impending at the time, and it seemed to me that a Nationalist who
would do his work honestly in prosecuting offenders against the
ordinary law might strike a blow against tyranny by refusing to
accept a brief, if offered, against men accused of political
offences or prosecuted under a Coercion Act. I know that a similar
view was entertained by the late Very Rev. Dr. Kavanagh of Kildare,
and many others. However, we failed to influence Mr. Taylor further
than to make him say that he would do nothing in the matter until
Mr. Davitt was consulted. I, for one, called on Mr. Davitt, and
pressed my views upon him; but he was decided that no Nationalist
could identify himself in the smallest way with Castle rule in
Ireland. This settled the question, and Mr. Taylor declined the
post, which was subsequently applied for by Mr. Luke Dillon, who
now holds it.--Faithfully yours,

JAMES A. POOLE.

29 Harcourt Street.

EDITORIAL NOTE.

_"United Ireland," June 23._

We devote a large portion of our space to-day to the apparently
organised defence of Mr. J.F. Taylor and his friends, and we are
quite content to rest upon their letters the justification for our
comments. When a gentleman who avows himself a disappointed
aspirant for Parliamentary honours, and who owns his regret that he
did not become a petty Castle placeman, is discovered writing in an
important English Liberal paper, venomous little innuendos at the
expense of sorely attacked Irish leaders which excite the
enthusiasm of the _Liarish Times_, it was high time to intimate to
the _Manchester Guardian_ the source from which its Irish
information is derived. The case against Mr. Taylor as a
criticaster is clinched by the fact that his cause is espoused by
Mr. John O'Leary. The Irish public are a little weary of Mr.
O'Leary's querulous complaints as an _homme incompris_. So far as
we are aware, the only ground he himself has for complaining of
want of toleration is that he possibly considers the good-humoured
toleration for years invariably extended to his opinions on men and
things savours of neglect. His idea of toleration with respect to
others seems to be toleration for everybody except the unhappy
wretches who may happen to be for the moment doing any practicable
service in the Irish cause.

NOTE O.

BO