May 29th. Our fare continues remarkably good; and, though our confinement be strict, and every attention paid to our safe custody, the conduct of our guards is perfectly correct, and that of the officers and keepers uniformly marked with discretion and civility.

August 4th. Our table excellent and improv ing. We have very fine salmon twice or thrice a week, which are taken in our view, at the distance of about 150 yards. Of other fish, both round and flat, we have great variety. Our beef, mutton, pork, veal, lamb. &c. are remarkably good. Latterly, we have had plenty of garden stuffs and sallading, and sometimes young ducks and peas-yesterday and to day new potatoes. We have not wanted eggs and cold meat, at breakfast, a single day since our arrival here. Our wine, porter, and ale, have been uniformly good. And, at supper, we have occasionally had very fine crabs and lobsters.*

• For a considerable time after our arrival, we never had fish at our table, though we saw them daily, in the fort, in great variety and abundance.. This produced a peevish note to Mrs. M'Gregor. This note was answered by information that, as fish was so plenty, and consequently cheap, that none but the common soldiers used them, she feared sending them to us would be attributed to selfishness or insolence. This will not surprise, when it is known, that the largest cod are delivered, by the fishermen, at two shillings per dozen, to the houses where they are pickled &c. for the London market; and that fish, of every other kind, is proportionably cheap-safmon excepted.

September 14th. This day added strength to the presumption that Irish influence, arising from Irish cabinet fears, is yet used with the British minister, to intercept or abridge our comforts.

For some months, applications had been made and repeated, in vain, to the Irish minister, that Mrs. Emmet might be permitted to visit Mr. Emmet; and communications holden with the duke of Portland, for the same purpose. Notwithstanding the repeated refusals in Ireland, the duke of Portland granted the boon, but under such restrictions, that it was honorably declined, as the following letter will shew.

"SIR,

Mrs. Emmet, wife of Mr. Emmet, one of the prisoners at Fort-George, has obtained my permission to see her husband; but, as she is suspected of having imbibed his principles, you will take particular care that she shall not be the means of communication between him and the disaffected in Ireland. She is only to see him in the presence of a proper person, and you are to take such steps as that she may not carry any letters or papers in or out of the fort, I have the honor to be

Though the permission, granted in this letter, be entirely due to the duke of Portland; I appeal to every man of common sense whether the restrictions are not evidently of Irish suggestion. Should a doubt exist, the fact will appear, hereafter, supported by evidence equal to demonstration; and, I ask, whether any one of them has ever known, read, or heard of, such insulting and barbarous restrictions being imposed on any human being, in such circumstances; much less on a lady of most respectable connexions, and dignified character-mother of five children, languishing to visit a beloved husband, an exile and prisoner, five hundred miles distant ?*

October 5th. We had nice fresh herrings, for some days past, in addition to our other fare. The price, to day, as we are told, is two pence per hundred.

November 5th. This day supplied a sufficient proof of continued Irish control over our affairs, and a disposition to harass us and our friends. This, however, neither surprised, nor hurt us. so much as the unmerited insult offered to our worthy governor in the following letter, the origin of which cannot be doubted.

*

"Whitehall,

Supposing Mrs. Emmet to travel the same Highland roads that we did, her journey from Dublin to Fort-George would have been 503 English miles; by London, which was her route, 945.

SIR,

"Whitehall, October 31st.-1799.

I am directed by the duke of Portland to desire that you will acquaint the state prisoners under your care, that it will be proper for them to inform their correspondents in Ireland, that all letters addressed to them should be sent open, under cover, to the secretary of the civil department in Dublin, who will forward them to this office, from whence they will be sent to you to be delivered to the prisoners. In the mean time, and until you receive such letters from this office, you will be pleased to transmit to his grace such letters as shall arrive at FortGeorge, for the said prisoners, before they are given to them.

I have the honor to be,
sir, your most obedient,
humble servant,

Endorsed, duke of Portland

J. KING.

regarding the state prisoners'

Jetters,

October 31st.-99"

The preceding was accompanied with the following note.

"Fort-George, Nov. 5th.-99. "Lieut.-Governor Stuart is somewhat at a loss to account for the cause of the enclosed order, as he is positive no improper letters have been attempted to be sent to the state prisoners, since in his custody; but, that as little delay as pos

sible may arise to their letters, the lieut.-governor desires the gentlemen may immediately write to their correspondents, in the terms of the secretary of state's orders, and their letters will be forwarded to the office directly.

To the state prisoners."

The preceding letter not only proves what I have already mentioned of still prevailing fears and suspicions, in the Irish cabinet, respecting us, and a mean distrust in governor Stuart; but implies a want of confidence between the Irish and British secretaries, as our letters must pass through the offices of both. Our worthy governor says that he is somewhat at a loss to account for the cause of the order &c." But, why at a loss? Because the good man was a stranger to the wretches with whom it originated.* Had he known their crimes and their cruelties, as admitted by themselves, he would have been at no loss to account for their fears and their precautions. I say, "admitted;" as their bills of indemnity

*Let it not be surmised that I mean to reflect on Mr. J. King, or connect him, or his grace of Portland, with the wretches to whom I allude, on a supposition, that this order respecting our letters, or the proceeding respecting Mrs. Emnet, originated with either. Whatever may be my opinion of Lis grace, as a minister, I conceive of him as incapable of the meanness or malignity from which such orders must have originated. Nay, I pity him under the necessity, to which a degrading ambition has reduced him, of being pandar to the meanness and malignity of others,