But should some farther explanation be expected of me on this interesting topic, I will freely own that, having enjoyed the high privilege of communion with one of the most enlightened philosophers of the age—and in accordance with his wishes the responsibility rests with me, as far as my ability extends, of completing his labours,—in pursuance of this trust I have devoted more than the leisure of a life to a work in which I hope to present the philosophic views of my "great master" in a systematic form of unity—in a form which may best concentrate to a focus and principle of unity the light diffused in his writings, and which may again reflect it on all departments of human knowledge, so that truths may become intelligible in the one light of Divine truth.
Meanwhile I can assure the friends and admirers of Coleridge that nothing now exists in manuscript which would add materially to the elucidation of his philosophical doctrines; and that in any farther publication of his literary remains I shall be guided, as I have been, by the duty which I owe to the memory and fame of my revered teacher.
Joseph Henry Green.
Hadley.
KING JAMES'S IRISH ARMY LIST, 1689.
(Vol. ix., pp. 30, 31. 401.)
I was much pleased at Mr. D'Alton's announcement of his work; and I should have responded to it sooner, if I could have had any idea that he did not possess King's State of the Protestants in Ireland; but his inquiry about Colonel Sheldon, in Vol. ix., p. 401., shows that he has not consulted that work, where (p. 341.) he will find that Dominick Sheldon was "Lieutenant-General of the Horse." But after the enumeration of the General Staff, there follows a list of the field officers of eight regiments of horse, seven of dragoons, and fifty of infantry. In Tyrconnel's regiment of horse, Dominick Sheldon appears as lieutenant-colonel. This must have been, I suppose, a Sheldon junior, son or nephew of the lieutenant-general of horse. This reference to King's work has suggested to me an idea which I venture to suggest to Mr. D'Alton as a preliminary to the larger work on Irish family genealogies which he is about, and for which we shall
have I fear to wait too long. I mean an immediate reprint (in a separate shape) of the several lists of gentlemen of both parties which are given in King's work. This might be done with very little trouble, and, I think, without any pecuniary loss, if not with actual profit. It would be little more than pamphlet size. The first and most important list would be of the names and designations of all the persons included in the acts of attainder passed in King James's Irish Parliament of May, 1689. They are, I think, about two thousand names, with their residences and personal designations; and it is interesting to find that a great many of the same families are still seated in the same places. These names I think I should place alphabetically in one list, with their designations and residences; and any short notes that Mr. D'Alton might think necessary to correct clerical error, or explain doubtful names: longer notes would perhaps lead too far into family history for the limited object I propose.
In a second list, I would give the names of King James's parliament, privy council, army, civil and judicial departments, as we find them in King, adding to them an alphabetical index of names. The whole would then exhibit a synopsis of the names, residences, and politics of a considerable portion of the gentry of Ireland at that important period.