The history of Ireland must have a strong influence on men's hearts, for nobody can speak or write of it without exhibiting the feelings of the partisan. The unstudied inaccuracies of the phlegmatic Froude show that historian to be capable of emotion when dealing with Irish affairs. Froude had no sense of humour, and, therefore, no sense of proportion, and his detestation of the Celtic temperament caused his prejudices to run riot in his pages on Ireland. On the other side are the painfully sincere patriots whose efforts to divide humanity into sheep and goats wrong both parties. Perhaps one of these days it will be agreed that any event more than fifty years old shall be considered outside party politics. As it is, the rebellion of '98 is a subject strong enough to-day to arouse as much passion as the latest proposal of a vote-bidding Government, Conservative or Liberal. It would be as easy as it is tempting to dwell upon the doings of the year 1798, but the 'rebellion' has its own historians. One example of Castle methods must be given. Among the lawyers who enjoyed a more or less fashionable practice was a man named McNally. He was friendly with the leading patriots and also with the Government, and he approved in a purely intellectual manner of the rebellion. When, therefore, a batch of important rebels were in need of a barrister to defend them, they sent for McNally, and as their counsel he was told everything, {207} including certain information which the wily lawyer knew would be of immense value to the Government. This was his opportunity, and he never hesitated. To the Castle he went, and sold his clients for a life-pension of L300 a year. But this was a venial sin compared with some others which could be cited. [Sidenote: The Act of Union introduced] The surrender of General Humbert to Cornwallis marked the termination of the rebellion, and, in the opinion of Pitt and Portland, the Home Secretary, the most favourable time had arrived for the introduction of the Act of Union. In November, 1798, the duke sent to Cornwallis the first articles of the Bill. These were introduced into the House of Commons in Dublin in the certain hope that they would be accepted. To the astonishment and dismay of the executive, the Bill was rejected by 107 votes to 105. Castlereagh was furious; Cornwallis indifferent. Both men advised Catholic Emancipation as the price for Parliamentary surrender, but the Government was averse to placing the majority in power.