Haverty, and was altogether disappointed not to find some slight mention of a little book which, if my memory does not strangely deceive me, is one of the most readable, and on the whole fair books on Irish history. I am alluding to Taylor's "Civil Wars of Ireland," somewhat queerly so called, but really an abstract of Irish history from the Norman Conquest to the Union. In one short paragraph we have Sir John Davis, Monk Mason, Hallam and Thierry jumbled together on some principle of association utterly unintelligable to me. I agree, however, with what is said about Davis and Thierry (save that the "excellent chapter" should be excellent chapters), but I do not see anything that is "pro- found" in Hallam, and have, unfortunately I suppose, not read Monk Mason.
For the fifth paragraph I have little to say that might not take the shape of praise and general agreement, though here, as nearly everywhere "His - toricus" has an odd and somewhat unsystematic way of bringing men and books together. There seems to be a very general consensus of opinion as to the merits of Mr. Walpole's [[Kingdom of Ire- land]], but I do not exactly understand what "His- toricus' means by administering Sir Gavan Duffy as the antidote to Froude. I fancied that Mr. Lecky was a much more proper and more potent antidote, as he deals fully with a period which can be only glanced at in Duffy's bird's eye view. It reads oddly, by the way, that this last "is of course, written essentially from an Irish point of view." Yes, of course, but who needed to be told this ? Did anybody expect that Sir Gavan Duffy would write from a Kamschatkan or lunar "point of view" ? Here, as indeed throughout his valuable paper, "Historicus" shows that he is not only nothing if not historical, but that he is, I fear, an historian of somewhat Dryasdustian proclivities.
M'Gee's and Mitchel's histories are somewhat too highly spoken of. They neither gave any measure of the men, being both hastily compiled — Mitchel's, as 1 learned either from himself or his publisher, in the almost incredibly short period of three months. But why does not "Historicus" put among his best books lather Mitchel's "[[Last Conquest of Ireland]] (Perhaps)," and, above all, his "Jail Journal," which is, to my mind, in the mere matter of style, the best Irish book written in my time ? But I fear "Historicus" sets small value on this little matter of style. Of the rest of this paragraph I have little to say, save that, in talking of the calendering of State papers, "Historicus" makes no mention of the valuable introduction to the State papers of James I by Dr Russell and Prendergast to what I understand to be a very valuable work of Gilbert on the War of the Confederation period. However, per- haps I have more fault to find with "Historicus" here for sins of commission than omission. I do not see why such books should have a place at all among the hundred best books, but if they are to have a place, I think many quite as valu- able as some given by "Historicus," but which I have no time to pick out now, might easily be culled from the various Society publications — the Irish and Kilkenny Archaeological, Celtic Ossianic, and the like. With the books given in the sixth paragraph I have no fault to find, save that, if my memory does not greatly deceive me, Hardy's "Charlemont" is a stilted, wearisome, and comparatively valueless book.
On the seventh paragraph I have only two re- marks to make. I heartily concur in what His- toricus says about Tone's Memoirs, but I do not in the least see why he should not have added Barrington's "Personal Recollections" to his "Rise and Fall," or, if he wished, substituted the first for the last.
I can leave the eighth paragraph pass with the remark that the Abbe Perraud's book might per- haps be added to De Beaumont's. It is by no means equal to it, but it deals with Ireland at a later period, and has much good matter in it. The ninth, tenth, and eleventh paragraphs might wholly pass, but that I cannot even guess why Lady Morgan's three books should find a place in the best hundred or even the best thousand Irish books. But if people have plenty of time on hand, and are not thinking of best books at all, they might read with profit and amusement her "O'Briens and O'Flaherties," and if time were almost unlimited and addiction to fiction excessive one might even read her "O'Donnell." The twelfth paragraph I must deal with very cursorily. I should have to write columns to deal satisfactorily with it. But perhaps as I have said so much elsewhere about Young Ireland and Young Irelanders I may let the matter mostly slide here and now. I may say, however, that "Who fears to speak of '98 ?" is not the best song of the "Spirit of the Nation," though it is perhaps the best in spirit, and that Speranza "is certainly not entitled to the first place among the delightful warblers of her own sex." "Mary" is entitled to the first place, "Eva" to the second, and "Speranza" at most to the third. If "M'Lennan's 'Life of Thomas Drum- mond' must be mentioned," why should the "Cornwallis" and Castlereagh correspondence be passed over ? Men who want to know of '98, not to talk of other things, must con- cern themselves much with these books. 1 think, too, that Ireland could very well spare Mr. Bright's speeches; though possibly English literature could not- The recommendation to read Mr. Bright is the odder in that we are no- where told to read Curran, Plunket, O'Connell, or Shiel. Mill's pamphlet on "Ireland and Eng- land" is, no doubt, a valuable one; but surely should have no place among a hundred best books, and is in no way comparable, from an Irish point of view, with such a pamphlet as Holmes' "Case of Ireland Stated." Senior, too, should have no place in this list. I am sorry to say I have read much of this man, and, as far as I can at all remember, he knows little about Ireland, and cares less. Dr Sigersou's "Modern Ireland" might be added to his "Land Tenures," if the question were only of good books; but when the elemeiu of arithmetic is brought to bear on the matter, there is, of course a difificulty here, as there is, 1 should say, in at least one-fourth of the books mentioned by "Historicus." "Of books published within the past live or six years," to take a phrase from "Historicus," one of the most useful is Mr. Barry O'Brien's "Fifty Years' Concessions to Ireland;" but taking the arithmetical test, I am in no way ])reparcd to say it should be put among the best hundred books, or rather I am prepared to say it should not. Another very good recent book, though a very different one, is Sir John Pope Hen- nessy's "Raleigh in Ireland." Tliis little book is excellent both in spirit and style, and I mention it here chiefly because I do not think it has at- tracted all the attention it deserves. I am happy
