In direct contradiction, however, of fuch a conclufion, and of the statements of the fecret committee, it has been afferted by those who are interested in calumniating the Catholic character, and believed by those who are ignorant of its true nature, that the rebellion of Ireland was a Catholic rebellion; that the defigns of the Catholic body went to the maffacre and deftruction of every Proteftant in Ireland; and that all their other plans were wholly fubfervient to that of establishing the Catholic religion.*

As

These are the propofitions which Sir Richard Musgrave has laboured to maintain. His work profeffes to do that which the fecret committee of the Houfe of Commons was appointed to do, namely, to give a faithful account of this rebellion. A difcerning public will at once fee to which authority they ought to give a preference. Sir Richard dedicated his first edition to Lord Cornwallis. Upon reading it, however, Lord Cornwallis directed his Secretary to write the following letter to him:

SIR,

Dublin, March 24, 1801.

I am directed by the Lord Lieutenant to exprefs to you his concern at its appearing, that your late publication of the hiftory of the Rebellions of Ireland has been dedicated to him by permiffion. Had his Excellency been apprized of the contents and nature of the work, he would never have lent the fanction of his name to a book which tends fo ftrongly to revive the dreadful animofities which have so long distracted this country, and which it is the duty of every good fub

ject

As to the conduct of the Catholic clergy of the county of Wexford, it is now well known," that "not one of them who had a flock, not one parish "priest was implicated, or had any concern in " fomenting, encouraging, or aiding the rebellion;

nay, it is certain, that they abhorred, and de"tefted, and fhuddered at it, as the most wicked, "fcandalous, and abominable event that they had "ever witneffed."*

The fuppofition that the establishment of the Catholic religion was one of the objects of this rebellion, is proved to be unfounded, by the evidence of the principal leaders, Emmet and

M'Nevin.

The following are their anfwers, given before the committees, to the question, "Whether or "not they would fet up the Catholic religion?"

ject to endeavour to compofe. His Excellency therefore defires me to request, that, in any future edition of the book, the permiffion to dedicate it to him may be omitted.

I have, &c.

E. LITTLEHALES.

* See Dr. Caulfield's Reply to Sir R. Mufgrave, fold by Keating and Co. Duke street.

M'Nevin-" I would no more confent to that, "than to the establishment of Mahometanifm."

-

Emmet "I do not think the Catholics would "wifh to fet up a Catholic establishment, even at "the prefent day. Perhaps fome old priests, "who have long groaned under the penal laws, "might wish for a retribution to themselves, but "I don't think the young priests wish for it; and "I am convinced the laity would not fubmit to it; " and that the objections to it will be every day "gaining strength."

Two circumstances more only remain to be taken notice of regarding the conduct of the Catholics as a body in this rebellion. One of them, the indifputable fact, that, of the twenty-four leaders of the rebellion who were banished to fort St. George, only four of them were Catholics, twelve were of the Church of England, and the remaining eight were Diffenters. Well indeed, then, might Mr. Pitt fay, in the Houfe of Commons in 1805, whofe opinion is the other circumstance alluded to, "I do not confider the late

"rebellion

"rebellion in Ireland to have been a Catholic "rebellion."

Facts, reason, and authority, therefore, it appears, all coincide in the condemnation of the calumny, which a few blind and miftaken men have had just talent enough to propagate amongst the ignorant and prejudiced. The magna vis veritatis will, however, prevail on this, as well as upon all other occafions, and fooner or later bring forward the unfortunate and much injured Catholics of Ireland to the view of their English fellow-fubjects, as highly deferving of their confidence and their affection.

The next great event belonging to the Catholic question is the measure of union, not as having, in any way, altered the political condition of the Catholics in refpect to the penal laws, but as a meafure concerning which a compact was virtually entered into between them and the English government. For though it is true that no regular articles, like thofe of Limerick, can be produced to prove this compa&t, ftill there is circumftantial

evidence

* Debates on Catholic petition, by Cuthel and Martin, p. 126.

evidence of fuch a nature as to bring conviction to every candid mind, that, on the one hand, the Catholics did agree to support the union, and, on the other, that the English government, on their part, did indirectly agree to fecure to them, in confideration of that fupport, the measure of emancipation.

This evidence is to be collected; ift. From the fpeech of Mr. Pitt on propofing the union articles to the House of Commons; 2d. From the act of union; 3d. From Mr. Pitt's fpeech, and the letters of Lord Cornwallis and Lord Caftlereagh, concerning the change of administration in 1801.

ift. Mr. Pitt's fpeech-"I am well aware," fays Mr. Pitt," that the subject of religious dif "tinction is a dangerous and delicate topic, espe "cially when applied to a country such as Ire"land; the fituation of which, in this respect, is "different from every other. Where the efta"blished religion of the ftate is the fame as the "general religion of the empire, and where the "property of the country is in the hands of a "comparatively small number of persons profef