In the desultory history of this question, two facts have been stated requiring distinct proof. They are:--First, that Mr. O'Connell was favourable to the principle of mixed education in the commencement. And, secondly, that the Seceders--those who were afterwards so glibly denounced as infidels for their support of the Godless bill--were as much opposed to that bill as he was. How Mr. O'Connell expressed himself when the bill was first announced has been already stated. It is at once conceded that the writer's memory of a conversation, in its nature almost private, were he even above all suspicion, would not be a safe authority. In this instance there is no need to rely on it--the statement is more than sustained by Mr. O'Connell's recorded words. From a number of occasions, equally available, I select one, because of its solemnity and importance. In a prolonged and most earnest debate in the House of Commons, on motion for going into Committee on the Bill, June 2nd, Mr. O'Connell, after eulogising the Maynooth grant, says:-- "Take one step more, and consider whether this bill may not be made to accord with the feelings of the Catholic ecclesiastics of Ireland. I ought not to detain you: I am not speaking here in any spirit of hostility. I should be most happy to give any assistance in my humble power to make this bill work well. I have the most anxious wish to have this bill work well, because I am desirous of seeing education promoted in Ireland; but even education may be misapplied power. I admit that at one time I thought the plan of a mixed education proper, and I still think that a system of mixed education in literature and science would be proper, but not with regard to religious education." And further on: "Again I repeat I am most anxious for the success of this bill, but I fairly tell you it cannot succeed without the Catholic bishops.... "There may have been harsh expressions in the public papers, but depend upon it great anxiety exists in Ireland to have such a measure." The second proposition would be abundantly sustained by a single sentence in Thomas Davis's commentary on the speech from which I extract the above. "On our part we had feared O'Connell conceded almost too far." But the testimony of Mr. O'Connell himself will be considered more conclusive. Speaking in the Association on the 6th of July, he said:-- "I may remark for the present that on this subject a question of difference has arisen among ourselves. Some of the members of the Association are for what is called mixed education, and others of us are against it, but that difference of opinion ought not to create any division among us, for neither the one nor the other of us is gratified by the bill as it stands." Again, in the course of the same speech, he said: