to diminish their claim for compensation
upon the repeal of those acts. But it only diminished, it did not
destroy that claim. All those persons reposed some confidence in the
security of the then existing government; and many of them found a
justification for the Cromwellian conquest, in the conduct of the
Irish, as the well-sustained falsehoods of the English describe it.

For these reasons, Chief Justice Keating prepared a long memorial,
which Forbes, Lord Granard, presented to the king, during the
discussions on the bills, in May, 1689, setting forth the claims of
those who came in under the acts of settlement, as incumbrancers,
purchasers, tenants, by marriage, etc. This memorial is dishonestly
represented by the Whig writers, as directed against the repeal
altogether; but any one who reads it (which he can do in the appendix
to Harris's life of William) will find that it is an argument in favour
of the classes described in the last sentence. From the long and
careful clauses in the following act, for the reprisal and compensation
of those classes, we must infer that Keating's memorial produced its
intended effect. However, these clauses require to be carefully
examined, to see whether they carry out this principle of compensation
fairly and impartially. The character of this parliament for moderation
depends greatly on their doings in this respect.

We now come to a second class, the Irish who, having been given the
alternative of "Hell or Connaught" (as a certain bishop was of Heaven
or Dungarvan), preferred the latter, and were located on the lands of
the Connaught people. This class would generally come in for their old
holdings in the other provinces, and required no compensation; but the
distribution, under this act, of the incumbrances, etc., between them
and the owners of their former and present lands, seems lawyer-like and
reasonable.

The next great class are the "adventurers," those who got lands during
the Commonwealth, and whose holdings were confirmed by the settlement.
Their claim was boldly and ably urged by Anthony Dopping, bishop of
Meath. His speech on the Repeal Bill is given in King's appendix, and
is worth reading. He bases their claim upon the supposition of the
Irish having been bloody rebels, rightly punished by the giving of
their lands to their loyal conquerors. His speech gives the genuine
opinion of the English at the time. The preamble to the following act,
and that to the Commons'