Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1873-06-29
Answer 10 "SeOtch-ITish''-BeYieW OF
the Historic Questions at Issue
Colonel ID. n. McRae's
Lecture.
Froude and his Historical ROmance-Is
EiCi0usness, Intrigue and I'm
chastity TO be Laid at
Queen Mary's Door.
Queen Elizabeth's COnduct-HHme as an
AuthOrity-St. Patrick Belongs
to All Glasses Of Irish
men.

EDITORS APPEALs-The writer of this
does not profess to "take up the cudgelN
against "Scotch-Irish, who criticised
that gentIeman's late lecture before the
library association of this city, in an
elaborate, and We are free to say, q very
enlightened and interesting article, in
the APPEAL OF the twenty-third. The
article is evidently written by q person
of reading and Thought. 1t bears the
mark Of a cultivated taste and q we'll
informed understanding, and while ia
no harsh mood we propose to cTiticlse
some Of its fault-findings Of the lecturer,
we do it rather in the interest Of fair
Edsy, because it cannot be expected that
Colonel McRae can find time to lecture
for the benefit Of our association and
then defend through the press his lee
tUre; not against any definite impeach-
ments, but against general dissatisfac-
Gions from some who think they didn't
get their share of the "drOppings Of the
sanctuary" For the life Of US
We cannot see how the COM
plainant can think the Scotch
lrishn neglected, or that the lecturer
'limIted his conception" to the "ele-
ment of the Irish population" below
1'the north branch of the BOyne.n We
are sure that Colonel McRae set out,
when he turned to the defendant in
Mr.. Froude's grand arraignment' the
whole form and figure OF ireland in her
entirely as "the people through whose
veins courses the blood of the Celts in
its purify A Scotch-Irishman ought
not to feel himself excluded from this
cOnsanguinity. He is at least half Celtic
=r,N T-s1l. 90 iu Tra1aTN
that the lecturer spoke of as the ''beauti-
ful island, toe home of the FirbOlg, the
Quatha de Danaus, the Milesian, the
Gael, and the Scott" Surely, here are
loins enough, out of some of which a
Scotch ITishman might suppose himseli
descended. All these were alluded to
WITH equal honor. Were there no
SCOTCH-IRISHMEN
fighting for liberty at BannOckburD,
who became beneficiaries under the
grant to kincardine O'Neill which the
Bruces rendered as q mark of bis graft
tude for faithful service? II so, why
DOGS ScOtch-Irish refuse for his ancestors
their share in the attribution of noble
conduct bestowed by Colonel McRae
upon all Irishmen who bore part in that
glorious conflict, especially the men OF
Ulster. Would be have had the lecturer
10 discriminate by calling one set Irish
and the other Scotch-Irish? Would
{" ScOtch-Irish y himself call Andrew
Jackson a Characterization Could
a lecturer in an hours discourse enter
into such minute details,n when Mr..
Froude, in a History Of England, "could
hardly be expected TO do sO?" 1t must
certainly have escaped the ear OF
" Scotch Irish - that Robert Emmet is
distinctly mentioned by the lecturer
along with Nirgilius, Erskine, Grattan,
Emmett, Swift, Sheridan, Lover, Moore,
Gerald Griffin, Davis and the great
O'COnnell, as lreland's " choicest repre-
seutatives, who have consecrated their
powers to the cause of liberty" also in
the " anecdotes OF foreign travel y which
the lecturer told Of the shillalah play in
the theater at Dublin. Has "ScOtch-
Irish " any doubt that one of his cOun-
trymen, or more, from the - north bank
of the Boyne Say from Ballycastle-
was one Of the party who, in the twink.
ling Of an eye, had no eye to twinkle.
Indeed, il is not so sure lfOr the lee
turer has never said sO) that the
very s'Bourchsl," !" who brought on tht
row, by refusing TO take of his hat IL
the front row, was not a ScOtch-1rish
man from DONEGAL Bay or LOugh
neagh. On this review, We ask "Scotch
Irishu if he does not think his criticism
is a little hypercritical on the ''limiteC
cOnceptiOn?n "Scotch-Irishn falls int
an error in supposing that the lecturer
"told that a leading feature in Mr.
FTOUde's history was an overweenlnl
admiration for Queen Elizabeth" Thi
sort of error is very natura
one to
A READER OF MR. FROUDE,
who is not cautious enough to avoid bi
example. 1t is precisely in the employ
ment Of artistic language, not in bar
mOny with strict narration, that Mr.
Froude converts history into romance
Now, we remember the lecture, an'
have had access 10 the manuscript, AM
all that Colonel McRae says Of Mr.
FrOude is that he is the "eulOgist o
Elizabeth in behalf of whom b.
"plumes an eagle pen for flights 30 loft!
that truth vanishes out Of sight" L
was not asserted that Mr.. Froude, OF
level ground, eschews all historic Ear
Tatives. 1t is only when b
aAlEEs DA lit MAAES Va &AN-~-
ton or burrows in the mire o
prejudice. He could not screen all tn
vices Of Elizabeth, but he whitewashe
them, and mitigates their indulgence
for the purposes to be served, the resul
being generally approved; and while tn
force of irresistible facts cOnstrains som
touches Of her in her true colOrs, thes
flashes Of history are inevitably bedark
ened by the clouds of suppression am
evasion which he gathers around them
Aud when Colonel McRae stated, ss
chief characteristic Of his history, that
was a eulogy Of Elizabeth ana defa
nation Of Mary, he guarded his Ian
guage within the strict limits Of accu
Tacy. "ScOtch-Irishn is evidently con
WINGED, and concus with Mr.. Froude a
to the guilt of Mary Stuart of the mul
der Of Darnley, and Of vicious intel
course with Boutwell,, and general Dc
prayity; and relies on Hume as sun
cient authority for the conclusion.
might be sufficient to reply that Hume
rancorOus antipathy 10 the queen
Scots Is perceptble. But We propose
encounter the witness addueed b
"Scotch-Irishp as though he were in
partial, and test the sufficiency Of h
testimony with this concession.
HUME RESTS HIS CONVICTIONS
on the production by Murray, before ii
English commissioners at York, OF whit
is known as the casket letters. BE say
that Murray produced several lOve-le
tiers and sOnnets of Mary to BOthwel
written all in her own hand, anOthl
subscribed by her, and written by Il
earl of Huptisy, each of which contail
ed a promise Of marriage, which we
made before Bothwell's pretended tri
ard acquittal. The alleged history
these papersis that Boutwell,, IN his fiigl
from Carberry, left this easket at u
castle OF Dunbar, in the keeping OF :
John Balfour, and afterward sent sc
want Dalgleish for them. Balfour dell
cred the casket, but contrivedi WlthMO
ton, 10 have Dalgleish intercepted, al
the papers captured. Now, II IS adml
ted that if these were genuine doc
ments, Mary's guilt would be successft
IN established. The stress Of the en-
mics Of Mary, then, has always been
establish their genuineness. And M
Froude has addressed himself to this Ia
in manner cOnsummately character
tic. Now, it is a personal matter OF 1tl
odds whether this poor, murdered que
was really guilty or not, but in the
tcuest of history and truth, which 8
ever to be revered and preserved and d
Tended, it is matter Of vital momel
Then for Mr.. Hume:
First-His opinion of the genuinens
Of these papers is opposed by DR.. Joh
son, Gilbert Stuart, Tytler, Whittak'
I,ingard, Chalmers, Sir Walter SEQ
Aytoun, HOsaek and Card, with {
Rishop Of Keith, and that ornament
her sex, Miss Strickland, all of who
on thorough research, pronounce the
10 lie forgeries. To these may be add