XII. That if the Irish insurgents of 1641 deserved to be stigmatized as traitors and rebels, then were the English revolutionists of 1688, the American of 1776, and the French of 1789, traitors and rebels of the very worst possible kind; as their grievances bore no more proportion to those of the Irish, than the gentle Schuylkill to the impetuous Mississippi, the hill of Howth to the peak of Teneriffe, or lake Erie to the Atlantic

ocean.

XIII. That there is a striking contradiction between the facts and inductions of Carte, Warner, Leland, and nearly all the other writers of Irish history.

XIV. That, in the Anglo-Hibernian histories of Ireland, there is so much error and falsehood, established beyond the possibility of doubt or denial, that they are utterly unworthy of credit.

XV. That the seventeenth century, in the British dominions, was characterized by a succession of forged plots, resting on the basis of flagrant perjuries, and calculated to sacrifice the lives and property of the innocent, and enrich malefactors of the worst kind.

XVI. That the Irish code of laws, whose pretended object was "to prevent the growth of Popery," was intended to gratify all the basest passions of human nature, in violation of public faith, honour, justice, and humanity; and that it organized as tyrannical an invasion of liberty, and

as piratical a depredation on property, and was covered by as base a cloak of hypocrisy, as the annals of the world can produce.

I fondly flatter myself, I repeat, that the proofs I have adduced fully establish the whole of these points. But should I be too sanguine in this expectation, I still trust that I shall secure the assent of liberal and ingenuous minds to all the essential ones. Against the fortresses of fraud and imposture, I have brought a battery of eight-and-forty pounders, which can hardly fail to demolish them. The arsenals of enemies, some of them most envenomed, have furnished all the cannon. The laborious and unwearied research for them, and their mere disposition and arrangement, are all the merit I claim.

It would be a most fastidious and hypercritical delicacy, that should preclude a writer from fairly stating the merits of, and obviating objections to, his materials, or the authorities on which he relies to support his narrative, if he write history; or his discussions, if he investigate historical facts. I neither feel myself, nor fear in my readers, any such delicacy. I therefore treat on the materials of this publication, as I should on those of any other whatsoever.

I feel confident that there is probably no historical work extant, that rests on stronger grounds. I am not aware of a single fact of importance, throughout the whole, that is not

supported, not only by reference to, but, what is far more important, quotations from, indisputable authorities, authorities generally hostile to the cause I espouse.

Dr. Curry, in his invaluable work, the "Historical and Critical Review of the Civil Wars in Ireland," has set a laudable example in this department of literature. He has, in most cases, established his facts by copious quotations. I have not merely followed, but have gone beyond his example. I have been more general in my quotations; and have but slenderly availed myself of the Irish writers: whereas a large portion of his authorities are of that description; and, although they are in themselves perfectly sound and unexceptionable, yet they are liable to cavil, for which I was determined to afford no pretext whatever. On such a question, Irish authorities would not have sufficient weight with minds devoured by prejudice; and would come before the world in a questionable form, and subject to suspicions of partiality. I have therefore almost wholly rejected them throughout; so that, in about five hundred quotations, there are not a dozen from writers of that class: and, in one of the most important chapters of the book, that on the subject of the massacres and murders perpetrated on the Irish, I have not made use of a single one of their advocates. In this respect, I believe the work rests on the most impregnable foundation; and am persuaded no similar instance ever occurred.

My heart swells with a glow of satisfaction and pride, that I can come before the critical world, with a defence of Ireland, resting on the names of Spencer, Davies, Coke, Temple, Borlase, Clarendon, Rushworth, Nalson, Carte, Warner, Leland, Baker, Orrery, &c. nearly all of whom were open or concealed enemies of that country and its unfortunate inhabitants. It may seem extraordinary, that there is on the list the name of the wretched Temple, who, as I have shown,* was so far ashamed of his own spurious work, that he endeavoured, but in vain, to suppress it: but it is the peculiar felicity of this undertaking, that it may be fairly said to this father of all the imposture,

"By thy words thou shalt be condemned."

for, were all the other authorities, cited in this work, totally annihilated, there is enough in this legendist to demolish the fabric of fraud and deception, in the erection of which, so much time, and such varied talents, have been prostituted, for a hundred and fifty years past.

Having stated the motives to this undertaking; the points I have endeavoured to prove ; and the materials I have employed, it remains to render some account of the execution of the plan: and here I confess I feel myself open to censure, from which I shall not attempt to shrink. The work is in a very imperfect state indeed; and

* Page 391.

has not had a due share of attention bestowed on it. Whether, by any degree of time and labour, I could have rendered it complete and perfect, I am very doubtful. But this is certain, that I might have made it far less imperfect, had I devoted more time to it. The great body of it has been written at night, when the pressure of usual avocations had subsided; and next day hastily committed to the press, under all the consequent disadvantages.

This statement is the offspring, not of ostentation, but of a due regard to truth, and in the faint hope that it will operate as some sort of apology for the manifest imperfections of the work. I am not, however, unaware, that, in strict justice, this avowal may be considered as rendering those imperfections more unpardonable; as it may with truth be said, that no man has a right to present his productions to the world, without due preparation; that it is disrespectful, and deserves severe censure; in a word, that the haste with which this vindication has been composed and hurried through the press, so far from being an extenuation, is an aggravation of the offence.

The correctness of these objections cannot be denied. But let it sink deep into the mind of the reader, that, whatever I may suffer from the justice, or even the utmost rigour, of criticism, is unimportant, compared with what I feel from the convictions of my own mind. I stand selfcondemned. That I have not done justice to