inquiry might be conducted, so as to enable me to rebut any charges that could by possibility be brought against me by you.

I refer you to this letter, and more especially, as the Lord Lieutenant, after much delay, has been pleased to say "he does not consider my communication one on which it could be proper for him to act," thus throwing on you the responsibility of replying to it.

I have resolved to request the members for Kildare, to move in the House of Commons for the production of several documents connected with these proceedings, and, as it might be said, you had no formal notice of my letter to the Lord Lieutenant, I now respectfully call your attention to it.

I have the honour to be, &c., &c.,

RICHARD GRATTAN, M.D., Ex-J.P.

LETTER FROM LORD CLONCURRY.

My dear Doctor Grattan,

I have read your very true and very admirable letter to the Chancellor, and subscribe to almost every word it contains.

I am sorry for the country and for the honour of the magistracy that you are no longer of that body; but I congratulate you on the occasion offered you of speaking your ever honest opinion. Had your advice been followed when we were fellow-labourers years ago in the " Society for the Improvement of Ireland," we

should not now be in the wretched state to which bad government and bad men have reduced us.

With respect and regard,

Maritimo, 6th December, 1849.

Most faithfully yours,

CLONCURRY.

TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE AND HONOURABLE THE KNIGHTS, CITIZENS, AND BURGESSES IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED.

The Petition of the undersigned inhabitants of the Parish of Naas, County of Kildare.

Humbly Sheweth,

That Richard Grattan, Esq., M.D., of Drummin House,

County Kildare, was deprived of the Commission of the Peace, during the government of Lord Clarendon in this country, under circumstances which demand inquiry; and the refusal to grant which leads your petitioners to infer, that it is intended by the Irish Executive to intimidate the magistracy generally, and compel them to profess themselves the supporters of the policy of Lord John Russell, on pain of removal-a proceeding inconsistent with the independent and impartial administration of justice.

Your petitioners therefore appeal to your Honourable House, to order a full and strict enquiry into the cause of the removal of the said Richard Grattan, Esq. from the magistracy.

And your petitioners will pray.

[This and six or seven similar petitions from other parishes, all numerously signed, were transmitted from the County of Kildare for presentation to the House of Commons.]

I have published the foregoing documents because they have become matters of historical reference, and place in a strong light the difficulties with which Ireland has always had to contend from the shortcomings of her pretended friends. They explain, in some degree, why we are "in the wretched state to which bad government and bad men have reduced us." They establish the necessity of the Irish people taking the political management of their own affairs into their own hands.

O'CONNELL.

I find that in several instances I have expressed myself with regard to O'Connell and his policy in terms which, on more mature consideration, I feel I ought not to have employed. I should have distinguished between O'Connell as an individual, and the Whigs as a political party. My excuse is, that the Whigs were preserved in office chiefly by O'Connell's influence. I held him responsible for their misdeeds, when, but for him, I am now persuaded, their treatment of Ireland would have been more unjust and more oppressive.

The Tories refused to co-operate with O'Connell in any way, while the Whigs gladly availed themselves of his support. They used O'Connell. He used them. This is the explanation of their

political co-partnership. The Whigs, in England, gorged themselves with the plunder of office, while in Ireland O'Connell was the dispenser of every place at the disposal of the minister. The Lord Chancellor the Judges-Chairmen of Counties-Stipendiary Magistrates-were all promoted or vetoed by him. In this I believe O'Connell acted for the best, and accomplished for Ire land all that was in his power, as far as the intolerant spirit of the time would permit him. Since then there has been a great change in public opinion. The masses of the people demand to be heard and to have their interests cared for. It is to the labouring and to the middle classes that I chiefly address myself. The future of Ireland depends upon them. It is time they should know their own power, and it is right to endeavour to teach them to use it prudently and safely.

THE ORANGE PARTY.

Having, I hope, sufficiently excused myself for my observations on Daniel O'Connell, I have a few words to say in reference to his most uncompromising opponents-the Orangemen of Ireland. An advocate, as I always shall be, for conciliation-mutual forbearance and peace among Irishmen-I feel I should fall into an error if I were not to qualify some of my remarks in reference to the proceedings of the Orange Organization.

In early life many of my most intimate friends and associates were Orangemen. I thought them greatly mistaken in their political views. We differed in opinion, but I am quite sure we never quarrelled on the subject. I believe the majority of orangemen are persons of high principles and correct in all the affairs of ordinary life, but I dissent from and protest against the policy of their political system. Defenders of Protestant Ascendancy, what has been their reward? Have they not been deceived, deserted, and betrayed, by every Conservative ministry in succession? Contending for Ascendancy, have they not become the enemies of religious freedom-which is religious equality or nothing. But Protestant Ascendancy is gone-Religious Equality is an accomplished fact. Does Protestantism in any of its many forms need the protection of Orangeism? By no means. It can protect itself, and is never so strong as when least interfered with. The Orange party calls itself conservative-but it has nothing to preserve. This is an absurdity. The Tithes are gone. The Established Church is gone. Catholic Emancipation has been granted. Par

liament has been reformed.

What more? What have the Conservatives to preserve? Nothing. Then would it not be wiser for Orangemen, instead of suffering themselves to be made the tools of the late Established Church, and of unprincipled ministers, to consider what would most benefit themselves and their country? For what purpose do they continue their illegal demonstrations which are always productive of bad feeling, bloodshed, and sometimes even of murder? Do Orangemen hope to re-establish the Tithe System-or to re-enact the Penal Code-or to confiscate the property now possessed by Roman Catholics-or to re-endow the Established Church-or to increase the Poor Rate or as a final effort, to repeal the Union? It is to be wished Orangemen would tell other Protestants and the world at large, what their objects are. For my part, I protest I do not know-I cannot discover any one benefit that the country derives from Orangeism. On the contrary it suffers, in my opinion, great injury. Several years ago I put an end to Orange exhibitions in my neighbourhood, and we have been at peace ever since. Their revival would throw the whole country into a blaze. We should have battery and bloodshed in all directions. I wish the promoters of Orange ascendancy would explain in what way such party feeling and lawless turbulence could benefit us. Until then, I for one, as a Protestant, will enter into no compromise with Orangeism, or permit myself to be considered as approving of it in any way.

THE IMPROVEMENT OF IRELAND.

INTERNAL COMMUNICATION.

Two canals connect Dublin with the Shannon. The Royal Canal, in the direction of Galway, and the Grand Canal which meets it lower down, towards Limerick.

Both canals became insolvent several years ago, having for a time paid large dividends with borrowed money. Their shares fell to a mere nominal value, to the great loss, and in numerous instances the total ruin, of the shareholders. The Royal Canal, in some degree made compensation to the public, by constructing the Midland Great Western Railway in connection with the canal, thereby bringing Galway within a few hours of Dublin, and greatly facilitating the traffic between the east and west of Ireland.

The Grand Canal, on the contrary, not only neglected to adopt this great improvement, so much called for by the requirements of the entire country, but in the narrow spirit of a selfish mono

poly, resisted the formation of a railway by other parties, and succeeded, after a bill for this purpose had passed the Commons, in causing its rejection by the English House of Lords.

Since that time, having nothing to fear from a competing railway, the efforts of the company have been chiefly directed to raise the price of their shares in the money market, paying little attention to the reasonable claims of those who reside or carry on business in the immediate vicinity of the canal. The tolls are so high as to render it in several instances cheaper to send corn, fuel, and other heavy articles, by land carriage to Dublin, than by the canal. The Directors have discontinued the conveyance of passengers by canal boats—a mode of travel which was a great accommodation to the public, and for which they have not provided a substitute. In short, possessing a monopoly they little regard the interests or convenience of the public. The management of the canal should be strictly inquired into. Of the Directors several seldom attend the regular business meetings. The officers seem to be the Directors, and to regulate all matters at their discretion. If this be the case, a Board of Directors is more for ornament than use. There should be a meeting of the shareholders to call upon the present Directors to attend to the business of the Company or give place to others who will do so.

I have had occasion recently to correspond with the Directors. I advise the shareholders to call for the production of my letters. There are several important questions in which they must be interested, and which seem to me to require their serious consideration. The tolls are too high by one half. Not only is the price of fuel unreasonably enhanced, but the surplus water of the canal is suffered to run waste into the Liffey-the rent demanded by the Company for this useless overflow being so exorbitant that the Dublin Corporation considered themselves not justified in paying it.

An appeal to the English Parliament would be useless. A HOUSE of ASSEMBLY sitting in College Green, would soon bring the Company and its Directors to a sense of their duty. It would teach them that, having received large grants from the Irish Parliament for public purposes, they are trustees for the benefit of the public, and therefore so far accountable to the public whose interests it is their duty to promote.