Ah so John Mitchel's book written in 1861 in America where he could not possibly have any access to relevant records and after an absence from the country(Ireland) of 13 years is to be viewed as an authoritative account purely because it supports and reinforces your bigoted and biased belief in a supposed genocide perpetrated by Britain.

A book written in Ireland by a Canon of the Roman Catholic Church, Canon John O'Rourke, in 1874 however is to be dismissed and discounted on the basis that - "things have moved on" - How utterly ridiculous and pathetic of you.

Canon O'Rourke in researching his book wrote query sheets and sent them to all who were in possession of information of the Famine. He investigated Public Journals, Parliamentary Blue Books, Parliamentary Debates, pamphlets, periodicals and the reports from the various Societies and Associations responsible for dispensing aid and alms. Canon John O'Rourke in researching the material for his book also visited those parts of the country most affected where he talked to those who had lived through it.

Of the two books, the highly charged political rant penned with scant research by John Mitchel, or the thoroughly researched work by Canon John O'Rourke, I think if I wanted information on the Famine I would rely and put a great deal more credence on the factual authenticity and accuracy of the latter.