IRELAND PAST AND PRESENT.

Inangahua Times, Volume II, Issue II, 28 March 1881, Page 2

IRELAND PAST AND PRESENT.

[CoBfcSSrOHDBKT OP THB SCOTSMA^.J I [COKCLUDBD.J I ** On earth peace."--Kuke ii I In those days coercion wts used in ill simplest form. By a statute of 1465, anfl Irish person ' coming or going, baring nfl faithful man of good name and fame ifl his company, in English apparel,' mighfl be killed, nnd upon producing his heal his {.layer was rewarded from the taxes M the district This, it i» said, caused I good deal of slaughter* I Sir John Paris ' knits up ' the matiefl as he terms it, into three conclusion**^ first, that the Kings of England hid beefl continuously advised by their repretenfl tatives in Ireland (whose interest in doinfl so he bad already pointed out) not tfl communicate to them the laws of Engfl land, or to admit them to the state anfl conditions of free subjects ; second, thai the Irish, for at least 200 years after thfl arrival of Henry 11., would gladly htvfl embraced these laws, and did evrnestlH desire them ; thirdly, that the denial <■ their prayer necessarily caused continusfl border wars between the English rolonl ists and the natives of the country ; .anfl lastly, that had that prayer been grantefl Ireland, like Wales, would have been ifl a state of peaceful settlement, and all (■ ' meers and bounds of the marches anfl borders had long since been worn out anfl foreolten.' H In the time of Charles 11. an Act fl Settlement was passed for Ireland, whicfl was a measure of compromise. ThH King could not forget bis proclamation from Breda, nor could he forget thfl fidelity to his crown shown by the pe^J pie dispossessed by Cromwell, but hfl dared not reinstate them thoroughly, anH by displacing only a portion of the nefl colonists by the original owners he suiH ceeded in offending the one and bilterlH disappointing the other party. The question of Boman Catholiois^^ was no part of tho original reason Irish discontent. That was a qnestion the people and the land alone. It t^M mained for more enlightened times interweave the devotion to a creed wi^| the love of country and the sense justice, and to unite them inseparably the hearts of Irishmen. We find in tho^| days Catholics of the pale fighting aloi^| with the English of the pale with t^| Irish beyond the pale. Id the Edinbur^B Eeview of 1807, Sydney Smith writ^H reviewing a publication called * A H^| toricsl Apology for the Irish Catholic^B which, it may be interesting to note, w^| written by William Parnell. SydnH Smith says that it is conclusively sho^| that many of the sanguinary scenes s^| tributed to the Cat hoi re religion are lo^M imputed to causes totally disconncct^B with religion j that Mr Parnell shotH

that in the time of Henry VIII. the reformation was rewired without the smallest opposition, and that the troubles which took place at that time were, -en* tir«iy attributable to the ambition and injustice of Henry. In the time of Queen Mary tjiere was no recrimination ' upon the Protestants ; the insur/ectiona against the i authority of a Roman Catholic Queen were just as numerous in the reign of Mary as in the reigns of Henry VII. and Edward VI., and it was not till the lime of James J. that, as one of the Iriah Catholic writers «ays, ' And now the eyes of the English Irish (i.e., the Catholics of the pal<) were opened, and they curted their folly in helping the heretic.' Queen Elisabeth does not ap. pear to have felt the religions difficulty , aa some of tbe people of the present day do. She was not afraid to employ the Catholic Earl of Kildare as General of her forces in Ireland. She saw no rea» sod against creating the Catholic William O'Bonrges Lord Castle Connell. < I have thus >ie4f gone over the porition of Ireland until, the, reign of Willwm and Mary, when a freih opportttnitt w« given Co Bail*** to *$M/HSfe&?M& rain. It fo-fcaf#jrwS^Wy to ro into the reasons for tbe native l>Ub people electing to support tha felling throne of the Stnarw. No doubt tbe religious element was then stirring deeply in their hearts, for the treatment of Catholics and the efttabfohment of aProteatAttt ChurDh for the minority of the inhad* created a fioman hierarchy, i where in former days no such distinct organisation had existed. In fact, in the times of the old chiefs and separate courts, a Boman Catholic Cburch of Ireland was an impossibility, Dottbtle»s, too they hoped that the success of their cause might bring back their ancient lands, but along with these it umst be remembered that it was from the bands of tta Stuart Kings that Inland had received the only fcvoutf of MO years, and that the fiojal Hpuse of Scotland was associated front the remotest period of authentic history with the struggles of the Irish against their English invaders- That this loyalty was no selflib fiction is shown by Ihe departure into voluntary exile of the Irish soldiers of King lames. Be that as it may, the adherence to King James was not rebel* lion, it was resistance to revolution, of which it may be said that wtsucodssful revolution, is rebellion, and svecMsfol revolution. (But this eoatM of reading 'Endjtnion.' Bril commanications corrupt good manners.) Nor is it neeeasßry to follow the fortunes of the field. Ai one often feels m reading *St Bonan's %*%* or *Kanilwoifth/ or ' The Abbot/ or < The . Bride of Lammermoor,* or tome such , tragic tale, to must the Jacobite readers of Irish history hare, dwelt upon the past, to rttd ami Mad again, and every time to feeling tnat the iligbt«»t acoident might have change* all ihul. foachiton« mfahfc bare explained sooner, f ernY ifcifr.-aww miawd bi# shot Lsmtwt, Muy. might have wwonl/aogiide, lucy Aihtbti might haw lhred a happy ▼omao, and Edgar Bsvenswood an ho«-----dured man, and 'ihe King might have enjoyed his own again.' But wiser fate said no. j At the town of limerick the seal was put to Ireland's domestic history for a century. Her native soldiers} exacted on condition of surrender two treaties— one a civil treaty for the people they, were about to leave, the .other a military treaty (ot themselves and their brethren ia arms. The military treaty was s'mple, and at once carried out. The remains of the army departed and disappeared in the confusion of Continental warfare. It will be for another article to show how the , Treaty of liim'etick was looked upon by the Irish and English peoples, and how its provisions were carried out. Lord Macanlay says, in a footnote to his History of England \ * This treaty han often been reprinted/ bat | he does not say where. It will be found in j , fall text at the end of Leland's History of Ireland, and of the Abbe Geohegan's address to the Irish soldiers in Trance. All that I desire at present to note is, that (his Threat? was signned by the Lord Justices of Ireland and Lieiitrasnt«Greneral Giokle, on behalf of William and Mary on ihe one part, and by the Right Honourable, the Earl- of Laean and others on the other part ; and that in it their Majesties engaged so ioon as the!!* 1 affairs would permit them to summon a Parliament, to endeavour to procure (in addition to what they engaged to the Treaty) such farther security io regard to the Bosun Catholics in Ireland as would prevent them being disturbed in tbe exeroi c of their religion.