al lad been made to the law. It admitted of no excuse. A man,
without a shadow of right, destroys and carries of the materials of
another man's house. The police force not only do not prevent, _but they
assist him_. There is a stipendiary magistrate, but he does not
interfere; a petty sessions court, but no recourse is had to it; and,
strange to say, there is Daniel O'Connell, to whom every thing is known,
and he is silent; the two Messrs Butler, the members for the county, and
they are mute; Lord J. Russell assails the conduct of the ministry
towards Ireland--here was a case more flagrant than any he brought
forward; he knows it, for he recommends the book in which it is
stated--he dares not bring it forward, for no doubt he enquired, and
found it was untrue. To have it refuted, would not answer his purposes
or those of O'Connell, his ally. He recommends the book as an authority
to those who wish to see how the Irish are treated by their landlords;
and, receiving his sanction, it gets into circulation, and obtaius
belief for, others in addition to the many calumnies already propagated
against the Irish gentry. The author tells us--

"The writer of the following pages has personally visited many of
the towns and rural districts of Ireland; and, _in obedience to
those who instructed him to perform the task_, has drawn up a plain
statement of facts, for the benefit of persons interested in the
welfare of Ireland, and who cannot visit that country personally to
judge for themselves."

And right clumsily has he performed the duty assigned to him. Had his
cunning been equal to his malignity, he would have acted with more
prudence. He would not have recklessly asserted in one place what his
own admissions refute in another. He would not have charged the most
talented, distinguished, and impartial law-officers of the crown with
having strained the law to protect a delinquent because he was a
Protestant--and afterwards shown that the conduct of this man was
condemned by those very persons accused of partiality towards him; and
that his illegal acts were punished by those very tribunals to which (he
asserts) no poor man need think of applying for redress. He, however,
does his best to cover those glaring inconsistencies. He breaks the
thread of his narrative, and intersperses his stories in such a manner,
that a casual reader, who has not time or inclination to examine or
compare them, may easily b