A PERSON who had been many years a member of the Catholick committee, gave me the following account of this inftitution. I fhall not take upon me to vouch its authenticity; but fhall leave the reader to judge of it from the views and defigns which they afterwards difplayed.

The Catholick committee very wifely enlifted in their fervice fome proteftant barrifters of abilities, but defperate circumftances, and totally deftitute of all religious principle. Though they were ftipendiaries, and received pay, it was agreed that they fhould appear to have volunteered in their caufe from generous and difinterefted motives, for the purpofe of lulling the fufpicion of proteftants in general, of decoying and attaching to the Catholick caufe, by varnifhing it over with the femblance of general and abftract liberty, fuch perfons of that perfuafion as had revolutionary defigns, particularly the prefbyterians.

The honourable Simon Butler, brother of the late lord Mountgarret, and Theobald Wolfe Tone, were the leaders of this band, and the firft perfons who engaged themfelves in the fervice of the Catholick committee.

The laft, who was the fon of a mechanick, received a good education in the univerfity of Dublin, and was afterwards called to the bar; but having a wife and children, being unfuccefsful in his profeffion, though he had diftinguifhed abilities, and being indigent in his circumftances, he hoped, by promoting that innovating fpirit which had fhaken the foundations of many European ftates, to fubvert our conftitution, and to rife, during a feafon of anarchy and confufion, from poverty and obfcurity to wealth and celebrity. Tone informed the Catholick committee, that they could not fucceed in their extenfive plan of emancipation, unlefs it had, at leaft, the femblance of being fanctioned and approved of by a confiderable number of proteftants; and knowing that the inhabitants of Belfaft, the mafs of whom are Calvinifts, had manifefted during the American war, when volunteering flourifhed, an earneft defire of fubverting

the conftitution, under the pretext of reforming it, propofed to fome republican friends in that town, to inftitute the fociety of united Irifhmen, round whofe ftandard revolutionifts of every religious perfuafion were to rally.

Tone, their hired agent, knew, that if the repeal of the reftrictive laws were propofed by a numerous body of proteftants, it would have peculiar weight, as flowing apparently from a liberal and difinterefted love of liberty.

Subfequent experience has proved, that affurances were at the fame time given to the republicans of Belfaft, that the Catholick committee and fuch of their perfuafion as they could influence, fhould co-operate with them in fubverting the conftitution.
They embraced the propofal with alacrity, and the firft fociety of united Irifhmen fat at Belfaft in the month of October, 1791; when Richard Simms was fecretary.

But before I proceed further, it will be neceffary to fhew the defigns of Tone and Jones, from their own publications. The former publifhed a pamphlet, entitled, “The Northern Whig,” in the year 1791, foon after he enlifted in the fervice of the Catholick committee. The whole of this publication, which he entitled, in the fecond edition, “An argument on behalf of the catholicks of Ireland,” is entirely taken up in recommending a total repeal of the penal laws againft them.

He endeavoured to put on the cloak of liberality, and the maflc of difintereftednefs, by making the following declaration, in the beginning of this pamphlet “Before I proceed to the object of this book, I think it neceffary to acquaint the reader, that I am a proteftant of the church of Ireland,* as by law eftablifhed, and have again and again taken all the cuftomary oaths, by which we fecure and appropriate to ourfelves all degrees and profeffions, fave one, to the utter exclufion of our Catholick brethren. I am, therefore, no further interefted in the event, than as a mere lover of juftice, and a fteady detefter of tyranny, whether exercifed by one man or a million.”

This work was reprinted by the united Irifhmen of Belfaft in the year; 1792, and fix thoufand copies of it were foon circulated, which shewed

* He was a profeffed deift.

that a clofe union, and an ardent defire of mutual co-operation exifted between them and the Catholick committee.

In it he cenfures and vilifies the conftitution, reprefents it as a fyftem of tyranny; and afferts, that nothing but a total repeal of the reftrictive laws againft Roman catholicks can reftore it to its original purity.

This turbulent adventurer, the founder of the fociety of united Irifhmen, was one of the fecretaries of the Catholick committee, and had the chief direction of both.

Mr. Todd Jones, having injured his fortune in electioneering, was led, by the hope of repairing it, to become their advocate, both in and out of parliament; and I have not a doubt, but that fome other members of that affembly were attached to their caufe from the fame fordid and finifter motives; as they often panegyrifed the Roman catholicks for their fteady loyalty and unremitted refpect for the laws, when they were in actual rebellion.

Mr. Jones wrote a pamphlet in the year 1792, entitled, “A letter to the focieties of united Irifhmen of Belfaft, on the reftoration of the Catholick rights and he gives the following reafons for publifhing it:

“In cherifhing from my early years the auguft idea of the emancipation of the catholicks from a profligate, miftaken, pastionate, and impolitick farrago of ftatutes of penalty and difqualification, I have frequently enquired into the motives of my own mind, why I fhould never experience apprehenfions upon this fubject, in common with many felfifh and fome innocent antagonifts of fuch a glorious reftoration to their country; and it may be pardonably objected againft me, that poffeffing, from my family decline, inconfiderable property to hazard, I could not be liable to that delicate fenfe of danger which muft come home to the feelings of the great proteftant proprietors; but granting I have but little, comparatively at ftake, that little is my all.”

He denies that the popifh parliament, which fat in Dublin in the year 1689, paffed a bill of attainder againft all the proteftant landholders of the kingdom, though James II acknowledged in his diary, found in the Scotch college at Paris, that he gave his aflent to it with reluctance, and merely to gratify his Irifh Roman catholick fubjects; and Harris, in his life of king William, declares, that he found it in the Rolls office; but all the acts paffed by king James’s parliament, were afterwards burnt by

[97

the hands of the common hangman; and therefore Mr. Jones denies that it ever paffed, and afferts, that it was fabricated by archbifhop King, who gives a copy of it.*

The firft fociety of united Irifhmen at Belfaft publifhed their plan or profpectus in the Northern Star in October, 1791, though it had been fabricated in Dublin.

We need no other proof of this, than that a paper, containing the original defign of that affociation was circulated in Dublin in June, 1791, which may be feen in page 50 of the report of the fecret committee.

We may fairly conclude, that the heads of the Catholick committee in Dublin, and the turbulent leaders of the prefbyterians at Belfaft, refolved to unite their refpective orders, for the purpofe of fubverting the conftitution.

One of the moft intelligent and efficient members of the catholick body, and whofe writings ferved them materially, becaufe he affumed, at leaft, the appearance of moderation on moft occafions, made ufe of the following menace to the proteftant ftate, in a pamphlet which he publifhed in the year 1792: “Will the prefbyterian yeomanry of the North take up arms for the courtiers who enjoy penfions, for the parfons who exaft tithes, and for the landlords who exact rack rents? They too are complainants; and if they unfheath the fword againft their brethren, (meaning the proteftants of the eftablifhed church,) will they be likely to return it to the fcabbard, until they have procured very ample redrefs, and removed the caufe of their complaints? Should that people ever be embodied, tithes, boroughs, and all the arts and practices of monopoly will inevitably fall before them.”

We may infer from this, that the Roman catholicks hoped for the co-operation of the preffayterians in their revolutionary defigns; but the prophecy was “not fulfilled; for the prefbyterian yeomen of the North continued loyal during the rebellion, though numbers of their perfuafion were feduced. This odious picture of the conftitution in church and ftate, the hope with which this writer endeavours to infpire the members of his sect, that they would be joined by the prefbyterians, and the lure

* Though I condemn Mr. Jones for hiring out his talents to the Roman catholicks, yet I would not be underftood to include him in the ftrictures which I make on his coadjutors, as I know and efteem him, and believe him to be a gentleman of principle in other refpects.

which he holds out to the latter, indicate the dangerous defigns which were at that time brooding.
The Roman catholicks fucceeded fo eafily at Belfaft, that at atown meeting held there the twenty-eighth of January, 1792, in a prefbyterian conventicle, the reverend Sinclare Kelburn, one of their minifters and a noted demagogue, in the chair, they refolved* to petition parliament to repeal the whole of the popery laws; but two hundred and fifty-five of the moft refpectable inhabitants of that town protected againft it.
In a fhort time after the commencement of the fociety at Belfaft, there were no lefs than four grand ones eftablifhed there, who refolved to fet on foot fimilar ones in every part of the kingdom.
On the ninth of November, 1791, the united Irifhmen of Dublin began their feffion, and publifhed their declaration, which was exactlly fimilar to that at Belfaft; but with this difference, that a teft was annexed to it.† The honourable Simon Butler was in the chair, and James Napper Tandy was fecretary. I fhall refer the reader to Appendix, No. VII. for their conftitution and their mode of election. Revolutionary defigns are very evident in their declaration.
On the thirtieth of December, 1791, they held a feffion and adopted a circular letter, and refolved to have it printed and difperfed through every part of the kingdom, to encourage the formation of fimilar focieties 1 a nd they annexed to it a declaration of their political principles, and the teft which they had taken, “as a focial and facred compact to bind them more clofely together.” See Appendix, No. VIII.
On the fourteenth of September, 1792, they addreffed the Irifh nation, and declared their indignation at the infidious means employed to ftifte the catholick voice. The whole of this addrefs was on the grievances of the Roman catholicks; and it ftrongly recommends a total repeal of the reftrictive laws. They fay in it, “popery is no longer to be met with but in the ftatute book.”
It muft feem extraordinary, that a fet of men, who were deftitute of principle and property, fhould be fo anxious about the intereft of that fect from whom they differed in religion; but Tone and Butler, the leaders of the fociety, were their agents, and received pay from them.

* About the fame time a revolutionary club at Belfaft, called a reading fociety, entered uito refolutions in favour of the Roman catholicks.
† See Appendix, No. VI.

In their addrefs of the fourteenth of September, 1792, to the Irifh nation, they feverely condemned the county meetings and the grand juries, who thanked the majority of the houfe of commons for rejeding the petition of the Roman catholicks, and for pasting refolutions againft granting the eleftive franchife to them, and for cenfuring Edward Byrne’s circular letter for choofing delegates. They condemn alfo the addrefs prefented by lord Kenmare on the twenty-feventh of December, 1791, with as much acrimony as the demagogues in the Catholick committee did; and becaufe it was humble and refpectful, they called it an eleemofynary addrefs. In fhort, the whole of it is taken up with the claims of the Romanifts.

On the twenty-third of November, 1792, William Drennan, chairman, Archibald Hamilton Rowan, fecretary, they addreffed the delegates for promoting a reform in Scotland; and on December the fourteenth, the volunteers of Ireland, to whom their addrefs is a direct invocation to rebellion. It directs that parochial meetings fhould be held, and that each fhould elect and return delegates to form a national convention; and they fay in it, that the civil affembly fhould be attended by military affociations.

October twenty-fixth, they addreffed the friends of the people at London; November twenty-fifth, the delegates for reform in Scotland; and introduce catholick emancipation into it.

November thirtieth, they addreffed a circular letter to all the focieties of united Irifhmen in the kingdom; and refolved to effect a better organization, and a more intimate union with the different focieties, than had before fubfifted; and to communicate all their publications to the confederated focieties.

On the twenty-fifth of January, 1793, they addreffed the Irifh nation.

November twenty-fifth, they addreffed the Britifh convention who had affiliated with them, and propofed univerfal fuffrage and annual parliamentts, which the united Irifhmen affented to, and refolved to adopt.

By a report made the fourteenth of Auguft, 1797, by a provincial meeting of delegates of Ulfter, it appears that there was a number of focieties of united Irifhmen in North America, whofe profeffed object was to affift Ireland.*

* See report of the fecret committee, Appendix, No. IV.

All thefe adreffes, which are very inflammatory, are to be found in the Appendix, No. V. of the laft report of the fecret committee of 1798.

It is obfervable, that the main purport of them is the repeal of the penal laws againft the Roman catholicks.

They had a committee of conftitution, of finance, of correfpondence, of accommodation, a treafurer, a fecretary, and a feal of office.

Their law agent was Matthew Dowling, a fellow of a moft infamous character, who has been tranfported to Scotland with a numerous gang of traitors, who probably would have been hanged, but that they obtained the royal mercy on condition of going into banifhment.

A writer in America, who affumes the name of Peter Porcupine, defcribes the inftitution there, and gives an account of their declaration and conftitution. It complains much of the tyranny of England over Ireland, and enforces the neceffity of her emancipation, and the eftablifhment of a republick there.

On the twenty-firft of January, 1792, they made a report of the popery laws in force in the kingdom, by their chairman, the honourable Simon Butler. In fact, he was in the utmoft indigence, and was paid by them for making it, though it was in the name of the fociety. It contained many grofs falfehoods and exaggerated miftatements, tending to inflame the popifh multitude, and to deceive the government of England and Ireland.

In the debate of the Roman catholicks, affembled in Dublin on the twenty-third of March, 1792, Mr. Keogh faid of it, “For a late publication, the digeft of the popery laws, the united Irifhmen, and their refpectable chairman, the honourable Simon Butler, demand our warmeft gratitude.”

It is ftated in the report of the fecret committee of the houfe of lords, made in 1797, “That the leaders and directors of the united Irifhmen are now, and have been for fome time paft, anxioufly engaged in uniting with them a clafs of men who had formerly difturbed the peace of this country by acts of outrage, robbery and murder, under the appellation of defenders; and that the committee had reafon to apprehend, that in a certain degree they had fuceeeded.”

The following obfervation is to be found in the report of the houfe of commons made in 1798, page 9; and, in the courfe of my enquiries, I have found it to be ftrictly true:

“That the counties in which defenderifm had prevailed, eafily became converts to the new doctrines; and, in the fummer of 1797, the ufual concomitants of the treafon, namely, the plundering houfes of arms, the fabrication of pikes, and the murder of thofe who did not join the party, began to appear in the midland counties.”

William Paulet Carey, who was admitted a member of the fociety, became their printer. He publifhed a newfpaper, called the National Evening Star, which he called the organ, and himfelf the printer, of the people. It was very inflammatory.

He was profecuted by the attorney-general for having printed in his paper fome feditious publications, at the inflance of the united Irifhmen, who refolved, in the moft folemn manner, to defend him at their own expence; but they afterwards abandoned him to the vengeance of the law, and he was ruined.

In revenge, he wrote a pamphlet, in which he abufed and expofed them with fome ability, and not without wit.

He bellows the following encomium on Mr. John Keogh. In fpeaking of one Matthew, a chandler, he fays, “In the Catholick committee he appeared for nine years the colleague of Keogh, whofe courage and talents firft gave the impulfe of freedom to three millions of Irifhmen, and who originated the bold meafure of overturning the ariftocracy of the Catholick committee.”*

He fpeaks of Napper Tandy in the higheft ftrain of panegyrick, and of E. Crookfhank Keane.

He is extravagant in his praife of Edward Byrne, and of William T. Jones, the firft proteftant fenator, he fays, who brought forward the queftion of Catholick emancipation.

Among the lift of worthies whom he panegyrizes, we find Matthew Dowling.

Carey fays, in his pamphlet, “That as the united Irifhmen came forward in the prefence of God, and pledged themfelves to labour for a reform

* This alludes to the feceffion of fixty-three members.

of every fpecies of corrupt influence, and had eloquently declaimed againft the profufion of the publick money, he could not have expected that they would have abandoned the prefs and the printer, for the wine calk, the cook and the vintner.”

They, in excufe, complained of the apathy of the people; that their funds were exhaufted; that money came in flowly; and that they muft difcharge, in the firft place, £200 which fum was yet due for wine drank in Newgate. This alludes to the imprifonment of Bond and Butler, which I fhall explain hereafter.

Though they facrificed this unfortunate man, they defended, at their own expence, Meffrs. Drennan, Rowan, Tandy, Bond and Butler, who were profecuted for feditious practices.

Carey makes the following juft remark in his pamphlet “The hiftory of political parties is but too often a picture of knaves betraying, and of knaves betrayed; of ambitious and indigent profligates, labouring to get into afliuence and power; and of honeft men contributing by their own degradation to lift them into affluence and power.”
The idea of uniting the prefbyterians and Roman catholicks, to fubvert the conftitution, had exifted for fome years.

I mentioned before, that the bifhop of Cloyne -wrote a pamphlet in the year 1787, on the perfecution of his clergy; and that it drew on him the vengeance of fome prefbyterian minifters and popifh priefts, whofe feftaries feemed to rejoice at this apparent junction of the two orders. On that occafion, Carey, who had been bred at the Dublin fociety as an engraver, publifhed a print, reprefenting doctor Campbell, a diffenting minifter, and father O’Leary, a friar, fhaking hands. They were the moft virulent antagonifts of the bifhop.

In the beginning of the year 1793, the houfe of lords infliituted a fecret committee, to enquire into the nature and origin of the difturbances made in different counties by the defenders, and fummoned fome perfons to give evidence concerning them.

The fociety of united Irifhmen in Dublin, the honourable Simon Butler in the chair, Oliver Bond, fecretary, publifhed fome fevere animadverfions on the powers which they affumed; and in doing fo, they were guilty of a grofs libel on that affembly, and a violation of its privileges;

for which they were committed to Newgate by the houfe of lords, and fined £500 each.

While in prifon, they were maintained in the following manner, by the members of the fociety: They made four hundred tickets, of which a certain number were blanks, the remainder were marked with the dates of the days that the prifoners were to remain in confinement; and any perfon who drew one of the latter, was obliged to provide a dinner, with twelve covers, on the day fpecified in his ticket. Four perfons were invited by each of the prifoners, and three by the perfon who procured the i;epaft, who, with himfelf, made twelve.*

There is not a doubt, but that there was a clofe connection between the Catholick committee and the fociety of united Irifhmen, for fome of the former were members of the latter; but it is very remarkable, that none of the Romanifts ever took an open and active part in it, fuch as chairman or fecretary; but remaining behind the curtain, they left the obnoxious and oftenfible proceedings to be conducted by a few men who were totally void of all religious principle, though they affumed the mafk and the name of proteftants.

The united Irifhmen, who were bold and enterprifing, affaulted the conftitution as it were with a battering ram; the Catholick committee filently, and by fap, inciting the people to infurrection and outrage, while they made publick declarations of their unfhaken loyalty and unremitting refpect for the laws.

The latter had this advantage, that none but Romanifts could be members of the committee; and perfons of their perfuafion were admitted into the fociety of united Irifhmen, and were actually affociated in it.

We find, that when perfons were fent to different parts of the country from Dublin, to perfuade the people to unite and fraternize, they often confifted of perfons delegated from each body, which fhewed their intimate connexion.

As the lower clafs of prefbyterians bore an inveterate hatred againft the Roman catholicks, and as they on all occafions fuccefsfully oppofed the defenders, who were encouraged and protected by the Catholick committee,

* The heavy expence attending this fcheme contributed to damp the ardour of the fociety, and induced fome members to fecede from it.

we find that the latter, and the united Irifhmen, ufed the utmoft exertions to unite the two orders, as their co-operation was neceffary to promote their revolutionary defigns.

In the month of July, 1792, Theobald Wolfe Tone, John Keogh, and Richard Mc Cormick were fent by the Catholick committee on a miffion to the northern counties, which were difturbed by the peep-of-day boys and defenders, to effect a reconcilement between them.* In their way they were joined by Samuel Neilfon, an active and artful demagogue, who was profeffedly a prefbyterian, but who, as well as Tone, a reputed proteftant, was deftitute of all religious principle. They pretended to be actuated by motives of the pureft patriotifm and benevolence; but as Tone, Neilfon, and McCormick, appeared afterwards to be notorious traitors, we cannot be at a lofs to know their real views.

At Rathfriland, in the county of Down, Tone mounted the roftrum, and haranguing the populace, recommended peace and unanimity to them, on the grounds of chriftian charity and brotherly love. He threw out many invectives againft government, whom he reprefented as defirous of dividing the people, for the purpofe of governing them corruptly and defpotically; and he advifed that all orders fhould unite to oppofe their bafe and finifter defigns. A magiftrate, who happened to be prefent, filenced the orator, by reminding him that there were ftocks in town; on which he and his affociates precipitately left it, and proceeded on their miffion.

Soon after, Mr. John Keogh, accompanied by one O’Hanlon, a grocer of Newry, and his fon, both papifts, made a fecond attempt to reconcile thefe two orders, at Rathfriland; but the diffenters fhewed fo ftrong an averfion to it, that the miffionaries were forced out of town, and were refufed accommodation at the principal inn.

It required fome time and unabated exertion to overcome the ftrong antipathy which exifted between the papifts and the lower clafs of prefbyterians; and it probably could not have been accomplifhed, if the leaders of the confpiracy had not attached to their caufe the clergy of both.

From the men who compofed this miffion, it is evident, that the Catholick committee, and the united Irifhmen were clofely connefted,

* Many miffions of this kind were undertaken in 1792 and 1793.

and labouring in the fame vineyard: Tone was at the fame time the fecretary of the former, and the original framer and the chief leader of the latter in Dublin; Neilfon in Belfaft; Keogh and McCormick were the moft active members of the former. At a general meeting of the Roman catholick committee in July, 1792, an addrefs was voted to the defenders, and circulated in every parifh, where they had made their appearance, exhorting them to a peaceable deportment, a refpect for the laws, and to abftain from every meafure that might give offence to their proteftant brethren. For their laudable endeavours in this inftance, as well as by their miffionaries, to reftore peace and focial order, they received many flattering encomiums from their republican friends in Belfaft, publifhed in the Northern Star.

The following aneedote will fhew the reader what a ftrong antipathy there exifted between the prefbyterians and papifts of the North:

On Monday, May fixth, 1792, the funeral of a Roman catholick, attended by great numbers decorated with ribands, carrying a flag and forming a kind of martial proceffion, proceeded from the village of Hilltown in the county of Down, through the town of Rathfriland to the grave-yard of the parifh of Ballyroney. In pastlng through Rathfriland, they were hooted, infulted and pelted with dirt, by the prefbyterians; but when they arrived at the grave-yard, and the priefts began to chaunt the requiem of the deceafed, they were attacked by the prefbyterians with ftones and clubs, and compelled to fly, leaving the corpfe unburied. They were then hunted acrofs the country, and purfued to a confiderable diftance by their affailants.

There appeared in the year 1792, in the Northern Star, a newfpaper publifhed at Belfaft, which was a vehicle of treafon and fedition, many exhortations to the Roman catholicks and prefbyterians to unite in the common caufe; an addrefs to them for that purpofe, penned with peculiar energy, was publifhed in that print on the feventeenth of January, 1792. It is certain that the prefbyterians of Belfaft were as warm in this courtfhip as the Roman catholicks. In the year 1792, when the former paid the moft fervile adulation to the latter, they built a chapel for them at Belfaft; and Waddell Cunningham, a merchant of great wealth in that town, and a noted republican, attended the celebration of mafs in a popifh chapel there, at the head of a company of volunteers,

who, as well as their leader, were prefbyterians; and a fimilar fcene was exhibited at Lifburn by doctor Crawford, a phyfician and captain of a company of prefbyterian volunteers. As religionifts they hated each other; but both having one grand object, the fubverfion of the conftitution, politicks became the inftrument of their union, like two fluids that are heterogeneous and immifcible, but which can be made to unite and amalgamate by what the chymifts call an intermede or a tertium quid.

About that time, a prieft of Belfaft, who was fenfible and loyal, happened to be invited by two principal merchants of that town to take fhare of a bottle of wine with them. Politicks, and the sincere regard which the prefbyterians of Belfaft; entertained for their catholick brethren, became the subject of cbnverfation, when one of the merchants propofed that a marriage fhould take place between the two orders. The prieft wittily replied, with all my heart, I can have no objection to it; though when a fimilar propofal was lately made to me by a member of the eftablifhed church, I abfolutely oppofed it. Why fo? faid one of the prefbyterians; that appears very extraordinary: Not at all, replied the prieft; for I confider an union with the eftablifhed church as a kind of inceft, as we are too nearly related; but the prefbyterians may marry with us whenever they choofe, for we are not the leaft akin.

It is moft certain, that the firft leaders in the North, though regarded as prefbyterians, were in fact infidels, who endeavoured to extinguifh all religious principle by the dissemination of French doftrines, the circulation of Paine’s Age of Reafon, and publications of that ftamp; and well knowing that even the religious part of their order were inimical to monarchy, and particularly to our hierarchy, they endeavoured to avail themfelves of that propensity in them to overturn the government; knowing alfo, that the Roman catholicks had difpofitions ftrongly hoftile to a proteftant ftate, they endeavoured to form a union with them for the above purpofe.

The prefbyterians engaged in the confpiracy were chiefly confined to the counties of Down and Antrim; and even there none of the refpectable members of that order were concerned in it. Some of the moft profligate diffenting minifters* in thofe counties, who became partizans

* See in Appendix, No. XII. the prefbyterian minifters of the Counties of Down and Antrim concerned in the rebellion, and the punifhments which they fuffered.

of the united Irifhmen, prevailed on the rabble of their perfuafion, and fuch of them as were devoid of principle and property, to join in the plot; but very few, if any, of the really religious prefbyterians entered into it.

Some of the moft intelligent perfons of the North have affured me, that the infidel leaders thought they had gone rather* too far, even before the rebellion broke out, in raifing the hopes of a popifh eftablifhment in the mafs of the Roman catholicks; having difcovered too late that religious bigotry formed the principal, if not the fole fpring of action among them, which evidently appeared on the explofion of the confpiracy.

It is a pofitive faft, that John Sheares† promifed a complete extinction of his religion in confideration of catholick co-operation, without reflecting that it was an act of fpontaneity in them; by this he meant the fubverfion of the proteftant hierarchy, for he was as deftitute of religious principle as the few confpirators of that perfuafion who confederated with him. The only bounds of feparation between the prefbyterians and papifts was the eftablifhed church, which fufpended and fuppreffed their mutual enmity; and the fubverfion of it, like the removal of a peninfula between two raging feas, would have produced collifion and difcord. While fome of the unprincipled prefbyterian minifters of the counties of Down and Antrim were decrying religious bigotry, under the pretext of liberality, they almoft proftituted religion itfelf, in order to prepare the minds of their flock for the reception of rebellious doctrines; but the popifh priefts, fearing that the light of the new philofophy would difpel the illufions of purgatory, holy oil, holy water, and abfolution, which gave them a complete afcendancy over their fuperftitious fectaries, and which, like true alchymifts, they could turn into gold, infufed into them a more than ordinary degree of fanaticifm, well knowing that it would augment the facerdotal power over them, and encreafe their hatred to the proteftant eftate; for thefe reafons, the popifh multitude appeared more fanguinary againft the members of the eftablifhed church, and more devoted to their clergy wherever the rebellion broke out, than they had been for many years before; though they univerfally pretended that their influence was entirely done away.

* A Cork gentleman who was a moft efficient member of the union, having ftudied the theory of infurrection at Paris.

Thus the diffenting minifters and popifh priefts endeavoured to attain the fame end by different means. Joined to the malignant efforts of the united Irifhmen, there is not a doubt, but that the active interference of fome French democrats among the difaffected part of the Irifh nation, their extravagant admiration of the French revolution, and their correfpondence with fome of the clubs in France, contributed materially to diffufe the intoxicating poifon of republicanifm.

In the years 1791 and 1792, Rabaud de St. Etienne, the bofom friend of Briffot, the famous leader of the Girondine party in the French national affembly, paffed fome time between Dublin and Belfaft, fowing the feeds of future combuftion.

The fociety of the friends of the conftitution, affembled at Clermont in France in the month of October, 1791, refolved, that, on perufing the different publications addreffed from various parts of Ireland to the national affembly and the people of France, an addrefs, then agreed to, fhould be forwarded to the volunteers of Ireland, at Dublin, and which addrefs was publifhed in the publick prints; and an anfwer to faid addrefs was agreed to by the volunteers of Dublin, and forwarded to France in January, 1792. It was figned by James Napper Tandy, Thomas Bacon a tailor, Edward Newenham, William T. Smith, A. H. Rowan, J. T. Aflienhurft; and contained the moft extravagant encomiums on the French conftitution, and condemned the Irifh as imperfecl:, and as founded in tyranny.

In a fociety of united Irifhmen affembled at Temple Patrick, in the county of Down, on the nineteenth of December, 1791, which was foon after the formation of the inftitution, and fhews how rapidly it fpread, they refolved to promote Catholick emancipation, and a reform of parliament; and affert, that whilft an extra-national government retains the power of the national purfe; and whilft religious animofities, under the direction of infidious adminiftrations, continue to difunite Irifhmen, it is vain to expect emancipation, or the bleffings of a free conftitution.

The celebration of the anniverfary of the French revolution, which took place at Belfaft on the fourteenth of July, 1792, opened a wide and extenfive theatre for traitors and difaffected perfons of every rank, character, and religious perfuafion, to fraternize and fpread the infection of their noxious principles.

Some months before, it was announced in the publick prints, and all the volunteers of the province of Ulfter were invited to affift there. Mr. Tone, thinking that this would afford him a good opportunity of attaching to his fyftem a great number of the Northern prefbyterians, well trained to arms, fent to a republican friend at Belfaft, the refolutions and declarations of the united Iriftmien, and defired him to propound them to the volunteers, when they were intoxicated with the admiration of French liberty.

The main object of the refolutions is, “a complete internal union of all the people of Ireland, to refift the weight of English influence.” He fays in his letter, “with a reformed parliament every thing is eafy; without it nothing can be done. The foregoing contain my true and sincere opinion of the ftate of this country, fo far as in the prefent jundture it may be advifeable to publifh them. They certainly fall fhort of the truth; but truth itfelf muft fometimes condefcend to temporize. My unalterable opinion is, that the bane of Irifh profperity is in the influence of England.* I believe that influence will be extended while the connexion between the two countries continues; neverthelefs, as I know that that opinion is for the prefent too hardy, though a little time may eftablifh it univerfally, I have not made it a part of the refolutions. I have not faid one word that looks like a wifh for feparation; though I give it to you as my moft decided opinion, that fuch an event would be regeneration to this country.”

“I think the beft time for publifhing them will be on the fourteenth of July: I learn there is to be a commemoration of the French revolution; that morning ftar of liberty to Ireland!”

“The volunteers, if they approve of the plan, may adopt it, and I have worded it fo as to leave them an opportunity. I have left, as you fee, a blank for the name. As to the Roman catholicks, I have alluded to them, but fo remotely, as I hope not to alarm the moft cautious proteftant. It is wicked nonfenfe to talk of a reform in Ireland, in which they fhall not have their due fhare.”

This fhews how anxious he was about the Roman catholicks, whofe hired agent and fecretary he was at that time; and how artfully he

* In the reign of James II the Irifh Roman Catholicks made a great outcry againft Englifh intereft, as may be feen in lord Clarendon’s ftate letters.

endeavours to allure the proteftants to promote their luleren:, though their own deftruction was involved in it.

The anniverfary of this French revolution* was celebrated with great pomp and fplendour by a proceffion of many volunteer corps, in which fome pageants and large emblematick figures, with mottos fuitablc to the occafion, were dravyn by horfes. On one of them, drawn by four horfes, there was the following infcription: “The releafement of the prifoners from the Baftile.” On the reverfe, there was a figure of Hibernia, with one hand and foot in fhackles, and a volunteer prefenting to her a figure of liberty. The following motto was infcribed on another: “Our Gallic brethren were born July fourteenth, 1789: Alas! we are ftill in embryo.” On the reverfe, “Superftitious jealoufy, the caufe of the Irifh Baftile: Let us unite and deftroy it.” Among them appeared the portrait of doctor Franklin, with this motto, “Where liberty is, there is my country.”

I have been informed by many gentlemen well acquainted with the real fentiments of the prefbyterians of the North, that they harbour a moft inveterate hatred towards the Roman catholicks; that they never sincerely wifhed that they fhould obtain the eleftive franchife; and that they endeavoured to raife their expectations very high, from a mahgnant hope, that a difappointment, arifing from not having them fulfilled, would exafperate them againft the ftate, and make them more fanguine in their defires to overturn it.

On the other hand, the Romanifts were lefs sincere; for the late rebellion proves that they meant to make ufe of that sect of the proteftants, merely as an engine to oveiturn the conftitution, and to have extirpated the whole order of proteftants when they had fucceeded. As there are many good and loyal fubjects among both thefe religionifts, I think it right to apologize to them; and to affure them, that I allude only to the ignorant, the unprincipled, and uneducated ranks of both.

The Catholick committee, hoping that they might conciliate and gaim over to their caufe the volunteers of Ulfter, affembled at Belfaft, when the flame of liberty excited in their breads the moft tender emotions of fraternity and benevolence, and extinguifhed all mean and felfifh affections, fent fourteen delegates there, of whom one was a prieft, fome days before the civick feaft began.

* It lafted fome days.

A Frenchman, who had been very bufy intriguing in Dublin, attended there alfo.

When the proceffion was over, the volunteers and many of the inhabitants of the town affembled in the linen-hall, and entered on the difcullion of politicks. Parliamentary reform, and an univerfal reftoration of all the privileges of the Roman catholicks were refolved on.

They then voted an addrefs to the national affembly of France, and another to the people of Ireland.

The leading orators, and the chief friends of the Romanifts on this occafion, were Meffrs. Sampfon and Neilfon, notorious rebels, prefbyterians by profeffion, but decided deifts; the reverend T. Birch, the reverend doctor Dickfon, and the reverend S. Kelburne,* prefbyterian minifters, and doctor Caldwell, a noted republican.
Thefe active citizens, and the delegates from the Roman catholick committee, whofe hatred towards each other could be equalled by nothing but their zeal to overturn the conftitution, which was their only bond of union, were like two bands of robbers in Arabia, whofe competition for plunder was an unceafing fource of enmity; but meeting with a rich caravan, fo well guarded, that they defpair fingly of conquering it, they therefore unite for that purpofe.
The Roman catholick delegates having completely fucceeded in their negotiation for fraternizing with the prefbyterians, and for attaching them to their caufe, gave way to immoderate joy, and poured out many a libation to Bacchus, on the night of the day that the civick feaft was held.
On the fourteenth of July, the volunteers of Dublin affembled and -fired three volHes on the quay, in commemoration of the French revolution; and on that day, and on the fixteenth of July, many political clubs dined together, to celebrate that event.
On the twenty-third of May, 1792, the Polifh revolution was celebrated at Belfaft; that day being its anniverfary. A numerous company who dined at the Donegal arms, drank the following among other toads: The rights of man and Tom Paine: the fovereignty of the people: may philofophy enlighten all nations, and form the whole into one family: the revolution fociety of London: James Napper Tandy, and a fpeedy check to unconftitutional and undefined privileges.

* Birch and Dickfon have been tranfported; Kelburn was imprifoned a confiderable time.

May eighteenth, 1792, the Belfaft fecond fociety of united Irifhmen refolved on contributing their fhare of money to affift the people of France in the prefent war.

At this time there exifted a Northern whig club, which frequently publifhed refolutions of a revolutionary tendency.

On the twenty-eighth of October, 1792, they celebrated, with great pomp, at Belfaft, the retreat of the duke of Brunfwick’s army from France. Lifburn, and many other towns of the North, followed their example.

December thirty-firft, 179?, the union fociety at Newry, confifting moftly of Romanifts, Patrick O’Hanlon,* fecretary, refolved, “that their object was to remove religious prejudices, and to promote unanimity and brotherly love among Irifhmen of every fect and perfuafion.”

The Roman catholicks of Dublin, duly convened by publick fummons the thirty-firft of October, 1792, Thomas Braughall in the chair, voted their thanks to the different volunteer corps reviewed in Ulfter; to the focieties of united Irifhmen of Dublin and Belfaft; to the proteftant freeholders of Cork;† and the gentlemen on grand juries, and at county meetings, and to all others among their proteftant brethren \ who manifefted a wifh for their emancipation.

Left the lower clafs of the Romanifts fhould not feel that enthufiafm in the caufe of emancipation which the Catholick committee did, numbers of the popifh multitude under the denomination of houfeholders of Dublin, were convened in their refpective parifhes, the latter end of the year 1792, when they entered into a difcuffion of their claims.

At an affembly of them the thirty-firft of October, one of the leading members of the Catholick committee, to animate them, faid, “Look to the proteftant part of Ireland, the North; look to Belfaft; look to the four focieties of united Irifhmen there; to the declaration of the volunteers in every part of Ireland, rising once more from their lethargy to raife their degraded country.”
Two volunteer corps, affembled under arms at Belfaft on the feventh of September, 1792, expreffed their joy at feeing that the fpirit of

* He attended John Keogh on his miffion to Rathfriland.
† This was a mob confifting moftly of papifts, convened by a few difcontented. gentlemen foured by difappointed ambition.
  On the contrary, the real proteftants this very year were loud and vehement againft granting the Roman catholicks the elective franchife.

volunteering was reyiving throughout the province of Ulfter, being confident, that the rights of the people are moft fecure, when they are able to affert them; and that they are perfuaded the country owes whatever commerce and conftitution it poffeffes to the fpirit and wifdom of the volunteers; and they re-adopt the refolutions of thofe affembled at Dungannon the fifteenth of February, 1782, and the eighth of September, 1783, in which a total repeal of the popery laws, and an union of perfons of every religious perfuafion, is recommended.

A revolutionary club, who called themfelves the Irifh jacobins of Beifaft, publifhed a moft feditious addrefs to the publick on the fifteenth of December, 1792, in the Northern Star, in which they fay there is no national government, and that there muft be a complete reprefentation of the people; and they inculcate the neceffity of parliamentary reform and Catholick emancipation.

Different revolutionary focieties in the North, raifed by fubfcription, in the year 1792, confiderable fums of money for the republicans of France. At Coleraine they fubfcribed £600. The inhabitants of Drumacoe, in the parifh of Newtownlimavady, and its vicinity, fet one on foot the tenth of July, and invited perfons of every religious perfuafion to contribute to it.

In July, 1792, Monfieur Francois read a letter in the French convention, written by a fociety of friends to the French conftitution in Ireland, who praifed it very much, and offered eight hundred livres towards the expences of the ftate.

In the year 1792, there exifted the following political clubs in Dublin: The Whig club: The Whigs of the capital, who circulated twenty thoufand copies of Tom Paine’s Rights of Man, at id. each, but many of them gratis, to enlighten the people: The friends of the conftitution, liberty and peace:* The Catholick committee: The Catholick fociety: The united Irifhmen; who were very numerous: The defenders, who multiplied to a very extraordinary degree, were much influenced by the united Irifhmen, and with whom they began to affiliate in the year 1792: Many reading clubs: The Shamrock, Telegraphick, and Philanthropick focieties,

* Many men of principle and good fortune, who wifhed for nothing but a fimple reform of parliament, were members of it, but did not know the latent defigns of the rebels.

which were ramifications of defenderifm, and confided of the lowed claffes of the people, and furnifhed the united Irifhmen with affaffins. The Philanthropick paffed fentence of death on captain Giffard in the year 1794* when high fheriff of the city; but the affaffin appointed to execute it, being touched with remorfe, informed him of it, and put him on his guard.

On Monday the twenty-feventh of February, 1792, an event happened which filled all loyal subjects with alarming apprehenfions, and with ominous conjeftures, left the malignant defigns of the traitors, who were numerous at that time in the metropolis, might terminate in its deftruction. About the hour of four o’clock on that day, when the houfe of commons were in a committee, a member, conceiving that he perceived the fmell of fire, fent fome of the fervants to the dome of the edifice, and they immediately announced that it was on fire. The members, having inftantly retired to the oppofite fide of the ftreet, faw the flames burfting from it in feveral places and in oppofite directions, and the whole was inftantly in a blaze. The utmoft exertion, with all the buckets and engines of the city, were ufed to extinguifh it, but in vain; for that magnificent edifice was entirely confumed.

It occafioned univerfal confternation; the guards at the caftle, and the magazine in the park, were doubled; and the artillery approached the city.

A committee of the houfe, who fat to determine on the caufe of it, reported, that it happened by accident; though the ableft members of that committee were convinced that it was done by defign; but they feared that the admiffion of it would be injurious to the trade and credit of the nation. An idea was univerfally diffeminated, that one of the metal flues, conftructed for the purpofe of warming the houfe, had communicated fire to the dome; but for the following reafons that will appear to have been utterly impoffible: They were made of caft iron; they were placed outfide the houfe, fo as to have no communication with the dome, which was fheathed with a thick coat of copper; and there was no timber employed in the conftruction of the flues.

Mr. Penrofe, an able architeft,* and well verfed in many other fciences, was decidedly of opinion, that it was not poffible for the flues, or any

* He was architect of the houfes of parliament, and had been at that time daily infpecting the roof of the houfe of commons, as he was repairing it.

accident, to hnve occafioned the fire; that it was done by deliberate defign, and muft have been effected by fome chemical procefs.

The dome was formed of an immenfe body of folid timber, which, in the ordinary progrefs of fire, would require fome hours to confume; and yet it foon formed a circular body of fixed inextinguifhable flame, and was confumed in about an hour and a half.
As there were at that time in the city two defperate factions, who, we have learned by fatal experience, meditated the fubverfion of the conftitution, and the deftruction of the government, it is not unlikely that it was perpetrated by one or either of them, or by both in conjunction; as it will appear in the fequel that they often co-operated.

Napper Tandy had narrowly efcaped the vengeance of the houfe of commons, for having offered a grofs infult to one of its members; and a proclamation for his apprehenfion appeared at that time in the newfpapers.

About the fame time, all the efforts of Richard Burke, agent to the Catholick committee, were completely baffled; and he with difficulty efcaped the refentment of the houfe of commons. He had prevailed on one of its members to prefent a petition on the part of his employers, and he had the folly and prefumption to enter into the body of the houfe, to prompt the gentleman who had undertaken that talk, which excited the indignation of that affembly; and nothing but his precipitate retreat faved him from being arrefted by the ferjeant at arms.

The overweening and infolent petition of that body had been recently “difmiffed with indignant contempt; and the new popery bill, which though it gave them confiderable privileges, blafted their future expectations, had juft paffed through the houfe of commons. The leading catholicks of Dublin gave various proofs of the indignation which they felt at thefe difappointments, particularly in their debate on the twenty-third of March in Fifhamble-ftreet.

From the many traitors and incendiaries who appeared in thefe two bodies in the year 1798, we may fairly conclude, that they would not hefitate to form a fcheme for deftroying the houfe of commons, when they had meditated a plot for overturning the ftate, and the extirpation of numbers of the moft valuable members of fociety.*

* Some of the wretches arrefted on the explofion of the rebellion, acknowledged that they knew of, and were privy to, the burning of the houfe, previous to its perpetration; and one perfon fwore an information of it.

Suppofing, therefore, that it was an accident, it muft be acknowledged that it happened at a very critical moment.

It is obfervable, that a few days before the perpetration of this horrid crime, the following printed paper was diftributed through the ftreets in the form of a hand bill, and pofted on the city walls, and even on the houfe of commons, under the proclamation iffued for apprehending Napper Tandy:

“The members of a certain great houfe, not far from the college, are hereby cautioned how they perfecute to ruin a virtuous citizen, for defending his character, and afferting the liberties of Ireland; if they do not, let them beware of the awl of the cobler of Melfina.”*

Early in the year 1792, a military body who ftyled themfelves national guards, becaufe they endeavoured to affimilate to thofe at Paris, were arrayed and difciplined in Dublin. Subfcriptions were fet on foot to purchafe uniforms, pikes and accoutrements for them, and of which they befpoke large quantities!

They wore green uniforms, with buttons, having a harp, and a cap of liberty inftead of a crown.† Their leaders were A. H. Rowan and James Napper Tandy, who addreffed each other, and the members of their rebellious corps, by the appellation of citizen, in imitation of the French.

The multitude in Dublin were fo much difaffected at this time, that they ufed to wifh fuccefs to thefe traitors, openly and without referve, as they paffed them by in the ftreet, or faw them on parade.

The mafs of the people were fo much infected with treafon, and fo prone to rife the latter end of the year 1792, and the beginning of the year I793, that a general infurrection was apprehended; and even particular nights were fixed for that purpofe, of which government had certain

* A gentleman, now living, informed a member of the privy council, that he was acquainted with circumftances which would lead to the difcovery of the burning of the houfe of commons; but he afterwards informed him, that the council did not wifh to enter into an inveftigation of it.
† This band of traitors fprung from the volunteers; as ftated in the report of the fecret committee.
‡ Carey, the printer of the united Irifhmen, boafted in his pamphlet, “that he was Mr. Rowan’s companion in arms, in the firft national battalion; and that he oppofed and finally procured the abolition of the mifchievous button and cockade, which afforded a pretext to the enemies of our glorious volunteer inftitution to prevent its fufpenfion.”

tain information. In fhort, the city was like a great fhell, fraught with various combuftibles, and ready to explode on the application of a match.

Five nights out of feven alderman Fleming, by the orders of government, patroled the ftreets with a body of horfe.

Lord Weftmorland defired him to attend particularly to the cuftomhoufe, the poft-office, and the gaol, as his excellency had undoubted information that they were the firft places to be attacked; and that the fignal for rifing was to have been the pulling down of the ftatue of king William in College-green, with ropes.

One night lord Weftmorland was fo much afraid that the infurrection would take place, that, though he had given orders in the morning to the alderman to patrole that night, he fent an aid-de-camp in the evening to fee that he was in readinefs to do fo.
It was discovered at that time, that there was a confpiracy to affaffinate Mr. Beresford. One of the perfons privy to it confeffed it to alderman James.

The national guards, and all the volunteer corps of Dublin, were fummoned by Matthew Dowling, to affemble on Sunday the ninth of December, 1792, to celebrate the victory of the French, and the triumph of univerfal liberty. The fummons began with the appellation of “citizen foldier.”

Government, having received undoubted information that a general infurrection was meditated, iffued a proclamation on the eighth of December againft their affembling, which ftruck fuch terror into them, that the national guards did not affemble; and the only perfons who appeared on parade were A. H. Rowan, J. N. Tandy, and Carey the printer. For this meafure of precaution, which faved the city from plunder and conflagration, and its moft valuable inhabitants from affaffination, we are indebted to the earl of Clare, the prefent lord chancellor, whofe wifdom, fagacity, and unabated fortitude, notwithftanding many plots which were formed to murder him, have preferved the kingdom of Ireland, on various occafions, from utter deftruction. The exalted fphere to which he has been raifed, and the honours conferred on him by our gracious fovereign, prove the fuperior excellence of a mixed government like ours, where the monarch felects men, like him, diftinguifhed for wifdom, abilities, and virtue, to fill the principal departments of the ftate; but in a republick, where demagogues can turn the giddy multitude like a torrent,

to overwhelm every thing that is great and good, a Tone, a Tandy, or a Sheares, would fill the department over which this noble lord fo worthily prefides.

On the thirty-firft of January, 1793, an addrefs of thanks to lord Weftmorland was moved and carried in the houfe of commons, for having iffued this proclamation. In the debate on it, lord Edward FitzGerald arofe, and faid aloud, in an angry tone, “I give my moft hearty difapprobation to this; for I do think, that the lord lieutenant, and the majority of this houfe, are the worft men in the kingdom.” The houfe had ferious thoughts of expelling him; but, with fingular pufillanimity, pardoned him on making a flight excufe.

There was as much treafon in the city of Dublin in the year 1792 as in the year 1798; but with this difference, that it was not organized into fyftem.

An ingenious writer, in a letter addreffed to a friend in England, and publifhed in the year 1792, makes the following obfervations on this period: “On your fide the water, philofophy, I fuppofe, is defined after the good old manner; the love or ftudy of wifdom, moral or natural. With us it is a word of a very different import; for in Ireland, no man is allowed to poffefs either wifdom or learning, who does not believe in the new American gofpel; who is not in politicks a republican; and in religion a prefbyterian, a papift, or an infidel. Out of thefe, there is no faving wifdom: Such are the figns by which Irifh philofophy is known. Sometimes, indeed, it difplays itfelf in libels on the king and the revolution; and he who difcharges the greateft portion of filth is the deepeft philofopher.”

The political horizon of Ireland was fo much darkened at this time by black threatening clouds, that trade and publick credit were materially injured. Bank flock which had been fo high as £171 fell to £158 and the other funds in proportion. Lottery tickets fhared the fame fate.

As the Roman catholicks were chiefly inftrumental in bringing the country into this alarming ftate, doctor McKenna, a member of that order, ftepped forward with a feafonable and judicious addrefs, in which he told them, “that they lived under a wife and fortunate organization of fociety  that, violence in afferting what they call their rights, ought

not to be employed; for few political benefits are of fufficient value to be purchafed by commotion.”
When the difaffected clubs found that they could not elude the vigilance of the magiftrates, who often difperfed or arrefted them, they ufed to affemble in the environs of the capital, particularly at Harold’s-crofs, under a pretext of boxing or playing at foot-ball.

Notwithftanding the proclamation of the eighth of December, the goldfmiths’ corps, commanded by major Bacon the tailor, and that noted traitor Dowling, paraded in Ship-ftreet, on Sunday the twenty-feventh of January, but were difperfed by alderman Warren; however, before their difperfion, they entered into ftrong refolutions in favour of catholick emancipation* and reform of parliament.

In defiance of the proclamation of the eighth of December, to prevent the affociation and aifembling of difaffeded perfons in arms, under a pretence of obtaining a redrefs of grievances, the Dublin rangers paraded in Ship-ftreet, on Sunday the twenty-fourth of February, 1793. Alderman James, unattended by any civil or military force, defired them to difperfe; but, on their refufal, Mr. Oliver Carleton, an active and intelligent magiftrate, purfued and overtook them on Effex-bridge, where he attempted to feize the adjutant; telling him, at the fame time, that he was his prifoner; but he was refcued. Mr. Carleton received fome blows, and was pelted with ftones by the mob, who were warm partifans of thefe armed traitors. Alderman James purfued them to Drumcondra, with a party of the army, but they difperfed before he could approach them.
On the fixteenth of January, the inhabitants of Belfaft affembled, and voted an addrefs of thanks to his majefty, for having recommended the Roman catholicks to the confideration of parliament.

On the fourteenth of January, 1793, a motion was made in the houfe of commons for a parliamentary reform, which was the grand defideratum of the united Irifhmen, and one of the engines by which they hoped to overturn and proftrate the conftitution.†

* Thefe words were adopted to make the people of England believe that the Irifh papifts were flaves, though they enjoyed more civil liberty than the moft favoured fubjects of any European ftate, except England.
† It is remarkable, that the oppofition in the parliaments of England and Ireland fed the hope and promoted the wifths of the difaffected by inflammatory fpeeches.

Many attempts were made at Belfaft, fo early as the year 1792, to feduce the military. Jofeph Cuthbert, a mafter tailor, there was condemned to ftand in the pillory for that offence.

In the month of April, 1793, the difaffected people of that town would not fuffer the loyal inhabitants to illuminate their houfes, for the fuccefs of our allies on the continent. Some of the diifenting minifters of that town offered up prayers for the fuccefs of the French republicans againft the powers who oppofed them. It generally happens that the moral and political principles of men, in a great meafure, emanate from and are modified by their religion. As the prefbyterian church was formed in a republick, and as its ecclefiaftical eftablifhment was affimilated to the civil policy of the ftate, its members in every country in Europe have fhewn a difhke to every form of government but a democratick. For this reafon, the calviniftical minifters in France, juftified the rebellion againft Charles I. and prayed publickly for its fuccefs; and, left from their zeal they might have been confidered as entertaining views and wifhes hoftile to their own government, one of their ableft profeffors at Saumur publifhed the following abfurd apology for them: That the kings of France were abfolute by prefcription; but that thofe of England were fubordinate to the parliament. Nothing fhews fo much the excellence of our conftitution, as having the king at the head of the ecclefiaftical ftate.

I before obferved, page 8, that while this policy was adhered to by the emperors of Rome and Conftantinople, peace and tranquillity reigned in their dominions; but when the bifhop of Rome affumed a right to regulate religious matters in them, it produced inceffant ftrife and difcord.

It was a ftanding law of an early date at Rome, that no one fhould feparately have new gods, or worship privately foreign gods, unlefs admitted by the commonwealth,* and Ifocrates tells us, that the fame law exifted at Athens, †

Maecenas, in his advice to Auguftus, faid to him, “Perform divine worfhip, in all things, exactly according to the cuftom of your anceftors, and fuffer no innovations in religion; becaufe thofe who create fuch,

* Cicero de Legibus, lib. II.    † Ifocrates Areopagus [Socrates]  

are apt to make changes in civil affairs; hence confpiracies, feditions, and riots; things very dangerous to government.;” This obfervation apphes ftrongly to the ftate of Ireland at prefent, and that of England in the reign of Elizabeth and James I. before the bleffings of the reformation were fully experienced in it.

James Napper Tandy was indicted at the fpring affizes of 1793, held at Dundalk, in the county of Louth, for having diftributed feditious handbills the preceding fummer, to encourage the people of that country, much infefted by the defenders, to rife; but having, through his attorney Matthew Dowling, difcovered that there were ftrong charges for high treafon againft him, he fled, forfeited his recognifances, and never since appeared, till he was brought a prifoner from Hamburgh.

On the feventh of March, 1793, alderman James found and feized fome pikes in Suffolk-ftreet, and lodged them in the king’s ftores;† fo early did the difaffected begin to procure thefe weapons.

In the month of January, 1793, the Roman catholick inhabitants of many parifhes in Dublin affembled, debated on their claims and pretenfions, and voted addreffes to their delegates in the general committee; in which fome of them recommended the expulfion of lord Kenmare, and applauded the conduct of Meffrs. Braughall, Ryan, and Sutton.

The reader may eafily conceive for what purpofe the mafs of the papifts were thus affembled, and how much it muft have inflamed their paffions, and prepared their minds for the reception of fedition and treafon.

As the Roman catholicks of fome counties and difhrids had affembled with their proteftant fellow fubjects, to join in an addrefs to teftify their allegiance, the fub-committee of the Roman catholicks diffuaded them from doing fo, “fince,” as they faid, “that end was anfwered in a more dignified, folemn, and authorized manner, by their delegates.”

As large quantities of gun-powder and arms had been fent from the metropolis to the defenders, concealed in packages, and it was univerfally believed that much of both had been imported into the kingdom, the attorney general introduced a bill into the houfe of commons, to prevent any perfon from keeping, importing, or removing, any more than a certain quantity, without a licenfe, under a penalty of £500.

* Dion Caffius, lib. iii.      † They were the firft of thofe weapons difcovered in Dublin.

This very falutary law, to which the falvation of the kingdom may in fome degree be imputed, was violently oppofed by the minority in parliament, and feverely condemned by the united Irifhmen, who feemed to concur in cenfuring every meafure of prevention and precaution, which government adopted to defeat the defigns of the confpirators.

In the year 1793, when republican principles were diffeminated by all the revolutionary focieties, in many publick prints, and various inflammatory publications, doctor Troy, titular archbifhop of Dublin, publiihed a pamphlet, entitled a Paftoral Letter, in which, after departing from the main defign which he profeffed, he faid, that the antient republicks of Florence, Sienna, and Pifa, were eftablifhed and governed by Roman catholicks, who ftill continue to fupport thofe of Poland, Venice, Genoa, Ragufa, Lucca and Marino; and he makes the fame remark in refpect to the popifh cantons of the Helvetic union, and obferves that the calviniftical ones prefer an ariftocratical government.

As popery has been generally congenial to monarchy, and rather favourable to defpotifm, it was believed that the doctor did this to attach more firmly the prefbyterians to their caufe, by proving that the popifh perfuafion was well fuited to a republick.
The reader may deduce from fubfequent events, whether this conjefture was well founded.

It ftruck me, and many perfons of fagacity obferved, that the horrors which people in general felt at the cruelties and barbarities committed by the French republicans, began to abate in the minds of the Roman catholicks in the beginning of the year 1793, and that they continued to wear away gradually, till the rebellion broke out.

Doctor Huffey, in a paftoral letter, publifhed in the year 1797, endeavoured to prove how well fuited popery was to a republican form of government.

We may form fome opinion of the alarming ftate of the North, from the report of the fecret committee of the lords, made in 1793; and from a proclamation which iffued the eleventh of March, of that year, which alludes chiefly to Belfaft. It ftates, “that certain feditious and ill-affected perfons, in feveral parts of the North, particularly in the town of Belfaft, have endeavoured to foment and encourage difcontent, and to defame the government and the parliament, by feditious publications,

circulated among the people; and that feveral bodies of men have been collected in armed affociations, and have been levied, and arrayed in the faid town of Belfaft; and that arms and gun-powder to a very large amount have been fent thither; and that bodies of men have been drilled and exercifed by day and night, under the pretext of obtaining a redrefs of grievances, though the obvious intention appears to be, to overawe the parliament and the government, and to diftate to both.”

It then charges all perfons, under their allegiance, to abftain from committing fuch offences refpectively.

This falutary and vigorous meafure gave a vital blow to volunteering; and the preffure of the times called for it, as the Belfaft volunteer company, affembled the feventeenth of December, 1792, refolved on an addrefs to the volunteers of Ireland; in which they encouraged them to affemble as ufual, and feverely condemned the proclamation which iffued on the eighth of December.

When the proclamation of the eleventh of March iffued, the lord lieutenant’s fecretary wrote to the fovereign of Belfaft, defiring him to prevent all illegal meetings of perfons in arms; and informing him, that he and the other magiftrates would be aided by the military, fhould they meet with any oppofition in difperfing them.

In the month of January, 1793, there was a meeting held at Ballynahinch, to which all the parifhes in the county of Down fent delegates regularly chofen, and recommended to them to promote parliamentary reform and catholick emancipation; and at a town meeting held in February following at Carrickfergus, in the county of Antrim, befides difcuffing thefe fubjects, the policy of holding a national convention was ftrongly enforced.

In the beginning of the year 1793, meetings of the people were held in different towns and diftricts in the counties of Down and Antrim; when they inculcated the necefhty of parliamentary reform and catholick emancipation, condemned the eftablifhment of the militia, as tending to enflave the nation, and recommended the volunteers to affemble as ufual.

On the fifteenth of February, 1793, a provincial meeting was held at Dungannon, in the county of Tyrone, to which moft of the parifhes in Ulfter fent delegates.

Their debates were highly inflammatory. Every thing that could tend to depreciate the conftitution, and debafe and vilify the members of the government in the opinion of the people, was faid there. They inveighed ftrongly againft the war, and entered into refolutions againft it.

Doctor Dickfon, a prefbyterian minifter, and a noted demagogue, was the leading orator there. He inveighed bitterly againft fencibles;* faid that the militia were but fubftitutes for them, and that the object of both was to enflave and not to defend the nation. He faid, that catholick emancipation was but a fhadow, as the gunpowder act, which he feverely condemned, deprived not only the Roman catholicks, but the proteftants, of the ufe of arms. He reprobated the proclamation iffued the eleventh of March againft the illegal affociation of men in arms, and ftrongly exhorted the volunteers to affemble as ufual. He declared, that he had three fermons ready for the prefs, which were calculated to enlighten the people; and he recommended to the delegates to circulate them in their refpective diftricts. The publication of them was to be announced in the Northern Star, and Samuel Neilfon was one of the perfons appointed to receive fubfcriptions. He faid, that the militia eftablifhment was merely to promote venality and patronage, for the infamous train who fatten on the fpoils of the people. He condemned the war in fevere terms.

At the requeft of the herd of republicans affembled at Dungannon, he preached a fermon, or rather a political difcourfe, fraught with phlogifhck principles, in a meeting-houfe, and was attended by perfons of every religious perfuafion. His text was Jofeph’s advice to his brethren, “See that ye fall not out by the way.”

He recommended in his fermon catholick emancipation, and reform of parliament, on the bafis of chrifhanity.

In the fummer of 1797, he, after the manner of Thelwall, ufed to read political difcourfes, which he called evening lectures, to his congregation at Portaferry, for the purpofe, as he faid, of enlightening them.

At Dungannon, they framed fifteen refolutions, which reflected upon government, and were very inflammatory; and before their prorogation,

* Four regiments of them were raifed in the year 1782, on advantageous terms to the ftate; becaufe the officers were not to receive half-pay on being difbanded. They were hateful to the factious demagogues of that day, who hoped, through the volunteers, to fubvert the conltitution, as there were but few troops in the kingdom.

they appointed a ftanding committee, who were to concert meafures for affembling a national convention.

Soon after, moft of the volunteers and many town and diftrict meetings of the people in Ulfter, affembled, and expreffed their approbation of thefe refolutions.

Nothing can afford a ftronger argument in favour of an union with Great Britain, than fuch meetings of the people, affembled for the purpofe of overawing the parliament; particularly as they were conftantly encouraged and made ufe of as engines to diftrefs government, by the difcontented members of the houfe of commons, at the expence of publick morals, peace, and induftry.

In defiance of the proclamation of the eleventh of March, the true blue and Cork union volunteers adopted the following refolution, the thirty-firft of May, 1793: “We proclaim aloud, that we will never part with our arms, but with our lives;” and many other volunteer corps entered into fimilar refolutions.

Though the Roman catholicks were recently put exactly on a footing with proteftants, except that they were precluded from fitting in parliament, and from about thirty offices in the executive department, the defenders began in the month of June to commit the moft dreadful outrages in many parts of the kingdom, but particularly in the counties of Kerry, Cork, Wexford, Limerick, Queen’s County, Meath, Weftmeath, Dublin, Cavan, Monaghan, Louth, and in the liberties of Drogheda, Leitrim, Longford, Rofcommon, Mayo, Sligo, Armagh, Down, Donegal, and Derry.

Treafon and difaffection were univerfally diffeminated at this time. The united Irifhmen ufed to fend emiffaries to different parts of the kingdom, who made it a practice of difperfing feditious hand-bills, in every county through which they paffed, from carriages.*

As the united Irifhmen of Dublin and the provincial meeting at Dungannon propofed the convoking a national affembly, which was to have affembled in the month of September following, the lord chancellor, whofe fagacity and political wifdom could be equalled by nothing but his

* Left it fhould be faid, that what I have afferted as to the difturbed ftate of the kingdom this year is not founded, I give in Appendix, No. XII. a ftatement of fome of the outrages committed in different parts of the kingdom.

firmnefs, prefented a bill, “To prevent the election or other appoint-ment, of conventions, or other unlawful affemblies, under pretence of preparing or prefenting publick petitions or other addreffes to his majefty, or the parliament.”

This falutary meafure averted a ftorm, which would probably have produced general anarchy and defolation, as there were but few troops in the kingdom; and the volunteers, at that time numerous, well armed and. appointed, were very much inflamed againft government, by the fpeeches of factious demagogues.

Nothing can evince more ftrongly the policy and utility of this law, than that Samuel Neilfon declared upon oath, before the houfe of lords, “That the convention bill was calculated to meet every part of the fyftem of united Irifhmen.” When he read it, he faid, “he fuppofed the framer of it had their conftitution before him whilft he was framing it.” Neilfon was one of the moft active and intelligent members of the Irifh union, except Tone.

In the month of October, 1793, the reverend and amiable Mr. Butler, chaplain to the bifhop of Meath, was murdered near his lordfhip’s houfe at Ardbrackan. It appeared afterwards, that he had been previoufly tried and fentenced to die by a committee of affaffination.

During the whole of the year 1794, the defenders became terrifick, committing nocturnal robbery and affaffination, in the counties of Cork, Dublin, Meath, Leitrim, Longford, Armagh, Louth, Cavan, and part of Down; in confequence of which, the proteftant inhabitants of moft of them affembled, formed affociations for their defence, and offered rewards for bringing the defenders to juftice.

They were fo daring and deftructive in the county of Longford, that the nobility, clergy and freeholders united, refolved to levy money by fubfcription, for raifing and maintaining a body of horfe for their defence; and having addreffed the viceroy for permiffion to do fo, obtained it.

In the month of February, 1794, a numerous body of infurgents affembled between Dunmannaway and Bandon, in the county of Cork, and fwore feveral perfons not to pay tithes, taxes, or hearth-money, and to obey no laws but thofe of captain Right; and even threatened to attack the town of Bandon. They were incited to this by feditious hand-bills, fome of which. were fent by poft from Dublin.

They affembled again in the month of March, affumed the function of legiftators, and difperfed a body of police attended by a magiftrate. They had the boldnefs to attack a party of the Carlow nulitia, and wounded a magiftrate, while reading the riot act.
In that month they affembled often in different parts of that county.

The fheriffs of the city of Dublin, in the year 1794, and the other magiftrates there, affured me, that the defenders were conftantly forming plots and confpiracies in it.

On the fourth of March, a bill was prefented to the houfe of Commons, for a reform of parliament.

In the month of March, 1794, the united Irifhmen difperfed feditious hand-bills in the univerfity of Dublin, in order to feduce the ftudents from their allegiance.

In the month of January of this year, Mr. Pentland, a revenue officer, was barbaroufly murdered at Drogheda in the night.

On the twenty-eighth of April, 1794, the reverend Mr. Jackfon, a proteftant clergyman, was committed to.Newgate on a charge of high treafon.

He came to Ireland as a miffionary from the French government, to lay a plan for invading it; and was convicted of that crime in the year 1795 but died of poifon in the dock, before the fentence could be pronounced. This man was formerly the confidential friend and private fecretary of the famous duchefs of Kingfton, who was better known by the name of Mifs Chudleigh.*

A. H. Rowan, who was concerned in the plot with him, made his efcape from Newgate, where he was under fentence of imprifonment, for having difperfed fome feditious papers.

On the night of the twenty-third of May, 1794, alderman Warren, fheriffs Giffard and Jenkin, attended by fome conftables, repaired to Tailors-hall in Back-lane and difperfed the united Irifhmen, whom they found fitting in confultation, and feized their papers; but they continued afterwards to fit, and to carry on their nefarious machinations with fecrefy, but with equal effect. It appeared afterwards, that many of the

* There is not a doubt but that this man was invited by the Irifh republicans to undertake this miffion. [I.e., Rev. William Jackson; vide also p.195.]

leaders of the Catholick committee were members of the fociety of united Irifhmen, though they artfully concealed themfelves while that body openly avowed its exiftence, and publifhed its proceedings; having left the obnoxious and dangerous part to the proteftants, who, though few in number, ferved as fcape-goats to draw on them the vengeance of the law, and the deteftation of all good men and loyal fubjects.

I give the reader the names of fome of the proteftant leaders, with the fate which befel them.

† Exiles.            * Were hanged