Mr. Dunlop states, “to speak accurately,” that my reference to Shane O’Neill as “done to death” (so _he_ expresses it) by the English is “absolutely without foundation.” His own account of Shane’s death in the _Dictionary of National Biography_ tells us that “possibly if he could have kept a civil tongue in his head the MacDonnells might have consented to a reconciliation.” “It is doubtful whether his assassination was premeditated ... it is probable that when heated with wine he may have irritated them by his insolent behaviour beyond endurance.” In the _Cambridge Modern History_ (iii. 592), however, Mr. Dunlop has attained conviction. “In his wine-cups,” he tells us, “he began to brawl, and was literally hacked in pieces by his enemies.” These and some other of his suppositions do not appear to agree with the story in _Holinshed_, _Campion_, _the Calendar of State Papers_, or the _Four Masters_. But why does Mr. Dunlop disagree with Lord Deputy Sidney, the main mover in the matter? Many efforts, it is well known, had been made to murder Shane. In 1566 Sidney sent to Scotland his “man,” the English-Scot Douglas, who had come to him from Leicester himself. Sidney gives us the clue to his mission. “I pray you,” he wrote to Leicester, “let this bringer (Douglas) receive comfortable words of you. I have found him faithful, _it was he that brought the Scots that killed O’Neill_.” Douglas repeated the boast and prayed a reward from Cecil. Years later Sidney, being maligned by powerful enemies at Court, reminded the Queen of his old services. “And whereas he [O’Neill] looked for service at their [the Scots] hands against me, _for service of me, they killed him_.... But when I came to the Court,” he added with indignation, “it was told me it was no war that I had made, nor worthy to be called a war, for that Shane O’Neill was but a beggar, an outlaw, and one of no force, and _that the Scots stumbled on him by chance_.” Would Mr. Dunlop, as a means of overthrowing me, join with Sidney’s enemies to rob him of the deed he boasted of? (_Vide_ _Sid. Let._ 12, 34-5; _C.S.P._ i. 430; _Car._ ii. 338, 340-1.)