Page:Confiscation in Irish history.djvu/183

 since given distinguished proofs of their loyalty. Protestant clamour however proved too strong and only a few Catholic peers were able to take their seats.

From a parliament thus composed the Irish had little to hope. But in conformity with Poyning's Law the Act in its main features was to be settled in London by the Privy Council; and here the Irish hoped to obtain a favourable hearing

Unfortunately for them if justice was on their side, force was on the side of their opponents. It soon became plain that one or the other interest must be sacrificed; the question was who? The Catholics pleaded solemn treaties, the plighted word of two Kings, their eminent services and sufferings. The Protestants were armed; they held all the garrisons; and all the administrative posts. They threatened an appeal to the sword.

The Irish, too, were unfortunate in their advocates. Sir Nicholas Plunkett and others, men more convinced of the justice of their cause than of the need of tact to overcome the prejudices against it.

Ormond, writing to Eustace, says that he "fears the liberty allowed to the Irish to speak for themselves will turn to their prejudice by the unskilful use they make of it, in justifying themselves, instructing the King and his Council in what is good for them, and recriminating of others."

Carte expatiates at considerable length on the want of prudence on the part of the Irish in presenting their claims, and contrasts it with the