Exposure of the unfounded character of the story that in the Irish rebellion in 1641, Bishop Bedell, of Kilmore, countenanced the rebels of Cavan, by drawing up a remonstrance for them / by T. Wharton Jones.

  • Thomas Wharton Jones
Date:
1888
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Exposure of the unfounded character of the story that in the Irish rebellion in 1641, Bishop Bedell, of Kilmore, countenanced the rebels of Cavan, by drawing up a remonstrance for them / by T. Wharton Jones. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The Royal College of Surgeons of England. The original may be consulted at The Royal College of Surgeons of England.

    7/8 (page 7)
    TIiP (limlnisliinfr numbers of ontraffos which are here mani- fested, it is to be noted, must l)o taken to indicate not an amelioration of alfairs, but only that fewer victims remained to lie sacriliced, and that the British were now actinj^ on their defence. The misrepresentations contained in the Dinlor/up hrtirppn a Dissmfpr and a Mnnhi'r of tin' Clnirrli of Ireland were exposed by !Mr. Walter ITarris (the editor of Sir James Ware’s History of Ireland and the Irish Bishops) in a book ])ublished in ITo'i, entitled “‘Fiction unmasked: or An Answer to a HiaIoi,Mie published by a Popish Physician, and Pretended to have Passed Between a Bissenter and a Member of the Church of Ireland: Wherein the Causes, Motives, and Mischiefs of the Irish Pebellion and ]\Ia.ssacrcs in Iti-il are laid thick upon the Protestants.” To this book of Mr. Harris a rejoinder appeared in 17(i7, entitled “Histoi-ical IMemoirs of the Irish Rebellion in the year Kill, Extracted from Parliamentary Journals, State Acts, and the most eminent Protestant His- torians.” In spite, however, of all the efl'orts herein made to maintain fiction for fact by vigorous assertion and re-assertion of unfounded allegations, so as to make the worse a])]>ear the better cause, the admissions of the rebels themselves in the Cavan Remonstrance, the admissions direct or indirect from other rebel sources, and the admissions of the ajiologists themselves, are alone sufficient to confirm the tenor of all that has been i-ecorded on the subject in State paiiei-s, the depo- sitions in the Library of Ti-inity College, Dublin; in the various pamphlets and news-letters imblished at the time, and the special histories by Dean Jones, Sir John Temple, Dr. Borlasi', Sir Richard Cox, and even the Rev. Dr. Xalson, who wrote to palliate the atrocities of the Rebellion for the puriiose of Screening the King’s memoi-y from the imjmtations which had been cast against his Majesty for having encouraged the Schemes whicli h‘d to the fii'st outburst of rebellion. Mr. Daniel O’fhmnell, in his “Memoir of Ireland, Native and Saxon,” jmblished in LSIJ, cpiotes from Mr. Thomas Moore the lines :— “On onr side is virtue and Ei-in ; f)n tlieii'S is the Saxon and guilt” not only as a fancy mottri on the title-]iage, but also as a brief of iustructioii'for vituperating the English and extolling the