into the name of a lord; he told me they called him so because he was O'Donnell. I asked him by what authoritie he was soe, and he saide by my lord deputies; I badd him make that appear to me and all was well. Hec plucked out a lettre written unto him from my lord, about two yeares before, superscription whereof was this: "To my very loving friende O'Donnell." I asked him if this were all the warrante he had, and he said, yes. I asked him why he went not to my lord all this while, nor came unto me sooner, nor restored Rorie O'Donnell's cattle; his answer was this, 'You know the whole country of Tyrconnell was long since promised me, and many services I have done, that I think I have deserved it, but I sawe I was neglected, and therefore I have righted myselfe, by takeing the cattle and people that were myne owne, and to prevent others, have made myself O'Donnell: now, by this meanes, the country is sure to mi."-pp. 266, 267.

But "the country was not sure to him; he was threatened with imprisonment in irons; was compelled to restore all Rorie's property; and for his treachery to his name had no consolation but that of being the last O'Donnell who received from the Abbot the white wand of sovereignty over Tyrconnel, on the inauguration stone at Kilmacrena. He had no substantial reward save the property he possessed when he first met Sir Henry Douckra, and he died some years later in prison, where he was thrown by those whom he had so faithfully, and for his kindred so fatally served.

The other Irish chieftains who had joined the English, met with similar treatment: O'Dogherty was disappointed in his expectations of the promised chieftaincy of Inishowen: young Turlough O'Neale was told he should be strongly recommended by the Lord Deputy to the mercy of the late rebel, the earl of Tyrone; and O'Cane found that he should still pay his rents to the same earl.

"In the meane time, my lord Hugh (the earle of Tyrone's eldest son,) and I went home together, and when wee came to the Derrey, I sent for O'Caine and told him what my lord's pleasure was touching him. He began presentlie to be moved, and both by speech and gesture, declared as earnestlie as was possible to be highlie offended at it, argued the matter with mee upon many points; protested his fidelitie to the state since he had made profession of it; asked no favor if any man could charge him with the contrarie; said he had always built upon my promise, and my lord deputie's; that hee was now undone, and in worse case than before he knewe us, shewed many reasons for it; and asked if we would

claime him hereafter, if hee followed my lord of Tyrone's councell though it were against the kinge, seeing he was in this manner forced to be under him. In the end, seeing no remedie, he shaked handes with my lord Hugh, bad the Devill take all English men, and as manie as put their trust in them, and soe in the shewe of a good reconciled friendship, they went away together."-p. 277.*

But the severest trial to which Douckra was subjected, was the personal sacrifices he was obliged to make of his own share of the spoils of war. The salmon fishing of Lough Foyle was to be the reward of him and his descendants for ever, for having planted the English flag on its hitherto independent shores. As soon, however, as the earl of Tyrone had submitted, an order from the Lord Deputy cancelled the grant, and the earl's men had full permission to fish the river. This and other indignities roused the proud spirit of Douckra; he sold his house and three quarters of land which he had purchased, and his company of foot, and his company of horse, for a smaller sum, he protests, than his horse alone had stood him in, and retired from the public service, in which he had played a part, not inferior to that of many others, whose descendants retain to this day the broad acres and populous towns with which they were rewarded. There is an air of honesty and candour in the greater portion of the narrative, that becomes a soldier: but however faithful he may have been to other parts of his instructions, he appears to have sadly neglected the order for establishing the Christian religion: his chief performances in that line consisting exclusively of the conversion of some Churches and monasteries into garrisons, which was indeed the only reformation hitherto introduced into Ireland, by the generals and clergy of the great Protestant Queen.

*Philip O'Sullivan describes Niel Garh, (Asper) venting his indignation in a somewhat similar strain: " Aspero illæ tantum possessiones quas habuit priusquam ad Anglos defe cerat adjudicantur et baronis titulus offertur. Ille ira percitus titulum accipe re noluit et in Iberuiam postquam redivit, Dubhlinnæ in senatum ad regium consilium productus, senatores et gentem Anglicam asperrimis verbis exagital, non ab Anglis sed ab ipso, Catholicos fuisse devictos atque debollatos-a consilio et Anglis improbe et perfide cum ipso agi neque fidem impleri." Inde seipsum quod unquam Anglis fidem habuerit execratur, dirisque imprecationibus devout."-T. iii. Lib. viii. cap. vi.

66

It is true, when occasion required, the conquerors could solemnly protest they had no intention of interfering with religious liberty. O'Neil, in one of his projected submissions, had stipulated on behalf of himself and his adherents, for the free exercise of the Catholic religion, to which an answer was returned with all the imitated air of injured innocence, that there never had been any intention of interfering with his priests; a proof, says the national bard, Thomas Moore, that religion was not one of the causes of Irish war under Elizabeth; a proof, he should have said, of the unscrupulous mendacity with which the government of England sought to palliate the atrocities perpetrated in the name and for the establishment of the reformed law creed in Ireland. In no place where the English power prevailed, were the Irish Catholics allowed their public worship. The same injustice was continued under James I., and the same indignant denials of any persecution for religion's sake, were made by him and his ministers, and solemnly circulated through the Catholic courts of Europe, with all the pomp of a royal declaration, at the very time when the prisons of Dublin were filled with recusant Catholic mayors, magistrates, and burghers, and when Catholic bishops and priests were hunted down by the government marshals. The same spirit of craft and venom inspired succeeding governments, and appears this day in the person of Whig ministers, who so kindly volunteer their assistance to protect the Irish Catholic against the Pope, and revive by their insulting enactments, but to their own certain discomfiture, a deep and burning indignation, which can be controlled by prudence alone.

We take our leave of the Celtic Miscellany with a sincere wish for the success of the society. As it has outlived the last three years, fatal to so many projects: there is reason to hope that it will not die out, until it has either completed its mission, or at least diffused a taste which will not rest satisfied until the work is done.

ART. IV.—1. Public Instruction in France under M. Guizot. Quarterly Review. December, 1848.

2. Récit complet des Actes du Gouvernement provisoiree; par EMILE CARREY. Paris, Durand, 1848.

3. Rapport fait, au nom de la Commission chargée de préparer une Loi sur l'Enseignement, par M. JULES SIMON, représentant du peuple. 4. Loi sur l'Enseignement, suivie des Règlements d'Administration publique Décrets, Circulaires et Instructions Ministerielles relatives à soz exécution. Paris, Dupont, 1851.

5. La Vérité sur la loi d'enseignement, par MGR. PARISIS, évêque de Langres. Paris, Lecoffre. 1851.

6. Premier Rapport sur les travaux du Comité de l'Enseignement libre. Paris, Lecoffre, 1851.

7. De l'Education, par MGR. DUPANLOUP, Evèque d'Orléans, Paris, Lecoffre, 1850.

8. Idées sur l'Education, par un Professeur de Philosophie. Paris, Lecoffre. 9. L'Education, Journal d'Enseignement elémentaire, pour les Ecoles et les Familles. Paris, Rue Garanciere, 10. 1851.

AT the close of the year 1848, the Quarterly Review

published an article upon Public Instruction in France under M. Guizot. The author professed to write it under the immediate inspiration of that celebrated statesman. In France, it was generally believed to proceed from his own pen, and to those who are familiar with his style and productions, the circumstance seems by no means improbable. But whoever may have been the real penman, the paper itself could not fail to call forth great interest, more especially among our neighbours. The reader will not therefore feel surprised that we should place it at the head of our references, when purposing to draw his attention to the state of Public Instruction in France since the law which was voted upon the 15th of March, 1850. That law may be considered as the Magna Charta of French liberty, in regard to Education, for some time to come; against which were brought in array the whole forces of an infidel university, a legion of demagogues, nay, more, the enmity of many eminent Catholics themselves. Down to the present moment, there are not a few

amongst the latter who consider the above measure as a cowardly concession to the bad passions of the age; whilst on the other hand, a Montalembert, a De Falloux, a Dupanloup, at the head of an intrepid band of staunch believers, maintain that the most has been made of the existing circumstances. Indeed, upon being duly referred to, the Pope himself has issued an answer favourable to the bill, and this alone is sufficient to quiet such consciences as may be over scrupulous upon the subject.

It has been the good fortune of the present writer to pass a portion of his life among many of the distinguished persons who played a prominent part in the late contest; for years he has enjoyed their confidence, and through their kindness, as well as through means and papers of his, he has been enabled to glean information which otherwise might have been withheld from an Englishman. To both of these sources he intends to refer without hesitation, though at the same time, he trusts, with such discretion as may justify the confidence he alludes to. These observations he feels necessary, however, when about to contradict some of M. Guizot's statements.

It is now well known that when Napoleon founded his new university, he remodelled it in such a way as to mould the rising generations according to his own ideas of military despotism. The establishments which Catholic piety had liberally provided for Education in France had all fallen a prey to revolutionary fury; and disposing as he did of large resources, the emperor found it no difficult task to ensure an absolute ascendency to the new-born fabric. Besides this, a true scholar was then a rarity in France; classical information was indeed at so low an ebb that Cuvier, the man who was the grand tool in this intended restoration, was frequently at a loss to find masters who could accurately write their own language. Such had been the fatal consequences of the storm which, during the short space of ten years, had covered the country with blackened ruins. It became a matter of necessity to select for professors and masters, men who, after giving up their clerical duties, had turned out to be a scandal and a shame to the Church. The hatred which such persons bear to their former profession and creed, is a well-known fact. One instance alone we will quote,that of Daunou, who acquired great historical eminence. An oratorian when the French Revolution broke out,