my paper, views such as those expressed by Sir Gavan Duffy and Dr Healy, and it was my aim to draw up a list of books which, having regard to the meagre materials at my dispo- sal, might on the whole be useful to those desirous of knowing, with such an approach to accuracy as is fairly attainable, a little at least of Irish history. Dr Healy hits the nail on the head when he speaks of men “ who never consulted, nor cared to consult, original authorities.” This, beyond all doubt, is the vice of many writers of Irish historical books. Of course it is the vice of a great many other writers too, but I have nothing to do whh other writers now. Nothing, strikes one more forcibly in looking through our historical literature than the absence of any attempt to be exact. Men spend the time in turning sentences wllich they ought to devote to verifying facts. The vicious process is like this : — Somebody writes a book “ with- out consulting original authorities.” A few years later some one else takes up the same subject, and writes another book, quoting as an authority for his facts the first book, and so on ; others succeed, each quoting the previous text books, and not one of those writers ever dreams that the way to write history is to fling text books to the winds, and go straight at the original documents. Let there be no mistake about the fact. There are writers of Irish “history” who got “ puzzled” over a list of books with which every historical student is familiar, and who would be as much “at sea” in a muniment room as a ballet-girl on the judicial bench. Some one has asked “What is the meaning of the ‘ best’ books ?” In my opinion, histories. And who are the best historians ? Men who possess the faculties I have ventured to as- cribe to Mr. Lecky— men who have the “ faculty of research, the faculty of style, and an inherent love of justice.” Judged by this test, the majority of the historians I have named must not be regarded as of high rank. Yet without Leland, Plowden, and Mac- Geoghegan, such as they are, we would be in a very much more wretched plight than we are at present. M’Gee and Mitchel cannot in strict- ness be regarded as historians ; but under peculiar difficulties they did good work. Mitchel, I think, possessed the historical faculty in a marked degree ; and could he have devoted the necessary time, and made the necessary researches, he would, I believe, liavo written a history of Ireland as charming as Macaulay’s England. But, as Dr Healy gjiyg — and every sentence in his letter betrays the thoughtfulness of a cultivated gentleman and an enlightened patriot— we are at present only at the stage of collecting materials for writing Irish history. “ When the time is come, and the matter shall be ready, I have no doubt the man will not be wanting.” I share the hopes and desires thus expressed by Dr. Healy. Several of your correspondents draw attention to the fact that in limiting my paper to books about “ Ireland or the Irish” I have shut out some of the best Irish books, in the sense of books written by Irishmen. This, of course, is quite true, and I felt its force in writing my paper. But I believed that, even at the risk of raising a hornet's nest about me by giving no place in my list to the name of Goldsmith, by shutting out that splen- did poem “The Forging of the Anchor,” by consigning to the shade for the moment the “charming” Steele and “ the amusing” Con- greve and Farquhar ; yet that, upon the whole, it would be better for Irish students to turn their attention, in the first instance, to Irish history. Afterwards, of course, they might plunge into the literature of the whole world. They should begin, but not end, with the study of Irish history. This was my view : it is my view still. I still preach from Carlyle’s text. With these general observations I shall now notice in detail the letters of your cor- respondents so far as space will permit. Dr Garnett, formerly the courteous Head Superintendent of the Reading-room of the British Museum, and the ever-ready and ency- clopgedic scholar, names three books which he kindly says I must have omitted by “accident. ’ As a matter of fact there are certain books (which I shall presently mention! that were “accidentally” omitted, but not the ones pointed out by Dr Garnett. The ones so mentioned are ‘ ‘ Bagwell’s Ireland under the Tudors” (also . mentioned by Mr. Lecky), Gardiner’s History, and Miss Hickson’s “ Ireland in the 17th Century.” I had thought ot Mr. Bagwell, and at first con- ^ 'jidered he ought to have a place on my list. But on second thoughts I said “No.” It is quite clear that my second thoughts were not “best,” and I shall be glad now
