where the Campbell galleys could not reach them. Radcliffe, who was in Dublin, kept this letter to himself, for he saw that the plan was impossible, and he knew that the House of Commons there was already getting out of hand. Strafford believed that something equivalent to a state of siege existed, and that he was therefore justified in the most extreme measures. History may make excuses, but to the Long Parliament he was the man who had encouraged them to oppose the King, who had then gone over to the side of prerogative, receiving titles and power as the price of desertion, and who was ready to dragoon better men into submission. To honest Scotch Covenanters he was of course the arch-enemy, and those who espoused their cause from selfish motives knew that his interests were not theirs.[214] FOOTNOTES: [206] Adair's _True Narrative_, 26; Mant's _Church of Ireland_, 457; Blair's statement in Reid's _Presbyterian Church_, i. 103. [207] Wentworth to Bramhall, September 12, 1634, in _Rawdon Papers_; Report of the Belfast conference in Reid's _Presbyterian Church_, i. 195 and Appx. iv; Livingston's narrative, _ib._ 204-6. [208] Bramhall to Ussher, April 26, 1641, in his _Works_, i. xc; _Liber Munerum_, v. 113; Carte's _Ormonde_, i. 96; Wentworth to the King, September 2, 1639 (from Dublin) in _Strafford Letters_, and to Radcliffe, September 23 (from Covent Garden), in Whitaker's _Radcliffe_, 182; Bedell to Ward, April 23, 1640; in _Two Biographies_, 365; _Irish Lords' Journal_, March 31, 1640; Hickson's _Irish Massacres_, ii. 6-8. Corbet's 'Ungirding of the Scottish Armour' was licensed in Dublin, May 6, 1639, by Edward Parry, afterwards Bishop of Killaloe, on behalf of the Archbishop of Dublin. It is in the form of a dialogue between Covenanter and anti-Covenanter. The dedication of six pages to Wentworth contains some strong language about the 'fiery zealous faction' dominant in Scotland. 'The best of them is as a briar; the most upright is a thorn hedge; they do evil with both hands earnestly, hunting every man his brother with a net. They are gone in the way of Cain, etc.' Corbet's much better known _Lysimachus Nicanor_, dated January 1, 1640 (n.s.) was probably printed in Dublin, but has no printer's name and no imprimatur. He is believed to have had assistance both from Bramhall and Maxwell. Baillie (_Letters_, i. 243) wrongly attributes it to Henry Leslie, and calls the author 'a mad scenic railer.' It purports to be the letter of a Jesuit, who congratulates the Scots on their approach to the views of the Society concerning resistance to kings. See the article on Corbet in _Dict. of Nat. Biography_. I have used the copies of the two tracts preserved in the Cashel Library with MS. notes by Foy, afterwards Bishop of Waterford. [209] Clarendon's _History_, ii. 101; _Strafford Letters_ in July 1638, ii. 184-194, and Wentworth's answer to Laud, dated August 7; Baillie's _Letters_ i. 93.