English history, who attempt to give any rela "tion of this rebellion, having compiled from 66 some or other of the materials aforementioned, they have copied likewise their mistakes and

ર

imperfections; hence they are so inaccurate, "partial, and uninformed, that whoever contents himself with the accounts that he meets with "of it, in any of our histories of England (not

one excepted) may be said to know little of it." The same reverend author, speaking, in the body of his History, of Mr. Hume's gross infidelity, in representing the conduct of Charles I. towards his Irish subjects, says (p. 359), "To such mi"serable shifts are able men reduced, when they

write to please a party, or to support a cha"racter without regard to truth. It is but very little that Mr. Hume hath said on this critical part of King Charles's reign; but unless he could "have said something much more to the purpose "than he hath said, he had better have taken the

t

way Lord Clarendon took, and haye said no

thing at all." Can they claim title to the fairness of Reviewers, who charge the author (p. 661) with interdicting any reference to Temple, Borlase, Clarendon, Carte, and Cox, and accusing the Protestants with having commenced the first massacre in 1641; a position (they assert) contrary to the faith of history; when they must have read the following

C 2

following words, quoted out of Clarendon (Hist. Rev. 137): "About the beginning of November "1641, the English and Scotch forces in Carrickfercc gus murdered, in one night, all the inhabitants of "the island Gee, commonly called Mac-Gee, to the "number of above three thousand men, women, and "children, all innocent persons, in a time when

none of the Catholics in that country were in arms ૮૯ or rebellion. Note, that this was the first massa66 cre committed in Ireland on either side." Let any man of common honour or honesty (I appeal to none other) say, is this interdicting the authority of Clarendon? Is this Mr. Plowden's or Lord Clarendon's accusation?

Such barefaced attempts to impose upon ignorance or inability to attain the truth, such prostitution to every thing uncandid, such total abandonment of uprightness, will discharge the author from the nauseating task of specifying more of the wilful falsifications and mistatements of the writers of the British Critic. They have, however, called upon the author to disclose to the public his object in publishing such a work, at such a time as the present, with a further complaint, that at this unpropitious moment he has thrown down the gauntlet of religious and political controversy (p. 465). Before the author enters into the detail of the circumstances, under which he wrote and

published

published his Historical Review, he begs leave to premise, that the work does not contain a single sentence of religious controversy. If the narration of historical truths be, in the language of these pseudocritics, throwing down the gauntlet, the author declines not the contest with any one, who fairly enters the lists to disprove them.

In the autumn of 1801, the author had in the press a work, that has since appeared, upon the constitution of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, civil and ecclesiastical. It was his intention to have subjoined to it an Appendix, relating to the then recent transaction of the union. The difficulty of procuring any materials for the purpose in London, sharpened his eagerness for research, and led him to contemplate that great event in all its bearings. The subject was not new to him: he had long considered, as he still does consider, that an incor

porate

* The author had, in April 1792, after several conversations with the Minister upon the subject of Ireland, put into his hands the following considerations upon the state of that country, accompanied with a letter, which, should these sheets come under his eye, the author trusts will work an impression on that great man's mind, which either was not produced or not expressed at the time he received them. The writer was ordered, and he obeyed the order, to put a copy into the hands of Mr. Dundas (now Lord Melville). From that hour, though the author frequently solicited an interview with that

Minister,

porate union of the two kingdoms must be the greatest blessing to the British Empire, if followed

up

Minister, he never could obtain one during the remaining nine years he continued in office, though the objects of his solicita. tion were of the first national magnitude. Truth alone survives all changes of times, fashions, and circumstances. In justice to himself and family, the author now submits to the impartial public, that letter and that paper, which the consequent conduct of the minister, who received them, towards the writer, shews to have been displeasing or offensive. The fate of the Historical Review renders the case of the author the cause of Ireland; and it is now become expedient, just, and necessary, that his negociations in Downing-Street concerning it fhould be disclosed. Adelphi, 13th April 1792.

SIR,

Your apparent surprise at what I hinted to you about Ireland, the last time I had the honour of seeing you, has made me turn my thoughts more than ever to that subject. If the information, which you have received concerning the situation of affairs in that country be contrary to my representation of them, for once I shall cordially rejoice in being deceived, I have used what means I could to come at the truth; and you may rely upon the uprightness of my intentions in communicating to you the contents of the enclosed paper. I have withstood some pressing solicitations to publish an argument in support of the emancipa tion of Ireland. For very obvious reasons, I have preferred this measure, of submitting privately the grounds of the case to your consideration, that your prudence may apply such remedy, as you shall find the nature of it demands. You will forgive perhaps an officious, certainly a zealous attempt to contribute towards the prevention of very serious evils. I have that confidence in your judgment and resolution, that nothing but misin formation of facts, can betray you into an inefficient measure of Government. I hope, therefore, that my surmise of false reports having been made to you will plead my apology for having troubled you upon the subject. I most devoutly wish

the

up by an indiscriminating adoption of all his Majefty's subjects, in the assumption of the

Imperial

the circumstances not to happen, which, I am sorry to acknowledge, I see the strongest probability of happening. If happily they do not, I shall rejoice in having given an useless alarm: if unfortunately they do, I shall console myself in the consciousness of having done whatever lay in my slender ability to prevent them. My constant ambition is to promote and ensure the welfare and happiness of every part of the British empire. I have the honour to be with the most respectful deference and highest esteem,

SIR, your

devoted and obedient

Humble Servant,

FRANCIS PLOWDEN.

The Rt. Hon. William Pitt.

A sincere well-wisher to Government thinks it a call of duty and loyalty to submit to the Minister the following considera tions upon the present state of Ireland.

It is allowed that 3,000,000 of the inhabitants are Roman Catholics. It is a matter of notoriety, that they have petitioned Parliament in vain for the free elective franchise. The indul gences, which have been granted to them by Parliament, affect but few individuals of their body.

The situation of Ireland is at present widely different from what it was twenty years back. The sentiments and feelings of men upon government and subordination are also widely different from what they were five years back. Wherever a government or constitution is radically good, the discussion of its principles will strengthen and confirm it: but where it is otherwise, such discussion must produce a contrary effect.

Every general principle of the British constitution operates in the inverfe ratio upon Ireland; and the Irish are now taught to see, and spirited up to feel, that a nation cannot be taxed that is not represented, nor bounden by laws, in the framing of which they do not concur. They know themselves to have been loyal to their King and country: they profess that faith, which they

believe