at the same time. The committee of the lords through their long printed report of the examination of John Hughes, exhibit not only the names, but the occupations, and places of abode, of the persons mentioned by him, in his information. On the contrary, in the printed report, from the committee of the commons, of the information by Nicholas Magin, as given in, and attested on oath, by the rev. John Cleland, and comprising thirty-nine meetings at which Magin was present, no name, of any member, of any one of these meetings, is mentioned; though the names of all are stated to have been contained in the exact written communication. The printed minute of these meetings begins thus; "nine members present (their names appear in the original)." (Names of persons present)."Thirteen members present [their names]," or, persons assembled [their names] represented ten regiments." In the report of extracts from the examinations of John Hughes, by the committee of the commons, one part exhibits names, the other does not. The part, containing names, principally consists of conversations with individuals, or private parties, and of stories told him. Only one public meeting is mentioned: and all related in it took place before June, 1797, from which time he did not attend any meetings till March, 1798. After this, the extracts contain no information

formation from Hughes, but what bears date June 1st, 1798, in which all names are suppressed, as in Magin's examination.

Now, whence this difference? why are all names specified by the committee of lords, and all concealed by that of the commons? This question I shall not pretend to answer. However, I cannot withhold a remark highly honorable to the former. By the publication of names évery attention was directed to the persons affected by the information given, and to them only. No room was left for suspicion, misrepresentation, malicious censure, or unprovoked cruelty, in respect to others. The suppression of names, by the latter, had an effect directly contrary. The persons, constituting thirtynine public meetings were as little known after the publication of the committee's report, as if they had never existed; whilst hundreds, unconnected with them, might be looked to by suspicion, or pointed at by private enmity, as their constituent members, and harassed accordingly.

Besides, I would observe that, as every thing respecting the insurrection, so far as Ulster was concerned, was discussed and agreed to at these meetings, the members must have been of some consequence in their respective counties, and ought to have been laid hold of as soon as known. Now, the rev. John Cleland has acknowledged

Hh2

knowledged that Magin, immediately communicated to him, from time to time, what passed at each of these meetings; and swore that the papers given by him to the committee contained exactly the information so communicated. And the report shews that said meetings regularly succeeded each other, from the 14th. of April, 1797, till June 5th. 1798, only two days previous to the battle at Antrim.

1

Now, are we to suppose that the rev. John Cleland, during these thirteen months and upwards, retained this information entirely to himself, without giving a hint to lord viscount Castlereagh of what was going on so rápidly, uniformly, and dangerously? This cannot be supposed, on any principle of common sense or common honesty. If Mr. Cleland did communicate it to his lordship, it is equally improbable that he should conceal it from the then existing government. And, if known to goyernment, why was it not acted on? Should it be said that, for some time, the matter might appear trivial, and might be allowed to proceed for a season, as there could be little difficulty in suppressing it, different measures of government, and the reports of the committees, would lead to a presumption that they wished the people to believe that they thought otherwise. But, admitting that they despised the symptoms of insurrection in Ulster, during the

greater

greater part of these thirteen months, surely the commencement, extent, and temporary success of insurrection in the counties all around the metropolis gave sufficient cause of alarm. Yet, even then, no notice was taken of the information of Magin corroborated as it was by the rev. John Cleland. Not a man of the provincial, county, or baronial committees—not a general, colonel, or even captain-who had attended any of these meetings, was apprehended, or even disturbed, so far as I can recollect till, the very eve of the insurrection. Nay, it does not appear, on any credible evidence that any one of those then arrested had ever been present with Magin at any meeting. Now, may it not be asked, "why were not these persons, against whom evidence positive and dírect existed, taken into custody? On a moderate calculation they must have amounted, at least, to one hundred, perhaps twice that number. No man, therefore, can suppose that insurrection would have then taken place, where it did, had those been secured. But, if government did not wish to prevent insurrection, but rather to cherish it to a certain degree, and, therefore suffered Magin's information to sleep in quiet while it could be of any use, why the mockery of a solemn investigation after the insurrection was quelled? And, why, after such investigation, instead of chastisement, conceal the names of

its

its authors and promoters from the public eye, while their treasons are exhibited in the darkest colors?

Instead of amusing ourselves with devising answers, let us attend to the few following years, and they will supply a sufficiency. In fact, the measure of union alone is sufficient for the purpose, as might be easily proved. Besides, such a train of blanks gave abundant scope for circulating suspicions, which credulity easily swallowed, and malicious cunning consolidated into certainty. Of this I have been a notorious instance, and continue so to be. During my confinement, many of my friends were alarmed for my life, on the authority of whispers, and private letters from men, who had access to people about the castle. These whispers, and alleged authorities, were frequently and warmly urged, for my signing the compact for self-exportation; and so fully were my friends convinced of their truth, that they charged me with madness in rejecting the proffered mercy, as it was then called. Even after my return to Ireland, I was frequently congratulated on my fortunate escape, and most earnestly solicited to avoid all interference in public affairs for the future. But, what is still more remarkable, the active part, which I took, from beginning to end of the Down election in 1805, to assist the county in the vindication of its character by the rejection

of