Page:Confiscation in Irish history.djvu/237

 It is only necessary to examine this statement to see the absurdity of it. For of the five counties named, in which King James still had forces in arms, Cork and Limerick were almost entirely in possession of the Williamite troops. In Kerry scarcely any Catholics had recovered lands at the Restoration. So there remain merely the two counties of Clare and Mayo in which there could have been any considerable number of persons covered by the disputed words. Sligo, named by Froude is not mentioned in the second article at all, although it is mentioned in the heading.

The Treaty of Limerick had stipulated that the conditions agreed on were to be confirmed by Parliament, and William had promised in his Letters Patent confirming the treaty to recommend this. When at last, after long delays and at least one refusal the Irish Parliament did pass an Act purporting to confirm the Articles, the disputed clause was omitted by the Commons. The Lords at first objected; but finally the Act, in its mutilated form, became law by a majority of one vote.

Seven temporal peers and seven bishops protested that while the title of the Act was "for the Confirmation of Articles made at the Surrender of the City of Limerick" yet no one of the said Articles is therein fully confirmed. It seems that William, despairing of overcoming the resistance of the Commons reluctantly consented to the omission of the words and "all such as are under their protection in the said counties."

To sum up this question we may conclude that the disputed clause was agreed on by both sides in the original draft of the articles; that its omission