nd
cannon roared. Our greatest soldiers, M'Carthy and Tyrconnell, and,
indeed, most of the Colonels of the Irish regiments, sat in Lords or
Commons;--not that the Crown brought in stipendiary soldiers, but that
the Senate were fearless patriots, who were ready to fight as well as
to plan for Ireland. Theirs was no qualified preference for freedom if
it were lightly won--they did not prefer 'Bondage with ease to
strenuous liberty.'

Let us then add 1689 to our memory; and when a Pantheon or Valhalla is
piled up to commemorate the names and guard the effigies of the great
and good, the bright and burning genius, the haughty and faithful
hearts, and the victorious hands of Ireland, let not the men of that
time--that time of glory and misfortune--that time of which Limerick's
two sieges typify the clear and dark sides--defiance and defeat of the
Saxon in one, trust in the Saxon and ruin on the other--let not the
legislators or soldiers of that great epoch be forgotten.

Thomas Davis.
July, 1843.

CHAPTER I.

A RETROSPECT.

How far the Parliament which sat in Dublin in 1689 was right or wrong
has been much disputed. As the history of it becomes more accurately
and generally known, the grounds of this dispute will be cleared.

Nor is it of trifling interest to determine whether a Parliament, which
not only exercised great influence at the time, but furnished the
enactors of the Penal Laws with excuses, and the achievers of the
Revolution of 1782 with principles and a precedent, was the good or
evil thing it has been called.

The writers commonly quoted against it are, Archbishop King, Harris,
Leland; those in its favour, Leslie, Curry, Plowden, and Jones.[5] Of
all these writers, King and Lesley are alone original authorities.
Harris copies King, and Leland copies Harris, and Plowden, Curry, and
Jones rely chiefly on Lesley. Neither Harris, Leland, nor Curry adds
anything to our knowledge of the time. King (notwithstanding, as we
shall show hereafter, his disregard of truth) is valuable as a
contemporary of high rank; Lesley, also a contemporary, and of
unblemished character, is still more valuable. Plowden is a fair and
sagacious commentator; Jones, a subtle and suggestive critic on those
times.

If, in addition, the reader will consult such authorities as the
Letters of Lord Lieutenant Tyrconnell;[6] the Memoirs[7] of James the
Second by himself; _Histoire de la Revolution par Mazure_;[8] and
the pamphl