICAL APCiLOGY FOR
of the See of Dublin, and certainly this step
was full as agreeable to the rules Of law and
equity, as to popish zeal. '
The assertors of the Reformation during
the preceding reigns, were every way un-
inolested, or as the Protestant historian
chooses to term it, were allowed to sink
into obscurity and neglect. '
Such was the general spirit df toleration,
that many English families, friends to the
Reformation, took refuge in Ireland, and
there enjoyed their opinions and worship
without molestation.
The Irish Protestants, vexed that they
could not prove a single instance of bigotry
against the Catholics, in this their hour of
trial, invented a tale, as palpably false as it
is childish, of an intended persecution, (but
a persecution by the English gOA^ernment,
not by the Irish Catholics) and so much
does bigotry perA^erfc all candour and taste,
that even the Earl of Cork, Archbishop
Usher, and in later times. Dr. Leland, Avere
not ashamed to support the silly story of
Dean Cole and the Knave of Clubs.
How ought these perverse and superfi
cial ,men to blush, Avho haA'e said that the

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 4k
Irish -Roman Catholics must be bigots and
rebels, from the very nature of their religion,
and who have advanced this falsehood in
the very teeth of fact, and contrary to the
most distinct evidence of history.
The Irish Roman Cathohcs bisots I The
Irish Roman Cathdlics are the only sect
that CA'cr resumed poAver, Avithout exer

cising vengeance.

Shew a brighter instance, if you can,
in the Avhole page of history. Was this
the conduct of Knox or Calvin, or of the
brutal Council of Edward VI. who shed
tears as he signed its bloody warrants ?
Has this been the conduct of the Irish
Protestants ?
Had the Irish Roman Catholics, when
they gained the ascendancy, debarred you
of the rights of property, of the benefits
of education, of the enjoyment of social
worship, of the security of your domes
tic peace, of all that makes life grateful,
by making it respectable ? O ! how would
you not have laewailed your unmerited
sufferings — how would you not have ad
jured the detestation of God and iiian on
such monstrous oppression ! ,

4S HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
How strangely does bigotry cramp the
heart and understanding! who could have
thought that so obvious and splendid a
proof of the original virtues of the Irish
Roman Catholics, as this, should havfe
been slurred over, and almost effaced by
the. wilful blindness of Protestant writers!
So patural is it that lions should be always
represented as vanquished, Avhen men are
the painters.
The Catholic religion, certainly, could
have no effect in producing rebellions dur
ing Mary's reign, yet we have shewn that
rebellion still existed.
The causes of it were still the same.
The old Irish inhabitants of Leix and
Offalia, or the King and Queen's Counties,
could not patiently resign their claims and
possessions to the new settlers. They Were
ever spiriting up their friends and followers
to resist, what they deemed an injurious
usurpation of their lands, and thus brought
down the vengeance of government upon
their heads. -Numbers of them Avere cut
off in the field, or executed by martial
law, and the whole race of them would
have been thus utterly extirpated, had

THE IRISH CATHOLICS* 47
not the Earls of Kildare and Ormond in
terceded with the Queen, and become
sureties for the peaceable behaviour of some
survivors 1 1 — of some survivors !''
What a narrative delivered by the re
spectable Leland without comment or de
duction 1
Yet, as if the actual commission of un
qualified confiscation, was not sufficient to
spread alarm, and excite resistance; the
English government made an unequivocal
demonstration of their intention of posses
sing themselves of the whole kingdom.
The Chancellor was empowered to di
rect a commission for viewing all the towns,
villages, and waste grounds of the king
dom, and reducing them to counties, shires,
and hundreds.*
This was a direct blow at the indepen
dence of the Irish chieftains, and the go
vernment were very well aAvare of the effect
this measure was likely to produce, for it
provided that this commission might be
* The territory of every Irish sept came under the de-
nqmination of waste lands ; for, as it was- held in com
mon by the whole sept, there were scarcely any divisions
OT ^hcloswesv

48 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
suspended at any time in seven years, in
case it created too much opposition.
Yet such is the inconsistency, such the
waA^ering irresolution of conscious injustice ;
that at the very time the English govern
ment prepared, under the niask of law, to
possess themselves of the lands of the native
septs ; they acquiesced in the constitution,
and the lawful title of the Irish dynasties.
" Owen Macgennis, on the 6th of De
cember, 1553, was admitted by the lord
deputy to be chief of his sept,"
Kevanagh, head of the great Leinster fa
mily of M'Marchad, was created a peer of
the realm by the title of Baron Balyan,
but by the same patent was nominated
chief of his sept or nation; exercising the
ancient jurisdiction over all his followers.
So little did the Irish chieftains acknow
ledge any actual right of sovereignty in the
English government, that they still carried
on their mutual wars, governed their se
veral nations, elected their tanists or suc
cessors, without any deference to the lord
deputy. Yet his interference Avas sufficient to
support the alarm Avhich seems at this tiUie

THE IRISH CATHOLIC^. " 49
to have spread pretty generally through
the Irish chieftains. The first object ofthe
English government was to entail the Irish
principalities on the eldest son ; which was
considered as a submission to the English
yoke. The son in this case owed his ap
pointment to the English,^ and would na
turally be subservient to them ; whereas
when the chieftain was elected by his nation,
the English government having no influence
in his appointment, could have no pretence
to consider him as a dependant.
Happily there is one instance of the na
ture and effects of this species of interference,
which may be pretty clearly made out,
from such incidental mention as is made of
it by historians ; and will serve as a speci
men of all the rest. This is the extinction
of the principality of Thomohd.
Murrogh O'Brien, King of Thomond,
swore fealty to Henry VIII, and accepted
of the title of Earl of Thomond, which
earldom was entailed on his son Connor,
Murrogh O'Brien retained all his preroga
tives, and the title only was entailed ; the
English government purposely confounded
the earldom with the principality, and be-
E

60 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
cause the one Avas ent ailed, chose to consider
the other as entailed also. It is not im
probable that Murrogh himself, httle sus
pecting the farther encroachments the
English would make, if suffered to achicA'e
this first step, was flattered with the idea
of his principality being changed from an
elective to an hereditary title.
His subjects, however, must have regarded
the change with indignation ; tlieir preju
dices must have been violently shocked at the
idea of the old custom of election being
violated, and their pride must have been
sensibly wounded at the entire loss of in
fluence which they would suffer Avhen the
throne Avas no longer filled by the man of
their choice.
Upon the death of Murrogh, his son
Connor, A\'ho probably had been chosen
tanist during his father's life-time, suc
ceeded. The sept then proceeded to cliuse a tanist
or successor to him, and their choice fell upon
his brother Daniel, in preference to his son.*
* The Irish, in order to avoid the disturbances arising
from the election of a chief on the death of his predeces
sor, elected a .successor during the life of the reigning

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 61
This Was agreeabte to an old Irish custoin,
which always preferred the brother to the
nephew. Upon this the English government, in
Mary's reign, interfered, and insisted upon
the son being chosen tanist. A war eftsued,
in which Connor lost his life, and the Eng
lish succeeded in establishing his son by
force of arms, to the exclusion of Daniel,
who was the lawful successor.
In this instance we see the advantage
which they reaped by setting up a rival to
the legal chief. For the son feeling himself
entirely dependant on the Enghsh govai'n-
ment, consented to hold his lands as an Eng
Hsh subject, and to renounce the title of the
O'Brien. This was regarded by the sept,
not as the conduct of a rebellious subject
reclaimed to loyalty, but as a dereliction of
every honourable, sacred, and legal prin-
chief. Tliis successor was called a tanist Instead of
taking the title of piince, the chieftain omitted his
Christian' name, and was called "the O'Neil," " the
O'Donnel," &c. a circumstance which has lessened'
the interest their misfortunes would have excited ; as
they appear to rank no higher in history than private
gentlemei) or leaders of clans.
k2

68 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
ciple. <This_ is the description the Irish
annalists, of the time give of it. " He ac
cepted," they say, " the title of earl, but
gave^, up the dignity of Dalkais, to the
astonishment and indignation of the de
scendant? of Heber, Heremon, and Ith.
Llere, the designs of the English govern
ment, in their anxiety to make the Irish
sovereignties hereditary, were plainly be
trayed. Their interference became gene
rally suspected, and was always strenuously
opposed. We scarcely need insist, that the war
which Daniel O'Brien waged during the
reigns of Mary md Elizabeth, was to main
tain his right, and not from attachment to
his religion.
The injiUrrection of Shane O'Neil arose
from similar motives.
We have seen that the English govern
ment, in a moment of power, had caused
Matthew,.thebastard of Con O'Neil, to be
appointed his successor, and entailed the
' prihcipality on the heirs male of MatthcAV.
' But upon the death of Con O'Neil, his
legitimate son, ^ Shane O' Neil , Avas formally
invested Avith the sovereignty, by the sept ;

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 5^
and supported his just riglits by arms,
against his bastard brother and the English'
government. It is plain that the Conduct of Con
O'Neil, in allowing the succession to the
principality to be regulated by the English,
Avas extremely odious to the Avhole sept;
as his son Shane appeared justified in
throwing him into prison, and increased
his own popularity by doing so.'
A few years after the lord deputy. Sir
Henry Sydney, paid' the most abject court
to Sliahe, by going- to him, " and standing
God-father to his child (which was consi
dered by the Irish as a stronger .tie than
affinity,) at the very time that Shane was in
open arms. At this ceremony a' conversa
tion took place between the lord deputy
and Shane, which proves Clearly that we
have stated correctly the feelings and opi
nions of the Irish chieftains.
Sir Henry Sydney expostulated with
Shane, on account of his insurrection, and
his opposition to Matthew's title. Attend
to Shane's ansAver, Avhich is pregnant Avith
information :
He replied, " that in the first place,

54 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
JVIatthew was a bastard ; that any how, he
could not derive a title from their father
Con O' Neil's surrender to Henry VIII. for
that Con's surrender ( wa.s void, because he
h^ydi but an estate for life in his principality ;
nor could have more by the law of tanistry,
nor could surrender but by consent of the
lords of his country ; and tha^t even by tbe
J!lnglish laws, the letters patent were void,
because there Was no ^inquisition taken
before th,ey were past, nor could there be
my inquisition till the couutry , of Tyrone
wa^ - madfi §hire ground . - That he was
elected O'Neil by the nation, according to
custom; that he was the legitimate son
and heir of his father, and, lastly, that his
title to all he claims is by prescription-" ^ .
To a statement so reasonable. Sir Henry
Sydney h^d nothing to feply, and during his
governiuent' Shane O'NeU was unmolested.
So far religion had little influence on
events in Ireland, and the reign of Mary
elased, unstained by the crimes of any holy
persecutor in Ireland, We must also do the
Irish Protestants the justice to say, that
they were free from all spirit of intolerance.
That came from England.

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 55
The Irish Protestants had undet^ie no
persecution, they consequently neither in*
creased in zeal or numbers. In Englaftd,
the Protestants had suffeied much persecu
tion; their numbers in consequence had
multiplied, and their zeal become excessive.
One would imagine that the horrors of
Mary's reign in England, would have im
pressed on the most callous heart, and the
dullest understanding, how futile is the
barbarity, and how sad the folly of religious
intolerance. Yet, so perverse are the feel
ings ofthe vulgar, that the English Protes
tants seemed to rise from under the wheel
of persecution y with renewed vigour, to
persecute. Every instance of popish bigo
try has been recorded, not to deter from
bigotry, but to justify a similar indulgence of
depraved and malignant passions, under the
specious pretexts of retaliation and precau«»
tion. True it is, there is no more difficult task
than to suppress those feelings of vengeance
which may arise from a natural source, but
AVould be mischievous if generally indulged.
Yet, what else is the meaning of virtue ?

56. HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
what else the advantage of liberal education,
but that the crude and impetuous suggesr
tions of first impressions, should be disci
plined and regulated, by the calm coucIut
sjons and enlarged views of moral utility }

ELIZABETH.
T^HE Irish rebellions in Queen Eliza
beth's reign have been generally
ascribed to the influence of Roman Catho
lic zeal ; and this opinion has been main
tained both by Catholic and Protestant
writers. This circumstance might appear fatal to
our argument, but this concurrence of opi
nion niay be readily accounted for, even
supposing the fact to have been otherwise.
For, those authors who have been most
positive in ascribing these rebellions to reli
gious principle, wrote in later times, when
religious animosity had acquired its greatest
ranrour ; send attributed the feelings of

THE IRISH Cj^THOLICS, 57
their own breasts to the times that had
past ; Avhile the Protestant writers endea
voured to fix a stigma on the Roman Ca
tholic religion, by setting it forth as the
cause of these rebellions : the Roman Ca
tholic Avriters, with a zeal equally eager,
but less judicious, boast of these rebellions
as an index of the fervenc^ of the Catholic
faith. The Avretched bigot, O'SuUivan, records a
murder coihinitted by Sir John of Desmond,
on a Protestant, to whom he Avas much
indebted, as " preclarum facinus."* The
Protestant bigot. Sir Richard Cox, i'elates
as a very meritorious action, that Lord
Mountjoy reduced the Irish papists to the
necessity of eating one another.
We must turn from these writers, who
can never be trusted in their studied repre
sentations, but when they involuntarily be
tray the truth, to the cotemporary writers,
who saw the scenes which they describe.
These, on the contrary, make little or no
mention of any existing animosity on
* This rnurder was committed by Desmond to ingra
tiate himself with the Spaniards.

m HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
account of religion, and so far froni consi
dering it as a cause of rebellion, they do not
give the Catholics credit for it, even when
they professed it Avas so, but expressly de
clare it was never more than a pretext.
Though the hasty words of such a man
as the Earl of Essex cannot be pledged as
historical faqt, yet wemay quote them with
great reliance, as expressive of his feelings
and the feelings of the times, when he
replied to Hugh O'Neil, " Thou talk of
a free exercise of religion ! thou carest as
jnuch for religion as my horse.''
The Earl of Desmond's rebellion has also
been ascribed to his zeal for the Catholic
religion. Let us hear Avhat he says himself,
and collect the degree of his rehgious en
thusiasm from the very words of this re
doubted polemic.
It was made a condition by the Lord
Deputy, that the Earl should promote the
reformed religion in his territory. Desnaond
replies, " That as to the furtherance of re
ligion in Munster, having no knowledge in
iearniyig, and being ignorant Avhat was to be
done in this behalf, he would aid and main-

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 59
tain whatcA-er should be appointed by com
missioners nominated for this purpose !
As far as ^his rebellion is concerned, the
testimony of Sir Richard Gox is decisive ;
who, if he could have referred it to any
thing like popery, would certainly have
done so. He expressly allows th^t it arose
frpnji " the distaste of the old Irish poten
tates, and , old English settlers, Avho had
been dispossessed of their sovereign rights,
and that religion was only , made a pretence
for rebellion."
Moryson gives the same acqount of the
origiii of the insurrection under O'Neil.
*' About this time, the northern chieftains
conspired to defend the Romish religion ;
(for now, first among them, religion Avas
made the cloak of rebellion,) to admit no Eng
lish sheriff/i, and to defend their liberties
and rights against the English."
Those who have acquired from writers
of later date an exaggerated idea of the
fanaticism of the Irish Roman Catholics
during the reign of Elizabeth, AviU be sur
prised to hear that there were no recusants
till the reign of James I. Thi:; is a mqst

60 HISTOiilCAL APOLOGt FOR
irhpo'rtant fact^a decisive proof that the
growth of religioiis animosity in the Irish
CathdlicS was gradual — that it did not arise
from the establishment of a Protestant
government, but frorii the intolerance of
that gOvCrmhent. This singular circum
stance has escaped the attention arid can
dour of eveiy Irish historian, and is Only
casually mentioned by Sir Richard Cox ;
his wOrds are, " it'iiiust be observed that
tin this time (Ann. 1604) the papists gene
rally did come to church, and were called
church papists." ' '
Another fact, ^ scarcely less' decisive in
prbving that ie:bellioris arose, not from Ca
tholic zeal, but from Protfestant intolerance,
is, that during the reign of EHzabeth (Avhen
in Ireland intoler&ce was yet young), the
Ronia!n Catholics of the Pale,- who con
sidered themseb/es as of English descent,
invariably fought against the Roman Ca
tholics without the Pale, Avhohi they con
sidered as 7nere Irish. Roman Catholic
and Protestant had not yet become the
badges of a party It was the English and
the Irish-English, Avithout distinction of
Protestant and Catholic, Avaging Avar

^THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 61
against what were termed, the mere Irish,
and the. degenerate English. It Avas on one
side, a powerful government, possessed
Avith the spirit of rapine, invading property
and privileges not its own; it Avas on the
other side, a band of feeble, but lawful
princes, fighting without hope, yet ivith
pertinacity, because the^ fought for poAver
and independence.
Rehgion was nothing, to the purpose.
The English never mentioned it ; the Irish
only appealed to it as a known means of
acquiring nioney and supplies from the
Pope and the King of Spain. To lay stress
upon religion, where passions and interests
so much nearer to the human heart were
at Avork, reminds me of a bon vivant who
swalloAved all manner of good things till he
was fifty, and then attributed an attack
of the gout, to eating too plentifully of
water cresses.
There is no reason to believe that a
single respectable Roman Catholic of the
Pale, engaged in any rebellion, from attach
ment to his rehgion, during Queen Eliza
beth's reign ; on the contrary, they fought
against the Irish, notAvithstanding their

62 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
comxiion faith, with as much zeal as they^
had done for the four preceding centuries.
O'SuUivan, a bigotted papist, reproaches
them for doing so. Speaking of the reign
of James I. he says, "And now the eyes
even of the Englibh Irish {i.e. the Catholics
of the Pale) were Opened, and they cursed
their former folly for helping the heretic."
The English gOA'^ernment were so sensible
of the loyalty of the Irish-English Catho- ,
lies, that they entrusted them, as usual,
with the most confidential services. The
Earl of Kildare was the principal instru-
.ment in waging war against the chieftains
of Leix and Ofi'aly. WiUiam O'Bourge,
another Catholic, was created Lord Castle-
Connel for his eminent services ; M'GUly-
Patrick, a priest, was the state spy.
The English government never betrayed
any apprehensions on account of popery,
but attributed the rebellions entirely to
national feelings. In almost every letter of
instructions to a Lord Deputy or a General,
strong fears and jealousy are shewn of the
Irishry, but never of the papists. The
Queen herself perpetually remonstrated on
the impolicy of employing Irishmen in the

THE IRISH CATHOLICS, 63
army, and after the defeat of Marshal Bag-
neU, gave directions that it should be
cleared of them ; but never mentions Ca
tholics as objects of suspicion.
When Sir Henry Hannington Avas de
feated by the O'Briens, Pierce Walsh was
suspected of treachery and executed, bcr
cause he Avas an Irishman, as it is said, not
because he Avas a Catholic.
The Lord Deputy speaking of Sir Cor-
mac M'Teige, of Muscry, says, that " for
his loyalty and civil disposition, he was tlie
rarest man that ever was born of tlie
Irishry." Every where we find that the
being Irish, not the being Catholic, was
supposed incompatible with loyalty.
To these facts Ave have to add the testi
mony of another cotemporary, and cer
tainly a man of peneti-ation, Sir George
Carew, In his letter to Sir Robert Cecil,
he takes pains to prove that ambition, not
religion, was- the cau^e of the rebellions —
that the chieftains of English race fought
to maintain the independent sovereignty
they had been permitted to acquire ; that
the Irish fought to maintain or recover their

64 HISTORICAL AP6L0GY FOR
monarchy and provincial kingddms, which
they inherited from their ancestors.
Thus far the Roman Catholic rehgion
must stand acquitted of being necessarily
a disturber of the public peace, under a
Protestant government; and thus far we
have refuted those superficial and uncandid
writers who have attributed the great re
bellions during Elizabeth's reign, to the
factious spirit of popery. But to leaA^e no
doubt upon the subject, it may be desir
able to produce the real causes of- these
rebeUions, and to prove that they are suf
ficient to account for these calamities, Avith-
,out any reference to religion.
These causes, it will appear, were nearly
the same as those which produced similar
effects in the preceding reigns,
1st, The general aA^ersion Avhich every
nation has to be governed by a foreign
country, 2dly. The particular hatred conceived by
the Irish against the English, on account of
injurious usage.
3dly. The confiscations\)f property Avhich
had taken place, to the ruin of entire
septs.

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 65
4thly. The intention manifested by the
English government, of quelling the usurped
power and princely independence of the
chieftains of English descent.
5thly. The hostility of the EngUsh go
vernment to the Irish princes, and the in
tention openly avowed, of destroying aU
their sovereign rights.
The first cause assigned is so generally
felt, that it requires no particular comment,
though its influence must at all times be,
and is unfortunately even to this day, very
considerable. Of the second cause, a multitude of in
stances might be brought, but very few
leading points wiU be sufficient. Sir John
Davis relates, that it was held no crime to
kill a mere Irishman, and mentions two or
three instances ofthe murderer being acquit
ted, on its being proved, that the sufferer
had not been naturalized. The property
also of the Irish was placed without the
pale of law, and the moral of the most
part of the military history of the English,
is getting a great prey qfcows. The treat
ment of the Irish hostages, being generally
the sons or near relations of chieftains, was
F

63 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
particularly -severe ; and whenever these
unhappy -chieftains tliemselves fell into the
hands of the Enghsh, their murder, for
it can be called nothing else, was too gene
raUy the consequence. O' Rourke, the great
chieftain of Leitrim, was delivered up by
the king of Scotland, and hanged by Eli
zabeth in London. The treatment of
M'Mahon Ave shall notice presently ; these
executions must have been regarded with
particular horror by the Irish., as they
themselves had no capital punishments, and
such Avas their veneration for the persons
©f their chieftains, that when Hugh O'Neil
(who had learnt the custom in England)
ordered Hugh Gavelock's head to be cut
off for informing against him, he could
not find an executioner among his own
subjects. There is a fine reply of an old chieftain,
who when brought to Dublin, was brutally
sheWn his son's head fixed on a pole : '* My
son," said he, turning from the horrid spec
tacle, "my son has many heads."
Wherever the Irish were mentioned in
the acts of parliament, it Avas to mark them
out not merely as enemies, (though that was

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 61f
their appellSfion,) but as something AvhoUy
out of the contemplation of the common
rules of law and morality *.
Baron Finglas, in his Bieviate of Ireland,
pives several plans for the improvement of
that country ; one of them is, that no mer
chant do send any manner of wares among
Irishmen, to be sold, on pain of forfeiture
ofthe same."
Yet there appears nothing in the charac
ter of the Irish, to justify this excess of
hostility and cruelty. Until the reign of
Charles I. when religious persecution had
soured their disposition, they seem to have
maintained a very marked superiority over
the English, in point of humanity and ge-
* Until the reign of Henry VII. the term rebel was
never applied to the Irish, but only to the degenerate
English. " The Irish, ene'niy ; the English rebels,"
was the distinction always made use of (see Sir John
Davis). This is a clear proof that the Irish were not
considered as subjects by the English government of
that period. Even from the reign of Henry VII. till that
of James 1. the civil situation of the Irish was Very
equivocal, or rather was exposed to the evils, both of a
state of slavery and hostility, so' well described by
Tacitus. ,
" Habent subjectos tanquam suos, vites uf alieiios."
f2

68 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
nerosity ; and this appears more striMng,
when we consider, that the principal his
torians are EngUshmen who would natu
rally favour their OAvn countrymen, and
disparage the Irish ; yet whUe they record
the most, atrocious actions committed by
the English, such as the assassinations of
Lord Mountjoy, and Sh G. CareAV, they
mention no instances of retaliation, or of
similar brutality on the part of the Irish.
The Irish probably possessed the virtues,
as well as the vices, which flow from elective
monarchy. While in their contests for their petty
thrones, every species of violence and blood
shed Avas made use of, and seemed justified
by established usage ; in their private cha
racters, they possessed that generosity,
humanity, and affability, which Avas ne
cessary to concUiate the affections of their
sept. A very amiable trait appears early in the
Irish character, which has been very httle
noticed. On the first invasion of the
English, we are told by Leland, that a
synod of the church was held, to consider
what national sin it was which had brought

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 69
upon their heads this terrible visitation.
It Avas unanimously resolved, that it arose
from the traffic which at that time was
carried on in English slaves, and with a ge
nerous compunction which has since been
very ill requited, this slave trade was abo-
Hshed, A people who could reason thus,
were certainly no barbarians ; and when we
consider the extreme humanity of their
laAvs, which in no instance allowed the
shedding of blood ; we may conceive with
what abhorrence they must have beheld
that licentious system of English cruelty,
which has been so minutely detailed by the
principal instrument of its exercise, the
author of the Paccata Hibernica,
The third cause is, of all, the most im
portant. It has already been explained, that if the
English government had extended the pro
tection of its laAVS to the different septs, it
would have found no difficulty in overturn
ing the power ofthe Irish chieftains without
shedding a drop of blood. This power Avas
founded upon customs and laws so destruc
tive to the property and security of the

70 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
wre;tched vassals, that they would gladly
have transferfcd their ill requited allegiance
to l^he fostering controul of English laAV ;
certainly when once they haql , submitted
to it, and tasted the sweetness of an impar
tial administration of justice, of the secure
possession of property, and the valuable
privilege of transmitting it to their children,
they never would have revolted, to submit
to a slavery which had no recommendation
from interest, or personal security.
But Avhen the government, by a most
cruel and absurd implication, confounded the
sept with the chieftain, and because he re
sisted, confiscajited their property ; they
took from them more than they could ever
make a recompense for, ^nd created a com
mon interest with their tyrant, whom it
otherwise would have been more natural for
theni to desert, when the enjoyment of
a more lenient government was within their
reach. But, the object of the E,ngiish govern
ment at that time, was plunder, and
confiscation ; they despised the natives too
much to consider them as objects of care-

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. Tl
or civU imprOA^ement ; they Avere only
solicitous to improve every pretext for
making forfeitures.
We have seen that the tesritories of Leix
and Oft'aly, Avere confiscated under EdAvard
VI. and tile septs, as well as their leaders,
banished or destroyed. Tliis circumstance
had given rise to frequent rebellions under
Mary ; and, as well as Ave can collect, the
septs, viz. the -O' Moors, and O'Connors,
had succeeded in a certain degree in re-
coA^ering part of their possessions by force
of arms.
The reign of Elizabeth began ominously
for Ireland. Her first instructions to Lord
Sussex were, for " tbe distribution of Leix,
Off'aly, together with Iry, Glanmacaliry,
and Slemergie." By the memorial of Sir
J. Perrot, we -find that all these lands Avere
made estates in tail io Englishnen.
We have seen that the English gOvern-
ment had influenced the chieftain Con
O'NeU, to surrender his territory, and take
back a grant of it, with remainder to his
bastard son Matthew, and his issue, instead
of his liegitimate son, Shane O'Neil. This
policy exactly resembled what the English

T3 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
government has practised in later times in
India ; they raised a person to the throne,
in violation of the customary mode of suc
cession, who depended for his station on
their power, who was strictly a dependant,
and might be set aside whenever a favour
able opportunity occurred *. Upon the
death ofthe father, Shane O'Neil Avas elected
chieftain according' to ancient usage. The
English made war against him as an usur
per ; he is slain by treachery ; and his
territory, which in the,eye of the English go
vernment itself, could not, by itsoAvn act, be
considered as belonging to him, but to the
issue of the bastard Matthew, was con
fiscated for his supposed rebellion ; and the
issue of Matthew, who had been guilty of
no rebellion, were left destitute ! So that
in order to divest Shane, the territory was
* The same policy was adopted by the late Empress
of Russia, in the conquest of the Crimea. Her directions
were to support the weaker chieftains of the Tartars
against the stronger, and to take every opportunity of
appointing chieftains in the interest of Russia. There
is nothing peculiar in the History of Ireland, or in the
nature of the Irish ; it is the history ©f spoliation, of
resistance and suffering, which has taken place in so
many nations, whose only fault has been their weakness.

THE IRISH CATHOLIC!'. 73
reputed MatthcAv's ; and in order to get rid
of Matthew's claim, the territory Avas con
fiscated as Shane's.
But in fact it belonged to neither. It
was the great province of Ulster, which the
chieftain possessed as a king, not as a land
lord, and drcAV his rcA'^enue from various
imposts on the gross produce of the terri-
toiy, and not from the territory itself.
The lands belonged to the sept, and Avere
held by them in joint tenancy. To talk
of confiscating the lands of Shane O'Neil
Avas the same as if the emperor of Austria
Avas to confiscate the lands of the elector
of Bavaria, to dispossess every old proprie
tor, and let every acre of ground to under
takers. To confiscate the most flourishing
quarter of Ireland Avas CA^en then much more
easy to decree, than effect ; and though this
monstrous exploit was perpetrated in the
end, yet at first, it Avas more Avithin the
measure of the cupidity of the English go
vernment, than its pOAVcr.
Yet the confiscation was decreed, and
Elizabeth, with all the rapaciousness of a
land pirate, took a share in the adventure.

74 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
The account is curious,
" On the 9th of July, 1573, the Queen
granted the Earl of Essex the half of the
signoriesof Clanneboy and Ferney, &c. &c.
The Earl was to go thither with 200 horse,
and 400 foot, and. maintain them for two
years. Afterwards the Queen and Earl
were to keep an equal military force at their
several expence, for the defence of , their
respective shares. Each was to bear an
equal charge for erecting fortifications:
Afterwards, division was to be made by
commissioners, and then each might for
tAventy years build on her or his respectiA^e
share, as they pleased : each might dispose
of five thousand acres as they pleased ; the
Earl was to be Captain-general for seven
years, and was to plant his part, as well
as the Queen her's, until there should be
a thousand English inhabitants in each
moiety. The royal and lordly robbers took their
measures with the duplicity of conscious
vUlainy. The Lord Deputy, Sir WUliam
Fitzwilliams, was instructed to give out
that Essex came to repel the Scots, and

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 75
not to hurt the Irish. In consequence he
was joined by Bryan Mac Phelemy ;
who soon deserted him, probably on dis
covering his real views. The expedition
failedj as likewise did another fitted out by
Sir Thomas Smith, who sent his natural
son to make a plantation in the Ardes.
As if these measures were not sufficient
to force the miserable natives to take up
arms, fresh instructions were sent to let
Leix and Offaly to English undertakers.
Can we be surprised to read in the next
page that " The Lord Deputy found Ulster
in a flame !" or are we to allow that the
flame was kindled by Catholic zeal ?
The rebellions of the Cavenaghs, of the
Knight of the Glynns, and of the Seneschal
of Imokilly, arose from the same cause.
Barry of Barryscourt was despoiled of his
territory merely on a complaint being pre
ferred against him by Raleigh. Sir Peter
Carew set up an antiquated claim to half
the kingdom of Cork, which was supported
by the Lord Deputy and Council, although
they were sufficiently aware of its probable
effiects, as, " Sir Peter was advised not to
alarum the Irish by beginning Avith them

76 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
first. "* But the claims of the Queen, who
seems to haA-ehad an eager spirit for rum
maging into the ragged title deeds of the
Irish, Avere more formidable. If priority
of possession could make a good title, the
Irish had the best in the world, as their ge
nealogical tree was full of fruit before the
other nat-ions of Europe had thought of
planting one.
But this title the English maintained,
Avas destroyed by the confiscations which
took place after the successes ofthe English
arms. The Irish might have replied by the
same rule, when they re-conquered the .
lands that had been confiscated (which they
had done,) the right derived by the English
from confiscation, should merge in superior
right of conquest. But unluckily the Irish,
according to their own proverb, had to go to
laAV with the devil when the court was held in
hell. We find directions from the Queen to es
cheat granted lands ; to escheat lands which
iphieftains had surrendered, and Avhich had
* This claim of Sir Peter Carew's, which was allowed,
was from so distant a date as the reign of Edward III.
Sir Peter obtained a large consideration by way of com™
promise; from the actual holders of the property.

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 77
been regranted to them, if the Queen or any
other person could shew a title to them ;
Avhich must always haA-e been the case, as a
previous confiscation Avas ahvays held to be
a title, and there was scarce an acre of
land in Ireland but Avhat had been con
fiscated. After the defeat of the Earl of Desmond,
and the confiscation of that quarter of Ire
land called Munster, the Queen advanced a
step farther in the destruction of CA-ery
security of property.
There Avere some men of property Avho
had sense enough neither to care about the
Earl of Desmond or the Queen — who had
not taken arms, and whose property could
not be decently confiscated. The Queen
thought they might be inconvenient in her
plan of making a colony in Munster; and
therefore required them to prove their titles ;
whiphif they could not do to the satisfaction
of her commissioners, they were turned out ;
and which, if they could do, why they were
turned out too ; only they were to be in
sulted by a compensation, aUotted by these
same commissioners, Mr. Smith and Mr.

78 HISTORICAL APOLOGYTOR
Meagle, " meet men, and apt in tbe profes
sion ofthe laAV,"
Are Ave to be surprised, that a fresh re
bellion * broke out ? or is this too to be
ascribed simply to the eftect of Popish
zeal ?
The fourth cause we have assigned for
the rebeUions in Elizabeth's reign. Was the
intention shewn by Elizabeth, to reduce
the old chieftains of English blood Avho had
become independent, and exercised princely
prerogative, to the rank of mere subjects.
I'his Avas a difficulty which the English
governpient had created for itself. It gave
away the lands of the Irish with such libe
rality to its own subjects and dependants,
that it made them too great'for subjects.
Ulster (a whole province) was given to
John de Courcy ; the county of Meath to
Hugh Lacy. The kingdom of Cork was
granted to Cogan and Fitzstephens, the
* The rebellion under James Fitz-Thomas, com
monly called the Sugan Earl. His proclamation, like
that of O'Neil' s, is full. of devotion to the Catholic
faith, evidently with the same view, to gain supplies
from the Pope and the king of Spain.

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 79
kingdom of Limerick to William de Braosa ;
Sir Thomas de Clare obtained a grant of
Thomond, Ottho de Grandison of Tip
perary, Robert de la Poer of Waterford,
and William Fitzadlem, of a large portion
of Connaught, But a more material grant
was the licence alloAved to these men and
their descendants, to raise troops, and take
by force as much more territory as they
were able. In consequence of such drains
upon the sources of pillage, the croAvn had
no more to bestow ; every inch of land which
had been obtained, or which it was pos
sible to obtain by force, was engrossed by
the chieftains of English blood.
This event had taken place even as early
as Edward III.'s reign so completely,
that in order to satisfy the voracity of a
horde of disappointed adventurers, who had
been drawn to Ireland on the speculation
of new confiscations and grants, Edward
was obliged to resume the grants made
in his and his father's reigns. This invi
dious measure gave rise to the distinction
of English by birth and English by blood,
which afterwards produced so much ani
mosity. The English born in England,

80 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
who passed over into Ireland to obtain
civil employments or grants of land, were
geneially connected with some court influ
ence, and obtained every thing worth hav
ing. While the old English by blood-, born
in Ireland, gradually lost their connection
with the government, and degenerated, as
it was phrased, into mere Irish.
Independent of the great property they
had acquired, there Avas another foundation
for the power of the English and Irish
chieftains. Till the reign of Elizabeth, the
English government was too weak at home
to spare any^ great force for the protection
of its colony in Ireland.* The defence of
the pale rested entirely with Irish-EngUsh
chieftains who were constantly inured to
war, and from their knowledge of the na
tives and of the country, Avere best ac
quainted with the mode of warfare that
was adopted by them.
The English government was also ex
tremely necessitous;., and hence the means
and burthen of raising and maintaining
a military force, were left entirely to these
* This is extremely well explained by Sir J. Davis.

THE IRISH CATHOLICS, 81
chieftains. It is not surprising that they
soon began to esteem themselves hidepep-
dent of a poAV^er which would at any tiine
have ceased to exist but for their protection.
They adopted the customs and preroga
tives of the Irish princes whom they had
dispossessed. They not only levied armies, waged war,
and made peace like other potentates, as the
whim seized them, but they drew their reve-r
nues according to the Irish mode pf taxation,
partly from tribute paid by dependent
chieftains, partly by imposts, called Bon
naught, Cutting, Coyne and Livery, Kar-
nety, &c.
To mark still stronger their tot^il seces
sion from the controul of English juris
prudence, they adopted the Brehon law, they
submitted their property, and that 9 f their
dependants to the custom of Gavelkind,
as it has been improperly termed, more pro
perly speaking, " hodge podge ;" and their
rank of chieftain descended according to the
law of tanistry. AU this the English gp^
vernment put up with very good humoured-
ly, whencA'er it stood in need of these
chieftains for defence against the native

82 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
Irish ; but whenever it occasionally gained
a little strength, it was sure to lay claim to
its renegade subjects ; and a continual
source of jealousy and bickering,, and ulti
mately of very serious and sanguinary wars
arose to England, exactly in proportion to
the rapine and ravage she had committed
in Ireland,
It is of no consequence to our present
enquiry whether the English government^
or its degenerate subjects Avere in the
Avrong ; we shall only observe, that the
English-Irish chieftains had obtained, a
right by prescription to their independence,
as far as lapse of time, and long possession
could estabUsh it : and as this is the firmest
foundation of all right, there must have
lieen great apparent hardship in requiring
these chieftains to descend at once from the
rank of princes, to that of mere subjects,
at least it must have appeared so to them ;
Avhich is sufficient for our purpose, as we
Avish only to prove that this sense of injury,
and not religion, was the cause of their re
bellions A short account of the rise and fall ofthe
liOuse of Desmond, will be sufficient to

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 83
shew the real causes of the rebellion of its
last earl under the reign of Elizabeth.
At the time of Edward II. the English
power in Ireland only maintained a passive
existence from the voluntary services of
Maurice Fitz-Thomas of Desmond. He
was sufficiently brave, but extremely poor ;
and receiving no supplies from England, he
was obliged to adopt the Irish custom of
Coyne and Livery, or free quarters, for
the support of his army. This measure
had its usual effect ; the inhabitants of
Kerry, and of the counties of Limerick,
Cork, and Waterford, who were exposed to
it, were either murdered, or so harassed by
extortions, that they left their possessions
to seek a temporary security, where the
couutry was not desolated by a protecting
. army. Desmond, his kinsmen, allies,
and retainers, entered into these possessions,
and appropriated the lands to themselves.
Desmond took what he liked for his own
private property, and reserved an Irish
seigniory or the right of Bonnaught cut
tings, &c. over the rest. So that he raised
his income from one thousand marks per
G 2

34 HISTORICAL APOLOGY "FOR
annum, to ten thousand pounds per an
num ; an enormous sum in those days.
From this time the Earls of Dfesihond
assumed all the prerogatives of independent
princes, refusing to attend parli'aiheht,
levying taxes, makirtg wars, and, as they
could find no precedent for tlieir COiiduct
in English law, they very naturaUy adopted
the old Irish usages which Were quite con
sonant to their vie Avs.
Their example Avas foUoAved by nearly all
the English famUies of ConSide!rable pro
perty, by the Burkes, Birminghams,
Dexons, Geraldines, Butlers, 'Condrons,
&c. Avho, in the stile of Irish royalty,
assumed a fictitious sirname in place of the
title of prince. Such as M'WiUiarh
Eighter; M'YoriS, M'Costelo, M'Morris,
M'Gibbon, M'Pheris, &c. They all 'had
their particular nations and their tributaries ;
they levied taxes according to the Irish
u'^ages, and made Wars wlieh-they pleased,
tiud Avith whom they pleased. They met
with very little interruption froin the Eng-
u-;h government, Avhich either regarded this
ussumption of independence with indiffe
rence, or was too AAeak to prevent it.

THE IRISH -CATHOLICS, 85
Whenever it ^cquheda momentary strength,
the Lord Deputy would catch hold, of an
earl of Desmond, and endeavour to attach
him to the court, or hang him ; which only
sprved to keep alive the jealousy of these
degenerate chieftains, against the English
government. No steady or efficacious sys
tem Avas adopted to reduce their poAver, till
it had acquired almost the sanction of pre
scription. This wa-s the state of things Avhen Eliza
beth ascended the throne, when every cause,
Ayhich had so long repressed the natural
energy of the English government, of that
solid and spirited force which arises from
wise and equal laAvs, was removed ; Avhile
the Irish had not advanced a step from the
weak and impoverished state which had
been engendered by tyrannical habits and
absurd laws. Elizabeth felt the difference,
and knew her poAver, and proceeded to re
duce these long established dynasties to the
r^nk of subjects. These unfortunate chief
tains Avere too ignorant to comprehend
whatthe power of England Avas, they only
recollected how Aveak it had been. They
had been in the habit of treating the. threats

§S HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
of the English government with scorn, they
had been successful in throwing off" its
controul and repelling its aggressions by
force. Is there any thing miraculous, that when
fresh threats were held out, and fresh aggres
sions prepared, they should again have re
course to force ? What has this to say to
religion }
Take the particular instance in this
reign of Garet, the last earl of Desmond.
The Lord Deputy summoned him to resign
all the princely prerogatives which had
been transmitted to him through a long line
of ancestors. He consults his relations and
feudatories, who unanimously advise him
to resist so unreasonable a demand, and pro
mise to maintain their advice by force of
arms, against the Deputy or any other
that zmll covet the said earl's inheritance.
Xot one word of religion. The earl of
]3esniond had ahvays been considered as
tlip leader of the English-Irish chieftains ;
lie Avas the most poAverful and Avealthy, and
stood most forward on the canvass. As
long us his privileges Avere untouched,
tlieii's remained secure, when he was at-

THE IRISH CATHOLICS, 8?
tacked, their welfare was in jeopardy till the
contest was ended.
On this head there Avas no doubt of the
intentions of Elizabeth ; and consequently
as soon as a small force of Spaniards landed
at Smerwick, the Earl of Desmond and all
his feudatories, turned their arms against
the Lord Deputy.
But the Irish had at length to learn the
difference between the force of a govern
ment, founded on wise laws, and the
power of their dynasties which rested on
principles, repugnant to justice, and com
mon sense. The forces of the Earl of Des
mond were defeated, dispersed, annihilated ;
all compromise denied to him, because, as
it was admitted, his possessions were of too
princely an extent to be rescued from for
feiture. The wretched old man was hunted
like a wild beast, from his forests and his
caverns ; he was surprised at length in a
miserable hut ; his head was cut off ; and
out of compliment to the Queen, Avas con-
A^eyed to her, and impaled on London
bridge. AU the Earl of Desmond's property Avas
confiscated, and as it was conA'enient for the

3S- HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
^ English Government to construe the sove-
' reignty he held over a large territory into
property also, the estates of his ckn, and
his feudatories, were also cohflscated. That
is, nearly the whole province of Munster.
Hence we may trace the cause of the suc
ceeding rebellion, without having recourse
to that which has been made a saddle for all
horses — religion.
The fifth c^use for the rebeUions under
Elizabeth was the plan adopted by the
English government, of destroying the
poArer and privileges ofthe Irish princes.
Wlien we consider, that at the commence-
lUent of Elizabeth's reign, there were more
tlian sixty independent chieftains in Ireland,
of Avhom the greater part were in fact
kings, and possessed of unlimited power
over their subjects, AA-hen Ave know the at
tempts that had been made, and were at
this period absolutely making, to reduce
this band of sovereigns. Who traced their
descent from the most remote antiquity, to
the condition of subjects ; instead of look
ing for imaginary causes of rebellion, one is
surprized, that rebellions were not more
frequent, and conducted with more unani-

THB IRISH CATHOLICS. 8»,
mity. Why, during the early reign of
Elizabeth, Avhen the English force was in
significant, Avhen the reign of a woman
could not appear formidable to men Avho
excluded women from their oavii petty
thrones ; why, when the whole province of
Ulster was confiscated ; when the name of
O'Neil Avas abolished, when the laws of
tanistry were pronounced treasonable by the
English laAV ; why Avas there not a general
union, and a prompt resistance of all the
Irish chieftains, to an aggression, Avhich
aimed at tlie A'cry foundation of all their
princely rights ?
The English government Avas in fact not
so inimical to the Irish chieftains as it ap
peared; it was too conscious of the injus
tice and weakness - of its pretensions to act
up to them. In the very act which pro
nounces the prerogatives of the Irish
princes an usurpation, and abolishes them
as such, a power Avas vested in the Lord
Deputy to re-grant the same by letters
patent, Avith much, greater privileges than
the chieftain possessed by the rules of the
Irish laAV.*
* The queen tacitly allowed the validity of the Irish

90 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
A chieftain possessed by the Brehon law,
no property in the territory over which he
ruled, except his patrimonial lands ; he pos
sessed the throne only as a life tenant ; the
succession did riot necessarily descend to
his son ; on the contrary, his successor Avas
generally elected by the sept during his life,
and in some degree divided with him, thp
influence of government.
whereas if he agreed to hold his petty
empire by letters patent from the English
government, immense adA^antage accrued to
him. All the duties and exactions custom
ary by the Bi;-ehon law, Avere continued to
him ; and in addition, the lands of the
whole sept (by a most extravagant stretch
of injustice) were made absolutely his pri
vate property, and what Avas still more
gratifying, he was released from the inter
ference of an, elected successor, and his an
cient prerogative and his new possessions
Avere strictly entailed on his eldest son.
dynasties, by supporting any one she could get to be a
rival to the existing chieftains. Thus, she had her
O'Neil, her O'Donnel, and her O'Reily, whom she
made use of lo sow divisions among the clans and di
vide their force.

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. J)l
From this statement, one might be sur
prised that every chieftain did not imme
diately submit to hold ^ his territory by
English tenure. But there were several
causes to produce hesitation. Pride strongly
combated interest ; and as the objects of
interests are, after all, of no value except
as they contribute to the gratification of
pride, it is no wonder that in many -in
stances the end was preferred to the means ;
and that the princely descendants of a hne
of kings preferred an honourable dominion,
conferred by the free choice of their sub
jects, to a more lucrative grant bestowed
by an overbearing and foreign power.
Besides, the design of the English govern
ment was, at all events, to acquire a nominal
supremacy over the Irish chieftains; and
this once established to overthrow, when
the opportunity offered, those prerogatives
which were suffered to remain. This could
not entirely escape the jealousy ofthe chief
tains, and made them cautious how they
surrendered for any momentary advantage
their ancient title to their sovereignty,
which Avas too strong in prescription to be
questioned .

92 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
Yet the snare had to a certain degree suc
ceeded ; and though fcAv of tbe Irish chief
tains had consented to hold their territories
by English tenure, yet their suspjcions were
lulled, and thei-- animosities were disarmed,
tiU the designs of the English government
became too glaring to be mistaken.
This event took jdace on Sir WiUiam
Fit'ZAvilliam being appointed Deputy, Ann,
1589, We are informed by Fines Mori-
son, (a bitter enemy ofthe Irish) .that "pre
vious to Sir William's arrival, the kingdom
was in the best state it had been a long
time ; any chieftain readily attended, when
summoned by the Lord Deputy, none of
theni were discontented ; the country was
plentiful in corn, cattle, and all manner of
victuals." This state of things was com
pletely reversed by the outrages committed
by the Lord Deputy against the Irish lords,
M'Tuathel and O'Dogherty, and the Irish
chieftai n M ' Maho wn .
Sir William had received information,
that part of the treasure on board the ships
belonging to the Spanish armada, Avrecked
on the coast of Ireland, had fallen into the
hands of the Irinh in Munster.

THE IRISH CATHOLICS, 93
He entered the country, but being dis
appointed of his booty, he seized on M'Tool
and O'Dogherty, who, of all the Ulster
lords, had been most faithful to the Eng
lish, and put them into prison.
The first refusing to pay for his enlarge-
hient, continued prisoner tiU Sir William
Russel's government, who in pity discharged
him ; " but the old lord's heart Avas first
broken, so that he shortly after died. The
second Avas released, after two years impri
sonment, not without paying for his liberty,
as the Irish say."
" And at this hard usuage, all the great
men of the Irish, (especially in the northern
parts,) did much repine."
But the murder of M'Mahon, prince of
Monaglmn, at length opened the eyes of
the Irish chieftains to the designs of the
English govermnent, and shcAved them that
the SAVord afforded better security for their
rights, than an English patent.
M'Mahon, chieftain of Monaghan, had
surrendered his country to Elizabeth, and,
as Avas the custom, received a re-grant of it
to him and his heirs male, and in default of
such issue, to his brother Hugh. He died

94 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
without issue, and Hugh took possession.
The Lord Deputy Fitzwilliam proceeded
to Monaghan, under pretence of giving
M'Mahon security in his possession. But
as soon as he arrived there, he raised an
accusation against M'Mahon, for having
two years before recovered some rent due
to him by force of arms. This, by the laAV
of the English pale, Avas treason ; but M'Ma
hon had never stipulated to be subject to the
English law ; on the contrary, the patents
by which their territories were re-granted
to the Irish princes, either formally acknow
ledged the validity of the Irish Brehon law,
or tolerated it by a sUence equally expres
sive. " The unhappy M'Mahon, for an offence
committed before the law which declared it
capital was established in his country, was
tried, condemned by a jury formed of pri
vate soldiers, and executed in two days, to
the horror and consternation of his subjects
and the rest of the Irish chieftains. His
territory Avas distributed to" Sir II. Bagnall
and other English adventurers. Four only
of the sept saved their property f"
This event was well calculated to decide

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 95
the Irish chieftains in taking up arms.
" Certain it is," says Morrison, " that upon
Mac Mahon's execution, heart-burnings and
loathings of the English government began
to grow in the northern lords against the
state, and they shunned, as much as they
could, to admit any sheriffs, or any English
to Ua'c among them."
The minds of the Irish princes had al
ready been sufficiently inflamed. EngUsh
garrisons Avere forced on them under dif
ferent pretences, Avliich removed from any
responsibility, pillaged and laid waste the
surrounding country. The English sheriffs
were a yoke no less grievous : established
under pretence of introducing a more equi
table administration of justice, as soon as
they were firm in their seats, their extor
tions, and exactions, with less appearance,
of right, became more intolerable than
those of the native dynasts. In the instruc
tions to Lord Grey and Sir John Perrot, the
abuses committed by the English garrisons
appear to haA'e been notorious. The dread
of an English sheriff had become so great
in the Irish territories, though at first they
Avere, thankfully accepted,, that his life Avas

m HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
not secure. When FitzwiUiam proposed to
Mac Guire, Prince of Fermanagh, to send a
sheriff into his district, Mac Guire re
plied: " Your sheriff shall be welcome,
but let me know his Erick, that if my
people cut off his head, I may levy it on
the country."
A creature of the Lord Deputy, named
WiUis, was sent as sheriff, Avho according
i'to Morrison and Lee, " harassed the coun
try with three hundred of the very rascal
and scum of the kingdom, which did rob
and spoil that people, ravish their wives
and daughters, and make havoc of all."
Morrison himself particularises the ty
ranny of English sheriffs as a leading cause
of the succeeding confederation of the
Irish dynasts ; and in tlieir remonstrance
to Walloip and Gardiner, who were ap
pointed to confer with them, they insist
upon being exempted from garrisons and
sheriffs. Even had the English garrisons
and sheriffs committed no abuses, the
eagerness Avith which the English govern-
ment seized- every pretence to introduce
them, must have worn a very equivocal
appearance to the Irish chieftains ; it might

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 9V
have proceeded from a wish to promote
tranquillity and law, but it might also pro
ceed from a design of subverting the pre
rogatives of the Irish dynasts, and seizing
on their territories.
This being the fact, it was difficult for
men so immediately interested, to be en
tirely unaware of their danger, and the
period fast approached when it became
necessary for them to forget their mutual
feuds in their common peril, and make a
last struggle for their independence, their
power, and their property.
The period was favourable, as far as com
mon injuries could give union and vigour to
their exertions.
The sept of Mac Mahon, equally regret
ting their murdered chieftain, and abhorring
the seneschal set over them, were ripe for
action, Mac Guire roused to arms, by the
indignity he had suffered from sheriff Willis,
was only repressed by Hugh O'Neil, who
had not yet thrown off the mask.
The O'Connors and O'Moores had
bravely contested the possession of their
native territories, Leix and Offalia, and
were now in great force. H

9S filSTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
The chieftains of the De Burghes, ori
ginally English, but who had long enjoyed
the independence and absolute prerogatives
of Irish princes, had resisted the attempt
of Sir Richard Bingham, to rq^uce them to
the state of subjects ; alarmed for their
independence, and grievously harassed (as
we are told) by Wallop, by the late in
troduction of sheriffs, their defeat was only
productive of forced submission.
O'Rorke, who, had been driven from his
petty principality by Sir Richard Bingham,
had taken possession of Leitrim, and bid
defiance to the Lord Deputy.
Shane M'Brian O'NeU had taken arms
to recover an island and a barony wrested
from him by the Earl of Essex, who had
imprisoned him till he surrendered them.
The inhabitants of Munster, driA^en from
their possessions by the English under
takers, had collected in force, and only
waited an opportunity to recover their pro
perties ; they soon after elected James Fitz-»
thomas, commonly called the sugan earl of
Desmond, for their chieftain. He had the
command of eight thousand men, as we
learn from the Paccata Hibernia ; he was

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 99
elected agreeable to the law of tanistry, on
condition of doing homage to O'Neil, and
was in every respect, a prince contending
for power, and not a bigot striving to esta
blish a domineering religion.
iPut ^ the most formidable support of the
Irish war, (for it is quite impossible to call
it a rebeUion, where there were more than
sixty kings of acknowledged right, though
possessed of trivial territory, fighting for
the existence of their power) were the
talents and courage of two principal chief
tains, O'Donnel and O'NeU.* O'Donnel
was a hero, O'Neil was something still
better. With equal courage and perse
verance, he knew how to bend to circum
stances, and to supply by address, the im
mense inferiority of force, which did not
deter him from the daring attempt to
release his country from a foreign yoke.
These men, whojie characters have been
basely traduced by historians, too bigoted
to be generous ; wanted only a more
splendid sphere of action, to have ranked
? The kings in Ireland were sixty and more. See
Holland's insertion in the text of Camden.
h2

100 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
with the greatest characters that great
events have produced. However, granting
it otherwise, it does not affect the present'
argument, which tends to shew, isat that
the Irish chieftains were heroes, but simply
that they were not bigots.
Hugh O'NeU was the son of the bastard
Matthew, and in opposition to the Irish
usage of tanistry (as We have already
shewn) the dynasty and foe . of Ulster was
vested in him on his father's death, by let
ters patent under the great seal. He com
mitted no act to forfeit his right, but be
cause Shane O'Neil rebelled, to whom in
the eye of the English law Ulster did not
belong, it was confiscated to the queen's
uSe ; and Hugh O'NeU sufferedTthe penalty
for ariother person's treason, and that per
son his opponent. The queen, however,
was riot then sufficiently powerful to take
possession ; and to coriiplete the inconsis
tency, she acquiesced in the election of
another chieftain,. Tyrlogh Lynogh.
On his death, Hugh O'Neil was inaugu
rated by a better title than the queen had
to bestow, the free election of the whole
sept, who from time immemorial had ap-

THE IRISH CATHOLICS, loi
pointed, their chieftains. O'Neil was too
well acquainted with the English court,
and knew he could only maintain his rights
by force. After he had endeavoured to
supply his inadequacy in mUitaj-y strength
by that policy which can alone give the
weak the advantage against the strong, he
took the field, and gained a decisive victory
at Blackwater.
Hugh O'Donnel shared with him in the
glory of the day ; their ancestors had
always been enemies ; it was an O'Neil
who in Henry VII.'s reign, wrote to Hugh
Roe O'Donnel. " Cur hoom mi keesh no
monna Curhirl" i. e. " Send me my tri
bute, or if you don't!" — To which
O'Donnel replied, " Neel keesh a gut urm,
agus da beh!" i. e. " I owe you no tribute,
and if I did!"
We have seen in the reign of Henry
VIII. the Lord Deputy declaring O'Donnel
independent of O'Neil ; but when the Lord
Deputy proceeded to declare O'Donnel's
dependants also independent, it seems to
have opened his eyes, for we hear of no
more disputes between the O'Donnels and
the O'Neils,

102 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
The wrongs of Hugh O'Neil, a worldly
and politic man, are not calculated to
excite interest, but those of the open,
generous, and spirited O'Donnel, will move
any feelings but those of a bigot. The
father of Hugh O'Donnel, the powerful
Prince of Tyrconnel, refused to admit an
English sheriff in his territory. The Eng
lish government were too conscious of
the villairiy of the attempt, and their want
of any plea of right, to enforce it by arms,
They had recourse to means which would
appear incredible, if the truth of the fact
was not Well authenticated. What must
have been the general conduct of the Eng
lish, when Sir John Perrot, who was accused
pf favouring the Irish, and who was be
loved by the Jrish, as comparatively a just
and humane Deputy, when he contrived
a,nd boasted of the following project :
A merchant of Dublin was instructed to
feign himself ^ Spaniard, and to sail up by
Donegal into the territory of Tyrconnel, to
shew an extraordinary courtesy to the
natives, to invite ,and feast them in his
sjbip. — If the old chieftain or his son came
on board, to intoxicate them, secure theni

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 103
under the hatches, and convey them to
Dublin, The stratagem succeeded, and
Hugh O' Donnel was the victim , And what
was his treatment afterAvards, when policy
could not point out any reason for farther
cruelty ? Take the account from Lee's me
morial to the Queen :
" After the obtaining of him, his manner
of usage was most dishonourable and dis
commendable, and neither allowable before
God nor man. My reasons are these : He
being young, and being taken by this stra
tagem, having never offended, was impri
soned Avith great severity, and many irons
laid upon him, as if he had been a notable
traitor and malefactor."
His imprisonment would have lasted for
life, had he not found means to make his
escape with the two sons of Shane O'Neil
and O'Reily. Hugh O'Donnel and Arthur
O'Neil were hotly pursued ; they were
obliged to conceal .themselves in a fastness
without food, and exposed to the cold of a
severe winter. In this situation they re
mained four days, when they were disco
vered by their friends. Young O'Neil was
expiring. Hugh O'Donnel, deprived of the

104 HISTORICAL APULUGY FOK.
use of his limbs by the severity of the cold,
was weeping bitterly over his friend, and
endeavouring to preserve his life by shel
tering him with his own body. Arthur
O'Neil died. O'Donnel regained Tyr
connel, and swore eternal enmity to the
English. His father resigned his power to
him, and he was solemnly invested with
the principality of Tyrconnel by the suf-
frageS' of his sept.
Upon the defeat of the English at Black-
water, every Irish chieftain took arms.
Morrison giA'^es a list pf them and of their
force?, which is alone sufficient to prove
that the English government could not,
with any propriety, consider them as sub
jects. Directed by O'Neil and O'Donnel,
they defeated the -best appointed army
which had ever been sent from England ;
and Essex, who commanded it, returned
to England disgraced. This was the only
time that the fortune of Ireland seemed to
gain the ascendant. O'Neil, with an inferior
force, had baffled the English by address ;
he had now the superiority, and his success
appeared certain. Every chieftain, whether '
of Irish or English extraction, saw that

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 103
they could only hope to maintain their
prei^ogatives and independence by force of
arms, and their natural courage was insti
gated by every spur of pride and self-
interest. The assistance of Spain was hourly
expected. The ablest of the English ge
nerals were cut off, and the Queen's army
thought only of defending the Pale,
Lord Mountjoy was appointed Deputy
in the room of Essex, and every thing was
reversed ; Lord Mountjoy, under an effe-r
minate exterior, possessed all the qualities
necessary for conquest ; courage, prompti
tude, cunning, unshackled by probity;
severity unalloyed by compassion. He
made every means subservient to his end,
and opened his Avay by'the cruellest perfidy
and the most horrible and indiscriminating
havoc. His object Avas lo take off the Irish
chieftains by assassination, and to reduce
the country by famine. But to make the
reverse of all their fortune as bitter as
possible to the Irish, a seeming certainty of
success immediately preceded their complete
ruin. Don Juan de Aguila landed at
Kinsale with a large body of Spaniards.
O'Neil and O'Donnel collected their armies,

106 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
and Lord Mountjoy, with an inferior foi^ce
was hemmed in on all sides. Don Juan in
tended to attack the Lord Deputy : in vaiii
O'Neil urged the want of' discipline in his
troops, and the certainty there was of
reducing tjie Lord Deputy by cutting off
his supplies. The fate of Ireland was
decreed. The attack Avas determined, the
design Avas betrayed, the Spaniards did not
^ct in concert, and O'Neil and O'Donnel
Were entirely vanquished.
O'Donnel, and with few exceptions the
whole body of Irish chieftains, disdaining to
live as subjects where they had ruled as
kings, passed over into Spain, where they
were received with all the respect due to
their rank, and all the tenderness that could
alleviate misfortune. O'Neil, confident in
his resources, maintained a short and fruit
less struggle, and then followed their
example. This is one of the most singular,
and yet least noticed, revolutions that ever
took place in any country.
Sixty princes, independent, and exerting
kingly prerogatives from time immemorial,
after a contest of five centuries, were in the
course of six years swept from the face of

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 107
their country by the superior energy of an
ambitious woman. They fought long and
they fought bravely, and though vanquished
they did not yield. This Avas clearly a
contest of power, not of religion. We
cannot refuse our sympathy to their wrongs,
their courage, and their misfortunes ; but
it is the perversity of fanaticism, to applaud
tliem for their piet}^, or to censure them for
their bigotry. Religion was never appealed
to by them, but as a pretext calculated to
gain them money and ammunition from
Spain and the Pope, and to throw an addi
tional stigma on the. name of Englishmen.
Yet, since we find the Catholic religion
assumins: a considerable degree of conscr
quence, as a principle of discontent in the
succeeding reign; there can be no doubt
that it had gained considerable hold of
men's minds during the reign of Elizabeth.
It is true, that at the beginning of the war,
the being a papist was no cause of suspi
cion ; all the towns Avere peopled Avith Ca
tholics and remained loyal; the Queen's
army consisted mostly of Catholics, and was
genera.lly commanded by Catholic officers ;
yet latterly apprehensions were entertained

log HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
of the loyalty of the cities and towns; at
the same time this is mentioned as a mat
ter of surprise. Sir R. Cox says " the very
cities and towns were staggering, and so
frightened by the threats of the clergy, that
no trust would be reposed in them ," O'Sul-
livan mentions it as a subject of regret, that
only a few of the papists in the Queen's
army revolted. Yet this shews that there
was a certain degree of disaffection con
nected with religion, Camden also relates,
that many of the papists, who had been
loyal, sent to Rome for a " dispensation of
this crime." When the young Earl of Des
mond was sent by Elizabeth to Ireland, the
people of Munster at first received him with
congratulations, but deserted him on dis
covering that he was a Protestant.
These are the most material instances we
collect of the progress of Catholic bigotry
during Elizabeth's reign, which prove that
it existed in,no great degree, yet that it did
exist and had encreased.
The reasons for this encrease appear to
be these ;
First. The Protestant religion having
met with no persecution in Ireland, made

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 109
no progress. The native Irish to a man
remained Catholics, while the Protestants
consisted entirely of English, Hence Eng
lish and Protestant became synonimous.
terms, and by a natural association of ideas,
the hatred entertained by the Irish to the
English was continually transferring itself
to the religion of the English ; and, by the
reverse cause, their attachment to the Ro
man Catholic faith encreased, from its being
the badge and peculiarity of their own
body. Secondly, In the war which they were
waging, the chieftains derived the most
important advantages from professing and
inculcating in their followers the most de
voted attachment to the see of Rome, —
O'Neil, though indifferent to religion him
self, was too politic -to forego so favourable
a pretext, and declared himself the cham
pion of the Roman Catholic religion : in
Consequence, supplies of money and men
were obtained from the Pope and the King
of Spain. Vicars and Jesuits were sent
over to Ireland, who, by the customary
arts of zealots, awakened religious fanati
cism ; and gave effect to a bull of exconi-.

110 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
munication issued against Elizabeth by the
Pope. MacEgan, the Pope's Vicar, never
allowed any Irish papist that served the
Queen to be pardoned when taken prisoner.
The Irish chieftains, however, were never
infected with this theological spirit; we
hear of no murders or massacres of Pro
testants, as such, though afterwards their
enemies shed such horror over the rebel
lion of 1641. Yet men, the most indif-
ferent to the meaning of their own profes
sions, will insensibly be influenced by the
constant repetition of them. Though at
first the Irish chieftains espoused the Pope's
quarrel from policy, there is no doubt they
became, attached to it from pi inciple, and
the misfortunes they suffered while engaged
in its cause, gave it that hold on their hearts
which it never would have gained on their
understandings. The last reason seems to have been the
distinctions drawn between Catholic and
Protestant by the laws: these distinctions
were comparatively trifling during the time
of Elizabeth, and may be seen in the acts of
the2d of her reign. But nothing is trifling
that womids the vanity or pride of men,.

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. ill
motives which influence their conduct
much more than grosser interests. They
gave to O'Neil an opportunity of repeatedly
demanding the free exercise of the Catholic
religion, which claim (as is usual) was re
fused Avith a pertinacity equal to its insig
nificance. This was sufficient.
The practical persecution, hoAvever,
which was felt or feared by the Roman
Catholics, was of greater extent.
In the pardon granted to the province of
Munster by Sir G. Carew, he tells us (in the
Paccata Hibernia) that Priests and Romish
religious persons Avere excepted. The
Priests were always murdered in cold blood,
whenever a town or garrison was taken.
Sir C. Wilmot, when he took the Lord of
LixnaAv's castles, only spared the Priest's
life, to get possession of the Lord of Lix-
naAv's child. Spencer speaking of the state
of religion in Ireland, of which he had been
an eye witness, delivers this just and admi
rable sentiment, which shews that practical
persecution did exist : " In planting re
Ugion, thus much is needful to, be observed,
that it be not sought forcibly tp be iin-

112 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
pressed in them, ioith terror and sharp penal^
ties, as is now the manner, but rather delivered
and intimated with mildness and gentleness,
so that it may not be hated before it be
understood," This maxim, however, Avas so little con
genial to English jurisprudence, that, on the
contrary Valentine Brown calmly recom
mended the extirpation of the Irish papists,
as the best means of advancing the Refor
mation, These reasons appear sufficient
to account for the degree of Roman Catho
lic bigotry which appeared at the conclusion
of Elizabeth's reign. But, as I imagine,
that at this time Was also formed that san
guinary character which henceforth marks
the Irish, and the Popish religion in Ire
land, I shall plead no excuse for digres
sing to point out its cause. This was the
extreme ferocity with which this war of
Elizabeth was carried on, against the Irish
and the Irish chieftains.
Superiority and impunity are the only
conditions necessary to develope the natural
barbarity of the human heart, when its ob
ject is power. What we despise we appear
to have a right to oppress. Hence, the na-

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 113
tions which are themselves the most free,
prove the greatest tyrants to their depen
dants. Hence the contempt which the white
men in the West Indies feel for the black,
may be considered as partly the cause, as
well as the effect, pf the oppression of the
latter, WhUe the Irish were able to maintain a
pretty equal struggle with the English co
lony, that is, till the reign of Elizabeth, the
common usages and laws of war (unless
they were very unsuccessful) were preserved
towards them. But when the power and
pride of the English became so highly ex
alted under Elizabeth, the Irish were con
sidered as a sort of rebel savages, clearly ex
cluded from the contemplation of the laws
of God and man, the violation of whose
rights formed no precedent that could af
fect civilized nations ; and it did not follow
that a man who should spoil and murder
them might not be possessed of an upright
and gentle heart.
Not to weary the attention with a repe
tition of cruelties, which would become mo
notonous in spite of their singular atrocity.

114 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
we will confine our remarks to the policy
and conduct of the Lord Deputy Mount
joy, He adopted the plan for reducing
Ir'dahd, pointed out, though not practised,
by the Earl of Essex : this was by the ^^word
and by femine. That there might be no
cessation to military execution, the armies
were kept on foot during the winter ; sal
lies were made from forts and garrisons, to
prCA'^eht the sowing of corn ; every exertion
was made to take or destroy the gattle, and
in summer, the isoldiers were employed to
cut down the com in the Well-affected parts
of the country, as weU as the territories be
longing to the chieftains in armS ; no quarter
was given in the battle, and prisoners taken
in garrisons were murdered in cold blood,
WhPle districts, from the smallest pretence,
were delivered up to tlie sword. -
Because tlie Queen's troops could not kiU
fast enough, no Irishman was pardoned,
unless he; undertook to murder his nearest
friend or relation. Lord Mountjoy 's secre
tary relates that, .". Lord Mountjoy never
received any to mercy but such as had s©
drawn blood, on their feUow rebels." Tim?

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. lls
Mac Mahon and Mac Artmoyle offered to
submit, but neither could be received with-*
out the other's head.
" I have, it seems," says Lord Mount
joy, " made some of them put themselves
in blood already ; I hear that Lord Mount-
garrett's sons have killed some of Clon-
care's and some of Tyrrill's followers : since
I contested with their father, about some
what I heard suspicious of them."*
A singular account may be seen in the
Paccata Hibernia, related by Sir G, Carew,
of the ^.ttempt he made to assassinate the
Sugan Earl, and his brother, by means of
their friend Nugent. The plot failed, but
it had the effect of sowing mistrust among
the chieftains ; and as they never retaliated
on the Lord Deputy or Lord President, it
became a received tactic in the warfiire of
those days.
And n6w came the triumph of power.
" The multitude, (as Sir J. Davis in
forms us) being brayed, as it were in a mor
tar, wi*h ftie sword, pestilence, and famine,
* When any of the Irish procured their pardon by
these means. Lord Mountjoy placed them in the posts
of danger, and so got rid of them.
I 2

116 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
altogether became admirers of the crown of
England!" " No spectacle, (says Morrison,) was
more frequent in the ditches of towns, and
especially in wasted countries, than to see
multitudes of these poor people dead, with
their mouths all coloured green, by eating
nettles, docks, and all things they could
rend above ground."
The very commanders, with some degree
of inconsistency, had to hang a parcel of old
women, convicted of being cannibals, after
they had reduced thein to the necessity of
becoming so . At length Sir Arthur Chiches
ter was eye witness to three chUdren feeding
upon the dead body of their mother ; and
some compunction seems to> have arisen in
the breasts of the English when they found
nature thus outraged by the effect of their
measures. The Queen exclaimed, that she feared
the same reproach might be made to her
which was formerly made by Batto to Ti
berius : "It is you, you that arq tQi^lame
for these things, who have committed your
flocks, not to shepherds, but to wolves."
Even Lord Mountjoy, the author of this

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 117
system of coercion, saw its folly arid re
pented of it. In his letters to the English
lords of council, he advises sincere and per
fect forgiveness to be granted to the Irish,
complete toleration of religion, and great
tenderness and liberality, in treating with
the old Irish chieftains.
So that after all the waste of life and
money. Lord Mountjoy had not advanced
a step, but now equally felt the necessity of
those wise and Conciliatory measures which,
if adopted at first, would have made the
war unnecessary.
Lord Bacon, in a letter to Secretary Ce
cil, inculcates the san^e policy ; and, with
his usual good sense, objects to the too
much letting of blood, (the panacea, so rea
dily adopted by statesmen of cold hearts,
and muddy understandings) and insists on
the necessity of religious toleration.
It is quite terrible (and it is still more
shocking that the observation should have
become trite and common-place) how
odious human nature appears in the re
corded transactions of governments *. They
* The English government, in order to steel its heart
against all the sufferings of the Irish, concluded that the

lis HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
seem to have no humanity, nor even good
.nature, and thejr errors seem to spring just
as much from a spirit of oppression and re
venge, as from folly. Elizabeth was cer-
,tainly a highly gifted princess, yet if she
had never been known but by her admini
stration in Ireland, she might fairly have
been ranked among the most oppressive
and vindictive tyrants that haAre insulted
th^ feelings and outraged the interests of
mankind,
nature of the Irish was different from that of any other
people, and only to be conciliated by hard usage. Thus,
they were said to be Uke nettles, which AVould not stipg
you if you squeezed them hard. TJieir ve?y submission
Avas considered as a symptom of rebellion, for
" Non genus ulium invenies, cui peccai-e
" Et flere magis iiaturale est."
Their sufferings were ridiculed by the proverb of " iveep^
ing Irish," as if in any countryan oppressive conqueror
could rely Avith security on forced subipission.

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 119

JAMES I.
TF desolation can be called tranquillity,
tranquiUity was the effect of Elizabeth's
measures ; yet the state of peace which
contiriued, with very trifling interruptions,
during the whole reign of James, must, in
justice, be ascribed to the policy of this
prince himself. It is true he exasperated
and encreased the new causes of rebellion,
and some of the old ; namely, those which
arose from religion and confiscations ; but
at the same time, he removed the principal
and most momentous spring of distur
bance, by effectually reducing the power of
the old Irish and old English chieftains.
This, for the time, was the most material
point ; independence and liberty were
well disciplined to pics and well understood,
which upon any favourable opportunity
could move the whole island to arms ;
whereas the natives had yet to learn the
more refined and metaphysical feelings,
which bleed and fester from the endurance
of distinctions and privations on account

1 20 HISTOEICAL APOLOGY FOR
of religion. It is therefore no wonder, that
although James, in fact, laid as sure a
ground work as any 6f his predecessors, for
future rebellions, his own reign was com
paratively tranquU.
His first object was to destroy, not only
the power but the very existence of the
old Irish and old EngUsh chieftains, and
this he accomplished with admirable wis
dom. He espoused the cause of their op
pressed subjects against their " chieftains.
He held out to them the blessing of equal
law, of the inviolabUity of their persons, of
the secure possession of their properties,
and its descent to their children. He
strengthened defective titles, and abolished
all distinctions between English and Irish ;
". whereupon, (says Sir John Davis,) such
comfort and security was bred in the hearts
of all men, as insured the calmest and most
universal peace that ever w^s seen in Ire
land." Can there be a more delightful, a
more glorious contemplation, than to see a
nation, a whole people, thus^rescued from
ignorance, poverty, faction and Avar, and
installed in aU the blessings of knowledge,
wealth and peace, by the operation of a

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 121
single measure, and this after the same
effect had been in vain attempted by force,
and its necessary attendant, havoc.
This was perfected in Ireland by the too
little celebrated Act of Oblivion, published
by proclamation under the great' seal; by
this all offences against the Crown, and all
particular trespasses betAveen subject and
subject, done at any time before his Majes
ty's reign, Avere pardoned, remitted, and
utterly extinguished, ncA^er to be revived or
called in question. And by the same pro
clamation all the Irish (avIio hitherto had
been left under the tyranny of their lords and
chieftains) were received into his Majesty's
protection, The oppressive exactions of
the Irish chieftains on their subjects, their
bonnaught, their coyne, and liveiy, cuttings
and cosher ings, Avere abolished. Instead of
granting to a chieftain, who surrendered
his chiefiy, the whole territory of the sept
in perpetuity, as had hitherto been done,
he was only allowed his patrimonial pro
perty, Avhich Avas generally very small, and
a compensation in money for the tributes,
exactions, and services due to liim.
The common Irish Avere studiously in-

122 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
structed that they were free subjects to the
kings of J!,ngland, and npt slaves or vassals
to their respective chiefs ; that the tributes
iand ejctortions exacted from them were not
lawful, and that they should no longer pay
them ; they gave a willing ear to these
lessons, " and therefore," says Davis, "the
greatness and power of these Irish lords
over the people suddenly fell and vanished,
when their oppressions and extortions were
taken away, which did maintain their
greatness, insomuch, as divers of thqm who
formerly made themselves owners of all
by force, were now, by the law, reduced to
this point, that wanting means to defray
their ordinary charges, they resorted to the
Lord Deputy, and petitioned fpr a competent
maintenance. But some of them being im
patient of this diminution, fled out of the
realm to foreign countries ; whereupon we
may well observe, that as extortion did
banish the old English freeholder, who
could not live but under the law, so the
law did banish the Irish Lord, who could
not live but by extortion,"
This enlarged policy, which destroyed
the Irish chieftains, as i£ by magic — this

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 123
system, at once so simple and so effectual,
never entered intp the contemplatioij of
James's predecessors. When they seized oft
the possessions of a conquered chieftain,
they confiscated also the Avhole property
of his subjects ; in order to win only a
seeming dependance, and to procure a no
minal surrender of his authority, they re-
granted to him not only his own lands, but
tiie lands of all his subjects, leaving him in
full possession of all his ancient tyranny,
tribute and exactions. When they sought
to destroy a chieftain, they raised up and
supported a rival, by which they tacitly
acknowledged the legality of those petty
sovereigns — thus Queen Elizabeth had her
O'Donnel, her O'Neil, her Macguire, her
O'Reily. Whenever they interfered, they
left the condition of the Irish worse than
before. They held the Irish in too much
contempt to have any interest in their wel
fare ; and this good effect at least arose
from the desperate resistance made by the
Irish against Elizabeth, that they gained a
Certain degree of respectability, which
seemed to entitle them to the solicitude of
gOA'ernment. James rescued them from

124 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR ^
oppression, and raised them from the station
ofthe slaves of petty despots, to the highest
rank of men, free British subjects.
If a dog were treated with barbarity, one
would feel an inclination to take his part.
One cannot but pity the misfortunes of the
Irish chieftains, and sometimes one must
admire the virtues which those misfortunes
called forth ; one cannot but detest the
mean perfidy, the rapacity and cruelty of
their oppressors ; yet as far as we can
judge from the scanty annals of the country,
they were the scourge of their own subjects,
and Ireland stands deeply indebted to
England for their overthrow.
James conferred a still greater benefit on
Ireland, by the abolition of the Brehon
laws of property.
After reading every account of Irish
history, one great perplexity appears to re
main : How does it happen, that from the
first invasion of the English till the reign
of James I. Ireland seems not to haA'e
made, the smallest progress in civilization
or wealth? That it was divided into a
number of siriall principalities, which
waged constant war on each other ; or that

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 125
the appointment of the chieftains was elec
tive, do not appear sufficient reasons, al
though these are the only ones assigned by
those who have been at the trouble of con
sidering the subject ; neither are the con
fiscations of property quite sufficient to
account for the effect ; there have been great
confiscations in other countries, and still
they have flourished; the petty states of
Greece where quite analogous to the chief-
ries (as they were called) in Ireland ; and
yet they seemed to flourish almost in pror-
portion to their dissensions. Poland felt the
bad effects of an elective monarchy more
than any other country, and yet in point
of civilization, it maintained a very respect
able rank among the nations of Europe ;
but Ireland never, for an instant, made
any progress in improA^emerit till the reign
of James I.
The cause of this extreme poverty, and
of its long continuance, Ave must conclude,
arose from the peculiar laws of property,
which were in force under the Irish dynas
ties. These laAvs have been described by
most writers as similar to the Kentish
custom of gavel-kind, and indeed so little

126 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
attention was paid to the subject, that were
it not for the researches of Sir J. Davis ^ the
knowledge of this singular usage would have
been entirely lost.
The Brehon law of property, he tells us,
was similar to the custom (as the English
lawyers term it) of hodge podge. When
any one of the sept died, his lands did not
descend to his sons, but were divided among
the whole sept ; and for this purpose the
chief of the sept made a new division of the
•whole lands belonging to the sept, and gaye
everyone his part according to seniority.
So that no man had a property which could
descend to his children; and even during
his own life, his possession of any particu
lar spot was quite uncertain, " being liable
to be cons;tantly shuffled and changed by
new partitions." The consequence of this
was* that there was not a house of brick or
stone among the Irish, down to the reign
of Henry VIL; not even a garden nor
orchard, nor Avell fenced nor improved
field, neither viUage or town, nor in ady
respect the least provision for poi^terity**
* WaMier givfes the same account of this singular and
pernicious law, dti the authority of an old Ifish mauu-

THE IRISH catholic's. 127
This monstrous custom, so opposite to, the
natural feelings of -mankind, was probably
perpetuated by the policy of the chiefs. In
the first place, the power of partitioning
being lodged in their hands, made them the
most absolute of tyrants, being the dis
pensers of the property, as well as of the
liberty of their subjects. In the second
place, it had the appearance of adding to
the number of their savage armies, for
where there was no improA^ement or tillage,
war was pursued as an occupation.
In the eaily history of Ireland we find
several instances of chieftains discounte
nancing tillage, and so late as Elizabeth's

script. He says that " upon every death, the possessions
of the whole sept were put together, and again divided
among the survivors by the head, or coufmny, Avhich di
vested each of them of his estate upon every new di
vision. The coufinny would refuse to admit a trades
man to a share of liis estate, as he had thereby degraded
himself. The reason of these perpetual subdivisions was, that
each country, not having a revenue to maintain an army,
the number of freeholds enabled a greater number of
freeholders to inaintain themselves'; and aS every holder
of land was a soldier, the oftener a freehold divided, the
greater number of men at arms.

128 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
reign, Morrison says, that " Sir Neal
Garve restrained his people from ploughing,
that they might assist him to do any mis
chief."* If it were not foreign to our present pur
pose, we could wish to dwell longer on this
subject ; it is fertUe in profitable contem
plation to every Irishman ; for at the same
time that we would not let a fault pass un-
censured in the vile system of government
practised by the English in Ireland, we
would stm maintain its superiority over the
barbarous tyrannies it displaced. We wish
io repress the headlong and unmethodised
desire for a separate and national govern
ment Avhich pervades Ireland, and suggest a
doubt whether modern chieftains would not
he as liable to make as fatal errors in their
civil code, as thase which have been point
ed out in the Brehon laws, and which Irish-
m.en stUl attempt to extenuate and affect to
admire. From the specimens left by the
leaders of late rebellions, we have little

* Con O'Neil, sirnamed Bapco, denouiiced a curse
Bpon such of his posterity as shquld sow corn or build
Ijouses. See Camden.

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 129
doubt they would, and less doubt, that the
consequence would be a proportionate re
turn to the degraded level of industry,
morals, and manners, Avhich existed during
the savage independence of Ireland.
James enforced the laws of England
throughout Ireland, extended the protec
tion of government to the lower orders, and
secured every man in possession of his pro
perty. These measures at once put an end
to the power of the Irish chieftains, and ex
tinguished the immediate cause of rebel
lions. James himself enjoyed a tranquij reign,
but unfortunately for his successor, he cre
ated pr inflamed other causes of rebellion,
which proved more inveterate than the
animosity ofthe old chieftains. These con
sisted in enormous confiscations of proper
ty, and in a decided hostility commenced
against the Roman Catholics.
Upon the flight of the Earls of Tyrone
and Tyrconnel, 500,000 aCres (which by
the bye did not belong to, them, but tp
their vassals) were cpnfiscated ; and tp this
cause may be fairly ascribed the share
which Sir Phelim O'Neil tpok in the rebel-
K

130 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
lion in the succeeding reign. However, to
do James justice, he avoided several errors
Which had been committed in former distri
butions of confiscated lands. He included
a large proportion of native Irish in the
grants, arid allowed to none of the under
takers, those large proportions which engen
dered petty despots, and gave them a con
sequence that disdained the coritroul of laws.
James, as a planter, saw the expediency of
toleration, and exempted his Roman Ca
tholic tenants from taking the oath of su
premacy. '' Sixty-six thousand acres were seized on
between the river of Arklow and the Slane ;
three hundred and eighty-five thousand
acres in the counties of Leitrim, Longford,
Westmeath, Leix, and Offaly ; and by re-
granting large proportions to the old inha
bitants on permanent tenures, these mea
sures were carried Avith apparent tranquil
lity. So far James iseems to have been
actuated by a colonizing Quixotism ; and
though his vicAv of objects was false, his in
tention was Uberal and good. But at the
latter end of his reign he was gradually led
frpm confiscating people's property for

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 13J
their interest, to confiscate for his, OAvn ; and
hi^^d recourse t9 an outrage whiph fpr its
practical viUainy, and its disastrous cp.n^e-
quences, can scarcely be paralleled-
Jaines's revenue in Ire^id fell i^hort sb^-
teen thouSfind ppunds per annum, in those
days thought a terri^ile deficiency. To, sup
ply this he h^ recpurse tp t]ie fplloAving de
vice, wh^ft^ ^'^ aimed at the inhabitants c^f
5|.n entire provinjce.
The lords a.nd gentleman of Connaught,
including the county o^ Clare, had surren-
dered th^ es^tates on cornpositijpn to Eliza-
biSth, but had neglected to t^e out the
i[etter§ patent for the re-grant of th^m, ^
was the custom, Th^s defect Afas fupfiUed
by J^iqes in his better days, Avhxp issued
^ew patents for re-conveying their \^x^s to
them and their heirs. T^i^se patents re
ceived the great seal, but by neglect qf the
officers cpncerned, were npt enrplled in
chancery, alt^ipugh the prpprietors^ liad:
paid three thousand pounds for the enroll
ments. Advantage was now taken qf tins invo
luntary omission. The titles were pro
nounced defective^ and the lands vested in
K 2

132 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR ,
the crowri. Though an act of state, dur
ing Lord Grrandison's government, had de
clared the titles valid, thoiigh the wrong
was evident, and the most pathetic remon
strances were made to the King, he would
not retract, till the desperation of a pro
vince, inhabited by an active and spirited
people, became alarmirig. Influenced by
this fear, and his' immediate necessities,
James consented to sell a new confirmation
of the 'patents, on dorisideration that the
rents' were to be doubled, and that a fine
shbuld^be given him equivalent to the sum
that was computed would arise from a new
plantation of the province . To these hard
terms 'the proprietors agreed .
^'- Surely if to these reasons for discontent
we add the regret which many of the chief-
lains or their heirs must haVe retained for
their princely prerogatives, and that natu-
ralfeeling 'which inspires one nation to re
sist the domination of another, a great part
o¥ the odium of -the succeeding rebeUion
should in justice be removed from the sup
posed influence of the Catholic reUgion.
Yet theie is no doubt that this influence
Avhic^i, as Ave have seen, had but a verv

THE IprSH, CATHOLICS. ;l33
partial effect during Elizabeth's reign, took
a very decided character at the latter end
of James's life.
The point then next to be considered, is
whether this disaffection was a necessary
consequence of the Catholic religion itself,
or whether it was excited by the injuries in
flicted on those who professed this religion.
The Roman Catholics of the Pale, and of
the toAvns and cities, Imd fought Elizabeth's
battles, and hitherto had considered the
distinction of English and Irish as para
mount to that of Protestant and Catholic.
During the whole of Elizabeth's wars, the
Catholics of the English Pale had always
sided with the Protestants of the English
Pale against the Irish enemy, though Ca
tholics. Yet in return, they had been
treated with considerable ' contumely as
Catholics, and in consequence finding
their religion made a mark to separate
them from the English Protestants, that
same religion became a common interest,
which drew them to an union Avith their
ancient enemies, 'the Catholics of Irish
race.

134 HISTORlCAi APOLOG't FOR
On the accesMori pf JaMfes, Whpfed hm^
kriPwh tp have tamfJCrfe'^ 'Ivith the 'ep^Uft of
Rpme, they resumed the public exerc'ise pf
their ieligipn as a thing of Conine; hut
James, who had measures to kee^ A^th *thfe
puritaris, arid who was very tenacious of his
ecclesiastical supremacy, prohibited '^e ce
lebration of the mass. T'his was the first
of those sa,d follies which sacrificed the in
terests of the fairest island in the world to
the senseless visioris of self-sufficient bigots.
This -was the first insuk which made the
most important jpart of the Catholics feel
that they had a separate interest from the
governmerit. The next step was still more brutal, and
proportionably stupid. The'Catholics Were
required to attend the Pro'testarit churches.
Upon their refusal, the magistrates and
chief citizens of Dublin were fined and com
mitted to prison. ^This sprea,d a general
feeling of anger among the Catholics, and
an immense concourse presented a remon
strance against the illegality df the im
prisonment, as the utrilost SeA^erity of the
laAV, obsolete from the time of its enact-

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 135
ment, only authorised a fine ; and at the
same time, petitioned for the free exercise
of their religion.
Unfpttunately for that system of con-
cUiation, which the Vast importance, and
hitherto known loyalty of the Catholics of
EngUsh descent tended to suggest to
James's counseUors, the news of the Gun
powder Plot was received on the very day
this petition was presented; and though
there appeared no reason afterwards to sup
pose any connection between the English
and Irish Catholics, yet this coincidence
was productive of every ill effect at the
moment. The Irish government was
alarmed, the chief petitioners were eon-
fined in the Castle of Dublin, and Sir Pa
trick Barnwell, their principal agent, was,
by the King's command, sent prisoner into
England. But what cpntributed mpre, even than
aU these reaspns, tp alienate the minds pf
the Cathplies pf the Pale and pf the toAvns,
was, their removal from all places of trust
and emolument.
To appreciate the effect which these
measures had upon the minds of the Ca-

136 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
tholics, we must make ourselves famUiar
with their situation in these times, and
judge of them from what, they were then,
not from what they are now. This point
is very httle understood. The Catholics
ofthe Pale and towns had, at the beginning
of James's reign, exactly tbe same habitual
ascendancy over the mere Irish, which the
Protestants have now over the Catholics.
They occupied every situation of import
ance under government, all offices in the
law, in the magistracy ; they filled the
ranks and officered the army ; they had
long been in the habit of considering the
English government in Ireland as owing its
existence to their courage, their loyalty,
and not unfrequently to the assistance of
their private fortunes. It had always been
considered as a matter of course that their
lords should be consulted on every impor
tant measure taken by government. So
circumstanced, the character of the Catho
lics of those days was quite the reverse of
what it was afterwards. Not habituated to
degradation, their sense of honour was lively
and resentful ; above suspicion, their con
duct was frarik, manly, and in justification.

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 1J7
bordered on defiance; their minds un
broken by adversity, and unsapped by the
effeminacy of superstition, were liberal,
enlarged, rich in the natural luxuriance of
talent, and grateful to culture. The he
reditary practice of arms had impressed
upon them the best qualities of a soldier-a
moral and physical courage, disinterested
ness and promptitude. We see in their
conduct nothing paltry, wavering, or sel
fish. We are not to imagine that because the
Catholics long felt very little interest about
their emancipation from degradation, that
the Catholics then felt very little upon
entering on it ; on the contrary, just that
degree of rage and indignation which the
Irish Protestants spoiled by poAver; would
now feel, if their churches were shut up,
if they were compelled to go to mass, if
they were declared incapable of holding
any office of trust and emolument, if they
were driven from the privy council; just
that degree must the old English colonists
have felt when, for the first time, discoun
tenanced and persecuted by the govern
ment.

13« HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
We omit to dAvell upon the condemna
tion of Lalor, a popr popish ecclesiastic,
whom government sought to dignify with
a martyrdpm ; and upon the expulsipn of
the pppish regulars from the kingdpm,^ as
far as direct insults could justify the resent
ment of the Roman Catholics, we have said
enough. An indirect attack was made
upon them, more fatal to their interests
and to those of the countrj^ at large, which
well merits our consideration, for we now
pay the penalty for it.
James, finding it possible that tliere
might be a majority of Roman Cathohcs
in the House of Commons, created a large
number of boroughs from towns so incon
siderable, that they and their represent-
tives would be certain to be dependent on
government. Here was accomplished the
ruin of the Catholics ; here was perpetu
ated the distraction of ^the country ; here
commenced the corruption of the constitu
tion; this measure, to which the Pro
testants were base accessaries, has been
visited upon their descendants with poetical
justice, by the Union, which was effected
by purchasing the corrupt owners of th'ese

TllE IRISH CATHOLICS. 139
identical rotten b<3^<)«ghs. To this mea
sure the Cathplics gave all the resistance
wMch S]pirit and talents couM prompt. In
vain. A tyrant might have yielded from
fear ; a Wise king would have retracted from
eonvictioto ; but the obstinacy and conceit
of a pedant were invincible.
Vet James had cerise enough to stoop
to cPnciliation when kie had carried his
point. No netv measures were proposed
against popery; the oath of suprem^acy
was tacitly excused, and, when a bill was
proposed hy Sir Oliver St, John for keep
ing the 5th of November as a religious
anniversaiy, it Avas silently ^Ot rid of.
A government may, with safety to itself,
essentially infringe the irfterests of its sub
jects, if it has the condescension to manage
their pride. This was exemplified in the
case of James. Although he had prepared
t^e ruin of the Catholics, yet as soon as he
assumed a moderate tone and gentle usage
towards them, they vied with the Protes
tants in expressions of loyalty, and, what
was more substantial^ in granting subsi
dies. Thus stood the Question of disaffection

140 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
when James died : Ampiig the Ipwer ranks,
there was a legendary recprd pf English
barbarities ; the ppwer pf the pld Irish,
and pf the pld English chieftains, had been
destrpyed by the wisdpm pf James ; yet,
ampng these septs, there were many whp
valued the direct gratificatipn of pride,
afforded by princely consequence, to the
indirect gratification of pride, which is ac
quired through the medium of property :
who preferred to be poor tanists, elected by
their clan, rather than rich landlords de
pendant on law. The title of Monarch of
Ireland was stUl cherished by the O'Neils,
and that it was still allowed, at least by the
northern Irish, is evident from the great
power acquired by Sir Phelim O'Neil, in the
, greatrebellion under CharlesI, James'scon-
fiscations, but particularly the attack made
on the titles of the province of Connaught,
the practice known to be a favourite one
with him, even as a systematical degree,
kept men's minds in an uneasy state of
suspense for Avhat Avas to come, and rage for
what had past.
The persecution of the Catholics had,
for the first time, produced a resistance on

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. ui
the part of the old English Catholics of the
Pale, hitherto the most efficient supporters
ofthe English power ; it had alienated their
minds— it had detached their sympathy from
the ancient object of their love, the Eng
lish government ; and gradually attached it .
to the ancient object of their detestation, the
Irish enemy. That this was the effect, not
of religion, but of the persecution of the
religion, is clear. Had it been the effect
of the religion, it Avould t have com
menced in Henry VII l's time^with the Re
formation, which it did not; it Avould have
been apparent in Edward VI's time, which
it was not ; it would haA'^e proved fatal to
the English power in Elizabeth's wars ; yet,
at that time, there Avas little or no appre
hension of it- But on the contrary, it did
not exist before the persecution began ; it
priginated with the persecution, and it
grew and waxed strong, as the persecution
encreased.

142 HISTORICAL APOLOGY IfOK

CHAi;iL.ES I.
T^E nq^Asr apprp.a(fh a period pi Irish
biistory, wlji^a increased civi,Uz?^tion
gave a more distinct order, and ^ cleare;r
Ught to th^ tr^n59.ctipjns pf the times,
Tbe reoprds pf t^iefn? days ^.r^ copious,
and 9.re eij.tirely in i^vpur pf Pur argument,
and may b^ reJ,ied on Ajvith certainty.
We ?Ii^y stiU pursue the s^me §rraflLge-
me^t, poiinitiiEig ^Uft; the C3.uses which gene
rated rebeUipii, and di^ti^i^guishing the
effects produced by the injurious treatment
of tbie professors o/ th^C^ithpMp rehgion,
from th^ influence pf t^ r^gipn itself,
until that in^uence b/?ing rpused a*Qd exas-
perate:d by persecution, acquired a fojce
from its co;p,tmri.^- struggles, Avhich swept
before it every obstacle of prejudice ^n^
reason, of oppression and law.
Independent of this new influence of re
ligion, which now rapidly encreased, we are
to consider, that many previous causes of
discontent continued to exist. We are not

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 143
to omit, the unappeased hatred, which the
Irish sul^ects bore to their EngUsh con
querors. The injuries done to individuals
by confiscations and plantations, particu
larly those of Ulster. The regrets of the
descendants of the Irish chieftains for the
loss of their principalities, and the ever
Avakeful ambition ofthe lipuse pf O'NeU,
The more effect these causes had in pro
ducing the succeeding rebellion, the less
must be ascribed to tlie Catholic religion.
That these causes had a principal effect,
and produced the rebeUion of I64I, though
they did not entirely supply its force, is
very clear, from the following account of
its commencement, extracted from Leland:
Roger Moor was the head of that power
ful family who had possessed the dynasty '
of Leix, now called the Queen's county.
Th^ were his ancestors, who in the reign
of Mary, had been expelled from their
princely possessions, by violence and fraud ;
the Sept had been almost exterminated by
mUitary execution. Those that remained,
Avere distinguished by an hereditary hatred
of the English, In the progress of an ob
stinate contest, they had re-possessed them-

1-14 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
selves of a great part of the territories, and
fought under the O'Moor, of Elizabeth's
reign, with great resolution and persever
ance, but were ultimately defeated, and
again driven from their possessions,
Roger O'Moor possessed all the qualities
of the heroic character, talents, prompti
tude, courage, and love of his country. ; his
person was remarkably graceful, his aspect
dignified, his manners courteous. The old
Irish beheld the gallant representative of
one of their kings ^ith an extravagance of
rapture and affection, and stimulated his
spirit by the expectations they attached to
him.- It* Avas a proverbial expression,
" our dependence is on God, our Lady, and
Roger O'Moor." He was tenderly attached
to young O'Neil, the son of the great Hugh
O'Neil ; with him he dwelt on the calami
ties of their fathers, their brave efforts in
the cause of their countrymen, and the
hopes of still reviving the ancient splendor
of their families. With such interests to
confirm his purpose, with such passions to
fire his iniagination, is there any necessity
to suppose, that 'religious bigotry was his

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 145
iriducement, to devote himself tp pne brave
effort for the independence of his country ?
It was upon the same feelings he relied,
for gaining associates ; he spoke to the
Ulster Irish, of the severities inflicted on
them by Elizabeth, and of the plunder of
their property by James.
To Mac Guire, whose father was chief
tain of Fermanagh, he represented the an
cient power and splendor of his famUy, pa
thetically lamented his present difficulties,
and pointed his anger against, the English,
who had despoiled the old and rightful pos
sessors ofthe island, arid planted a race of
aliens and foreigners ori their property.
With the same representation he wrought
upon Mac Mahon, Reily, Byrne, * Tyr-
logh, and Phelim O'Neil, whose ancestors
had, within a no very distant date, been
possessed of sovereign power,
, These were the men who planned, these
the motives that urged and stimulated the
country to rebellion ; whatever accession it
afterwards received from different causes,
these must be considered as the principal,
from these, and these alone, it began; had
* The sept of the Byrnes had. been cruelly harassed
and spoiled by SirW. Parsons. L

146 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
these not existed, it is problematical, whe
ther the rebeUion itself Avould ever have
existed. Another material cause of the rebeUion,
which had no connection with religion, was
Lord Stafford's resumption of the plan for
confiscating the province of Connaught.
The unfortunate landed proprietors had
already twice purchased their titles from
the crowUj'^yet Stafford did not hesitate to
outrage every feeling of humanity, and
every rule of justice, by subverting them a
third time.
This transaction may not perhaps he the
most infamous that ever occurred, but cer
tainly the most infamous act of oppression,
that was ever perpetrated by a plea of law,
under the sanction of juries. It is uncoin-
fortableto dwell on so abominable an out
rage, it is sufficient to observe, that it was
in part carried by violence, by fining the '
sheriffs, imprisoning jurors, and fining them
totheampunt of 40001. each, by the terrors
of Star Chamber, and the presence of the
Lord Deputy ; yet in the end, the haughty
and interiiperate spirit ctf Stafford was
forced to bend to the tempest he himself

THE IRISH CATHOLICS, 147
had raised, and the apprehension of a rebel
lion put a stop to the project.
The king deduced his claim from an sera
so distant as the reign of Henry the third,
and when we consider that the attempt had
now been thrice -repeated, and that upon
pretences equally antiquated, the property
of the O'Byrnes, in AVicklow, had lately
been confiscated ; we must not be surprised,
that none of the Irish, or old English, felt
secure in their possessions..
Let us now consider, how far religion
may be considered as a cause of the rebel
lion. We have already seen that in James's
reign the Catholic religion had asisumed a
very decided influence on men's minds ; in
Charles's reign, this continued to encrease ;
in both reigns it was adverse to the govern
ment. In James's reign, we proved, that
this arose from the injuries sustained by
the professors of that faith, not from the
faith itself, let Us see if there are any grounds
to support the same conclusion during the
reign of Charles, *
The first important injustice which
tended to alienate the minds of the Roman
L 2

148 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
Catholics, was the perfidy of Charles, with
regard to the celebrated Graces. The Ca
tholics had offered to pay one hundred
and twenty thousand pounds for the enact
ment of certain laws, for the security of
toleration, property, and justice ; the king
accepted their offer, and gave his royal pro
mise, that these laws should be passed. He
took their money, and broke his word in
the most cruel and insulting manner, arid
not one of these Graces, though they were
so reasonable and wise, that the monarch
ought to have been pbliged tp the subject
for suggesting them, was ever granted.
Thus, in addition to the indignation
Avhich the Catholics already felt, on account
of the penal laws, was added, resentment
for the loss of their money, and that bitter
vexation, which is always felt by persons
conscious of having been duped.
The Catholics felt this treatment more
sensibly, because, from the supposed parti
ality of Charles, to the Popish rehgion, they
had expected protection, countenance, and
favour. * Part of the money was ajso paid by Protestants,
as several of the Graces were of a general nature.

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 149
Charles, with that policy, at the same
time unsenerous and fruitless, which is
ever the resource of tottering power, sacri
ficed his friends, in hopes of appeasing his
enemies. The new English and the Puri
tans in Ireland, Avere courted and advanced
to every office of trust, while the old Eng
lish, (mostly Catholics,) who had been in
the habit of influencing every affair of mo
ment, AA'ere driven from the court with
every expression of contumely and con
tempt. The invidious fine on Catholics,
for not frequenting church on Sundays, was
perpetually threatened to be imposed, and
at length was made a source of revenue,
and was commuted by Lord Stafford, for
the sum of .i^20,000, Finally, Sir WUliam
Parsons was appointed Lord Chief Justice,
and the Catholics could no longer entertain
any doubt, but that the Puritans Would
acquire the same ascendancy in Ireland,
Avhich they had already done in England.
To calculate the impression which this
conviction must have produced on the
minds of Catholics, we ought to look back
to the language held by the Puritans of
those days, and the sentiments they avowed,
Avhen speaking of the Catholics ; the iaso-

150 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
lence of political superiority intoxicated
them, the pride of fanaticism hardened their
hearts ; their pPwer was commensurate with
their hate; Avith one hand they signed the
law-, with the other they raised the sword
that was to exterminate the Papists, whom
they called bloOdy.
All this tiine, while the English goA^ern-
ment prepared the ground, the court of
Rome Was industriously sowing the seeds
of rebellion.
Jesuits and priests were sent from Spain
and Rome, who knew how to turn these
preposterous mistakes of government, to
the best account ; they knew how to en-
flame men's passidns by their pride, how
to mould their opinions by their interests,
and how to urge religion to fanaticism, by
the sharp incentive of injuries and insults.
Heme the Cathplic religion, which in Ire
land had till nPw been characterised by a
native mildness, a spirit of toleration, and
a composure peculiar to old establishmerits,
acquired an Uliberal, enthusiastic, and san
guinary spirit.
Yet, so difficrilt is it even for oppression
to eradicate from men's mUids, \he habits

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 151
of loyalty and submission to government,
that the religious principle appears to have
had little influence in originating the rebel
lion. Even when the stronger feelings of
injured interest, and outraged pride, had
urged the native Irish to take up arms, the
Catholics of the Pale advanced forward in
support of government. They were re
ceived with a scA'cre suspicion, by the puri
tan chief justice ; and instead of being as of
old, looked up to as the solid support of
government, (which probably would have
made them continue so) a very scanty sup
ply pf arms was delivered to them. At
length, on the progress of the rebeUion,
they were entirely deprived of arms.
This was the full measure of folly, and
completed that series of insults and injuries,
which broke the strong bands of habitual
loyalty, which had hitherto attached the
Catholics of the Pale to the English gp-
vernment, with a fidelity that had never
been suspected through five successive
reigns. The Catholic lords and gentlemen of the
Pale, when their loyalty was made incom
patible with their, honour, reluctantly had

lis HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
recourse to resistance, and sooner than sur
render their arms, turned them against the
government.* The Catholics of the Pale, hitherto the
most determined enemies of the native Irish,
now joined in their rebellion.
This is the event with which the train of
our argument closes.
Before this it is impossible to call the
rebellions of the Irish, Catholic rebellions,
when they were in fact principally opposed
by Catholics ; butafter this it would beidle to
deny that Catholic bigotry had a very large
share in exciting and prolonging the rebelr-
lions in Ireland. That writer would be an
injudicious defender of the Catholics, who
should deny the fact ; when perhaps there
is not a more lamentable instance of the
weakness of the human mind, when sub
servient to religious bigotry, than the ab
surdity arid intemperance with which the
Catholics, acted, when they surrendered
* In an age when the profession of arms was the only
profession of a gentlemap, and Avhep it Avas disgraceful
to appear without them, this measure of depriving the
Catholic gentry of arms, must have been felt as a much
greater insult, than what we have now any idea of

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 153
their interests to the influence ofthe Nuncio
Ranuncini, and in fact sold their country to
the Pope.
But if it is certain that the Catholics be
came bigots and rebels, it is no less certain
that their bigotry and rebeUions arose en
tirely from the injuries and insults inflicted
on them ; and if avc have made this clear so
far, it is unnecessary to carry the argu
ment further, as this persecution was en
creased to a degree which future ages will
scarcely believe, or believing, will Avonder
how it could be borne.
To the Protestants these arguments are
addressed, and if they have no other effect
than to make them re-consider the policy
of maintaining the present political inferio
rity of the Catholics, they will not have
been urged in vain.
In our anxiety to produce conviction,
we have already been guilty of too much
repetition. Instead, therefore, of recapitu
lating our arguments Ave will take a short
view of the impolicy of continuing the pre
sent restrictions, and briefly state their prac
tical effect.
We Avill not argue the question of right.

154 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
In this age of mere mercantile feelings, to
^ speak from, the heart, is not to speak to the
head ; Ave must prove the Catholic restric
tions to be a losing speculation, or we
prove nothing.
At this present moment, the Avhole soul
of England is bent on reducing the power
of the French within reasonable bounds.
For this they are profuse of their blood,
€md their very means of subsistence ; . yet to
this they will not sacrifice their bigotry. If
England had possessed any day these last
three months, a disposable army of 60,000
men, to act on the Continent, she might
have struck a decisive blow ; she might
haA'e destroyed Boulogne, she might easily
have become mistress of Italy, or she
might have hung upon the whole line of
French dominion, and held those armies in
suspense, which now pour into Poland with
such uninterrupted celerity. Yet double
this force might have been raised in Ire
land, if the minds of its inhabitants had been
conciliated by a constitutional grant of civU
and religious freedom.
At present, the Roman Catholic peasan
try enlist with the greatest reluctance, be-

THE IRISH CATHOLICS, 155
cause government sets their religious faith,
and their mUitary duty, at variance, and
the circumstance of there being no Catholic
officers in the army, destroys that inclina
tion to enlist, Avhich ahvays arises from
serving under officers of the same sect as
themselves. The same injudicious intolerance makes
the peasantry disaffected; what follows?
you cannot trust in the militia, for they
are Catholics. The yeomanry are too few
in numbers : and as they, from the same
infection of intolerance, are partizans, in
calling in their aid, you run the risk of
exciting a civil war.
You are forced then, in order to prevent
the bad effects of your system of govern»i
ment, to bring an army from England.
.Then comes the fear of invasion, and your
difficulties multiply an hundred fold. You
want an additional army to keep down the
peasantry, you want an army to awe the
militia, you want an army to restrain the
intemperate zeal of the yeomanry, you
Avaiit an army to oppose the enemy.
This is no very inaccurate statement of
the military necessities of the English go-

156 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
vernment in Ireland, which arise entirely
from the want of wisdom in their political
measures. An army Avithout any facUity
of recruiting ; a people for your enemy ; a
militia that you place no confidence in ; a
yeomanry whose very assistance is accom
panied with the risk of injuring you ; and a
foreign enemy, ready to take the first op
portunity of turning your mistakes to his
own profit.
But for a moment reverse your mea
sures : treat the Protestants and Catholics
without any discrimination, assuage the
wounded pride of the country, by some
modification of the union, and the hearts
of the Irish, naturally loyal and affection
ate, Avill yield with delight to the senti
ments of zeal and duty towards the govern
ment. Who, that sympathised in the expansion
of honest gratulation which broke forth on
the Duke of Bedford's arrival in Ireland,
can doubt it !
What would be the effect ? The yeo
manry, strengthened by the accession of
all the wealthy and more respectable Ca
tholics, and Avithout any apprehension of

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 157
internal insuri'ection, Avould be quite suf
ficient to defend the country from any sud
den invasion, on a small scale. The militia
might be sent on foreign service, together
with the English army, at present locked
up in Ireland, or kept in England from the
apprehension of danger in Ireland.
The recruiting service, assisted with the
influence of Catholic officers, would go on
with rapidity, and produce an annual sup
ply, far beyond what is imagined. By
these means, an army of at least 60,000
men might be made disposable, and be
brought to act against the most vulnerable
parts of the French empire : let its losses
be ever so great, the means of recruiting
it would be nearly inexhaustible ; and it is
no great presumption, after what we have
seen done by a combined army of Irish and
English at Egypt, and at Maida, to say,
that it would consist of the bravest, and
most formidable troops in Europe.
To this desirable and decisive increase in
national strength, there is but the one ob
stacle, a kind of nursery terror of the Pope,
which still clings to our maturer reason.
It is by the extreme of this terror that

158 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
our opponents are blinded, or they would
perceive that we have the same object in
view with them, only that we pursue it by
very different means.
They wish to secure the forfeited proper
ties to their present OAvners ; so do we. They
wish to put an end to Catholic rebellions ;
so do Ave They wish to curb the bigotry
and intolerance of the Catholic religion ; so
do we. What means have they adopted
to effect this purpose, and have they suc
ceeded? No. Why then should you be
so aA^erse to try an opposite mode of pro
ceeding ?
You were possessed of every instrument of
influence, of restriction, of terror, and you
made ample use of them : yet the Roman C a-
thoUcs, like the Israelites of old, multipUed
under the oppression of their task-masters.
If interest has failed to gain one single con
vert from the most corrupt of the Roman
Catholics, the desire cf political importance
from the most ambitious, fear from the
most timid, certainly the severe and dis
qualifying system is radically wrong. On
the contrary, it has become a received
axiom in modern policy, that sects gain

' THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 159
force and numbers by being stigmatized and
oppressed, but by being assimilated and
adopted by government, their union i re
laxed, and their numbers diminished. Vol
taire Avas a deist, his testimony must, there
fore, be considered as impartial ; Mrs. Bar-
bauld is a dissenter, her evidence is the con
fession of an enemy.* Both agree that sects
only flourish from the distinctive marks and
disqualifications which governments attach
to them, because no honourable man Avould
quit a discountenanced sect, as his desertion
would not be supposed to arise from a
change of opinion, but from motives'of fear
or mean interestedness. But when nothing
is lost by remaining attaclied to a sect, and
nothing gained by quitting it, its adherents
will listen to persuasion, or will yield to
fashion, and will naturally adopt that form
of religion which is most consonant to truth.

'3*

* See. Voltaire's English letters. Mrs, Barbauld's
beautiful Essay on Devotional Taste,
" That conversion will always be suspected M'.hich
apparently concurs with interest; he that never finds his
error till it hinders his progress towards wealth and
honour, will not be thought to love truth only -for her
self," Johnson on Drydea's Conversion.

IGO HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
or most suitable to the manners of the
Avoiid. In this age when scepticism is affected as
a mark of talents, and religious policy enters
very little into the usual intercourse of the
world, even the Protestant rehgion, di
vested of many awkward articles of faith,
and of all the rigour of church discipline,
is , lamentably on the decline. We cannot
suppose that the doctrines and ceremonies
of the Catholic religion are more consonant
with reason, or more agreeable to the
strong impulse of manners ; surely, then,
its flourishing state must be the effect of
the political causes to which it is sub-
jecteci; of that irritation Avhich prevents
indifference; of those distinctions which
make adherence amenable to public opi
nion ; of those privations which make apos-
tacy base.
The present union and formidable di
mension of the Catholic body, arise from
the injudicious repulsion of government; as
a political party, they could never hold
together merely by their own weak at
traction.

, THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 101
What can be a stronger proof of the
truth of this reasoning, than the fluctuation
of religious zeal in France ? The Roman
Catholic religion had there been long es
tablished under the monarchy, and had
gradually dwindled into a mere state cere
monial. Persecuted, during the violence
of the revolution, it recovered the enthu
siasm of primitive Christianity ; tolerated
under the constilate, its zeal abated. Once
more established under the imperial house,
it has ceased to be an object of interest, and
the churches are once more abandoned.*
It is not from the efforts of the esta
blished church, from its charter-Schools,
and the aid of penal laws; that the Catho
lics have any reason to apprehend a diminu
tion of numbers, but from a sect, and that
sect the MethodiSits. A very obvious fact
wiU sometimes remain unnoticed, and yet
when once pbirited out, wiU be generally
acknowledged. This We imagine to be the
case with the hitherto urinotieed progress
the Methodists are making in Ireland
against the Romari Catholic religion.
* See Maclean's Tour in France.
M

102 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
Their eloquence, their zeal, and astonishing
industry in employing the most minute
means to propagate their tenets ; above all
the judicious use they make of the power of
the press, has produced an impression
which has evidently alarmed the Catholic
priesthood. We are very doubtful Avhether
it is an event to be wished : whether the
Catholic religion is not better adapted to
the cheerful temper of the Irish peasantry,
than the proud and sullen spirit of Metho
dism ; yet we have not the least doubt, that
if the Catholic clergy were paid by govern
ment, and if the practice and principle of
religious restrictions were abandoned, in
the course of a few years, a very large por
tion of the Irish peasantry would be con
verted to Methodism.
At present, the Methodists only succeed
in cutting off. supplies from the established
church, and have reduced it to an insignifi
cance, which, compared with its revenues,
is quite ridiculous.
What then, in the name of consistency,
can make the enemies of Popery so violent
in their opposition to the only measures
which can check the influence of the Ca-

The IRISH CATHOLICS. 163
tholic religion? That which will ever
make the opinion of the 'multitude an ab
surd one, on abstruse subjects; the want of
capacity and inclination to examine farther
than the apparent effects of circumstances ;
which makes them bcUeve, that scarcity is
the effect of regrators and monopolists ; that
protecting duties bring home-manufacto-
:|:ies to perfection; that the sun revolves
round the earth, or any error which it re
quires a chain of reasoning to refute.
But whence can arise the opposition of
goA^ernment to the emancipation ofthe Ca
tholics ? are we seriously to be referred to
his Majesty's coronation oath, to his Ma
jesty's scruples of coriscience!
There is at least as much truth in the
maxim that the King never dies, as that the
King can do no wrong ; and if the former
means any thing, it is that the constitution
solely regards the King in a political, never
in a personal light : his Ufe is a poUtical life,
and knows no dissolution ; his acts are con
sidered only as acts of state, for which not
the King, but ministers are responsible : his
oath is not his own personally, he is not
responsible even for its violation, but his
M 2

164 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
ministers are; it is an act of state, it istft
pledge given to the legislature ; the per
formance of which they only can exact, they
only can remit, and which an act of theirs
clearly can remit.
There has been of late years, a great, ' an
alarming, and a treasonable inroad made
upon the constitution, by a set of men, who
perpetually introduce the idea of the King's
personality ; of which the wisdom of our
constitution has foreseen the dai>ger, and
has guarded against it with the most
anxious Care, For, if that fatal hour shall
ever come when the King of England shall
be the leader of a. party — -when he shall be
nominally King, and virtuaUy minister —
when to tbe prerogative of the veto, he shall
add the power of the initiativerr—tbat sacred
fiction, that the King can do no wrong, will
gradually disappear before the force of im
perious circumstances,, and responsibility
wiU gradually attach itself to the idea and
the person of the King,
This, revolution we believe to be far,, very
far distant; nor are we of that class cf
j'afermists who instantly believe the exist
ence of whatever they apprehend. But

THE IRISH CATH'&LICS. • 165
foreseeing tlie calamities that would flow
from such a change, Ave cannot think our^
selves too anxious in protesting against the
too frequent introduction ofthe idea ofthe
King's private feelings and interference on
great political questions.
We shall, therefore, with more decency,
and more in the spirit of the constitution,
consider only the scruples of conscience
which may arise in the breasts of his Ma
jesty's ministers, or the two houses of Par
liament, from any inconsistency between
the coronation oath, and the repeal of the
restrictions on the Roman Catholics.
There appears nothing in the literal sense
of the oath hostile to the removal of any re
ligious disqualifications imposed upon any
sect, when such disqtiaUfications are found
to be detrimental to the empire. But as
Avords may be construed into almost any
meaning, we will not stand upon these
grounds ; but suppose that Catholic eman
cipation is inconsistent with the tenor of
the coronation oath .
WcAvill noAV ask, can any obligation, any
oath be valid in the eye of religion and mo
rality, Avhich is grounded on a violation of

166 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
an engagement more solemn and sacred?
There can be np dpubt pf the reply : Cer
tainly npt.
Then we ask, how can the government
plead the coronation oath to perpetuate
measures that were enacted in violation of
the solemn treaty of Limerick ?
That treaty remains a monument of the
most flagrant perfidy that ever disgraced a
. nation ; upon the faith of it, the Irish Ca
tholics gave up that power and influence,
which you neither wiU, nor can restore to
them. And tiU that treaty is fulfilled in its
most liberal sense, no ingenuity can remove
the stain of deliberate perjury from the
character of the English nation.
Surely it is a conscience which will strain
at gnats, and yet swallow camels, which
stickles for an oath of ceremony, doubtful
even in the meaning of the animus impo-
nentis ; and yet wiU be content to viuiate a
compact so important as the treaty of Li^
merick, for Avhich you have received your
consideration, and on which millions rested
their confidence and their interests.
Surely the conscience of ministers might
be affected by the viplatipn pf thpse pledges

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 167
given to the Catholics at the time of the
Union, (it signifies not Avhetlier expressed
or implied) ; surely they might feel com
punction at betraying a nation to dishonour,
and then Avith-holding from her the paltry
recompense that bribed her to her disgrace.
The men who perpetuate a crime, com-'
mit it ; and as long as the present or any
ministry continue the restrictions on the
Irish Roman Catholics, they are deeply
responsible for a gross and dishonourable
breach of common faith and honesty. It is
in vain they attempt to shelter themselves
under the plea of the King's personal feel
ings. It will not be readily supposed that
his Majesty, whose principal glory will
hereafter rest on the repeal he has made of
the severer penal statutes in Ireland, who
has seen the happiest effects, in promoting
wealth, and the security of property, flow
from that repeal, it avUI not be readily sup
posed that he can be actuated by the il
liberal spirit which his self-narned friends,
but real enemies, charge to his account.*
* His present Majesty repealed the Act of Parliament,
by which Irish Catholics were prevented fiom purchas-

138 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
Though we are not inclined in general to
violent measures, yet we think that im
peachment and imprisonment in the Tower,
Avould be too gentle a punishment for those
secret advisers, who have not only unhinged
the most delicate springs of the constitu
tion to serve their piivate views, but have
done their best to cast obloquy and con
tempt on the name of the King— a name
which ought neA^er to be compromised on
any topic whatever---ought never to be ex
posed to the common handling of public
disquisition. With what flagrant and impudent mis
representations must these men have poi-
soined the King's ear, if they have, suc
ceeded in making him perversely hostile to
^the Irish Roman Catholics — a body of
men who have the strongest devotion and
attachment not only to his Majesty's po-
ing property. The samp alarm was felt at that repeal,
which is now attempted to be raised on account of a still
more liberal repeal ; and yet none but the best Conse
quences have followed. The large purchases which the
Catholics have made of the forfeited lands, have removed
the insecurity which depressed their value, as long as
they were possessed exclusively by Protestants.

THE IRISH CATHOLICS, 169
litical, but to his personal character, and
who would set a value on his Majesty's
countenance and favour, only inferior to
that which they would attach to the benig
nity of their God.*
We aie anxious before Ave conclude, to
give the public the means to form a just
estunate of the hardship of the priA^ations
which the Lish Catholics experience, the
extent of which is not generally under
stood, and from the supposed insignificance
of which, an argument is sometimes draAvn
against their repeal.
The Catholics, by being excluded from
all offices of trust and emolument, lose all
political consequence in the country; so
that a Pi otestant of seven hundred a year is
more looked up to than a Catholic of seven
thousand a year.
By being excluded front sitting in Parlia
ment, they are deprived of tlie most pre-
* We have heard Irish Catholics, who have had only
a glimj^se of his Majesty's person, on Windsor terrace,
spe^k of him with a fervor and delight, which we never
Avitnessed in an Irish Protestant, who only loves his
King, as a Dublin coal merchant does a foul wind, be
cause it encreages his monopoly.

170 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
cious and most effective guarantee of civil
liberty. This disqualification, in fact, shuts them
out from the subordinate offices which the
law permits them to hold ; for all these are
places more or less at the disposal of the
Irish members of Parliament, in order to
secure their attachment to ministers.
Thus Catholics, through the greater part
of Ireland, are still virtually excluded from
the offices of Justice of Peace, and Grand
Juror ; and where they are admitted, it is
because they have a sufficient number of
votes to be an object to the county mein-
ber. A gentleman's consequence in Ireland
consists very much at present in being a
Justice of the Peace, a Grand Juror, and a
Captain of a yeoman corps. From these
situations the Catholics are, for the most
part, in fact excluded, and consequently
exist in a very painful degree Of insignifi
cance. From the same cause the middling class
of Roman Catholics are excluded from the
very desirable employments of the revenue,
the excise, and all petty municipal offices,

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 171
So complete is the monopoly of civil em
ployments in lie' and, that to be a Pro
testant is almost sufficient to be secure of
a competence. But the Catholics may have recourse to
trade. It is true; but under great com
parative disadvantages. They aie exclu
ded from all corporations, and are de-
barrred by law from being Directors of the
Bank. It is very plain that this oppressive re
striction, .^ubversive of the fieedom of trade
as well as of civil liberty, must have a very
pernicious effect on the industry of the Ca
tholics ; and if Catholic tradesmen and ar
tizans should be found more addicted to idle
and irregular habits than the Protestants, it
may fairiy be ascribed to this very intelli
gible cause, rather than to the nature of
their religion.
Another immediate injury, which the
present penal statutes inflict on the Ca
tholics, is a great insecurity of property
a nd person, and extreme uncertainty of
redress from the laws of their country.
Catholics cannot be Sheriffs, or Sub-
sheriffs; Juries are of course Protestant;

179 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
and on any trial, where party feelings can
interfere, a Catholic is generally judged
unfairly. It is grown into a proverb among the
common people in Ireland, that there is
no law for a Catholic.
But a still more vexatious train of in
juries flow from the influence which these
penal statutes have in forming habits and
opinions inimical to the Catholics.
Government, in fact, is the great leader
of the ton, and its caprices and absurdities
are adopted by the public, with all the
rage and servility of fashion.
The EngUsh government manifest by
their tenaciousness of the penal laws, that
they mistrust and dislike the Catholics.
First come the Bank Directors of Ire
land, who, not having the good sense to
feel, that as their profession is naturaUy
sordid and selfish, it ought to -^be counter
acted by liberality of sentiment, pass a
law, that no Catholic shall be employed
in any office belonging to the Bank, the
number of which is A'-ery considerable.
Protestant famUies will not in general
take Catholic servants: every newspaper

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. , 173
eon tains advertisements for servants ; sig
nifying, that they must not be Catholics.
In yeoman corps, with very feAV excep
tions, no Catholics are admitted.
Upon the last rebeUion, tlie principal
Roman Catholics in Dublin, Avere anxious
to enrol themselves in yeoman corps ; they
were rejected to a man, by the merchant's
corps, and in general by all others, and
Avere only admitted into the lawyer's corps.
In the country corps of yeomanry, the
bigotry of the captains generally excludes
Catholics, and even when the captains
would wish, for the appearance of their
corps, to mix a few stout comely Catholics
in it, the bigotry of the privates interferes
to prevent it; as in most instances, they
would resign to a man, if such a measure
was persisted in.
In many towns of Ireland, there are con-.
vivial societies, among whom it is a rule to
exclude all Catholics.
In many counties, Protestants will not
visit a Catholic, and it is the fashion to
speak of them in the mc^t injurious and
degrading terms.
Yet the Irish Protestants are not so

174 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
much to be blamed for these ridiculous and
disgraceful habits of domestic dissension;
they suffered in fact much by a rebeUion
which they imagined sprung from Catholic
bigotry. They suffered still more in appre
hension. They were too much under the influence
of alarm to enquire calmly into the causes
of the insurrection, or to consider that a
popular commotion, excited by contumely,
could not be appeased by a continuance of
injurious usage.
But the British cabinet, safe and at a dis
tance, cannot reasonably urge the danger
of the present moment, as an excuse for
continuing a system of insult towards the
Catholics, blind to all its future conse
quences. We may disapprove, yet we may stiU
view with some scruples of allowance, the
institution of Orange Lodges, those great
political blunders of those Protestant
gentry. But the government cannot be
excused for countenancing the public cele
bration of the l^t and 12th of July, and the
4th of November ; which every year give
rise to the most fatal outrages on the part

THE IRISH CATHOLICS; 175
of the Protestants ; which are notoriously
intended by the one party, and felt by the
other, as a parade of insulting domination.
It requires no great spirit of prophecy to
foretel, that if the English cabinet go on
preparing every year, more materials for a
civil war in Ireland, the public celebration
of one of those days, will afford the
trifling cause, the little spark, which is ever
wanting to make the train of mischief ex-
plode.* Will the English cabinet never perceive
the important circumstances on which all
poUtical events are now turning ?
Will they not open their eyes to that in
calculable encrease of personal pride, which
has taken place in the British islands ?
Can they not see that, every effort of
modern habits is dhected to the g ratifica
tion of pride and vanity ; and to secure,
under some shape or other, the esteem
and regard of society. ?
Will they never abandon those Scotch
* The Duke of Bedford, with that good sense, which
if permitted, would have achieved the preservation of
Ireland, forebore to countenance the celebration of the
Orange Orgies, by his presence.

176 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
principles ofpolir'y, which only regard the
vulgar interests of men, and neglect the
feelings of the hunaa misid, to wliich the
strongest interest is after ail entirely sub
servient ?
Of what value is wealth, and all the
principles of economy on which it is sup
ported, but as it assists the gratification of
personal pride?
What kind of policy then is this, Whidi
would scruple to plunder the Roman Cai ho
lies of their wealth, whit, his of no value, but
as a means to gratify their personal pride,
and yet will not hesitate to make a direct
attack on that personal pride in its most
delicate and inost irritable organs ?
If there is a poUtical maxim established by
experience, it is, that it is safer to injure men
iirtheir interests, than to wourid their pride.
The most disagreeable CircumstanDes
whieh the Catholic? are exposed to, are
these testimonies of contempt iriflicted on
them by their feUow-countrymen, which
would not take place, did not the govern
ment of the country declare the Catholics
to have forfeited its sympathy, and to be
unworthy of its confide^jce.

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 177
You may say, that this want of confi-
, dence is merely nominal ; that government
in fact, places as much confidence in Ca
tholic soldiers and sailors, as in Protestants.
AUow, (which is not the case,) that this
want of confidence is merely nominal, still
when a government calls names, Avhether
good or bad, they become in fact, very
grave realities.
GoA^erUment calls a man a lord. This is
only a name ; but do not the most sub
stantial effects of consequence and superi
ority flow from it ?
But the reverse of any proposition that
is true, is true also in the reverse ; and if
gOA^ernment, by attaching nominal honours
to men, really irivests them with superiority
and grandeur; so by attaching nominal
dishonours to men, it stamps upon them
inferiority and disgrace.
It is not, therefore, for the sake of political
emoluments alone, (though these are fair
objects" of honorable ambition) it is not
merely to represent the insignificance of
their country in Parliament, that the Ca
tholics look for an equality with the Pro
testants s this is not the emancipation which
N

178\ HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOU
informs them with pne soul, pne interest,
one purpose ; Avhat they may not, what
they will not forego, is an emancipatipn
frpm national cbntempt, frpm public ignp-^
Ininy, from domestic depredation,
A Catholic suffers the three most poig-*^
riant feelings than can touch the human
heart. The government of his country passes a
vote of censure on him.
His fellow-citizen expresses his contempt
for him, and expresses it with impunity.
The child of his affection blushes for him,
and mourns for hhnself, when he learns that
he necessarily inherits from "Uis father a.
blot and a reproach, Avhich no private vir
tues, or mental endowments, can obliterate
or conceal.
How can we torture with this refined
barbarity ?
Do not Ave shrink back at the sight of a
limb being cut off, and feel it in our oAvn
marrow ? Can we not feel, because the
sufferer is a Catholic ?
O hearts of barbarians, of zealots, of
Protestants! the flames Avhich made the
name of Bonner accursed, the hideous night

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 179
of St. Bartholomew, are not so great a dis
grace to the character of man, as your cold
contriving bigotry.
They at least had the excuse, the varnish
of religious feeling ; they sprung not from
selfishness, but from a visitation of fanati
cism, as inscrutable as physical insanity.
These men merely made a mistake ; they
Worshipped a demon, and thought him
God. But you, with perfect possession ofyour
faculties, with a calm pulse, and minds un
affected by the slightest emotion, perpetu
ate statutes, to gall the best and most
honourable feelings of many millions of
men, whose sensations of pleasure and pain
are exactly of the same nature with those
from which your own happiness or misery
is derived.The Catholics can feel, and do suffer.
The very peasantry acutely feel the
stigma cast by government upon their sect
and their religion. The loAvest order even
suffer most. The wealthy Catholics ac
quire a degree of consideration and legal
security from their property, but the pea
santry are left naked to the pelting of the
N 2

180 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
storm, to allthe jibes and jobs of Protestant
ascendancy. Not only a Pi'otestant lord , looks down
Upon a Catholic lord, and a Protestant
gentleman on a Catholic gentleman, but a
Protestant peasant on a Catholic peasarit ;
and in projportion as the degrading scale
descends, the expression of contempt be
comes mpre marked and gross.
Now, let any man say, can such dis
qualifications be perpetuated with justice
or humanity ; or can they be borne with
patience ?
Can Ave then find too strong terms to ex
pose to Europe, every where else en-^
lightened and lilaeral, the dull and malig
nant conduct of the Irish and English
Protestants ?
Can we find words to express our
astonishment, that the English cabinet
should become an echo, not to ravings
of Bedlam, but to a cento of every thing
that is gross, vulgar, and perverse ; Dublin
guilds, common eouncU-men, aldermen,
corporations; fat fools, that have been
hitherto non-descripts in the classes of
science, literature, and good sense.

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. ISI
Can we too warmly deprecate the dis-
ingenuousness with which every variety of
rebellion in Ireland is attributed to the
Catholic religion, without ever taking into
consideration, the injustice with which the
professors of that religiPn have been
ti'eated ?
The Protestants, in their terror of per
secution, have become persecutors;, tlieir
alarm at Catholic atrocities has made them
atrocious ; to hear them speak, one would
imagine that they had been the patient and
uncomplaining sufferers, from the r^eign of
WUliam till George the Third ; that they
had borne this long and ciuel test of loyaj
resignation ; that they had been deprived
of property, of arins, of every legal and
honourable right.
No, it is not suffering, but it is power^.
it is the pride of artificial ascendancy, it is
the jealousy arising from exclusive privilege,
that corrupts the understanding, and
hardens the heart.
The ridicule of this outcry, which the
Protestants make against the Catholics, at
the very time they oppress them ; and in
deed our whole train of arguirient, cannot

182 HISTORICAL APOLOGY FOR
be better iUustrated, than by an old fable
and moral, which we make no apology for
delivering in the very words of Sir R.
L' Estrange. FABLE OF A WOLF AND LAMB.
"AS a Wolf was lapping at the head of
a fountain, he spied a Lamb paddling at the
same time, a good way off down the stream .
The Wolf had no sooner the prey in his
eye, but away he runs open mouthed to it.
Villain, says he, hoW dare you lie muddling
the water that I am drinking ?
" Indeed, says the poor Lamb, I did not
think that my drinking here beloxto, could
have fouled your Avater so far above.
" Nay, says the other, you Avill never
leave your chopping of logic, till your
skin's turned over your ears, as your
father's was a matter of six months ago,
for prating at this saucy rate. You remem
ber it full well, sirrah.
" If you will belicA'C me. Sir, quoth the
innocent lamb, with fear aqd trembling, I
was not come into the world then.
" Why, hoAvnoAv then. Impudence, cries
the Wolf, hast thou neither shame nor con*' '

THE IRISH CATHOLICS. 18S
science? but it runs in the blood of your
whole race, sirrah, to hate our family, and
therefore, since fortune has brought us to
gether so conveniently, you shall e'en pay
some of your fore-fathers scores before you
and I part ; so without any more ado, he
leapt at the throat of the miserable helpless
lamb, and tore him to pieces,"
MORAL,
" PRIDE and cruelty never want a pre
tence to oppress: the plea of not guilty
goes for nothing against power ; for accus
ing is proving, where malice and ibrce are
joined in the prosecution.
" When innocence is to be oppressed by
might, arguments are foolish things ; nay,
the very merits of the person accused, are
improved to his cpndemnatipn. The Lamb
itself shall be made malicious,
*' And what is this now, but the lively
image of a perverse reason of state, set up
in opposition to truth and justice, but
under the august name and pretence of
both. As loyalty, for the purpose, shall
be called rebellion ; decency of religious

184 HISTORICAL APOLOGY, &c.
worship shall be made superslitipn ; tender
ness pf conscience shall be called fanaticism,
singularity, and faction,
The cause of the innocent must be rer
mitted at last to that great and final deci-^
sion, )vhere there is no place for passion,
partiality, or error. But as to the busir
ness of this world, when Lambs are the
accused, and Wolves the judges, the in
jured must expect no " better quarter ;
especially when the heart's blood of the one
is thenourishnientand entertainment ofthe
other."

INDE X.

Page-
ACT of Oblivion passed by James 1  121
Ambition, one real cause ofthe Irish Rebellions. .67, 68
Arms, privilege of wearing, taken away from the
Irish gentry  loi, 1 59
 consequences of this measure  162, note
Aversionof the Irish to subjugation by foreigners,
one cause of their insurrections  65, 6&
B
Bacon, Lord, his wise policy towards ihe Irish. , 117
Bigotry, (Catholic) existed only in a small degree 107
 causes of its increase  ,..,,,.. 108
-.  entirely to be attributed to persecution. . 152
Boroughs, a large number of, created by James I. 138
Brehon Law of Descents  90, 91
 respecting property abolished by
James I  • • • • •  ' 24
 particulars respecting  126, 128

Carew, Sir George, his account of the cause of the
Irish rebellion  63, 64
Catholic Rehgion, persecution of, the cause of dis-
aflection among the Roman Catholics 3, 4, 140, 141
— —  inquiry into its immediate con
nection with events in Ireland, from the Re
formation to the great rebellion  9 & fol.

186 INDEX. Page
Catholic Religion, intolerance of, by government,
the real cause of present disaifection. . . .155, 156
 : — progress of, endangered by the
successful zeal of the Methodists  l6l, 162
Character, amiable, of the native Irish.  68
Charies I. conduct of, towards Ireland  142,143
Chieftains (Irish) submitted to Henry VIII, , . , , . 14
— —  their dependencies, how broken  ^^
 their submission, merely feudal, and
nominal  S3
 anecdotes of,  66, 68
 subjugationof, a cause of insurrection 88,104
 power of, finally destroyed by James I, 124,125
Clergy, (Irish) formerly illiterate, and of no influ
ence  , . . 9, 10
Confiscations of Irish property, one cause of the
rebellions  69 & fol. 130
Connaught, province of, unwarrantably confis-
. cated  131^132
Coronation oath, a violation of the Treaty of Li
merick  166
Cox, Sir Richard, his account of the cause of Irish
insurrections  57'
D
Davies.Sir John, account of the Irish laws, by. .126, 139
Dependencies ot the Irish chieftains, how broken 29, 30
 destruction of, a cause of their rebel
lion  .^  88, 104
Desmond, Earl of, cause of his rebellion  58, 59
 House of, account of its rise and fall. .90, 104
E
Edward VI, state of Ireland under his reign . .. .25, 41
Elizabeth, state of Ireland under her reign , , . .56, IIS
English Government, severe measures of, the real
cause of rebellion  36 & fol.
— —  '¦ injurious treatment of, ano
ther cause  65, 68
their confiscations of Irish

property, one cause ofthe rebellions. .... .69 & foL

INDEX. 187
Page
English Government, unwise policy of the present,
investigated,  163 & fol.
Essex, Earl of, defeated by the Irish  104
Extortions of English Sheritfs  95, 96
F
Feudal Rights, the nature of  34, 35, 39, 40
Fitz-William (the Lord Deputy), oppressive and
treacherous conduct of , . *  92, 94
G
Garet, last Earl of Desmond, driven into rebellion 86
 '  ¦¦ — is defeated and slain ib, 87
Grand Juror, office of, engrossed by Protestants. . 170
Grievances, statement of, under which the Irish
now labour  ^  1()7 & fol.
H
Henry VIII. received feudal allegiance from the
hish chieftains  -.,... 14
State of Ireland under his reign  12, 21
I
James I, state of Ireland under the government of 119
 • pQlicy of, with regard to the Irish chief
tains  .120,122
 unwarrantably confiscated the province
of Connaught  131, 132
 consequences of that procedure  132, 133
Jesuits, the, spirited the Irish into rebellion  1 50
Ireland, rebellions in, equally prevalent under a
Catholic, as under a Protestant government 4, 7
¦ review of its condition under Henry VIII. 12, 21
 _  Edward VI, 25, 41
¦  ^—  Mary  41, 56
 —.  -¦ — Elizabeth. .56, 118
¦  i  Jamesl. .119, 141
 ;  —.  CharlesLl42 &fol.
Irish, aversion of, to subjugation by foreigners, one
cause of their insurrections  ..,.....,- 64

188 INDEX. Page
Irish, their hatred of the English for their oppres
sive conduct, a second cause  ,  65,68
 abolished early the traffic in English slaves 68, 69
 destruction of their princes' power and privi
leges, a cause of their rebellions  103, 107
 Law, outline of, respecting real property 90, 91, 126
 true interests of, never consulted till the reign
of Jamesl  127
¦ oppressive conductof Jamps I. towards them,
the real cause of their disaffection  134, 140
— ¦¦ — spirited into rebellion by the emissaries of
Spain and Rome  150
 statement of the grievances und£;r which they
now labour . —  167 & fol.
 excluded from all offices of trust. ,.,.,. .170, 174
K
King, the Irish much attached to the  168, 169
— — coronation oath of, unjust  166
 supremacy of, acknowledged  14, 15
L
Laws of Ireland, brief notice of  , .90, 91, 126
L'estrange, Sir Roger, fable from  1 82, 1 83
Limerick, treaty ot^ violated  166
M
M'Mahon, an Irish chieftain, treacherously put to
death, and his property confiscated  , , 94
Mary, state of Ireland during her. reign  41, 56
Methodists, successful progress of, against the Ca
tholic religion  161, 162
Militdiy necessities of government in England,
- cause of  ; .,  154, 155
Moryson, his account of Irish insurrections , . . ,65, 104
Mountjoy, Lord, defeats the Irish  105, 106
 barbarous policy of  107, 108
Munster, province of, confiscated  ^ , .87, 88
O
Oath, the coronation, a violation of the treaty of
Limerick  '.  , . Iqq

INDEX. 189
Page
Oblivion, general act of, published by James I, , 121, 122
O'Connor and O'Moor defeated and imprisoned 37, 38
O'Donnel (Hugh), account of  §9
 defeats the Earl of Essex  104
 is defeated by Mountjoy  106
 retires into Spain  ib«
O'Moor, Roger, cliaracter of  144
— . his ineffectual efforts in behalf of his op
pressed countrymen  , . . 1 45 & fol.
O'Neil (the Great), rece:ived titles from Henry VIII. 15
 '¦  (Shane) the cause of his enmity to the Eng
lish  ,  30,31
¦ — cause of his insurrection  52
 account of the confiscation of his property 73
 name of, abolished  S9
 (Hugh) account of.  100, 102
 is defeated by Lord Mountjoy  106
 retires into Spain  jb.
Offices of trust excluded from Catholics  170, 172
Orange Lodges, mischievous tendency of . . . .174, 175
P
Pale, Irish Catholics of the, loyalty of.  61, 62
— — driven by persecution to oppose the Eng
lish  1 40, 141
Persecution, the real cause of disaffection among
the Catholics  3, 4, 140
Property, outline of the old Irish law respect
ing  90, 91, 126
Protestants engross all offices of tr,ust in Ire
land  ^  170, 172
 consequences of this unwise policy 175, 176
R
Rebellions as frequent in Ireland under a Catholic
as under a Protestant government  4, 7
 • real cause of, in Henry VIH.'s reign, ,21, 22
 Mary's reign  52, 54
 the time of Elizabeth 56 —
118
 five real causes of, assigned  .64 & fol.
 — gteat, in Charles L's reign, cause of 142, 143

190 INDEX. Page
Roman Catholics: see Catholic Religion, Irish,
Pale, S;c.
Rome, court of, fomented the Irish into rebellion 1 50
S
Sheriffs, F.ngli^, their extortion  95, 96
— — — no Catholics can be  ;  171
Slave trade early abolished in Ireland  '. . .68, 69
Spain, emissaries from, spirited the Irish into re-
,; . bellion  150
Stafford, Lord, oppressive government of, drove
the Irish into rebellion  146, 147
Subjugation of independent Irish chieftains.a cause
of their rebellions  .88 — 104
Sub-Sheriffs, no Catholic can be  170,171
Supremacy (the king's) acknowledged by the
Irish  14,15
Sydney, Sir Henry, lord deputy of Ireland, his
conduct  53, 54
T
Tillage discountenanced by several Irish chieftains 198
Treaty of Limerick, unjust infraction of  166
U
Ulster, confiscation of  78, 79
W
Warner,Dr. his account ofthe old Irish law 126, 127,note
Y
Yeomanry Corps, Catholics excluded from  173

C. Squire, Printer,
rurniTal's-lnn-Court, Holbom.

BOOKS PRINTED FOR
J. HARDING, 36, St. J AMES's-STREET.

A HISTORY of the PENAL LAWS against the CA
THOLICS, from the Tueaty of Limerick to the Union.
By H. PARNELL, Esq. With an Appendix. 8vo.
PROTESTANT ASCENDANCY in IRELAND, con
sidered. By an Englishman. 8vo. 3s. 6d.
DE LOLME OH the CONSTITUTION of ENG-
LAND. A N^w, Edition improved, with Notes, and Por
trait of the Author. 8vo. 10s. 6d.
The ELOQUENCE of the BRITISH SENATE, being
a Selection of thc.bestPARLiA.MENTARy Speeches, from the
beginning of the Reign of Charles i. to the present Time;
with Notes, biographical, critical, and explanatory. By W.
HAZLITT. Svois. Svo, ll. Is.
HUME'S HISTORY of ENGLAND, from the Inva
sion of CjESAR to the Revolution in 1688, a New Edition,
with the Author's last Corrections. 8 vols. 8vo. 31. 4s.
SMOLLETT'S CONTINUATION of HUME's HIS
TORY, to the end of the Reign of George II. 5 vols.
8vo. 21.
ANNALS of COMMERCE, MANUFACTURES,
FISHERIES, and NAVIGATION, with brief Notices of
the Arts and Sciences connected with them, containing the
Commercial Transactions of theBritish Empire and other Coun
tries, from the earliest Accounts to the Meeting of the Union
Parliament in January 1801 ; comprising a body of most im
portant Information, collected from sources of unquestionable
authority. By DAVID MACPHERSON, Esq. 4 large
vols. 4to. with Tables, Appendixes, &c. 81. 8s.
DEBRETT's PEERAGE of ENGLAND, SCOT
LAND, and IRELAND, containing an Account of all the
Peers, whether by Tenure, Summons, or Creation ; their
collateral Branches, Births, Marriages, and Issue ; Family
Names, and Ti,tles of eldest Sons; extinct, forfeited, and dor
mant Peerages ; account ofthe different Orders of Knight
hood, with Lists of the Baronets and Knights, and of British
Subjects v/ho have been honoured with any foreign Order of
Knighthood ; also a Table of Precedency. The whole illus
trated by the Arms, Supporters, Crest, and Motto,, of all the
Peers. A New Edition corrected and enlarged, with the
Additions, brought down to the day of publication, and Plates,
2 vols. 1 8s.

Bottles printed for J.Harding, St. James' S'Street.
' DEBRETT's COMPLETE BARONETAGE, A
New Edition, corrected and much enlarged, 2 vols, with
the Plates, &c, IBs. - .
IMISON's ELEMENTS of SCIENCE and ART,
jjeing a familiar introduction to Natural Philosophy and
Chemistry; together with their application to a variety of
elegant and useful Arts and Manufactures. A New Edition,
considerably enlarged, and adapted to the present state of
Philosophical Science. By THOMAS WEBSTER.
Principal contents of the work :— Mechanics, Pneumatics,
Hydrostatics, Hydraulics, Optics, Electricity, Galvanism, Mag
netism, Astronomy, Chemistry. The Arts of Bread-making,
Brewing, Bleaching, Dyeing, Calico-Printing, Manufacture
of Glass and Pottery, Tanning, Currying, Refining, Varnish
ing, Japanning, Lacquering, Gilding, Silvering, Tinning,
Soldirin<', Moulding and Casting, Cements, Lutes, Ink-mak
ing, Staining, and removing Stains. The Fine Arts' of Draw
ing, Painting Transparencies, Crayon-Painting, Etching, En
graving, Mezzotinto Scraping, Engraving in Aquatinta, En
graving on Wood, Ktching on Glass, Engraving on Stone,
and a great variety of miscellaneous Articles. 2 vols. 8vo.
with Thirty Plates, ll. 5s.
MARSHALL'S TREATISE on PLANTING and
RURAL ORNAMENT, including a Planter's Dic
tionary, descriptive of the Trees, Shrubs, &c. used for
Plantations; their various qualities, uses, and different modes
of Culture. 2 vols, 8vo. I6s. i
WlSSETT's COMPLETE TREATISE on CULTI
VATING and PREPARING HEMP, with an Appendix
By the Right Hon. LORD SOMERVILLE, recommend
ing the immediate culture of Hemp in England and Ireland,
and pointing out the means of raising an ample supply on our
own Soi\,mth0ut interfering with the Wheat Crops. Commu
nications are here given from some, of the most successful cul- .
tivators of English Hemp, showing the expenses and profits of
this branch, of Husbandry, with minute directions for perform
ing all the operations of sowing, and subsequent management
in the field, and for drying, watering, peeling, heckling,
scutching, braking, &c, 4to. with Plates, ll. lis. 6d.-
SMITH'S Observations on the Utilty, Form, and
Management of Water Meadows, and on Draining and
,J^,ttiGATiNG Peat Bogs. 8vo. with Plateg. 8s.
Harding's Catalogue of Book's oh Agriculture,
Planting, Gardening, Rural Architj;cture, Lands
cape Gardening, Sporting, B^arriery, and other Topics
of Domestic and Rural Economy ; including the Laws
relating to Estates, Tithes, Inclosures, Game, and Rural Af
fairs in general. Is, , ,-,. /

kUM-

m^mmm