Ireland -- History -- Rebellion of 1798; Women -- Ireland -- Biography
Alas! it was his own mistaken trust in the turnkey of Kilmainham, George
Dunn, which put Government in possession of the knowledge they had
hitherto vainly sought. Dunn had been bribed by St. John Mason, Emmet’s
cousin, to facilitate his escape, but while pretending to fall in with
Mason’s plans he had in reality betrayed them to the Castle. Knowing
nothing of this, Emmet entrusted to George Dunn, a letter openly
addressed to “Miss Sarah Curran”—and this letter (which clearly
indicated her as the writer of the others) was, within an hour, in the
hands of the Chief Secretary.
Amid the other grim documents of the Home Office Secret Papers this love
letter of Emmet’s keeps strange company. It has been published, for the
first time, in “The Viceroy’s Post-Bag” (p. 358):—
“My dearest Love,
“I don’t know how to write to you. I never felt so oppressed in
my life as at the cruel injury I have done to you. I was seized
and searched with a pistol over me before I could destroy your
letters. They have been compared with those found before. I was
threatened with having them brought forward against me in Court.
I offered to plead guilty if they would suppress them. This was
refused. Information (without mentioning names) was required. I
refused, but offered since if I would be permitted to consult
others, and that they would consent to enter into any
accommodation of that nature to save the lives of those
condemned, that I would only require for my part of it to have
those letters suppressed, and that I would stand my trial. It
has been refused. My love, can you forgive me?
“I wanted to know whether anything had been done respecting the
person who wrote the letters, for I feared you might have been
arrested. They refused to tell me for a long time. At length,
when I said that it was but fair if they expected I should enter
into any accommodation that I should know for what I was to do
it, they then asked me whether bringing you into the room to me
would answer my purpose, upon which I got up and told them that
it might answer theirs better. I was sure you were arrested, and
I could not stand the idea of seeing you in that situation. When
I found, however, that this was not the case, I began to think
that they only meant to alarm me; but their refusal has only
come this moment and my fears are renewed. Not that they can do
anything to you even if they would be base enough to attempt it,
for they can have no proof who wrote them, nor did I let your
name escape me once, nor even acknowledge that they were written
directly to myself. But I fear they may suspect from the stile,
and from the hair, for they took the stock[99] from me, and I
have not been able to get it back from them, and that they may
think of bringing you forward.
Footnote 99:
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account