pected we should be cut off before they could arrive and release us. In this terrible state of fufpenfe we remained till four o'clock in the afternoon, when we heard a horrid noife at the gate, and a demand of the prifoners. Eighteen or twenty were immediately taken out; and, in about half an hour, the rebels returned for more victims. In the whole, they took out ninety-eight.---Thofe who were laft called out were feventeen in number. Mr. Daniels and Mr. Robinfon, both gaugers; Mr. Atkins, a tide-waiter; Mathews and Gurly, who were with me at the execution of Murphy; and myself, were included in this lot. The moment Mathews put his head out of the gaol, he was shot dead; which, I believe, would have been the fate of us all, had not a Mrs. Dixon, (wife to a man who kept a public houfe in the town, and who had been made a captain by the rebels,) when Mathews fell, immediately advanced, and defired they would defift, as they ought to allow the people on the bridge the pleasure of feeing us. We were accordingly marched to the bridge; and, when we came in fight of the people affembled there to witnefs the executions, they almoft rent the air with shouts and exultations. I and my fixteen fellow-prifoners knelt down in a row. The blood of thofe who had been already executed on this fpot (eighty-one in number) had more than ftained, it ftreamed apon, the ground about us. They first began the bloody tragedy by taking out Mr. Daniels, who, the moment he was touched with their pikes, fprung over the battlements of the bridge into the water, where he was inftantly shot. Mr. Robinson was the next: he was piked to death-The manner of piking was, by two of the rebels pufhing their pikes into the front of the victim, while two others pushed pikes into his back, and in this ftate (writhing with torture) he was fufpended aloft on the pikes till dead. He was then thrown over the bridge into the water. They ripped open the belly of poor Mr. Atkins; and, in that condition, he ran feveral yards; when, falling on the fide of the bridge, he was piked. Thus they proceeded till they came to Gurly, who was next to me. At that moment, one of them came up to me, and afked me if I would have a prieft. I felt my death to be certain, and I answered "No." He then pulled me by the collar; but was defired to wait till Gurly was finished. While they were torturing him, General Roach rode up in great hafte, and bid them beat to arms; informing them that Vinegar-Hill camp was befet, and that reinforcements were wanting. This operated like lightning upon them they all inftantly quitted the bridge, and left Mr. O'Connor, an organift; William Hamilton, the bailiff of the town; and myfelf, on our knees. The mob (confifting of more women than men) which had been fpectators of this dreadful fcene, alfo inftantly difperfed in every direction, fuppofing the king's troops were at hand. We were fo ftupified by terror that we remained for fome time in this posture without making the leaft effort to efcape. The rebel-guard foon came to us, and took us back to the gaol; telling us, that we fhould not escape longer than the next day, when neither man, woman, or child, of the Proteftants, fhould be left alive. But it pleased Gon to prevent their dreadful intention from being carried into effect, by giving fuccefs to his Majefty's arms." P. 24,

Wo

We are much concerned to obferve, that the cruel and atrocious fpirit of this rebellion feems to have been blended with, and much inflamed by, religious bigotry. The Roman Catholics, at least in that part of Ireland, feemed to confider the cause of rebellion as that of their religion, and to look to the fuccefs of their arms as a prelude to the establishment of their hierarchy. In the frenzy of their zeal they appear to have forgotten that they were inftigated by avowed Jacobins, the difciples and imitators of the French Revolutionists; who would probably, like their prototypes, have trampled upon every faith, when the pretext of religion had become no longer neceffary to the acquifition of power.

It is with pleasure that we view in this narrative a striking contrast to the barbarity of the rebels, in the conduct of the King's troops and the loyalifts, on their victory. Only the leaders of the rebellion, and a few of their most active followers fuffered, and thefe after the most patient and impartial trials. We will ftate, in Mr. Jackfon's words, the temperate and compaffionate behaviour of the loyal inhabitants of Wexford, on the execution of thofe very men from whom they had fuffered fuch dreadful perfecutions.

"Monday, June 25, Captain Keughe, Father Roach, and the feven other convicted rebels, were brought to the bridge of Wexford at eleven o'clock, according to the fentence paffed on them. The crowd affembled was very great; which I mention, as I wish to remark how different the conduct of the fpectators on this melancholy occafion was, when compared with the licentious and inhuman fury of that mob which furrounded and witneffed the maffacre of the Proteftants. Thofe victims, while on their way to execution, were deafened by the exultations, and oppreffed by the infults, of the favageminded men and women, who, in droves, preffed upon them on all fides. What a reverfe did the present scene exhibit! Recent as were the injuries which had been fuftained by those who were now liberated from prifon, and inflamed as the minds of the various fufferers by the rebellion may be supposed to have been, yet not a reflection was caft by them upon any of the convicts, nor a gefture feen that could difturb them at this awful moment. The fentiment which produced fuch decorum at fuch a time, evidently proceeded from the temperate and humane manner in which the law was put in force by the commander in chief, even against thofe rebels whose conduct had been moft flagitious." P. 68.

This interefting narrative is written in plain and perfpicuous language, and has every appearance of truth; which is further confirmed by feveral atteftations to the good character and conduct of the writer. We believe this to be the most authentic account of the rebellion at Wexford that has yet been publifhed; and truft it will not only prove of public utility, but,"

by

by its produce, alleviate the lofs which Mr. Jackfon has fuftained, and enable him to re-eftablith himself in his business, and fupport his family.

ART. XV. An Answer to the Addrefs of the Right Hon. Henry Grattan, Ex-Reprefentative of the City of Dublin in Parlia ment, to his Fellow Citizens of Dublin. By Patrick Duigenan, LL. D. a Citizen of Dublin, and one of the Reprefentatives of the City of Armagh in Parliament. Third Edition with Additions. 8vo. 196 pp. Milliken, Dublin. Sold alfo at Wright's, Piccadilly. 1798.

ALTHOUGH the pamphlet before us does not, as a literary compofition, rank in the firft clafs of political writings, yet the very important matter which it contains (illuftrating not merely the conduct of a prominent perfonage, but the state of Ireland and the true fource of its late dittractions) claims a full and attentive confideration.

Mr. Grattan, in the addrefs which Dr. Duigenan undertakes to answer, had given an account of his political conduct to his late confiituents, the citizens of Dublin; in which he arraigned the meafures of the English government, with refpect to Ireland, almost invariably, from the reign of James the First (inclufive) to the prefent time. His principal objections are founded on the influence of the British cabinet on the parliament of Ireland, which affembly he calls "a Borough ParJiament;" on their refufal to accede to all the claims of the Irish Catholics, and to put them upon an equal footing with the Proteftants; and, laftly, on the fyftem of coercion lately adopted by government. As our bufinefs is to examine the work of Dr. Duigenan, not that of Mr. Grattan, (which is here only published as an appendix to the former) we fhall merely fay that we fhould have deemed many of Mr. G.'s statements fallacious, many of his opinions erroneous, and many of his arguments inconclufive, even if we had not perufed Dr. Duigenan's anfwer. Events that have fince happened have indeed thrown a very strong light on Mr. G.'s opi ions, as well as afforded a ready answer to the greater part of his addrefs.

Dr. D. begins his attack, by remarking on Mr. Grattan's dif regard of the inftructions given him by his conftituents; his attempts against the Proteftant intereft in Ireland, and his object in propofing a reform (as it is called) of parliament. His conduct on the difpute refpecting the regency is also brought forward, as a proof of a long-formed defign to feparate Ireland from the British empire. Without deciding on the justice of

this imputation, the arguments of Dr. D. are certainly well worth the attention of thofe who may not yet have seen that queftion fully or ably difcuffed. But one of the principal charges here adduced against Mr. Grattan, is that of intriguing with the Roman Catholics, to effect a feparation of the two kingdoms. To maintain this accufation, his adverfary goes into a hiftory of that body of men and of Mr. G.'s connexion with them; which he imputes to the motive, already stated, of effecting a feparation of Ireland from Great Britain. On imputations of this kind it would not become us to give a decided opinion. But it certainly is remarkable that, of the nine perfons appointed by the Romish Convention as a permanent committee, three have fince been arrested, and are ftill in cuftody on a charge of trealon, and their fecretary has fled the kingdom. In this part of his work we think the author too fevere on the memory of Mr. Burke; who, however he might err (as furely he did) in fupporting fo ftrenuously the claims of the Irish Catholics, could not harbour the defign of feparating that kingdom from the British empire, ftill lefs of erecting a republic under the protection of France; which, as it now clearly appears, was the defign of the chief malecontents.

The conduct of Mr. Grattan during the short administration of Earl Fitzwilliam, is feverely commented upon, and more particularly his anfwe, to the addrefs of the meeting of Roman Catholics at Francis-ftreet chapel t; which Dr. D. confiders as an incitement to rebellion: and it is, no doubt, replete with violent and intemperate language.

It is impoffible, in this account, to follow the author through the hiftorical details he purfucs; though they appear to be founded on the beft authorities. They refpect chiefly the government of Ireland during the reign of James the Firit, and the maffacre of the Irish Proteftants in 1641. The account of Mr. Tone and his proceedings is interefting, and appears to be accurate; but how far the inference drawn from thence against Mr. G. is warranted, it is not for us to determine.

The author then difcuffes at large the meafures which Mr. G. has reprefented as grievances to Ireland, and gives explaAfter a variety of other nations and juftifications of each. topics, arifing from Mr. G.'s Addrefs, he enters very fully into the two measures, by which alone, according to Mr. G. the

One of them, Dr. M'Nevin, has fince very frankly confeffed his treasons.

+ The address and answer are fubjoined to Dr. D.'s work by way of appendix.

diforders

diforders of Ireland can be fuppreffed; namely, emancipation and reform, (as Mr. G. calls them); but which Dr. D. undertakes to prove really mean "the fubverfion of the Proteftant Eltablishment in Church and State, and a Republic feparate from, and independent of Great Britain."

On the former of thefe topics, the Doctor shows that, although the attachment of the Catholics to the House of Stuart is at an end, yet a principle as hoftile to the conftitution has fucceeded, (at least in the minds of thofe with whom Mr. G. was connected) namely "the influence of pure democra tic republicanism." To illuftrate this point, Dr. D. comments on the publications of their principal writers, particu larly a paftoral letter of Dr. Huffey, the titular Bishop of Waterford, and one of Dr. Troy, the titular Archbishop of Dublin. On the former he is particularly fevere, and justly fo, if his quotations from Dr. Huffey's Letter are fair and accurate. The true impediment to the claim of the Catholics he states, to be not (as Mr. G. had reprefented) that they refuse to abjure the worship of the Virgin Mary, and the doctrine of the real prefence; but that they refufe to take the oath of fupremacy, part of which is, that "no foreign prince, prelate, ftate, or potentate, hath or ought to have any jurifdiction, power, fuperiority, pre-eminence, or authority, ecclefiaftical or Spiritual, within this realm." Dr. D. argues, that it is impoffible to diveft the fupremacy in fpirituals of a confiderable degree of temporal power;" and thows a cafe in which the separation of the two powers is impracticable. Having argued at length on this fubject, he next juftifies the creation of boroughs by King James the First; a meafure upon which Mr. Grattan had commented with great severity. But we haften to the plan of reform propofed for Ireland, and (as Dr. D. ftates) zealously fupported by Mr. Grattan and his party. This confifted, firft, in the emancipation, as it was called, of the Catholics, that is the admiffion of them into parliament, and the great offices of ftate; fecondly, in the diffolution of all corporations in cities, &c. which enjoy the privilege of fending members to parliament, and the divifion of the kingdom into departments, each department to contain five thou

fand houses.

"This project of reform, at one ftroke cuts down by the root, the parliamentary conftitution of Ireland, modelled exactly from that of England; all corporations reprefentable in parliament are to be abolifhed; and that renounced inftitution to which Great Britain owes her liberty, her property, and her glory,which fhe tranfplanted into this king dom, and which is here coeval with the conftitution, established on the expulfion or rather fubjugation of barbarifu, is, in the military

fenfe