forts could have stood. Then the parliament, which had been adjourned, would have assembled; and as the protestant members would have been frightened away, the roman party would, if sanctioned by the throne, have carried every thing, and possibly ordered what they afterwards called for, a free parliament, in other words, one composed of their own party, since they were infinitely the most numerous, and the protestants durst not have contested an election with them. New taxes would have been levied; arms imported, and such an army organised as might have bid fair to render the monarch independent in Britain; while it is likely that the attrocities would have been greatly prevented. Nor is it unworthy of remark, that he had promised a visit to his Irish subjects*. It is likely enough that all this would have proved abortive, as the British, now that the veil was so odiously laid aside, would, with the exception of the popish party, have united as one man; but as Charles seems ever to have conceived, that with an army his power would be irresistible, so all his measures tended to that object; and it must be confessed, that, of all his schemes, this was unquestionably the most feasible. If, too, he attempted so much without that help; if he even at last, when the execrable cruelties of the Irish shocked every British subject, relied confidently on subduing the parliament with an army from them, we need not

See second letter from Sir Patrick Wemyss to the Earl of Ormonde. Carte's Let.

wonder at his policy here. If this were the most feasible, it was, perhaps, according to the anticipated result, the most blameless of all his attempts at arbitrary power, and is particularly innocent when contrasted with his measures in about eightteen or nineteen months afterwards in regard to Scotland. Before the Scots had entertained any idea of the Solemn League and Covenant, while Charles was protesting that he would preserve their privileges inviolate, before the cessation of hostilities with the Irish, he concerted with the Earl of Antrim to carry over a body of the Irish rebels to overwhelm that kingdom, in an unsuspecting mo. ment of security.

Had the first plot succeeded, the atrocities that followed would, in all probability, have never occurred. A regular army, instead of an undisciplined rabble, whom their leaders, including the clergy, found it requisite to stimulate to direful cruelty, would have been under the control of a vigorous government; and the fears which gave rise to all their horrid deeds could never have existed. Sir Phelim O'Neil goaded his tumultuary army to every act of abomination, that, having lost all hope of mercy, they might not desert him; and it is but charitable to attribute the ferocious instigations of the clergy to the same cause. No sooner did the pale join the rebellion, than the cruelties were lessened; whence we may conclude, that, had matters succeeded at first, they never would have disgraced human

nature.

According to Antrim, whose declaration appears to have been strangely overlooked *, even the Earl of Ormonde, as well as himself, was applied to, for the purpose of securing Dublin Castle, re-arming

*See "The Information of the Marquis of Antrim," in the Append. to Clarendon's History of the rebellion and civil wars in Ireland. It was taken in 1650. Antrim said that he knew nothing of the commission alleged to have been granted by the king; "but that the late king, before the said rising of the Irish in Ireland, sent one Thomas Bourk, kinsman to the Earl of Clanrickarde, to the Lord of Ormonde, and to him the Lord of Antrim, with a message, that it was the king's pleasure and command, that those eight thousand men, raised by the Earl of Strafforde in Ireland, should be continued without disbanding, and that they should be made up twenty thousand, and that they should be armed out of the store of Dublin, and employed against the parliament; and particularly that the Castle of Dublin should be surprised and secured." "That the letters of credence, by the late king to Thomas Bourk before mentioned, were in substance as followeth: Thomas Bourk, you are to repair to Ormonde and Antrim in Ireland, who are to give credit to what you are to say to them from us, C. R.'" Antrim proceeds to state that he and Ormonde attempted, by correspondence through third parties, to have a meeting, which, however, did not then take place, owing to their fear of being suspected: that Ormonde advised, that as the army was already disbanded, one of them two should repair to the king to receive his instructions; that himself, being a stranger at court, could not go to England without suspicion; but that Antrim might. Antrim says that he declined to go without Ormonde, but by the pressing solicitation of Coll. John Barry, (this was one of the colonels who was to carry a regiment out of Ireland, and whose loyalty is vaunted of by Carte, because he afterwards joined the royal army in England,) he sent a Captain Digby, constable of the castle of Dunluce, in the north of Ireland, belonging to his lordship-who saw the king at York, and that instructions were received from his majesty, that all possible endeavours should be used for getting again together those eight thousand men so disbanded; and that an army should immediately be raised in Ireland, that should declare for him against the parliament in England, and do what was therein necessary and convenient for the service"-that he (Antrim) spoke to Lord Germanstown, and others of the pale, but that, owing to the folly of part of the con

the popish army, of which Ormonde had been commander, and raising more troops; but the wild Irish had begun to act too soon. It was Charles's misfortune to be ever engaged in various plots at

spirators, the rising took place before matters were fully ripe: that the plan was to seize the castle of Dublin, while the parliament, which should declare for the king, was sitting, and that the Lords Justices and others should be secured, &c.

Now it will be proper to make a few remarks upon the objections to Antrim's statement. "That it cannot be true, but either Antrim deceived the world, or Bourk imposed upon him; for besides that Ormond and Antrim were unfit to be joined in a commission, as well because there never was any good understanding between them, as also because they were of different religions and interests; how much more obvious and easy, less scandalous, and more effectual, would it have been for the king to have made Ormond Lord Deputy, than to order him to surprise the castle and the Lords Justices."-Now, with regard to the first objection, it is easily answered, 1st, Antrim had, as we have seen, been intrusted before, and Strafforde, Ormonde's patron, had been ordered to assist his schemes; 2dly, The following letter, by the king, dated 12th March, 1643-4, after affairs had become less reconcileable betwixt these two, puts matters beyond all doubt. "Ormond, I have received such an account of Antrim and O'Neile's negociations with the Irish, as gives me an expectation, that, with your help and co-operation, they may do me very eminent good service. I have commanded Digby to inform you exactly of all particulars: only one thing I thought necessary earnestly to give you in charge myself—which is, that you will unite yourself in a strict and entire correspondence with Antrim, and contribute all your power to further him in those services which he hath undertaken; for I find that almost that whole kingdom is so much divided betwixt your two interests, that if you join in the ways, as well as in the end, for my service, you will meet with small difficulties there; which I no way doubt, being thus recommended by your assured friend Charles."-Oxford, 12th March, 1643. App. to Carte's Ormonde, vol. ii. p. 4.

The other objection is equally futile: Charles wished to appoint Ormonde deputy, and was prevented by the parliament. No secret commission could be issued in England, for, 1st, If the plot failed, the royal cause was ruined; 2dly, Charles had left the capital on his way to Scotland, and could not grant it then; and, 3dly, as the

the same time, which, though all tending to the same object, had different degrees of guilt, according to his discernment of the disposition of the parties. Thus Hyde, afterwards Lord Clarendon,

Scottish army was not disbanded before his departure, he durst not do it sooner, nay, the keeper of the seal durst not have passed it; 4thly, A commission under the great seal of Scotland, which Charles had access to, would have been disregarded as of no validity in Ireland by the Lords Justices, who were in the parliament's interest.

The next objection is, that there were only twelve thousand stand of arms in Dublin Castle, and therefore not enough to arm 20,000 men; but, 1st, It is not to be supposed that Charles knew exactly how many arms Strafforde had procured, and he might be deceived by that minister; 2dly, It was the interest of the king to magnify his resources, and arms could soon have been procured by the money raised on the large collar of rubies for instance. The other forts too would have supplied a number; and the protestant army, if it declined to join, could have been disarmed. The third objection is, that matters then tended to an accommodation with the parliament, which is directly contrary to all facts, as their measures were such as Charles was prepared at all hazards to resist; and the incident proves it.

The third objection is, that Charles knew the troops would be disbanded, which proves little; 4thly, The letter from Charles on the 31st October, to Ormonde, to suppress the rebellion is produced; and lastly, a letter dated Windsor, February 8th, 1642, in favour of Bourk, which it is said is the original one alluded to by Antrim, is founded on. But the last letter to Ormonde does away the effect of the first to him, by shewing that secret instructions were sent to him not quite in unison with the public instructions. The letter is this: "Ormonde, being well satisfied of the fidelity of this bearer, Mr. Bourk, I have thought fit not only to recommend him to you, but also to tell you that I have commanded him to impart to you what I have not time to write, which I think will much conduce to the reducing of the rebels, which I know none desires more than yourself, and so I rest.” Now, 1st, This letter proves that secret negociations were going on, though Charles pretended to have devolved the conduct of the business on the parliament. 2dly, It never could be the one alluded to by Antrim, and it does not even appear that this was the same Bourk. 3dly, Docs it follow that, because one letter was given a se