which rendered the resolution less censurable than it would otherwise have been; but even their fellow prelates were ignorant of this fact for nearly nine years after.

How was the question of Union received in the Irish Parliament ? It was carried by a managed majority of fifty-eight, and solemnly proclaimed to the nation, on the first of January, 1801.

Was not this event dignified by an extraordinary promotion in the army and a numerous creation of peers in consequence of the former promises?

Yes; individual engagements were generally observed to that effect with fidelity by the British Minister; national pledges were only disregarded.

Did Mr. Pitt or his colleagues ever bring forward the Catholic claims ? Shortly after the union they snaked out of office under pretence of inability to forward those claims, leaving a written pledge to this illustrious body, that many characters of eminence (including of course their own,) were pledged not to embark in the service of government, except on the terms of the Catholic privileges being attained.

Were Mr. Pitt and his colleagues sincere in their conduct?

No; for ere long he returned to office, under a counter pledge of never bringing forward, or supporting the Catholic claims; Lord Cornwallis accepted of the government of India, but never stood up in Parliament to enforce their claims, and all their friends seemed to forget their promises. What became of the Earl of Clare, who had borne the principal share under Mr. Pitt, of goading, terrifying, dividing, and degrading his country?

After the first session of the Imperial Parliament, he was so little satisfied with the success of his own efforts, to infuse into the British public, a horror of his countrymen, that he quitted England in disgust, deprecating the Union which had deprived him of his dictorical and political influence. The disappointment of an ambitious and rancorous mind, contributed not a little, to his dissolution which took place in January, 1802.

What was the grand active principle upon which Lord Hardwicke accepted the government of Ireland in 1802.

A principle he dared not openly avow, viz.—to resist her emancipation, and to perpetuate the old system of division and exclusion, under the delusive semblance of a new system of conciliation and mildness.

Was there not another rebellion in the year 1803 ?

There was a mad attempt of a disorderly mob, which lasted about

an hour on the night of the 23rd of July in Thomas-street, Dublin. They were led on by a young man, Robert Emmett, who appeared to have nothing organized.

Was there not another attempt made in the north?

Yes, under Thomas Russell, who led on about fourteen persons, some of whom were mad, others idiots, and the rest abandoned drunkards. What was the consequence of these attempts to the country?

The gaols were filled with numbers of persons on suspicion, they were mostly however, persons who had resisted temptation, and preserved their loyalty.

Did the Catholics receive any concessions from government, during the administration of Mr. Addington-now Lord Sidmouth?

No; this Minister pledged himself to march in the steps of his predecessor, consequently, he deprecated the very thought of Catholic emancipation.

What was the situation of Ireland, when Mr. Pitt returned to office in 1804 ?

It experienced all the baneful effects of UNION; an enormous and growing increase of debt, a rapid falling off of revenue, and a decay of commerce and manufacture.

Were not the threats of a French invasion industriously kept afloat at this period, in order to decry the loyalty of the Irish?

Yes; and Ministry thus justified the expence of their public measures of defence, and affected to sanction the necessity of internal coercion. Many persons were taken into custody under the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, and the rigorous treatment of state prisoners, who had been for several months in confinement, was sharpened without any visible or known cause.

Did Mr. Pitt retain all of his former sway in the Cabinet ?

No; several of his partizans seceded; even his old trusty tool in the coercion and monopoly of Ireland. Mr. Foster rose up against him, Lord Hardwicke too, found his mandates to the Irish government so unwarrantable and overbearing, that he resolved to tender his resignation. But before he quitted Ireland in 1806, Mr. Pitt was launched into eternity. What happened upon the death of Mr. Pitt?

A new Ministry was framed at the head of which was Lord Grenville. Mr. Fox* accepted the office of Secretary for foreign affairs, but the

* This excellent Statesman and uncorrupted patriot, died the following September. He invariably deprecated the mischievous system upon which the Irish Government seemed to act.

only act of government in Ireland, that was traceable to his personal influence, was the instant removal of Lord Redesdale from the Chancery Bench-" an incohate act of justice," says Mr. Plowden, "to the great body of the Irish population, to put an early and unequivocal mark of reprobation on the man, who had calumniated and insulted them, with an ignorant and malignant bigotry, which has not been exhibited on any European theatre for centuries."

Who was appointed to the government of Ireland?

The Duke of Bedford, who accepted the situation at the earnest solicitations of Mr. Fox. During his short administration, his grace was mild and benevolent to all. Cordially anxious for the welfare and happiness of the people, he lamented that the progress towards their attainment, had not kept pace with his sympathies or expectations.

Had not a change of ministry taken place the preceding month? Yes; a party at the head of which, was the Duke of Portland, Mr. Perceval and Lord Hawkesbury, worked itself into power by pledging themselves to be adverse to Catholic concession.

Did not the resolutions of several country-meetings of Catholics with reference to their total emancipation, hold a language of confidence and assurance which was as new as it was offensive to the Castle?

Yes; but nothing so alarmed government as the rising harmony and concert of the Protestants with their Catholic countrymen.

Was not the Catholic petition presented in due form to the Imperial parliament in 1808?

It was; and at that time was brought about the discussion of the Veto, which threw the public mind into universal agitation.

Did not this attempt to intermeddle with a national religion, preserved with a virtuous Hierarchy without any civil establishment or state interference, through centuries of oppression and persecution produce alarm in every reflecting mind?

Yes; the laity abhorred the idea of ministers of their religion becoming open to court influence and intrigue, and shuddered at the prospect of prostituting the sacred function of the Apostolic Mission and jurisdiction, to which they had hitherto submitted as of divine institution, to its revilers, persecutors and sworn enemies.

How did the Catholic prelates act on this occasion?

They met in regular national synod on the 14th and 15th of September 1808, in Dublin, and came to the following resolutions. "It is the decided

opinion of the Roman Catholic Prelates of Ireland, that it is inexpedient to introduce any alteration in the canonical mode hitherto observed

"in the nomination of the Irish Roman Catholic Bishops, which mode "long experience has proved to be unexceptionable, wise, and salutary. That the Roman Catholic Prelates pledge themselves to adhere

to the rules, by which they have been hitherto uniformally guided; namely, to recommend to his Holiness, only such persons as are of "unimpeachable loyalty, and peaceable conduct."

These synodical resolutions against the Veto, were signed by twentythree Prelates.

Did not many and unequivocal proofs bespeak the determination of the Richmond administration to rivet Catholic Ireland in degradation and despondency?

Yes; a fostering countenance was particularly given to the Orangemen, that tended rather to foment and discourage, than to put down or punish their atrocities.

Did not Orange ferocity sensibly increase in the year 1809?

It did. The native leaders of the Orange societies rendered their system at that period so additionally ferocious, that some of the less blood-thirsty withdrew their names, who nevertheless adhered to the general principles of their institution: that is, to a proscriptive and implacable hatred to Catholicity.

Was not the King incapacitated from attending to business, towards the close of the year 1810?

Yes; it pleased the Almighty to revisit his Majesty with a return of that illness which has suspended his exercise of the executive authority since that period.

The Erasmus Smith Endowments, Judicially Reviewed.

Passages from the Judgments of the Judicial Commissioners (Rt. Hon. Gerald Fitzgibbon, P.C., Lord Justice of Appeal in Ireland; Rt. Hon. William O'Brien, P.C., Justice of the Queen's Bench in Ireland), on the Draft Scheme of the Educational Endowments (Ireland) Commission; Monday, October 22, 1894, at the Four Courts, Dublin.

[Final Report, Educational Endowments (Ireland) Commission, 48 and 49 Vict. c. 78 (C. 7517). Dublin, 1894. Appendix, pp. 235-254.]

FITZGIBBON, L. J.

The history of this Endowment covers 250 years. Since the original deed of foundation, it has been the subject of three Royal Charters, of

several Acts of Parliament, and of Inquiries and Reports of numerous Commissions... The property consists entirely of land, or of money representing land, granted to Erasmus Smith as an "Adventurer," in the Settlement which followed the troubles of 1641. He was born in 1610, and his first adventure in Irish land was in 1642. From that time until his death, he was actively engaged in Irish affairs. He took the side of the Parliament in the Civil War, and he received large grants of land in different parts of Ireland, of which the School Endowment is only a portion. The estates of which the tenants and inhabitants were entitled to special advantages under his Foundation, are to be found in nine counties-Tipperary and Limerick, in Munster; Meath, Westmeath, Kildare, King's County, and Louth, including Drogheda, in Leinster; and Galway and Sligo, in Connaught.....

In my judgment, the first and paramount intention of Erasmus Smith was to establish a fixed number of Grammar Schools, in localities appointed by himself, and to give combined religious and secular education to all who were willing to receive it—those pupils of the school who were poor, children of his tenants, or inhabiting any of his lands in the nine counties I have mentioned, being entitled to special privileges, and to preference in free schooling, clothing, advancement to the University, and other advantages. But it was a vital, essential, integral part of the education offered, that it should include Protestant teaching....

The Endowment has increased in value beyond the needs of the Grammar Schools.....I should have been prepared, even at some risk of inconsistency, to have applied the surplus funds to technical and agricultural education, from which the tenants and inhabitants of the estates might have reaped substantial benefits, without raising any religious difficulty.......

I am not prepared to adopt the view...that the Governing Body should be exclusively confined to members of the Church of Ireland, and that the Masters of the Schools should all be of the same denomination. I am impressed by the omission, throughout the whole of Erasmus Smith's documents, of any reference to attendance upon Divine Worship, or to the use of the Liturgy, or to the adoption of the Catechism, of the Established Church. I am impressed also by his adoption, not only of the Catechism of the Assembly of Divines, but of the Catechism of Archbishop Ussher,...whose Catechism differs from the Church Catechism, in a manner indicating a desire to make it acceptable to those who are not members of the Established Episcopal Church... ...

I maintain that these schools must remain under Protestant masters,