Digitized by the Internet Arcinive in 2010 with funding from Duke University Libraries http://www.archive.org/details/originprogressdiOOnang THE ORIGIN, PROGRESS, AND DIFFICULTIES OF THE ACHILL MISSION, AS DETAILED IN THE MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE SELECT COMMITTEE OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS, AP- POINTED TO INQUIRE INTO THE PROGRESS AND OPE- RATION OF THE NEW PLAN OF EDUCATION IN IRELAND ; AND TO REPORT THEREUPON TO THE HOUSE. REPRINTED, WITHOUT ABRIDGMENT OR ALTERATION, FROM THE AUTHORIZED REPORT, WITH AN INTRODUCTION AND APPENDIX, BY THE REV. EDWARD NANGLE, A. B. DUBLIN : WM. CARSON & CO., 92, GRAFTON-ST. : J. NISBET & CO., BERNERS ST., LONDON. MDCCCXXXIX. ACHILL—PRIN'TED AT "THE MISSION rilE.SS," ty TTilliam Pugh, it INTRODUCTION. Popery has hecn well compared to a great sword, the hilt of which is at Rome. The pope issues his orders to the Bishops, the Bishops com- municate them to the priests, and the priests hring them into operation in the districts over \\ hich they preside, having, when their authority- prevails to any extent, a vigilant and powerful police, always at their command, to detect the refractory, and awe them into suhmission. Force and cruelty are the means, which popery employs, for main- taining her dominion over the minds and consciences of men. Reason- ing and persuasion, may at first be tried, but when these fail, violence, if circumstances permit, is always employed. "Whosoever shall affirm" decreed the council of Trent, " that * * * all christians, of both sexes, are not bound to observe the same (confession to a priest) once a year according to the constitution of the great council of Lateran : * * * "Let him be accursed." Nor is this enactment, one of those obsolete barbarisms of the dark ages, which our modtrn advocates of popery would persuade us has fallen into desuetude in the light and intelli- gence of the nineteenth century. An acute observer of men and man- ners, thus describes its operation in Italy. " If every true-born Italian, man, woman, and child, within the Pope's dominions, does not confess and receive the communion at least once a year, before Easter, bis name is posted up in the parish church ; if be still refrain, he is exhorted, enti'eated, and otherwise tormented; and if he persist in his contumacy, he is excommunicated, which is a very good joke to us, but none at all to an Italian, since it involves the loss of civil rights, and perhaps of liberty and property." Rome in the Nineteenth Century, ii. 262. " Every Italian must at this time confess, and receive the communion. A friend of ours,Avho has lived a great deal in foreign countries, and there im- bibed very heterodox notions, and who has never to us made any secret of his confirmed unbelief of Catholicism, went to-day to confession with the strongest repugnance. ' What can I do ?' he said. ' If I neglect it, I am reprimanded by the parish priest j if I delay it, my name is posted up in the parish church 4y INTRODUCTION. if I persist in my contumacy, the arm of the church will overtake me, and my rank and fortune only serve to make me more obnoxious to its power. — If I choose to make myself a martyr to infidelity, as the saints of old to reli- to conceal my true belief, and profess what I despise, but I must bring up my children in their abominable idolatries and superstition; or, if I teach them the truth, make them either hypocrites or beggars.' I shall not enter into the soundness of my friend's arguments, or defend the rectitude of his conduct, but certainly the alternative is a hard one; and I believe there are thousands whose virtue would not be proof against it ; for this reason, he would not live a day in Italy if he could live out of it, which is not in his power." Ibid. iii. p. 160. In those parts of Ireland, where the Romish religion is dominant, the same moral despotism prevails, with this diflerence, that its victims be- in "• called British subjects, are supposed to enjoy, the benefit of British law, and British freedom, and thus their nominal privilege deprives them of the commisseration and sympathy, which an undisguised exhi- bition of their wretchedness would call into exercise. In the popish districts of Ireland, the priests keep a roll of the inhabitants of every village in the parish, at certain periods he attends in each of these vil- lages for the puii)ose of hearing confessions. If any absent themselves they are immediately suspected of disaffection to the church. If a Bi- ble-school has been established in the neighbourhood, or if any opera- tions are in progress for the extension of scriptural knowledge among the adult population, the priest does not fail to use his influence in the confessional, to check the progress of light, and to ascertain whether any of his flock have drank at the stream of knowledge, or acquired an ap- petite for it. The shifts which some of the poor Irish make to elude the priest's vigilance on such occasions, afford melancholy proof of the moral degradation which popery entails on its vassals. Though they re- gard the priest in the confessional as God himself, they frequently en- deavour to deceive him. We have known an Irish peasant to remove a Bible from his house, the day before he went to confession, with the pur- pose of taking it back when the confession was over, in order that when questioned by the priest, as to whether he had been reading the Bible, he might baffle the inquiry by telling him, " That he had no such book in his house!" The priests themselves are aware that the duplicity in which they have schooled the people, may be thus employed against themselves, and therefore they do not depend exclusively on the confessional for sup- plying them with accurate information as to the state of mind of their parishioners. They employ the more devout portion or their flocks in the honourable office of spies. The most efficient persons in this capa- city are the confraternity-men, individuals who have bound themselves together by a vow, to perform certain superstitious observances, and who are distinguished by wearing a scapular or some other amulet. This trumpery they purchase from the priest, and they also swell his income by paying him additional fees, for extraordinary confessions. Other TNTRODUCTION. r g^overnmcnts maintain tlicir police at a heavy expenditure, but the depth of Romish policy is such, that the most efficient of their police, are tri- butary' to the despotism which receives the benefit of their services. In addition to tliese auxiliaries the priest has ahs ays ready at his beck a number of lawless, turbulent fellows, who, when the signal is given, destroy the property or injure the persons of those whom the church has marked for vengeance. The former class of auxiliaries are held in sub- jection to the priest by a superstitious awe of his authoiity, and an un- questioning persuasion of his interest in the spiritual world; in a word, by a firm belief that he is able to save or damn whom he pleases. But the latter class are retained under the priest's banner rather by the spirit of party, and the love of mischief. They also find the influence of the priest with the magistracy and the government very useful in extricating them from scrapes into which they frequently fall, in the indulgence of their lawless propensities. There is a third class of Roman Catholics in Ireland quite distinct from the two former. They have but little scriptural knowledge, yet they have discernment enough to see that the violence of the priests against their Protestant neighbours, and their insatiable rapacity in ex- acting money from their own flocks, render their high spiritual assump- tions very questionable. The change which the Church of Rome has made, in the recollection of the present generation, in her holidays and fast days, has also helped, in connexion with intercourse with their more zealous Protestant neighbours, to induce a secret suspicion of the anti- quity and truth of popery. These persons are well disposed to attend the preaching of the Gospel, and to send their children to scriptural schools. But they dare not do either the one or the other. If an indi- vidual does so he is immediately reported to the priest by the confra- ternity men — the priest calls him out by name in the chapel — he even reports his name to the priests of the surrounding parishes, who also denounce from their altars the individual who has dared to rebel against the church ; and thus the concentrated bigotry and party spirit of a whole district is directed against one devoted wretch. If he still remain contumacious, his wife and children are exhorted to forsake him, his friends and relations are fobidden to speak to him, or shew him any kindness ; and if the bludgeon or the bullet of the assassin does not send him to an untimely grave, he is exposed to a constant fretting and harass- ing persecution more intolerable than death itself* In these distressing * The following paragraph, extracted from a pamphlet written some years ago by the Bev. James Carlile, before he became a Commissioner of National Education, is such a striking confirmation, by an unsuspected witness, of the views put forth in this essay, that we think ill well to transcribe it : — " The efforts to perpetuate this system of darkness and delusion [i. e. the religion af the Church of Rome] are most formidable. The clergy, regular and secular, of the Church of Rome prodigiously outnumber all the other clergy in Ireland of every denomination; ^nd in general they are extremely active and vigilant. To this peculiar activity and vigilance they are excited by various causes — a spirit of party has its influence ; their deriving their incoma from the free will of their people, and being paid for particular clerical services performed by Uiem, constitutes another stimulus ; while their form of ecclesiastical government in Ireland, gives energy to the whole system. Parish priests have no security for their livings, inde- pendently of the will of the bishops, as in the Protestant Establishment ; but every priest may at any moment be superseded by a power from which there is no appeal, eitlier to the law o§- yi I tTRO DICTION'. circmiTstanccs tlic victim of Roniisli intolerance can dovive little aid from an appeal to the laws of his country. Jurors who try criminal ca.ses at the Quarter Scs.sions and Assizes, are generally selected from a class over which the Romish priest has unhoundcd influence. In the estimation of such persons the expressed will of an ecclesiastic divests perjury of its guilt, and through their instrumentality, trial hy jury, the hoasted Palladium of British liberty, is changed into an engine et oppression. f This picture has been drawn from life, and the writer is at any lime prepared to illustrate er>-erv particular in his statement by cases which luive come within his own knowledge. And now the question arises, what is to be done to correct such a deidorable state of things? We answ^er, unhesitatingly:— Let ScrijituTal knowledge be imparted to the peojde j •* knowledge is power" morally as well as politically. No knowledge but that which is derived from God's Holy Word can create the moral energy which bursts the shackles ai popery : He is the frccmiin wlioiri the truth makes free : And all are .slaves bcsitlc*. „ But it will be asked : How is this knowledge to be imparted ? W e are agreed as to its value and necessity, but what means can you rccomiuend as likely to secure its extension ? "This brings us at once to the point on which we wish particularly to fix the reader's attention. It seems to us that those who have been engaged in the promotion of Sciiplural know- ledge in Ipcland, have framed their measures without taking into ac- eoiHit the nature of the difHculties wUich opposed its progress. In a word, we say the people must be protected. They must be placed beyond the reach of the priests' jiolice ; their properties must be pre- sei'ved from injury, and their persons from violence. To state the means by which this can be aceom]dished we have only to detail the peculiari- ti'cs of the AcHiLL Mission, premising that our sy.stcjn of operation is not the result of any preconceived theory, but the gradual product of experience. Having procured a tract of reclaimable moor, of about 500 Irish acres * v,c erected upon it dwellings for the mi.s.sionaries, school teachers, scripture readers, and steward, also a church and school-houses. We have built a number of small cottages, and when persons present them- selves, expressing a desire to be sheltered from the tyranny of the Roman the country, or to the voice of the people. To the ordinary prjostliood, and friar.t of diflerent descriptions that are numerously scattered over the country, has oflate years been added the assistance of lay brethren, or societies of laymen, who perform many useful .services for the priest; such as convevinRto him informatioii, and snjiportinp his authority, by intiniiilatinft those wlio niiKht be disposed to resistit. Through means of thisi)Owerful aj^ency, llieiicoide are individually Kept constantly uudtr the eye of the priest, luid in perpetual dn ad of his displeasure. To .so f,'reat iterfcclion is this system of viplance and of teiror carried, that altlioiii/li'in intinsn curiosity f.rista amnnq t/ir pro}ilf (i> rrad the Sirij'tiirrx, and an iiilmsi; (If. lire to have thrir children rdiicnitil; the most poor and vrrtchrtl o/ thnn Jhls that ha cannot aduiil a Jiihic into his house, or send his children to an;/ school tautjht b;/ a Protestant, vitliout at imre hrinfjint/ himself into rollision vilh his niif/libonrs and his clerifif" + Scr, for illustration of this," a raiiijiblel entitled, " 'I'lie Inquisition in the Jury Box," which may be had at Mr. Wm. t'arson s, '.t'J, (irafton St., IJublin. ♦ The greater jiart of this land isctmtained in a Island aVjout six miles distant from our present Settlement, whrie we puqiose to establish another Colony, with a minist'r, school, t«achers,&c , bhould the libeiality of the christian public bupidy us with adcfj»uite fund.-*. INTRODUCTION. VU Catholic Priests and their police, and to be instructed in scriptural CTiristianity, we let them one of these cottages and a plot of ground at- tached to it, at a fair rent. We are enabled to give these people con- stant employment in reclaiming land, and we trust that shortly, the produce of their labour will suffice to pay their wages. By this system our people are rendered quite independent of the priest and his flock, for their support, and put in a position to maintain themselves by their owu industry. It is among the young that we hope to reap the most abutidant har- vest, and the system described above, affords peculiar facilities for cul- tivating that part of our missionary field. For, while the adults are en- gaged in agricultural work, the children being all located around us, can attend at our schools without having to pass through the ordeal of annoyance and insult, to which their location among a Romish popula- tion would daily expose them. The object to which our efforts have been continually directed, is to render our" Settlement quite independent of our Romish neighbours, for this purpose we have established a shop, for the sale of sucli articles m our people might most need, and we have also erected a mill upon the premises, to grind the corn which is produced by the labour of our con- verts, for their sustenance, and also a tuck-mill, for thickening frize and flannel, which we hope to encourage them to manufacture. We antici- pated that the Romish apostacy, true to its character, as described in the book of God. Rev. xiit. 13—17. would endeavour to ruin us by a system of exclusive dealing, and in this anticipation, the precautionary means which are above described, were adopted. The event has proved that we were not mistaken^ but the foresight which God gave us by his Word, led to the adoption of means which we doubt not, will be ren- dered effectual by his blessing to frustrate the mahcious designs of our enemies, the Roman Catholic priesthood. The following extract from the last Report published by the Achill missionaries, details another important means, which they have adopted for the accomplishment of their object: — " ' Train up a child in the way he shotild go, and when he is old he will not depart from it.' The primitive Christians, believing that this sentence contained an inspired truth reduced it to practice. The event proved that they were not mistaken, for even the infidel historian of ' The decline and fall of the Roman Empire,' enumerates the zeal of the Christians in educating the orphan children of Heathen parents, among the causes which accelerated the triumph of the gospel over hea- thenism. Contending as we do against a baptized heathenism, it oc- curred to a person connected with our mission, that, acting on the faith of the divine promise, the education of the orphan children of Roman Catholic parents would be followed by an equally happy result, \ye ac- cordingly opened a small asylum for their reception, and so considera- bly has the reverence of the people for popery been diminished, that already fifteen* children have been entrusted to our care, with the fullest under- * Their number lia» now (December 4, 1H08,) increased to 27, fill INXnODUCTIONV standing that our main object in receiving them, is to educate ttiem in the protestant religion.' '^' It must not however be imagined that the temporal interests of the children are overlooked. While our principal object is to imbue their minds with sound religious principles, we endeavour to train them up in such habits of industry as will qualify them for a useful occupation of the place which in after-life they are destined to fill in society. With this view we have built a comfortable cottage, capable of containing 20 children, with the man and the w^oman to whose care they are en- trusted; here the children live together as one family, the girls attend- ing to the household concernSj and the boys, out of school hours, em- ployed in field labour. Arrangements are now in progress for employing the females in useful manufactures, and a piece of ground is to be set apart for the boys, to be cultivated exclusively by them, and the produce of which is to be appropriated to their supports " It is calculated that about £5, per annum will be required for the maintenance of each orphan. Should there be any overplus it will be lodged in the Savings-bank at the end of each year. When one of the orphans marries with the consent of the minister, or is bound to a tradcy or otherwise settled, his or her dividend of the fund will be given to the orphan or expended in such a way as the managers think most profitable, " Should an orphan be removed from the institution, or marry without the consent of the Minister, all claim on the fund is forfeited. It is hoped that many important ends will be secured by these arrangements. 1st. — The prospect of having the children settled in life, will counteract the efforts which the priest will make to induce the surviving parent or rela- tives of the children to withdraw them from ttS, 2ndly, It will incite the children to industry, as the more they can raise for their awn support^ the greater will be the accumulation of the fund in which they have a common interest. — 3rdly, It will act as a check on the intermarriage of the orphans with Papists, a cause which has tended, perhaps more than any other, to the extension of the Romish superstition in Ireland." We have also in connexion with our Mission a Dispensary, at which advice and medicine are given gratuitously to all the poor who apply for them. We entertain no feeling but that of kindness to our Roman Ca- tholic countrymen, and this is a means of expressing it, which some at least can appreciate. This department of our work is carried on by a skilful physician, who, with a gc ncrous devotedness well worthy of imita- tion, gives his services gratuitously to the Mission. Another important auxiliary is a Printing Press, by which we are enabled to take advantage of matters which excite a local interest, by the publication of popular tracts. A monthly stamped Newspaper en- titled " The Achill Missionary Herald, and Western Witness,'' also printed in our Office, supplies us with a ready medium for making known our wants, our grievances, and our success, to the christian public. The following extract, from the first number of The Achill Herald, contains a summary of our success and our difficulties : — " A clergyman who was laid aside from active employment by severe indisposition, was induced by the perusal of 'Anderson's Historical INTRODUCTION. IX Sketches of the Native Irish,' to commence the study of the Irish lan- guage, with a view to devoting himself to the service of Christ among the portion of his countrymen who use that language. In 1831 the western coast of Ireland was visited by a severe famine. The clergyman to whom we have alluded, having at that time acquired some knowledge of the Irish language, was induced to visit the scene of distress, at the earnest solicitation of a friend who was actively engaged in sending re- lief to the sufferers. " On his arrival in the west, having heard of the extreme destitution of the inhabitants of the Island of Achill, he detcnnined to visit it. It should here be mentioned, as one of the links in the chain of causes which originated the Achill ^lission, that this clergyman, before he left Dublin, had had his mind particularly directed to the missionary opera- tions of the United Brethren among the Greenlandcrs and other barba- rous people. The actual survey of the condition of the people of Achill iirst suggested the establishment of a mission among them, on the same plan as those which have been established by the United Brethren, de- signed to further the temporal welfare of the* natives in subserviency to their higher interests. Returning from Achill our traveller communi- cated his thoughts to a christian friend in the neighbourhood, who sig- nified his approbation; and having received encouragement from the principal lamled proprietor of the Island, by the promise of a lease of mountain ground, he returned to Dublin, where, through the zealous and warm co-operation of a few christian friends devoted to the improvement of the Native Irish, a Committee was lormed for establishing and con- ducting, in the Island of Achill, the first :Missionary {Settlement which had ever been established among the Native Irish, using the Irish language. " The Committee being formed, a sulscription was opened for carrying the conlcmplated object into eflect. A lease of 130acresof land, situated in the North-east of the Island, having been obtained, at a nominal rent of £1 per annum, a Steward was cng'agcd, and sent to superintend the reclaiming of the land, in the summer of 1833. The difficulties to be overcome, even in this stage of the operations, seemed almost insur- mountable. A wild tract of moor, overrun with heath, was to be re- claimed and rendered productive ; houses were to be erected in the midst of a wilderness, without any means of communication with a civilized country but the sea, whicli, in consequence of a boisterous cli- mate, and the want of a commodious landing-place, afforded but a pre- carious medium of intercourse -, and these works were to be accom])lished by the instrumentality of a people, destitute of skill or suitable imple- ments, whose ignorance and prejudices might easily be so worked upon by designing men, as to make them regard the growth of the infant Settlement witli jealous enmity, instead of considering it in the light of a benefit, either spiritual or temporal. Under the superintendence of the Steward, however, the farm was soon inclosed, and a house being erected sufficient for the accommodation of two families, tlie C'ommittee sent a Schoolmaster to the Settlement, in November 1833 ; he wasshorlly followed by a Scripture-rcadrr ; and another house being erected, a X INTRODUCTION^ Clergyman who was appointed by the Committee to take charge of tha Settlement, as Missionary, removed there with his family, in August 1834, where he was shortly followed by another Minister and three more Scripture-readers, for whom an extensive and encouraging field of labour was opened. "A furious persecution was got up by the Roman Catholic priests and Dr. M'Hale, who aimed at nothing short of the expulsion of the Missionaries from the Island. But the Lord was with his servants, and the machinations and violence of their enemies were fruitless. " The Missionary Settlement has since grown into a village — the sides of a once barren mountain are now adorned with cultivated fields and gardens — the desert literally rejoices and blossoms as the rose — and the stillness of desolation which once reigned, is now broken by the hum of the school, or the sound of "the church-going bell." The Achill Mis- sionary Settlement is, indeed, a proof of the truth of that memorable saying of John Elliot: ' that prayer and pains through faith in Christ can do anything.' ' This is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes.' " To' expect the attainment of an end without the use of suitable means is fanaticism, and we feel persuaded that to attempt to extend the Pro- testant religion in Ireland, without providing for the protection of con- verts from the cruel, politic, and powerful confederacy which the Church of Rome has organized, is to seek the attainment of an end without an adequate instrumentality. Let such establishments as the Achill Mis- sion be set up in the Romish districts of Ireland — let them be worked vigorously, firmly, prudently, and we shall soon see a beautiful structure of Scriptural Christianity raised on the ruins of the Romish apostacy. — The writer has at this moment in his possession a letter from a zealous and intelligent clergyman, residing on the southern coast of Ireland, assuring him that if a refuge, similar to that at Achill, were opened in his parish, one hundred men, with their wives and their little ones, in the surrounding district, would gladly shelter themselves from Romish oppression under the banner of the Gospel, within its enclosure.* It must not be imagined that this paper is designed to discourage christians from the use of any legitimate means for propagating Chris- tianity in Ireland. We say, let education —Scriptural education, go forward. Let a determined and sustained protest be kept up against the National System, which, in base succumbency to the monstrous assumptions of popery, permits the priest to deprive the youth of Ireland of the only means of their enlightenment. But, let not our zeal evapo- rate in idle declamation against the unscriptural system of the National Board, but let it display itself in costly and self-denying sacrifices of our energies and our money in the cause of Scriptural Education.f In pro- moting this object the instruction of the Native Irish in God'sholy word, * Should this paper fall into the hands of any who are "rich in this world," and should they desire to help forward the good work in the district alluded to above, they shall be in- formed of all the iiarticnla]-s on application to the Eev E. Nanglk, Achill, Newport, Mayo. + The above allusion to the subject of Scriptural Education, reminds us of the duty of pressing upon its friends the claims of " The Tuam Established Church Education Society." under the patronage of his Grace the Archbishop of Tuam. IXTKODUCTIOV. Xf through the medium of their own language, has a special chiim on our support. The system of Sunday-school tcacliing, so well calculated ta improve our Protestant population, and therehy to exhihit before our Roman Catholic countrymen a living illustration of the excellence of true Christianity, must not he neglected. The circulation of tracts, espe- cially such as clearly and forcibly exhibit the abominations of popery, and particularly the. circulation of the Holy Scriptures should be promoted, and above all let not the ministers of God^s Word endeavour to persuade themselves that they have done «// their duty when they have borne pub- lic testimony to the truth of the Gospel; if they would win for them- selves a scriptural claim to the title of '* Good Ministers of Jesus," they must put even the " brethren in remembrance" of the lies of the apostacy. In a word, let them deal with the "false teachers" of the cliristian church, as the servants of God dealt with the " false prophets" of the Jewish dispensation. In love to the souls of the people let them lift up their voices like a trumpet, giving a loud and distinct note of denuncia- tion and warning, and that the trumpet may not " give an uncertain sound" in the ears of many of our countrymen, let them learn to ad- dress them in their native language, the language in which they think, and with which their warmest affections are associated. In proportion as all these means are used, in prayerful dependence on the divine bless- ing, the numbers of those who sigh for deliverance from Babylonish captivity will be multiplied, and the protective system which we re- commend will become more effective. The district to which we have alluded above, as presenting such a promising field for the application of the protective system, was previously cultivated by the Irish So- ciety. The indiflcrencc of the people to popery in that part of the countp)', is to be mainly attributed to the knowledge whicli they have received from the Holy Scriptures which they have been taught to read in their own language. The evidence contained in the following sheets will be found to detail mu:h of the difficulties and success of the Acliill Mission. It is re- printed without curtailment or alteration, from the authorized report — much of it may seem tedious to the reader: a digest or abridgment of it might be more generally interesting, but that would leave it liable to a charge of partiality, which would frustrate our purpose of presenting to the public, what all parties must admit to be, authentic information concerning the Achill Mission. We now conclude this long introduction, praying that the great Head of the Church may render this publication instiumental to the weaken- ing of the blighting influence of the Romish apostacy, and the extension of the Gospel of Peace in our oppressed, and enslaved, and distracted country. AchUl, November 30, 1838. THE NATJONAL BOARD Of EDUeATIOI* Die Lunse, 17*' Aprilis 1837. THE LORD PRESIDENT IN THE CHAIR. Thomas F. Kelly, Esq., is called in and further examined as follows : Have you the affidavit which Mr. Kelly the Inspector mentions in his report page 24, as having been made by Mr. M'Donnell at Castlebar ? I have, but not here; I can produce it if required. Can you also furnish the minutes of the Board relative to this case ? I have transcribed them and brought them with me. Is the transcript that you now produce a transcript of all the mi- nutes respecting the case of Achill ? ■ It is. And resi:)ecting any part of the transaction refen*ed to in these returns ? Not altogether, as there is another case, that of Cassidy, also mentioned in these returns; I have not transcribed any minutes respecting that. But with the exception of that ? Yes; and supplemental to that return, I have brought down certain letters whi('h are not given there, namely, my letters to Mr. Kelly the Inspector ; I have also brought letters that passed between Mr. Connolly, who is the Roman Catholic clergyman, and myself; AND THE ACIIILL MISSION. I have also In ought a minute of a conversation that passed between Mr. Domhrain, who is the Inspector General of the Coast-guard, and Mr. Carlile, with respect to the point now before the Com- mittee. Is that Mr. Carlile 's handwriting ? It is, and delivered by him to me. Upon the foiTner day my attention was directed to the omission of two letters in reference to the Erril School ; one of these was stated to be a letter of the 14th July 1836; there is no such letter; the letter alluded to is dated the 14th January 1836, and is already handed in; the mistake •with respect to its date has arisen from the copy of the letter in which this letter of the 14th of Januaiy is referred to being erro- neously dated the 27th of July 1836, whereas its true date is the 22d of January 1836, being a reply to the letter of the 14th of January 1836, and beginning thus: "In reply to your letter of the 14th instant." Will you deliver in the papers you have now produced ? The witness delivers in the same, which are read, and are as follow : "Extract of Board's minute, dated 5th November, 1835. "Present: — Most Reverend Dr. Murray, Rev. Dr. Sadlier. "Read the report of Mr., Kelly, the Inspector, upon the teacher of Dugorth National School, of the 24th ultimo; and also a letter from Rev. Mr. Connolly, dated the 25th ultimo, upon the same subject. "Considered that the replies contained in these to the charges advanced by the Rev. Mr. N angle against this teacher are satis- factory." "Minute, 18th August 1836. "Present:— The Archbishop of Dublin, Rev. Mr. Carlile, A. R. Blake, Esquire. "Considered a letter from the Rev. Mr. Nanglc, dated 13th July ultimo, containing certain accusations against Cassidy, the teacher of Duiga National School, and also against O'Donnell, the teacher of the Dugorth National School. " Considered also the reports of the Inspector, dated the 24th and 30th July respectively, upon these several charges, together with the letters of Captain Irwin of the Coast Guard, dated respec- tively 14th and 30th July, and also the letter of the Secretary of the 6th of August, replying thereupon to the Rev. Mr. Nangle. " Resolved, That the charges brought forward against Cassidy appear to be altogether frivolous and unfounded; and that with respect to the allegations against O'Donnell, the Board deem it ex- pedient to see Mr. Dombrain, the Inspector General of the Coast- 3 THE NATIONAL BOARD Of EDUITATION guard, at as early a clay as possible." '^Minute, 13tli October 1836. " Present : — Duke of Leinster, Most Rev. Dr. Murray, Rev. Dr. Sadlier, Rev. James Carlile, A. R. Blake, Esquire. " Read a letter from the Rev. Mr. Nangle, dated 22d August, and wliicli had been presented to the Board on a former Board day. " Ordered, That this letter be forwarded to the Chief Secretary, with ti request, that as it referred to matters which involved a breach of the peace, he would submit it to his Excellency the Lord Lieu- tenant, in order that such steps relative thereto should be taken as might be deemed expedient. "Education office, 16tli September, 1835. " Rev. Sir — The Commissioners of Education especially wish and direct that the masters of National Schools should abstain from all processions, carrying flags, or partaking in any way of party or political colouring. "The reason is obvious; the main object of a co-operating and common system of education being destroyed if any teacher em- ployed under it bind himself by his acts to either one or other party. " O'Donnell, teacher of the Dugorth National School, has been on a late occasion represented as offending against this rule, through ignorance it is presumed. " Will you therefore set him right, and let him learn that one of the duties of his office is to conduct himself in goodwill towards all men. " I remain. Sir, your very obedient servant, ""Thos. F. Kelly." " Rev. M. Connolly, Achill, Newport Pratt." "Achill, 20th September, 1835. "Sir — I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 16th instant, and beg your acceptance of my most sin- cere thanks for the kind manner you were pleased to convey to me the wish and directions of the National Board regarding teachers under their patronage taking part in party business. " With reference to the case alluded to, I certainly did not con- ceive that it merited that name, nor can I understand how even our enemies could designate it as such. Our Archbishop paid us a visit in the discharge of his episcopal duties, and the people (as is usual since his translation to the seeof Tuam) went out to welcome him to this retired corner of his archdiocese, carrying flags and ban- ners to shew their veneration and respect to him whom they love ; this could not surely be called party business, particularly in Achill, where all the natives are Catholics; there were no party tunes, no AND THE ACHILL MISSION, party colours, no revolutionary mottos; in lact, nothing calculated to give oftence or annoyance to any one, except indeed that, in spite of lies, calumny, and bribery, all the people were unanimous in testifying their reverence and esteem for their bishop. O'Donnell walked with the body ; he might carry a flag ; I am sure he did ; but neither he, I am sure, or any of us, bore the least illwill to any man. "The directions of the Board shall be most strictly complied with ; indeed we owe them too many obligations and respect you, sir, too much, to deviate a single iota from any instructions they or you may be pleased to send us. "Thanking you, sir, most sincerely, I have the honour to remain your much obliged and most obedient humble servant, Martin Connolly, P. P., Achill." "Thos. F. Kelly, Esq., &c. &c." " Education oflicc, 2d October, 1835. "Rbv. Sir — I have to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 20th idtimo upon the 1st instant, and am directed by the Com- missioners of Education to state their satisfaction at its contents in reply to my letter of the 16th ultimo. • "I remain. Sir, your very obedient servant, Thos. F. Kelly." " Rev. M. Connolly, Achill, Newport Pratt." " Education uiTice, 17th October, 1835. "Rev. Sir — The Rev. Mr. Nangle complains that James O'Donnell is using very unworthy means to prevent children at- tending a school under his (Mr. N's) patronage. "He states that O'Donnell with a knife in his hand threatened to take the head off one of these children for attending his (Mr. Nangle's) school. " Will you have the goodness to ascertain if this have happened, and should O'Donnell appear to you to be guilty of such very vio- lent and indecorous conduct, the Commissioners of Education are satisfied that you will so represent to him the impropriety of it that henceforth any account which may be forwarded to this office of him may be that of a man moderately and becomingly dis- charging the duties of his station. "Will you, in every event, have the goodness to represent to him the effects which must result from his acting according to the principles inculcated in the * general Lesson,' hung up in all the National Schools by direction of the Commissioners, which says. 5 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATION Christians should endeavour to live peaceably with all men, (Rom. ch. 12, V. 18.) even with those of a different rehgious persuasion. "I am to request that at your earliest convenience you will favour me with your report upon this subject. I remain, sir, your very obedient servant, Thos. F. Kelly." '' Rev. M. Connolly, Acliill, Newport Pratt." « Achill, 25th October 1838. "Sir. — After my arrival here on yesterday 1 lost no time in see- ing the persecuted O'Donnell, teacher of the Dugorth National School, for the purpose of ascertaining Vr^hether he was guilty of the charge of which he stands accused by Rev. Mr. Nangle before the National Board. I did not confine my inquiries to him alone, but before and after divine service this day required and requested information on the subject from the villagers of Dugorth, and all such others as could possibly be acquainted with the case. I feel happy to inform you that they all bore testimony to the excellent character and mild deportment of O'Donnell, and expressed them- selves ready to go any where, and any distance, to rebut the charge, which they believe to be false, calumnious, and unfounded, but ad- vanced by the enemies of order here, for the purpose of having poor O'Donnell removed from conducting the Dugorth school. But what is the mighty charge ? It is this — that O'Donnell threatened to cut the ears off a child who attended Mr. Nangle's school should he (the child) go there again; surely such conduct is unbecoming and indecorous, and O'Donnell should be severely reprimanded for it, were he capable of being guilty of such un- manly conduct. But it may be pertinent to inquire who this ehild is "^ What is his age ? And how it happens that he alone out of the other different persons who from time to time were in the habit of attending this school, should be selected by Mr. O'Don- nell as an object of his vengeance ? This child is then the son of one Ginty, from the village of Dunivir, three miles distant from the Colony; his father is a poor, wretched miserable, pauper, who (if report be true) has made his conditions with the man of money and of Bibles, and is determined to change his religion with his rags. His age is about nine years, surely a grave witness ! and no other human being can be found who will bear him out, or say that O'Donnell ever spoke to him, except indeed his father, who, though at the time some miles off, is ready to dejiose that his child had been thus treated by O'Donnell; surely under these circum- stances a person will naturally hesitate to give credence to such evi- dence, which may be influenced by rewards and promises, particu- AND THE AtHILL MISSHTN. f> larly when O'Donnell, a man of truth and cliararter, is prepared to declare on his solemn oath, that so far from threatening this child, he never knew him, never (to his knowledge) saw him. I have insinuated above that the child's father might be tampered with; I hesitate not to declare, from my acquaintance with the system pursued by the colonists, that such might be the fact, and that aiy means, however unreputable they may be, would be readily adopted for the base purpose of obtaining their end. But why should Mr. Nangle thus persecute O'Donnell P The reasons are obvious ; Mr. Nangle since his connexion with Achill for the last few years has exerted himself in ever}- possible way to proselytize the unfortunate uneducated nati\^s ; he has em^doyed, at a salary of £20 a year for each, a posse of ignorant fanatical preachers, who are sent through the parish, armed with fire-arms and Bibles, abusing tiie religion of the people and heaping calumny on their clergy, pro- mising bribes in the shape of clothes and money to the naked and half-starved people of Achill, exhibiting pictures representing a mouse gnawing the sacrament of the eucharist, supphed with scales for the purpose of weighing the consecrated host, (a new ex- periment indeed, and worthy the enlightened mind of the saintly Nangle,) forcing controversy on the ignorant peasants, &c. &c. &c. until Mr. Nangle has by these and similar unwarrantable means completely succeeded in destroying the peace, harmony, and chris- tian feelings for which Achill, until his arrival, in the worst of times was remarkable and distinguished. These emissaries of dis- cord coming thus armed in constant collision with Kean, O'Don- nell's predecessor, at the Dugorth National School, succeeded in making him a convert to their opinions, and instead of £8 a year from the Board, he has now secured £20., the usual salaiy of a preacher, or more properly speaking a public disturber. The head controvertists under Mr. Nangle met O'Donnell, forced controversy upon him ; he, unlike Kean, was able to meet and refute them ; they could not then hope to make him al^andon his religion ; he could not be bribed or bought, for he is a sincere Catholic and edifies the people by his virtuous, moral, and exemplaiy life ; he is therefore an obnoxious character, a marked man, and must be removed, cost what it will ; this accounts for Mr. Nangle's ire and •pei-secution. I maT^e this statement advisedly; I pledge myself to prove what I advance, and under these circumstances I hope that the Board and you. Sir, will honourably acquit poor O'Donnell. I have trespassed too long on your time and patience ; my apology is that I feel interested in your decision, for should the «nemy of or- der and peace succeed in this instance he will readily adopt the «ame course of annoyance against the other teachers, and I may ^ THE NATIONAL BOAUD OF EDUCATION then close up all my schools, and leave the people of Achill, as I found them, ignorant and uneducated. The board will,! am sure, come to no hasty decision. Should this statement be not satisfac- tory all I require for O'Donnell is a fair trial, and this I have no doubt will be readily granted. * **! remain, Sir, your obliged and obedient servant, Martin Connolly, P. P. Achill." " Thomas F. Kelly, Esq." " Education Office, 7th November 1836. "Rev. Sir. — I have received and submitted to the Commis- sioners of Education your letter of the 25th ultimo, i*elative to the charge which had been alleged against the teacher of the Dugorth School, and the circumstances and facts put forward by you, after due examination, in refutation of it, and I have also submitted to them the report of their inspector, who had received their directi- ons to inquire into and report on this subject; they desire me to state in reply that having fully considered the documents, they are per- fectly satisfied that the charge has been made in error, or through great misrepresentation, and accordingly see no reason for remov- ing O'Donnell from his office. " They request that you will from time to time give such atten- tion to this and the other National Schools in Achill as your other avocations will admit of, in order that the rules of the commissi- oners may in all respects be strictly adhered to. " I remain Sir, your very obedient servant, Thos. F. Kelly." -" Rev. M. Connolly, Achill, Newport Pratt." (Copy.) Secretary's letter to Mr. Kelly, Inspector. " 17th October 1835. "My Dear Sir. — ^Many circumstances have occurred which render your immediate visit to the National schools of the Island of Achill absolutely imperative. Complaints have been forwarded of the master of the Dugorth school by the Rev. Mr. Nangle of that Island, upon two several occasions. " Upon the latter occasion this gentleman accuses O'Donnell of threatening with a knife to cut off the head of any child that would go to Mr. Nangle's school, *' I have written to the Rev. Mr. Connolly with respect to these complaints, but the Board are of opinion that your personal visit, and your explanation of the principles of their National system, will be productive of much good. I have to remind you that these * See Appendix. AND THE ACHfLL MISSION. S schools "have never yet had the benefit of an inspection ; although aided by the Board, there is therefore every thing for you to do. I am also to remind you that sectarianism as well as political ani- mosity rage very much in these Islands ; you will therefore so con- duct yourself, that, in asserting the principles of National Educa- tion, and setting opinions right concerning it, you steer clear of giving offence to any side. I shall expect your report in the be- ginning of the ensuing week. *a am, &c. &c. &c. (Signed.) T. F. Kelly, Sec." (Copy.) Secretary to Mr. Kelly, Inspector. " 7th June 1836. "My Dear Sir. — When visiting the AchiH Schools in Octo- ber last relative to certain charges made by the Rev. Mr. Nangle, can you upon your recollection state whether you visited this gen- tleman previous or subsequently to this investigation ? You state in your letter of that month that you waited upon him. An immedi- ate answer is requested. " I remain, &c. &c. (Signed.) T. F. Kelly, Sec." (Copy.) Secretary to Mr. Kelly, Inspector. " 9th June 1836. *' The Commissioners of Education request yo.u will reply by re- turn of post to the following queries, viz. : Inquire what passed be- tween you and the Rev. Mr. Nangle ? Did Mr. Nangle say that he could prove any facts if time were allowed to him to produce witnesses, or did he say that he had any witnesses, or did he com- plain that he had not notice of the Inspector's intention to visit the school ? " I am, &c. &c. (Signed) T. R Kelly, Sec." (Copy.) Mr. Kelly, Inspector, to the Secretary. "Tuam, 11th June 1836. "My Dear Sir. — At the time of my visit to Achill I fully iiiv^stigated the charges made against O'Donnell the teacher of the Dugorth National School, and examined all the witnesses con- cerned in those charges, and reported to the Board the result. " Mr. Nangle regretted he did not know of my intention of calling upon him, and stated that he would have had all the per- sons connected with these matters to meet me. I however met his objections by telling him that I would accompany him to their se- veral houses ; we accordingly went to the places where the persons were engaged at the time. Mr. Nangle afterwards stated that had he had notice of my visit he would have had the matter arranged. I could 9' THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATION not judge on what grounds he made this assertion, as he did not say that any of his witnesses were unprodueed ; on the contrary, I accompanied Mr. Nangle across the Island, a distance of three or four miles, in order to meet one of the parties. From all those circumstances I feel assured that all the persons concerned in the matter were before me. In my report I stated fully to the Board the substance of my interview with Mr. Nangle, which was con- fined to the matter before the Board. "I remain, &c. &c. (Signed) James Kelly." "ToThos. F.Kelly. &c. &c. &c." (Copy.) Secretary to Mr. Kelly, Inspector. " 18th July 1836. ''My Dear Sir. — A letter received from Mr. Nangle repeats the charge against O'Donnell of his being dismissed from the coast- guard for using seditious language, and also, for the first time, brings forward a charge against Cassidy, the teacher of the Duiga school. I give the extract with regard to both from his letter, it i? as follows, viz. : *'I have also to complain of the conduct of Cassidy, the teacher " ofthe]National School in Duiga, almoin this Island. When my " colleague, the Rev. Mr. Bay lee, was assaulted in that village, and '^ pelted with stones, the pupils of the National School came out of " their school-house, and took an active part with the assailants, " Cassidy 's own son being amongst the most forward, and though *' Cassidy himself stood by, he never attempted to reprove or re- ** strain them ; the same individual set on a number of men to " hoot after me with most abusive language when I travelled along ** the public road at the village of Casliel. 2d. As to O'Donnell, " the teacher of the Dugorth National School, I have ascertained " that he was dismissed from the Coast-guard service, as I have " stated in a former letter, for making seditious speeches ; and as " the truth of the other charges which I brought against him " is perfectly well known in the Island, his continuance in the " employment of the Board is naturally regarded by many as a " sanction, or at least a connivance at outrage." " Mr. Nangle further requests that he may get previous notice of the arrival of the Inspector there, in order that he may attend with his witnesses, and he also requests that the report of the In- spector may be attested by a Magistrate or other respectable person. I have by this night's post told him that you have been under or- ders for this Island, and that by this postl desire you to wait upon him immediately on your arrival, and to open your inquiry with AND THE ACHILL MISSION. 10 whatever assistance in the investigation he may chose to offer; but that you were to viake the report to the commissioners. I now beg to remind you that you are an officer in the confidence of the Board, and that were you not so you woukl cease to be one, there- fore your report comes attested as usual by no name excepting your own ; it is also confidential, made to the Board, and to them only, the Magistrate or any other respectable person, or Mr. Nan- gle, may also, if they please, make their report, but yours only is confidential ; it was not thought fit that I should write these mat- ters to Mr. Nangle, it is sufficient to inform you. " Now, my dear Sir, your situation is dehcate and difficult, but with good sense and temper you will steer through. Cassidy's cas« is the easier of the two ; receive openly every charge, and let them not say you refused any witness ; O'Donnell's is somewhat of a more dijfic^dt nature. In September or October last Mr. Nangle stated that he was informed of his dismissal, he now states that he has ascertained it; on the fonner occasion it did not seem to be ne- cessary to examine a hearsay, but now he states a fact, keep there- fere back the matter of the affidavit which I sent you upon Saturday, and observe silence as to it. If the inquiry prove O'Donnell's in- nocence then follow my instructions of Saturday, otherwise do not. You may have to do in this case with hated partisans perhaps, on both sides, but never forget that the character of the Board is in- volved in your mode of dealing openly with all, and taking part with nothing but truth ; you had better therefore give two days' no- tice of your day of investigation, and it may be best to let this ** two days' notice" be served the day 'previous to your arrival, so that like a judge you may open your court m perfect ignorance of all evidence, until it come fairly before you ; be sme, however, that you serve the notice, and are able to prove the service. Patrick No- lan of Cashel National School the Board has dismissed, he having been convicted at a Petty Sessions of an assault. Should Mr, Nande ask after him you can tell him this. *a am, &c. &c. T. F. Kelly, Sec." *' Minute af conversations between Rev. Mr. Carlile ani Mr, Dombrain. '* Mr Carlile had a conference vAih Mr. Dombrain on the sub- ject of the dismissal of the School-master O'Donnell, when Mr. Dombrain stated that he had no record or notice of any iiiquiry respecting O'Donnell or of his dismissal, but added that as it ap- peared that O'Donnell was employed merely as a supernumerary, the Officer on the spot had full power to dismiss him without any Jl THE KATIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATIOIT formal inquiry, and without reporting to the coast-guard office.' The witness is directed to withdraw. )W»iy THB ACH4LL MISSIO!*.- ISf % i>. The Reverend Edward Nangle is called in, and examined' ar follows : You are settled in the Isle of Achill, which is an island oflf the coast of Mayo ? I am. What induced you to settle there ? The extreme destitution of the inhabitants in every ppintof view, both temporal and spiritual. When did you settle there ? I arrived in the island in July 1834. In what character did you settle yourself, — as a Clergyman of the Established Church, or merely as an ordinary inhabitant ? As a Clergyman. Did you undertake to give spiritual ministrations there ? Yes. Had you the sanction of His Grace the Archbishop of Tuam for what you did ? I had not only his Grace's sanction, but his warm appjoval. Is his Grace's handwriting known to you? It is. [A letter is shown to the witness.] Is that letter in the handwriting of the Achbishop ?' It is. The letter is delivered in, and the following passage is read: "Although Mr. Nangle is neither Rector nor Curate of Achill>» f$ THE NATIONAL RDAIID or EDOCaTICWJ Jie is acting there entirely under my sanction. He was sent ^(mn there by a body of pious men who formed themselves into a society called the Achill Mission Society, by whom he is supported. Be- fore he was commissioned to that place I was consulted whether I would receive him' as one of my clergy under my episcopal supre- macy. I was but too thankful for the o€ei' of such a man's ser- vices in that dark spot in my diocese, and gladly embraced the oifer, and would then, or at any time since, or now (if he wished it), grant him my formal licence, having, always had one virtually. The fruits resulting ft'om this faithful man's labours (notwithstand- ing all the opposition and persecution he endures) amply bear me out in the confidence I had placed in him. He is a most valuable-, devoted, faithful, single-eyed servant of the Lord. The Incumbent ©f Achill is an infirm man, quite incapable of active duty : he is also a very poor man ; his income out of this parish of Achill is ©nly £100 per annum ; out of which he could not be expected to* pay a Curate." Is the Rector of Achill resident in the Island ? He is not. Is there any Glebe house in the Island ? There is not. Is there any Glebe belonging to it ? No. AVas there any Church when you first went there ? No Church. Have you since received a formal licence of the Archbishop of Tuam ? I have. With what success were your endeavours crowned in the Island at first ; what were you able to do generally ? In reply to this question, I shall just describe the present state of the Mission ; we have now altogether connected with our Mis- sion Thirty-four families resident at our Settlement. In one particular part of the Island ? Upon our Mission Ground. Which does not comprise the whole of the Island ? Only a very small part of it ; Twenty-seven of these families ar« persons who have come out of the Church of Rome, and joined themselves to the Protestant Church, and either eighteen or nine- teen of those families have been brought out of the Church of Rome within the last two years and a half since I went to the Island ; and we have now in our two schools, a male and a female school. Eighty children receiving scriptural instruction. As regards tem- poral things, we have reclaimed about Thirty-two acres of our AND THE ACHILL MISSIOX. 14 land, which was all wild moor, and made it productive. Are the houses that have heen built of a very superior order to* those which you found in the Island ? There was never a slated house seen in the Island till we erected them. Several of our buildings; our little church, our schoolrooms^ my own dwelling, are slated. You have a Church there ? We have. At the time when there were most scholars in your school, in. which you say the bible was read, what was the gicatest number of scholars which you ever had in those schools ? I can state the number that we had in actual attendance. I do not speak now of the number upon our books, but the number in actual attendance at one time, and I speak from my own actual ob- servation. We had in the school at Dugorth 160 children, in the school at Slevemore 140, at Cashel 80, and at Keel 40; making a total of 420. You say you had that number ; when was this ? This was in the spring of 18Ji5. What number have you now ? We have now only two schools atDugorth,and in the two schools- we have Eighty children. The children at both taken inclusive are only Eighty ? Only Eighty. To what do you attribute this falling off ? I attribute it to the violent persecution of the Roman Catholic priesthood, as detailed in a petition presented to the House of Lords by the Bishop of Exeter. A petition from you ? Yes. Have you reason to know whether there is a greater number of children educated now, taking into account both those educated in your schools and those educated in the other schools in the Island, than there were when first you went there ? I know that the number has consideraby diminished in the Na- tional School at Dugorth ; I speak from personal inspection of that school ; the number in actual attendance is Twenty-three. The number at Keel, and I speak here from the report of my colleague the Rev. Mr. Baylee who inspected this school, the number is 60 ; the number at the village of Duiga is Sixty, and the number in Cashel Twenty ; I speak in reference to this latter school from the report of the country people. I could not visit it myself froJ» fear of personal violence, as I have been often insulted and ill- treated at the village. 15 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATION Then the whole amount of children now receiving instruction in those schools which have superseded yours, and yours together,, amounts to 243 ? Exactly. Whereas before it was 424 ? That is my statement. Are those schools which you have last enumerated NationaT: Schools ? Yes, they are. Are those schools so situated' as to interfere with yours ? They are all so situated, with the exception of one ; that is, the school at Duiga. With thut exception, are there any National Schools in other parts of the Island ? I am not aware of any. So that your impression was, that those were set up in opposition to yours ? Yes; I entertain no douht upon that, inasmuch as other villages greatly needing schools were left without any. Had you ever occasion to complain to the Board of National* Education for any thing whatever ? Yes, I have had frequent occasions to complain, both of the per- sons employed as teachers, and also of the parish priest who acts as patron to the National Schools in the Island of AchilL Will you state what was the first occasion on which you made a complaint ? The first occasion on which I made a complaint was ou the 8tli- of September 1835. Is that No. 3. in the printed returns^ ? It is. You there seem to make two charges, and also to state a thing for the information af the Board against O'Donnell which did not concern you ? Yes. With reference to the complaint, the first appears to be, " I beg leave to inform you that James O'Donnell, master of the Dugorth National School, in this Island, headed a procession carrying flags and banners which went to meet Dr. M^Hale on his arrival in this place. O'Donnell bore a flag with the inscription, 'welcome reli- gion and liberty,' which was sufficiently intelligible to all who knew that Dr. M'Hale is a bishop of the church of Rome and the advo- cate of repeal. This illegal procession was mustered and marshall- ed by O'Donnell's exertions, for until his coming to the place the poor people were happily preserved from the evil contagion of party AND THE ACHILL M^ISSIOX. Iff politics." That is the first charge. Did you see this procession ? I saw the persons as they were returning from the procession bearing one of the hanners; I did not actually see the procession going out, but I saw them returning from it. Upon that banner that you saw, what was the inscription ? It was as stated in this letter, " welcome religion and liberty." There was also — I did not think it necessary to state it in my letter — but there was also upon it, ** In hoc signo vinces," and across drawn upon it. Was the cross connected with "In hoc signo vinces"? Yes, it was, evidently ; the inscription had evidently referenc« to it. Whi^ was carrying that banner ? I can only state that from hearsay. Was it O'Donnell ? I am firmly persuaded that it was O'Donnell, because it was so- reported. Do not you know O'Donnell 's person ? I do, but I stated that I did not see the procession going out ; it was returning when 1 saw it; it was a boy that carried the ban- ner then. When was this letter attended to ? I have the answer to it here. No. 4 is the answer to it. Will you read the beginning of the second paragraph ? "The transaction respecting O'Donnell, as aUeged, they will have investigated." Was investigation ever made ? It was, but not until I had written another letter on the 9th of October 1835. Pressing for an investigation ? Yes. That letter stated some other fact, it appears ? It did. Was that letter acknowledged by Mr. Kelly ? Yes ; we have the acknowledgment here, No. 6. Was an investigation then granted ? Yes ; the Inspector of the National Board, Mr. Kelly, visited our Settlement; he called upon me the 21st of October 1835. Have the Board ever communicated to you their decision upon the first charge, that of O'Donnell's having been concerned in this procession ? No ; they never communicated any decision to me. 17 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATIO?f Now, with respect to the second charge ; will you read that se- cond charge ? '' Dr. M'Hale before his departure from the Island thought fit to curse some of the peasantry who had left the Church of Rome and joined themselves with us as members of the Protestant Church. He forbid their Roman Catholic neighbours to speak to them, or hold any intercourse with them in the way of courtesy or traffic. — O'Donnell is a zealous agent for enforcing these unsocial com- mands. On Sunday last, seeing one of the islanders conversing with one of our people, he reproved him for holding any commu- nication with an accursed heretic, asking him, *Was he not aware that he himself came under the priest's curse for so doing.' " Was there any communication ever made to you of the Boai'd's decision respecting that charge ? No, I do not recollect that there was. Did the Inspector, when he came, inquire into either of those charges ? He did not. I offered to produce witnesses to substantiate the truth of the first charge, and he told me it was needless, because O'Donnell acknowledged that charge to be true. Then does not that show that he did investigate the charge; how could that acknowledgment have been made unless the Inspector liad first asked the question ? He must of course have received his information from O'Donnell. Then, upon the first charge, had you reason to know that the Inspector made inquiry ? He must have made inquiry from O'Donnell, when he stated to me that O'Donnell admitted his guilt. He told you that O'Donnell admitted his guilt ? He did. Then that was the reason why it was not necessary to have any further inquiry upon that head ? Yes. And yet the Board never gave you their decision upon it, although the Inspector told you that O'Donnell had admitted the fact to him ? No, they never did. Now, with regard to that second charge, in that letter of the 8th of September, that which related to O'Donnell's being a zealous agent for enforcing the unsocial and uncharitable commands of Dr. M*Hale, did you ever offer to produce any testimony to the Inspector upon that subject ? I told the Inspector that it was impossible for me to do so on that occasion, as he had given me no previous notice of his intention to visit me, and the persons on whose testimony I relied, to prove it AND THE ACHILL MISSION. 18 were not in the Island at the time. Have you subsequently gone anywhere in the Island to see per- sons who would prove any thing upon that subject ? Not upon that subject. Subsequent did an occasion arise for your having an inquiry into the second charge ? No; there was no investigation. Not upon any subsequent visit of the Inspector at the Island ? No. With regard to the third point ; will you read that ? "I have been since informed, that O'Donnell was once in the Coast-guard, but that he was dismissed on account of being impli- cated in Ribbonism. The Board can readily inform themselves on this point, by reference to Mr. Dombrain, Inspecting Commander of Coast-guard. As to the charges which I have brought against O'Donnell, I am prepared to prove them before any tribunal.'' Do you know from any communication made to you from the Board, whether the Board took any steps to inform themselves upon this subject ? No; they made no communication to me upon the subject. Did you ever recur to this third charcre aprainst O'Donnell ? Yes, I did. When ? "As to O'Donnell, the teacher of the Dugort National School,! have ascertained that he was dismissed from the Coast-guard service as I stated in a former letter, for making seditious speeches ; and as the truth of the other charges which I before brought against him is perfectly well known in the Island, his continuance in the employment of the Board is naturally regarded by many as a sanc- tion or at least a connivance at outrage." What was the date of that letter ? The 13th of July, 1836. Was this charge which was thus again pressed upon the attention of the Board by you ever noticed by them in any communication to you ? No, it was not noticed in any communication ; except in a ver- bal communication from the Inspector. Look at No. 14, the last line but two ? "And also for the cause of the dismissal of O'Donnell from the Coast-guard." — "I have to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 13th instant, and in reply am to state that Mr. Kelly the In- spector, who has been under orders to repair to Achill this week upon the business of the Board, has received instructions by this night's post to wait upon you, upon his arrival there, in order to 19 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDU/?ATION receive any assistance which you may think proper to give him in the investigation of the charges brought forward by you against Cassidy the teacher of the Duiga National School ; and also for the cause of the dismissal of O'Donnell from the Coast-guard. — Mr. Kelly will then report the result to the Commissioners for their decision on these matters." Look at No. 16 ; what is the date of that ? The 6th of August 1836. Will you read the last clause but one ? "With respect to what you allege against O'Donnell, as the Commissioners are given to understand that you intend to forward to them a certain document in support of your allegation, I am to say that they postpone at present expressing their opinion in ex- pectation of its arrival." Did you ever recur to this matter ? In No. 17 there is a reference to it again. What is the date of No. 17 ? The 22d of August 1836. Will you read the reference of which you now speak ? *' In reference to O'Donnell (the teacher of Dugort National School), I need not say any thing in confirmation of the truth of the charge which I have brouglit against him, as Captain Irwin has already furnished you with the amplest proof." After that did the Board ever communicate to you their decision relative to this matter ? I do not recollect that they did. In your letter of the 9th of October 1835, No. 5, you made another charge against O'Donnell; will you read that charge ? " I allude to his attempt to enforce the prohibition which the Parish Priest uttered against any communication being held by his flock with members of my congregation ; and in addition to this I have now to complain, that he has endeavoured, by the use of the most violent and threatening language, to hinder children from coming to my school; with a knife in his hand he threatened " to take the head off one of our scholars, because he came to our school." Did the Inspector, when he came, inquire into this matter ? He did. As I have before mentioned, I was taken altogether by surprise, and the child alluded to here, and also the father of the child, were at a distance from our Settlement of about four miles. I went there in company with the Inspector in order to examine them on the subject of my charge. Did you find them ? We did. ANT) THE ACHILL MISSION. 20 Can you mention what passed in the inquiry ? We first of all called the father of the child, and he told the In- spector just what is stated in this letter, that his child informed him on his return from school one day, that he met OT)onnell, the teacher of the National School in Dugort, and that he threatened him as described in my letter ; we then called the child, for he was not with his father at the time we spoke with him ; we found him a very intelligent boy, of about nine or ten years of age ; he related the occunence between him and O'Donnell as described by his father, and the observation of the Inspector was this, " this is quite satisfactory, and I shall report to the Board accordingly." I can positively swear that he made use of expressions to that purpose ; I will not state that those were the very words that he uttered, but the expression was to the purport, that the evidence of the fact was quite satisfactory. Satisfactory as proving it ? As proving it. Did he say whether he thought that the Board would take any special course with regard to O'Donnell in consequence of that ? He did not. Did the Board make any communication to you of their decision upon this complaint ? Yes ; we have the decision here, in No. 7, the 9th of November 1835. "They find that this charge is supported by the evidence of the accuser only, Michael M*Ginty, a child of nine years of age, the elder M*Ginty being merely a narrator of what this child had told him. On the other side they find that there is the most direct proof, not only that O'Donnell did not use the words alleged in the charge at all, but that it was another person who used them. They cannot but place the utmost reliance upon the fidelity of the report made to them upon this case by their Inspector, and also upon the concurrent testimony forwarded to them by the Patron of the school." Will you look now at No. 23 in page 16; what is the date of that? The 24th of October 1835. Read the first sentence of it ? " My dear Sir, — According to your instructions I have visited the schools in this Island, reports of which I herewith forward, and investigated the charges preferred against O'Donnell, teacher of the Dugort National School." Read what he there says of the third charge ? The third charge states that O'Donnell threatened "to cut off the head of a child going to Mr. Nangle's school if he persisted in so •21 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDUiCATIOTS doing." I examined the child so threatened. Michael M'Ginty, nine years of age, declares, that going one day to Mr. Nangle's school he met O'Donnell, who threatened to cut off his head if he went there any more. Andrew M'Ginty, father to the child, states tliat he returned home, and told him the conduct of O'Donnell. There is another clause which follows, which has relation to that charge ? "With respect to the two first charges, they are admitted. The ■evidence of the parties on the third I should he inclined to receive with much caution, as I am sure that slight inducements would he ■sufficient to cause the people of this Island, where party and poli- tical feeling rages to such an extent, to deviate from the truth." Are you quite confident, so as to have no particle of douht in your mind, that this Inspector, when he examined these witnesses "with you upon this point, said that this was quite satisfactory ? I am perfectly confident that he expressed himself to that pur- port. I cannot just say that those are the very terms he made use of, but certainly that was the signification of the terms he did employ. Will you now look again at No. 7, and read what the Board -says there in a letter from Mr. Kelly ? " They find that this charge is supported by the evidence of the accuser only, Michael M'Ginty, a child of nine years of age, the elder M'Ginty being merely a narrator of what this child had told him. On the other side they find that there is the most direct proof, not only that O'Donnell did not use the words alleged in the oharge at all, but that it was another person who used them. They <;annot but place the utmost reliance upon the fidelity of the report made to them upon this case by their Inspector, and also upon the •concurrent testimony forwarded to them by the Patron of the school." Will you look again at 23 ; do you find that the Inspector's re- -port on the third charge is in conformity to that statement that Mr. Kelly makes of it, or contradictory to it ? Mr. Kelly speaks here of '' the most direct proof," and I find no proof in the Inspector's reports, except a very ungenerous and un- founded insinuation be considered such. Will you read what is said upon the fourth charge in No. 23 ? "The fourth charge is, that O'Donnell sent a message by one of liis scholars to his sister, declaring that if she went to Mr. Nangle's Slight school he would be before her, and thereby endeavour to pre- vent her so doing. This charge has not been sustained, as on my questioning Edward Mangan or Lavelle, he declared that O'Don- nell did not say so, but that he told her from himself, in order to AND THE ACHILL MISSION'. ^ deter her from attending Mr. Nangle's school " K^W' T "^i^"' """"t 'V"^^" >'^" ^^ "^''^^^"g intelligible what Mr. Sip^\ ;/ 'T '^"«^^'' supposing that these two matters wxre nuddJed together by the Board ? Mr. Kelly seems to have huddled the two cases together, and to have made a statement com-eming the third charge which belonged more properly to the fourth charge. ^ When was the fourth charge made ? flrd^^" ^^^^ ^"^ measures to prove that fourth charge ? What course did you take ? nf^'^ yomig woman alluded to there lived as servant in the house to Mr' k' i:?''''-^T^\"^ the village of Dugort, and Iproposed Jnv r . '^ ^/""^V ^^'^ Coast-guardman's house in order to investigate it. Mr, Kelly told me, that this Coast-guardman, whose thTj/^A' t^ ?P^^?' 'J" ^""^ ^^'^^^y «» '^'^ ^»«i»^«s, and OT)onn n T '"^''^'''•'^" ^"'^ '""^^"^^ i" '^'^ '^'^'^^ against Inno " T f T i' '"^"^^ "^« very much, but on gohig up to JonessI found Jones s statement directly contmdictory to the statement of Mr. Kelly the Inspector. ^ Was Mr. Kelly with you at the time ? He was. What did Jones then say ? He stated that this young woman had receivi«d a message by her brother from O Donnell, the teacher of the Dugort school, that if she persisted in coming to our night school he would meet her on danIX ri' /'^'''"M ^^"'^^" ^^^^^"^ Lordships, that the nfJt ^ 1 ^^*^^«"^^. '^'^ Coast-guardman, also attended our night school and as this was the case, Jones, in order to protect scl^ol,and O Donnell did meet them, as threatened. Wow do you know that ? thp^nr?' ' ^ ^'fZ^ 'VT^ ^y ^^"^'' ^" ^^'^ investigation held in the presence of Mr. Kelly. ° Did any thing else happen in the course of that investigation ? ^«n ?A ""t '^^"^^^^^ to another village to find out Edward Man- Manln". ^^ Ta^ '"^ '" '1^" Inspector's report). Edward r^fX T'^'^'T^^ ''^'y ""^"^^ ^"^ ^-as evidently unwilling to femll who H A T ^'^^^^P^king to him, his sister (not the ^TLw \"^"^^V"!* '^^^^^^^ came to the door of the cabin, answer nnvf"" "' ^'''^'' '^'' '^^^'^ ^'"^ ^^^ ^nd told him not to answer aiiy of our questions. 28 THE N-iTIONAL BOARD OF EDUCvtTIOT« Did you hear that ? Yes, I was present. Do you understand Irish ? I do. Sufficiently to be able to repeat the substance of a conversation that takes place ? "Yes. Are you able to preach in Irish ? Yes ; I preach every Sunday in Irish. And you heard what passed in Irish from the girl to the boy ? Yes. What did pass ? After she had called the boy into the house, she said, "We do not wish that my sister should go to that school at all ; for," said she, " is not the Parish Priest cursing her every Sunday in the chapel for doing so, and do not the people of the village say that they will come and cut her up in quarters, and pull down the house over her head." Mr. Kelly the Inspector was present, and as he did not understand Irish I told a countryman that stood by to translate for him what the woman had said. He translated it just as I have now related it to your Lordships in the hearing of Mr. Kelly, and I then particularly remarked to Mr. Kelly, that he might learn from what he had heard who were the persons that wjfere disturbing the peace of the country. In the Inspector's Report, No. 23, will you read what is said beginning with, "The teacher placed at the Dugort school"? "The teacher placed at the Dugort school by Mr. Connolly, previous to the school being recognized by the Board or O'Donnell appointed, was tampered with, and finally brought over to Mr. Nangle's side of the question, upon which he placed O'Donnell there, on whom he could rely. The result is, that attempts have been made on him, and, failing those, complaints have been lodged, not, I am sure, so much wiUi a view to the general good, as to in- jure him. From this circumstance Mr, -Connolly is naturally anx- ious to retain him." Do you know this teacher placed at the Dugort school by Mr. Connolly previous to the school being recognized by the Board; can you state his name ? Yes; Philip Kean. Do you know any thing of his having been "tampered with, and brought over to your side of the question"? I am quite confident that if the expression " tampered with" is Intended to insinuate that any unworthy motives were proposed to 3iim as a reason for clianging his profession of religion, he never XND TIIi: ACHILL MISSION* 24 was tampered with. Can you answer for that ? I can answer for it for myself. But not for any body else ? I can, from my knowledge of the character and principles of the persons engaged in our mission. I have the fullest moral evidence of its truth even as regards them. You are at the head of this mission ? Yes, And they would not like to take any steps in sucli a case witliout your concurrence ? No ; I am sure T should be consulted. What description of persons have you under you in your mission ? I have a Steward, I have also four persons employed as Scrip- ture readers, a Schoolmaster and a Schoolmistress, and 1 have a colleague in the ministry who acts as my Assistant. And those are persons for whose integrity in this matter you are sure you can answer ? Yes, I am. They came to the Island with you ? They did. None ofjthose that you have under you in the mission were per- sons that you found in the Island when you arrived there ? No ; none of those employed in the work of the mission. When you state that you are confident that they were not tam- pered with, do you mean to say that you do not conceive that any improper motives were held out to the master of the school for leaving it ? Yes ; that is what I meant to state. Have you any doubt then that the master was induced by the exertions of those individuals to give up the school over which he had been placed ? I believe he was not spoken to at all in reference to the school. Did he in point of fact give up the school ? He did not give up the school ; he was shut out from the school. On the contrary, he was w^illing to have gone on teaching the school, in order to support himself, but he was not willing to teach the Roman Catholic Catechism, which he did not believe. Then do you believe that inducements were held out to him not to continue that system of instruction which he had originally un- dertaken as master of the school ? So far as I know, no inducements were held out to him to dis- continue his teaching in the school, for he was shut out from the school. He was willing to have gone on as the teacher of the "25 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATION school. But why do you understand that he was shut out from the school ? From what I leamed from himself. What reason was there ? It was simply his hecoming a Protestant. But then do you heheve that no previous communications had heen held with him which led to his becoming a Protestant, and at the same time that he became a Protestant abstaining from the course of instruction which previously had been pursued in the school over which he was placed ? I am sure that several previous communications were held with him. There were conversations going on between him and our Scripture readers on the subject of the points of difference between the Church of Rome and the Church of England ; but I do not know that their conversations went beyond that. The question is, not whether their conversation went to any other subject, but whether the subjects of their conversation went to de- tach him from the principles he had previously professed, and from the mode of teaching he had used in the school ? I cannot state that they thought of the situation that he occupied as teacher. Their simple object was to convince him of what they believed to be the errors of the Roman Catholic religion, and the truth of the Protestant religion. Was it a National School that he was master of ? It is denied here in this Report that it was a National School, but I have reason to believe that it was a National School. When you say it is denied, what do you mean ? " The teacher placed at the Dugort school by Mr. Connolly, previous to the scnool being recognised by the Board or O'Donnell appointed." That says it was not a National School. At the time that he was shut out was it a National School ? At the time that he was shut out I have reason to believe that it was a National School. And the reason he gave for being shut out was, that he had re- fused to teach in it the Roman Catholic catechism ? That. he had just become a Protestant. What I stated was, that he was willing to have gone on as teacher of that school provided he was not required to teach the Roman Catholic catechism. Did he say that the teaching of the Roman Catholic catechism was imposed on him as part of his duty as the teacher of that school ? It was always part of his duty to teach the Roman Catholic ea- tcchism. AND THE ACHILL MISSION. 36^ The qaestion is, not what you think to have been his duty, but what he said he thought was his duty. Did he say that he consi- dered the teaching of the Roman Catholic catechism as part of bis duty at the school ? It was, and he considered it so. Did he tell vou so ? No. Upon what ground then do you say that he knew that it wa* part of his duty ? Because it was always taught in the school ; it was always part of his duty as the teacber of the school to teach it. If he did not tell you so, how do you know that he had that opinion ? I put myself in his place, and I cannot understand how I or any intelligent person occupying bis place could anive at any other conclusion. Then you mean to say that if you had been in his place you would have thought so ? Yes. Have you any other ground for believing that he thought so ? I suppose that any intelligent person in the same circumstances would arrive at the same conclusion. What reason have you to believe that it was a National School ? There is the sworn testimony of Philip Kean himself. He says, ** If the testimony of the Rev. Martin Connolly is to be beheved, it was so, because the Rev. Martin Connolly of Achill told hira that it was a National School." Was the word National School written up over the door ? I cannot state whether it was then, but it is now. What is your reason for believing that it was a National School ? My reason for believing it is the sworn testimony of PhiHp Kea» himself. Upon what occasion ? An affidavit that I have brought over with me. Have you got that affidavit ? I have handed it over to the Bishop of Exeter.. Before whom was that affidavit made ? Before the nearest magistrate. Upon what occasion ? I brought Philip Kean before him, and had his affidavit taken. He did not swear that he knew of his own knowledge that it was a National School ? No; he states it on the testimony of the patroft of the schooL 27 THE NAT105rAL BOARD OF EDCCATIOST You stated it upon the evidence of Kean, and he states it tq>oB the evidence of Mr. Connolly ? Yes. What was the date of Philip Kean giving up the school, or be- ing turned out of it ? It was in July 18.35. How do you know that it was in July 1835 ? I recollect well, because I was in London at the tfme myself, and I received a letter, informing me of the master of the National School having become a Protestant. Was there any thing in the history of that man that made it pe- culiarly gratifying that he should have become a Protestant ? Yes, there was, inasmuch as he had been once very bitter against us, and was even convicted for committing an assault upon some of the children coming to our school. Had he been punished for that ? He was convicted, but the attorney employed for him stated that the conviction was not legal, inasmuch as there was only one magistrate on the bench at the time > the conviction therefore was not carried into effect. Was it notorious in the Island that the Roman Catholic cate- chism was taught in that school ? It was. Where was he convicted of this which you say was not a legal conviction ? It was at the Sessions at Newport. In your letter of the 13th of July 1836 you allege serious charges against the patron of the National School at Achill, the Reverend Martin Connolly, the Parish Priest ; will you read those charges ? *' I have also serious charges against the patron of National Edu- cation in this island, the Reverend Martin Connolly, P. P. I can prove that he has ordered the people ia shout after me and the members of my congregation whenever they see us ; that he ha^ endeavoured to establish, to our injury, a system of exclusive deal- ing ; and that he commanded the members of Ms congregation to assault any person connected with this Settlement who should attempt to speak to them with the first weapon which came to hand ; either * to knock them down with a spade, or stab them with a pitch- fork; and that he particularly marked as an object for popular ven- geance a man of most unblemished character employed by me as a schoolmaster, saying, from the altar of his chapel, 'There is that ^ f^erred, to any of the Commissioners ? I did. I sent a copy of it to his Grace the Duke of Leinster and- his Grace the Archbishop of Dubhn, and to the Rev. Mr. Carlile ond.Hr. Sadleir. Did you receive any answer from any one of the Commission err S9 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATION to yonr letter ? I received a simple acknowledgment of my letter from his Grace the Duke of Leinster ; I received no communication whatever from any of the others. Did the acknowledgment from his Grace the Duke of Leinster include an acknowledgment of the letter written to any other of the Commissioners ? No, it did not. Are the Committee' then ta understand, that after yonr laying this grave charge hefore the Board on July 13th, and their IW' gpector then omitting to inquire into it, and your recurring to it in the next montb, addressing the different Protestant memhers of the Board upon it, and a delay ©f noticing it for two mo^nths longer, that the Board at last took no step whatever ? It remained unnoticed until the lOlh Octoher 1836 ; then I re- ceived a letter from the Board in reply to my letter of August. There was no acknowledgment then of this part of your letter a» l)eing in your letter of the 13th of July ? No. Perhaps I should state that the truth of one of my charges against the Rev. Mr. Connolly came out in th« inspection whic^ the Inspector of the Board held at Duega, In your presence ? In my presence. What passed ? Mr. Connolly, the Parish Priest, was present at an investigation field by the Board into- the conduct of one of their masters, Gassidy, at Duega, Mr. Connolly was present, and there was an English gentleman from Oxford, of the name of Hill, also with me. I said to Mr. Connolly, " Now. Mr. Connolly, I charge yoir, in the pre- sence of the Inspector of theNational Board and in the presence ©f this English gentleman, with having commanded your congregatioa to shout after me and insult me as I go thrmigh the IslaTrd. Now, if that charge be false I call upon you to* deny it i" their presence."" His only observation was, ** I am not going, Sir, to answer your question." The Board said something in another letter up®n this subject;, in No. 19 of the correspondence of the 20th of October ? Yes; there is a letter before that, in No. 18: "I beg to apolo- gize for the error but this morning discovered by me." In that letter they merely acknowledge your letter of the 22^ August ? Yes. The real answer to it is in the next letter ? It is. ** I have submitted to the Commissioners your letter of A^D TH£ .4CHILL MISSIOS. 30 the 22(1 August ; they direct me to state in reply, that as it appear? lo them to relate to matter properly cognizable by a legal tribunal tliey have refcired it to the consideration of his Excellency the Lord Lieutenant." And it was in that way that they disposed of the complaint ? Yes ; I never heard any more about it. With respect to this coiTespondence which passed between yoa and Mr. Carhle the Commissioner; had yoo long been known to him ? We were not very intimately acquainted ; we had known each other in Dublin a gowl while before ; I cannot exactly state how long. In one of the letters, where it is said that Kean had been tam- pered with, it is ifixd that attempts had been made on O'Donnell ; do you know of any attempts having been made of that kind ? No. I kno^v of no attempts whatever having been made, except the attempt that we honestly make on every Roman Catholic that we meet \v\{\\, to convince him of the error of the Roman Catholic religion and the tnith of the Protestant faith. In what form was that attempt made upon this man ? By an appeal to the Scriptures, as the ride which must decide the points of the controversy between us. By whom was it made ? By se\'CTaL Was it made by yourself? I do not know that I ever had a conversation with him. Do you knoAV that .iny others have ? Yes ; I have heard a disputation upon religions subjects between O'Donnell the schoolmaster and a schoolmaster of our own. Who was that schoolmaster of your own ? Murray was his name. W here was it made ? It was on the public road. Did you bring MuiTay to the Island, or find him there ? We brought him to the Island. Were there any Protestants in the Island when you went to Achill ? I am not aware of any, except the Protestant Coast-guard, and one family in the village of Duega, the male members of which acknowledged themselves Protestants. Had you had any previous communication with that family, pre- vious to your going to Achill ? I never knew of their existence till I went into the Island. Was it understood, when you went to the Island, or soon aft^r;. ST THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATION by the inhabitants, that you came for the purpose of reclaiming the' inhabitants from the errors of popery ? It was perfectly understood ; we never made any secret of our object. Did you not also go into' the Island with a view to the destitute condition of the inhabitants in other respects ? Certainly; we conceived it to be our duty as Christians to en- deavour to do them good in every way we could. But you do not wish it to be understood that you went there with reference to their destitute condition, without coupling it with th^ reclaiming the inhabitants from tile errors of popery ? Certainly ; we considered the reclaiming them from the errors of popery as the main object of the greatest im|K>rtanc8, and the other as subservient to it. And you so wished it tobe understood, and it was so understood-? I suppose it was. Is the man named Murray the same person mentioned in this letter, No. 13, where it is said, — '^ There is that devil Murray, going through the Island, a man who wouldf not be suffered to live in an)s place but Achill ?" Yes ; it is the same person. Who is the landlord of that part of the Island; ? Sir Richard O'Donnell. Did he encourage you, or discourage you ? He encouraged us, by letting us have a tract of wild moor ground: on a lease. It appears, in the letter No; 19, that the Commissioners referred^ the matter therein adverted to to the Consideration of his Excellency the Lord Lieutemyit ; had that reference any result that you are aware of ? No ; I never heard any thing about it since. Do they continue their opposition through the Island now ? Yes, they do. Have they appeared to be less indisposed towards yott' since the investigation which was carried on by order of the Board ? No ; they are pretty much in the same state as usual ; the peo- ple themselves are extremely kindly disposed when they are let alone. What is the police force in the Island ? There are six men stationed at Cashel, a village where the patroa of the National Education resides, which is the centre of disturbance in the Island. How near to you ? About four miles. X.VD THE ACHILL MISSIOTST. 32 When you say the centre of disturbance of the Island, do yon mean of all disturbances that take place, or any particular dis- turbance ? It was from that village that the teacher of the National School, Hoban, was brought to be tried before the magistrate for an assault on two persons coming to our Settlement, and was convicted of the assault ; and it was passing by that village that my sister and my infant children were assaulted and pelted with stones by a furious mob when going in their jaunting car along the public road, and I myself can scarcely ever pass without being hooted, and sometimes pelted with stones ; and therefore I think I am justified in stating that it is the centre of disturbance. From your knowledge of the Island, has there been any serious disturbance in the Island connected with other subjects than that of the mission ? I do not know of any disturbance ; the natives of Achill are an exceedingly peaceably disposed people. What is the population of the Island ? I cannot exactly state; buti believe it to be four or five thousand. How long have you been in the Island ? I settled in the Island first in the latter end of July 1834. The Inspector says, in a letter of his, (hat there is a great deal of disturbance and excited feeling in the Island ; is that so ? Yes. Was that so when you first arrived ? No, it was not ; it was not so till the present patron of National Education amved. How long after you came there did the present patron of Na- tional Education come ? I cannot state accurately, but I think it was in the spring of 1835. Till then was all quiet in the Island ? No ; I recollect that the Parish Priest before him also stirred up the people in a most violent manner, as I have most certain evi- dence of. Stirred up the people in a most violent manner in regard to what subject ? In reference to our schools, and also to ourselves. You arrived in July 1834, and before the spring of 1835, there was great disturbance, and the people were much stirred up ? Yes. Were there any schools in the Island before you established your schools ? There was no school except one ; a pay school, attended by veiy few children, as I understood. 33 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF F.DICAIIOV Was tliat in tlio same pail of the Isliiml where you were? No; it wxs in a distant part of tlie Island. Wliat do you suppose was the cause of the disturbance in the Island? The cause of the disturbance was the harangues that the people were in the habit of hearing in the chapel. What was the subject of those harancjucs? Some of them arc detailed here in (he complaint to the Board, in reference to the Rev. Martin Connolly the Parish Priest. Were there anv haraui^ues made in the chapel by the predeces- sor of the Rev. Mr. Connolly ^ Yes; I have already slated that there were. But von do not know of your own knowled<;e i* I know it upon the teslimony of a respectable Roman Catholic in the Island How many families have you now on what you call the mi.ssion protnid ? We have altopjether thirty-four families. ilow many of these are old inhabitants of Aehill ? I could not state that. Did not you say twenty-seven "* T said that twenty-seven (»f those families had been brouLjbt from the Church of Rome, and T said that eighteen or nineteen families had come out from the Church of Rome since we went to the Island. Are any of the Coast-guard living on your mission ground? There is one Coast-guardman living on the mission ground. Some of the other families are persons who came with your mission ? Yes ; but I stated that there were thirty-four families altogetluT living uj»on the missicui ground, and that twenty-seven of tho.se families were j)ersons who luid been brought out from the Church of Rome ; some of them came with us ; and I also stated, that since wc came into the TslaTul eighteen or nineteen families have been brought out from the Church of Rome. Are those old inhabitants of the Island? They are not all old inhabitants of the Island ; they have congre- gated around us from various parts. What conditions do you make with the people to whom you give ground ; do they work for you? The manner of our proceeding is simply this : we give a cottage, and wc give an acre of reclaimed ground, and for this they pay us a yearly rent of £2 eOs., getting constant cnjj)loyment from us in reclaiming the rest of the land ; they are employed as our labourer* AND THE ACHILL MISSION. 34 in reclaiming land. Are they all Protestants of the Church of England ? All the persons living on our mission ground are, with the ex- ception of one female. Do you make that the condition of residence!* Yes ; the place is intended as a refuge for persons wishing to be protected from the tyranny which every one acquainted with the state of Ireland knows is practised upon those persons who leave the Church of Rome. It is founded to provide habitations for persons who are con- verted from the Roman Catholic religion to the Protestant.** Yes, and are suffering persecution. When you say suffering persecution, do you make it a rule that their condition shall have been positively impaired in consequence of the change of their religious faith ? There is no occasion to make any such rule, because it is inva- riably the case, when persons in Ireland leave the Church of Rome, that they are exposed to the most furious persecution. Do you make it a rule or not ? No, we do not. Do not you know that there are a great number of persons in Ireland that have no visible means of subsistence whatever ? There are a great number in the Island of Achill in that con- dition. Are the persons living on the mission ground there in that state !* No ; I should be sorry to see them so ; it is our object to better their temporal as well as their spiritual condition. Therefore a person in the miserable condition you have described in the Island of Achill, if he came upon your ground would be in a better condition ? No, I do not know that he would be in a better condition upon the whole, for this reason, that the Irish people are very hospitable and always very charitable to those of their own persuasion when they are suffering distress; but as soon as ever a man professes himself to be a Protestant the stream of kindness is cut off fromi him completely. The suficrings of our poor people have been very great in consequence of (he exclusive dealing established in the Island, and the refusal even of their fellow countrymen to speak to them ; frequently when they meet them on the road they make the sign of the cross, saying, " The cross of Christ be between me and harm," and they draw back as if the convert to Protestantism carried a deadly pestilence about him. Then you do not think that the worst class upon your mission 3.5 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATION* ground are in a better condition than the worst class of those who are in other parts of the Island of Achill? Our object is to raise them in every way, and certainly I con- ceive myself bound to use all my endeavours to better the tempo- ral condition of those persons who acknowledged themselves to be members of the Protestant Church, and put themselves under my protection ; but it is hard to avoid reproach ; sometimes we are ac- cused of being ready enough with our preaching because it costs us nothing, but that we will not give any thing to the poor people; then when we strive to better their temporal condition it is insinu- ated that we attempt to induce them to change their religious pro- fession by bribery. Are not the persons who having become converts are admitted upon that ground into your Settlement in fact in a better condition than the most destitute of the catholic population of the island of Achill ? They are in a better condition, certainly. You mean in a better (condition as to provision, clothing, and habitation ? Yes. Do you mean that they are in a better condition in those re- spects, but that, from the causes you have stated before, there are evils attending their condition which would prevent persons com- ing hypocritically to pretend to be Protestants into your Settlement ? Certainly. What are those inconveniences.^ The forfeiting the good opinion of their neighbours, their being called by abusive names, and their being treated with personal vi- olence. Have any families left your mission ground ? Yes, they have. Have they relapsed into the Roman Catholic religion ? I cannot state that they have actually returned to the Church of Rome again ; I can state that some persons who left our ground have entreated us to receive them back again. You mentioned a person of the name of Philip Kean ; does he live upon your ground .'* He does at present. Is he a native of Achill ? He is not ; I believe he is a native of the town of Newport. What was he by profession ? I cannot state what he was till I saw him in Achill; he was em- ployed there as a schoolmaster by the Rev. Martin Connolly, the patron of National Education. AND THE ACHILL MISSION. :3$ In one of your letters, No. 3, you state that O'Donnell, the master you complained of, had been dismissed from the Coast-guard for being implicated in ribbohism ; who told you that ? It is notorious in the whole country ; I have heard it from several persons ; in fact it is a matter of common notoriety in the whole country. Did any person that you specifically recollect ever tell you that O'Donnell had been dismissed for making seditious and disloyal harangues ? Yes ; I had it from a man of the name of Rutledge, the chief Boat- man of the Coast-guard station at Achill, who was in charge of the sta- tion from which O'Donnell was dismissed, and I also had it in a letter from Lieutenant Irwin. Did you ever make any inquiry upon the subject of O'Donnell's dis- missal either from Mr. Dombrain or from Mr. Irwin? I wrote to Mr. Dombrain on the snbject;he referred my letter to Mr. Irwin, and he sent me back Mr. Irwin's reply. Do you recollect the date of your application and of that reply ? No, I do not recollect the date. Do you happen to know whether that happened very early in August 1836? I could not say. In Mr. Kelly's answer to your letter, No. 16., in page 12. in the last paragraph but one, he says that you intend to forward a certain document in support of your allegation against O'Donnell; what was that docu- ment ? As well as I can recollect now, my intention was to have had Rut- ledge's affidavit, and to have forwarded that to the Board. In your letter to the commissioners you say, " In reference to O'Don- nell," in page 13., " I need not say any thing in confirmation of the •truth of the charge which I have brought against him, as Captain Irwin Tias already furnished you with the amplest proof." How did you know that Captain Irwin had furnished that proof to the Board? When I wrote to Mr, Dombrain for information upon the subject of the charge against O'Donnell, he sent my letter to Captain Irwin, and X^aptain Irwin in his reply, which Mr. Dombrain forwarded tome, said ■" I cannot do better, in replying to this inquiry, than by sending you a copy of the letter which I have sent in answer to the same question pro- posed to me by Mr. Kelly, the secretary of the National Board of Edu- cation; and in that way I knew that Mr. Kelly was in possession of Mr. Irwin's testimony as to the truth of my charge. Mr. Irwin sent to Mr. Dombrain a copy of the letter which he sent to Mr. Kelly, and he sent it to you ? Yes. Is that the letter which you find in No. 22, at the bottom of page 15 ? It is. Do you think that is ample proof that this O'Donnell was discharged ? It was ample proof to me, and for this reason, that I had it in my power perfectly to identify the O'Donnell dismissed from the Coast- guard with the O'Donnell that was teaching the school ; I could do that 37 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATION by Rutledge, who was in Achill at the time, and who had been in charge of the Coast-guard station from which O'Donnell was dismissed ; I could therefore establish the identity of O'Donnell with the person alluded to in Lieut. Irwin's letter. It was ample proof therefore to you; but do you think, as it stood, it was ample proof to the Commissioners ? I think that the Commissioners had quite sufficient proof before them to lead them to press the inquiry further. Should you call the evidence of one Timothy M'Carthy, a boatman, sufficient proof to dismiss a person upon such a charge as that, after an interval of four years, from a situation in which he was earning his bread, with such a stain upon his reputation as would probably prevent his ever being employed in his professional capacity again ? My answer to that question is simply this : — Mr. Irwin conceived that it was sufficient ground for dismissing him from the situation which he held in the Coast-guard ; and therefore I should think it was decidedly a sufficient ground to dismiss him from the situation under the National Board. The witness is directed to withdraw. Ordered, That this Committee be adjourned till to-morrow. Two o'clock. *SO THE ACIIILL MISSION. 38 Die Martls, 18^ Aprilis, 1837. THE LORD PRESIDENT IN THE CHAIR. The Reverend Edward Nanglk is called in, and further ex- amined as follows : Will you have the goodness to refer to No. 2 in page 4 of the correspondence; there is a letter from Mr. Carlile to you; in the third paragraph of that letter he intimates to you that hy taking tpart in the management of the National School you could secure the reading of the scriptures to a great portion of the children : did you act at all in accordance with that suggestion, or attempt to act so P No, I did not. Why not ? Because I <^ould not in any way whatever seem to signify my approval of the National Board of Education hy having the schools under it or in connexion with it. The letter to which that is an answer is marked No. 1, the letter •of the 10th of March; at the time you wrote that letter were there any National Schools established in the Isle of Achill ? I really cannot say at what time the schools were taken into con- nexion with the National Board; not being in correspondence with the Board I have no means of obtaining the information. Do you recollect whether that letter was written in apprehension «of such schools being established, or in consequence of the scliooh '^9 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATION being established ? It appears from the letter itself that some schools were established at the time; whether they were in connexion with the Nationa •Board just at that time I cannot say. Does not the letter rather express an apprehension that schools 'l^ould be estabhshed that were not in existence. The words are, that the priest designs making application for schools to be set up ? In the sentence before that I say, "as the schools which he has established, and whose existence he hopes to perpetuate by a grant from the National Board." Still there were no National Schools ? I certainly wrote that letter under the impression that tic schools were not at the time actually taken into connexion with the Na- tional Board ; but whether the impression was right or wrong I cannot say. Did you, when you came to the Island, find that the Cathohc •clergyman had schools in the Island ? No ; those schools were set up a very short time before the date of my letter. There was no school when I came into the Island, except one pay school. It was not till our schools were established, and great multitudes of children had flocked into them, that those schools were set up, as appears from this letter. You went to the Island in July 1834, and this letter is dated March 1835, which leaves only about seven months for the esta- blishment either of your schools or of the priest's from the time you came into the Island ? Yes, that is the case. Of course, in the condition in which the schools first were so set up with the priest, you couM not go into them at all, and did not P No; 1 have no right to go into them. But you are aware that when they came under the National Board, it would have been within your means to have bad access to those schools to a certain degree ? Yes ; but I stated yesterday that one of the National Schools in Achill I really dared not visit from apprehension, not only of abuse but personal violence ; for, as I stated, I have often been shouted after and pelted with stones in passing by the village in which that school is established. Is there any parochial clergyman of the Estabhshed Church re- siding in the Island of Achill ? There is not, except myself and Mr. Baylee. You consider yourself as a parochial clergyman ? Yes, I do, certainly, as acting under the license of the Archbi- shop of Tuam. AND THE ACHILL MISSION. 4(^ ^ Do you receive any salary from any revenues belonging to the Church Establishment ? No, I do not. Did you at any time before ? Yes; I had been a Curate in the Established Church, receiving a salary. Where were you a Curate ? I was Curate in the parish of Athboy in the diocese of Meath, and I was Curate of Arvagh in the county of Cavan. Did you give up that last Curacy for the purpose of undertaking this Mission to Achill ? 1 was obliged to give it up several years ago on account of iH health, and it was on the recovery of my health that I went to Achill to spend my days there. By whom was this Mission established. Was it by the Arch- bishop of Tuam, or by clergymen of the Established Church.^ The Mission originated with myself first. Did it not require considerable funds to take those lands where you were understood to say that some large sums of money were laid out ? Yes. Were those funds in any way derived from the revenue of the Established Church ? No; they were all voluntary contributions. There is a Commit- tee in Dublin, and this Committee receive the funds. They have a regular Treasurer, with whom the funds are lodged, and the dis- bursements are made by the Committee. To what purpose were those funds appropriated ? The support of two Ministers at the Missionary Settlement, and the support of the land Steward, Scripture Readers, and School Teachers, and also the erection of buildings, and the reclaiming of land. Do the operations or the views of this Missionary Society relate to the Island of Achill alone, or to other parts of Ireland ? The Society commenced with Achill; and now they purpose ex- tending their operations to other parts of Ireland. And under them you were sent to Achill ? Yes. Are you remunerated from this Society ? Yes. I receive £150 a year. What were the instructions given to you ? I stated that my object in going to Achill was to endeavour to better the people both in their temporal and spiritual condition. With respect to their spiritual condition, — to convert them from m THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDDCATIOSJ the Roman Catholic rehgion to the Protestant ? Most decidedly. Conversion, in short, was your ohject ? Most decidedly. When you actively took up that ohject had you reason to helieve ^that the Inhahitants of Achill were in a very demoralized condition ? I had reason to helieve that they were in a state of the most ex- treme ignorance. Darkness in spiritual things and what I would call immorality always go together. Did you find them, in point of fact, in a state of great crime ? I do not know that they are more remarkahle for the commis^- •iBion of gross crime than any other number of unregenerale men. Did you hear that there had been many murders in the Island ? I heard of one murder a short time before I went into it. Has any occurred since you have been there ? Not just in the Island of Achill; on the opposite coast I have "heard of some very dreadful outrages. Are they given to robbery and theft? They are just as much as the population of Ireland generally are. I should not wish to brand them as being thieves above others ; but they are destitute of the knowledge of Christ, and that is a thing that I view as a matter of great importance. Did you find them much given to other immorality ? I have already stated as regards immorality, that I do not think they are worse, generally speaking, than the rest of the popula- tion of Ireland ordinarily are. Then when you went to the Island you found those people not remarkable for any immorality or crime, and you also found them according to your statement yesterday, in tranquility; but now they are in a state of very excited feeling, and considerable disturbances have taken place in the Island lately ? Yes, considerable disturbances have taken place ; but I would couple that admission with the most unqualified statement of the fact, that the Roman Catholic priesthood have been the means of exciting those disturbances. There has been a Roman Catholic priesthood in that Island for a great many years, has there not ? Yes. For centuries, perhaps ? I cannot tell how long. If your Lordships Avish to press me upon the statement I have made as to the Roman Catholic priest- hood being the disturbers of the public peace in Achill I am pre- pared to bring forward facts in confirmation of its truth. You said just now that you thought that darkness in spiritual AND THE ACHILL MISSION. 4T mailers and what you call immorality go together. What do youi mean by that immorality ? When I speak of immorality I use the term with reference to the statements of scripture, and I believe that every man is living in immorality who is living without a knowledge of the true God,, and not in subjection to him. Then by the word "immorality," you do not mean the gulit of an immoral life, — drunkenness or debauchery, or any thing of that sort; but you mean living in ignorance of what you consider the true faith ? And also living without the exercise of right alTections in reference to God; not only having the understiinding darkened by ignorance. But also living under the power of an unsanctified heart And that you think the necessar}' consequence of being a pro- fessor of the Roman Catholic religion ? Yes; I believe that the Roman Catholic religion is the apostacy from the Christian religion foretold in the scriptures. You went to Achill to convert those people from this immoral state ? I went there with the desire of being an instrument in the bands^ of Cod to accomplish it. Did you proclaim those intentions ? I never madcany secret of them. In what way did you make them known ? By speaking to the people wherever I met them, telling them of what I believed to be the errors of their religion, and endeavouring to set before them what I believed to be the truth. Did you assemble them together for that purpose, or did you only speak to them as you casually met one or two in a room ? Both. As many as I could I assembled, and when I could not assemble them I spoke to them as I met with them. And you warned them against the doctrines inculcated by their own spiritual advisers, their own priests ? I did. You told them that they were unregenerate ? That is not my province ; it is God who judges the heart. I told ' them that regeneration was necessary. I pointed out to them the means by w^hich regeneration was to be obtained, but I did not take upon myself to judge the individual. You did not tell them that they were in a state of unregeneracy P I told them that so long as a person lived in the avowal of the doctrines taught by the church of Rome I could have no evidence from the scriptures of his being in a regenerate state. I made that general statement, but I could not take upon myself to lay my fin*- 43 THE >MTIONAL BOARD OF E&UCATIOW ger upon any man, and say, you are unregenerate. Did you warn tliem against the doctrines that were preached by their own priests ? Most decidedly T did. Your Lordships will recollect that I am a Minister of the Church of England, and when I received ordina- tion from the hands of the Bishop I solemnly vowed, in the pre- sence of God, to '' give diligence to drive away all eri'oneous and strange doctrines contrary to God's Word." I, as a Minister of the Church of England, can have ns doubt as to the doctrines of the Church of Rome being erroneous and strange doctrines, and con- trary to God's word ; and when T see the mass, the leading doctrine of popery, described in the thirty-nine articles, which I have sub- scribed, as a ''blasphemous fable and dangerous deceit," and in the rubric as idolatry to be abhorred of all faithful Christians,! would ask whether I could, as a Minister of the Established Church, hav- ing received ordination from the hands of a Bishop, and having subscribed to those articles, and vowed to drive away all erroneous and strange doctrines, be silent on the subject of popery. I appeal to your Lordships' consciences whether I could be silent, and main- tain that consistency of principle and conduct which an honest man must ever desire to maintain. You did, in fact, warn them against the doctrines that were in- culcated by their priests ? Yes, I have stated the fact; I never shrunk from the avowal. And you thought yourself bound as a Protestant Clergyman by your ordination vow to do so P I most decidedly did ; I never had the slightest shadow of a doubt about it. Does it strike you as an extraordinary thing that those priests against whom you warned their flocks should feel some hostility towards you who made a point to represent their doctrines to their flocks in the light in which you thought it your duty tO' represent them ? I think that if they entertained any hostility towards me on that ground, at all events they are under the censure of the National Board of Education, for I only wish to refer your Lordships to the " general lesson" which those priests are directed to post up in their schools. I have therefore no hesitation to say, that, in entertain- ing hostility towards me, so as to endeavour to injure me, either in character or person, they were acting wrong, both as persons calling themselves christians and professing to act under the Board of Education. [The last question is repeated.] I answer decidedly, I do think it an extraordinary thing AND THE ACHILL MISSIONv 44 til it any man professing to be a christian should entertain such au hostility against another as the Roman Catholic priests have ma- nifested to^vards me and my people on account of my speaking against their doctrines. ' The question is, whether you think it extraordinary that when you go to the flock of a priest, and represent his doctrines to that flock in the way in which you feel it your duty to represent them, that that priest should feel some hostility towards you ? I think it extraordinary th^ any one professing to be a christian should entertain such hostility, because our Lord has commanded us to bless those that curse us ; I mean such hostility as the priest has manifested. What is the hostility that the priest has manifested ? The hostility is, first of all, endeavouring to injure us in our property by establishing a system of exclusive dealing; secondly, by commanding the people to hoot after us and to insult us as we travelled through the island ; and thirdly, making such harangues to the people as are calculated to stir them up to inflict personal in- jury upon us. Who is the priest who has done these things ? The Rev. Martin Connolly, the present parish priest of Achill, and his predecessor, whose name, I think, was OMalley. Did Mr. Connolly endeavour to enforce upon his flock the prac- tice of exclusive dealing ? Yes, he did. How do you know that ? I know it on the afl^davit of a witness who was present in the chapel in the month of September when Dr. M'Hale visited the island of Achill. A system of exclusive dealing was then com- manded to be observed towards us. On the same occasion the Protestant religion was described as having its origin in hell and its end in hell, so that, as to hard speaking upon doctrines, I think the Roman Catholic priesthood have no reason to complain. You state this upon the assurance of an affidavit ? I do. Where is that affidavit ? I handed that affidavit to his Lordship the Bishop of Exeter.- On what occasion was it taken ? It was taken preparatory to my coming here. With a view to make it evidence here ? Yes. At whose desire ? It was my own thought having it done. You charge the priest with having exhorted his people to ab-^ 45 THE NA^IOXAL BOXfiD OF EDl'CATrt)V Stain from dealing witli your con^^rcgation or vour Mission ? From holding any dealing whatever with us, or from workings* labourers for u.s. How do you know that P I know it on the tcstimotiy of another person, whose testimony I believe. Is that person here ? He is. You do not know it of your o\m knowledge ? No. 1 know the fact of persons who had been in our emplov- mcnt witlidrawing from it innnediately after I had received from that individual his testimony concerning the exclusive dealing hav- ing bi'en prt^achetl in the chajiel. T did not hear the juicst com- mand that exclusive dealing, but 1 saw th<: elfeet of what I had been told he had done. Did any one of those men who- withdrew from yom- employment tell you that it was in consecjuence of being exhorted to do so by the priest ? Many of them told me so. Did you remonstrate with them upon that P Yes, I often remonstrated with them. From what employment did they withdmw- ? They were working a.s labourers. What cmidoyment did they go to>P I cannot tell. Did they get any other employment ? I do not know. The witness who stated that fact to ycni is liere r' Yes. You said that the priest had connnnnded the people to hoot yoivf do you know that of }()tn' own knowledgt' P T mentioned to your liordshi)>s yesterday, that when the Inspec- tor of the National }3oard of Kducation visited Achill 1 charged Mr. Connolly to his face, in the lnspcct(n*'s presence, with having commanded the jK'ople to shout after me its I jmssed through the island, and to iusult me; and 1 called upon Mr. Connolly, in the presence- of the Inspector, to deny it if it were not true, and, as 1 stated yes- terday, Mr. Connolly's answer was, " Sir, I am not going t(» an^ swer your (piestion." Is that the only ground you have for stating that he commanded the people to hoot after you P No, it is not the only ground. Mr. Lewis who was either the Inspector or Sub-Inspector of police in the town of Newport, the nearest town of any consideration to Achill, hearing of the treat- AND THE ACHILE MISSION. 4& ment we were receiving, he sent clown to the person commanding: the party of poHce in Acliill, ordering him to call upon Mr. Con- nolly, and to request him to exercise his influence with his peo- ple to hinder them from shouting after us and insulting us; anci the answer that Mr. Connolly gave was this, " tell the person that sent you to me, that it is by my orders that they do so, and that no method of annoyance that we can practice against Mr. Nanglc and his flock, short^ of an actual breach of the law, shall be left un- tried and unpractised." Were you present ? This was a letter ; it was a report sent by tlie person who had charge of the party of police in Cashel, a village in Achill, where Mr. Connolly resides; it was an official report written by a Serjeant of police to his superior. What is the name of the person who wrote it ? I think the man's name was West, as well as I recollect. Where did you see it ? In the town of Newport. Who showed it to you ^ Mr. Lewis showed it me. On what occasion ? I was conversing with him ; I cannot state from recollection what was the subject of our conversation at the time when he showed me this letter. What were the words of it; have you got them in writing? No. I do not pledge myself that I use the very terms used in the letter, but I pledge myself that the statement in the letter is just as I have made it. But you are not positive as to the words ? Not as to the very words ; but I am quite positive as to the meaning. Another thing that you stated was, that he made harangues to- tlie people; were you ever present at any of those harangues ? No, I was not; but witnesses are here ^vho were. Then you do not know of your own knowledge what he said ? I merely state it on testimony that I most assuredly believe. Are the population of the lower class of the people of Achill very much attached to their priests P I cannot say that the population of that part of the country luc attached to the priesthood ; I should rather say the reverse, as fai^ as my experience extends. I hear universal complaints amongst the people of the avarice and rapacity of the priests in the exaclio^* of their dues. You think they were not attached to their priests ? 47 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF ED*JeATION This is my opinion. I answer, of course, in a general wa3\ There are individuals amongst them of course who are attached to the priests ; but as the question is put in a general way I give a general answer. Do you suppose it to be entirely in compliance with the wishes of the priests that they ill-treated you in this way ? I do not see, from what I have brought before your Lordships, how I can come to any other conclusion. Had they ever shown any disposition to ill-treat you before this intervension on the part of the priests ? No, they did not ; on the contrary, I would mention that the first night I landed in Achill the people of the village had actually kindled a bonfire to greet me on my arrival amongst them. Did they know at that time your object in coming amongst them ? I am firmly persuaded that they did, for this reason ; that we had a steward employed in reclaiming part of the land for several months previous to my arrival in the Island, and that steward had just the same views on the subject of the Roman Catholic rehgion as I have. That steward was employed in reclaiming the land ? He was. Was he likewise employed in converting the people ? He took every opportunity, as a christian man, of speaking to his fellow sinners. Was that person a clergyman ? No, he was not. Did he harangue the people ? He spoke to them whenever he had an opportunity of doing so. Did he hold the same language towards them as you did ? His views of the Roman Catholic religion were just the same as mine, and therefore he adopted the same course as I did. Is he here ? No. Do not you know whether he took the same method of proclaim- ing his opinion ? I suppose that he did. But you do not know it ? No. In point of fact had much land been reclaimed before you went to Achill ? I cannot stale how many acres just now; some acres were re- claimed. AND Tli-E ACHIiL MISSION'- 4^ Do you know liow many people had been employed by thai person ? It varied according as the season was fit for work or other- wise. How long had he been there before you came ? I could not exactly state, but I should say at least six or seven months. How many people were employed when you arrived ? I could not state that, because it varied considerably. I suppose probably the average number of men emj)loyed was about twenty- five or twenty-six. And had he converted any ; had any become Protestants ? That man was the means of bringing some persons out of the Church of Rome, who have since adhered steadfastly to the pro- fession of Protestantism. Had they been converted to Protestantism before your ani- val ? No; but! believe the first impressions were made on their minds by conversation with him. You have stated that the people exhibited great joy at your ar- rival ; do you conceive that that was in a cjreat measure to be at- tributed to the hope that they entertained that by your stay amongst them their temporal condition would be improved ? Yes ; I have no hesitation in stating that it was. And the Committee understand from the course of your evidence that their temporal condition was, in your opinion, in a state of improvement ? I am sure that the people of A chill have reaped veiy conside- rable temporal advantage from our residence among them. But their temporal improvement has been exceedingly interfered with since these feuds, to which you have now adverted, have been in progress, since the minds of the people have been turned against you.? Yes, it has been considerably interfered with ; but I trust we are surmounting the difficulties. Is there any Magistrate in the Island of Achill ? No. You say they lighted a bonfire, and that they expected great temporal advantage from your coming there. When you first preached to tliem what you considered christian truth, and which opposed the Roman Catholic behef, did you experience from the people any hostility ? No, I did not. Did you experience any mark of their readiness to hear yoi« 49 THE NATIONAL BOARD Ot EOUCAHON^ preach on that subject? Yes, I did. Did they seem to have pleasure in hearing the word of" God expounded by you in their own language as from the book of God? Several of them did . SVhen was the first occasion on which you experienced hostility from the people ? I could not exactly state when it was. Was it before or after you understood that the priest had com- manded them to be hostile ? I can state decidedly, that the hostility of the people commenced after I had heard of their having been stired uji lo hostility by the- speeches of the j)riest in the chapel. How many people could read in that part of the Island ? There are not a great many readers ; I could not state the precise number, but the number of readers is small. What means had they of judging, without reading, whether Mr. Nangle or the priest was speaking the word of truth ? The only means that they had was by the exercise of that judg- ment and discrimination Avhich God has given to every man uport« the doctrines that they heard from us and the doctrines that they, heard from the Roman Catholic priests. I conceive that the tes- timony to the truth was not insufficient to convince, because it was oral testimony. The judgment of man may be exercised upon, oral testimony as well as upon written testimony. But were they of a description of persons that were likely to dis- criminate ? Yes ; I think they are j ust as much disposed to do it and as qua- lified to do it as any other persons in an uncultivated state. Then, in fact, what they had to decide between was your word and the word of their own priests ? Yes ; both professed to be teachers of the truth, and it was for them to decide which was right and which was wrong. Then could you be very much surprised at the priest opposing the doctrines that you taught? I should not be surprised. If the priest believed himself to be right, I think it would be his duty to endeavour to persuade those under his care that he was right and I wrong. I never complain- ed of argument and persuasion being made use of; on the con- trary I commend a religious teacher for doing it, if he supposes that the doctrine he teaches is right. All I complain of is his in- terfering with our civil rights, and stirring up the people to violence upon our persons. I wish every man to possess the same liberty AND Tti£ ACHILL MiSsIONf 50 't)f conscience and liberty of speech that I claim for myself as a Minister of Christ. But the object of your exhortations was to lower the priests in 'the opinions of the persons whom they taught? I would say that the object of our preaching was to exalt the Lord Jesus Christ as the Saviour of sinners ; that was the object of our ' p reach hi g. Then your object was not to lower the priests as such : that might be an incidental consequence ; but your main object was to lead them to christian truth ? Decidedly. In fact did not you preach and bring the most violently contro- verted subjects before those who could not understand them ? I do not think that we brought any subject before them that they were not, as intelligent beings, capable of understanding. I do not wish to blink the question. T openly avow that we did use con- troversial preaching. Is it your opinion that the peasantry of Ireland are, generally speaking, a very aeute race of men ? I think, generally speaking, they arc. Is the Island of Achill an exception to that? I do not see why we should suppose that the Islanders of Achill are destitute of the intelligence that belongs ordinarily to their coun- trymen. Did you always address them in the Irish language ? Not on all occasions ; I did occasionally. Is the Irish language the common language in use among them ? It is. You were asked whether some of the settlers had not quitted the Mission land, and since returned to the church of Rome, and you answered, " I do not know that they have." Do you mean by that answer to state that none of your settlers who have made a profession of Protestantism have relapsed ? No, I did not intend to state that. Some persons we detected to be hypocrites, and we were obliged in consequence of that to put them away from our land, so that their abandonment of Protestant- ism was in fact previous to their leaving our land, and not subse- quent to it. As to others who have left our land I have no evi- dence of their having returned to the church of Rome. I have the clearest and most decided evidence that several of them have, even in the face of verygreat persecution, steadily maintained their profession of Protestantism. I have heard of others having on some occasions conformed to the church of Rome, but those persons have since de- clared, either to myself or to my Colleague Mr. Baylee, that they 51 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATION did so, not that they believed the doctrines of Romanism, but to shelter themselves from persecution. What was the number of those persons that you referred to as being relapsed ? The number of persons that we put away from our land on the persuasion that they were acting the h}qiocrite was five. Did you conceive that such a proceeding of having put away those persons would expose you to any persecution or any violent language ? I did think that it might expose me to a charge of persecution, but unjustly, because those persons came to our place on the un- derstanding that they were Protestants, and I therefore considered that when I found them out to be acting the hypocrite, I was quite justifiable in excluding them. If I were to feign myself a Roman CathoHc and to go into a monastery, my expulsion, on being found to be a hypocrite, would furnish no just ground for a charge of per- secution against the members of such an establishment. The cases seem to be analogous. Have you in any public documents set abroad that these people were hypocrites ? Yes ; it is my invariable desire to set forth all that is discouraging as well as encouraging in the work of our Mission ; and in the last report of our Missionary proceedings, published in this month, there is the following statement, in page 18 : " Avery few we have detected in gross hypocrisy, maintaining an unabated affection for the abominations of popery, while they professedly joined themselves to us in the hope of temporal advantage." You published a report addressed to the Society that sent you there ? Yes ; the report is written by myself. Do you conceive that such facts as these you mention with re- spect to the removal of these individuals have brought any discre- dit upon your Mission ? I think they are calculated to bring no more discredit upon our Mission than the apostacy of Judas, or the hypocrisy of Ananias and Sapphira, was calculated to bring discredit on the Christian religion and the primitive church. Such things must be expected. You stated that some members of the Settlement had left your land; have any of those persons relapsed ? I have heard of several of them having maintained their Pro- testant or christian profession steadfastly. With respect to others, I have heard of their conforming on some occasions to the Church of Rome, but they have since that declared, some of them to me and some of them to Mr.Baylee, that their conformity was only to screen ■AND THE ACHILL MISSION. 52 tliem from persecution, and that they did not believe the doctrines of the church of Rome; and therefore I conceive that I am fully justified in stating as I did, that I could not say tliat those persons who have departed from our land had relapsed into what I believe to be the errors of the church of Rome. You have spoken to-day of the subjectof (he unregeneracy of the members of the church of Rome ; do you mean to apply that merely to the members of the church of Rome, or to the members of any Other church ? By no means. I include every son and daughter of Adam on the face of the earth who is not under the influence of the spirit of Christ, whether they be Protestants or Romanists, or Heathen or Mahomedan. You conceive that it is the duty of a Protestant minister to preach the Gospel to all persons whomsoever he maybe brought in contact witli, whatever their profession may be? Most certainly. Had you any object in the line that you took at Achill to bring persons over to the Estabhshed Church, in order to swell the num- bers of that Church ; or was your object to bring them from what you conceive to be error to truth ? My object has always been to endeavour to bring them from error to truth, as the Scripture speaks, " from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God." Then your object was not to swell the number of the Protestant Established Church of Ireland ? No. I should think that a very poor object indeed to spend one's time and strength for. Where is the nearest Magisterial Bench to the Island of Achill? The town of Newport is the nearest Petty Sessions. How far is that? Twenty-live miles from the place where I reside. Previous to your arrival who was the person in the Island of Achill that had most influence over the people ? I cannot state what the state of things was before my arrival. There is no resident proprietor, is there ? No. I should suppose that the priest was the most influential person in the Island. Does not a Mr. MT-jaughlin live in tlie Island? No. He owns part of the Island ; but he lives upon the main land. Is he much there ? He is not a great deal in the Island. You found thesepeoplc very far remote from any magisterial authority £)3 THE NATIONAL SOARD OF EDUCATIONS and not having the benefit of the residence of any clergyman of the e». tahlished church, or of any large proprietors, chiefly under the influence of the priests, living very quietly and contendedly, and in no particuhir degree of vice Or sin otherwise than as connected \vith their ignorance of Avhat you term the way of truth ? As I have before stated, they were not pre-eminent for vice above the rest of the population of Ireland. You have stated that they \^ ere in a tranquil condition? They were. And you have stated also that at that time the priest was themostjin- •fluentiai person in the island? Yes. And since that, you think the priest stirred them up to evil against you ? I not only think that, but I am certain of it. Then must they not have had a good deal of aff'ection for this priest? That does not necessarily follow. I believe that they had not aff'ec- tion for the priest. There is another influence that can tell on the mind -of human beings besides affection; the terrors of superstition exercise a most powerful influence, and I believe it was by means of that the Ro- man Catholic priesthood maintained their authority over the Achill pea- santry. With your Lordships' permission I will relate an anecdote illus- trative of this. There is a man residentin the village of Keel in the Is- land of Achill ; that man was heard to say, " I never gave but one shout after Mr. Nangle, and I only gave that shout in order that I might not have the priest's curse lying upon me, for he prayed in the chapel that the tongue might drop out of any one that did not shout ; and as soon as I got the priest's curse removed from me by giving that one shout I •shouted no more." I state this on the testimony of a witness of whose veracity I have no doubt whatever ; and if ycur Lordships doubt the truth of it you can summon the witness, and have it from him personally. He is not here ? He is not. You do not know it of your own knowledge ? I do not; but I have the same certainty of its truth as your Lordships '•would derive from the testimony of an immediate witness. You had not it from the individual himself ? I had it from the individual to whom that speech was made ; by tlic ;person to whom I have alluded. Who is that? His name is James Meredith. What is he? He is employed by me as a Scripture Reader. Who told it to Meredith? The indivdual himself. I can state the name that he goes by, Mi- ochael Crone ; I do not know that this i.s his pr(>per name ; to distinguish ■diff'erent individuals of the same family orclan they have very frequently 'bye names. I rather fancy that this is a bye name ; but the indivi- uilJiaal to whom I allude is well known in the Island under the name of AND THE ACHILL MISSION. 54 Michael Crone. Do you know upon what occasion he related this to the Scripture Reader; was he applying to him for any thing ? It was merely accidental. It was incidentally in the course of conversalion that I heard our Reader relate this anecdote. And it is your firm helief that the man shouted after you because he was afraid that if he did not his tongue would drop out of his mouth ? I have it on tlie assertion of the man himself, and I do helieve that many of the Irish peasantry are under such a superstitious influence as would lead them in such circumstances to form such a supposition. Do you believe that the man himself thought the tongue would drop out of his mouth ? I have no reason to disbelieve his own words; it was his own statement. What was the priest's curse ? The priest's curse was that the tongue might drop out of any one that did not shout, and in order to put this curse away from himself Michael Crone did give a shout. Did you ever know an instance of any similar case ? I cannot just now recall tliem to my recollection, but if I were to sit down and think over the things that have come under my own observation, I could compile a chapter of such anecdotes. You stated that when you arrived in the Island you found it perfectly tranquil ; did that tranquility continue undisturbed for some time after your arrival ? It continued undisturbed for a considerable time after my ar- rival. How long ? I really cannot exactly state, but it was, as well as my recollec- tion serves me, for two or three months. Was the interruption of that tranquility coeval with the arrival of Dr. M'Hale in the island, and the commencement, on the part of the priest, of the conduct to which you have adverted ? It was not coeval with the entrance of Dr. M'Hale, because the denunciations in the chapel had commenced before that, and even before Mr. Connolly, the present priest, came. Did Dr. M^Hale come in the coui-se of his ordinary visitation of the island ? I cannot say what Dr. M*HaIe's arrangements might be. I could not take upon myself to answer that question. With reference to your letter to Mr. Carlile, No. 1, why did you S5 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATION consider that the introduction of National Schools, or the applica- tion of the national funds to the Priest's school, would necessarily check your exertions ? Because it appears to me that the absence of any school but ours gave the children who were desirous to come to it a very good pre- text for doing so ; but when the priest established another school, then it became an act of more daring rebellion against his authority to pass by that school and to come to ours. You w^ere understood to say, that the priest had established schools; indeed in your letter you refer to the schools established ? Yes ; but I stated that those schools would have their existence perpetuated by a grant from the National Board. Had you reason to suppose that if the National Board did not give a grant of money, those schools w^ould not continue ? It was the impression upon my mind that they would not. Had their numbers decreased ? My reason for supposing that the opposition schools would not continue, unless supported by the National Board, arose out of the persuasion of my mind, that the Roman Catholic priests had not sufficient zeal in the cause of Education to induce them to sup- ply funds for the support of the schools from their own pockets, and that therefore, if the funds were iiQt supplied by the National Board, the schools would fall to the ground. Have you any ground for that opinion, except a speculative no- tion that the Roman Catholic priests could not have sufficient zeal for education ? It appears to me that their conduct has manifested such a want of zeal in the cause of education as justifies that opinion. In fact, in Achill itself, I had a most striking instance of the indiflerencc of the Roman Catholic priesthood on the subject of education, be- cause there was no school when I first went there but a small pay school in a distant part of the Island, six or seven miles from our Settlement. Had the Clergyman of the Established Church given any thing to any school ? Not that I know of. The Committee understand from your statement that Dr. INI'lIale came into the island after the appointment of Mr. Connolly ? He did. Had you any reason to know that Dr. M'Hale as well as Mr. Connolly used inflammatory language to the people with respect to your Settlement P I know this, that when very inflammatory language had been AND THE ACHILL MISSION. 66 used bj two priests in Dr. M'Hale's presence in the chapel, he stood up and signified his approval of all that the priests had spoken. How do you know that ? I know it on the testimony of a witnesss who is now in London. Was it a matter of notoriety in the island that Dr. M'Hale had in the manner in which you have described encouraged the inflam- matory language of the priests ? Yes, it was universally known through the island. A speech delivered by the Roman Catholic Archbishop in the chapel, of course, must have become the subject of common notoriety amongst the people. Did the feeling of excitement appear to you to be stronger after the visit of Dr. M'Hale than it was before his arrival ? Yes, unquestionably ; I had the plainest evidence of it in the withdrawal of labourers from our land who were working previously contentedly and thankfully. You stated yesterday that the schoolmaster O'Donnell had ad- mitted that he had gone in the/nanner described by you to meet Dr. M'Hale on his arrival in the Island ? Yes, it was admitted by O'Donnell to the Inspector. The ac- knowledgment of this admission will be found in No. 23. of the printed returns. It appears in the Inspector's report. No. 23., that O'Donnell ad- mits that upon the occasion of Dr. M'Hale's visit he, in common with the inhabitants of the island, met him with green boughs, &c., &ic. Does that contain an adrtiission of the whole charge made by you ? When Mr. Kelly, the Inspector, came to Achill, and told me that he was sent by the Board to investigate certain charges that had been brought by me against O'Donnell, he called upon me to prove those charges. I went for a copy of the very letter I had written to the Board, as it is here in the printed returns. No. 3. : *' I beg leave to inform you that James O'Donnell, master of the Dugort National school in this island, headed a procession, carry- ing flags and banners, which went to meet Dr. M'Hale on his ar- rival in this place. O'Donnell bore a flag with the inscription, ' welcome religion and liberty,' which was sufficiently intelligible to all who knew that Dr. M'Hale is a bishop of the Church of Rome and the advocate of repeal." I read this letter in the hear- ing of the Inspector. In fact, my charge was stated in the very words contained in this letter, and itwas to the charge as stated in those words that Mr. Kelly said O'Donnell pleaded guilty. Then, on turning to the Inspector's report, your Lordships will see what ap- :57 ^HE WATIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATIrtIS pears to me to be an attempt to mitigate and soften down the whole business. " O'Donnell 'admits that upon the occasion ox Dr. M'Hale's visit, he, in common with the inhabitants of the island, went to meet him." I represented him as being the ringleader in the whole business, as heading the procession, and as carrying a -banner with, to say the least of it, a very objectionable inscription upon it; and all these important facts are merged, and O'Donnell •is just represented as a person who, in common with the rest of 'the inhabitants of the island, took a part in this procession. What do you understand by " &c. &c." ? I really do not understand what signification to attach to it ; I think that an official document should not be worded in such a very vague and anibiguous manner. Should you have thought it very extraordinary that O'Donnell should have gone with green boughs to meet his own bishop on his arrival in the island, if such was the practice of the country, if he had merely gone with green boughs ? «If he had merely gone with green boughs, if such had been the practice of the country, I should not have thought it strange. But what you complained of was his going with banners and obnoxious inscriptions ? It was. And you do not think that in this respect the Inspector's Report contains an account of O'DonnelFs admission of your charge ? I think it does not. You spoke of Scripture Readers ; what do you mean by Scrip- ture Readers ? A Scripture Reader is a man generally selected from the humbler walks of life, who has an enlarged knowledge of his Bible, and who also exemplifies the power and excellence of the truths contained in the Bible in his life and conversation. Such persons are cho- sen as V'cry fit instruments to go about reading the Holy Scriptures amongst those persons who are not able to read for themselves, and amongst others who are willing to hear them, Roman Catholics as well as Protestants ; and as they read the Holy Sciiptures, they converse on the subject of their doctrines and precepts. Who chooses them in your Missionary Settlement ? They were chosen by myself. Were they inhabitants of Achill ? None of those who are employed as Scripture Readers are na- tives of Achill. Two of them have come from the County of SHgo, and two more are young men from the neighbourhood of Westport : there are four in all in our employment. AND THE ACHILL MISSION". 5^- You say they were in a humble class of life ; were they common' peasants ? They were not in the lowest grade of society, but small farmers. . What emolument do they receive ? Our Scripture Readers receive £24. a year, and if they choose to cultivate it they have an English acre of reclaimed mountain and a house to live in. It is their business to go about into the cabins and read the Scriptures ? To all who are willing to hear them. Do they ever force themselves into the cabins where they are not willing to receive them ? No, they never do ; if the inmates of the cabin desire them to ga- out they go out immediately. Those are the directions you give them ? Certainly. Do they ever enter into discussions and controversies--? They do. I« the cabins and elsewhere ?' Yes.. They are instructed so to do ?' Yes, certainly. You are speaking of the Scripture Rfeaders under your society ?" Yes; I am confining my observations to the Scripture Readers connected with our society. Have you any knowledge of the Scripture Readers of other Mis- sions ? I have had knowledge of other Scripture Readers through* the country, connected with the Scripture Reader's Society for Ireland. Is there any agent who in the absence of Sir Richard O'Donnell the Proprietor of the Island^ took any interest in the concerns of the people ? Mr. Alexander Clendinning of Westport is- SirR.- O'Donnell 's agent. Does he frequently come tothe Islando He has never been in the Island since I came to it; Has there been no person on the part of the land owner to re- ceive the rents from the people ? Yes, there is an under agent, a person of the name of Gillespie ;, he comes down occasionally to receive the rents. Did you ever state to him the manner in which you were ill-r used in that Island ? S9 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDtJCATIOW I dare say I have, but I cannot state positively that I have ; I only saw Mr. Gillespie once or twice since I went to the Island. Is there any County cess collected in the Island ? I believe there is, but I cannot state positively. Is there any Tithe collected ? I have heard it stated that Mr, Wilson does receive £100. a year out of the Island of Achill; bat I do not state this positively, as of my own knowledge. You referred to a report of your society ; is that report published annually or monthly ? It is published annually. Does it circulate in the Island of Achill ? No ; this report is published for the information of persons who are subscribers. Have you ever published any works or writings in the Island of Achill ? Yes, I have. Large works or small works ? We have a Printing Press, and we have printed pamphlets of 150 or 160 pages; and we have also printed small tracts and hand-bills. Controversial tracts P Many of them controversial. Have you any of them here P No. Could you procure them in London P I could procure them in the course of some days by writing for them. Are they in English or Irish ? I printed one tract, fourteen questions addressed to the priest, in consequence of some observations of his in the Chapel ; and it is in both English and Irish, on opposite pages. I would also beg leave, in connexion with my books and tracts, to lay before your Lordships some tracts and writings of the Roman Catholic Priest- hood and of Dr. M'Hale in reference to the Achill Mission, in order that your Lordships may not have any ex-parte view of the subject, but may see the publications on both sides. The documents to which I refer have been printed with Dr. M^Hale's name affixed to them in the public Newspapers, They are not pamphlets published by Dr. M'Hale, but letters in the Newspaper collected and published ? Letters referring to the Achill Mission. They were in the provincial paperS;, were they not ? AND THE ACHILL MISSION. 60 They were in the provincial papers, and also in the Dublin papers. You have stated that in your opinion the population of Ireland, including the Island of Achill, is naturally acute and able to dis- tinguish between truth and falsehood ; are you of opinion that that natural acuteness would be more likely to enable them to distin- guish between truth and falsehood after having received the benefit of teaching, and having acquired the practice of reading, than in their natural and uninformed state ? Of course that natural acuteness would be sharpened by cultiva- tion and exercise. The witness is directed to withdraw. 61 I HE .VATIONAL BOARD tUrf EB-CeATIfiW Lifeiifenant Joseph: Irxc in, R. N., is called in, atid exacmined as follows : Had you at any time in the month of October 1831 the com- mand of the coast guard district of Westport ? Yes. At that time did yoiJ know a person named Timothy M'Cajthy ? Yes. Was he then a boatman serving upon that station ? He was. Under whom as Chief Boatman was he serving ? John Rutledge. At what station ? At a detached station which I put on myself, called Rossmore Point, near Newport/ Did John Rutledge make any reports to you at any time respect- ing the conduct of the persons under him ? He had occasion frequently to make reports of that kind. Respecting James O'Donnell ^ Yes. What report did he make to you ? McCarthy first reported the circumstance to me respecting James O'Donnell. What was that ? McCarthy came into Westport, where I resided, by order of Rutledge, who was his Chief Boatman, to report the conduct of James O'Donnell for making use of improper language at the sta- tion, disaffected language, as he called it ; and when M'Carthy AfiO THE ACHILL MISSION^ ersOTi who gave this information ? No. But in the investigation of a charge against a regular hoatman you would have to go through some form ? The Board of Customs give me a commission for the purpose to enahle me to swear the men. But in cases of extra hoatmen they are under your absolute com- mand? Perfectly so. T had another strong reason for believing this man had been guilty of this offence; McCarthy being a Catholic, I thought that unless they had had some private quarrel or some pique he would not have made this charge against him ; and I particularly inquired if there had been any quarrel between the men, for I was most anxious to keep the man. Did you find there had been any quarrel ? No ; I could not make out that there had been any quarrel ; and I thought that McCarthy was afraid of allowing the thing to go any further. When you spoke to Sir Richard O'Donnell, he did not say any thing disadvantageous to O'Donnell's character ? No; he said, "I did not expect that of him;" and he was very much annoyed at his having turned out so. He did not say that he of his own knowledge knew any harm of him; but he was simply alluding to the reasons you had told him for dismissing him ? He was alluding entirely to what I told him ; not only that, but if O'Donnell had conceived himself improperly treated by me, he would naturally have gone to Sir Richard. Was O'Donnell, generally speaking, a well-behaved man ? I see so little of the men as Inspecting Commander that I can- not say; but Rutledge, I think, did not make any other complaint against him. How long had he been serving wiih you ? Some months, I think. You never heard any complaint against him for improper con- duct in any other respect ? No; I think he was a sober man. I scarcely recollect the man, and I do not think I should know him if I saw him. Did you ever hear that he was in any way concerned in steel- boy outrages? No; I do not think I ever heard much of the man afterwards; his associates, I heard, were bad men. A^D THT. ACHILL TVilSSTOV. 7^ Did you ever hear what became of him afterwards ? I never heard a word about the man till Mr. Kelly wrote to me to know if such a person served under me. If Mr. Kelly had mentioned the station that he was at, and the officer under whom he had served, I should have recollected the circumstance at once. Do you feel now perfectly sure that the person concerning whom Mr. Kelly wrote to you is this same ODonnell? No; I have never seen the n.ian since; T am F^^caking of a per- son of the name of James ODonnell, who was serving under me at the time; T know nothing of 1 im afterwards. You have said that the first time that James ODonnelFs name was brought to your attention was in a letter from Mr. Kelly, tlie Secretary of the Board, on the 2-3th July 18J^6; and you were un- derstood to say that Mr. Kelly mentioned the cause of dismissal in his letter: were you rightly understood in that.? Yes, he mentioned the cause. Will you read No. 20. of the printed correspondence before the committee? ^'Sir. — At the requestof the Commissioners of education, I beg leave to inquire from you the cause of the dismissal of James ODonnell, extra boatman of the station of Rossmore in 1832, from the service. They are anxious to be informed upon this point, as this man is now a teacher in one of the National schools, and they feel assured that they can have this information in a sa- tisfactory manner from you only, as being the officer under whom he served." Does he there mention the cause of dismissal ? No, he does not. Then there was the less reason for your recollection being drawn to this case at that time .'* Certainly ; and, in fact, my mind was fixed upon a James ODon- nell that was serving under me at the station of Ross. There were several Rosses ; Rossmore and Islandmore, and several places si- milarly named. You have stated that Rutledge received a bad wound; had Rutledge received that wound before the dismissal of ODonnell or afterwards ? Before. The witness is directed to withdraw- 71 THE NATIONAL BOARD Of EDUCATION Timothy McCarthy is called in, and examined as follows Were you at any time a coast-guard man at Rossmore Point, under Lieutenant Irwin ? I was. Did you know a coast-guard man named James O'Donnell at that time? I did. Had you ever occasion to report tlie conduct of James O'Donnell (* I had. To whom did you report it ? To the chief boatman under Mr. Irwin. Who was that ? John Rutledge. What did you report of him ? Rebellious speeches, and saying that the tithes should be done awaywith, thatno tithes should be paid, and that Ireland should be free and flourish once more; and himself and a man of the name of David Kelly made a great noise. He came out of his house into mine; there was only a thin wall between his house and mine, and we had one roof for both houses. I told him it was a great shame of him to make the noise he was making, to make the speech as he was making; and he told me he would have no thanks to me, and called me an Informer. At the time he called me an informer I went out to the chief boatman and reported him. He was stand- ing on the road, and told me to go in to Mr. Irwin and report it. Did he tell you any thing about the name of O'Connell ? AND TUT. ACniLL MISSION. 72 T Imrdlv remenilTcr what he said now, it is so long a"-o it is more than five years ; I know he said a good deal more than I re- collect now. To what effect was it ? Whenever one of them would make a speech, it was in regard ol V Conn€l], and they would have loud cheering. They used to be at It as if two gentlemen wei^ against each other. He menti- oned that Ireland would be free, and tliat it would flourish once more. Have you any knowledge of any of his companions? David Kelly used to visit at his house veiy often. What was there particular in David Kelly. He used to make speeches the same as O'Donnell would. Was David Kelly ever brought to justice for any thing? * I ha;-e not heard of him since I left that place, but he ^v^s not at that tune. You never heard of his being transported ? Not till George Crea.sv told me of it. Who was David Kelly ? A brother of the priest who was there. Where was he ])riest ? He was in the county of Mayo. Was he a householder or a farmer.^ He was a farmer. Whose tenant was he ? I am not sure, unless he v.^s Sir Richard O^Donnells tenant. ^ 1 ou said these men were making a noise. When they were mak- mg a noise were they at all drunk ? No, I did not notice them to be drunk, for I was sick at the time and I was under the care of Dr. Dillon of Westport. I was upon my bed, and I told him what a noise they were making. You are a Roman Catholic ? Yes. Did they ever say any thing to you about that the Protestant religion would soon be down ? I do not remember. Did he ever say any thing about that the country would soon be yours r _ 1 heard them say that Ireland would be free once more, and that It would flourish; and there was loud cheering. Were these two men alone when they were going on with thi« conversation. I do not doubt but a little bov used to be in the house. 73 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATION Were you tliere ? I was in the next door. And you heard it through the wall ? Yes ; and he came into my house. Did you hear it through the wall, or over the wall ? I heard it over the door. Do you know where O'Donnell is now ? 1 do not. Did you tell O'Donnell that you would report it ? Yes ; he said. " do your best ; I have better interest than you have." Did you see him again afterwards ? I was near being injured by a party of his, and I got removed out of it, and I came out of the county of Keny. Was that in consequence of having reported O'DonnelFs conduct? I got sick there, and at the time I went into Newport his sister met me in the very centre of the town, and spat upon me, and called me all the names she could call me ; and there was a party ^vhich, but for a man of the name of Moran, would have hurt me. After you made the report ? Yes. And in consequence, as you believe, of tbat report? Yes. Did you then apply to be removed from there ? Yes. Was that application in consequence of the manner in which tlie people treated you ? I was afraid that they would hurt me there. Have you seen O'Donnell since that time ? I have not seen him since I was removed from there. Do you know whether lie was ever employed as a schoolmaster in Achill ? I have heard of it, but I do not know it. Can you speak Irish ? I can. Do you understand it better than English? It is very bad Irish I can speak ; I cannot speak good Irish or good English. How long have youbeen in the King's service ? Sixteen years at Christmas. Had you and O'Donnell any words or quarrel together except upon this occasion ? No. AND THE ACHTLL MlSSlOV^ 7i You never had any quarrel at all ? Not that I know of. Did you ever see O'Donnell after he was dismissed? I did before I was removed. Did you ever hear him complain that he had no investigation?" I did not. Did he know why he was dismissed? He did. Who told him why he was dismissed? John Rutledge told him. Did you hear Rutledge tell him the reason he was dismissed ?" I heard him say he was dismissed. For what reason did he say ? For rebellious speeches and abusing me as he did. Did O'Donnell say any thing upon that occasion?. I do not know what he said afterwards^ Did you ever hear of Steel-boys ? I have heard of \viiite-boys. Have you any reason to suppose that O'Donnell had any thing to do with any society of that sort? I do not know whether he had. The witness is directed to withdraw. Ordered, that this Committee be adjourned to Friday next, twor o'clock. 75 THE SATIOJ^AL BOARD OF El9VCAJl0!f l^ie Veneris, i2l« Aprilis 1337. THE LORD PRESIDENT IN THE CHAIR. James Dombrain, Esqiiirie', is called in, and examined as"^ follows : You hold the office of Inspector Genei'al of the Coast-guard iw Ireland ? I do. Were you ever in the Island of Aehill officially ? Several times. In the course of the last two years? I was there last Summer and the year before.- Did you visit tlie Protestant Settlement there ? I did. In what state did yau find it! ; was it in a state different fron:f the rest of the Island, or like ther&st of the Island ? Very different from the rest of the Island. Was it in a state inferio-t 0* su|yeriori* Very superior. In what respect? Generally superior in respect of industry and cultivation ; it had superior huildingsand every thing that would stamp an appearance of civilization in a very remote district. As far, therefore, as appeared to you, it would be a great blessing to the Island if the example so set could be followed throughout llmt Island ? AND THE ACHTLL MISSION. 76 Decidedly, Were you at all molested in going through the Island? Not at'all. Had you any reason to expect that you would he n^olested? I left it very early in the morning; as early as seven o'clock. Upon what occasion are you now speaking of? In last June, when I was there on my official visit of inspec- tion. Mr. Nangle, and JNIr. Baylee were both absent, and I ne- ver saw either of the gentlemen, but natural curiosity led me to visit the Settlement; and after remaining some time looking over the buildings I was about to leave it, after being there about half an hour, when one of the coast-guard men who accompanied me recommended me strongly not to think of doing so, for he said that I should be molested if the people of the country knew that I came from the Settlement; however I was not deterred, and I was soon afterwards joined by Mr. Reynolds, and I walked over the Island with him without experiencing any mo- lestation . Who is Mr. Reynolds? The chief officer of the coast-guard stati on at Keel, about four miles from the Settlement in Achill. You of course inspected the coast-guard, that being your object in going there ? Yes, I did. Did anything remarkable come to your knowledge? Yes ; it had been intimated to me that some very strong lan- guage had been used by the priest from the altar, either on the pre- vious Sunday, or the Sunday before that, in the presence of some of the coast-guard men. Did you call those men ? I did ; after the inspection was over T called the men forward, and before entering into the particulars I told them that if any thhighad occurred between them and their priest connected with their religion, or any thing of a spiritual character, I did not wish to hear it ; but that if any thing had happened that was likely to compromise the character of the service, or its efficiency or discip- line, or any thing likely to lead to a breach of the peace, which I had been given to understand the words used were likely to do, then I thought they were bound to come forward and state it. How many men were there that you so called ? Two. Were they Roman Catholics ? 1t1 THE Ni-ATIOXAL BOARD OF EDtfATlO They were. Wliat were their rjame^^? Kelly and Donovan. Who had given yoQ that information ? Mr. Reynolds. Did they state any thing to you i* Yes; they stated that the priest had been speaking from the at- tar about the Protestant Colony, and that he had desired the con- gregation generally to hoot and hiss at them wherevcrtheymetthem for ihat he would not be satisfied till he hfjd driven them out of the Island. When did you tmderi?tandthat this had been said ? Either the Sunday previous, or the Sunday before that. This was in the course of the last summer J* In the coarse of last summer; in Jane last. Were you ever applied to on the part of the National Board <7f Education for information respecting the dismissal of Jame"S O'Donnell in 1831 or 18321' I was. Was tlxe applieation made to you personally or by letter i* P'irst it was made to my oflTce during my absence, I believe personally, by Mr. Kelly, and subsequently by Mr. Carlile to my- self. What information did you give upon that occasion? When Mr. Carlile came I told him that of course I was most anxioors to give him every possible infonnation,and I immediately rang for the papers, when he told me he had received a report of Lieutenant Irwin, aTid asked m« if there was any thing further : I told him I did not recollect any thing, but that if he would have the kindness to write to me upon the subject I woidd make every incpiiry in my power, and give him every information I could obtain. When he said that he had seen a report from Lieutenant Ir- win, did y(^u understand that he had seen the report of Lieutenant Irwin contained in page 15. No. 22. of the printed papers before- the Committee ; is that the letter to which you conceived he re- fen ed ? Yes. Did you see the letter at the time ? I saw a copy of it ; Lieutenant Irwin gave me a copy of it pre- viously to that, when I was in the immediate neighbourhood of Kis station. Do you know James O'Donnell youi'sclf ? AND THE ACHILL MISSION. 7g I Jo not. Have you any reports or inquiries made on any occasion, by or- der of the Board of Customs, into the conduct of any Officer of the coJist-guard of Achill, on a complaint of Mr. Connolly ? Yes, I have several in my possession. Do those reports, or does the evidence taken on those inquiries-, at all relate to the language or conduct of Mr. Connolly with res- pect to the Protestant {Settlement of Achill ? Yes, they do. Are those the official, reports upon Mhich the decision of the diflerent authorities who decided upon that occasion was formed ? Yes, they are. Who were those authorities ? The first was Captain Meame, who was directed by the Board of Customs, through me, to proceed to Achill, and to hold an inves- tigation. Then my own report to the Comptroller General of the coast-guard in London, and the report of the Comptroller Gene- ral to the Commissioners of the Customs, with their final decision upon it. What were you to investigate ? The charges preferred by Mr. Connolly against Mr. Reynolds, the Chief Officer at Keel. You have been asked, whether there are any parts of the evidence taken on that occasion that relate to the language or conduct of Mr. Connolly in respect to the Protestant Establishment in Achill, and you say there are. Did Charles Bridger give evidence on any of those occasions ? I think his evidence is among the papers. If it is there, will you look at it, and say whether that is one of the evidences that were taken upon that inquiry ? I do not find Charles Bridger 's examination here. Do you find the evidence of Thomas M'Nulty and Thomas Ralph ? The examinations of Thomas M'Nulty and Thomas Ralph are here. Was the evidence of Thomas M'Nulty and Thomas Ralph given in the presence of Mr. Connolly, and subject to his cross- examination ? It was. Are those two reports official reports of the evidence P Those are the official reports; the original reports. Upon those, in connexion with the other reports, the different authorities came to a decision in that case ? 7d THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATION Yes. What were the charges brought by Mr. Connolly against Mr, Reynolds ? They were very numerous; principally for interfering^ as he stated, with his flock, and entering into religious con- ti'oversy. What was the result of that inquiry ? That the Commissioners of Customs did not consider that Mr, Reynolds had conducted himself with the circumspection that ought to have marked his conduct, but that, in consequence of the very high character given of him, they merely admonished him to be cautious in future. Then that investigation was, with respect to Mr. Reynolds, on charges produced against him by Mr, Connolly ? It was. Was the evidence of Thomas M'Nulty and Thomas Ralph on oath ? It was not. Had you the power of administering an oath ^ The Officer had not the power of administering an oath. It was given in the presence of Mr, Connolly, and subject to hi& cross-examination ? It was. Do you know Thomas M'Nulty? No, I do not. Do you know Thomas Ralph ? No, I do not. Do you know John Rutledge P Yes. Have you seen him lately ? I have. Have you known him long? I have known him for nine or ten years. Are you of opinion that he is in a state to give evidence before this committee i' I should think most decidedly. He has had a wound? I have heard so. Have you seen him lately ? I have seen him very lately ; he is waiting here. And you are convinced that he is quite capable of giving evi- dence before this Committee? I should think so. ASD THE ACHILL MISSION, 80 Have you had the same opportimit}- of observing Rutledge that Lieutenant Irwin has had ? I think recently I liavehad more ; Lieutenant Irwin has left the station for some time. You think there is no circumstance connected with his health, and the wound he has received, which makes him an incompetent witness with reference to his memory ? Certainly not. Of course my communication with a person of his rank has not been very extensive ; but I should say from what I have seen of him he is perfectly comi>etent. Do you think his memory is perfectly unimpaired ? So far as I can judge; I have known veryUttle of him, except meeting him upon the annual inspection. What was his character as to peaceableness and veracity ? Very good. I never heard any thing to impeach it. Do you know Mr, Reynolds ? I do. What is your opinion of Mr, Reynolds ? I believe Mr. Reynolds to be a very correct, steady, and good Officer. And of course you would not consider him a steady, correct, and good Officer if you doubted his honour, and the veracity of any statement that he made ? Not the least ; he is one of the very last men I should doubt. The witness Avas directed to withdraw. 81 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EI>UCATlO»- Charles Bridgek is called in, and examined as follows t Are you steward of the Missionary Settlement in Achill ? I am. How long have you held that office ? Since last August twelvemonth. Do you recollect the time when Dr. M'Hale visited the Island of Achill ? Perfectly well. Did you see any procession in honour of his ariival ? Yes. In that procession did you see any thing remarkable carried by any persons there ? I saw a banner. What was that P I cannot ej^actly say what was written upon it j there were words- on it< Do you know who carried it ? Not of my own knowledge. What colour was it ? The ground colour was green. If certain words that were said to be upon it Were repeated to^ you should you know them ? I have heard the words myself, but 1 was not near enough W see them. At what distance were you ? AND THE ACHILL MISSION. 82 I suppose about from 100 to 200 yards. Do you know, of your own knowledge, that in consequence of that visit of Dr. M'Hale, and what may have taken place that day, any of your labourers refused any longer to take your employ- ment ? Yes, many. Were you Steward of the Missionary Settlement at that time ? I was. Did they tell you that they went away on accotmt of that ? They did. Did they tell you that they had been forbidden to work any longer for you ? They did. How many ? I cannot say the exact number, "but I could mention many. Forbidden by wliom ? By Mr. Connolly, the parish priest; and one person in parti- •cular told me what the bishoj) said. Who was that person ? His name was Burke. What did he tell you ? This Burke worked at the Settlement on the very day that the bishop arrived in Achill,and he was the next day called on by hisfa- tlier to go to the bishop to make confession, and he told me that Bishop M'Hale desired him not to work there any more. Did he tell you whether this was said in the chapel or not ? I rather think it was said in a private house, tut I am not certain. Is he a Roman Catholic ? He is. Has he ever returned to your employment ? He has returned since as a workman occasionally, but not as a regular labourer as before. Have you found tlie operations of the Settlement materially im- peded by the prohibition of the priest Connolly, according to the statements made to you by the labourers ? As to the labourers coming to work, we have. But you have still some Roman Catholics ? We have. Did they all leave you at that time ? Yes ; all the Roman Catholics. Then have several of them returned since ? Several of them have returned since. Did you understand from them whctlier the prohibition had 83 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATION been withdrawn ? I did not understand whether it had or not. What interval of time elapsed between the time of their with- drawing and the time of their beginning to return? I could not answer that accurately; I suppose about three months. Did they return in small numbers at first, or did a good many return at the same time ? In small numbers ; we never had so many as we had before. Did they appear unwilling to leave their work when they first left it ? Certainly ; they were very anxious till then to have whatever they could get. Did they appear unwilling to leave the work ? They said nothing as to that to me. Had they had regular work before you employed them ? No. They were out of work previous to that ? Yes. And they came very eagerly to work with you ? They appeared very eager to work with us. Were you able to get men to supply their place ? T was, by going to Westport, and paying them more wages. What were those with whom you supplied their place, Catholics or Protestants ? Roman Catholics. And they made no difficulty /* No difficulty. How far did they come? About thirty-two Irish miles. Then you were obliged to procure a lodging for them ? Yes; and board. Which you had not been obliged to do for the others ? Certainly not. Under what Roman Catholic bishop is Westport ? Under the same bishop; the bishop of Tuam. Is that Dr. M'Hale ? It is. Did it ever happen to you to have any reason to apprehend mis- chief to your Settlement, either before or subsequent to this, by any indications to disturb you at the Settlement, or do any injury to you, either before or after Dr. M'Hale's visit to Acliill ? I had only arrived in the Island just before Dr. M'Hale came AND THE ACHILL MISSION. 84 there. After Dr. M'Hale's visit was there ever any appearance that caused apprehension on your part of violence either to the building or to the persons employed about tlie buildings, or to any of the officers of the Settlement ? I know of none. How long have these Westport people been employed by you ? They were employed three months. During that time Dr. M^Hale did not object to their working for you ? He did not ; not that I know of. Did you ever hear whether the priest endeavoured to prevent the Westport men working for you ? I never heard that he did. Since Dr. IVPHale's visit have you been always able to go on peaceably with your work ? Not at all. This time twelvemonth I had to bring men from Westport; that was seven or eight months after Dr. M*Hale came. You understood that the men that were replaced by the people at Westport were forbidden by their priest to work for you ? By their priest, Mr. Connolly. Are you a Protestant ? I am. What part of Ireland do you belong to ? I belong to the South of England. What induced you to go to this part ? I wanted a situation, and I went there. How long had you been in Ireland before you went to Achill P I cannot exactly say. I had been ten or eleven years. Who employed you to go to Achill ? The Committee of the Achill Mission in Dublin employed me. Are you their servant ? I am. W^hat do they pay you ? £40 a year. What is your business ? To act as land steward over the Mission. Have you ever received any ill-usage from the people at Achill ? Not personally. You are well known there P I am. 85 THE NATIONAL BOAHn OF F.DUCAl ION And the people know what vou arc ? Yes. Have von over liccn liootcd altor ? Many linns. But received no other ill-usage ? No. Are von employed as a Scripture Reader ? No, I am not. How came von to join this pnKcssion to meet Dr. M'llale ' I did not join it; 1 was about 200 yards oil. You were looking on ? T Wits. Were there many people there ? 'J'licre were a great numher. How many ? I cannot say how many. And v(»n were never nearer than 200 yards ? I think tlicrcahont. Did vou feel any apprehension of your own safety ? No, I did not in tlie least. Have you ever felt any apprehension of your own safety ? No ; I never feel any apprehension as to bodily fear for myself. You have not been threatened ? No, I do not know that I have ever been threatened. Was there any system of exclusive dealing established in the Island? Yes; they were regularly forbidden to sell to any j)ors{)n living on the Settlement. Who forbade them to sell to any person living on the Set- tlement ? The people themselves told us that the priest would not allow them to sell to us. Did thev refuse to sell ? They did. They would not take the money ? They would not take the money ; but upon one occasion, this time twelvemonth, a man came to me and offered me seed pota- toes, and I mentioned to him that 1 was astonished tliat he would bring them to us to sell, and he .said that he was g(»ing to be mar- ried, and that in consecpienee he wanted the marriag*' money for the priest. Did he say that lu was permitted to sell foi- that purpo.se ' AXT) THE ACIIILL MISSION. i^ He did. That he had the permission of tlie priest for that purpose ? He did not say from whom, hut that he had permission. Were there any dehts due hy the })ersons on the Island to the mcmhers of yonr Missionary Estahhshnient that were not paid ? There are to me i)ersonally. Who are tliey due hy ? One man's name wasDivor. Did he give yon any reason wliy you wore not paid ? He toUl me that the priest desired him not to pay me. I of- fered him to come and earn it out, and he told me that the priest desired him not to do it, hut to let me process him, and that all I could do would he to send him to gaol for a month, &; that I should have to pay him a shilling a day whilst he was in gaol; hut this person came afterwards and paid me the money, hut the other two nevQV did. Did the person wlien he came to pay you say why he had come to pay yiMi that ? He was always an honest man, and I considered him so. Then he considered it dishonest to obey the ordeen ofTered to the officers or labourers upon the Settlement, but that they were not under the belief or ap})rchension that any would be offered to them; is the Committee so to understand? Not as to all the officers on the Settlement, but as to myself per- sonally. Then are the Committee to understand, that after the visit of Dr. ISTHalc the sentiments ofthe people were or were not so changed towards the Settlement as that they were or were not api)rehcn- sivc of violence after that time? 87 THE NATIOMAL BOARD OF EDUCATION I cannot answer whether the rest of the people on the Mission were apprehensive of violence, but I say that some of them suflered, and even very lately, as T know, on the road. How did they suffer ? They were beaten. Were any of them pelted with stones at any time ? Frequently. Have any of your works, or any of your crops, ever been des- troyed ? I cannot say that our crops have been Have your houses ever been attacked P' Not since I have been there. There has been no attempt to wreck the Settlement? Not since T have been there. Are things quietei* now than when you first went there ? I cannot say whether they are or not ; the people are very riolent. Do they still continue to hoot at you ? They did not hoot me the last time, when I was coming out upon this journey; that is the only time I ever passed without it. When you say they are very violent, what do you mean by that? When they beat one of our men coming in, about a month ago, I think that is violence. Did they hurt him much ? They broke his nose. Do you attend the Church where Mr. Nangle officiates ? Certainly ; every day. You are a constant attendant upon it ? I am. Did you ever hear Mr. Nangle, from his pulpit, say any thing to his people of an uncharitable tone towards the Roman Ca- tholics ? No ; quite the reverse. Did you ever hear him, out of his pulpit, in his private house or elsewhere, express to any person any uncharitable sentiments against his Roman Catholic brethren ? No; quite the reverse. His object always was to make the people under him to love their enemies as themselves. Did you ever hear Mr. Nangle hold any violent language, upon the subject of the priests ? I never did ; not any violent language. What have you heard Mr. Nangle say about the Roman Ca- tholic religion ? AND THE ACHILL MISSIOil. 88 I Kave heard him often preaching upon the Roman Catholic religion. Have you heard hnn say it was superstitious ? I have. Have you ever heard him say it was idolatrous ? I have. Have you ever heard him say that the persons that embraced it put their salvation in danger ? I have. Have you ever heard him accompany those things so said with advice to his people that they were to love their enemies and not to curse them ? Always. When I heard him preaching, and mentioning the words now put to me, I always heard him at the latter end telling them not to hate them personally, but still to abhor the sin of theirreligion, and to love them. And to be kind to them in their dealings ? Exactly so. Did he ever notice to them the conduct of the other people towards them ? Yes ; T have heard him just noticing thatto them, and tell them not by any means to take pattern by it. Did you ever go into a Roman Catholic chapel there ? No ; I never did. You say he said this at the end ; you mean at the end of the sermon ? Yes; at the latter end of the sermon always. He preaches in Irish ? In English and Irish both. Do you understand Irish ? Not perfectly, but I understand a little. You say at the end of the sermon ; do you mean that Mr. Nangle's advice to them, to be kind to the persons and loving to the persons, followed soon after what he had said so adverse to their religion ? Yes ; after stating the errors which Mr. Nangle considered to be in the Roman Catholic religion, he always mentioned the pro- priety of kindness to them. Were there any Roman Catholics present during his sermons ? Very often. Did they say any thing, as if they were hurt at what Mr. Nan- gle said ? I never heard them. 89 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATION Did the Roman Catholic persons there ever show to you any feehno: of regret that they were driven to violent conduct towards Mr. Nangle or others ? No, they never did. You never heard them say that they were sorry for it ? I never did. You say you could not mention the number that constituted the procession that went to meet Dr, M'Hale ; can you say nearly what was the population of the Island ? I am not aware of it. Was the procession peaceable or tumultuous ? With the exception of hooting as they passed our Settlement, I saw HO other act of violence. Oil this occasion they hooted as they passed the Settlement ? Yes they did. With Dr. M'Hale ? I am not sure whether Dr. M'Hale Avas actually in the pro- cession at this time or not, but there were many priests. Was Mr. Connolly there. I cannot say exactly. Do you know whether Dr. M'Hale was ever there before? Not in my time. Had there been any opposition to the Settlement before Dr. M'Hale came there ? I had just arrived at the time. How do you know there were many priests in the procession ? Because I saw them; I knew them by their dress. How many priests are there in the Island ? Two. Then those other priests came with the Doctor ? They did. How long had you been in the Island before Dr. M'Hale came ? I should think about a month or five weeks. Had you found any difficulty in getting workmen before Not the least. Had you found an anxiety on the part of the people to come for work ? Very greal^. How long had Mr. Nangle been there before Dr. M'Hale came ? I cannot exactly say. How much land have you been able to reclaim since you have AND tiif: achill missiov. 90 been there? T should think about twenty acres since I have been there ; perhaps more. When the people hooted you, did they use abusive language ? No, nothing more than hooting. Do you mean to say that when you have wisbed to purchase articles, and have had the money to pay for them, people would not 'really furnish you with the articles ? Yes. Shopkeepers and farmers ? Farmers ; there are no such things as shops in the Island. Then how did you manage to procure the necessaries of life i* By getting them from Westport. A distance of thirty-two Irish miles ? Yes. As you are an Englishman can you say how many EngKsh miles that would be ? I believe about forty. Westport is on the main land? It is. What is the nearest town containing shops? Newport. How many miles off is that ? I believe twenty-seven Irish miles ? Why did not you send there ? Because Westport is a better market town ; there are veiy few shops in Newport. Did the system adopted by Dr. M'Hale and the priest in the Island occasion to the society of which you are steward additional expense in the carrying on their objects? Yes. In what way ? In labour particularly. And in other ways besides ? Yes, and in other ways,in consequence of stopping the sale of provisions. The witness is directed to withdraw. &1 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF £I)C€ATIO» Thomas Ralph is called in, and examined as follows: What are you ? I am a Protestant. What is your occupation ? My occupation is a Scripture Reader. Who employs you as a Scripture Reader? The Rev. Mr. Nangle. Do you receive payment as such ? Yes What salary do you receive? £24 a year. Have you always heen a Protestant ? No; I was brought up in the Church of Rome. When did you become a Protestant ? In the year 1824. What was your reason for leaving the Church of Rome? By reading the Scriptures, and taking notice ; that I did not lik& their mode of worship ; that it was not according to the Scripture. Where were you first employed as a Scripture Reader ? I was first employed by Mr. Blest; I continued a Reader under his superintendence for a time. Where was this? Mr. Blest lived in Sligo at that time. When were you first employed as a Scripture Reader in the Island of Achill ? I believe it was last January three years. AND THE ACHILL MISSION. 92 That was in January 1834 ? Yes. Who employed you in 1834 as a Scripture Reader? TheRev, Mr. Nangle. And you have been in his employment as such ever since ? Yes, You have been a Protestant for thirteen years ; ever since the year 1824? Yes. What brought you to Achill first ? I was employed by the Reverend Mr. Nangle as Scripture He induced you to come into the Island of Achill ? Yes, he brought me there. Did you know Mr. Nangle before you went to Achill? I did; I met him near the town ofBallina. Do you recollect tlie time when Dr. M'Hale visited Achill? ^ Yes, I do ; but I do not exactly know the time ; i ihmk it wa<< in December in the year 1835. Did you see any procession at that time in honour of him ' Yes, I happened to come to the Chapel where they were col- Did you see tlie people go out to meet him or bring him in ? At the tnne I went there they were in the Chapel. You went to the chapel where the people were ? Yes. Did you see Dr. M'Hale in the Chapel ? I did. ^ Did you see Mr. Connolly in the Chapel? I did. Did you see the other priests of the Island in the Chapel ? 1 believe he had a curate; 1 think he was there. Ch^'el^"^'^^'^^^'*^''""''^^^^''*'^"'^' '''' ^""^ anything in that I did." Did you hear him say any thing concerning the ProtestantRe- ligion ? I did. What did he say ? .JV.?V^'%^'^ 7^' l^'u '^'' P^'^t^^tant religion began in hell and that it would end m hell. Did he say any thing about the salvation of Protestants ? XNo, 1 did not hear him say thing about that. P3 THE NATION AT, BOARD OF JEDUCATION Did he say whether they would be finally lost or not ? That was what he was about. What he was saying was, that that religion had no foundation ; that it was a new religion from the time of Luther, Calvin, and soon; and that it began in hell and that it would end in hell. j3id he say any thing that meant thatjicrsons who belonged to the Protestant religion would go to hell, oi not;* Yes, he did say that they would go to hell; and before I left the church of Rome I often heard that said by priests. Did he say any thing about persons who worked for the Pro- testant Settlement '" - He did. What did he say ? He was blaming those people for going to work there, and re- presented them as one going before the devil, and the devil having two half crowns on his two horns ; and that the man that v\'ould go to work there was just com|)letcly equal to the man that would t'ake down the half croM's from the devil's horns, and fall down and worship him or thank him. Did he say that as a reason to deter persons from working at the Protestant Settlement ? He did ; that is my opinion. Did it appear to you at the time clearly that that was- his meaning ? Yes ; I know it was. Did he at the same time forbid jicrsons to sell to the Protestant Settlement ? Yes, he did; he told them not to have any communication with them, not to buy or sell, nor even speak a word with them. Did you hear him say that ? I did. Did he say any thing about sending children to Mr. Nangle's schools ? I do not know indeed. Did Dr. M'Hale say any thing Avhen this sermon was over? He got up, and it seemed to me that he confirmed this, or ap- proved of what he heard, in some words that I cannot recollect now. He got up and signified his approval i* Yes. You have attended Mr. Nanglewhen he has preached ? Yes. Did you ever hcai' Mr. Nangle say any thing about the way ;5ND THE ACHILL RTlSSICm. 9'4 in which it was the duty of his people to behave to the Roman Catholics ? Yes ; I often heard Mr. Nangle preach that we should treat them as our friends, though being our enemies, and so on, and should pray for ihem ; and so I have heard Mr. Nangle himself do the same. Did you ever hear Mr. Connolly say any thing about a man named Murray ? No, I did liot. Were you ever treated with violence in the Island of A chill? I was ; evcrv day we are treated in that way ; I could not de- scribe about that ; almost every day that v.e go out we are treated in that way; shouting and liooting and throwing stones after us, and calling us names, and calling us devils. Was ever a stone thrown at you P Yes. Did ever a stone hit you ? Not to my recollection. You probably would recollect if a stone had hit vou ? Yes. Did you deem it necessary to have some one with you when you went out to keep each other from being hurt P Yes, I would think it necessary that two should go out together. You think it necessary for two always to go together for protect- ing each other ? Yes. Should not you venture to go outby yourself ? We take the example that our Lord and Saviour laid down, to go out two and two ; we go by that example. Then you never have been in the habit of going out alone ? Seldom indeed Iwentoutalone since I came to Achill. But you have sometimes? I would go out to near neighbours. Would you be afraid to go alone ? I would be afraidr The only reason that T would not be afraid is that it is not merely looking to the law of" the land, but looking to the Lord of heaven and earth ; but w^e must look to the law of the land too. Do you think they would kill you /* They would kill me, and would think they were doing God service in killing me. Do you think the law of the land is sufliciently strong in Achill to protect you ? 95 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATION No, without God's hand being upon us ; without the Lord stand- ing by me, but I know the law of the land is commanded by God himself, and that we ought to look to the law of the land. Do you speak Irish? Yes. Do you preach in Irish ? I do not preach at all ; I simply read God's Word. But when you read the Scripture, and converse upon it; do you speak Irish or English ? It is in the Irish that I generally read in Achill. You were examined before Captain Neame ? I was. Was Mr. Connolly present at the time ? He was. Did you there state what you have now stated, respecting his preaching when Dr. M'Hale was present ? Yes. Did INIr. Connolly ask you any questions as to whether it was true or not? I do not know whether he did or not. Did he contradict you upon it ? No. How did you happen to be in the Chapel to hear Mr. Con- nolly state this ? It is my business to go out every day reading God's Word to people ; I went there to see whether I could get a good sermon from Bishop INI'Hale; I thought it as well to go the way to the chapel as any other way, and so I went in there. Are you a married man ? Yes. Is your wife a Protestant or a Roman Catholic? She was a Roman Catholic once, but, thank the Lord, she is not so now. You were not afraid to go to the Chapel upon that day? If I would be afraid to go out, that would not do, I must go out. Did the people know in the Chapel that you were a converted Roman Catholic ? They do in all parts of the Island wherever I go. When you were in the Chapel that day, was it publicly known that you were there? It was. And you met with no molestation there ? AND THE ACillLL MISSION. 96 No ; but at the time that I was hearing the sermon I watched an opportunity of walking out of the Chapel. I knew that whilst I was in the ehapel nothing would harm me ; but I watched an opportunity, and when 1 got out I made speed. I knew the plan well. You having been once a Roman Catholic knew the plan well. You knew from experience that no violence would be offered to you in the chapel while the service was going on, and you knew that the danger would be when the service was over; and in consequence of that knowledge you took an opportunity and went away before the service was over ? Yes. Was that chapel at Ducanally ? It was. Were you ever afterwards reproached with having been in the chapel by any of the people who had seen you there, knowing who you were ? Though I cannot make mention of those men, some of them, after coming home, told me that if I had tarried there for any more time I should have been injured. After their so telling you, did you go again into the chapel ? No, I have not been in the Chapel since. Do not you frequently go into a Roman Catholic chapel ? No, I have not gone since. You have not been into a Roman Catholic chapel since the time when you went in to Ducanally chapel when Dr. M'Hale was there ? No. Who went into that chapel with you at that time ? It was one John Gardiner. Was he one of your Mission ? He was. Had he been a Roman Catholic himself ? No; he was a Protestant from his youth. Did you go into that chapel with the intention of giving any religious advice to any persons there ? I knew well that there would not be any opportunity of doing that. I had an intention of going in to hear Bishop M'Hale preach a sermon. My object was to see if they had mended in their religious service since the time I left them. Did Bishop M'Hale say any thing about the Scripture Readers ? 1 did not hear him say any thing about them* 97 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATION Was it Mr. Connolly or Bishop M'Hale that preached that day? Two priests preached ; it was not INIr. Connolly that was preaching wlien I went in. The Mass was over, and the preaching was going on when I went in theie, and I did not know the priest. It was not Dr. M'Hale that preached -^ No, it was not. But Dr. M'llale got up at the end, and expressed his con- currence ? Yes. When he got up did he say any tlnng about the Scripture Readers. I do not recollect that he mentioned Scripture Readers. How many Sripture Readers has My. Nangle got in Achill ? Four of them. What is your business as a Scripture Reader; what is it you do? Just to go out and read God's Word to the people in a lan- guage that they can understand. What is it you read ; the old Testament or the new Testament ^ Both of them. Any part of the Bible that you choose ? Yes; but there are certain portions that we generally read to the people pointing out the sufliciency of the Saviour, Who points them out to you ? We know them very well ourselves. You choose what part you please ? We arc commanded to read those passages which show the suf' ficiency of the Lord Jesus Christ to the people. Do you choose them yourselves, or are they pointed out to you before by any other person ? I choose them. Does Mr. Nangle never point out to you what you are to read to the people ? Yes, sometimes; he knows that I keep a journal. I must let Mr. Nangle know what 1 read to the people. When you have read a passage do you expound it and ex- plain it •* The passage is so plain that it needs no commentary. It wants no explanation ? I think not. 1 do not say that I would be cpialified enough to give an explanation. AND THE ACHILL MISSIOV" 98 In what place is it that you read these passages to the people? About the villages. Is it in the street ? Those few that will allow us into their houses, we read to them. You desire tlicm to let you into their houses for the purpose ? Yes; we ask leave to read to them. And when they refuse, you do not go in I* No, we do not go in if they refuse. Do you read in the streets to them ? Just as we get an opportunity. Do you read to crowds or to individuals ? Just as we meet them. Do you tell them the difference between the Catholic and Pro- testant religion. I tell them salvation is by Christ alone. Do you tell them that the views of the Roman Catholics are false? I would not wish to abuse any religion in that way, but just show them their own error, that they do not believe in the Lord Jesus Christ. You arc satisfied with pointing out wliat you believe to be the truth, without talking to them about their own error; is that so <* Yes that is what I mean. Do not the Roman Catholics beUeve in the Lord Jesus Christ ? When I was a Roman Catholic I believed in many things be- sides that. Do you know the Inspector of the National School, Mr. Kelly, who came there last Summer to inspect the National School ? No, I do not. You do not recollect meeting him ? I do not recollect meeting him. You know Mr. Connolly ? Yes. Do you remember meeting him with another gentleman there, and following them ? No, I do not. Are there several Scripture Readers in Achill? There are four. When you read the Scriptures to the people do they ever ask yon questions about it ? Sometimes. ])o you answer those questions ? 99 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATION As well as the Lord shows me. Do you wait to be invited by persons to talk with them upon these subjects, or do you offer yourself to them ? We would begin to speak to each other of the Saviour, and so on. You begin then to speak to such persons as you meet with upon this subject? As they would give me leave. If you iind them unwilling to receive you, do you stay there, or go away P I would withdraw. When you were in the chapel was it in the sermon that you heard the declaration that the Protestant Religion began in hell and would end in hell ? It was. Were you rightly understood to say that it was not Mr. Con- nolly that preached that sermon ; did you not say that you did not know the person that preached ? There was one preached before Mr. Connolly ; but it was Mr, Connolly that made mention of those words. In what language ? In the Irish. The witness is directed to withdraw AND THE ACHILL MISSION. 100 Thomas M'Nulty is called in, and examined as follows: - Are you a Bible Reader? I read a little sometimes. You are not employed by Mr. Nangle to go about as a Bible Reader ? No. What are you ? I am a labourer. Do you work for the Protestant Settlement at Achill ? I do. Are you a Protestant ? Yes. Were you always a Protestant ? No. What were you before you were a Protestant '^ I was a Roman Catholic. When did you become a Protestant ? Last August twelvemonth. What induced you to become aProtestant? I thought it was the best religion. Are you a native of Achill ? No. What brought you to Achill ? Mr. Bridger went there, and took me there first as a servant boy. He is the Steward of the Settlement? He is. 101 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDU-CATION Were you a Roman Catholic when yon came into Achill ? I was. Were you ever in the chapel of Ducunnally in the Islancl of Achill ? I was. Were you in the habit of attending in that chapel? I attended once on Sunday. You were a Roman Catholic at that time? I was. Who was the priest that officiated when you went there i* The Rev. Mr. Connolly. Do you recollect any advice he gave to the people at that time ? Yes, I do. Was it in his sermon ? Yes. What did he say ? He gave orders to his congregation, that any person, Protes- tant or Reader, from the Settlement, who would ceme to lliem to the field where they were at work, whatever they would have in their hand, if it was a spade, to strike them with it; and he like- wise told them, if they went to their houses, if it was a pitchfork they had in their hands, to stick them. How soon after that Sunday did you become a Protestant? At this time my master went to Westport, and I went, unknown to him, that Sunday to mass. I was a Roman Catholic then. Did your master think you were a Protestant .'* No. How soon after that did you become a Protestant ? I cannot say how long it was after that time ; but I did not go to mass after that. Why do you say you went unknown to 3-our master? Because he went from home, — he went to Westport, — and be- cause I had so much business to do at home I would have to stop at home. Did he tell you not to go to mass-^ No, he never did. Had he any objection to your going to Mass? No. I had been with him four years before thatc Was it on a Sunday that you went ? It was. Was your work so pressing that you could not leave home to go to your place of worship on Sunday without his permission ? No. A'SD THE ACHILL WISSICN. lOt Then why was it necessary for you to go witliout his knowledge ? My master was away. You said you had so much work to do ? He was not married at the time, and there was no one in the house but me. Then you felt that it was necessary to stay at home to take care «f the house ? Yes. In this sermon that you heard did Mr. Connolly say any thing about a man named Munay ? He did. He said to his congregation : "You dirty set, I am tired of you ; to see that devil, Murray, going about like a wasp, having a sting on his mouth just to sting the people ; a man that was hunted and hooted out of every place that ever he was in, till became into the borough, and there he is." What did you understand him to mean by the " borough" ? That he was in the Settlement ; and there he was. By the ''borough, "you understood him to mean the Settle- ment ? Yes. Did he say any thing about Munay being a man who would or would not be suffered to live in any place but Achill ? He said that he washunt<,'d out of every place that he was in till he was hunted into the borough, and tlicre he was. Did you ever hear Mr. Connflly t/'ll his congregation that they -should persecute the Protestants t;;(^n('rally? I did. I heard him say that which I said before. Have you attended Mr. Nanglc'.* sermons often ? 1 have. Have you ever hcp.rdliiin tell hispeojdehow they should behave I© the Roman Catholics? I heard him say that they ought to return good for evil. Where do vou live now ? J« Achill. ' Were you examined befca'c Captain Neame ? i was. Did you say at that time what you have now said, 4ibout the language of Mr. Connolly in his sermon ? I did. Was Mr. Connolly present? He was. Did Mr. Connolly contradict it ? No, he did not that I know. 103 THE NATIONAL BOAUD OF EDUCATION So long as you were present he said nothing in conti*adiction? He said nothing. I told him the language he had expressed from his altar, and he did not say any thing against it. Captain Irwin was there. Was this language that you heard in the sermon against the Pro- testants, in any degree the cause of your leaving the Roman Ca- tholics? It was a good deal of it. I thought it was not a fit thing for a man who professed to be a minister of Christ to give his people such orders from his altar. Do you know whether there are any schools in Achill? I know there are. Connected with the National Board ? Yes. How many? In the neighbourhood that I am in, we have a school in our Settlement, and a school in the next village of Dugort. Does the school in your Settlement belong to the National Board ? No, it does not. Have you a house of your own in Achill ? I have got a house there within these last two months. Belonging to yourself? No ; it belongs to Mr. Nangle ; he bought it; he has some land there; there are labouring men that go to that house when they go to work there. Do you pay any rent for it? No ; Mr. Nangle pays the rent for it. Are you a servant still to the same person ^ No; I am working now for myself. Have you some land of your own ? No. Were you a labourer before you became a Protestant ? I was. What wages do you receive as a labourer now? A shilling a day. And a house ? Yes. Have you any garden ? No. Did you ever receive any ill-usage from any body in Achill? There is not a time that I have passed by that I was not shouted after, after I left the Church of Rome. AND THE ACHILL MfSSIOK. 104 Were you ever beaten ? No. You never received any personal injury? No, not beyond shouting and telling the people not to give me any thing that I wanted to buy. They never beat you or threw stones at you ? No. Do you find now any difficulty in purchasing things that you want in the Island ? The first time thati went to that place the people there that had things to sell would not sell them to me, but they gave them to another Roman Catholic about the place, and I would meet that man and buy them ofj^him; they would dread themselves to sell them to me. Is that the case now? Not since I have bee» there. Are you obliged to buy indirectly in that manner of another person ? Yes. But it is sent to that person for the purpose of being sold to you ? Yes. Before you became a Protestant were you ever told by the priest, or any other Roman Catholic, that you ought to leave the Settlement, and have nothing to do with the Protestants there >* No ; except by the country people. What is the usual rate of wages in Achill per day ? 8d. a day. Do the Roman Catholics work for 8d. ? They were afraid to work there for 8d. a day. They said sometimes that they would not work there at all ; they were afraid of the I priest. Do the people earn 8d. a day in general in Achill ? They do in general. Do all the labourers at the Missionary Settlement get Is. a day ? No. Why do you get more than otliers ? Because I was a steward with the men that were there in ano- ther Island. Were the directions from the priest to strike any one belonging to the Mission with a spade or with a pitchfork, or was it confined to the Scripture Readers ? lt)5 THE NATlONAf. BOARD OP E&UCATION It was to any of the readers or preachers, or any of the Colony. Had you no apprehension that you would be struck ? I was often in dread that I would be struck. Was any of them ever struck with a spade or a pitchfork ? That I do not know. At the time when you were a Roman Catholic, would you have considered yourself bound to obey such a direction of the priest ? I would ; I would be afraid not to obey it. Then how can you account for it that in a population of 5,000 men not one of those 5,000 men who inhabit the Island of Achill obeyed that direction of Jie priest, to your knowledge, though you say you would have obeyed it when you were a Roman Ca- 'tholic> That I do not know. You said that the priest told them that they were to strike with the first weapon that they had, if they should attempt to speak to them, any person connected with the Settlement ; but you did not understand him that unless the people of the Settlement went into their houses they were to be struck in this way ? No ; he gave them orders that if they would come to their houses they were to stick them. And if they should speak with them in the open air what were they then to do ? To strike them with whatever they had in their hand ? Did you undertsand that to mean, if they were to speak to them about their religion, or if they were to speak to them at all ? Yes. Whether it was about religion or any thing else ? Yes. In consequence of that do you know whether the people of the Settlement did or did not go freely into the houses of the Ro- man Catholics in Achill, and talk freely with them ; I know that they were willing to talk freely with them. I was going down the sea-shore one evening, and there was a man, one of the readers, who spoke to a man in the middle of the road, and I saw him strike him. And you considered the man, when you saw him strike, acting in obedience to what the priest told him in the Chapel? I think so. Tht witness is directed to withdraw. A1«B TVS ACUTLL MISSION. 106 Mt. Francis Reynqlds is called in, and examined as follows v* You are an Officer of the Coast-guard-^ I am. Are you in his Majesty's Navy ? No, What is your office ? I am the civilian Chief Officer of the Coast-guard in the Island of Achill.. As such are you obliged occasionally to give orders to the men Hnder your command to protect any persons ? I have been obliged frequently to give orders to them to pro>- tect the people of the Protestant Settlement, Mr. Nangle and Mr. Baylee. In consequence of what has come to your knowledge officially ; Yes and from what I have seen. Are you a Protestant or a Roman Catholic ? I am a Protestant. Are you married ? I am. Is your wife a Protestant or a Roman Catholic ? She is a Roman Catholic. Did you, in consequence of any thing that she told you of what she had heard from the priest in the Chapel, think it neces^* sary to take any steps ? I did. What had she told you ? 107 THE NATIONAL BOARD Of EDUCATION She told me that she heard the priest say that he would banish Mr. Nangle and Mr. Stoney, and any man that would take their part ; and it was their intention to drive the Protestants out of that Island. How long have you been in Achill ? I have been in Achill this last time six years. Had you ever been there before ? I had, for three years. What interval was there between the two limes of residence P About three years. You were there, therefore, when Mr. Nangle came in 1834 ? I was. Did you see any improvement produced in the Island ? I did. I saw a great improvement in the cultivation of the land, and also in having schools for the instruction of the chil- dren. Did the people testify any feeling towards Mr. Nangle at that time ? They always appeared to me at the time to be very fond of Mr. Nangle, and to like him very much. When were the first indications of a different feeling towards Mr. Nangle ? When the priest gave orders to shout after the Protestants whenever they saw them. What priest. Mr. Connolly. About what time was that ? I think it was in March 1836, but I am not quite certain as to the date. Was it before or after Dr. M'Hale's visit ? I think it was after Dr. M'Hale's visit that the greatest perse- cution A\as carried on. Had any thing taken place in the way of persecution before ? Yes. When did Mr. Connolly come into the Island ? I think in either February or March 1 836, but I am not quite certain of that. Might it have been 1835 ? It might. Do you recollect when Dr. M'Hale came ? I think it was in August or September in the year before last* Was Mr. Connolly there before Dr. M'Hale came ? He was. AND^ THE ACHILL MISSION. idS Then if he came there before Dr. M'Hale, and Dr. M^Hale came there in September 1835, most it not have been in the March before that ? Then it must have been in the March before that. Did you have officially reported to you any thing by Thomas- Williams in the autumn of last year ? Yes ; Thomas Williams reported to me on the 30th of Octo- ber, on the Sunday, that there were four New TeslamenLs burnt by a man named Lavelle, and that two of them were flung into his house, Who is James Lavelle ? A man that acts as the clerk to Mr. Connolly ihe priest ; they were half burnt ; there was " Hibernian Society" marked upon them. On what terms do you yourself live with the respectable Ro- man Catholic inhabitants of the Island ? I have been on very good terms with them all, except a- very (ow ; I never had any dispute with any person in the Island. Did they attend or not attend to the direction of the priest to abstain from all communication with the Protestants ? No ; they always said they were ashamed of such work. There are some respectable Roman Catholics in the Island ^ Yes; respectable people, that are of better order than the rest. Then an obedience is paid to the priest, in respect k) refiising to have conversation with Protestants, only by the lower order of the people ? So far as I understand. You do not find in the great body of the Roman Catholics of respectable station of life any disinclination to converse with you P Not the slightest. Are there many persons in a respectable station of life in the Island ? Yes; there are a great many what we consider respectable peo- ple in the Island. But the great multitude of the people were obedient, as far as' you know, to the priest's orders i' They were, because I witnessed it myself The witness is directed to withdraw. 109^ 3tHE NATIONAL BOARD OF BDUCAIUO* John Kutledge is called in, and examined as follows ;: Are you a Coast-guard man at Achill ? Yes. Have you long been so employed ? Eighteen years in the service. In the Month of October 1831 had you charge of the coast- guard station of Rossmore Point ? Yes. Do you know Timothy M'Carthy ? Yes. Did he report to you any thing respecting the eonduct of James^ O'Donnell ? Yes, he did. Is thut James O'Donnell the James O'Donnell who is the schoolmaster at the National School at Dugort ? I do not know whether he is there at present or not j he was there. He is 'the man that was a schoolmaster there ? Yes, he was. What did M'Carthy report to you as having been said or done hy O'Donnell ? As near as I can recollect, the report was that Ireland would soon be their own, and O'Connell would be their king; I can recoiiect no more than that of the speech, it is so long since^ Did you report this to your superior officer ? Yes ; I reported it to Lieutenant Irwin, the Inspecting Com- A?IJL> THE ACHILL WISSIOW. ll'O^ Blander. Before this, had you ever heard O'Donnell say anything else ?* Previous to that I heard him make a kind of a speech ; I heard him say that he thanked his God that he would soon see the day that they would trample down the Protestant Church, and that their own church would flourish again, which had been per- secuted. Who wrote that paper from which you are reading? I wrote it myself. When did you write it? Since I came here. Why did you write it? To recollect. I have a very bad memory; it is on account of the wound I received on my head in the service. Are you quite sure that O'Donnell said what you have now stated ? What I have now said I am willing to make oath to. Did you write that at the desire of any other person ? No ; just for my own information. Did you warn O'Donnell at all? I threatened him before that to report him. It was two days, before he made this speech that he was complained of by INl-Carthy. To whom did you report this ? To the Inspecting Commander. Who was that Inspecting Commander ? Lieutenant Irwin. Did you ever receive any threat from O'Donnell? By some of his relations I did, in Newport, at different times; and I should have been ill-used by them only for other peo- ple interfering. Was that before or after you had reported him ? After he was reported and discharged. What was the threat ? To beat me for getting iiim discharged. He thought it was through me that he was discharged from the Coast-guard service. Where was it that he made this speech that you have repeated now ? Convenient to his own house; it might be, I suppose, about fifty yards from my dwelling. You did not hear him yourself ? Iheard him, but I was at a distance off, that I did not know Ill THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATIO^f what he said. Whom did he say it to ? It was to one Kelly, that was transported. Was it in a house or out of doors ? I understood it was hoth inside and outside. There was nobody else there ; there was not a multitude of peer- pie there ? No, there was not. Who told you what it was that he said ? It was McCarthy. Where was McCarthy at the time ? He was listening ; the doors were close to one another. They lived under one roof, did they not ? They did. Was not it inside the house ? McCarthy says that he spoke some of it inside and some outside ; he told me that. Is McCarthy a Roman Catholic/ Yes, he is. The witness is directed to withdraw. AND THE ACHILL MISSION. 112 Mr. James Kelly is called in, and examined as follows; You are an Inspector under the National Board ? I am. Have you ever, as Inspector, visited Aclaill in consequence of complaints against the teacher of the Dugort National School ? I have. When was that ? The first investigation took place on the 24th of October 1835, the date of my first report. On that same day ? On that day it took place. When you went there who was the first person that you went to? I went to Mr. Connolly in the first instance. Why did you go first to him ? He is the manager and correspondent for those schools. Had you given any previous notice to Mr. Nangle of your inten- tion of visiting in consequence of his complaints? Not at that time. At that time you did not give to Mr. Nangle any notice of your intention of coming to. inquire into the matter of his com- plaints f* Not at that time. And the first person vou went to was Mr. Connolly P Yes. Did Mr. Connolly send for O'Donnell ? 113 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATION No he did not ; I went to the schools. Did you tell Mr. Connolly what the complaints were ? I think I stated to him that there were complaints against O'Donnell. Did you tell him what the complaints were ? I am not quite certain. Wherefore should you go to the patron and correspondent of the school first, except to let him know what the complaints against the master were ? I am not quite certain that I went into all the details of those complaints to Mr. Connolly, hut I told him generally that there were some complaints against O'Donnell. Did you show Mr. Connolly the letter of Mr. Nangle to the secretary of the board that contained those complaints ? No, 1 did not. Were you directed by the Board to go in the first intance to. Mr. Connolly ? Certainly not; I received no instructions upon that point, as to* calling on Mr. Connolly. Will you look at your report. No. 23. in the printed correspon- dence. The secjond paragraph there gives an account of your report upon the first subject of complaint ?■ It does. Will you read it ? " O'Donnell admits that on the occasion of Dr. M'Hale's visit he, in common with the inhabitants of the Island, met him with green boughs, &c. &c., but that in doing so he was ignorant of any violation of the rules of the Board." You went afterwards to Mr. Nangle ? I did. W^hat did you tell Mr. Nangle respecting the first charge ? I told him that O'Donnell admitted and pleaded guilty to the first charge, that is, with regard to going with thejoeople to meet Dr: M'Hale on his visit to Achill. You will see that the complaint was that O'Donnell bore a flag with the inscription " welcome religion and liberty." That was the first charge ; and you say that you told Mr. Nangle that O'Donnell had pleaded guilty to that charge.'* I do not think I got a copy of Mr. Nangle's letter ; I was di- rected to go there and inquire into those comi)laints. What letter had youi* A letter from the secretary diiccting me to go there and inquire into the complaints against O'DonnelL AND TH£ ACHILL MlfcSION. 114 Have you got that letter ? No, I think not. Then you have no copy of your instructions ? No, not with me at present* Were they written instructions ? They were ; it was a written letter. Did the letter contain the charges made against O'Donnell by Mr. Nangle ? Generally, I think. But not specifically ? I rather think not specifically. Is that the usual course adopted by the Board when it instructs its inspectors to investigate charges against the masters employed ? On a subsequent occasion I know that the charges were spe- cified. Is it the usual course of the Board to send an inspector to in- vestigate charges without giving him a specification of the charges ? I should think not. The direction that I received in that in- stance was to investigate charges against O'Donnell, and to re- ceive them from Mr. Nangle. Then the letter went on to speak generally of those charges, I think. What did the letter say generally of those charges ? It said that O'Donnell was charged with having on the occa- sion of Dr. M'Hale's visit met him with green boughs, &c. That was one charge. Is the paper from which you are now reading the letter you re- ceived from the secretary ? No, it is my report. The reason I referred to this paper is that I investigated all the charges contained in the secretary's let- ter as they appear here. Will you state what the other charges were ? The second was that he had controversial discussions with Mr. Nangle 's readers or preachers. What was the third charge.^ That O'Donnell threatened to cut off* the head of a child going to Mr. Nangle's school. Were these all the charges that were mentioned, or was there any thing about O'Donnell having been once in the Coast-guard, and dismissed on account of being impHcated in ribbonism ? No, that was not mentioned; that was the subject of a subse- quent inquiry. Is that the usual way in which the Board proceeds in respect of 115 THE N4TI0NAL BOARD OF EDUCATION the charges brought against its teachers; does it give specifically the cliarges that are said to have been brought, or only deal with them generally, in the way you have stated ? I cannot answer as to the general usage of the Board. Have you ever been engaged in any similar investigation ? I think this was the first case. Have you been engaged in any since ? Yes, on one occasion. Then as far as you recollect, you never were employed by the Board; except in this one instance, in investigating a charge against any of its schoolmasters ? Not at that time; but I Avas subsequently. Has it often happened to you to investigate charges under the direction of the Board ? Not often. Has it several times ? I can bring to my recollection one occasion subsequent to that. Do you recollect its having occurred more than once ? I do not recollect its having occurred more than once, and that subsequent case also referred to Achill. Then are the committee to understand that the only case in which you have been employed to investigate complaints against schoolmasters has been in the Island of Achill ? 1 do not recollect any particular instance at this moment ; there may have been some other trifling charges. Then the Committee are to understand that you, being the in- spector of the Board, do not recollect whether you ever have been instructed by the Board to inquire into the conduct of any school- master against whom complaint has been made, except in this in- stance of O'Donnell at Achill •* Yes; there was a man of the name of Cassidy in the same Island. But, with the exception of those two instances in the isle of Achill, do you say that you do not recollect ever to have been em- ployed in investigating any charge against a schoolmaster ? I cannot at this moment bring to my mind any. How long have you been Inspector ? Since the year 1833. I recollect perfectly now another case ; a case of a man of the name of Flaherty, in the County of Gal way. But with that exception you do not recollect any other case.' So far as I recollect at this moment I do not recollect any other AND THK ACHILL MISSIOX. 116 instance. Did the Board tell you that O *D on n ell's going out with green boughs to meet Dr. M'Hale was the complaint against him upon that occasion ? I cannot positively state, but I should say it was so from the view I took of the thing. Can you recollect whether the Board told you that the com- plaint against O'Donnell was for heading a procession, carrying flags and banners, which went to meet Dr. M'Hale on his arri- val at this place, and that he bore a flag with the inscription '* wel- come religion and liberty ?" I cannot recollect unless I have the letter itself. Have not you the latter in your possession ? I unfortunately did not bring it. Did not you know that you were summoned here upon this case? I did. Did not it occur to you that such a letter as that would be rery important ? It did not; I thought my own report would be the principal subject of inquiry. You can procure that letter ? I can. Are the committee to understand that you wrote your report with the Secretary's letter before you, .and that you followed the order of the letter with respect to the things you were to in- quire into ? I cannot positively say; I should think I did from the manner in which I made the report. When you were asked about the letter just now, you referred to a paper in your hand, and you said you could infer from that pa- per what the statements were in the letter ? Yes ; I think I followed the directions of the letter. Then if you think you followed the directions of the letter, do you think that you followed them when you made that report of O'Donnell having admitted that he met Dr. M'Hale with green boughs &c., do you think that that must have been in accordance with the instructions that were sent to you ? If your Lordships will allow me I will endeavour to procure that letter before I can answer that question with certainty. [Some letters are shown to the witness.] Will you look at those papers and see whether you find among tli«m the letter sent to you by Mr. Kelly ? 117 THE NATIONAL BOAftD OF ET^UCaTIOIS' Yes, here is the letter. Will you read it ? " Many circumstances have occurred which render your imme" diate visit to the National Schools of the Island of Achill abso- lutely imperative. Complaints have been forwarded of th« mas- ter of Dugort school by the Rev. Mr. Nangle of that Island Upon two several occasions. Upon the latter occasion this gen- tleman accuses O'Donnell of threatning with a knife to cut off the head of any child that would go to Mr. Nangle's school. I have •written to the Reverend Mr. Connolly with respect to these com- plaints, but the Board are of opinion that your personal visit, and your explanation ofthe principles of their National system will he productive of much good^ I have to remind you that these schools have never yet had the benefit of an inspection, although aided by the board ; there is therefore every thing for you to do. 1 am also to remind you that sectarianism as well as political ani- mosity rage very much in those Islands. You will therefore so •conduct yourself that in asserting the principles of National Edu- cation, and setting opinions right concerning it, you steer clear ©f giving offence to any side. I shall expectyour report in the be- ginning of the ensuing week." That was the letter which you conisdered your instructions for going to Achill ? Yes. That was the only letter of instructions you received P I think there was one upon the 18th, after the one I liave read. Do you mean to say that you believe that the second letter gave you instructions respecting the two first complaints ? I rather think it did. Now have the goodness to look again at No. 23. of these printed papers ; there you say that the first complaint is, that he, in common with the inhabitants of the Island met Dr. M^Hale ■with green boughs ; but you see the complaint in Mr. Nangle's letter is about flags and banners. Do you mean to say that you received no instructions from the Board to inquire into a complaint about his carrying flags and banners ? I cannot say without I see the letter ;I am positive there is such •a letter giving me instructi<5ns to inquire about green boughs, or about flags and banners. You see that you have answered as if the complaint was of green boughs ; now you are referred to the letter of Mr. Nangle to the Board, where it appears that his complaint says nothing AND THL ACHILL MISSION. ||^ about green boughs, but flags and banners? If I fell into such an enw it must have been an error of mv own; if the letter stated that I was to make an inquirv as^o hi caiTying flags, and I made an inquiry as to gree^n bougU t e error must have been my own. i^^^b^^^ liie Do you know for cert^ain what your instructions were ? 1 cannot say positively till T see that letter. What reason have vou to believe that you received a further letter of instructions, dated the 18th of Oc-tober ? d,o''.%lT;Ser;^"5p'"''''''"^"" --"dalcuc- dated No, I had not. Do you believe thct you received such a letter? No. Then, not believing that you received a letter of the 18tli is the letter of the 7th, which you have read, the letter which you call yourinstructionsmyourreport of the 24th of October i,°d upon which you made vour report? ciooer, ana I would beincliiicd i« believe that the charges were more" fully 1 have made the report. "uii-u You had no verbal communication upon the subject ? None whatever; I was in a distant part of Ireland at the time. ?Zo"st , ill'tl^'r""'" r' '''''' " ->''-eop]e of this island, where party an 1 political feeling rages to such an extent to deviate from the truili." Now, is it}>ossihIe that if you thouglit tliat was the re})ort to be made, you could have said to INIr. Nangle, "this is quite satisfac- lory, and I shall report to the Board ?" I cannot answer that question. Then will you read the fourth charge? *'That O'Donnell sent a message by one of his scholars to his sister, declaring, that if she went to Mr, Nan gle'.>* night school he would be before her, and thereby endeavour to prevent her so doing." Will you read what you have said u]xm that ? " This charge has not been sustained ; as, on my questioning Edward Mangan or i/nvelle, he declared that O'Donnell did not .V ly so, but that he told her from himself, in order to deter her from attending Mr. Nangle's school." Who declared that ? The brother ; the boy that conveyed the message, Do you recollect a woman coming out of the house while you were questioning Mangan or Lavelle upon that subject '* I do. Did she speak in English anything, or in Irish ? I think in Irish. ' Was what she said translated to you ? I think not Will you recollect; because it has been positively declaimed that it was ? I do not recollect what the woman said. I know that shf. sj)oke in Irish ; and if it was translated I do not recollect what it was. Do you recollect that a countryman was by at the time ? Yes ; \ thnik tliere was a man came with Mr. Nangle. Do you recollect Mr. Nangle telling that man to translate to you what had passed ? I do not. AND THE ACHILL MISSION. 124 Do you or do you not recollect this being translated to you, as said at this time by the woman : " We do not wish that my sister should go to that school at all ; for," said she, *' is not the parish priest cursing her every Sunday in the chapel for doing so; do not the people of the village say they will come and cut her up in quarters, and pull down the house over her head?'* I do not recollect. I know that she spoke in Irish ; and I do not recollect whether it was translated or not, I speak as to my recollection. Did you hear any thing upon that occasion about persons being cut up P I do not remember. Should not you have recollected if you had heard any thing so violent and so atrocious suggested •* I dare say 1 should. But you do not recollect? I do not recollect it. U it had been said to you would it have induced you to inquire further into the circumstance than you appear to have done, rest- ing upon the testimony of the brother of the person? I was told that the brother and sister were the only persons ; they were the only persons that Mr. Nangle brought forward to prove the charge. If you had heard that which has been read stated to you at the time, would not it haveinduced you to make further inquiries and to refrain from taking for granted the assertion of the brother ? I do not see how I can answer that. If you had heard such strong expressions used, which you do not recollect to have heard, would you not have made further in- quiries, in consequence, as to this charge ? I had no opportunity of making any further inquiry. If I had had an opportunity of making further inquiry I think I should. Would not it have led you to believe that this was some ground for the charge, if that woman had made such a declaration as stated in the evidence which has been read ? No; I think there was no proof of the charge. You said that you were told that Mr. Nangle had only two witnesses ; who told you so ? He was the only person that could have told me. My reason for saying that was, because they were the only two persons he pro- duced to prove the charge. Were you told by Mr, Nangle that they were the only two 125 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATION" persons ? He did not precisely say those are the only two persons I have to prove the charge, but he did not tell me of any others. That is your explanation of it, that you were not told of any others, and tlierefore you conceived they were the only two witnesses ? Yes. In the same rej»ort, in the last paragrajdi hut four, you say that *"* the teacher placed at the Dugort School by Mr. Connolly pre- vious to the school being recognized by the Board or O'Donnell appointed was tampered with and finally brought over to Mr. Nangle's side of the question." What do you mean by " tam- pered with .?" I refer to the statement made by Mr. Connolly to me, that the person who taught before O'Donnell in the Dugort School left that School and went to Mr. Nangle's Colony. When I say " tampered with" I mean that Mr. Nangle influenced him to go. What sort of influence did you mean to imply in** tampered with ?" I understood from Mr. Connolly that he held out prospects to him ; that he had been seduced. What v/as his name ? I do not know what his name was. You perceive that you write very decidedly that the teacher was tampered with and finally brought over. Before you wrote that to the Board, on having been informed by Mr. Connolly that this person had been so seduced by Mr. Nangle did you mention to Mr. Nangle what had been said by Mr. Connolly '^ No; it was after I left Mr. Nangle that Mr. Connolly told me of this. As well as I recollect, the way in which this happened was this: I was saying to Mr. Connolly, ** there appears to be a great deal of bad feeling between Mr. Nangle and O'Donnell; now do not you think," said I, " if you were to remove him to some other school where he would have equal emolument, that perhaps it might do away with this feeling, and place some one else there ?" He said tome, "I cannot do so, for those reasons that I have stated." ylnd you thought yourself justified instating thus peremptorily to the Board that such was the fact, on the statement to you of Mr. Connolly the priest, though you had not an opportunity of teliingMr. Nangle what was said? I had no reason to doubt Mr. Connolly. AND THE ACHILL MISSION. 126 Look at the same paragi'apli, and you will see that you state that attempts had been made upon O'Donnell ; what attempts did you refer to ™ Mr. Connolly also stated that attempts were made to in- duce O'Donnell to pursue the course adopted by his pre- decessor. What attempts ? I cannot immediately recollect. Did you understand any improper attempts ? I cannot recollect just now what the attempts were. Did you tell Mr. Nangle this either ? No. Havinghadthis only from Mr. Connolly, and not having told Mr. Nangle of this, did you consider yourself justified in reporting thus lormally to the Board, on this investigation of yours, that those complaints had been lodged against O'Donnell, not, you were sure, so much with a view to the general good as to injure liim ? I thought so from the general tenor of the investigation. — from the manner in which the charges were sustained against O'Donnell. You are understood to state that the attempts were not described to you by Mr. Connolly ? I think they were at that time. You stated that you did not recollect what was described ? I do not recollect what was described. Had you any communication upon the subject but with Mr. Nangle and Mr. Connolly :' Nobody but those two, and the witnesses. Were there any witnesses produced as to any attem.pts to seduce or tamper with O'Donnell ? No, none, Tlren all the information you got was from Mr. Connolly ? On that point. You do not recollect what that information was ? T do not distinctly recollect. Do you recollect whei.hcr it was more than general to that effect, or whether he gave you any proof of it at the time ? I cannot bring it to my recollection. You do not recollect whether or not you took that accusation merely upon the information of Mr. Connolly the priest <* I took it solely from him. And you did not state any thing upon that subject to ^Mr. 127 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATION Nangle ? No ; it was subsequent to my interview with Mr. Nangle. Do you mean that you only saw Mr. Nangle once during the time you were there ? I saw him subsequently in the following year; but this time I saw him only once. Then you made that positive report without ever having com- municated with Mr. Nangle upon the subject of it, or endeavoured to ascertain whether the general statements made to you were true or false ? I took it on Mr. Connolly's own showing. Did you think any other testimony necessary than Mr. Connol- ly's as to the fact of his motive for wishing to retain O'Donnell as Schoolmaster ? I did not think any other testimony required. You went to Mr. Connolly in the first instance on arriving in the island ? I did ; 1 had to pass by his house. Do you suppose that any other person's authority could have given any strength to Mr. Connolly's testimony as to his own mo- tive, as far as that was part of your assertion for what he had done in appointing and retaining O'Donnell ? No, I should think not. Do you think that in an investigation of a charge it is your duty to hear one side only, or both ? This was not a charge against the teacher. Upon a charge a"-ainst a teacher I should think it was my duty to investigate both sides. But in a charge against a person that complained of a teacher, you did not think it your duty to hear both sides ? I did not think I was perhaps authorized in inquiring into the thing. Did you think yourself authorized to report upon this though you did not think yourself authorized to inquire into it? I did report, because I wished to give a reason to the Board for Mr. Connolly's retaining him. Did you consider Mr. Connolly as meaning to prefer a charge against Mr. Nangle in having tampered with the Schoolmaster when he stated these facts to you, or did you consider him as merely accounting to you for his desire to retain O'Donnell as Schoolmaster ? Merely Avishing to account to me for his desire to retain AND THE ACHILL MISSIO.X. J2g O'Donnell. Then, in fact, you made that as the best report that, in in your judgment, you could come to upon the facts, from your investigation i* Yes. I wish to explain a conversation that I had with Mr. Con- nolly ; although I did not put the conversation in my report, still this bore upon it. Did you know any thing of Mr. Connolly before ? Yes, I did. Had you known him lonj; ? 1 was at the school where he was educated. Were you at school with him ? ^ I cannot say I was at school with him ; he was in the Eccle- siastical school, and T was in the lay school, of Tuam. You are a relation of the late Dr. Kelly of Tuam ? I am his nephew. When were you appointed inspector ? In the year 1 833. That was before your uncle's death, was it? It was. On whose recommendation were you appointed ? T had numerous recommendations. Do you recollect any in particular? Your uncle very na- turally would recommend you; do you recollect that he was one? I do not, indeed; I do not think that he was one. I recollect a recommendation from a relation of mine, a Protestant Clerf^y- man, Mr. Aslie. ^"^ Are you related to JNIr. Kelly the Secretary of the Board? No relation whatever. Did Mr. Nangle state to you, on the occasion of this investi^-a- tion,that O'Donnell had been dismissed from the Coast-guard 1'or making seditious speeches ? On this occasion I do not think that JNIr. Nangle made that charge. Were you aware at that time that Mr. Nangle had made that charge ? I was not. You are confident of that ? I am. In the Report No. 24. of the printed papers you state a circum- stance as exemplifying the distracted state of the Island; will you read that passage ? " As Mr. Connolly (who accompanied me to all the schools) 129 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATION and I proceedecl, on Tuesday last, from Keel to Dugort on foot^ not having been able to procure horses, we met two of Mr. Nan- gle's Bible readers, who followed us a distance of a mile and a half, discussing in our hearing various controverted subjects, such as would be likely to exasperate and wound his feelings, but of which he took no notice ; they managed their distance so well that no matter at what pace we walked, we could not lose one word of their conversation." When you say you met them, what do you mean ? Were you and Mr. Connolly going on the road in one direction, and did you meet these two Bible readers coming a contrary direction ? We were coming from Keel to Dugort, and there was one of them sitting on a stone by the road side, &tlie other I think,was stand- ing in the road ; they were speaking to a peasant who was digging, & they had books in their hands, which I believe were Bibles. You mean that you saw them; you do not mean that you met them on the road, and that they turned about and followed you? One of them was sitting aiKl the other standing at the time. And you did not see in which direction they were going ? No. I know the direction they took afterwards. You have said there was a third person near them, and that they had books; were they or were they not conversing with that person on religious subjects ? They were conversing with him ; T do not know upon what subj ect. When they were conversing with books in their hand, did not Mr. Connolly interrupt their conversation v/ith this man, and re- prove him, as being one of his congregation, for conversing with them ? On coming up Mr. Connolly stopped and called the man to him ; I walked on and passed them all by, and waited for him down a little further on the road ; I did not hear what Mr. Connolly said. Did Mr. Connolly tell you what he had said ? I think not. Did any thing pass to induce you to understand that Mr. Con- nolly reproved this man for talking with these persons, and to pre- vent them from going on ? I cannot bring any thing to my recollection. Did this man walk away with you and Mr. Connolly ? No. Yon are sure that he staid tliere ? AND THE ACHILL MISSION. 130 I am not positive that he staid there ; he did not come with us. You do not know hut that it might have happened that Mr. Connolly might have rehuked the man for talking with them, and that in consequence of that interruption they then followed, ma- king those controversial ohservatioiis ? I cannot say indeed. In point of fact Mr. Connolly did go and speak to that man, with whom they were talking at the time ? He did. But you do not know what he was talking ahout ? I cannot say what he was talking ahout; I did not hear him. And you have no reason whatever to suppose that he was re- huking him for thus talking with them ? I could not swear as to that. You had no knowledge of that ? I had no knowledge of it. Looking again at what you have stated in your report, do you think that that representation is that sort of representation which, when these things are hrought to your recollection, you would state to he an adequate and just statement!* I do think it a just statement. You will see what that statement is : — " We met two of Mr.Nan- gle's Bible readers, who followed us a distance of a mile and a half discussing in our hearing various controverted subjects." You think that is a fair way of stating this, although there was this incident occurred of Mr. Connolly's going up and talking with the man with whom they were conversing, which, for aught you know, might have caused that proceeding on their part ? I think it a fair statement, if I maybe allowed to give an ex- planation of the word ''met"; what I meant by met is, that we came up to them where they were standing. Was it the fact that they did follow you for a mile and a half ? It was the fact. , And that they talked upon those subjects in such a way as that you could hear them .'' Yes. Do you recollect any part of the conversation ? The only word that I can recollect now is, that one of them was speaking of the man of sin, * Applying that to Mr. Connolly ? I took it so, and I was uneasy lest any thing unpleasant might occur; and I said to Mr. Connolly, " Do not mind, do not take any notice of what these persons say." We varied our pace 131 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATIOV very much, and walked behind and walked on, and still we could not get rid of them till they came to the entrance of the Settlement. You mean, that when you varied your pace they varied theirs so as to keep within hearing distance of you ? Exactly so. Before you came up to them, or after Mr. Connolly joined you again, did he say any thing to you which induced you to suppose that he had been remonstrating with that man ? Did he express any indignation that these peoj^le had been talking to a man of his congregation? I can only speak from my recollection of the matter ; I think he said, " you see now the means these people resort to." Did that apply to the conversation they were holding with that man, or to their irritating language towards you and Mr. Connolly ? No ; to the conversation they were holding with this man. Did you conceive, when you heard those persons say the Man of Sin, that it applied personally to Mr. Connolly? I did. Why did you so suppose ? I supposed it from my recollection, although I cannot now say the grounds upon which I supposed it. Did you or Mr. Connolly request of these men to walk on and leave you ? No; we had no conversation whatever with them. Then you did not give them in any manner to understand that it was disagreeable to you and Mr. Connolly that they should ac- company you so close ? Except by altering our pace and remaining behind, upon which they altered theirs accordingly, and then getting on very rapidly. I recollect I was very anxious to be rid of them; I was afraid lest any thing unpleasant lest any altercation, would take place between them, and I did not wish to be a party to it. You knew Mr. Connolly when he was at school ? I did. Intimately ? I was not at all so intimate with him as I was with the Board- ers on my own side of the house. Did you keep up your acquaintance with him from that time to this? No. I was at that school about twelve or eighteen months; that is twelve years ago, and I have not seen him between. AND THE ACHILL MISSION. 132 You Stated that those men followed you according to the rate at which you and Mr. Connolly went ; as you did hear the words '*Man of Sin," do you mean to say that you did not hear the rest of the conversation ? I could hear detached parts of it. I recollect they used to open • various parts of the Bible, which book I believe was the one thcv had, and repeat texts from it, and appeal to each other if that did not upset such and such doctrines. Although I cannot recol- lect any particular text, still 1 recollect perfectly the substance of it. That was the general tenor of the conversation ? Yes. Would not those words " Man of Sin," have reference to some- thing they were talking of, not to Mr. Connolly ? My impression was that they had reference solely to him. Do you know the persons of those two individuals ? I do not think I would recollect them. You did not observe them close enough to know them ? At that time I did ; I had a full opportunity of observing thenr but I do not think at this distant period I should recollect them. ' Do you think you could identify them now ? No ; T would not wish to do so from my recollection. Will you look at No. 7. in pages 6 and 7. Does that letter purport to be the decision of the Board, communicated by the Secre- tary to Mr. Nangle, on the matters which had been entrusted to your investigation "^ Yes ; but there is a slight confusion there. Will you read the second paragraph ? "They find that this charge is supported by the evidence of the accuser only, Michael M'Ginty, a child of nine years of ao-e, the elder M'Ginty being merely a narrator of what this child had' told him. On the other side they find that there is the most direct proof, not only thatO'Donnell did not use the words allen-ed in the charge at all, but that it was another person who used them." Now, have the goodness to turn to your report. No. 22. Does that decision of the Board appear to you at all to be in accordance with your report ? It is in accordance with my report, except that it confuses two charges. From reading this you would suppose that it had reference to but one charge, whereas my report refers to two distinct charges. Do you mean to say that that decision accords with your re- port, except that the descision confounds the two charges together, which are take^i separately in your report ? 133 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATION That is what I merm. Are the Committee right in miderstanding that the Board applies the evidence of the fourth charge to the third charge ? I would suppose so; it seems to be confused here; hut I can- not say whether they do so or not. But in point of Aict, taking the words of the"" decision as they stand, will you say whether they do or do not apply the evidence of the fourth charge to the tl)ird charge ? I think the Secretary would hest answer that question as to what they meant. You stated on a former day, that in another case of complaint you had been sent as the Inspector. Did you on that occasion re- ceive any detailed instructions ? I did. Have you got those detailed instructions? I have. Will you produce them ? [The Witness produces a paper.] This relates to Mr. Nangle; hut there was another charge which you stated you were sent to investigate ? T have not got those papers here. Did you receive instructions upon that case in writing ? I did. Have you got those instructions? I have got those instructions. I think I have them with me. What case do they refer to? The case of the dismissal of a teacher at Koundstone in the county of Galway. Have you ever been sent as Inspector to inquire into any other cases ? There is another case in Achill with reference to another teacher. Are those the only two cases in which you have been employed as Inspector ? As Inspector in cases of complaint against teachers. What are your usual duties as Inspector ? I have a regular form of report to make on all the schools in the district that I am appointed to. What extent of district does your inspection go over ? Four counties Are you by your office bound to visit the schools frequently ? As often as I can; as often as the extent of my duty will allow. How often has that been ? AM> THt, ACiriLL MISSION. 134 Once yearly; or, in ]mrticul;ir cases, I may be sent a scccnd lime, or perhaps a third time, to some place. Are there many of those particular cases in which you have been sent a second or a tliird time ? No, very few. I had this case of Achill particularly in my mind when I made the answer- Are there any other cases in which you have been sent twice •* I do not recollect any other. What speci'ic inspection do you go through when you arrive at a school P I examine the returns and rolls and hooks in the school, vr.d examine the accounts and see the different classes, and observe the method adopted by the teachers ; T suggest any improvements that I thinlv advisable, and also repoit on the state of the school- liouse, and so on. Do you keep any minutes of your proceedings? I always lake notes. Are you in possession of those notes ? I am. Can you produce them ? I can. I doubt if they would be very intelligible to your Lordships. The notes you make are for your own use only, and intended to be the foundation of such reports as you judge necessary? Exactly so. Have the Commissioners called upon you for any notes which you took in explanation of your report upon the complaint of Mr. Nangle, or have you made any extracts from those notes for the use of the Commissioners, or to justify the purport of your report ? I am not aware of their having called upon me for my notes, unless this letter of the 9th of June 1836 may be considered as such: "The Commissioners of Education request you will reply, by return of post, to the following queries, viz. : What passed between you and the Rev. Mr. Nangle ? Did Mr. Nangle say that he could prove any facts if time were allowed to him to pro- duce witnesses, or did he say that he had any witnesses, or did he complain that he had not notice of the Inspector's intention to visit the school ?" Unless that miiirht be considered as callinji; for notes I am not aware of any. Will you read your answers to those questions ? *' At the time of my visit to Achill I fully investigated the charges made against O'Donnell, the teacher of the Dugort National School, 1S5 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDLCATIOX and examined all the witnesses concerned in those charges, and reported to the Board the result. Mr. Nangle regretted he did not know of my intention of calling upon him, and stated that he would have had all the }K'i*sons connected with these matters to meet me ; I, however, met his ohjections by telling him that I would accompany him to their several houses. We accordingly went to the places where these ]>ersons were engaged at the time. Mr. Nan2;le afterwards stated that had he had notice of my visit hr would have had the matter ananged. I could not judge on what grounds he made this assertion, as lie did not say that any of his witnesses were unproduced; on the contrary, I accompanied Mr. Nangle across the island, a distance of three or four miles, in order to meet one of the parlies. From all those circumstances I feel assured that all the [versons concerned in th(> matter were he- fore me. In my report I stated fully to the Board the substance of my inten'icw with Mr, Nangle, which was confined to the mattw before the Board." How long was that letter written after your investigation ? On the 11th of June 1836; the inquiry was in October ISG^, Did you refer to your notes for the puri)osc of wiiting that letter ? I did, and to my recollection of the matter geneially. ]3ut you were not called upon to produce any of your notes bv the Board ? No. Are your notes as intelligible to yourself at present as they were when the transactions were fresh and vivid in your (xwn mind ? They arc. Are you directed by the Board to keep a minute book of your proceedings ? No. Is there not a minute book kept in all the schools? Not of the Inspector's proceedings; the Inspectors make entries in the Report ]5ook of the school. The Inspectors do not keep a minute book for the pur- pose of satisfying the Board of the execution of their duties as Inspectors:' I should think not. T keep notes of my own duty for myself, and I report to the Board on every school I visit. Have the Board in any case called upon you to produce your minutes in support of what you have stated in your reports .'' No ; unless ihis letter which 1 have just read may be considered AND THE ACHILL MISSION, 13$ to liave reference to that point. You stated that you had four counties under your care as In- spector; how many schools arc there in those four counties? I cannot recollect; the business is increasing every day; I am obliged to report upon every now applicant case. Are you occupied every day P Almost every day. Have you any other profession? It occupies my entire time. You have stated that you communicated with Mr. Nangle,and saw all the witnessess that he produced on that occasion ? I did. You went across thii island with him ^ I did. He did not mention tiiatyou ^vere to c^ll for any witnesses that Were forthcoming ? He did not. And you therefore heard all that he had to allege u|>oh tbe subject ? l understood that I did. Have you any doubt u|x)n that subject? I have no doubt. And your report was drawn in consequence of that? Yes. How long after you made the examination did you draw up that report? I took notes at the tim«, and I believe it \\tis the same day or the following that I made the report; I wished particularly to furnish the Board with the report as soon as possible. What district of Ireland is under your charge now as f ns])ector ? Connaught. I have four counties. What district were you in charge of in the year 1835? The same. Were you sent to Achill in consequence of being nearer to it, or were you sent directly from Dublin ? t was on my tour of inspection. The witness is directed to withdraw* 137 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATI©!* Thomas F. Kelly Esquire is called in, and further examined as follows : Will you turn to No. 3. of the printed correspondence now shown to you. Do you recollect at any time giving instructions to any Inspector to inquire into the facts contained in that letter of Mr, Nangle's >* No. I gave no instructions to an Inspector to inquire into the facts contained in this letter. Will you look at No. 4. and turn to the top of page 6. Is that a letter in answer to No. 3. ? It is. Will you read the third line of that ? *' The transaction respecting O'Donnell, as alleged, they will have investigated; and alsothey will communicate with the patrons of the school, so as to prevent either the happening of such a transaction as you have mentioned or the recurrence of it." Was that intended as a promise to Mr. Nangle that an investi- gation should take place ? It was intended as a promise, and an investigation did take place in consequence of it. When did it take place ? As immediately after my letter of the 16th September, which I addressed to Mr. Connolly the patron of the school upon the sub- ject, as was possible. This investigation was made at this time not through our Inspector, but by letter, addressed, as I have stated, by me to Mr. Connolly immediately after the receipt of Mr. Nan- gle 's letter, calling his attention to so much of the complaint as I A\& THE ACHILL MISSION. J^g Stated ; and to which I received a reply from that gentleman, dated the 20th September, acknowledging as fact the matter in respect oi^ which I wrote, and promising futm-e good conduct upon the part of the teacher, whom lie had admonished. Then you mean to say that Mr. Nangle having made this com- plaint to the Board, &you having given this answer promising in- vestigation, you satisfied that promise by making the inquiry through Mr. Connolly, who was the patron of the school, and not through the Inspector. Did you inform Mr. Nangle that you should make such an inquiry through Mr. Connolly ? Not in those terms. Your Lordships have before you, in my letter of the 16th of September, the exact words of my promise to Mr. Nande. In point of fact you did not inform Mr. Nangle that the inves- tigation would be made, which afterwards was made, through Mr. Connolly ? In point of fact I did not. Did Mr. Nangle ever receive from yon any intimation of the result oC that investigation ? He did not. Was that a solitary instance, as far as your recollection goes, of the mode in which the Board conducts its investigation of com- plaints, or not i* I have upon my recollection no other instance of the non-com- munication adverted to. Are the Committee to understand that in this case, in which very grave charges had been made by Mr. Nangle against a School- master, the Board, having promised that there should be an investigation, never told Mr. Nangle of the result of that in- vestigation.^ It is quite true that upon Mr. Nangle's first complaint the result of the inquiry into it was not communicated to him. I beg to add, however, that in carrying on the inquiry, through the jiatrous of the school, I but foUov/ed the course pursued in two ca^cs of the same nature which occurred but one or two weeks previous to this very case, and which, with your Lordships permission,! will name. A report was received from our Inspector in August 1835, com- plaining of the teachers of two National Schools in the North hav- ing walked in an Orange procession on the 13th of July, the month preceding, one of the teachers also being the stand?rd bearer. This report I brought before the Board on iLe 20i]i of August. The course the Commissioners directed me lu pursue was simply this: to write to the correspondent of those two schools. 189 THE N4TIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATIOJJ K-tatIng to him that such conduct in the teachers was in cliveet vio- lation of their rules, and requiring an explanation in respect of it» An answer was received from the correspondent admitting that the complaint was true, hut that the teachers had acted through ignorance, and promising future good conduct. The Commissi- oners were satisiied with this explanation, and there the matter ended; the teachers heing admonished. These two cases I consi- dered to be good precedents when I received the complaint from Mr. Nangle, which came so immediately after them. I therefore followed them in my mode of treating his complaint, and followed them, as I thought, safely; heing satisfied that the joining the procession with a banner inscribed" welcome religion and liberty," as stated in the complaint by Mr. Nangle, was precisely the same species of offence as the joining the Orange procession and carrying a banner, as stated in the complaint made by our Inspector. I therefore addressed the correspondent of this school, who, like the correspondent of the two schools alluded to, admitted the fact as alleged to be true, but stated that the men had acted through ig- norance of the rule of the Board, and promising future good con- duct on the part of the teacher, as he had admonished him. There the matter ended in reference to this, as it had done in re- ference to the two former cases to which I have alluded. You conducted yourself in a manner equally just to the complainants in both instances, or equally unjust ; which do you consider ? According to whichever term your Lordship may think it right to use, so did I conduct myself. In the case of the Orange processions, did you inform the par- lit swho had complained of your having made any inquiry ? The party who had made the complaint of the Orange proces- sion was our own officer. Then in that case it was not in fact a complaint made by ano- ther individual, but the information was brought to you by your own officer /* I admit the difference in that point. I do not say that that case bears out the present one in all the minuteness of its parts, but that it does so in substance and in principle. It has been said in evidence by one of the Commissioners that opportunities are always afforded to complainants to establish their case in the investigation. Must not this be considered as an ex- ception to the general rule ? I cannot say that it ought. I will state why : the charge to which my letter to Mr. Connolly specially referred, in conlmuni- AND THS ACHILL MISSION 140 calingto him the complainU urged by Mr. Nangle in his letter of the 8th of September, was the joining an illegal procession. My letter did not contemplate that which is in the latter part of Mr. Nangle's letter, namely, that O'Donncll had been implicated in ribbonism. Reference to my letter upon this occasion to Mr. Connolly will show the view which I took of that letter of the 8th of September of Mr. Nangle. Mr. Connolly's reply beingan ad- mission, as I have stated, of the fact of O'Donnell having joined the procession, I conceived there was no case for further investi- gation, this admision rendering it unnecessary. Do you mean to say that theonly complaint in that letter against O'Donnell was for joinmg this procession, and having been for- merly implicated in ribbonism ? There is some language of a very [objectionable nature attributed to him. Will you read it ? " Dr. M'Hale, before his departure from the island, thought fit to curse some of the peasantry who had left the Church of Rome and joined themselves with us as members of the Protestxint Church, He forbade their Roman Catholic neighbours to speak to them or hold any intercourse with them in the way of courtesy or traf- fic. O'Donnell is a zealous agent for enforcing these unsocial commands. On Sunday last, seeing one of the islanders convers- ing with one of our people, he reproved him for holding any com- munication with an accursed heretic, asking him, Avas he not aware that he himself came under the priest's curse for so doing ?" Does not that appear to you to be an additional and grave charge I think it an additional charge, but I also think it a loose one from the manner it is put. The question is, whether it is a grave charge' ? It appears to be a grave charge, but a loose one. Then you understand it to be a grave charge put loosely ? I do. It is a grave charge put loosely. It is a loose way of charging a man with a grave offence upon the hearsay of another. Because it was a grave charge put in a loose way did you think you were at liberty to omit altogether the investigation of it, though you had promised in your answer to it that it should be inves- tigated ? I cannot say that I can give an answer to that question in the affirmative. It appeared to me to be a grave charge and a loose charge. It is loose because it is a charge upon the hearsay of a third person of words spoken to him. It would be a grave charge ]41 THE NATIONAL liOAllD OF EDUCATION if brought home to this man by clh*ect evidence. Have the goodness to see whetlier Mr. Nangle did not alhide, in his letter of the 9th of October, No. 5, to this of the 8th of September P I thinlv he does. Have the goodness to read what relates to this part of his com])laint from the commencement to the word " con- gregation ?" " Sir. From the reply wliich I received to my letter of Sep- tember 8th, complaining of the conduct of James O'Donnell, teacher of the Dugort National School, I did hope that he would either hare been dismissed or reprimanded by the Board in such a tone as would deter him from the commission of similar offences in future. 1 regret to say that these expectations have not been realized. There has been a repetition of the objectionable beha- viour complained of in my former letter : I allude to his attempt to enforce the prohibition which the parish priest uttered against any communication being held by his flock with members of my congregation." You '-ee that there is a renewal of the charge, without saying that thai is upon l:earsay, but implying that he was prepared to prove that ? So I took it upon receipt of the letter now referred to, namely, the letter of Ociober, and so I still take it. Was there any investigation in consequence of the charge 80 made/* There v\^as an investigation in consequence. When ? By Mr. Kelly, as appears by his report bearing date 24tli of October 1835. Did you instruct Mr. Kelly to investigate this complaint ? 1 have already delivered in to your Lordships my letter of instructions, which T sent upon the occasion of Mr. Nan- gle's letter of October, to Mr. Kelly. It bears date the 17th of October. Did you at any time give instruction to Mr. Kelly the Inspec- tor to investigate that charge i* Yes, I did give him such instructions by my letter of the 17th of October. By whose directions did you write the letter of the 16th of Septi.mber ? I wrote it from no specific order oftheBoard,butas I conceived under my general instructions as Secretary. I have already stated AND THE ACIIILL MISSION. 142 that I conceived that I had a precedent in tlie two cases of the Orange processions. Will you point out the part of the letter of the 17th of October 1835 which contains an instruction to the Inspector to inquire into the complaint of letter No. 3, repeated in No. 5 ? The substance of my instructions on these points was, that ** there had been complaints forwarded of the master of Dugort National School, upon two several occasions, by Mr. Nangle; and that upon the latter occasion he had stated certain particulars." I thus referred to the letters both of September and October, and in express terms I directed the Inspector therefore to goto Achill, in order to investigate all matters, and report. But the Inspector says that he could find in your letter no in- struction to liim respecting this complaint, and therefore he did not investigate it ^ It is perfectly true that my letter contains of the charges put for- ward by Mr. Nangle upon those two several occasions but one of them specified in terms, but it is equally true that my letter states that Mr. Nangle had been an accuser upon two several occasions ; and my instructions to IMr. Kelly are at large, to go to Achill and report upon all matters, telling him at the same time that he has every thing to do. Nor did Mr. Kelly mistake my directions, for in his report of the 24th ofOctober he has given the accusation and the evidence and the judgment upon four distinct charges, being all the charges brought betVne him ; so that Mr. Kelly not only could not have misconceived the meaning of my letter giving him these instructions at large to inquire into all complaints, but on the contrary he fully acted nj) to them, and up to my expectation of what he would do when I v>roteliim that letter. Mr. Kelly the Inspector having stated to this Committee that in consequence of his not having received these instructions, which you conceive your letter gave, he did not inquire, except by going to Mr. Connolly, and that JNlr. Connolly told him of these things; and that Mr. Connolly's report only having been before him, he took it from the information of Mr. Connolly, without investigat- ing the thing as by order of the Board. Will you state whether that is in your estimation a lit mode on the part of the Board of securing attention from their Inspector to complamts made.? I certainly should not think it a lit mode if the facts really were as stated in the preliminary part of the question; but my own re- collection of the facts being precisely the other way I feel tliat full justice was done. I know that jNir. Kelly went to jNJr. Connolly and to Mr. Nangle ; I know that he '.eld as it were an open court 143 THE iNATlONAI, BOARD OF EDUCATION with each ; that he held his ears open to receive every accusation as well as every defence ; and that having done so he then made his report of the 24th ? How do you know that ? From Mr. Kelly's report, and also from his conversation in an interview with me, it being my custom to converse with all the In- spectors upon their returning to the office in Dublin at the end of their tour. Will you point out in the written report before you. No. 3, the part which says that he was holding an open court both with Mr. Connolly and with Mr. Nangle for the investigation of those ch arises ? The expression, " open court," is descriptive. I did not say that I quote the words " open court" from Mr. Kelly's report. When I used the phrase T meant that he gave each party an op- portunity to offer accusation or to offer justification. Will you point out in that report the part from which you come to that conclusion ? I draw the conclusion from the entire report; I think the facts are there stated in detail ; and I also have had an interview with Mr. Kelly, whom I consider as an officer of trust of the Board of Education, at which interview the subjectmatter of that report has been the subjectmatter of conversation. Did you have those interviews with Mr. Kelly previous to draw- ing out this third report ? Yes. I also had a written communication with Mr. Kelly pre- vious to drawing out the third report, which produced a reply from Mr. Kelly that is embodied in the third report, namely, whether Mr. Kelly, upon visiting the island upon that occasion, had given Mr. Nangle fair and clear notice ? Did Mr. Kelly, in his interview with you and his verbal report of these circumstances to you, tell you that with regard to the two first charges he did not communicate with Mr. Nangle but only with Mr. Connolly ? He did. But not previous to your making the statement to the Lord Lieutenant that you had investigated the circumstance ? No ; for my impression at that time was that Mr. Kelly had had all the parties concerned together ; but he has since informed me that he had a communication with Mr. Connolly separately upon two of the charges, and with Mr. Nangle separately upon the other two of them. Before you saw Mr. Kelly, and had this conveisation with him AND THE ACHILL MISSION. 144 in wliich lie lold you that he had had this statement from Mr. Con- nolly only respecting two of the charges, did you suppose that he had given Mr. Nangle an opportunity of full investigation of those two first charges ? Certainly 1 did ; because he waited upon Mr. Nangle, and of course Mr. Nangle might have used that opportunity for bringing forward all the charges which it appears he did for two of them. Have you found subsequently that that report was not made on the same full investigation upon which you thought previously that it had been made ? No; I do not alter my opinion ; because those two charges are charges which had been admitted to me, previous to this investi- gation, by INlr. Connolly in his reply to my letter of September, when 1 addressed him in consequence of Mr. Nangle's lirst let- ter uj)on the subject. W ill you read the report upon the second charge ? ** He also admits having had controversial discussions with Mr. Nangle's readers or preachers, but states that such were forced up- on him by their meeting him on the roads, and entering into them before the people; and that under those circumstances he did not think he violated rule by such discussions." That you consider to have been the second charge made by Mr. Nangle? J think Mr. Nangle's letters had a strong colouring of that charge as well in his letter of the Sth of Sej)tember as in the letter of the 9th of October. Will you look at No. 5. where you find the words, " I allude to his attempt to enforce the prohibition which the parish priest uttered against any communication being held with his flock by members of my congregation." Do you think that is or is not the same charge as the second charge in letter No. 23 ? In strictness of language I should think it was not, but I think in eflectand substance that the charge which we have in the letters of the Sth of September and of the 9th of October is the same as that admitted in this report of JMr. Kelly's upon tlie24th of Octo- ber. T find Mr. Nangle in St})tember stating that O'Donnell i.s a zealous agent for enforcing those unsocial commands. I find him in Octo])er stating that he is enforcing the prohibition of the parish priest. I find an admitted charge on the 24th of October thut O'Donnell has had controversial discussions. Now, it being my opinion that the language of those letters of Mr. Nangle in September and October is very loose, and also th;U all these charges and admissions a^ree in sul)stanceso far as that ihev refer to an- 145 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATIOW gry discussions and unsocial commands, and being aware that different men will express themselves of the same thing differ- ently, I looked upon all these charges as part and parcel of one unsocial and unchristian feeling, and therefore as all referring to the one matter. You will bear in mind that you nov/ know that the report of the 24th of October, No. 23, in respect to the second charge, was made only upon a communication with Mr. Connolly ? I will; but that I did not know at first. You were understood to say that Mr. Kelly the Inspector had recently informed you so ? Yes, Mr. Kelly the Ins^iector told me that upon those two first charges he had communication with Mr. Connolly, and he stated that they were admitted charges ; and I conceived that they were admitted charges equally by Mr. Connolly's letter to me, in answer to the letter which I wrote to him in the first instance upon* receipt of the letter of the 8th of September of Mr.Nangle, which, for the first time, contained the charges. Had you any reason to believe that Mr. Nangle would have considered persons holding controversial discussions with his read- ers or his preachers a subject of complaint? I cannot say what Mr. Nangle would consider upon that subject. Mr. Nangle having complained as follows : — " Dr. M'Hale, before his departure from the Island, thought fit to curse some of the peasantry who had left the Church of Rome and joined them- selves with us as members of the Protestant Church. He forbade their Roman Catholic neighbours to speak to them or hold any intercourse with them in the way of courtesy or traffic. O'Don- nell is a zealous agent for enforcing these unsocial commands." Mr. Nangle having made that complaint on the 8th of September, and having again said, on the 9th of October, *' there has been a repetition of the objectionable behaviour complained of in my for- mer letter. I alluded to his attempt to enforce the prohibition which the parish priest uttered against any communication being held by his flock with members of my congregation." You think that they may be fairly considered, without minute investigation, as answered by ** having had controversial discussions with Mr. Nangle's Readers or preachers ?" I think so , I think the one grew out of the other.^ I looked upon those charges but as somewhat loose assertions. You conceived that your letter of instructions to Mr. Kelly comprised all the three charges ? I did because I stated at large that upon two several occasions AND THE ACHILL MISSION'. ]46 Mr. Nanglc had made complaints. You conceive that the report of your Inspector was a satisfactory report upon 'all the three charges? Yes. r Yon supposed at that time that he had inquired into those charges from Mr. Nangle P I did. You have suhsequently ascertained that he never did upon those charges communicate with Mr. Nangle ? Upon two of them only. You say, however, that, with the information you now possess, you still continue to he of opinion that all those charges had been satisfactorily investigated hy the Inspector ? I do ; because those two charges upon which he did not com- municate with Mr. Nangle were admitted by the accused party ; and when he did communicate with I\Ir. Nangle, Mr. Nangle liad full opportunity, — and he is an active and zealous man, if I may judge from his correspondence upon the subject, — he had full the same opportunity to enter upon those admitted charges equally as upon other charges, or to bring forward any charges that were then proveable against O'Donnell. If at the time this investigation took place you had been aware that he had not communicated with Mr. Nangle upon the two first charges, how should you have supposed that he could ascer- tain what those charges were ? Of course the inspector not communicating with Mr. Nangle he could not ascertain what the charges were from Mr. Nangle ; but, as I stated before, the inspector saw Mr. Nangle, who, upon seeing him, advanced only two charges against O'Donnell. It was equally competent to him to have advanced twenty-two char- ges, and it would have been the duty of the inspector to have ex- amined into the twenty-two charges as well as into the two which were advanced. I conceive that the report was the result of a fair investigation, because the accusing party was called upon by the inspector in order to make good his charges. He was called in pursuance of my letter of instructions, which stated to the inspec- tor that upon two several occasions Mr. A^ angle had complained of O'Donnell, and which directed him to go and investigate. Mr, Nangle then having been called upon by the inspector under these circumstances, if the fault be to rest upon any one for not bringing forward charges upon the occasion, certainly it ought to rest upon Mr. Nangle, who was the accusing party, and whose duty therefore it was. Such as he did put forward v/ere inquired 147 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATION into and reported upon. It appears that there were two which were not put forward hy him. That is the fault of Mr. Nangle, not of the inspector; therefore I still hold that the report is a fair one. Then you think that Mr. Connolly would have given as satis- factory a statement of these charges to the inspector, and that the inspector would have received as clear an understanding of these charges from INIr. Connolly against the Schoolmaster, as he would have received from Mr. Nangle himself ? No, I do not. Had the report heen, that all the charges werc Tidmitted hy the teacher, and had Mr. Nangle not heen called up- Dn by the inspector at all, I think that question would have much point in it; hut Mr. Kelly did call upon Mr. Nangle, and gave him every opportunity of putting forward every charge which he had against the master, and he had an equal opportunity of putting forward these admitted charges as he had of the others which he did put forward; that he did not do so was not Mr. Kelly's fault, hut Mr. Nangle's. With respect to No. 7, which was written upon the 9th of No- vember 1835 ; by whose direction was that letter written ? By direction of the board. I think 1 gave in the minute of the ^th of November, in consequence of which I wrote that letter. Will you read that minute ? *' Minute of the Board, dated 5th of November 1835. Read the report of Mr. Kelly the inspector upon the teacher of Du- gort National school, of the 24th ult., and also a letter from the Rev. Mr. Connolly dated the 25th idt. upon the same subject. Considered that the replies contained in these to the charges ad- vanced by the Rev. Mr.Nangle against this teacher are satisfactory." Who were the members of the Board at which that minute was made ? Dr. Murray and Dr. Sadleir. Will you take No. 7. into your hand, and read the second para- graph of that letter ? " They find that this charge is supported by the evidence of the accuser only, Michael M'Guilly, a child of nine years of age, the elder M'Ginty being merely a narrator of what this child had told him. On the other side they find that there is the most di- rect proof not only that O'Donnell did not use the words alleged in the charge at all, but that it was another j)erson who used them. They cannot but place the utmost reliance upon the fide- lity of the report made to them upon this case by their inspector, and also upon the concurrent testimony forwarded to them by the AND THE ACHILL MISSION. 148 patron of the school." W ill you turn to the report of the inspector, No. 23, and read what the inspector says upon the third charge ? " I examined the child so threatened; Michael IM'Ginty, nine years of age, declares that going one day to Mr. Nangles school he met O'Donnell, who threatened to cut off his head if he went there any more. Andrew M'Ginty, father of the child, states that he returned home and told him the conduct of O'Donnell." Will you read what follows afterwards with respect to the third charge ? ** The evidence of the parties on ihe third T shouhllhc inclined to receive with much caution, as I am sure that slight inducements would he sufficient to cause the people of this Island, where party and political feeling rages to such an extent, to deviate from the truth." Is that the whole of what the inspector has said of the third charge in this report ? It is. Have the goodness to look at No. 7. Will you say whether you find in the report of the inspector. No. 23, any thing like the assertion that is here made in your letter written by the direction of the Board, namely. Dr. Murray and Dr. Sadleir, sayin^ that "on the other side they find that there is the most direct proof not only that O'Donnell did not use the words alleged in the char^^-c at all, but that it was another person who used them ?" There is an evident error here ; it is perhaps a pardonable one. I mixed up the declaration of an opinion upon the third and fourth charges together, in place of giving the opinion of the Board up- on each of them separately. There is part of two sentences beginning with the word " the" and ending at the end of the se- cond sentence with the word '' them ;" one part is applicable strictly to the third charge, the other is not so, but is strictly appli- cable to the fourth only. You have said that this letter was written by direction of the Board, that Board consisting of Dr. Murray and Dr. Sadleir • did they direct you what you were to write ? I had already written the minute. My direction is to embody the minute, which is their mind, in my letter. That was the only direction you received? That was the only direction I received. I embodied that mi- nute thus. You intended to embody it ; but in point of fact you have stated as evidence applying to the third charge that which did apply to 149 THE National board of education the fourth? And also that which did correctly a])ply to the third charge it- self. The error is not an error of omission. I have stated that as the evidence to the third charge which is correctly the evidence to the third charge, but I have also applied to the third charge that which was not evidence to it, but which was evidence to the fourth only. I regret that Mr. Nangle did not draw my attention to it; if hehad done so immediately afterwards the mistake would have been cleared up. Will you look at Mr. Nangle 's answer. No. 8. and read what he says upon the third charge there ? "As to the third, the inspector himself acknowledged that it was proved *^ quite to Jiis satisfaction,' and tliat he would make his report to the Board accordhigly." Was not that complaining of the decision that had been communicated to him by you in the letter. No. 7 ? The business of my office is too pressing to admit of time for minute criticism! I found that the letter referred to was substan- tially a reply to my letter, which drew it forth. I did not take it and put it alongside my letter to see how far it touched it or not, critically speaking. I saw from it that he was dissatisfied, and I left it. When you receive complaints of this nature against schoolmas- ters is it your invariable custom, when you undertake to investi- gate them, to send your inspector in the first instance to tbe patron ? No, it is not our invariable custom. Our custom very fre- quently is this, to write to the correspondent himself; and by that candid manner of proceeding the result is generally found to be a satisfactory one. Charges brought forward have been admitted in the replies, and the remedy applied at once, without provoking any unpleasant feeling or losing our inspector's time, whose busi- ness is more generally to investigate the discipline and conduct of the schools than complaints against the teachers. In this case you had a communication by letter previously to your undertaking to investigate it ? Yes. You considered those charges as of a grave nature ? I stated that the charge to which my attention was turned I thought both grave and loose. The third charge; did you consider that of a grave nature? I considered that of so grave a nature that I mentioned it in my letter to Mr. Kelly; in fact I looked upon it as a kind of overt AND THE ACHILL MISSION. |50 act, the rest appearing to be allegations which I thought he would better understand by going to tlie spot; but this being an overt act I thought it required a specific notice, and therefore it was the only charge I mentioned to him by name. But you considered the charges of such a nature as to justify sending an inspector to inquire into them ? Yes. Did you give the Inspector any directions as to what mode he was to proceed in? Upon this specific business my whole directions to the Inspec- tor are contained in my letter of die 17th of October; but in the instructions those officers receive upon the general duties of their office it has been again and again laid down, that in examining complaints they are to examine all sides and all things which bea'r upon the complaint; that they are not to mock inquiry by makino- it an exparte one. And such is the understanding of each of those officers, of whom there are eight, that in going to make inquiry they are to make inquiry calling all sides who have any thino- to urge upon it before them. ^ ^ As a Lawyer, do you conceive it to be a right and ju- dicious course of proceeding in an investigation to go to the party a^gainst whom the accusation is made in the first in- stance, instead of calling the person who makes the accusation ? Certainly not ; nor did Mr. Kelly do so. The complaints were not against Mr. Connolly, but against O'Donnell, Do you not consider that under all those circumstances, and from the previous correspondence, the complaints against theSchool- master to a certain degree involved the patron of the school ? No ; and I would strive to keep that conclusion from fastening itself upon my mind without very good and sufficient reasons. I could only look upon it as a conclusion. But whether as a conclusion or not, was not that impression upon your mind, or upon the mind of the Board, when they directed that investigation ? It was not. You did not consider the charges brought forward by Mr. Nan - gle as at all involving the character of the patron ? That would depend upon the result of the investigation. Are you still of opinion that under such circumstances the pro- per course for your Inspector to take was to go in the fii-st instance to the patron of the school ? I think that was a decorous course ; but had he rested there I would have considered him us liable to censure. He did not, how- 151 THB NATIONAL BOARD 0^ SOUCAflOK ever ; he went also to Mr. Nangle. Finding, therefore, that he acted with due regard to decorum in going to the patron, and to the ends of justice in going to the accuser, and that each of them had thus full opportunity of affirming or denying what the other denied or affirmed, I think he acted justly. Did you understand from him that when he went to the ac- cuser he stated to him that he was ready to hear all the com- plaints ? I did not understand it from liim ; but I should suppose he forgot his main instruction if he did not do so. You are aware that the first two charg es are veiy slightly glanced at in your letter of instructions ; should you not have thought it the duty of the Inspector to have called upon Mr. Nangle to state what his charges were, unless he could produce other instructions stating what those charges were ? I conceive that he substantially did so when he called upon Mr. Nangle ; I think his act of calling was an invitation to that gentleman to advance by word of mouth his charges of all or every kind. Should you think he has acted in that manner if in his only interview with Mr. Nangle he thus stated to him : " The two firsrt charges are already admitted" ? I think if he had stated to Mr. Nangle that the two first char- ges were already admitted that Mr. Nangle reasonably could ex- pect nothing more ; all he could expect at his hands was a conviction of the man upon these charges. After>vards he could write to the Board pressing them to inflict a punishment upon that conviction. Would not Mr. Nangle naturally have conceived that the In- spector had received full instructions as to the nature of all the charges .'' It was in the power of Mr. Nangle himself to have put that question to him. If he did not do so it lies at his own door. Was it not natural for Mr. Nangle to suppose that this in- spector had come well instructed as to the nature of his charges, and that it was unnecessary for him to repeat them, the Inspec- tor himself having stated to him that the two first charges were admitted ? Mr. Nangle might have supposed that, but we find the fact the other way : we find that he did repeat the charges to Mr. Kelly. If he did repeat them, and got an answer from the Inspector that the two first charges were admitted by the party accused, would not that be considered sufficient, and would he not natu- rally infer that the Inspector had had full information of the na- AND THE ACHILV MISSION. 152 ture of those charges ? I think he might liavc naturally supposed that if the Inspector had told him "the two first charges are admitted;" but Mr. Kelly got no instructions upon any charge except one specific one, and the specified one was not one of those admitted, and therefore all that ]\Ir. Kelly could have said upon going to Mr, Nangle was, *' there are two charges that I have heard from Mr, Connolly, and which are admitted by O'Donnellto be true." But if JNIr. Kelly said no such thing, but gave him to under- stand that the two first charges had been admitted, without giving him to understand that he had only received those charges through Mr. Connolly, and not through the Board, should you not then consider that Mr, Nangle very naturally supposed that he had been made acquainted by authority with the nature of those charges ? Yes, if Mr. Kelly's language to Mr. Nangle had been, " the first two charges are admitted ;" but it was impossible that Mr. Kelly could have used such language, because my letter did not detail the charges ; it only gave a single charge, and this single charge was not one of the admitted ones ; therefore all that Mr. Kelly could have said was, " there are two charges admitted." Therefore Mr. Nangle could not have supposed there were more than those known to Mr. Kelly. As far as framer of a report of this kind, should you tliink you had made a fair report upon this subject if you believed that your Inspector had not received any notice of those charges from Mr. Nangle, who made the charges, or from the Board who sent him to investigate into them, but only from Mr. Connolly the patron, and that tliat conversation had taken place subsequently, viz. that Mr. Kelly, on visiting Mr. Nangle, made the statement to him which has been stated to you : ** your two first charges have been admitted by the parties"? Yes ; but merely because they were admitted. Had Mr. Kelly said the reverse, — had he said, " upon the two first charges I ac- quit O'Donnell." then I would have said that he acted ex- tremely unjust, because before coming to an acquittal of the charges he should have seen first how far they could have been main- tained, and therefore should have seen Mr. Nangle upon them in order to examine them ;but I do not sec whatmore Mr. Nangle could have desired or obtained by any examination than he had already obtained by the party's own admission. Do not you consider that Mr. Nangle believed that Mr. Kelly the Inspector knew perfectly well what the charges were ? 153 THE NATIOTvAL BOARD OF FDUCATION I cannot say ; if I were to conjecture T should conjecture timt he thought that Mr. Kelly did not know what the charges were. I will give my reason : of the two charges which he did get from Mr. Nangle T had only mentioned one in my letter ; Mr. Nangle told him of the other. This must have struck Mr. Kelly as a novel one, and he must have naturally expressed himself so to Mr. Nangle. Was not Mr. Nangle's first charge against C^'Donnell that lie had " headed a procession, carrying flags and banners, v/hich went to meet Dr. M'Hale on his arrival in this place. O'Donncll bore a flag with the inscription, ' welcome religion and liberty!' which was sufllciently intelhgible to all who knew that i)i'. M'Hale is a Bishop of the Church of Rome, and the advocate oi Repeal." Is not that the first charge as it appears upon th.e face of Mr. Nangle's letter of the 8th of September 1835 ? y It is. Will ymi turn to page 16, No. 23 ? In the second paragraph it appears, " O'Donnell admits that uj-)on tlie occasion of Dr. M'Hale's visit he, in common with the inhabitants of the Island, met him with green boughs, &c. &c. ;" do you conceive that to be an admission of the charge just read ? I do. Will you explain howyou conceive it to be an admission of that charge ? I conceive that each has taken his own mode of describing this procession. Mr. Connolly has taken thesymbol that most struck liis mind, and Mr. Nangle the one that most struck his. The latter has told us of the banner with the inscription, and the other of the green boughs. Each of them was describing one and the same procession of men assembled upon this occasion by the symbol that he thought most descriptive of their movement. That is the way in which I account for the variance of the phrase, and yet the identity of the charge. Should you think it was any very serious charge against a Ro- man CathoHc, wheth<^r he was a schoolmaster or not, that upon the occasion of his Bishop coming to the Island he should have gone w^ith green boughs to meet him ; could that have amounted to a charge ^ It was made one. Does it appear that Mr. Nangle says any thing about gi'een boughs P No ; Mr. Nangle says a flag ; that appeared most to strike Mr. Nangle's eye. AND THt AtHlLL MISSION. 1^ Do not you conceive that the main ground of the charge against the man was, that he had gone with flags having a political reference ? As to ])olitical reference it must be by reasoning that we make it so. 1 conceive that the cliarge as made by Mr. Nangle cer- tainly was a charge that was rather of a grave nature against the teacher of a National School, because by his descri])tion of the procession it apj?oared to be of a political nature. Is not it a grave charge against any body to join in an illegal procession, whether a schoolmaster or not P I do conceive that joining in an illegal procession is against law. Then if a man is accused of having gone with any illegal sym- bols, calculated, under many circumstances, to provoke a breach of the peace, can it be possibly said that he admits that charge if he adinitts that he went out as a Roman Catholic with green boughs to meet his Bishop ? Yes ; but I think this is that a conclusion only to be gathered from a review of all the circumstances. When I turn back to the letter of the 8th of September I find that on the occasion of Dr. M'iiale's visit they carried banners. I find in the report, " that on the occasion of Dr. M'Hale's visit, he, in common with the inhabitants of the Island, met him with green boughs, &c." The admission of being at this j^rocession, no matter whetlicr they car- ried boughs or banners, or both, seems to be the admission of an act identicic in effect with the charge. The carrying of green boughs being apparently a legal act, and the carrying of banners being certainly not so, but admitted by you to be a matter of grave charge, do you think that when a man admits the one he thereby admits the same thing as if he admitted the other ? In this case I do ; I think they are identicle. We find that both sides they speak of a procession to meet Dr. M'Hale. The simple difference is, that Mr. Nangle describes it by the banners, and Mr. Connolly, whom JMr. Kelly in his report follows, de- scribes it by the green boughs and with an " et cetera." Then you conceive that O'Donneli intended by the words " green boughs" to confess that he bore a banner P Yes. And you conceive that by those words O'Donneli confessed that he went v/ith a banner ? I do. And the Board did not think that worthy of any gruve repre-' hinision upon O'Donneli P i55 THE NATIONAL ROARD OF EDIICATIOS No ; because, as I have already stated, they did not think so til the eases of the two schoolmasters in the North, who were convicted by their own admission of walking in a procession of Orangemen on the 1 3th of July, and one of them also of even carrying a banner in that procession. Then the Board did not consider that joining in illegal pro- cessions, whether Orange processions or of another character, was a sufBcient ground for the grave reprehension of a school- master /* Sufficient ground for reprehension, and they were all equally reprehended, but not for so severe a punishment as dismissal, as they all appeared equally to have offended through ignorance. The effort of theCoxinnissioners is to "deal justice in mercy," and their experience has found it to answer well, as it enables them to draw from or warn against danger those poor men who may be misled, through ignorance, into the commission »f illegal acts. Now, with resjiect to the second admission of 033onnelL The charge is, that O'Donnell was a zealous agent for enforcing the unsocial commands of Dr. M'Hale, those unsocial commands having been preceded by cursing the ]>easantry who had left the Church of Rome, and that be " forbade their Roman Catholic neighbours to speak to them or hold any intercourse with them in the way of courtesy or traffic." Then Mr. Nanglc proceeds to give an instance in which O'Donnell had marked his zeal in sup- porting the views of Dr. M'Hale ; that is a charge produced by Mr. Nangle. Then in the third paragraph of No. 23. comes the admission ofO'Donncll, that " he admits having had controver- sial discussions with Mr. Nangle 's readers or preachers." Do you conceive that the doing any thing so practicable as support- ing the views of the Bishop who forbade the Roman Catholics, to hold any communication with them was of the nature of con- troversial discussion, and that in admitting controversial discussion he admits such unchristian and unsocial conduct as that would appear to be ? In strictness of language I could not conceive the two things to be one. Are not the two things perfectly different ? 1 think they are so, in strictness of language j but 'at the same time these are allegations of what passed amongst unlettered men„ and amongst angry men, and who might call that controversial which had the effect of preventing social intercourse, or that un- social which was holding a controversial intercourse. It is im- AND THE ACIIILL MISSION. 15(J porssible to say, considering their rank of life, and their want of education, what circumstances miglit lead them to call it one thing or another. The same mistake would not take place among edu- cated people. This reiKjrt is signed James Kelly; is not the description to which you have been referred made by your own Inspector.^ He merely reports. Is it possible that he could have understood by controversial discussion conduct such as has been described /* No; but he takes these words descriptive of their sentiments from themselves, and merely reports their account in their own representation of it; but Mr. Nangle could have settled this, for lie still had it in his power, when Mr. Kelly called on him, to bring forward this charge in the shape he himself had made it, and he did not. The witness is directed to withdraw. Ordered, that this Committee be adjourned 'till to-morrow, two o'clock. 157 THE NATIOiSAL DOAKD OF EDIJCAJIO:? Die Martis, 25« Aprilis 183-^. THE LORD PRESIDENT IN THE CHAIR. Thomas F. Kelly Esquire is called in, and further examined as follows : Are all your instructions to your sub-officers written with the sanction of the Board ? All those which are written are written with the sanction of the Board. Then every thing that is written hy you in your official capacity is to be considered as emanating from the Board ? I should imagine it must be taken so; I am their Secretary. Does any copy exist of the instructions to the Inspec- tor, Mr. Kelly, to inquire into the first complaint made by Mr. Nangle ? The first complaint made by Mr. Nangle was in Sep- tember 1835, and I have already stated that no instructions were upon that occasion given to the Inspector, the inves- tigation having taken place through the correspondent of the School. Then at what period were the first instructions given to Mr. Kelly to report ? On the 17th October 1835, immediately after the second com- plaint from Mr. Nangle; the letter containing those instructions is in the hands of the Committee. AND THE ACIiiLL MISSION, 15S When did you again write to Mr. Kelly upon the subject of Mr. Npaigle's complaint P In July 1836, immediately arter Mr. Nangle renewed his complaints a third time, and aclded fresh matter for investigation. At what period i* In July lb'36 ; the correspondence then entered into is also in the hands of the commillee. Here is a letter dated the 18th of July 1S3G, will you state whe- ther that is yours ? It is. You state in this letter that Mr. Nangle for the first tunc brings forward a charge against Cassidy, the teacher of the Duiga School, and repeats the charge against O'Donnell of having been dismissed from the Coast-guard for using sediti- ous language ? Yes. These arc your instrmjtioiis to IMr. Kelly the Inspector: — " In September or October last Mr. Nangle stabjd that he was in- formed of O'Donnell's dismissal ; he now states that he has ascer- tained it; on the former occasion it did not seem necessary to ex- amine a hearsay." On what occasion did you inform Mr. Kelly that it was not necessary to examine into the complaint from hearsay ? Upon no occasion did I inform Ivlr. Kelly of that, or say any thing touching such a matter as examining a complaint upon licarsay, except in the ktter from which that paragraph has been read. The letter goes on to say, — " But now he states a fact, keep thercfoi'e back the matter of the affidavit which I sent you on Sa- turday." Have you got your communication of Saturday i" No, but I have not the least objection to state the substance of it ? it refers to an a(iidavlt which the Board insisted, as ground for future proceedings in a court of lav,% that O'Donnell should take in reference to his alleged dismissal from the Coast-guard for using seditious language ; I understood tlie Committee decided I was not to produce the affKlavit, and as this letter referred to it I apprehended therefore that it was not to be produced. The course of this correspondence, however, was as follows : My letter of Sa- turday (the 16th of July 1836) directed Mr. Kelly the Inspector to get O'Donnell to make the affidavit before the proper function- ary, namely, a Commissioner duly appointed to take affidavits. Two days subsequently, viz, upon the 18th, I again wrote to Mr. Kelly, in consequence 'of a letter received that morning from Mr. 150 THE NATIONAL BOAIlD Of EDUCATION Nangle (and my letter in its preamble states so,) which advanced amongst other things, the complain tin what appeared, and in what I there stated to he, a new shape, against O'Donnell ; I therefore in my letter of the 18th, with reference to this subject, told Mr.- Kelly to keep back or not to act upon my instructions of the 16tb mstant (Saturday,) because the allegation as to O'Donnell 's dis- missal having now been brought forward in such a tangible shape* as to admit of proof, it did not appear tome correct that O'Don- nell should be permitted to take an affidavit which would of course bind his conscience, an act in which I feared that Mr, Kelly mighl he looked upon as a participator, until he Mr. Kelly had first, by such inquiry or trial as he could institute, ascertained that O'Don- nell could do so with a safe conscience. My letter of the 18th was therefore to save O'Donnell from hastily taking an aflBdaVit through the medium of the Inspector, until that officer was first convinced by examination of the facts alleged that he eould safely do so. Are the committee then to understand that this affidavit was kept back having been already tak-en ? No, I have stated no such thing; I have stated quite the con- trary; I said " Do not let the man take the affidavit till you have first investigated the fact." The words in the letter are " keep therefore back the matter of the affidavit which I sent you upon Saturday, and observe silence as to it. If the inquiry prove O'Donnell'siinnocence then follow my instructions of Saturday, otherwise do not." ? That exactly bears out my present answer, " if O'Donnell ap- peared innocent then follow my instructions of Saturday in letting, him take the affidavit, otherwise do not." Was O'Donnell 's innocence of the charge against him proved ? Your Lordships have all the papers before you ; that is matter for your opinion. Do you consider O'Donnell's innocence to be proved ? So far as the evidence attainable could prove his innocence I do^ think it proved. Then you thought it expedient to order the affidavit to be taken ? My instructions of the 16th of July, already referred to had already been acted on, and the affidavit having been made in pur- suance of these was forwarded to me ; there was no subsequent communication from me to the Inspector in regard of that affida- vit after I had received it. But Mr. Kelly sent you the affidavit? He did ; but in point of time he sent me the affidavit before he AND THE ACIIILL MISSIOX. 100 had received, much less proceeded upon, the directions with re- spect to it, ortotlie investigation contained in my letterofthe 18th; and if your Lordship will turn to a subseciuent report of his, dated the 24tli of July, and to my letter of the 25th, you will find such to have been the fact. Did Mr. Kelly obey the instructions contained in your letter of the ISth ? He was unable to obey them all. Which did he obey and which did he not ? He could not obey the part which referred to the affidavit, hav- ing already obeyed the instructions contained in my letter of the 16th before he received this letter of the 18th. Did he obey all the others? He did not obey any part which related to Cassidy, the teacher of the Duiga School ; he may have inquired into the O'Donnell matter, but not into the matter relating to Cassidy, and therefore in my letter of the 25th 1 desired him to obey whatever directions I had given him in the letter of the 18th which were still uncom- plied with. Did Mr. Kelly write you any reason for his not having obeyed your instructions ? Yes, a very sufficient reason ; and it is in the printed paper be- fore your Lordships, No. 24,, his report of the 24th of July, which he commences by stating that he had only then, namely on the 24th, received my letter of the 18th ; of course I was satisfied, as he could not be expected to obey instructions he had not received until too late to obey them. This circumstance however was the occasion of my letter of the 25th, and of a corresponding one of the same date to Mr. Nangle. Will you read the third and fointh paragraphs of that letter of Mr. Kelly's ** I herewith enclose the affidavit ; O'Donnell has been most anx- ious for an investigation, and states that his dismissal from the Wa- ter-guards was caused by a private quarrell with one of his fellow boatmen, who lodged a complaint against him,^and that he was dismissed without any investigation ; that he subsequently memo- ralized Captain Irwin, his ins])ccting Commander, (now stationed at Dundalk) for an investigation, who told him he could not comply with his request, and on his demanding to know the cause of his dismissal told him that he was dismissed for inso- lence to a Boatman. Now, my dear Sir, I would beg to suggest that a good deal of angry discussion, such as I anticipate will re- sult from being obliged to bring the opposed parties in contact 101 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATION with each other, might be avoided by your writing to Captain Ir- win at Dundalk, requiring to know the cause of the dismissal of James O'Donnell, extra boatman at the station of Rossmore in the year 1832, from the service. I v/ouldalso beg to remind you that the officer is the only person who can prove the real cause of dis- missal, as Mr. Nangle's proofs most rest either upon the hearsay of individuals or documents \\ Inch I Vvould be very cautious in receiving as evidence, party feeling raging to such an extent in Achill that it would be impossible to define its limits." You thought tho.t a sufficient reason for his not fulfilling your Instructions ? No, I did not think that a sufficient reason for his not lulfilling my instructions ; I took the first paragraph of the letter or report of the 24th, already referred to, to be the reason for his not fulfilling my instructions. My instructions were contained in the letter of the 18th; Mr. Kelly, instead of receiving that letter in due course, did not receive it until six days after, namely, on his return to Tuam, the place to which it had been directed, he having left Tuam previously, in order to execute the directions contained in my letter of the ICUh; therefore I say the first paragraph of that letter or report of the 24th states satisfactorily \vhy he did not obey the instructions of the 18th, —simply because he had not received them in time to obey them. As far as relates to the affidavit, and no further ? Yes, and therefore is it that in my letter of the 25th I desired him to obey such part of my letter of the 18tli as remained still uncomplied with ; my letter of the 18tli countermanded my letter of thel6th; he did not receive this letter until after he had obeyed the letter of the 16th ; therefore in my letter of the 25th 1 told him to execute whatever remained of the directions of the letter of the 18th, judging the reason alleged in his letter or report of the 24th to be very sufficient for his not having acted in accordance with it before. Do you think thatparagraph vv^liich you have read contains a suffici- ent reason for not complying with your orders to make an inves- tigation ? No ; I have already stated so ; I think the paragraph which I have read refers to a distinct thing ; the affidavit was taken as all affidavits are, at the peril of the person wdio swore it, and Mr. Kelly got instructions to get O'Donnell to take this affidavit. What do mean by " at the peril of the person" '^ I mean the peril of his conscience ; in my letter of the 16th I had desired Mr. Kelly to go down to see that O'DonncJI had ta- AND THE ACIIILL MISSION. 162 \en his affulavit before the proper officer, namely, tlie commissi- oner for taking affidavits. Subsequent to that letter of the 16th Mr. Xanjjjle rencvved his complaints of O'Donnell in such a way as appeared to me to be capable of proof ; I immediately wrote the letter of the 18th, be,ij;i]!;ing 31r. Kelly riot to let the man take the affidavit till he Mr. Kelly was first satisfied, by such investi- gation as Mr. Nangle then had to offisr, whether O'Donnell was right or wrong in the transaction ; this letter, v.hich is before your Lordships, goes on to say, not to let the man take the affidavit if he was wrong, but to let him take it if he was right; I did that conceiving I was bound in duty to save O'Donnell's conscience, if he really were guilty of the fact, from takiug an affidavit denying it. Mr. Kelly did not get this letter of the 18th until the 24th, and when the 24th had arrived INIr. Kelly had already obeyed the let- ter of the IGth by getting the aflidavit. Will you state what part of Mr. Kelly's report satisfied you that he had made sufficient inquiry into O'Donnell's conduct ? No part of his report of the 24th of July satisfied me upon that point, because I drew no conclusion from it, as to O'Donnell, whatever; T merely received with it the affidavit of O'Donnell; and I found in it, by Mr. Kelly's suggestion, a reference to a re- spectable gentleman, from whom information on this subject might be obtained. And you pushed the inquiry no further as to Mr. Nangle's complaints No such thing; I did push the inquiry much farther, — as far as was possible, — upon this particular point. Your Lordships will find in the printed correspondence lying before you, at page 15., the copy of a letter addressed by me to Captain trwin immediately upon the receipt ofTJr. Kelly's re})ort of the 24th of July, and copies of two letters from that gentleman in reply ; your Lordships will also find in a subsequent letter to Mr. Nangle of the 6th of August that the matter of inquiry was still further pushed ; and your Lordships will find also, by a document whicli I gave in of an interview between Mr. Dombrain and INIi-. Carlile at a still later period upon this subject, that the matter was still further pushed. Did you state to Mr. Nangle that you had made such further inquiry ? No, I did not, and I will state the reason ; v/hen Mr. Kelly did proceed upon that letter to investigate those .charges Mr. Nangle then and there stated to Mr. Kelly that he would forward an af- fidavit of Rutledge to prove the charge iigainst O'Donnell; this 108 THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATION was a further and subsequent act; it is in page 18. of the printed letters: ** To prove the charge against O'Donnell Mr. Nangle brings forward no evidence, but merely refers to Rutledge the chief boatman, and Captain Irwin the Inspecting Commander ;he however states that he will forward to the Board the affidavit of Rutledge in substantiation of this charge." The Board upon that ^cted thus : through me they informed Mr. Nangle, by letter bear- ing date the 6th of August, that they would postpone their opinion upon the matter until they received the document which he pro- posed to forward to them ; no such document up to this mome^nt ever was forwarded by him, so that the evidence of the charge which Mr. Nangle then voluntarily offered, — and the only evi- dence, and for which Mr. Nangle was subsequently told the Board would wait, — Mr. Nangle never did forward, but merely in a sub- sequent letter, dated the 22d of August, page 13, refers to Cap- tain Irwin upon the point. In your second letter to Mr. Kelly the Inspector did not you recall that part of your letter which required any inquiry into the case of O'Donnell ? Certainly not ; on the contrary the letter referred to is very full upon this point ; it is as follows : ** Should Mr. Nangle desire to goon into O'Donnell 's case as to the dismissal from the Coast- guard, receive his evidence, whatever it may be, and forward it, I will make the necessary intjuiry of Captain Irwin." Had the affidavit been taken ? The afH lavit I had in my possession at the time. You said just now that whatever was written by you was writ- ten by the direction of the Board ? Either expressed or implied. Has it not occasionally happened after you have received orders upon certain cases, that when similar cases have occurred you have written an answer without immediately consulting the Board I have y I think I stated so in a former part of my evidence. The witness is directed to withdraw. APPENDIX. The fo^^owing letter was addressed to Lord Landsdown as Chairman of the Committee, by the Rev. Edward Nangle, as it does not aj^pear in the printed report of the evidence it is here in- serted : — London y May 2, 1837. My Lord : I have now the honour of laying before yom* Lordship copies of those controversial writings which your Lordship desired to see.* I crave the indulgence of being permitted to say a few words in the \tay of explanation relating strictly to those documents, exhibit- ing the occasions on which, and the purposes for which they were writ- ten, & as I consider myself still under the obligation of the oath on which my oral testimony was given before your Lordships, I hold myself responsible for every statement contained in this letier, which I pray your Lordships will order to be printed in the minutes of evidence, as part of my sworn testimony. Your Lordship will observe that some of my writings are addressed to the Rev. Dr, M*Hale, titular Archbishop of Tuam. When the attacks which that individual has made on my religion and my person- al character are read and considered, I am sure your liordship will admit that nothing which I may have written could give him a claim to public sympathy. I wish particularly to direct your Lordship's at- tention to the fact that Dr. M'Hale began the. polemical contest in a letter addressed to the Lord Bishop of Exeter, in which the Protestant Church is described as a "mighty nuisance," and its ministers as " kites and vultures," but I would not so much call your Lordship's attention to any isolated expressions as to the tone of insolent defiance which runs through the whole texture of that compositiom In the next publication of Dr. M'Hale (a letter addressed to Lord John Russel, dated St. JarlatliS Tuam, Vigil of Pentecost 1835, and signed f John Tuam,) I, as one of the Achill Missionaries, am described as " the demon of faJiatacism and relif^ious rancour," — apractiserof imposture — a deli- berate asserter of falsehood — a swindler and a fanatic. Your Lord- ship will please to observe that my seven letters to Dr, M'Hale were written in reply to his most uncourteous and insulting attack upon the Church of Enjjland in his letter to the Bishop of Exeter, and that my letter to Dr. M'Hale on his arrival in Achill was subsequent to his letter addressed to Lord John Russel, and which he thought fit to sea- son with such uncourteous language as I have quoted. In another let- • These publications may be ha'e character ©f my publications has not been to make out an apology foar myself, but to shew that our opponents have no claim whatever to your Lordship's sympathy. Most respectfully but most firmly do I state that my con- duct needs no apology. I speak not this my Lord merely in self- vindication — I stand out for a great principle for the maintenance of which I am concerned as a Minister of the Church of England. Hold- ing that high and honourable, and deeply responsible oflice, it is my duty, in fulfilment of my ordination vow, " to give diligence to drive away all erroneous and strange doctrine contrary to God's word," and performing that duty in the use of legitimate means, it is my privi- lege and Tuy right as a British subject to receive \e^a\ protection against the machinations and the violence of " unreasonable and wicked men." I have the honour to be, ycur Lordship's obedient and very humble servant in Christ, Edward Nangle. P. S. — Having understood that in a letter of the Kev. Martin Con- nolly, P.P., dated October 25, 1835, which has been laid before your Lordships that it is stated that Philip Kean formerly teacher of the Dugort National School is now employed by me as a Scripture Reader at a salary of £20, 1 beg leave to inform your Lordships that he is not engaged as a Scripture Reader at all — he is employed as a Printer at the wages of two shilling'^ and sixpence a week. \m APPENDIX. Thb following are the papers and original wood cute of 7^^ Pro* testant P^i^ny Magazine, which are referred to in the above letter !-• TRANSUBSTANTIATION DISPROVED BY A MOUSE. ♦♦ Si hostia coneecTata disparoatjVel casu aliquo ut vento aut miracwlo, vel a MURE nccopta, vel alioauimali, otnequeat roporiri, tunc altera con secratur • • et illud animal si capi potest, occidatur et comburatur, et cincTcs ejus progiciantur in Bacrarium vel sub altari." — Missale Romamtm ex decreto saero8(tncti Concilii Tridentini rcstitvtxm. Pii. v. Pont. max.jusdU eiUhtm. APPENDDi. l^ * If the conaocrated host (or wafer) dlsappeor, being taken away by some accident as by the wind, or a miracle, or a mouse, or any other animal, and cannot be found, then let another be consecrated ; and let that animal, if he can be taken, be killed and burnt, and his ashes cast into consecrated ground, or under the altar."— ^owan Mass-book restored by the decree of the most hoJij Council of Trent, edited by command of Pope Pius V. The above sketch exhibits the great idol of the Church of Rome the consecrated wafer, under the paws of a hungry mouse in tl>e T>ack ground a priest, and one of i\\e chapel servants appear hastening forward to execute tlie murderous decree of mother church against the sacrilegious devourcr of their deified paste. We may exclaim with Anne Askew ♦— " Alas3 poor mouse!" The bigoted adherent to Romish absurdities may fret and rage against such a Tcpresentation l)ut the extract from the missal, which stands -at the head of this arti- cle, shows that in making it, we hav-e not given unK'Ccnsed play to owr Imagination, But we must now request the special attention of our readers to the following extract from the decrees of the Council of Trent, in connec- tion with tho above quotation from the missaL toThe council having asserted tliaj the wafer is changed, by the words of consecration, ^* really and substantially into the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Jesus Christ,'* so that the siibstance of the wafer no longer remains • and having pronounced two anathemas or curses against any one who should have the audacity to believe their own senses, in opposition to this impious dogma, they go on to decree: "If any one shall deny that VTHOLE Christ is contained in the venerable sacrament, under each species, and, when a separation is made, under each particle OF THIS SPECIES, let him be accursed." — Cone, Trid. Sess. xii. can. lii. f We wish our readers to notice more particularly, in these extra- ordinary statements of the missal and the council, the sentences whieh fire printed in capitals. From tlie latter of these it appears that, accor- ding to the doctrine of the Romish Church, the whole Deity and manhood of Christ are contained in each of the countless particles into which a consecrated wafer may be broken The other statement ex- tracted from the missal, admits the fact that a consecrated wafer' may be devoured by a mouse ; that little animal, a.s every one knows, nib- bles its food, detaching a very small particle from the substance on which it feeds by each bite; hence it follows, that every movement of the jaw of the heretical mouse, who preys upon a consecrated wafer, by separating a particle of the paste, forms a new Christ; and so, be- fore the little animal has finished his meal, he may have more human bodies, and Deities too, in his stomach, than it would be easy to num- ber. We have heard the absurd expression, ** a whale in a butter + A Christian female who was putte death at the time of the Keforraation in England for denying the doctrine of Transubstantiation. ' ♦ As the Romish priests are in the habit of calling the veracity of such statements as this in question, we subjoin the original decree of the council- " Siquis negaverit in vene ^ rabili Sacramento Eucharijitio) subjunaquacjur specie, et sub sinaulis cujusquc speciei par- ibus, separatione facto, totum Christum coiMjineri ; anathema sit. >60 APPENDIX. l)oat,*' used to describe a thing beyond the range of all probability, b«l the dogma which requires us to believe that the stomach of a tiny mouse may contain hundreds of human bodies, and Deities to boot, at the same moment, out-Hcrod*s Herod for absurdity. Thus Transub- stantiation is disproved by a mouse. To nullify the argument with which that little animal has furnished us, the statement of the Council of Trent, which asserts that whole Christ is contained in every particle of the wafer, must be denied, and the consequences of the anathema with which that statement is enforced must be hazarded. We suppose that tlie practice of Roman Catholics, in suffering the wafer to melt away on their tongues, instead of chewing it with their teeth, is designed to provide against the absurd consequence to which we have alluded. Let every Roman Catholiq who .reads this paper, think upon this : let him, the next time the priest places his god upon tiis tongue, to be dissolved in his saliva, remember that, by an impru- dent movement of his teeth, he may have as many men and as many ^ods in his mouth, at the same time, as there are fragments of the wa- fer ; and let him, as he values his reputation for common sense, emancipate himself from a system which gravely proposes such filthy and blasphemous absujditles to his acceptance as Divine truths. APPENDIX/ m (—1 O O o an The al>ove> drawing f? a faithful representation of tlirceohjecls which- are worshipped as gods ])y a portion of the human race. The originals of the two^ figures which stand on cither side, arc the property of our jmblishers, who received them from a Missionary who had laboured in • India, where those clumsy mimicries of tlie human form are honoured as gods hy the Pagan inhahiUints. These idols were voluntarily given up by a Hindoo family who embraced Christianity, and therefore lost their reverence for them. The object which stands in the centre of the picture is a wafer, whidi was made in the town of Tuam, and ta- ken from the same heap as those which receive divine worship in the Romish Cathedral. It will be readily admitted that the Hindoos who** worship the images represented in our frontispiece are idolaters; we' should like to know on what principle it can be shown that the wor- shippers of the wnfcr do n(»t deserve the same tide. The images are jwade of metal— the wafer is composed of flour. The images were molten in-^'fuFuace, cast in a mould, and finished with a grave*' --^ 17t APPENDIX. The wafer was boiled in a eaucepan, impreeood with a stamp, and ciip* ped with a scissarsr The ligures were regarded as common metal un- til blessed by a Brahmin. The wafer is supposed to derive its deity and its right to divine adoration from the consecration of a Romisn Priest. Both the wafer and the figures, after their respective conse- crations, remain, a» all our senses tes-tify, what they were before — life- less, powerless, motionless matter. Alas J alasi we may say with equal truth of the worshipper of the former as of the latter," He feed- cth on ashes ; a deceived heart hath turned him aside, that he cannot deliver his soul nor say, is there dot a lie in my right hand ?" With a consciousness of truth as unwavering as that which we feel of our own existence^ we do assert, that the consecrated wafer which the Romish Priests teach the people to worship as god, is no god, but an abominable idoL Tliis proposition is so self-evident, that it needs no argument to confirm it: the statement which it embodies is so plain a truism, that the denial of it seems to imply the absence of the faculty, which renders argument effectual. Still it is notoriously matter of fact that many who exhibit much tact and genius in matters connected with this world, are subjects of the spiritual fatuity which puts a sense- less wafer in the place of the living God. The persons to whom we allude, like the ancient heathen, are skillful and dexterous in the sci- ence and business of earth: but when they attempt to soar into the re- gion of spiritual truth, their wisdom, like the wings of the flying fish, fail them : professing themselves to be wise, but slighting the deposi- tory of all wisdom — the Bible, they become fools —they become vain in tlieir imaginations, and tlieir foolish hearts are so darkened, that they change the glory of the incorruptible God into a corruptible wafer. Prophets and apostles, however, reasoned against ancient idolatry, not- withstanding the apparent hopelessness of reaching the understand- ings of those to whom they addressed themselves ; we may, therefore, apply to wafer-worship the arguments with which they assailed log-worship, without laying ourselves open to the charge of incon- sistency. The points which we hope to establish in this article in disproof of the supposed deity of the consecrated wafer are the following : — 1 st, that Christ's humiliation ended when he died; that he entered into glonr immediately after his death on the cross had filled the measure of fuf fering which he endured, as the sinner's substitute. 2ndly, That the doctrine of the Church of Rome, relative to the deification of the wa- fer, represents Christ as being still exposed to a far deeper humiliation than that which he submitted to up to the period of his death : and, consequently, that the doctrine of the Church of Rome on the subject of the wafer, as contradictory to the truth concerning the Saviour's glo- ri6cation, must be false. The first of these points is easily proved by a reference to the Scriptures; the second will be as readily established by a reference to the Missal. * First we are to prove from the Scriptures, that Christ finished his hu- miliation, and entered into his glory at the period of his death. We fcfoi My ihc worcle spoken by our Lord hlnw^f totwo of hk (lisclj>k6, on the day of his resurrection — " Ought not Christ to have suflercd these thingts and to enter into his glory ?" Luke xxiv, 26. Here the entrance of Christ into his glory is described as immediately succeed- ing the accomplishment of his sufferings by death. The Scriptures abound with passages to the same purpose. Being studious of brevity, we shall only quot^ three of them -'* Who (Christ) being the bright- ness of his glory — and the express image of his person, and upholdinff all things by the word of his power, when he had by hiravSelf purged our sins sat down on the right band of the Majesty on high." Heb. i, J3. ** He humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name." &c. Phil, ii, 8, 9. ** This man, (Christ) after he had offered one sacrifice for sins, for ever sat down on the right Iwind of God," &c. Heb. x. 12, It will be admitted that these passages fully prove, that when Christ arose from tlie dead, he entered into the enjoyment of indescribable and uninter- rupted glory, according to the prajer which he offered to his Father* when death was just about to close his humiliation — "I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do, and now, O Father, glorify me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the 'world was," John xvii. 4,5. Secondly, We are now to prove that the doctrine of the Church of Rome, concerning the wafer, represents Christ as being still in a state of humiliation. We know nothing more deeply degrading than de- f>endenceon the caprice of another; but the Missal * states that Christ 9 dependent on the caprice of the priests, in reference to the miracle which is supposed to change the wafer into a god ; unless the priest in- tends the change to take place, it is not produced. So speaks the Mis- sal. We believe that every one who retains the least portion of right feeling, whatever his religious creed may be, in his heart despises the meanness which, in the furtherance of its own selfish views, transub- stantiates many a Protestant Gentleman into a servile dependent on Romish priests, making him the sycophant of men who are his inferi* ors in birth and education, and every distinction which raises one man above another in society. How deep then the degradation which is poured upon the Son of God by a doctrine which represents him as a pensioner on the intention of a priest for the exercise of a most stupen- dous display of his power. Every Roman Catholic knows that the wafer which his priest tells him is whole Christ — body, blood, soul, and Divinity, — is composed of wheat, which has been made into flour by the ordinary process of grinding sifting, &c. He knows that it has been boiled in a saucepan and that it has passively received the marks which it pleased its manu- facturer to stamp upon it. Every priest has personal experience to • " SI quls habeat (XH-aiu so uudeclm Hostias et iiitendat consccrare solum decern, non detcnninana quas ducoin iutciulit ; uou coQSecrut QUJA iiiiyuiKiluu int£»xio. Missale Koea. Cap. de def. convince him that the wafer, even after its supposed deification by ths^ words of consecration, may be carried abv)iU in a little box, or shut up in the pocket of a priest. He is also aware of the fact that his Mis- sal states, that this wafer-Clirist may be swept away before the wind; or, that a little mouse may run away with it and eat it. We appeal to the common sense of our Roman Catholic countrymen, can the doc- trine which represents the Son of God as liable to such debasing ca- sualties, consist with the glowing representations which the Scriptures make of the glory to which he was exalted by his resurrection and as- cension ?' But this is not alL The wafer-Christ must enter the stomachs of millions of his creatures. Nay, the Missal' subjects him to a still deep- er degradation ; for it says, * "^ If the priest sliould vomit up the Eu- charist, if ihespecies appear whole, let them be reverently taken, unless it create nausea: in that case, let the species be cautiously separated, and let them be put in some sacred place, or under the altar. But if the species do not appear, let the vomit be burnt, and the ashes thrown into a SL'cred place." Reader, picture to yourself a priest, poking in his own vomit for the fragments of the disgorged wafer — ask him why ho is engjiged in such filthy employment, and if he adhere to the doctrine o( his church, he must answer, that he is searching for his God amid the offensive matter which he has discharged from his own stomach ! ! How striking th& contrast between the doctrine of the Romish Church and that of Scripture !' The Scripture says, " All power is given to Christ in heaven and in earth." No, says the Missal, he may be borne off by the wind, or a mouse may run away witli him« The Scripture says, that, *' He does whatsoever he pleasetKin the armies of heaven or among the inhabitants of the earth, while none can stay his hand, or say to him, what doest thou." No, says the missal, he can- not work the miracle of transubstantiation without the consent of a priest.- The Scripture says that Christ is entered " into heaven itself," there to abide until the time of his second and glorious coming. No says the Missal,^he may rot and turn to maggots in a little box, he may be shut up in the pocket of a priest, or conlined in a filthy stomach, 'lo finish the cor^trast, the Scripture says, that the risen and ascended Saviour, in the enjoyment of the glory which he had with the Father before the world was^ receives the homage and adoration of the hosts of heaven ; but the Missal states that he may be disgorged i'wm tlie dis- ordered stomach of a wretched creature, and as ho sprawls in helpless impotence in the vomit, excite no feeling in the ^beholder but nausea and loathing. The" Bible contains the religion taught by Christ and his apostles. The doctrine of the Romish Church concerning the wafer, is, as we have shown in this paper, contradictory to the statements of that sacred book concerning the glorification of the risen Jesus ; therefore, its doc- * Miss. Bora. Caj>. de, defec. APPENDIX. 174 tsrine is false — the ofTsiniug of human weakness -tlie nursling of hu- man wickedness — an apostacy from the ancient Catholic faith, taught by Christ and his inspired ai)OStks. IDOLATRY OF THE KOMISII MASS. Some of our friends may think that we have handled the deilied paste of llie Roman Church ratlicr unceremoniously. In vindication of ourselves, \>e refer to the conduct of IIc/,ekiah,2 Kings xviii», who^ when the Jews burnt incense to the brazen serpent, indig^nantly broke that divine symbol,.and contemptuously called it, " Nehushtan," i. c. a bit of brafs. In immediate connexion uith this act, the Holy Spirit has recorded the following character of Hczckiah, *' lie trusted in the Lord God of Israel ; so that after him was none like him of all the kings ofJudali,.nor any that were before him" (Sec 2 Kings xviii. 4, 5.) A divine ordinance,, in the use to which God has appointed it, demands our devout respect ; but when it is perverted from that use to an occa- sion ol iprobation ol' two doctors of the faculty of theology, and reprinted in 182L The three cuts with which we haie adorned this article are selected from nine with which the original document is il- lustrated. We shall introduce this legend by transcribing the certificate ap- pended to it. APPROBATION. *' We, the undersigned Doctors of the Faculty of Theology of Paris, certify, that we have seen and closely examined this History of the Miraculous Host of Paris, in which we have not found any thing contrary to the faith, nor to morals. Given at Paris, this 2nd day of August, U>33. *' N. PlON'AV, " F. Damourettes." nd APPBNOm. THE HISTORY OF THE MIRACULOUS HOST OF PARISu *♦ In tlie vear of our Lord 1290, in the reign of Philip the Fair of Fiance, ancf under the pontification of Boniface VIII., a poor woman of Paris, who had pledged her best gown with a Jew for thirty pence,. Baw the eve of Easter day arrive without the means of redeeming the pledge. Wishing to receive the sacrament on that day, in common with ail good Christians, she went to the Jew, and besought him to let her have the gown for that occasion, in order that she might make a decent appearance at Church. The Jew not only consented to let her have Che gown, but promised to forgive her the money lent, pro- vided she would bring him the Host she would receive at the altar, and which she believed to be her God. The woman, instigated by the same fiend as Judas, promised the Jew to do as he desired, and, for thirty pence, to deliver into his hands the same Lord whom the trait- orous disciple had formerly sold to the Jews for thirty pieces of silver. , . , , i • • ^' ^ •* The next morning, she went to her parish church, jomecl m the ser- vice, and received the sacrament, feigning a devotion equal to those around her. But she concealed the host in her handkerchief; and, on quitting the church, proceeded to the Jew's house, and delivered the Host into his hands. .,.,., , , , " This bitter enemy of Jesus Christ, holdmg withm his hands the real body of our Saviour, cried out — ' I shall soon see if what the Christian* would make us believe of this bread, be true or not /' In the phrenzy of his hatred, ho took a pen-knife, and laying the Host on a table, stabbed it several times ; and behold, the blood gushed from the wounds in great abundance. r x. ^ ■ x p ^ "His wife and children were terrified at the sight of this tnghttul AFPfiflDlll. f7e procRgy ; but the Jew, no way moved by this awful 6i)ectf>cle, ciWk)ft- ▼cured to pierce the Host with a nail, by dint of repeated blows with a liainmer. Blood again rushed out ; still the hard heart of the Jew did not relent. " Becoming more daring by the repetition of his crimes, he seized the Host the third time, and, having hung it upon a stake, he in- flicted upon the Host almost as many lashes with a scourge as the naked body of Christ received from the hands of his fore- fathers. " Snatching the Host from the stake, he threw it into the fire ; and, to his astonishment, he saw it moving in the midst of the flames, entire and untouched. " This new miracle drove the ruffian to new efforts, In the hope of destroying the host. With a large carving knife, he endeavoured, but in vain, to cut the Host to pieces. "As if resolved to omit no one of the sufferings endured by Jesns Christ on the cross, nor any of the indignities offered to him, the Jew now took the Host and hung it up in the place always deemed the vilest of a house, striving, with redoubled force, to pierce it with the point of a spear. ** The streams of blood, which now again flowed from the wounds, were still inculpable of extinguishing the cruel flamea of hia ha'tred. " He then again had recourse to his fire, and threw the Host Into a cauldron of boiling water. In the same instant, the water assumed the appearance of blood, and the Host was seen above in the form of a Crucifix^ and Jesus Christ was again seen dying upon the cross. " What a spectacle .' The wretched Jew, stunned with terror at this IVT Ai*PEI^DlX. Kist miracle, fled from befai'« the face of tbatGod whom ho had wu-- cified afresh, and hil himself in the darkest celhir of his house. "The Almighty wouUl not permit this great miracle to remain con- oealed, nor the crime which had called it forth to go unpunished. The church hell, at that moment, calling the people again to mass, one of the children of this vile man rushed from his house, and cried aloud with terror — ' Where do you go to seek foi' your God ? to the church ? Hat not my father, then, after haviny injlictcd so mavy tortures on him, has he not killed him ?' '* A woman, a neighbour of the Jew, hearing these words, went to his house, feigning to ask for light, and l)eheld this affecting picture of the passion of Jesus Christ, again exhibited on this spot. Moved with a holy fear, she prostrated herself on the ground, making the sign of the cross on her forehead. In the same instant, the body of Jesus Christ, which she had seen over the cauldron, suspended on the Cross, assumed its previous form. of the Host, and came and placed itself, un- broken and entire,in a vessel which she held in her hand. "This pious woman received the sacred gift with infinite joj, pressed- it to her bosom with reverence, and hurried away with it to the church of Saint John i*£Kfiit. workman made it " therefore it is not God." " Tli€y1)e no gods ihut iife made with hands," are declarations of inspired tni th which we should -wish to ring in the ears of every Romanist as he kneels in worship t^ the wafer. And oh ! that we could awaken a sense of guilt in the con- sciences (if those nominal Protestants, both laymen and ministers, who tacitly sanction the heaven -^daring idolatry of the mass, by passing it by in silence — and that we could speak still more alarmingly to thoj^e, who, for the gratification of a poor ambition of popularity, or wiih a base and selfish regard to their ease or emolument, positively sanction it, by contributing to the maintenance of priests by whom it is perform- ed, and to the erection of chapels in which the abomination is practised* But let desinging priests, and interested and selfish politicans do what they can to prop up the tottering cause of popery, its god the wafer, will yet be trampled under foot of men— it will be cast with contempt and abhorrencCj with tlie idols of heathenism," to tlie moles and to the bats*" Would that we could communicate to all our readers our most certain and unwavering persuasion of the truth of what we have writ- ten — -" The Lord is the true God, he is the living God, and an everlast- ing King; at his wrath the earth shall tremble, find the nations shall not be able to abide his indignation. ♦ * * " Xhe gods that HAVE NOT MADE THE HEAVENS AND THE EARTH, EVEN THEY SHALi. PERISH FROM THE EARTH, AND FROM UNDER THESE HEAVENS." Jer. X. 10, 11. We are certain that the heavens and the earth we»e not made by the wafer, which owes its own existence tc the fingers of our Tuam Demetrius, and therefore we are certain that the wafer, as an object of worship^ shall, in God's appointed time, " perish from the earth, and from under the heavens." For ** the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it." AVPESDlX. 184 CATTLE HEARING MASS. It was a fine Sabbath morning in Summer, when all nature seemed to unite with the sacredness of the se;ison in inviting God's intelligent creatures to holy and joyful meditation, that M» M'G—— -heard the noise of some cattle passing at the end of his house. Heat first sup- posed that it might be his own cows, which he had driven out to 185 Al»rEN.DIX. graze in the mountains, retnrwing to seek refuge under the frienrlly roof from the oppressive heat of the sun and the annoyance of the flies. On going to the door, however, he discovered the son of one of his neighbours driving several cattle before him. " Where are you going vsith the cattle at this hour of the day ?" said M'G. " I am driving them," said the boy, with that careless gravity with which a common- place question is usually answered — " lam driving them to mass." " To mass ! !" exclaimed M'G. " Yes," continued the boy, without taking any notice of the surprise which his extraordinary announce- ment had excited ; " to mass — the priest is -.vaiting yonder for them." The boy pursued his way; the cows were assembled; aai I the priest read mass for them ; as represented in our frontispiece. We pledge our veracity for the authenticity of this story. Indeed, the circumstance to which it relates is one of common occurrence, and by no means limited to the mountainous & secluded district which was the scene of the particular transaction described above. " They offer masses," writes the Rev. Mr. Nolan in his second pamphlet, "for the prosperity of houses, lands, cattle, and various other appendages of property. Oh ! what an abominable notion ! Oh ! what prostration of human intellect ; to suppose that the Lord Jesus Christ should be summoned from the throne of his eternal justice, to be offered upon the altar of human frailty, to remove the sickness or infirmity of dying or decaying beasts !" It may well be asked why are the cattle assembled in the ^lace where the mass is said for them ; being irrational creatures, it is im- possible for them to participate in a leligious sen ice? There is, how- ever, a good reason for this blasphemous absurdity. The mass which is offered for cattle is called the mass of the Holy Ghost; and on .ic- count of the superior virtue which it is supposed to possess, is sold fur double price. The usual price of a common mass is half-a-crown, bat a ma.ss of the Holy Ghost is considered a good bargain for five shillings. When such amass is celebrated, the cattle of the purchaser are assem- bled in the house, in order to establish the belief of the priest's asser- tion, that they only enjoy the benefit of his spiritual servicer. If the priest did not make such a judicious exclusion, all the people of the district might imagine that their cattle had the benefit of the mass; a supposition which would tend much to diminish the revenue which is derived from this awful traffic. This is the true origin of the close communion which the priests have established in their lestial con- gregations. How deeply is it to be lamented that intelligent men, whose rank in society gives them considerable influence on public opinion, should lend themselves to perpetuate such blasphemous frauds &impostures,by thecomplimentary language in which they speak of the Romish priest- hood who practise them ! It is now time that the Christian world should free itself from any participation in such criminality, and, in holy dis- regard of the censure of an ungodly world, lift up their voice like a trumpet against such abomiiuitions and the teachers of them. \^