Produced by Brownfox and the Online Distributed Proofreading
Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from
images generously made available by The Internet Archive)










  IRELAND UNDER THE STUARTS

  VOL. III.




_By the same Author_


IRELAND UNDER THE TUDORS

3 vols. 8vo.

Vols. I. and II.--From the First Invasion of the Northmen to the year
1578.

(Out of Print.)

Vol. III.--1578-1603. 18_s._


IRELAND UNDER THE STUARTS AND DURING THE INTERREGNUM

3 vols. 8vo.

Vols. I. and II.--1603-1660. With 2 Maps.

28_s._ net.


  LONGMANS, GREEN, & CO.
  London, New York, Bombay, Calcutta,
  and Madras




  IRELAND
  UNDER THE STUARTS

  AND

  DURING THE INTERREGNUM

  BY

  RICHARD BAGWELL, M.A.

  HON. LITT.D. (DUBLIN), AUTHOR OF 'IRELAND UNDER THE TUDORS'

  VOL. III. 1660-1690

  _WITH MAP_


  LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO.

  39 PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON
  FOURTH AVENUE & 30th STREET, NEW YORK
  BOMBAY, CALCUTTA, AND MADRAS
  1916

  All rights reserved




CONTENTS

OF

THE THIRD VOLUME


  CHAPTER XL

  THE RESTORATION GOVERNMENT, 1660

                                                           PAGE

  The Irish Convention                                       1

  Charles II. proclaimed                                     3

  Coote and Broghill                                         4

  The Church re-established                                  8


  CHAPTER XLI

  DECLARATION AND ACT OF SETTLEMENT, 1660-1662

  Position of Irish Recusants                               11

  The Declaration                                           13

  Various classes of claimants                              14

  First Commission of Claims                                16

  The Irish Parliament, May 1661                            18

  The Declaration debated                                   19

  Conditions of Settlement                                  20

  Insufficiency of land                                     22

  Ormonde Lord Lieutenant                                   24

  He arrives in Ireland                                     27

  The Clanmalier Estate--Portarlington                      28


  CHAPTER XLII

  COURT OF CLAIMS AND ACT OF EXPLANATION, 1662-1665

  The second Court of Claims                                30

  Innocents and Nocents                                     31

  General dissatisfaction                                   32

  Discontented soldiers                                     34

  Plot to seize Dublin Castle--Blood                        35

  Lord Antrim's case                                        39

  'Murder will out'                                         42

  Bill of Explanation                                       43

  Violent debates                                           49

  The Bill passes                                           50


  CHAPTER XLIII

  ORMONDE AND THE IRISH HIERARCHY

  Ormonde's royalism                                        51

  Peter Walsh, Orrery, and Bellings                         51

  Walsh and the loyal remonstrance                          55

  Opposition of Primate O'Reilly                            56

  Incompatibility of royal and papal claims                 58

  The Congregation meets, June 1666                         61

  The Remonstrance rejected                                 62

  Why the Congregation failed                               64


  CHAPTER XLIV

  GOVERNMENT OF ORMONDE, 1665-1668

  Irish Parliament dissolved                                67

  Mutiny at Carrickfergus                                   68

  Partial exclusion of Irish cattle                         69

  The Canary Company                                        70

  Disputes on the cattle question                           72

  Irish cattle excluded and voted a public nuisance         74

  Evil effects of exclusion policy                          77

  Ireland retaliates on Scotland                            79

  The first Dutch war--coast defence                        81

  Fall of Clarendon                                         84

  Ormonde and Orrery                                        86

  Recall of Ormonde                                         87


  CHAPTER XLV

  ROBARTES AND BERKELEY, 1669-1672

  Lord Robartes made Lord Lieutenant                        89

  The Tories                                                90

  Ossory and Robartes                                       92

  Character of Robartes                                     94

  Attempt to impeach Orrery                                 96

  Lord Berkeley and his Secretary                           99

  Recusants indulged--Oliver Plunket                       100

  Blood tries to kidnap Ormonde                            102

  Attacks on the Act of Settlement                         102

  Lady Clanbrassil                                         104

  The dispensing power                                     105

  Riots in Dublin--Bloody Bridge                           106


  CHAPTER XLVI

  GOVERNMENT OF ESSEX, 1672-1677

  Essex reaches Ireland                                    108

  Dublin agitators                                         110

  Essex protects Phoenix Park                              111

  Provincial presidencies suppressed                       112

  Intolerance of the English Parliament                    113

  Charles II. submits                                      114

  Agreement of Essex and Ormonde                           116

  Financial abuses--Ranelagh                               119

  Ormonde restored to favour                               121

  And to the Lord Lieutenancy                              123


  CHAPTER XLVII

  GOVERNMENT OF ORMONDE, 1677-1685

  Revenue troubles                                         125

  Scramble for land                                        126

  Oates's plot                                             127

  Ormonde and Orrery                                       129

  Intrigues of Shaftesbury                                 130

  Spies and false witnesses                                133

  Trial and execution of Oliver Plunket                    134

  Ormonde's opinion of the witnesses                       139

  Castlehaven's Memoirs                                    140

  Ormonde and Anglesey                                     141

  Tories--O'Hanlon and Power                               143

  Attack on the Settlement                                 144

  Court of Grace                                           145

  Death of Charles II.                                     147


  CHAPTER XLVIII

  CLARENDON AND TYRCONNEL, 1685-1686

  Accession of James II.                                   148

  Purging the army--Tyrconnel                              149

  Clarendon made Lord Lieutenant                           150

  His journey to Ireland                                   151

  Tyrconnel goes to London                                 152

  Irish and French Protestant refugees                     153

  Judges dismissed                                         154

  A new Privy Council                                      156

  Tyrconnel returns as Commander-in-Chief                  157

  Catherine Sedley in Ireland                              157

  Drastic changes in the army                              158

  Hard cases                                               159

  Tory Hamilton's case                                     160

  Tyrconnel summoned to London                             162

  'Lillibullero'                                           164

  Clarendon leaves Ireland                                 165


  CHAPTER XLIX

  GOVERNMENT OF TYRCONNEL, 1687-1688

  Tyrconnel made Lord Deputy                               167

  The Coventry letter                                      168

  The Land Settlement threatened                           169

  Protestant corporations attacked                         170

  The _Quo Warrantos_                                      172

  Panic among the Protestants                              173

  Lord Chancellor Porter dismissed                         174

  Succeeded by Fitton                                      175

  Judges, magistrates, and sheriffs                        176

  Rice and Nugent in London                                177

  Declaration of Indulgence                                178

  Tyrconnel multiplies commissions                         179

  Irish soldiers in England                                180

  Fresh regiments raised                                   181

  Death and character of Ormonde                           182

  Disturbed state of society--Leinster                     184

  Southwell's case                                         186

  William's overtures to Tyrconnel                         187

  Panic in Ulster--Lord Mountjoy                           188

  Gates of Londonderry shut                                190

  Enniskillen and Sligo                                    191

  Break of Dromore                                         193


  CHAPTER L

  JAMES II. IN IRELAND, 1689

  French designs on Ireland--Pointis                       195

  Tyrconnel invites James to Ireland                       198

  France, Emperor, and Pope                                198

  Tyrconnel prepares for war                               200

  Attempts at resistance--Bandon                           202

  Kenmare                                                  203

  James arrives in Ireland                                 206

  From Cork to Dublin                                      208

  Avaux and Melfort                                        209

  Fighting in Ulster--George Walker                        212

  William III. proclaimed at Londonderry                   213

  James II. in Ulster                                      214

  Naval action at Bantry                                   217

  Confusion in Dublin--John Stevens                        218


  CHAPTER LI

  THE PARLIAMENT OF 1689

  Tyrconnel, MacCarthy, and Sarsfield                      219

  The Hamiltons                                            222

  Composition of Parliament                                223

  The King's speech                                        224

  The Land Settlement attacked                             225

  Act of Settlement repealed                               227

  Act of Attainder                                         228

  Case of Trinity College                                  231

  Treatment of the clergy                                  232

  Commercial legislation                                   233

  Daly's case--scramble for property                       234

  French efforts to capture trade                          236

  End of the Parliament                                    237


  CHAPTER LII

  LONDONDERRY AND ENNISKILLEN, 1689

  Siege of Londonderry                                     239

  An English squadron appears                              242

  Schomberg orders the town to be relieved                 243

  Cruelty of De Rosen--indignation of James                245

  Londonderry relieved by sea                              248

  Cost of the siege                                        250

  Defence of Enniskillen                                   250

  Colonel Lloyd--the Break of Belleek                      252

  Kirke in Lough Swilly--Colonel Wolseley                  253

  Battle of Newtown Butler                                 255

  Walker in England                                        257

  Controversy as to his 'True Account'                     258


  CHAPTER LIII

  JAMES II. AND SCHOMBERG, 1689-1690

  Schomberg's preparations                                 260

  He reaches Ireland                                       261

  Carrickfergus taken                                      263

  Berwick evacuates Newry                                  264

  Flight of Melfort                                        265

  Schomberg refuses battle                                 266

  Military conspiracy                                      267

  Sufferings of Schomberg's army--Shales                   268

  Sligo taken and retaken                                  271

  State of Dublin                                          272

  Lauzun sent to Ireland                                   273

  French opinion                                           274

  Brass money                                              276

  Fighting at Newry, Belturbet, and Cavan                  278

  Avaux and Rosen recalled                                 280

  Lauzun reaches Ireland                                   281

  Disarming the Protestants                                282

  King and Bonnell                                         283

  Treatment of Trinity College                             285


  CHAPTER LIV

  WILLIAM III. IN IRELAND, 1690. THE BOYNE

  English and French interests                             287

  Charlemont taken                                         288

  Opposition to William's expedition                       289

  He lands in Ireland                                      290

  James moves to meet him                                  292

  William reaches the Boyne                                293

  Battle of the Boyne, July 1                              295

  Flight of James                                          299

  Political importance of the battle                       301

  James escapes to France                                  304

  William enters Dublin                                    306

  Final ruin of the Stuart cause                           307


  CHAPTER LV

  SOCIAL IRELAND FROM RESTORATION TO REVOLUTION

  Ireland after the Civil War                              309

  Country-houses--Portmore, Charleville, Kilkenny          310

  Dublin Castle                                            312

  An Irish spa                                             313

  Condition of the poor                                    314

  Ploughing by the tail                                    316

  Some Dublin houses                                       317

  Prosperity under Charles II.                             318


  CHAPTER LVI

  THE THREE IRISH CHURCHES

  The Establishment                                        319

  Jeremy Taylor                                            320

  Bishops ignorant of Irish                                321

  Condition of the clergy                                  322

  The Irish Bible                                          324

  The Presbyterians                                        325

  The Roman Catholics                                      326

  Oliver Plunket                                           327

  Talbot, O'Molony, and other Bishops                      328

  Recusants after James II.                                330

  Slow growth of toleration                                331


  APPENDIX

  Letter from Ormonde to Bennet, 1663                      333


  MAP

  Ireland to illustrate the reign of James II.      _At end of the volume._




IRELAND UNDER THE STUARTS




CHAPTER XL

THE RESTORATION GOVERNMENT, 1660


The King enjoyed his own again, and England rejoiced exceedingly. Even
Oliver's unbeaten soldiers, disgusted with his incompetent successors,
were for the most part ready to retire into private life. Yet the
spirit of the Puritan revolution survived, and the Mayor of Dover
presented a richly bound Bible to the restored monarch, who graciously
accepted it, remarking that it was the thing that he loved above all
things in the world. At Canterbury a crowd of importunate suitors gave
him some foretaste of future troubles, but the entry into London was
wonderful. 'I stood in the Strand,' says Evelyn, 'and beheld it, and
blessed God.' With the shouts of welcome still in his ears Charles
took refuge in the arms of Barbara Palmer, and next day issued a
proclamation against vicious, debauched, and profane persons.

[Sidenote: The Irish Convention.]

Coote and Broghill were jealous of each other. There is reason to
believe that the former was inclined to claim the whole credit of
restoring the King, but that the latter proved his own priority by
producing a letter from his rival acknowledging the fact. They agreed
that the Restoration might be delayed or frustrated by hasty action
in Ireland, and that it was better to wait until England herself was
committed to it. The officers who had gladly pronounced for a free
Parliament might not have been united had royalty been openly favoured.
But the Irish Convention lost no time in repudiating Cromwell's plan
of one legislature for the whole of the British Islands, while strongly
approving the restoration of the secluded members in England. They
declared that 'as for several hundreds of years last passed by the
laws and laudable custom and constitution of this nation, Parliaments
have been usually held in Ireland and that in those Parliaments laws
have been enacted and laws repealed, and subsidies granted, as public
occasion required so that right of having Parliaments held in Ireland
is still justly and lawfully due and belonging to Ireland, and that the
Parliament of England never charged Ireland in any age with subsidies
or other public taxes and assessments, until after the violence offered
to the Parliament of England in December 1648, since which time they
who invaded the rights of the Parliament of England invaded also the
rights of the Parliament of Ireland by imposing taxes and assessments
upon Ireland.' This important declaration was not made for more than
a month after the first meeting of the Convention, and the leaders
had prevented news from crossing the Channel until they were sure of
unanimity. It is therefore not surprising that they were reported to
favour separation from England. The Convention now stigmatised this
as a calumny originating with Ludlow and his friends, for the idea of
separation was hateful to Ireland as absolutely destructive, 'being
generally bone of their bone, flesh of their flesh.' It was clearly
seen that the colonists would have a majority, and means were taken
to make it permanent. The Convention pledged themselves to favour
education, and to assist in the establishment of a pious, learned,
and orthodox parochial clergy supported by tithes or endowments. The
adventurers and soldiers were to be secured in the lands they had
acquired, and all arrears of military pay to be cleared off.[1]

[Sidenote: Provisional taxation.]

For some months before and after the Restoration all real power was in
the hands of the army, but the Irish Convention gave a show of legality
to the means by which the soldiers were paid. A poll tax was imposed
for this and other public charges, every person of either sex under the
degree of yeoman or farmer being assessed at twelve pence, which was
the minimum, and the rate rose according to social position. A baron's
contribution was fixed at thirty shillings, and that of a marquis,
marchioness, or marchioness dowager at eight pounds, which was the
maximum. The chief Protestant gentry were appointed collectors in each
county, Coote heading the list for Roscommon and Broghill for Cork. The
royalist wire-pullers in London had been urging the managers of the
Convention not to go too fast for fear of alarming the Presbyterians,
and it was not till May 1 that they published a declaration condemning
the high court of justice and the sentence on the late King. The people
of Ireland, they said, took the first opportunity afforded them of
denouncing the most foul murder recorded in sacred or profane history,
considering that it had been committed in a country where the true
reformed religion flourished, and that it was contrary to the solemn
league and covenant which the murderers had themselves taken.[2]

[Sidenote: Charles II. proclaimed May 14.]

Charles II. was proclaimed in Westminster Hall on May 8, and six days
later in Dublin; and there were general rejoicings though the central
figure was wanting. The shops were shut, all the finery they contained
having been transferred to the citizens' backs. Hogsheads of wine were
provided for the multitude, and the more they drank the better the
givers were pleased. The guns of the Castle thundered salutes, volleys
of musketry were heard on all sides, bonfires and fireworks blazed
until midnight. A headless figure stuffed with hay and reclining on a
rude hearse was carried in a mock funeral procession, and subjected to
the blows and insults of the mob. The journey ended at the mayor's door
'where it was in part burnt before the bonfire there, and part trod
to dirt and mortar by the rout.' Such was the end of the mighty Long
Parliament.[3]

[Sidenote: Lords Justices appointed.]

Sir Charles Coote had been President of Connaught since 1645, and
there was no difficulty in his case, since service under the Protector
was not to be considered a disability. Broghill's appointment, if
ever regularly made, was of much later date and of republican origin,
but he had the military authority and the legal presidency was soon
conferred on him also. With these two was associated Major, soon after
Sir William Bury of Grantham, who had been one of the Irish Council
under both Protectors. These three were appointed Commissioners
for the Government of Ireland in January and were members of the
Convention though keeping their official work separate. Broghill was
generally in London for some time after the Restoration, and Bury, who
had Presbyterian leanings and whom Adair calls a religious, prudent
gentleman, did not always agree with Coote. Other Commissioners were
afterwards added and all were paid at the rate of 1,000_l._ a year
until the end of 1660. In compliance with the wishes of the Irish
Convention some of the great offices were filled up very soon after the
Restoration. The great seal of Ireland fell to Sir Maurice Eustace, who
had been Prime Serjeant and Speaker of the House of Commons as early as
1634, and had afterwards endured seven years' imprisonment which only
ended in 1658. He thought himself too old for the work, and Clarendon
was of the same opinion: 'he was now old and made so little show of
any parts extraordinary, that, but for the testimony that was given
of him, it might have been doubted whether he ever had any.' Sir James
Barry, the chairman of the Convention, became Lord Chief Justice. He
had been Strafford's attorney-general, and very useful to him in making
out the royal title to Irish land. Sir William Domvile, who was made
Attorney-General, chiefly on the recommendation of Daniel O'Neill,
showed great ability and presided in the Convention in succession to
Barry, who became Lord Santry. Arthur Annesley was installed in his
father's old place of vice-treasurer, and was soon created Earl of
Anglesey.[4]

[Sidenote: Monck and Robartes.]

Monck, now Duke of Albemarle, claimed the Lord Lieutenancy of Ireland
where he had an estate, but does not appear to have had any intention
of living there. Clarendon says his chief object was to make money.
It became necessary to find a deputy, and Charles fixed upon Lord
Robartes, whose business capacity was undoubted and who had a good
reputation for honesty. He was, however, of a morose temper, seldom
agreeing with others, and was much offended at being made Deputy to
Albemarle, and not to the King directly, though he was offered the
usual power of viceroy. The negotiation dragged on for six months,
during which Robartes made enemies of all with whom he had to confer
on Irish business, and at last he accepted the Privy Seal, leaving the
Government of Ireland to the old Commissioners, while Albemarle, who
was too important to displace, remained Lord Lieutenant. In September
Coote was created Earl of Mountrath and Broghill of Orrery, and the
latter showed his astuteness in securing precedence by getting his
patent passed one day before his rival. On the last day of the year the
two new Earls were appointed Lords Justices along with the Chancellor
Eustace. They were specially authorised by the King to assemble the
Irish Convention again in order to provide funds for the payment of
the army. The ancient framework of Irish government was completed by
appointing a Privy Council of thirty-four members among whom was Sir
Philip Mainwaring, made secretary by Strafford in 1634 and still in
legal possession of his office. He died a few months later, having
received little or no reward for old service and for more than twenty
years of poverty varied by imprisonment.[5]

[Sidenote: Negotiations with England.]

Before the Restoration was accomplished the Irish Convention sent
over Sir John Clotworthy and Major William Aston as Commissioners to
communicate with the still sovereign Parliament of England. Clotworthy,
created Viscount Massereene a few months later, was deeply interested
in the Cromwellian land settlement and gained much influence by his
activity. His unconcealed Presbyterian leanings were forgiven because,
in Clarendon's words, 'he was of a generous and a jovial nature' and
a staunch Royalist. After the Restoration these two Commissioners
were appointed to attend the King along with eleven others, including
Coote, Broghill, Barry, Eustace, and Audley Mervyn. They carried
with them 20,000_l._ for Charles and lesser gifts for each of his
brothers. Their instructions were to petition for an Irish Parliament
consisting of Protestant Peers and Commoners and freed for this turn
from the restrictions of Poynings' law, for an act of oblivion for all
Protestants subject to parliamentary exceptions, and for an act for the
attainder of such persons as Parliament should select. It was desired
that adventurers and soldiers should be settled in their lands and the
Irish in Connaught and Clare. Impropriate tithes in the King's hand
were to be restored to the Church, and taxation was to be controlled
by the Irish Parliament. These were the chief points insisted on by
the dominant party, while the Irish Roman Catholic gentry in London
besought Ormonde, who had been the principal means of uniting the three
kingdoms, to mediate for them 'and the remnant of their miserable
nation' who were ready to lay down their lives for the King. Sir
Nicholas Plunket was usually the spokesman of these suppliants. On July
27 Ormonde, who became an Irish duke, took his seat in the House of
Lords as Earl of Brecknock, and on the same day Charles concluded his
speech as follows: 'I hope I need say nothing of Ireland, and that they
alone shall not be without the benefit of my mercy. They have shewed
much affection to me abroad, and you will have a care of my honour and
of what I have promised to them.'[6]

[Sidenote: Position of the Roman Catholics.]

Unfortunately for the chances of the Irish Roman Catholics some of
them would not wait, but took forcible possession of their old lands,
and there were many outrages. The extent of the disorder may have been
exaggerated, but the Convention Parliament believed the worst and the
result was a royal proclamation, dated only two days after the King's
entry into London, in which he declared himself 'very sensible of the
innocent blood of so many thousands of our English Protestant subjects
formerly slain by the hands of those barbarous rebels.' To prevent the
further spread of lawlessness all Irish rebels except those protected
by articles were to be apprehended and prosecuted. Adventurers and
soldiers were not to be disturbed except by Act of Parliament or due
course of law. Many were imprisoned accordingly, and Ireland was
quiet while the question of future legislation was being discussed
in London. The pressure of business there was so great that little
progress was made during the latter months of 1660. Mountrath carried
on the provisional government, but his Presbyterian colleague did not
expedite the settlement of Church and State. After the appointment of
regular Lords Justices things went a little faster. In January five
months' pay was due to the army on which everything depended, beside
an old arrear of fifteen months, and the King found it necessary to
acknowledge the Irish Convention, thanking them for what they had done,
promising a Parliament as soon as possible, and asking for supplies.
A poll-tax, as authorised by proclamation of the Lords Justices and
Council, was accordingly imposed, baronets being assessed at six
pounds with a regular scale down to husbandmen, petty farmers, and
handicraftsmen, who were to pay six shillings each. With a Parliament
and possible impeachment in the near future, care was taken not to tax
either spiritual or temporal peers. The Church, which never ceased to
be legally established, had already been restored to its own.[7]

[Sidenote: The Church re-established.]

Eight Irish Bishops had survived the great storm, and the King with
Ormonde and Clarendon beside him ventured to fill the vacancies without
waiting for an Irish Parliament. Papists, Presbyterians, and Sectaries
were all alike powerless against the Royalist reaction. Bramhall was
named for translation to the primacy very soon after the Restoration,
and early in 1661 every see was provided for. Two Archbishops and ten
Bishops were consecrated in St. Patrick's Cathedral on January 27, and
this unique ceremony was no doubt very impressive.

'All the orders of the kingdom,' wrote the new Primate to Ormonde,
'Justices, Council, Convention, Army, City, graced it with their
presence.' The anthem was supplied by the Dean, William Fuller
afterwards Bishop of Lincoln, who sang in very tolerable verse of the
essential unity of Church and Crown. Jeremy Taylor, who had been over
two years in Ireland, was now Bishop of Down and preached the sermon.
Henry Jones of Clogher, who had been Oliver's scoutmaster-general, was
not allowed, or was perhaps too penitent to lay on hands, but held
a Bible and presented it to the Primate. Taylor had no doubts about
the claims of episcopacy, but in another sermon preached three months
later he practically describes his own not very enviable position among
the Ulster nonconformists: 'says the papist, "I will not obey the
protestant kings, because, against the word of God, they command me to
come to church where heresy is preached"; "and I will not acknowledge
the bishops," saith the presbyterian, "because they are against the
discipline and sceptre of Jesus Christ"; and the independent hates
parochial meetings, and is wholly for a gathered church, and supposes
this to be the practice apostolical; "and I will not bring child to
baptism," saith the anabaptist, "because God calls none but believers
to that sacrament"; "and I will acknowledge no clergy, no lord, no
master," saith the quaker, "because Christ commands us to 'call no
man master on the earth, and be not called of men rabbi.'" And if you
call upon these men to obey the authority God had set over them, they
tell you with one voice, with all their hearts, as far as the word of
God will give them leave; but God is to be obeyed and not man, and
therefore if you put the laws in execution against them, they will obey
you passively, because you are stronger, and so long as they know it
they will not stir against you; but they in the meantime are little
less than martyrs, and you no better than persecutors.'[8]

[Sidenote: Attempts to enforce uniformity.]

Nonconformists were now officially styled fanatics, and Mountrath
suggested that the King should make 100,000_l._ by excluding them from
the benefit of the new settlement. Orrery was less extreme or less
outspoken, but both he and Eustace were willing to give Bramhall a
free hand. Only five days before the great consecration a proclamation
was issued against Papists, Presbyterians, Independents, Anabaptists,
Quakers, and other fanatical persons. Conventicles were prohibited, the
bishops being charged to see that the sheriffs and justices did their
duty, while military officers were ordered to support them. Another
proclamation provided for the commemoration of King Charles the Martyr
on January 30, and a third for the prosecution of Tories as traitors
unless they surrendered before February 18, in which case those who had
not committed murder might be received to mercy on giving security for
good behaviour. It was found possible to reduce the army by 1,650 men
and a proportionate number of officers during the first twelve months
after the Restoration, but to do this 50,000_l._ had to be transmitted
from England. These men no doubt were paid in full, but when that was
done eight months of new and fifteen months of old arrears were due to
those that remained under arms. It was time to summon a parliament.[9]

FOOTNOTES:

[1] _Declaration_ of the General Convention of Ireland, &c., newly
brought over by a gentleman to the Council of State in England,
London, 1660; _Mercurius Politicus_, 612 (Needham's last number).
Broghill reached Dublin on February 23, which occasioned much joy.
Colonel Marcus Trevor to Ormonde, April 17 and 18, 1660, in _Carte
Transcripts_, R.O., vol. xxx. Budgell's _Memoirs of the Boyles_, 85-87,
3rd edition, 1737. Budgell was a disreputable person, but can scarcely
have invented the story about Coote's letter.

[2] _Declaration_ of the General Convention of Ireland (dated March
12, 1659-60) with the late proceedings there, newly brought over
by a gentleman to the Council of State in England, London, 1660;
_Ordinance_ of the General Convention 'for speedy raising of money,'
April 24, 1660, in Marsh's Library, Dublin; Lord Aungier to Ormonde,
May 11, 1660, in Carte's _Original Letters_; _Declaration_ of General
Convention, May 1, 1660, London and Dublin, 1660 (broadside);
_Proclamation_ of General Convention for proclaiming Charles II.
(broadside), London and Dublin.

[3] Letter of Toby Bonnell, May 16, 1660, in _English Hist. Review_ for
January 1904.

[4] As a sample of the way in which Coote and Bury agreed to differ
see their joint letter of October 4, 1660, in Cal. of State Papers,
_Ireland_; Patrick Adair's _True Narrative_, p. 236; Clarendon's
_Life_, Cont., pp. 124, 229; Eustace to Nicholas, October 3, 1660;
_Humble desires_ presented to His Majesty by the Commissioners of the
General Convention, MS. Trin. Coll., June 20 and 21, 1600.

[5] Clarendon's _Life_, Cont., pp. 125-128, 197-199; State Papers,
_Ireland_, December 18 and 19, 1660. The instructions to Robartes
calendared at July 1660 really belong to 1669.

[6] Rawdon to Conway calendared at March 17 and 28, 1660; Instructions
for Broghill, Coote and others, n.d., but very soon after May 14 Irish
nobility and gentry in London to Ormonde, May 6--the two last from
_Carte Transcripts_, R.O., vol. xxx.; King's speech to the Convention
Parliament, July 27, _Old Parliamentary Hist._, xxii. 400.

[7] Proclamation of June 1, 1660 (broadside), reprinted in _Old
Parliamentary Hist._, xxii. 311. Coote and Bury to Colonel Finch,
September 3, and Lord Montgomery to Ormonde, October 31, 1660,
enclosing letter from Jeremy Taylor--_Carte Transcripts_, vol. xxxi.
George Rawdon to Lord Conway, January 23, 1660-1, in State Papers,
_Ireland_. _Ordinance_ of Irish Convention, March 1, 1660-1, in Marsh's
Library, Dublin.

[8] Taylor's sermons of January 27 and May 8, 1661, in his _Works_, ed.
1839, vi. 301, 348. The words of Fuller's anthem are in Mason's _Hist.
of St. Patrick's_, 194, and in the 32nd _Report_ of the Deputy Keeper
of Public Records, 107. The opening lines are:

    'Now that the Lord hath readvanced the Crown,
    Which thirst of spoil and frantic zeal threw down.'

And the concluding chorus:

    'Angels look down, and joy to see
      Like that above a Monarchy.
    Angels look down, and joy to see
      Like that above an Hierarchy.'


[9] Proclamations of January 19, 21, and 22, 1660-1, in State Papers,
_Ireland_, and the Lord Justice's speech, _ib._ calendared at May 11.




CHAPTER XLI

DECLARATION AND ACT OF SETTLEMENT, 1660-1662


[Sidenote: Position of Irish Recusants.]

In the autumn of 1660 Sir Henry Bennet, who then represented Charles
at Madrid, forwarded a letter from Hugh O'Neill calling himself Earl
of Tyrone. The brave defender of Clonmel and Limerick felt that his
end was near and begged favour for his family 'which a long and sad
experience will have taught them to value as they ought to do.' Roman
Catholic refugees from Ireland, whatever part they might have taken
in the long struggle with the Parliament, felt that only the King
could now help them. At his command they had been ready to change
from the service of Spain to that of France, and to go wherever his
policy required them. They were included in the Breda declaration
which promised oblivion for the past and toleration for the future.
In London they found many sympathisers but also many enemies, and the
latter proved much the stronger party. The adventurers and soldiers
occupied all the best parts of Ireland, and by the proclamation of June
1 they were confirmed in their possessions until the King with the
advice of the English or Irish Parliament should 'further order, or
that they be legally evicted by due course of law.' Charles spoke under
pressure at the dictation of the English Parliament, but he was bound
by the Act of 1642 which pledged two and a half millions of Irish acres
for the cost of the war. He was not the man to risk his own position
from sentiment or from a sense of justice, but as far as he could do
so safely he sympathised with the dispossessed natives. He owed his
restoration to England, and Scotland and the English in Ireland, 'but,'
says Clarendon, 'the miserable Irish alone had no part in contributing
to his Majesty's happiness; nor had God suffered them to be the least
instruments in bringing his good pleasure to pass, or to give any
testimony of their repentance for the wickedness they had wrought, or
for their resolution to be better subjects for the future.'[10]

[Sidenote: Irish demands considered.]

At first the Irish appeared as suppliants acknowledging their faults,
pleading extenuating circumstances, and begging for royal favour. But
as the King's leaning towards them became evident they took higher
ground, demanding their rights in strong language, and 'confidently
excused, if not justified, their first entry into rebellion' as to
the inexcusable barbarity of which Clarendon speaks as strongly as
any of the Cromwellians. Rightly, from their point of view, but not
wisely, they maintained that the English rebellion, stained as it was
by the late King's murder, was much worse than theirs. Charles attended
regularly at the many Council meetings where the representatives of
various interests were patiently heard, and the more boldly the Irish
advanced their claims the more he was forced to listen to the case of
the Cromwellians, who of course raked up the story of the original
rebellion which in Clarendon's words was 'as fresh and odious to the
whole people of England, as it had been the first year.' As spokesman
for his unfortunate countrymen, Sir Nicholas Plunket must have felt
the weakness of his own position, for it was known, and he knew it was
known, that during the last phase of the Irish war he was anxious for
an accommodation with Cromwell and hostile to Ormonde and Clanricarde.
He had plenty of help from men who knew all the facts, but Orrery and
Massereene were no less well informed, and Ormonde himself was on
the spot. Plunket had been a party to the peace of January 1649 and
accepted office under it, but the terms were ill-kept, and even if
Ormonde were disposed to treat them as still fully in force he was
precluded by the King's Dunfermline declaration that it was exceedingly
sinful and unlawful. It was argued that those who had made the peace
professed to represent all Ireland, and that they had been totally
unable to manage the clerical party who reduced its value to waste
paper.[11]

[Sidenote: The Declaration.]

[Sidenote: Adventurers.]

[Sidenote: Soldiers.]

[Sidenote: 49 officers.]

At the end of November a Declaration was at last agreed to which for
the most part left the adventurers and soldiers in possession, while
making ostensible provision for Irish proprietors who had not engaged
in the rebellion or who had earned favour by subsequent services. The
whole settlement was founded on the principle that the property of all
persons implicated in the rebellion from and after October 1641 was
forfeited and actually vested in the Crown. The Declaration begins
with an acknowledgment of what the King's subjects in Ireland had done
to further his restoration. A distinction is drawn between what was
done by the Act of March 1642, to which Charles I. had consented, and
the subsequent ordinances of the usurping Parliament, the result of
both being that the adventurers and soldiers possessed the greater
part of Ireland. The truce of 1643 and the treaties of 1646 and 1649
were forced upon the late King, and his son would have us believe
that he had confirmed the latter to save his father's life, though
in fact he had done so long after his death. Attention is then drawn
to the fidelity of the Irish during Charles' exile who changed from
one service to another to suit his interest 'though attended with
inconveniency enough to themselves; which demeanour of theirs cannot
but be thought very worthy of our protection justice and favour.'
Nevertheless all the lands possessed by the Adventurers on May 7, 1659,
were secured to them, while those whose claims had not been fully
satisfied were to have the deficiency made up out of territory assigned
to them as a body but not yet distributed. Officers and soldiers
were next confirmed in their possessions with savings in the case of
fraud. Church lands were excepted, as also the estates of men not
protected by the Act of Indemnity or who had broken the peace since
the Restoration. In these cases, as in those where valid incumbrances
were proved to exist, reprisal was to be made. Commissioned officers
serving before June 5, 1649, whose arrears had not been paid in money
or land were to be satisfied out of undisposed land in certain counties
or within the mile-line surrounding the transplanters' district beyond
Shannon. The forfeited houses in towns were also assigned to these
officers, 'satisfaction being first made to such protestants, who
on leases, or contracts for leases, have built or repaired houses,
or planted orchards or gardens.' Protestants whose estates had been
divided among adventurers or soldiers were to be forthwith restored, a
reprisal of equal value being given to the latter.[12]

[Sidenote: Innocent Papists.]

[Sidenote: Article men.]

[Sidenote: Ensignmen.]

[Sidenote: Nominees.]

The next class provided for were known as Innocent Papists, that is
Irish proprietors who had been dispossessed 'merely for being papists,'
and who had received more or less of an equivalent in Connaught and
Clare. Applying for such an equivalent was their own act, and might
'without any injustice' disentitle them to any relief, but they were
admitted on equitable grounds. In many cases no doubt there had
been only three courses open to them, exile without means to live,
starvation at home, or land beyond Shannon. They were now to be capable
of restoration to their old estates at any time before May 2, 1661, on
condition of surrendering their transplanters' portions to the King to
reprise others. Any adventurer or soldier disturbed to make room for
the restored Papist was to have a reprise of equal value. In the case
of towns 'planted with English, who have considerably improved at their
own charges and brought trade and manufacture into that our kingdom
and by their settlement there do not a little contribute to the peace
and settlement of that country,' the old Roman Catholic proprietors
were to have reprise of equal values 'near the said corporations.'
The difficulties of doing equal justice to all was acknowledged to
be great, but those of the Irish who had acceded to Ormonde's peace
and had received land as transplanters were held bound by their own
act. Their case was hard, no doubt, but said the King, 'they can no
more reasonably expect that we should further relieve them, than our
friends in England and Ireland can expect that we should pay back
to them all the moneys they were compelled in the evil times to pay
for their compositions, which they would have avoided had it been
in their power.' Those who had chosen the better part and followed
the royal fortunes abroad, Muskerry and many others being named,
were to be restored if they had received nothing as transplanters,
but adventurers and soldiers in possession were to be first reprised
'out of the remaining forfeited lands undisposed of.' This was all to
be done by October 23, 1661. Eighteen peers, including Clanricarde,
Westmeath, Clancarty, Mountgarret and Taaffe were specially named for
restoration 'without being put to any further proof' along with twenty
commoners of whom Richard Bellings was the most remarkable. Orrery
had persuaded the English Council, or perhaps had only given them an
excuse for declaring, that there was enough undisposed forfeited land
to reprise everyone for his losses, and in the meantime the adventurers
and soldiers were left in possession. The first to be restored were
innocent Protestants and 'those persons termed innocent papists, who
never took out any decree or had lands assigned to them in Connaught or
Clare.' Innocent Protestants and Papists who had taken out such decrees
came next, then the Irish Papists who had constantly served under the
King's ensigns abroad.[13]

[Sidenote: Recipients of special favour.]

All who had been in rebellion before September 15, 1643, and had
received grants in Connaught or Clare were excluded from the benefits
of the Declaration, but some persons were specially protected from its
disabilities. Ormonde and his wife with all his tenants and mortgagees
or those of his ancestors 'barons of Arklow, Viscounts of Thurles, or
Earls of Ormond or Ossory,' were fully guarded. Inchiquin, who had
procured a private Act in England for the purpose, was restored to his
estate of which he had been deprived 'for his eminent services and
adhering unto us.' Albemarle was confirmed in all his possessions, as
were Orrery, Mountrath and his kinsmen, and several others including
'the orphans of Colonel Owen O'Connolly,' Sir Theophilus Jones, Arthur
Annesley Viscount Valentia, and Major George Rawdon. If any restorable
persons were ousted to make room for these eminent persons they were to
be reprised, forfeited lands in Carlow being specially designated for
those who were removed from the Ormonde estate.[14]

[Sidenote: A satisfactory settlement was impossible.]

It was intended that when the Declaration had been confirmed by law
in Ireland, and its provisions carried out, it should be followed
by a general act of pardon, indemnity, and oblivion on the English
model, 'notorious murderers only excepted,' but excluding all who had
conspired to seize Dublin Castle in 1641, and all who had any part in
the execution of Charles I. down to the halberdiers on guard. But,
unfortunately, this healing measure was withheld. The King, admitted
the imperfections of his Declaration, pleading 'that the laying of
the foundation is not now before us, when we might design the model
of the structure answerable to our thoughts.' Thousands of Englishmen
had possessed themselves of Irish lands after long and tedious legal
process, they had brought over their families, sometimes selling
all they had to do so, they had made great improvements, and it was
impossible, as it would have been unjust, to confiscate their property,
'reprisal not first being provided for.' The enormous difficulty of the
task must be admitted, but Charles proved himself no true prophet when
he expressed a confident hope that mutual forbearance would bring about
a good understanding between two parties who had nothing in common but
the memory of an internecine war.[15]

[Sidenote: The first Commission for claims.]

The next step was the appointment of a commission to carry out the
Declaration. It consisted of thirty-six persons, including many peers
and all the King's counsel. The attorney and solicitor-general were
afterwards excluded lest the Crown should be made a judge in its own
cause, but in truth there were but few disinterested men among these
Commissioners, for they were all concerned in Irish land, though
often differing in opinion. Massereene, Petty, and Audley Mervyn,
for instance, were naturally inclined to maintain the Cromwellian
arrangements, while Lord Montgomery, Domvile, and Lane were more in
favour of the old Protestant inhabitants. Some of their colleagues
were disposed to do justice to the Roman Catholics, but the latter
had no direct representation. It is unnecessary to enlarge on the
subject, for little or nothing was done by this unwieldy body, and the
instructions for its guidance had to be applied by a smaller and less
prejudiced commission. Of the three Lords Justices Orrery and Mountrath
leaned towards the adventurers and soldiers, while Eustace thought
more of 'the old English interest which lately overspread the land
far different from such as did rise up with Cromwell,' mushrooms who
considered themselves the true representatives of England and ignored
those who came in with the Conqueror and never made any defection
before 1641. Were they, he asked, all to be cast out for one fault? In
several months the Commissioners had only succeeded in relieving one
widow, though the streets were 'full of those miserable creatures of
all sorts noble as well as of inferior degree.' He thought they were
criminal who had deluded the King into believing that there was a great
scope of available land. Orrery and Mountrath felt the responsibility
though averse to restoring the Irish, and to avoid the odium of
inaction did of their own motion restore a few notable Roman Catholics,
but the great mass were reserved for the new commission.[16]

[Sidenote: Composition of the Irish Parliament, May 1661.]

[Sidenote: Speaker Mervyn.]

The composition of the first commission was not the sole cause of
delay, for the judges held that it would not be safe to act on the
Declaration until it had legal sanction. It was remembered how
Strafford had contributed to his own destruction by boasting that
he would make Acts of State equal to Acts of Parliament. The Irish
Convention having done its duty by making some provision for the pay of
the army, it was resolved to call a Parliament. As freeholds were for
the most part in Protestant hands there could be no question about the
majority. 'The papists and anabaptists,' said Orrery, 'stood in several
places to be chosen, yet but one of each sort was actually chosen, and
they both in the borough of Tuam, an archbishop's see; from which all
collect that both these opinions will oppose the true church.' The one
Papist was Geoffrey Brown, much trusted by the late Confederacy but
opposed to the nuncio. He was excluded by the oath of supremacy, and
his seat seems to have been treated as vacant and filled up. Parliament
met at Chichester House on May 8 after hearing Taylor preach on the
texts that obedience is better than sacrifice and rebellion as the sin
of witchcraft. Bramhall presided in the Lords, the Chancellor being
disabled as one of the Lords Justices. Lord Santry was anxious for the
post, but was considered a cold friend to the Declaration and rejected
to his great disgust. For the Speakership of the Commons the King
recommended Domvile the attorney-general, but the adventurers were too
strong and the Lords Justices acquiesced in the choice of Sir Audley
Mervyn, whose flowery speech before them contained much Latin and
some Greek. Never, he said, since Ireland was happy under an English
Government was so choice a collection of Protestant fruit that grew
within the walls of the House of Commons. Their lordships had piped
and the Irish danced, and 'Japheth might perhaps be persuaded to dwell
in the tents of Shem.' This oration was ordered by the Commons to be
printed, and it filled six crowded folio pages. Thanks were also voted
to Bishop Taylor for his sermon. _A jove principium_ exclaimed Mr.
Speaker on taking the chair. The oaths of supremacy and allegiance were
affirmed by both Houses, the civil authorities directed to co-operate
with the bishops in re-establishing the Church, while the Solemn League
and Covenant and the Engagement were ordered to be burned by the common
hangman in Dublin and in all market towns.[17]

[Sidenote: Debates on the Declaration.]

After a little sparring between the two Houses, the Declaration
was adopted by Parliament in a fortnight, but the Instructions for
working it which had also been transmitted from England were still
open to discussion. Commissioners were chosen by ballot, four peers,
representing each rank, and eight members of the House of Commons.

[Sidenote: In the Lords.]

[Sidenote: In the Commons.]

In the Upper House the lot fell first upon Wentworth Earl of Kildare,
the head of the Geraldines, who strangely enough held Ormonde's proxy.
His mother was a Boyle and his father had adhered steadily to the
Parliament, but he was looked upon as in some sort the protector of the
old English. For colleagues he had Lord Montgomery, Lord Kingston, and
John Parker, Bishop of Elphin, afterwards Archbishop of Tuam, who had
exerted himself in favour of the suffering Irish. Speaker Mervyn headed
the Commoners' contingent, and this shows how strong the Adventurers
were. Among the others were Petty, Sir John Skeffington, Massereene's
son-in-law and heir, Sir Theophilus Jones, who held the Sarsfield
property at Lucan, and Sir William Temple, afterwards so famous. All
were of course interested in land. Temple, whose diplomatic cleverness
was already recognised, acted for the Commons in their communications
with the Upper House. His younger brother John, the Solicitor-General,
was made acting Speaker during Mervyn's absence. Being unable to agree
as to what ought to be the contents of the coming Bill of Settlement,
each House instructed its own emissaries separately. The Lords Justices
also appointed agents to represent them in London and to carry over the
Bill of Settlement: Michael Boyle, Bishop of Cork, afterwards Primate
and Chancellor, Lord Kingston, and Colonel Thomas Pigott, Master of the
Court of Wards. Pigott, in Eustace's opinion, was 'as right unto the
poor people of this nation as any man living,' but he could not say as
much for the first two. Francis Lord Aungier, whose financial skill
was valuable, had six months leave from the House of Lords. Massereene
also had leave to go to the country, which he utilised to slip over to
England and join his forces to the representatives of the Commons, but
a letter was written on Kildare's motion warning the English Government
against hearing one who was not authorised to speak for the Peers.
Of Roman Catholic suitors there was no lack in London, Sir Nicholas
Plunket always figuring as their chief spokesman.[18]

[Sidenote: Conditions of the Settlement.]

It was from the first evident that there would not be land enough
to satisfy all claims, and the Declaration made careful rules about
priority. Innocents were to be first restored, but the Instructions
raised so many barriers that their case might well seem hopeless. Not
only were 'adventurers and soldiers and other persons' in possession to
be fully reprised before anyone could be restored, but Innocent Papists
were disqualified who came within any of the following categories:-

1. Those who were of the rebels' party before the cessation of
September 15, 1643.

2. Those who enjoyed their estates real or personal within the rebels'
quarters, an exception being made in favour of the inhabitants of Cork
and Youghal who were 'expelled and driven into the quarters of the
rebels.'

3. Those who had entered the Roman Catholic confederacy before the
peace of 1646.

4. Those who joined the nuncio against the King.

5. Those who having been excommunicated for adhering to the King owned
it an offence and were relieved from the ban.

6. Those who derived title from any person guilty of the above crimes.

7. Those who pleaded the articles of peace for their estates.

8. Those who being within the royal quarters during the war
communicated with the King's enemies.

9. Those who before the peace of 1646 or 1648 sat in any assembly of
the Confederate Roman Catholics, or acted under orders from them.

10. Those who empowered agents to treat with foreign papal powers or
brought foreign forces into Ireland.

11. Those who had been woodkernes or tories before Clanricarde left the
Government.[19]

[Sidenote: Paucity of evidence.]

With such a list of disqualifications it would seem hard for any Irish
Roman Catholic to prove his innocence within the meaning of the Act.
It was at first intended to exclude all who had paid contributions
to the rebels, whether voluntary or not, but this was dropped as
too manifestly unjust. A strong effort was made to do away with the
disqualification from enjoying estates in the enemy's quarters, but
against this it was argued that in many cases there was no other
applicable test. After twenty years there was little or no direct
evidence, and if the presumption from residence was disregarded
the great mass of the Irish would be restored, controlling future
Parliaments and getting all the seaports into their hands. 'Until the
cessation,' Mountrath wrote, 'none but the rebels' friends could live
in their quarters, all others were expelled or destroyed'; and this
reasoning prevailed. Yet it cannot be doubted that many remained in
the Irish quarters only because they had nothing to live upon anywhere
else.[20]

[Sidenote: Available area insufficient.]

[Sidenote: The Doubling Ordinance.]

Even those who could prove their innocence had to make reprisal to
Adventurers and soldiers in possession before they could be restored.
It soon became evident that Orrery had greatly exaggerated the amount
of land available, but Lord Aungier drew attention to the fact that
many Adventurers had received more than the value of the money advanced
by them. This was largely the result of the Doubling Ordinance passed
when the Parliament were in financial straits after Edgehill. As it
never received the consent of Charles I., Charles II. could legally
ignore it. By this it was provided that those who added one-fourth to
their original stake should have the whole doubled and be recouped in
Irish measure instead of the English acres originally intended. Thus
one whose first subscription was 1000_l._ and who afterwards added
250_l._ would be credited with 2500_l._ As to the Irish acres the
point had been conceded in the King's Declaration. Nor was this all.
If the original Adventurer refused to increase his stake a stranger
might come in and do it for him, receiving double of the whole after
deducting the original advance, and thus a speculator who never gave
more than 250_l._ would receive credit for 1500_l._ Massereene and
other interested persons endeavoured to maintain this arrangement, but
the abuse was too glaring and the Bill of Settlement provided that the
reprisal should extend only to the amount actually contributed. Even
so the fund was still far from sufficient. 'If,' said Ormonde, 'the
Adventurers and soldiers must be satisfied to the extent of what they
suppose intended unto them by the Declaration; and if all that accepted
and constantly adhered to the peace in 1648 must be restored, as the
same Declaration seems also to intend, and was partly declared to be
intended at the last debate, there must be new discoveries made of a
new Ireland, for the old will not serve to satisfy these engagements.
It remains then to determine which party must suffer in the default
of means to satisfy all; or whether both must be proportionately
losers.'[21]

[Sidenote: Incompatible claims.]

[Sidenote: Sir Nicholas Plunket.]

Ormonde would have liked to restore many of the Irish, but they
disregarded his advice. Instead of acknowledging, while endeavouring
to minimise, their share in the rebellion they insisted that the
Parliamentarians alone were rebels and sufficiently rewarded by being
suffered to live. They themselves were the loyalists and worthy of
reward. But their enemies were in possession, all-powerful in the Irish
army and Parliament, and in a position to show that the Confederates
had depended on foreign and papal support, and had done many things
in derogation of the royal authority. During the winter of 1661-2
the wrangle continued, and at last Charles, probably much against
his will, was constrained to cut the knot. The Solicitor-General
Heneage Finch, afterwards Lord Chancellor and Earl of Nottingham,
acted as legal adviser in all the Irish business, and he brought up
a report from the Committee of Council specially charged with it.
The Commissioners from the Irish Parliament and Council had produced
the instructions of January 18, 1647, from the supreme council to
Bishop French and Nicholas Plunket as envoys to the papal court, a
draft of similar instructions for France and Spain, and a copy of
the Jamestown excommunication. Sir Nicholas Plunket was then called
in and acknowledged his signature to the first and his handwriting
throughout the second document. This report was presented when the King
was present in Council supported by twenty members including the Duke
of York, Clarendon, and Ormonde, and it was thereupon ordered 'that
in regard the said Romish Catholics have been already several times
heard at this Board as to the Bill of Settlement, no more petitions or
further addresses be required or admitted from them for obstructing
the same,' and the Solicitor-General was directed to go on with the
engrossing of it. Sir Nicholas Plunket was at the same time ordered to
'forbear coming into or appearing in His Majesty's presence or court,
notice of this order being given to the committees employed from the
said Council and Parliament, to be by them transmitted into Ireland.'
Plunket was often heard again later on, but not till the Act of
Settlement had passed.[22]

[Sidenote: Albemarle resigns in Ormonde's favour.]

Mountrath died of smallpox on December 18, and a fresh patent was
at once made out to the survivors, Eustace and Orrery. But it was
already announced that this was only provisional, that Ormonde was to
be Lord Lieutenant, and that no important step was to be taken until
his arrival. Albemarle, who had a large Irish property, had for a
long time opposed his appointment, and surprised everyone by suddenly
recommending him as a most fitting person. It was, he said, useless for
him to retain the office in his own hands since he could not well be
spared from the King's side. Charles did not consult Clarendon, whose
opposition to his friend's promotion is amusingly described by himself.
The Chancellor objected that the King could not spare the Duke and that
the latter would be able to do no good in Ireland. He might have been
useful if despatched immediately after the Restoration, but now he
had hampered himself by engagements with individuals, and 'had given
himself so much to his ease and pleasure that he would never be able
to take the pains which that most laborious province would require.'
Ormonde answered good-humouredly that no one knew the difficulties
better than he did and that he had not sought the viceroyalty but could
not refuse it on public grounds, and that he would take indefatigable
pains for a year or two to purchase ease for the rest of his life. His
powers of work were enormous, but he knew how to unbend better than
his friend. When the news reached Dublin the Irish House of Lords at
once sent a letter of thanks to the King for choosing one 'of whose
noble and sweet disposition and prudent and just government void of
all sinister and self ends we have formerly had full experience.' His
presence would offer the best chance of peace and settlement, and
no kingdom ever needed them more. The House of Commons were no less
complimentary, regarding Ormonde's government as the most likely to
maintain order and to establish an English and Protestant interest.[23]

[Sidenote: Provisos in the Bill of Settlement.]

[Sidenote: Grant to the Duke of York.]

The Houses were not allowed to do much until the Bill of Settlement
had assumed its final shape. By Poynings' law it could not be altered
after its transmission by the English Council. A week before Plunket's
dismissal by the Privy Council the Irish House of Commons petitioned
the King that no provisos should be inserted in the Bill which affected
the interests secured by the Declaration. Many had, however, been
already decided on and some were added later, which were not all such
as the dominant party in Ireland could approve. Further favour was
indeed extended without demur to Ormonde, Sir John Temple, Sir George
Rawdon, Sir William Petty, and other well-known Protestants, and there
was no opposition to what was done for the Established Church, but such
eminent Roman Catholics as Sir Robert Talbot, Sir Valentine Blake, and
Geoffrey Brown, while deserving well of the Crown, cannot have had
the goodwill of the Adventurers. Antrim, who had been omitted from
the Declaration, was by a special clause placed upon the same footing
as those named in that document. The estates of all the regicides,
except a small portion already given away, were granted to the Duke
of York without any protection for the old proprietors. James proved
his claim to 77,000 acres, and in 1668 his agents were in possession
of at least as much more to which the title was disputed. Lest there
should be any doubt as to what lands were 'forfeited,' it was declared
and enacted 'that the said word shall be deemed and taken not only of
such lands, tenements, and hereditaments as are already forfeited by
judgment, confession, verdict, or outlawry, but such as by reason of
any act or acts of the said rebellion already committed by the several
and respectable proprietors hereof shall or maybe forfeitable.' And
'undisposed land' was defined to be all that was not disposed of by the
Act.[24]

[Sidenote: The Bill in the First Parliament.]

The final touches were given to the Bill of Settlement early in April,
and on May 6 it was read a first time in the Irish House of Commons,
who had the power to reject but not to amend it. Speaker Mervyn had
just returned to his post, and his influence was quickly visible. In
the course of prolonged debates discrepancies were noticed between the
original Declaration and the latter part of the Bill with which it was
incorporated. There was some inclination to refuse the passage of the
Bill until an explanatory measure was also passed, but Orrery pointed
out that there could be no explanation until there was an Act in being
to explain. The Commons proceeded, however, with the preparation of an
explanatory bill, and the Lord Lieutenant was reminded that he would be
expected to transmit it soon after his arrival in Ireland.[25]

[Sidenote: Ormonde arrives a Lord Lieutenant.]

Ormonde, in his capacity of Lord Steward, was detained in London by the
King's marriage, but reached Coventry on his way to Holyhead by the
beginning of July. He was accompanied by many Irish peers, members of
Parliament and claimants to land who were now hastening to defend their
own interests in Ireland. In each county that he passed on the road to
Chester the Lord Lieutenant came to meet him, and the local militia
were paraded. He travelled by land to Holyhead, crossed in very rough
weather and landed at Howth on July 27, the anniversary of the day on
which he had surrendered Dublin to the parliamentary commissioners
fifteen years before. He was at the Castle next day, and on the third
received the House of Commons and had to endure a speech from Sir
Audley Mervyn which was voted to express their sense and ordered to be
printed. There were many other speeches and addresses, and on the 31st
the Lord Lieutenant appeared in the House of Lords and gave the Royal
assent to the Bill of Settlement.[26]

[Sidenote: Bennet Secretary of State.]

In October 1662, a few months after Ormonde's arrival in Ireland, the
faithful old secretary Nicholas was dismissed and Sir Henry Bennet
appointed in his stead. He was soon made Lord Arlington, and by that
name is but too well known in history. The correspondence with the Lord
Lieutenant passed through his hands, and he set himself from the first
to make money out of Ireland. Most of the officials, in co-operation
with Colonel Talbot, did their best to advance the interests of a
courtier who was likely to be very powerful. He was, says Burnet,
'proud and insolent, a man of great vanity and lived at a vast expense
without taking any care of paying the debts which he contracted to
support that.' Clarendon says much more to the same effect and adds
that he was never guilty of friendship to any man. He married Lady
Ossory's sister, and was thus pretty closely connected with the Lord
Lieutenant, but the relations between them were never very cordial. The
nature of Bennet's interest in Ireland was soon made clear in the case
of an ancient proprietor who had no court interest.[27]

[Sidenote: The Clanmalier Estate.]

[Sidenote: Foundation of Portarlington.]

James I. had granted to the head of the O'Dempseys a great estate
on both sides of the Barrow in King's and Queen's Counties, worth
4000_l._ a year in its unimproved condition and subject only to a
small quit-rent. Sir John Davies had reported that the clan were
inclined to live in a civilised manner, and the chief was created
Viscount Clanmalier by Charles I. His son Lewis succeeded before
the outbreak in 1641, commanded a regiment during the war, and was
included in the Cromwellian Act of Attainder. He afterwards claimed
to have adhered constantly to the peaces of 1646 and 1648 and to have
preserved the land and goods of many distressed English, but received
no consideration for his estate which had been given to soldiers and
Adventurers. Not having served the King abroad he was not protected
by any clause in the Act of Settlement, and Sir Henry Bennet coveted
the property. Probably Clanmalier would have failed before the Court
of Claims, for he had been a long time in the rebels' quarters, but
his case seems not to have been heard, perhaps through his lawyer's
mistake, and his position was hopeless from the first. In November
1662 the King granted the whole estate to Bennet who had just been
made Secretary of State, and the Irish officials did their best to
make the grant effective. Winston Churchill and Talbot were very
active in the matter, and the latter showed very little anxiety about
getting anything for Lord Clanmalier. Ormonde was more sympathetic, and
discouraged the private Bill by which Bennet's friends proposed to cut
all knots. The Adventurers and soldiers had to be reprised, and they
exerted themselves to find concealed lands, thereby reducing the stock
available for working the Act of Settlement. Clanmalier was only tenant
for life, but in the end the Act of Explanation gave the whole estate
to Bennet without considering the reversion. The men in possession
were to have two-thirds of their interests, which some valued at three
and some at six years' purchase, and the Manor of Portarlington was
erected with great privileges and the right of sending two members to
Parliament. If Lord Clanmalier got anything at all it was in the nature
of a compassionate allowance. It is not surprising to find that Tories
were numerous near the new borough, and that some of them bore the name
of Dempsey.[28]

FOOTNOTES:

[10] Hugh O'Neill to Ormonde, October 27, 1660, enclosed in Bennet's
letter of same date, _Carte Transcripts_, vol. xxxi. Clarendon's
_Life_, Cont., 226. The Breda declaration is in his _Hist. of the
Rebellion_, xvi. 193, and in _Somers Tracts_, vii. 394.

[11] Clarendon's _Life_, Cont., 209, 221.

[12] The Declaration of November 30, 1660, is incorporated with the Act
of Settlement, 1662, 14 & 15 Car. II, cap. 2, which occupies 109 folio
pages of the _Irish Statutes_.

[13] _Irish Statutes_, i. 252-260, sections 16 to 28 of the
Declaration. Clarendon's _Life_, Cont., 233.

[14] Sections 11 to 15 and 20 of the Declaration, _ut sup._

[15] Sections 12-15, 29, 31 and 35 of the Declaration, _ut sup._

[16] The names of the first Commissioners are in the Act of Settlement,
_Irish Statutes_, ii. 264. Eustace to Ormonde, July 29, August 17 and
21, 1661, _Carte Transcripts_, vol. xxxi.; Lord Aungier to same, May
1, _ib._ The King to the Lords Justices, April 12, 1661, State Papers,
_Ireland_. The persons ordered to be restored by the Lords Justices
were Lords Clancarty, Clanricarde, Westmeath, Fingall, Dillon, Taaffe,
and Galmoy, Colonel Richard Butler (Ormonde's brother), and Colonel
Fitzpatrick. The first and the last of these were married to Ormonde's
sisters, but it appears from the Act of Explanation that there had
been a hitch in the cases of Lords Westmeath and Dillon and of Colonel
Butler.

[17] Orrery to Ormonde, May 8 and 15, 1661, in _Orrery's State
Letters_, i. 35, 36. Jeremy Taylor's sermon on May 8, _Works_, vi. 343;
Lord Kingston to Ormonde, May 5 and 8, _Carte Transcripts_, vol. xxxi.;
_Irish Lords Journal_, vol. i., May 8-25, _Commons Journal_, vol.
i., May 8-17, Mervyn's speech being in full; _Declaration_ of Lords
spiritual and temporal, May 17, separately printed for circulation.

[18] Irish _Lords and Commons Journals_, May to July 1661. Eustace to
Ormonde, July 29, 1661, _Carte Transcripts_, vol. xxxi. Montgomery to
Ormonde, June 29, and Kildare to same, _ib._ There is an elaborate but
not very clear account of all this in Carte's _Ormonde_, book vi.

[19] Instructions incorporated in the Act of Settlement, 1662, no. 11,
_Irish Statutes_, i. 269.

[20] Mountrath to Ormonde, June 19, 1661, _Carte Transcripts_, vol.
xxxi.; Heneage Finch's report, February 1, 1670-1, printed in Carte's
_Ormonde_, ii. appx. 91, p. 75. Finch is a first-rate authority for
everything that happened in London.

[21] The Doubling Ordinance of July 14, 1643, in _Scobell_, i. 45,
repudiated by section 126 of the Act of Settlement. Lord Aungier to
Ormonde, April 17, 1661, _Carte Transcripts_, vol. xxxi. Ormonde's
letter in full in Carte's _Ormonde_, vol. ii. In his letter of June 1
to Ormonde Bellings says not one per cent. would regain their property
'and yet they shall seem not to be excluded from all possibility
of enjoying it when that imaginary thing a reprisal is found,'
_Spicilegium Ossoriense_, ii. 189.

[22] Order in Council, March 14, 1661-2, in _Cox_, supplementary
letter, p. 5. Instructions to the Confederate envoys in _Confederation
and War_, vi. 223-227. In the letter already quoted Bellings gives
credit to Ormonde for having saved as many of the old proprietors as
he could. He confines his sympathies to the 'ancient families' and
warns Ormonde that it cannot be for a Butler's interest to see the land
possessed by 'a generation of mechanic bagmen who are strangers to all
principles of religion and loyalty.'

[23] Warrant for Ormonde's appointment, November 4, 1661, State
Papers, _Ireland_; Orrery and Eustace to Nicholas, December 19, _ib._,
Clarendon's _Life_, Cont., 234-238. On this occasion Clarendon gives
one of his rare dates, and it is wrong, 1664 instead of 1662. _Irish
Lords_ and _Commons Journals_, December 6 and 7, 1661.

[24] _Irish Commons Journal_, March 6, 1661-2. Act of Settlement, 14 &
15 Car. II. cap. 2, from clause 86 to the end. For the harshness with
which the Duke of York's claims were enforced and the character of the
men employed in the work see the letters printed in the 32nd _Report_
of the Deputy Keeper of the Public Records, appx. i. pp. 170-181,
particularly Colonel Cooke to Ormonde, June 6, 1668.

[25] _Irish Commons Journals_, May-July 1662. Orrery to Ormonde, May
17 and June 20, in his _State Letters_, i. 111, 123. The Bill of
Settlement passed the Lords on May 30, 1662, without a dissentient
voice. Forty-one peers were considered present, but of these
twenty-three were proxies. Those who actually attended were three
Archbishops; three Earls, Kildare, Roscommon, and Donegal; three
Viscounts, Conway, Baltinglas, and Massereene; seven Bishops; two
Barons, Caulfield and Colooney--_Irish Lords Journal._

[26] Carte's _Ormonde_, ii. 257. Clarendon's letter of July 17 in his
_Life_ by Lister, iii. 208.

[27] Carte's _Ormonde_, ii. 272. Burnet, ii. 99. Clarendon _State
Papers_, iii. 81 (supplement). The letter in which Ormonde explained
the State of the Land Question to Bennet when the Court of Claims had
just ceased to give decrees is printed as an appendix.

[28] Lord Roscommon, the poet, made an eloquent speech for Clanmalier
in the Irish House of Lords. The intrigues about this property may
be followed in the Calendar of State Papers, _Ireland_, 1662-5, but
the letters are too numerous to cite separately. That from Lord
Aungier, calendared at April 2, 1662, must, I think, belong to 1663.
Aungier, who possessed some of the land as an Adventurer, says all
the Commissioners favoured Bennet: he was himself protected by law.
Act of Explanation, sections 78 and 79. Dunlop's _Ireland under the
Commonwealth_, i. 154.




CHAPTER XLII

COURT OF CLAIMS AND ACT OF EXPLANATION, 1662-1665


[Sidenote: The Court of Claims.]

While Ormonde was on his way to Ireland the King appointed seven
Commissioners for carrying out the Bill of Settlement as soon as it
should become an Act. Great care was taken in choosing these, and
Clarendon assures us that it would have been impossible to get fitter
men. The first named was Henry Coventry, well known in the history
of the time. Sir Edward Dering of Kent, a very good man of business,
was second. The third was Sir Richard Rainsford, serjeant-at-law and
afterwards a judge in England. Sir Thomas Beverley, one of the King's
remembrancers, was the fourth. Sir Edward Smith, Chief Justice of the
Irish Common Pleas, came next, and was followed by Colonel Edward
Cooke. The last named was Winston Churchill, father of the great Duke
of Marlborough. Coventry was too useful at Court to be left long in
Ireland, and after a few months he was recalled and replaced by the
Surveyor-General Sir Alan Brodrick. Before the Commissioners could sit
to hear claims of innocence, rules of procedure had to be made and a
vast amount of preliminary work done. Petty's Down Survey was used for
the purposes of the settlement, his cousin John acting as Brodrick's
deputy. The Court of Claims was formally opened on September 20, its
powers under the Act of Settlement and an amending Act being limited
to one year from that date. The Lord Lieutenant was empowered by the
Instructions to issue subsidiary commissions, and one to enquire
into the value of estates restorable or reprisable was issued to
independent persons, and another to Anglesey, Sankey and others, in
conjunction with Coventry and his colleagues, to investigate frauds and
irregularities in the distribution of lands beyond Shannon under the
Cromwellian Government.[29]

[Sidenote: Innocents and Nocents.]

[Sidenote: The Commons dissatisfied.]

The result of the first day spent by the Commissioners in hearing
claimants was that two were declared innocent and one nocent. 'If,'
said Ormonde, 'the lottery would hold out so to the end of their
commission it would prove no ill one for the Irish,' and they
accordingly began to indulge in extravagant hopes. The more violent
among them declared that Orrery and the other leaders who had restored
the King should be rooted out as heretics and damned traitors as soon
as the army became 'Catholic loyal.' It was said, probably with truth,
that many forged conveyances were produced and admitted by the Court.
There was angry consternation among the Adventurers and soldiers who
did not believe in the impartiality of the Commissioners. The House of
Commons, meeting after a short recess, lost no time in giving a voice
to the prevailing discontent. Ormonde had forwarded the explanatory
Bill as desired, but it was altered in England, and when it came back
was, as he foretold, promptly thrown out by the Commons on the motion
for a second reading. 'When,' he wrote to Clarendon, 'anybody of credit
among these people finds himself like to be pinched in his interest he
causes a cry to be raised that all is lost to the English and that the
Irish be their masters.' Timid people sold their goods and departed,
while the alarmists stayed and got cheap bargains. Monks and friars
added to the panic by holding chapters as openly as in Spain, while
prudent Roman Catholics would have liked a sharp proclamation against
the regulars as a protection to themselves. The House of Commons were
bent on making the Act of Settlement more stringent, and unanimously
agreed to twenty proposals for the purpose. Founding an argument upon
the last clause of the Act which gave the Lord Lieutenant power to
alter the procedure of the Commissioners before a date which had
already passed, they called upon him to define the English quarters as
existing from time to time until he left Ireland in 1647, no witnesses
outside the line being admitted to prove innocence, since the rest of
the island was assumed to be rebels' quarters. Another proposal was
that no claimant once adjudged nocent should be allowed to make any
other claim. Ormonde was asked to admit a committee of the House to
confer with a committee of the Council, the action of the Commissioners
being suspended in the interim. The House of Commons had of course no
jurisdiction over the Court of Claims, and Clarendon reported that the
King was 'horribly angry' at their presumption in seeking to treat with
the Council.[30]

[Sidenote: Speaker Mervyn represents the malcontents.]

[Sidenote: Titles not regarded as permanently valid.]

Though fully determined not to yield to parliamentary pressure,
Ormonde promised that the proposals of the House should have 'such
speedy answer as the weight and number of these would permit.' The
Lord Lieutenant was treated with respect throughout, but the Speaker's
speech on the occasion was not conciliatory in substance. The Act of
Settlement, he said, was the Irish Magna Charta and not to be infringed
in any way: 'our strength lies in this as Sampson's in his locks; if
those be cut we are as weak as others when the Philistines shall fall
upon us.... I shall never forget that expression of His Majesty at a
full council "my justice I must afford to you all, but my favour must
be placed upon my Protestant subjects."' He descanted with some force
upon the anomalous powers of the Commissioners who both found the facts
and laid down the law. The House of Commons asked for juries, since
they were certain to be composed of Protestant freeholders. Mervyn
clearly understood that Irish claims would still be made whatever
law or lawyers might say, and to defeat them proposed to impound all
nocents' title-deeds. 'Sir,' he said, 'in the North of Ireland, the
Irish have a custom in the winter, when milk is scarce, to kill the
calf and preserve the skin, and stuffing it with straw they set it upon
four wooden feet which they call a _Puckan_, and the cow will be as
fond of this as she was of the living calf; she will low after it and
lick it and give her milk down, so it stands but by her. Sir, these
writings will have the operation of this _Puckan_, for wanting the land
to which they relate they are but stuffed with straw, yet, sir, they
will low after them, lick them over and over in their thoughts, and
teach their children to read by them instead of horn-books. And if any
venom be left they will give it down upon the sight of these _puckan_
writings, and entail a memory of revenge, though the estate tail be
cut off.' This was prophetic: for many generations and perhaps even to
this day obsolete title-deeds were handed about, though useless for any
purpose but to make property insecure and to perpetuate the memory of
wrongs long past.[31]

[Sidenote: The Court of Claims satisfied no one.]

The Commissioners continued to sit during the spring and summer of
1663, but no one was satisfied, and the sheriffs made difficulties
about executing their decrees unless they were backed by the ordinary
courts of law. The time for hearing claims expired in August, when it
was estimated that only one-sixth of the applicants had been heard, but
that 800,000 acres had been restored to them. Many Protestants sought
decrees of innocence, as a precaution no doubt, for Ormonde and Cork
were among them. In March the Lord Lieutenant sent an answer to the
Speaker reproaching the Commons with having caused general insecurity
so that many English Protestants had been frightened into 'selling
their lots and adventures at vile and under rates, or compounding with
the old proprietors on very ill terms.' He announced the discovery of
a plot by so-called Protestants to seize the Castle, and the Commons
could only resolve to live and die with His Grace. Average politicians
might be a little startled at the military conspiracy, but what they
really feared was quite different, and they presented bills for the
suppression of the Popish hierarchy and for imposing the oaths of
supremacy and allegiance upon all officials and others in positions of
trust. Five days later the House adjourned for six weeks, but before
the time had expired the Lord Lieutenant prorogued Parliament by
proclamation and it did not meet again for more than two years. Both
he and the King were almost tempted to dissolve at once, and he was
empowered to do so at his own discretion.[32]

[Sidenote: Discontent among soldiers.]

[Sidenote: Many cavaliers served the Parliament.]

Ireland could not be governed without a standing army, and the cost of
maintaining one, even on the most reduced scale, made it impossible to
balance the public accounts. As there was no money to spare in England,
the force upon which everything depended was irregularly paid and
of course discontented. Ormonde refused to be coerced by hot-headed
cavaliers into discharging all officers and men who had served the
Protector, though he weeded them as closely as possible. Those who
were discharged all remained in the country. A wholesale proscription
would affect nearly all the English in Ireland, 'and many of your own
party,' he told the King, 'were forced by the persecution that followed
them in England to shelter themselves in Ireland, and as they were
able to make friends, to get into the army some as inferior officers,
some as private soldiers.' The revolutionary politicians thought
it safer to get them out of England even on these terms. They were
Royalists all along, and showed it when the time came. Many who never
served against the King and some who had actually fought for him in
England, 'their interest and detestation of the Irish assisting their
mistake,' thought they might conscientiously oppose him when treaties
with the rebels were being made in his name. They also believed, or
wished to believe, that the late King had handed over the whole war
to the Parliament once for all. National feeling and the folly of the
clerical party made them receive Cromwell in certain towns, but they
had since repented. He declined to cashier such men, though he took
care to admit no recruits that had not a clear record. There were
therefore heads to conspire and plenty of hands to execute, but Ormonde
was aware that the plot in the North of England had sympathisers in
Ireland. It was reported that Ludlow had returned to put himself at
the head of the malcontents, and the Ulster Presbyterians might have
been goaded by the bishops into rebellion. Spies were not wanting,
and Colonel Vernon, Henry Cromwell's old antagonist, made himself
very useful. Robert Shapcote, representing the borough of Wicklow,
was arrested as a ringleader, and the House of Commons could not
interfere during prorogation. It does not appear that more than two
or three Presbyterian clergymen were in any way concerned, nor any of
the more responsible sectaries. Ormonde's suspicions fell, perhaps not
unnaturally, upon Henry Cromwell's old chaplain, Stephen Charnock,
but there seems no reason to suppose that he was implicated, and in
any case he eluded all attempts to arrest him either in England or
Ireland.[33]

[Sidenote: The Castle plot.]

[Sidenote: A Puritan visionary.]

The villain of the piece was Thomas Blood, owner or former owner of a
small property at Sarney, near Dunboyne, in Meath, whose mysterious
life has never been fully cleared up but who is known to students of
history and to readers of 'Peveril of the Peak' as the man who stole
the crown in the Tower and tried to kidnap the Duke of Ormonde at the
top of St. James's Street. Plenty of dupes were to be had among the
unpaid soldiery and the settlers who were likely to lose their lands
through the action of the Court of Claims. One of these, Colonel
Alexander Jephson, member of Parliament for Trim, disclosed the
whole plot to Sir Theophilus Jones two days before the time fixed for
its execution. Jones was living at Lucan, of which he disputed the
ownership with the Sarsfield family, and was walking near the bridge
looking at Colonel Jeffreys' troop when Jephson appeared and asked
him about his land case. Jones said the trial was fixed for June 17,
and that he hoped to succeed. Jephson said he would be beaten but
would recover the estate in 7000 years. After this apocalyptic speech
he asked for a private interview, distrusting Jeffreys, who had been
heard to say that the Commissioners were just men. They went into
the House together, Jones promising secrecy provided his visitor's
suggestions were just and honest. Jephson laid his hand on his sword,
which he had not worn for thirteen years, declared that he and his
friends were going to Dublin 'resolved to adventure their lives' for
the preservation of the English. Having a wife and thirteen children
he had taken the precaution to make a will, but had no doubt of being
able to seize Dublin Castle, Cork, Limerick, Waterford, and Clonmel.
The conspirators had plenty of money ready in Dublin, some of which
probably came from Holland, and 20,000 Scots excommunicated by the
Bishop of Down and other prelates were ready to take the field in two
days. The regular army would doubtless follow as soon as they had
circulated their scheme, of which thousands of copies were already in
print. Sir Henry Ingoldsby would appear in Dublin at the head of 1000
horse as soon as the revolutionary flag was hoisted on the Castle. All
soldiers who joined would have their arrears at once paid in full,
and all the English would be restored to their lands as they stood on
May 7, 1659. The solemn league and covenant would be enforced once
more with the help of many sympathising ministers who then went about
in periwigs, and no popery would be tolerated. Jephson was to arrest
Clancarty and Fitzpatrick, and the Lord Lieutenant to be civilly
treated as a prisoner. There was to be no bloodshed and no plunder, but
by peaceful means he had no doubt that they would have everything in
their power long before seven thousand years. Jones himself was to be
_Generalissimo_. Sir Theophilus wrote everything down at once and the
next morning carried the news to Ormonde.[34]

Philip Alden, one of the chief conspirators, gave full information,
and his escape from the Castle was probably connived at. He was an old
adherent of Ludlow and kept up a correspondence with him to prevent
suspicion.

[Sidenote: Failure of the plot.]

[Sidenote: Escape of Blood.]

The 21st of May, after at least one postponement, was fixed for the
attack on the Castle. Blood's plan, which he had been nine months
hatching, was for six men to enter by the main gate at six in the
morning and make their way to the back entrance in Ship Street, where
some confederates were to be in waiting with a basket of bread. The
loaves were to be dropped at the gate and in the confusion Blood was
to rush in with 100 men and make himself master of the Castle. Nearly
300 old officers would be ready to clear the streets. The conspirators
met about nine o'clock the night before at the White Hart in Patrick
Street, where it was intended that there should be a large gathering
before morning, but the landlady took fright and declared that if they
did not disperse she would give the alarm to the Lord Lieutenant. This
seems to have prevented the attempt, but Ormonde was already warned and
prepared for any event. Blood escaped through Ulster and a proclamation
appeared at once announcing the discovery of the plot, followed two
days later by another, in which several conspirators were named and
100_l._ offered for the apprehension of any one of them. Many arrests
were made, and the excited state of feeling may be gathered from what
happened when the first batch of prisoners were arraigned. A soldier
was killed by a musket accidentally discharged outside, and the fear
of a rescue caused such a panic that the judges were near leaving
the bench. Jephson was found guilty along with Colonel Edward Warren,
Captain Thompson, and a Presbyterian clergyman named Lecky. The first
three were executed a few days later, Jephson making a full confession
and laying all blame on the vile Papists. Again there was an alarm and
great confusion, the tradesmen beginning to shut up their shops, but
the Sheriff and his guard restored order so that Warren's speech could
be heard. He talked of the good old cause 'which now lieth in the dust
and some days would have terrified the greatest monarchs.' Thompson
also spoke, saying he was fooled by Blood, praying for the King and
dying a Church of England man.[35]

[Sidenote: Presbyterians only slightly implicated.]

The Rev. William Lecky, who was Blood's brother-in-law, feigned madness
after conviction so that sentence of death could not be passed on him.
He perhaps hoped that Massereene and Speaker Mervyn would be willing
and able to protect him, but if so he was disappointed. After nearly
six months' confinement he escaped out of Newgate prison disguised as
a woman, his fetters having been filed off by two men also in female
attire, but was caught again, sentenced, and hanged. His efforts to
bring other Presbyterian ministers into the plot had little success,
great as the discontent was. Many of them suffered detention, but only
two, Andrew McCormick and John Crookshanks, seem to have been really
implicated. They fled to Scotland and were both killed at Rullion
Green in 1666. The most important person affected in Ulster was Major
Alexander Staples, by whose means the conspirators hoped to possess
Londonderry. Staples was in prison for a year, but having been active
in the King's restoration he received a pardon, and the same indulgence
was extended to Shapcote, by whose example he had been guided. In
Munster there was an attempt to tamper with the soldiers, but Orrery,
with the help of his kinsman the Bishop of Cork, had no difficulty in
dealing with the malcontents. In Connaught it was reported that Ludlow
had actually arrived, and some suspected officers fitted out a ship
nominally to search for the enchanted island of Brasil. They were taken
at the Arran islands and discharged as 'ridiculously enthusiastic'
dupes. Ludlow was at Vevay all the time, though rumours of his coming
were rife long afterwards. He was in constant danger from Royalist
assassins, one of whom, an Irishman named Riordan, ultimately succeeded
in killing John Lisle.[36]

[Sidenote: The Marquis of Antrim's case.]

Nothing caused more alarm among the Adventurers and the English
generally than the judgment of the Commissioners declaring Antrim
innocent. Much of his property was in possession of Massereene and
of other soldiers and Adventurers who knew how to make themselves
heard, and the case may have had something to say to the Castle plot.
Within the meaning of the Act of Settlement Antrim was certainly not
innocent, for he had lived long in the rebels' quarters, worked for
Rinuccini against Ormonde, and afterwards been Cromwell's pensioner. He
had, however, raised men who formed the nucleus of Montrose's force,
though he did not go with them himself as agreed, and though the number
fell far short of what he had promised. He had been ruined by his
extravagance at Court long before 1641, and his creditors, some of whom
were secured by a mortgage, naturally maintained that if the men in
possession were put out their claims should be preferred to those of
the nominal owner. At first there was no inclination to treat Antrim
favourably, and when he came to London soon after the Restoration he
was imprisoned in the Tower by the King's special order at the instance
of the Commissioners of the Irish Convention, who impugned his conduct
during the war, and he was also charged with having libelled the late
King by suggesting his complicity in the Irish rebellion. His creditors
would have arrested him if the Government had not. No evidence was
offered, and at the end of March 1661 bail was accepted for his
appearance before the Irish Council, Lords Moore, Dillon, and Taaffe
being bound for him in the sum of 20,000_l._ He appeared in Dublin
accordingly, was under restraint there for a short time, and was then
bailed by orders from England. All the documents were forwarded and the
case was committed by the Irish Council to Attorney-General Domvile and
Solicitor-General Temple.[37]

[Sidenote: Queen Henrietta Maria favours Antrim.]

Charles had at first refused to see Antrim and showed no disposition to
favour him. By the Act of Settlement he was placed on the same footing
as Lord Netterville, who had to go before the Commissioners and failed
to obtain a decree of innocence. Pressure in his favour was however
applied by Queen Henrietta Maria, acting no doubt under the influence
of Jermyn, now Earl of St. Albans. At first her advocacy had not much
effect, and she was too cautious to write strongly in her own name
though she entreated Ormonde to 'forsake in part his own sense which
will most singularly oblige her.' She was above all anxious that the
case should be entirely settled in England. Antrim had been sent to
Ireland nevertheless, and when it was proposed to pass a special Act
in his favour, Ormonde found his whole Council against it and declared
that there was not the slightest chance of getting such a measure
through the House of Commons. Moreover, Antrim had put in his claim of
innocence. If he succeeded, no further legislation was wanted; if he
failed, an Act to exonerate him would be unjust to other Adventurers
and soldiers. An investigation was made by a Committee of the English
Privy Council, of which both Clarendon and St. Albans were members.
Ormonde and Anglesey, who best knew what could be said against Antrim,
were absent in Ireland, and the report was favourable to him. The
Chancellor, who admitted that he had always disliked him, did not think
that he could be rightly condemned 'except you have somewhat against
him which we do not know; and that it is strange that you have never
sent the information to us; for we know the King was not more inclined
towards him than law and justice required.' As it was, and in the
absence of further information from the Irish Council, His Majesty
wrote to them declaring his belief in Antrim's innocency and desiring
them to transmit his letters to the Commissioners. Several documents,
he said, had been produced which showed that the late King was 'well
pleased with what the marquess had done, after he had done it, and
approved the same.' He added that Antrim's English creditors were very
unwilling to lose their security by leaving his great estate in the
hands of Adventurers and soldiers 'who have advanced very small sums
thereon.' The Lord Lieutenant and Council hesitated to transmit the
letter to the Commissioners on the ground that the King had not all the
facts before him, that Antrim had notoriously sided with the nuncio,
prevented the Confederates from sending the stipulated 10,000 men to
England, and opposed the peaces of 1646 and 1648. Antrim's friends at
Court then procured a second letter from the King addressed to the
Commissioners of Claims directly, but containing the same matter as the
first, and so matters stood when the case came on for hearing.[38]

[Sidenote: A King's letter held superior to an Act of Parliament.]

Rainsford presided in the Court of Claims, and wished to find Antrim
innocent at once upon the King's letter only and without hearing
any evidence. Dering objected to this, and the case proceeded, but
Rainsford frequently interrupted saying that it was waste of time
and that the letter covered all. At last it was proposed first to
refer the case back to the King, then to adjourn it, and then to
give further time for the production of the Council's answer to the
King's letter. All these expedients were rejected by a majority and
Antrim was adjudged innocent by four votes to three. According to the
evidence he was clearly disqualified under the Act of Settlement which
the Commissioners were sworn to administer, and their decree rested
entirely on the King's letter.[39]

[Sidenote: 'Murder will out.']

[Sidenote: Antrim is restored.]

At the moment of this trial Roger Lestrange was appointed surveyor of
the press, and his attention was very soon attracted to a pamphlet
printed in London but sent from Ireland under the title of 'Murder
will out,' in which it is maintained that 'the King's letter takes all
imputations from Antrim and lays them totally upon his own father.'
The writer, whose name has never become known, said he was a young man
and may well have been one of the junior counsel present. There can be
no doubt that Charles I. did often communicate with the Irish through
Antrim, but there is no evidence of his complicity in the rebellion
itself, though he may have been quite ready to use and increase
Strafford's army and to make himself master of Dublin during the months
preceding the actual outbreak. The pamphlet, however, made a great stir
in England and was very useful to the extreme Protestant party. Charles
was much in the habit of signing important papers without knowing
their contents, but he now had this important letter read over to him
in full Council along with the hostile petition of the Adventurers
and soldiers. Ormonde had already complained that the restoration of
over 100,000 acres to Antrim would falsify all calculations as to the
amount of land available, nor could he naturally be much inclined to
favour the man who had thwarted him on every possible occasion during
the Irish war. Ultimately Antrim regained his estate through a proviso
in the Act of Explanation, repudiating the decree of innocence, and
setting forth that the marquis had since pleaded guilty to prevent a
new trial. Certain quit-rents imposed by that measure--and on such
an enormous tract of land they must have amounted to a considerable
sum--were granted by the King to St. Albans, and no doubt that was the
reward for Henrietta Maria's interference. Her favourite is described
by Evelyn as having 'lived a most easy life, in plenty even abroad,
while his Majesty was a sufferer ... a prudent old courtier and much
enriched since his Majesty's return.'[40]

[Sidenote: The Bill of Explanation.]

The first Bill of Explanation promoted by the Irish Parliament having
been promptly rejected by the English Government, Ormonde and his
Council were directed to prepare another. This was drawn by Rainsford
and sent away at the end of September. Amendments to it followed a few
days later, and Rainsford, who apparently had not had exactly his own
way, sent over a separate draft by the same messenger. Consideration
of the Bill was deferred until Sir Thomas Clarges arrived with these
additional papers, but Richard Talbot gave out that the delay was his
doing. Rainsford, Beverley, and Brodrick were sent for at once, and
Churchill was allowed to follow at the end of the year. The Bill came
before the Council in the middle of November, and was explained by
Finch. Sir Nicholas Plunket was at once heard in reply, but admitted
that the Solicitor-General had anticipated most of his objections.
After this, though there was much discussion in Council, the Bill
hung fire for months. Bristol's attack on Clarendon and the stress of
parliamentary work generally delayed the despatch of Irish business and
gave time for countless intrigues. 'There are very few,' Clarendon
told Ormonde, 'who have spent a few months in Ireland and return hither
who do not understand Ireland and the several interests there better
than you.' All parties were heard by April 1664, and as Clarendon had
long foreseen the King then found it necessary to send for the Lord
Lieutenant. He went over accordingly in May, leaving his son Ossory as
Deputy. Orrery reached London about the same time, and for some months
the scene of action was there, while Ossory kept Ireland quiet without
much difficulty. 'He is winningly civil to all,' his grandmother wrote
'and yet keeps that distance that belongs to his place, and manages his
affairs with judgment and care.'[41]

[Sidenote: Object of the Bill.]

[Sidenote: Dissatisfaction of Clarendon.]

The Act of Explanation was not intended to alter anything in the Act of
Settlement, but only to clear up doubts and supply omissions. Ormonde
repeatedly declared that almost any permanent arrangement would be
better than none, Ireland being a prey to uncertainty in the meantime.
There was not land enough to satisfy everybody and it was necessary
that each party should sacrifice something. In Ireland the English
party had agreed to surrender one-sixth of what the Act of Settlement
gave them, but the Irish agents in London thought this too little, and
it was then arranged that 1,800,000 Irish acres of profitable land
should be assigned to the English and the rest to the Irish. The latter
being still dissatisfied, the English party consented to have the
one-sixth raised to one-third, and upon that basis the Bill was settled
by Finch with the help of a committee consisting of the Duke of Ormonde
and of all the Irish Privy Councillors then in London, including
Orrery and Anglesey, with the Commissioners of Claims excepting Smith,
who seems not to have left Ireland. Clarendon wished the Bill to be
strictly explanatory and opposed all provisos in favour of particular
persons, as he had done in the case of the Act of Settlement, and all
material alterations in the draft sent from Ireland. 'To what purpose,'
he said, 'is Poynings' Act that all Acts shall be transmitted from
thence hither if we under pretence of mending an Act shall graft new
matter into it that hath not the least relation to the matter prepared
there.' Both he and Ormonde were opposed to such provisos. But he was
overruled, for Charles's good nature or indolence had induced him
to give many promises, which had to be redeemed. 'The first thing a
King should learn,' said Temple after some experience of the reigning
monarch's ways, 'is to say No, so resolutely as never to be asked
twice, nor once importunately.' That lesson was never learned by
Charles II., and the wrangle about the interests of particular persons
continued for nearly a year after Ormonde's arrival in England.[42]

[Sidenote: Provisions of the Bill agreed to.]

The Act of Explanation contains 234 clauses and occupies 136 folio
pages. Forfeited lands were vested in the Crown as before, but
decisions actually given under the former Act were confirmed. There
was, however, no attempt to provide for further decrees of innocence,
the power to grant which had expired on August 21, 1663. There had been
over 800 decrees, but Plunket and his friends alleged that 8000 cases
had been unheard for want of time, and Finch allowed that there were
about 5000 such claims, including several that had been entered twice.
By the Act of Settlement officers and soldiers were protected as to
lands in their possession on May 7, 1659, but some doubts had arisen
as to whether this did not exclude those who had left the army between
that date and November 30, 1660, and it was now decreed that there was
no such exclusion. It was laid down that Protestants should be first
provided for, 'of whom his Majesty ever had and still hath greatest
care and consideration in the settlement of this his kingdom,' and all
Adventurers, officers, and soldiers were confirmed as to two-thirds
of what they had held at the former date. Protestant purchasers of
land from the transplanted in Connaught and Clare were confirmed, but
Adventurers who claimed under the doubling ordinances of the Long
Parliament had to be contented with the equivalent of what they had
actually advanced. Of the thirty-eight persons specially named as
restorable in the Act of Settlement, seventeen had received nothing,
the stock of land available for reprisals having been exhausted.
To these were now joined sixteen who had been mentioned but less
particularly in the former Act, twenty-one fresh names were added, and
the whole fifty-four were declared entitled to their principal houses
and 2000 acres of land adjoining them. Very many of the provisos to
which Clarendon objected were nevertheless included. The administration
of the new Act and of the 'matters of the former Act which remain in
force' was entrusted to five members of the former commission, Chief
Justice Smith, Sir Edward Dering, Sir Alan Brodrick, Sir Winston
Churchill, and Colonel Edward Cooke. Rainsford, now a judge in England,
and Beverley, a master of requests, were very obnoxious to the English
party in Ireland and were not reappointed, ostensibly by reason of
their official duties. It was not till May 1665 that the Act was ready
for transmission to Ireland, where it might be passed or rejected but
not altered.[43]

[Sidenote: Ormonde brings the Bill to Ireland.]

The Court was at Salisbury in August 1665, and there the Great Seal
was affixed to the Bill of Explanation. Business was at this time much
interrupted by the plague, and some of the discussion had taken place
at Sion House and Hampton Court. Ormonde set out about the middle
of the month, stayed some days at Bristol, where as Lord Lieutenant
of Somersetshire he was occupied in settling local disputes, and on
September 2, having crossed the Severn at Gloucester and the Wye at
Hereford, sailed from Milford Haven in the _Dartmouth_ frigate, and
after only eight hours at sea arrived at Duncannon next morning,
where he found the Duchess and his two sons with their wives. The
distinguished party were ill lodged and fed at the fort, whence they
went to Waterford, and on the third day to Kilkenny, where the Lord
Lieutenant stayed for six weeks. On October 17 he entered Dublin amid
great rejoicings, the citizens marching in procession. The garrison
were reinforced by a troop of mounted volunteers in handsome grey
uniforms with scarlet and silver facings, mythological figures appeared
at various points, and claret ran freely from a fountain in the Corn
Market. Every available coach was in attendance, and when these
vehicles were at last got out of the way fireworks were discharged in
the streets.[44]

[Sidenote: The Bill in the Irish Parliament.]

After the adjournment of the Irish Parliament on May 25, 1663, the
recess was prolonged by almost innumerable prorogations until October
26, 1665, when the Houses were at last allowed to meet. In order to
observe their temper Ormonde withheld the Bill of Explanation for some
days, during which he ordered it to be printed, and the Commons at
once took up the Castle plot which had been exposed after their last
sitting. A committee was appointed who had the documentary evidence
before them, and Robert Shapcote, the member of the House chiefly
implicated, was twice heard in his own defence. The result was that he
and six other members were expelled and declared incapable of sitting
in any Parliament, their further prosecution being left to the ordinary
course of law. The conspirators' declaration written by Blood was
ordered, if the Lord Lieutenant should think fit, to be burnt by the
hangman in the most public part of Dublin. The Bill of Explanation was
read a first time on November 11 and a second time ten days later.
Petitions were then presented from John Fitzgerald, Knight of Kerry, a
Roman Catholic, and Captain John Magill of Down, a Protestant, whose
estates were declared forfeited to the Crown by special words in
the Bill. Counsel were heard at the Bar and the documentary evidence
was referred to a select committee, who reported that the Knight was
'a very well deserving innocent person' and the captain 'a very well
deserving innocent Protestant.' The House then resolved that they
would entertain these cases after the Bill had been read a third
time. Another committee was named to criticise the Bill, the chief
doubt being as to the sufficiency of the vesting clause. Those who
thought themselves aggrieved by the decisions under the first Act were
determined to leave nothing to chance. The third reading was taken on
November 29, and the House then proceeded to formulate its objections
in the shape of a petition to the Lord Lieutenant.[45]

[Sidenote: Two hard cases.]

The most important question raised by the Commons' petition concerned
the interpretation of words in the first clause, which vested in the
King all lands 'seized or sequestered by reason of the late horrid
rebellion which began on October 23, 1641.' Some lawyers held that it
was necessary to prove in each case separately that the owner of land
on that fatal day had been actually engaged in rebellion, a doctrine
which shook the title of all the men in possession. There was also
some doubt whether the new proprietors would hold their land in fee or
as tenants for life, but the Irish judges had decided in the former
sense. The Lord Lieutenant, first orally and then in writing, answered,
promising that doubts should be decided in a manner agreeable to the
parliamentary majority and to the intention of those who had passed the
Bill, which could only be amended by a subsidiary Act. Any attempt at
fresh legislation was dangerous where so many discontented persons were
involved, and the rock was avoided by asking the opinion of the English
judges on the first point. Ten of them, including Sir Orlando Bridgeman
and Rainsford, the late commissioner of claims, held that the disposal
of land within the meaning of the Act would of itself be good evidence
that it was vested in the King, and that the burden of proof lay upon
the party whose former property had been seized or sequestered. As to
Fitzgerald and Magill, whose lands had never been seized but who were
treated as if they had been, the House of Commons were of opinion that
they were innocent--nothing having been proved or even stated against
them. Counsel for the Knight of Kerry said their client was 'of English
extraction, never attainted, a matter rare in an Irish pedigree, but
constantly loyal.' In these hard cases Ormonde promised to do his best,
and this was something more than a common official answer since clause
159 provided that doubtful points might be decided by an order in
council having the force of law.'[46]

[Sidenote: Violent opposition to the Bill;]

[Sidenote: but it passes without a division.]

There was much discontent, especially among those who wished to fish in
the troubled waters of a new Bill. It was, however, decided by 93 to
74 that the Lord Lieutenant's answer was satisfactory, but a violent
debate took place upon the question that the Bill do now pass. Strong
language was hurled across the floor and many swords were half-drawn.
The December sun set upon a scene of confusion, and when candles were
called for they were quickly blown out by the opposition. Some shouted
that what they had gotten with the hazard of their lives should not be
lost with Ayes and Noes. Others called for an adjournment, and 'between
you and me,' says an eye-witness, the members, who were hungry as
well as angry, 'wanted very little of going to cuffs in the dark.' A
spontaneous adjournment followed, but the Bill passed quietly two days
later. A division was challenged by Archer Upton--who held some of
Antrim's land and lost all by his reinstatement--but he did not find
a seconder. Orrery kept his men so well in hand that only one Munster
member had voted in the minority, and he was a great advocate for the
doubling ordinance. Churchill attributed the final triumph entirely to
Ormonde, who 'by an eloquence peculiar to himself seemingly unconcerned
but certainly extemporary, so charmed their fears and jealousies
that they that were most displeased with the bill were yet so pleased
with the overtures he had made them that when it came to pass it had
only one negative.' It passed the Lords without a single dissentient
voice.[47]

FOOTNOTES:

[29] State Papers, _Ireland_, July 18, October 24, 1662. The
Commissioners are given in 15th Report of Record Commissioners (1825),
p. 34. Act for enlargement of time, _Irish Statutes_, 14 & 15 Car. II.
cap. 12 (Royal assent September 27, 1662).

[30] _Irish Commons Journal_, February 10, 1662-3; Clarendon to
Ormonde, February 28, in _Carte Transcripts_, vol. xlvii., and Lister's
_Life of Clarendon_, iii. 239.

[31] Speech of Sir Audley Mervyn delivered to the Duke of Ormonde in
the presence chamber in Dublin Castle, February 13, 1662-3, in _Irish
Commons Journal_, i. 617-630. The Speaker was ordered to have his
speech printed and entered in the Journals.

[32] _Egerton MS._, p. 789, gives all the decrees of the Court of
Claims, January 13, 1662-3, to Friday, August 21, 1663--Innocent
Papists 566, Innocent Protestants 141, Nocent 113. Mervyn's speech
(14 folio pages) in _Irish Commons Journal_, February 10, 1663; Lord
Lieutenant's letter, _ib._ March 10; proposed bills, _ib._ April 10.
Ormonde to Clarendon, February 21, March 7 and 12, April 8, 1662-3, to
the King, March 28, _Carte MSS._, vol. cxliii.; Clarendon to Ormonde,
February 28 and April 18, _Carte Transcripts_, vol. xlvii.

[33] Ormonde to the King, May 8, 1663, _Carte MSS._, vol. cxliii.; to
Bennet, _ib._ June 10 and August 22.

[34] A narrative by Sir Theophilus Jones, &c., _Trinity College MSS._,
_f._ 3, 18 (no. 47). This paper is unsigned but appears to be the
original draft in Jones's hand. Account of the Irish Plot in _Ormonde
Papers_, 1st series, ii. 251; Firth's _Ludlow_, appx. 450, 475. _Life
and death of the famed Mr. Blood_, London, 1680. _The Horrid Conspiracy
of impenitent traitors_, &c., London, 1663.

[35] State Papers, _Ireland_, May-July 1663, particularly James
Tanner's deposition, May 31, Sir George Lane to Bennet, June 25, and
Robert Lye to Williamson, July 16. The last is a graphic description of
the execution by an eye-witness. Lord Conway to Rawdon, November 18,
1663, in _Rawdon Papers_.

[36] Colonel Vernon to Williamson, July 1, 1663, in State Papers,
_Ireland_; Lane to Bennet (with inclosure), _ib._ November 18; Pardons
of Staples and Shapcote, _ib._ August 18, 1664. Patrick Adair's _True
Narrative_, chap. xvii.; Reid's _Presbyterian Church_, chap. xviii.;
Lang's _Hist. of Scotland_. Orrery to the Munster officers, May 25,
1663, in his _State Letters_, vol. i.; Sir Thomas Clarges to Ormonde,
May 15, in _Carte Transcripts_, vol. xxxii.; Firth's _Ludlow_, appx. vi.

[37] State Papers, _Ireland_, from June 22, 1661, to May 8, 1662.
Clarendon's _Life_, pp. 259-267.

[38] Carte's _Ormonde_, ii. 277-284. Clarendon's _Life_, Cont.,
262-269. Clarendon to Ormonde, July 18, 1663, _Carte Transcripts_, vol.
xxxii., and August 1, _ib._ vol. xxxiii. The King's letter of July
13 to the Lord Lieutenant and Council is in _Somers Tracts_, v. 626.
Documents calendared, State Papers, _Ireland_, under August 22.

[39] Dering's notes of the evidence are printed in Hill's _Macdonnells
of Antrim_, pp. 309-317, and the decree of innocence, _ib._ appx. 11.
The decree is signed by the majority, Rainsford, Beverley, Brodrick,
and Churchill. Dering, Smith, and Cooke, forming the minority, do not
sign. Ormonde saw the danger of inferring that Antrim acted under the
order of Charles I. Writing to Arlington on August 22, 1663, he says
it was argued but too plausibly 'that the King may as well declare any
of them who have most contributed to his restoration to be nocent ...
without proof as my Lord of Antrim to be innocent against proof ... no
security in an Act of Parliament,' _Carte MSS._, cxliii. 164.

[40] Act of Explanation, clause 172, s. 99. Arlington to Ormonde,
October 17 and 27, 1663, and January 30, 1663-4, in Tom Brown's
_Miscellanea Aulica_, and Ormonde's answer to the first, October 27,
in _Carte MSS._, vol. cxliii. _Murder will out_, published in London
between August 22 and October 17, and reprinted in _Somers Tracts_,
v. 624. Evelyn's _Diary_, August 18, 1683. Grant of quit-rents to St.
Albans, State Papers, _Ireland_, December 15, 1665. For some of St.
Albans' jobs see Carte's _Ormonde_, ii. 295.

[41] Bennet to Ormonde, October 27, 1663, in _Miscellanea Aulica_, and
November 17 _ib._; Clarendon, February 7, 1663-4, _Carte Transcripts_,
vol. xlvii. Lady Thurles to Ormonde, December 17, 1664, _Carte MSS._,
vol. ccxv.; J. Hughes to Williamson, 1664-5, State Papers, _Ireland_.

[42] Clarendon to Ormonde, April 16, 1664, January 30 and March 18,
1665-6, _Carte Transcripts_, vol. xlvii. Carte's _Ormonde_, ii. 302,
and Finch's report, _ib._ appx. no. 91. Temple's _Essay_, written in
1668. Clarendon's _Life_, Cont., 276, where one-third should be read
for one-fourth.

[43] _Irish Statutes_, 17 & 18 Car. II. cap. 2, especially clauses 4,
5, 6, 148, 159. Finch's report in Carte's _Ormonde_, ii. appx. 91.

[44] Arlington to Ormonde, August 19, 1665, in _Miscellanea Aulica_.
Sir Nicholas Armourer to Arlington, September 11, State Papers,
_Ireland_. Robert Leigh to Williamson, October 18, _ib._ Carte's
_Ormonde_, book vi. Armourer calls Lady Ossory 'the best woman in this
world.'

[45] _Irish Commons Journal_, October 26 to November 29, 1665.

[46] The petition is in _Irish Commons Journal_, December 11, and
Ormonde's answer in State Papers, _Ireland_, December 15. Opinion of
the English judges, _ib._ February 15, 1665-6.

[47] _Irish Commons Journal_, December 16-18, 1665. Leigh to
Williamson, December 16, State Papers, _Ireland_; Orrery to Arlington,
_ib._; Churchill to Arlington, December 27, _ib._




CHAPTER XLIII

ORMONDE AND THE IRISH HIERARCHY


[Sidenote: Ormonde a consistent Royalist.]

Loyalty to the Crown of England was Ormonde's leading principle,
and this is the key to his eventful life. He surrendered Dublin to
the Parliament rather than to the Irish because he regarded the
usurping power as the State for the time being. Later on and in still
more desperate circumstances he was forced to ally himself with
the Roman Catholic clergy, but he steadily refused to destroy the
value of the reversion, and events proved that it was impossible to
reconcile the claims of the Vatican with those of a sovereign who was
constitutionally the supreme head of an Established Protestant Church.
The idea of a free Church in a free State had not yet dawned upon
Europe, and when the monarchy was restored the legal position of the
Roman Catholics remained as it had been before the civil war. After a
short struggle, which revealed great dissensions among those who sought
relief, the recusancy laws were left untouched.

[Sidenote: The Roman Catholics at the Restoration.]

[Sidenote: Peter Walsh and Orrery.]

At the Restoration the dispossessed Irish Roman Catholics, especially
those who had followed the King's fortunes abroad, looked to Ormonde
as the only man who might be willing and able to espouse their cause.
As far back as 1653 Peter Walsh, Rinuccini's determined opponent,
was licensed by the Irish Government to assist in enrolling and
transporting 4000 men for the Spanish service on condition of ceasing
while in Ireland to exercise his office as priest. Later on he was
allowed to live quietly in London, and when Ormonde returned he wrote
to him on behalf of his co-religionists. The letter was published in
the following year, and Orrery answered it. Walsh argued that the
Irish were covered by the indemnity promised in the peace of January
1649, but Orrery truly answered that it could not cover offences of
later date, and that the articles in question had been generally
infringed, particularly by the excommunication of Ormonde and his
expulsion from Ireland. Walsh naturally maintained that the rebels of
Ireland, considered as rebels, were much less guilty than those of
England, that many had expiated their fault by repentance and faithful
service, and that the innocent or at least penitent majority ought
not to suffer for the crimes of a few. Orrery, on the contrary, urged
that the Roman Catholics of Ireland had been in rebellion over and
over again during the last three reigns, while the Protestants had
defended the royal authority, and that Ormonde had understood the real
bearings of the question when he surrendered Dublin; and later when
he allowed the loyal Protestants to make terms with 'Ireton himself,
esteeming them safer with that real regicide so accompanied than with
those pretended anti-regicides so principled.' Even if he had wished
it Ormonde could not have expelled the bulk of the Adventurers and
soldiers who were in possession of the forfeited land. What he did do
was to obtain tolerable terms for a great many Roman Catholics, and
it may well be that it was not always the most meritorious who came
best off. The Celtic population had begun the quarrel, and they were
the least considered. Walsh himself was always inclined to draw a
distinction in favour of the Anglo-Irish.[48]

[Sidenote: Richard Bellings.]

Richard Bellings, whose opposition to Rinuccini had been no less
strenuous than Walsh's, left Ireland with Ormonde in 1650. He had
married a Butler and was always on good terms with the head of that
family. At Paris he was engaged in controversy with Bishop French,
John Ponce, and others of the ultramontane party who did not forgive
his hostility to the nuncio. His knowledge of papal diplomacy and
influence among the Irish refugees abroad no doubt made him useful to
Hyde, who befriended him after the Restoration, when he was at first
in great difficulties. Early in 1662 Clarendon asked the King if he
intended to 'allow Dick Bellings anything to live upon, or that he
shift as he can.' Fox was thereupon ordered to pay him 400_l._ a year,
and he ultimately got back all or most of his Irish property, though
some difficulties were made about the merits of one who had been
secretary to the council of rebels. In 1663 he was sent to Rome to
solicit a cardinal's hat for Aubigny, and more privately to take what
steps were possible to bring about an understanding between Alexander
VII. and the statutory head of the Church of England. He failed in both
objects but without forfeiting the confidence of Ormonde and Clarendon,
neither of whom perhaps were fully in the secret. Evelyn met him at
Cornbury in 1664, and both before and after his Italian journey he
tried to help the Lord Lieutenant in his dealings with the Irish Roman
Catholics.[49]

[Sidenote: His appeal to Ormonde.]

In the summer of 1661, when the Royal declaration was known but before
the meeting of the Irish Parliament which was to make it law, Bellings
wrote from Dublin to Ormonde, who was still in London and not yet Lord
Lieutenant. The letter is essentially a plea for the Anglo-Irish who
never sought foreign help as long as there was a settled government.
There is not a word about the Ulster settlement, and the conduct of
Borlase and Parsons 'who favoured the party opposing his Majesty,'
is represented as the beginning of troubles. The new settlers, or
most of them, were 'the scum of England,' and the result of their
supremacy would be to people Ireland with 'a generation of mechanic
bagmen who are strangers to all principles of religion and loyalty.'
Ormonde's connections and natural allies would be ousted and in time
his own family would suffer. 'The King's faithful subjects, those who
have followed his fortune abroad, all the ancient families in Ireland
and among them your Grace's kindred, your allies and friends will be
made slaves.' Ormonde had saved some and might save more, and he was
reminded that the eyes of Europe were upon him.[50]

[Sidenote: Peter Walsh appointed procurator.]

The Roman Catholics of Ireland had no share in the Restoration: that
by a strange stroke of fortune was the work of their enemies, Coote
and Broghill and the Cromwellian army. Three of their bishops were in
Ireland at the moment and for some time after--namely, Edmund O'Reilly
the Primate, Anthony McGeohegan, Clanricarde's old antagonist, who had
been appointed to Meath, and Eugene Swiney, who had driven Bedell from
Kilmore. The first two were in hiding and the last was bedridden. There
were also three vicars-general and the superiors of the Capuchins,
Dominicans, and Carmelites; and Peter Walsh, who was in London, let
these ecclesiastics know that they would be expected to congratulate
the King and to declare their loyalty. They accordingly appointed
Walsh their procurator with full powers and instructions on behalf
of them all to kiss the sacred hands 'of our most serene lord king
Charles II.,' to congratulate him on his restoration, and to solicit
his favour. The least they thought themselves entitled to expect was
his adherence to the terms agreed on (1648) between Ormonde and the
Confederates. This paper was dated January 1, 1661, and received
by Walsh eight days later. Other signatures were afterwards added,
including those of Oliver Darcy, Bishop of Dromore, and Patrick
Plunket, Bishop of Ardagh. Bishop French sent a proxy from Spain, and
his representative signed the instrument of procuration in September
1662.[51]

[Sidenote: A loyal remonstrance of the Roman Catholic clergy
contemplated.]

[Sidenote: Signatures thereto.]

Armed with this instrument, which does not appear to have been ever
formally withdrawn, Walsh busied himself in London with endeavours
to better the position of his co-religionists. With Orrery and
Mountrath at the head of affairs little could be expected from the
Irish Government, but he was able through Ormonde to bring influence
to bear on the King, and procured the release of about 120 priests,
many of whom had been long in prison, and this without distinction
between the nuncionists and those who adhered to the peace of 1648. He
opened communications with his brethren in Ireland, representing the
necessity of their making some demonstration of loyalty. Bellings was
in Dublin in the winter of 1661, and there drew up a paper founded upon
a petition presented to the Long Parliament at the beginning of the
troubles. The language closely resembles the English oath of allegiance
but without clearly renouncing the Pope's deposing power. The Roman
Catholic clergy of Ireland set forth their hard case and the severe
measures taken against them. In order to show how little they deserve
such misfortunes they fully acknowledge the King's sovereignty in all
civil and temporal affairs and declare their readiness still to do so
'notwithstanding any power or pretension of the Pope.' They 'openly
disclaim and renounce all foreign power, be it either papal or princely
spiritual or temporal' pretending to release them from the obligations
of allegiance. Irrespective of their religion all absolute princes
and supreme governors are recognised as God's lieutenants, and they
repudiate the doctrine that it is lawful for a private person to kill
the Lord's anointed. In conclusion they maintain that their dependence
on the see of Rome in no way interferes with the obedience due to
their lawful sovereign, and they claim his protection in return. This
document, without any signatures, was conveyed to Walsh by Lord Fingall
and communicated to Ormonde, who after two days' delay said that it
might have been stronger but that it would nevertheless be acceptable
if sufficient names were attached. As an anonymous paper it would be
useless. The substance of the document was approved of by the King.
There were in London at the time about thirty Irish priests, and of
these twenty-four, including one bishop, Darcy of Dromore, affixed
their signatures after two days' discussion. Others followed, both
in London and Ireland. Four or five more objected to the expediency
of the Remonstrance but not to its contents. Walsh and his friend
Caron published pamphlets in the same sense, which at first were well
received; and between London and Dublin 121 Irishmen of position,
including twenty-one peers, signed the Remonstrance. But at the
beginning of 1663 the movement had long been hanging fire, and Ormonde
hinted plainly that those who expected favour should give their names
without further delay.'[52]

[Sidenote: Primate O'Reilly opposes the Remonstrance,]

[Sidenote: which is discountenanced at Rome.]

Primate O'Reilly was summoned to Rome in 1660, and arrived there at the
end of 1661 soon after the Remonstrance was signed. He stayed three
years, so that he knew, even if he did not inspire, the proceedings of
the Roman Court in the matter. As a partisan of Rinuccini and opponent
of the peace of 1648 he had been accused of being a firebrand, and the
clergy of his province now testified in his favour as an earnest and
devoted priest, who had suffered many things for denying the royal
supremacy. Ever since his arrival in Ireland in October 1659 he had
'lurked in woods, mountain caves, and similar hiding-places, with no
bed but straw or hay and a cloak thrown over it, without comforts,
contented with coarse bread, butter and flesh, drinking beer, water
or milk, without wine except for the sacrament, and all day without a
fire.' He was careful not to commit himself by public utterances at
Rome, but the action of the Curia was not long delayed. In July 1662,
just as Ormonde was starting to assume the government of Ireland,
Jerome de Vecchiis, the internuncio at Brussels, who had authority in
the Irish Church, wrote to Bishop Darcy and to Friar Duff, who had
also signed the Remonstrance, declaring that it contained propositions
already condemned by the Holy See. Both letters fell into Clarendon's
hands. Still more strongly, and on the same ground, did Francesco
Barberini blame the Irish gentlemen in the name of Pope and Propaganda.
Before the year was out the theological faculty at Louvain condemned
the Remonstrance, declaring that the guilt of sacrilege would rest
alike on those who signed it in future or refused to revoke signatures
already given. And this was significantly dated 'on the day consecrated
to the martyrdom of the glorious pontiff Thomas of Canterbury,'
formerly Primate of England.[53]

[Sidenote: The Remonstrance hangs fire.]

[Sidenote: Royal and papal claims found incompatible.]

Out of more than two thousand priests in Ireland, only seventy signed
the Remonstrance, and but sixteen of these were of the secular clergy.
Among the fifty-four Regulars all but ten were Franciscans. The lay
signatures were 164. Even in his own order the majority soon appeared
to be against Walsh, and ultimately agreed to a much weaker declaration
of their own, which contained no definite mention of the Pope and was
at once rejected by Ormonde as inadequate. Having made but little
progress in Ireland, Walsh went to London in August 1664, and shortly
afterwards heard that the internuncio had come there secretly. A
meeting was arranged 'in the back-yard at Somerset House,' De Vecchiis
being accompanied by Patrick Maginn, one of the Queen's chaplains, and
Walsh by his friend Caron. In argument the Roman representative was
perhaps no match for the two learned Franciscans, but he took his stand
on the fact of the Remonstrance being condemned by the Pope. To the
assertion that His Holiness had been misinformed, he answered angrily
that he was the informant--_ego informavi_. Caron continuing to urge
that the Remonstrance contained nothing contrary to Catholic doctrine;
he answered, 'so you think, but the Apostolic See thinks differently.'
He seems nevertheless to have really wished for some accommodation, and
suggested that a papal bull might be issued ordering the Irish to obey
the King on pain of excommunication. This was plainly inadmissible as
it made civil allegiance depend on the Pope; and the internuncio then
proposed that His Holiness should create as many bishops as the King
chose to name, and that these prelates should have power to banish from
Ireland all clergymen whom they found disobedient to their Sovereign.
Walsh liked this idea better than the other, but objected that the
King, if he was a Catholic, could appoint what bishops he liked, but
that he was in fact a Protestant and that the Pope had condemned the
oaths of allegiance and supremacy, while the clergy had to swear
fidelity to him. Moreover, the King could banish rebellious subjects
without any help from Rome, and the total result of the proposed
concordat would be to make ecclesiastics wholly independent of the
Crown. The conference, which lasted three hours, ended in nothing as
such encounters usually do, and De Vecchiis soon returned to Brussels,
but afterwards made another effort in which he was assisted by Aubigny
who still hoped for the red hat. Walsh and Caron were verbally invited
over to Flanders, and to the latter a letter was sent inviting him
to discuss the matter in dispute with his brethren at Brussels and
Louvain, and describing the Remonstrance as a rock of offence (_lapis
scandali_). Caron, who was ill and busy with controversial writing,
refused to go, telling his colleague that he would not have done so in
any case, for that the Court of Rome required a blind submission and
no debate. Walsh was anxious to accept the invitation, and extracted
Ormonde's unwilling consent, but the King forbade him to stir, and
Clarendon reminded him that he was a marked man on account of his
opposition to Rinuccini, that safe conducts might not be regarded
in such a case, and that the fate of Huss might be his. Walsh then
restated his case in two very long letters, and to these he received no
answer.[54]

[Sidenote: A congregation summoned]

Ormonde landed at Waterford on September 3, 1665, bringing the Act of
Explanation with him. Father Maginn, who had been at the Somerset House
interview, travelled with him, and went on to Dublin; while the Lord
Lieutenant stayed at Kilkenny looking after his own affairs and waiting
for the momentous law to be printed. Walsh had crossed by Holyhead and
met Maginn, who offered to solicit subscriptions to the Remonstrance
among his friends in the North, and went to Ulster for that purpose. He
had but little success, and Walsh made up his mind that the only chance
was a national congregation which he had opposed in 1662, chiefly on
the ground that all previous assemblies of the clergy had ended badly
for the Crown. The reasons which now weighed with him were the evident
wish of O'Reilly and others to revisit Ireland, the prospect of war
with France and Holland, and the probability that dangerous intrigues
in Ireland would be defeated if the clergy could be induced to make
a declaration of loyalty. Moreover, he fancied that he had himself
gained influence and popularity by his answer to Orrery's pamphlet.
Bishop Darcy was now dead, but Patrick Plunket, Bishop of Ardagh, who
lived in Dublin with his brother Sir Nicholas, was willing to sign the
letter of invitation, along with Patrick Daly, Oliver Dease, and James
Dempsey, vicars-general of Armagh, Meath, and Dublin. Dempsey was very
reluctant, but his letters demanding a national congregation in 1662
were produced and he submitted. There was a general desire to postpone
the day of meeting, and this did not promise success. Walsh suggested
February, but the winter was objected to. After Easter the clergy would
be collecting their revenue for the year, and 'because horse-meat would
be then scarce, they insisted upon the 11th of June as a time when
the weather being warm and grass of some growth they might travel with
more conveniency.' Walsh had to accept the date, though he foresaw that
time would thus be given to the enemies of his policy at Rome. The
letters of invitation were signed on November 18 but not sent out until
February, and Archbishop Burke of Tuam, who was in Ireland but refused
to attend, observed sarcastically that his summons had been a long time
on the road.[55]

[Sidenote: Ormonde, Walsh, and O'Reilly.]

Walsh had offered to intercede with Ormonde for Archbishop O'Reilly.
This was soon after the Restoration, and the Primate reminded the friar
of his promise when he left Rome in 1665. After some correspondence
O'Reilly addressed the Lord Lieutenant in a very submissive tone.
He 'was the publican standing far off and not daring to lift his
eyes to heaven, who begged for a share of His Majesty's unparalleled
mercies and solemnly promised compliance with his will as became a
faithful subject.' If otherwise, he concluded, 'who am I? but a worm,
the reproach of mankind, the vilitie of the people, a dead dog, a
flea.' This was written before the Congregation was decided on, and
after the invitations had gone out Ormonde gave leave to Walsh to let
the Archbishop know that he might come home safely provided that he
would sign the Remonstrance. Walsh transmitted this assurance in four
separate letters, but only in the second did he mention the condition.
O'Reilly expressly says that this second missive was never received by
him, otherwise he would not have come to Ireland. As it was he wrote
to Walsh wishing success to the expected gathering and enclosing a
letter to the members. The latter was purposely left open, and Walsh
never presented it, for it avoided any approval of the Remonstrance
and suggested that they should devise a fresh one. Walsh, he said,
nevertheless deserved thanks for his pains, and he proposed to
subscribe 13_l._ towards the expenses out of his slender revenue.[56]

Bishop French, as coadjutor to the Bishop of St. Jago, was living
at Compostella in 1665 'well looked upon and enjoying a subsistence
competent and decent for his quality.' Having been a party to
the Jamestown declaration, where all Ormonde's supporters were
excommunicated, and a prime mover in the invitation to Charles of
Lorraine, he did not think it safe to visit Ireland without the
Lord Lieutenant's special leave. Charles II. had refused to see him
at Paris. Walsh liked and respected him though their opinions were
irreconcilable, and Ormonde admitted that he was 'a good man, good
priest, and good bishop, candid and without cheat.' He justified the
Jamestown proceedings though very civil to Ormonde personally, and
regretting former strong language. In refusing to deny the Pope's
deposing power, he was, he said, supported by 'seven saints, including
St. Thomas, seven cardinals, one patriarch, three archbishops, ten
bishops, and thirty-one classical authors with other eminent divines,'
and he challenged Walsh to match this array. Failing to find a passage
from Galicia, he began his journey homewards by land, but a letter from
Walsh reached him at St. Sebastian in which he was advised not to visit
Ireland without having made a complete submission. Expressing surprise
that leave had been given to O'Reilly and refused to him, he went on to
Paris and thence to Belgium, where he spent the rest of his life.[57]

[Sidenote: The Congregation meets, June 1666.]

On June 11 the Congregation met as announced, the Remonstrance having
been previously condemned by the new internuncio Rospigliosi and by
Cardinal Barberini. Besides Walsh himself only three who had signed
it were members of the assembly. The total number present were about
sixty including many vicars-general and provincial heads of religious
orders. There were but two bishops, Plunket of Ardagh and Andrew
Lynch of Kilfenora. The latter was placed in the chair. Nothing
material was done during the first two days, but on the evening of
the second Primate O'Reilly came to Walsh's rooms having just arrived
from Flanders by way of England. He produced letters from Rospigliosi
stigmatising Walsh and Caron as apostates and their supporters as a few
nefarious brethren. The Primate was advised not to go to Ireland, and
in any case to use all his influence against the Remonstrance. He came
accordingly prepared to wreck the Congregation. At his first appearance
there he claimed the chair as primate. Lynch refused to give way, and
all the Armagh clergy followed their archbishop out of the room. An
immediate dissolution seemed imminent, which was no doubt what O'Reilly
wished for, but the chairman held his own, making a declaration that he
claimed no supremacy, and matters were patched up for the time.

[Sidenote: The Remonstrance rejected.]

[Sidenote: The Congregation dissolved.]

From the first it was evident that the Remonstrance would not be
adopted, but it would take a good-sized volume to contain even a
full abstract of Walsh's report. Ormonde employed Bellings as his
intermediary, and adhered to the position that the Congregation had met
only to pass the disputed instrument, that a most unexpected chance
had been given them of showing their loyalty, and that they would
never have such another. No serious motion to that effect was made,
nor would the Congregation entertain the negative proposition that the
Remonstrance contained nothing contrary to the Catholic faith. They
were also required to consent to six propositions of the Sorbonne, the
theological faculty of Paris, promulgated in May 1663 and declared
binding by Louis XIV. in the same year. The first three laid down that
the Pope had no temporal authority over the King, who had no temporal
superior but God, and that his subjects could not be dispensed from
their allegiance on any pretext. The other three declared that the Pope
had no power to depose bishops, that he was not above an oecumenical
council, and that he was not infallible without the consent of the
Church. The Congregation accepted the first three but rejected the
others, and agreed to an act of recognition differing widely from
the original Remonstrance. They expressed loyalty to the King and
repudiated the doctrine 'that any private subject may lawfully kill or
murder the anointed of God, his prince,' but did not mention the Pope
nor abjure his authority, though they declared themselves bound to
resist rebellion or invasion. Ormonde was not satisfied, and no further
progress was made, but those signatories of the original Remonstrance
who happened to be in Dublin made a final effort and expostulated at
great length. The letter was drawn up by Walsh, though he felt it to be
useless, and read out at the Congregation, but had not the slightest
effect. It was signed by fourteen Franciscans, two Dominicans, and
two secular priests. Oliver Plunket afterwards noticed that priests
ordained at Rome did not sign the Remonstrance, its chief support
being in France and Belgium. The assembly offered on two occasions to
compensate Walsh for his trouble and expense since the Restoration,
first by voting a sum of 2000_l._ and afterwards by proposing an annual
subscription for three years. They also declared their readiness to
promote his interest at the Roman Court. Walsh refused all such offers,
and the Lord Lieutenant, seeing that nothing could be got by further
discussion, ordered the Congregation to dissolve themselves on the
fifteenth day, and this was quietly done. 'These twenty years,' was
Ormonde's reflection, 'I had to do with those Irish bishops, I never
found any of them either to speak the truth or to perform their promise
to me; only the Bishop of Clogher (Macmahon) excepted; for during the
little time he lived after his submission to the Peace, and commission
received from me I cannot charge him.'[58]

[Sidenote: Primate O'Reilly and other prelates.]

On the evening of the fourth day Ormonde received Primate O'Reilly
at the Castle. According to Walsh he was the only other person
present, but O'Reilly says Bellings' father was there also and took an
active part in the conversation. It is not easy to reconcile the two
accounts, but it appears from both that the Lord Lieutenant treated his
visitor civilly and that no ground of agreement was found. When the
Congregation separated, the members were free to go where they pleased
except the three bishops whom Ormonde wished to see first. Lynch of
Kilfenora, the late chairman, slipped away quietly to the Continent.
Plunket of Ardagh after a few days was allowed complete liberty, and
he remained in Ireland busied in ordaining a vast number of priests
without much regard to their qualifications. In the meantime the Lord
Lieutenant received information from London which caused him to detain
Primate O'Reilly a little longer. Lord Sandwich, on his journey through
Galicia to Madrid, had heard through Bishop French that O'Reilly was on
his way to Ireland intending to give all the trouble he could. He was
told to have no fear and was not imprisoned, but a guard of soldiers
was told off to prevent him from communicating with those about
him. Ormonde had no good opinion of him and reminded Clarendon that
Arlington had intended to employ him as a spy but thought his services
too dear at 500_l._ He was conveyed at his own request to England
and thence to Calais in charge of city-major Stanley. On reaching
Louvain he wrote to Walsh that he had been fairly treated, but in a
very different strain to Rome. He made the most of his discomforts,
which were no doubt considerable, and said that Stanley was perhaps as
inhuman as the ten leopards of St. Ignatius, bishop and martyr.[59]

[Sidenote: Why the Remonstrance failed.]

'The proceedings at the meeting,' said Ormonde more than fourteen years
later, 'are at large set down in a great book by Peter Walsh. My aim
was to work a division among the Romish clergy, and I believe I had
compassed it, to the great security of the Government and Protestants,
and against the opposition of the Pope, and his creatures and nuncios,
if I had not been removed from the Government, and if direct contrary
counsels and courses had not been taken and held by my successors; of
which some were too indulgent to the whole body of Papists, and others
not much acquainted with any of them, nor considering the advantages
of the division designed. I confess I have never read over Walsh's
book, which is full of a sort of learning I have been little conversant
in; but the doctrine is such as would cost him his life, if he could
be found where the Pope has power.' This was written to his son, but
he had said the same thing to Essex seven years before. No doubt his
recall made a difference, but the Government had really very little to
give, for all the revenues went to the Established Church and there was
more to look forward to from Rome than from London. Many of Ormonde's
bitterest opponents found preferment abroad. He did indeed provide for
Walsh to the end, and for Caron till his death just before the meeting
in 1666. The Act of Explanation passed in the previous year made it
impossible for him to make better terms even for Roman Catholic laymen.
Walsh, who failed to make his party formidable, submitted to Rome just
before his death, but to Burnet who liked and admired him he seemed 'in
all points of controversy almost wholly Protestant.' He attended the
Church of England service without scruple, and Evelyn, who met him at
dinner at the Archbishop of York's, says nearly as much as Burnet.[60]

FOOTNOTES:

[48] Licence from the Irish Council to Peter Walsh, May 26, 1653, in
O'Flaherty's _West Connaught_, p. 423. Eighteenth article of peace,
January 17, 1648-9, in _Confederation and War_, vii. 198. Walsh's
letter to Ormonde written in October 1660, but not published till
after March 30, 1661, when the latter was made a Duke, and the answer
published in 1662, before Ormonde's arrival in Ireland, are both
reprinted in Orrery _State Letters_, ii. 355.

[49] Macray's _Privy Council Notes_, Roxburghe Club. Notes in
Nicholas's hand, State Papers, _Ireland_, under July 20, 1661. Evelyn's
_Diary_, October 17, 1664.

[50] Bellings to Ormonde, June 1, 1661, in _Spicilegium Ossoriense_
ii. 189. It was inevitable that Ormonde's friends and the Irish
generally should blame him for not doing enough, see Foxcroft's
_Supplement to Burnet_, pp. 60-62. The Plunket author of _A Light to
the Blind_ talks like Bellings of the 'Cromwellian scum of England,'
and calls Clotworthy, Broghill, Coote, and the rest 'little fanatic
scabs.' According to him Ireland really belonged to the Anglo-Norman
Conquerors, being royalist and Catholic; the native Irish, having
intermarried with them and remained Catholic, were of course loyal like
them.

[51] Walsh's _Hist. of the Remonstrance_, pp. 4-6. O'Reilly wrote at
this time that he was lurking 'nelle spelonche,' and McGeohegan 'in
cavernis'--Brady's _Episcopal Succession_, i. 226, 239.

[52] Walsh's _Hist. of the Remonstrance_, i.-xii. 47. Ormonde to Walsh,
January 26, 1662-3, _ib._ 94.

[53] Letter of Armagh clergy, December 13, 1660, _Spicilegium
Ossoriense_, ii. 201. Letters of Card. Barberini and De Vecchiis, July
8 and 21, 1662, Walsh's _Remonstrance_, pp. 16-19. James Rospigliosi,
internuncio in 1666, calls himself 'ministrum apostolicum cui res
Hiberniæ incumbunt,' _ib._ p. 634. Louvain judgment, December 29, 1662,
_ib._ p. 102.

[54] Peter Walsh to Essex, August 4, 1674, in his _Four Letters_, 1686,
p. 3; _Hist. of the Remonstrance_, pp. 511-513, 530-533.

[55] _Hist. of the Remonstrance_, pp. 570-574, 602.

[56] O'Reilly's letters of August 31, 1665, and April 13, 1666, in
_Hist. of the Remonstrance_, pp. 611-613. Writing to the Propaganda
in the late autumn of 1666 he expressly says that he attended the
congregation in order to defeat its object--'ad istam congregationem
... festinavi ut impedirem quominus noster clerus amplecteretur
præfate Walchæi remonstrantiam, ut vocat, suæ fidelitatis erga
Regem'--_Spicilegium Ossoriense_, i. 446.

[57] _Hist. of the Remonstrance_, pp. 618-625. Bishop French to the
Pope, May 22, 1666, in _Spicilegium Ossoriense_, i. 449. French's Latin
is better than his English for he uses such expressions as 'from them
parts.' His great attack on Ormonde, the 'unkind deserter,' was not
till 1676.

[58] The transactions of the Congregation are in _Hist. of the
Remonstrance_, pp. 641-743, the French and Latin texts of the Sorbonne
decrees at p. 660. The account given by the Rev. W. Burgatt, a hostile
member of the Congregation, does not materially differ from Walsh's,
_Spicilegium Ossoriense_, i. 440. Ormonde to Clarendon, June 9, 1666,
and to Arlington, June 13, State Papers, _Ireland_. On July 7 Clarendon
wrote: 'If I were you I would expel all the priests out of Ireland
who refuse to subscribe the declaration, and to my understanding if
you consent to the least alteration, how insignificant soever, you
overthrow the whole and absolve all who stand now obliged by the
subscription.'--_Carte Transcripts_, vol. xlvii.

[59] _Hist. of the Remonstrance_, pp. 744-749. O'Reilly to the
Propaganda, _Spicilegium Ossoriense_, i. 448 (Latin). Sandwich left
Portsmouth, March 3, 1665-6, and reached Madrid May 26, and these dates
fit in with Walsh's account. Ormonde to Clarendon, June 9, 1666, State
Papers, _Ireland_.

[60] Ormonde to Arran, December 29, 1680, in Carte's _Ormonde_, ii.
appx. p. 101, and to Essex, December 9, 1673, in _Essex Papers_.
Burnet's _Own Times_, i. 194, 195. Evelyn's _Diary_, January 6, 1685-6.




CHAPTER XLIV

GOVERNMENT OF ORMONDE, 1665-1668


[Sidenote: Ormonde and his Parliament.]

[Sidenote: Disputes between Lords and Commons.]

It was not surprising that there should be some difficulty about the
Acts of Settlement and Explanation, since the private fortune of every
member was concerned. But in other matters Ormonde had little to
complain of in the behaviour of the Commons. When he informed them that
France had joined hands with Holland, and that warlike preparations
were going on in Brittany which might be meant for Ireland, the House
made a solemn declaration of loyalty and promised eight subsidies
of 15,000_l._ each. Twenty subsidies in all appear to have been
granted by this Parliament. The royal assent to the money Bill and
to the Bill of Explanation was given on the same day, and Ormonde
made a speech in which he congratulated Parliament in having at last
'got into the prospect of a settlement.' He apologised for having
practically confirmed much of what had been done by the late usurping
Government, adding with grim humour that justice was sometimes done by
unjust men, 'Ireton at Limerick having caused some to be hanged that
deserved it almost as well as himself.' Of the later Acts passed by
this Parliament, the most important was that for religious uniformity.
Knight service and the Court of Wards had been already abolished, and
hearth-money permanently settled on the King in compensation. Ormonde
kept the Parliament in existence until August 1666, the time being
largely occupied in disputes between the two Houses. The Commons
claimed the right to sit at free conferences, but the Peers would not
allow it.

'Gentlemen,' said Lord Drogheda, 'you would all be lords.'

'Another rebellion,' replied Mr. Adam Molyneux, 'may make us so as
well as a former made your ancestors.' Both Houses having appealed to
the Lord Lieutenant, he reminded them that Strafford, who had long
parliamentary experience, had recorded in Ireland that the English
Commons stood uncovered at conferences. He dwelt on the danger of
breaking 'any ancient custom and practice,' but the Commons were
obdurate and declared that all the Irish precedents were in their
favour. Having secured the legislation he wanted, Ormonde then
decided to dissolve. Indeed the privileges of Parliament had become
an intolerable burden. Scarcely any debts could be recovered, and the
salaries of members, though all did not take them, came to nearly
100_l._ a day. An attempt was made to remedy these abuses by law, but
it came to nothing. A Bill of Indemnity on the English model had been
discussed at intervals since 1661, but without much enthusiasm, and the
Parliament came to an end without passing any such healing measure. On
August 6 the Lord Lieutenant proceeded in state to the House, sent for
the Commons, underwent a long speech from Speaker Mervyn, and gave the
royal assent to the subsidy and some other Bills. The Lord Chancellor
then thanked the Houses for their services in 'a most learned and
eloquent speech,' and dissolved them, to the great joy of thousands who
had suffered in pocket from their protections and privileges. No legal
Irish Parliament met again until 1692.[61]

[Sidenote: Financial difficulties.]

[Sidenote: Soldiers mutiny for their pay.]

Parliament had been liberal in granting subsidies, but it was hard to
collect the money, and not more than 60,000_l._ could be reckoned on
in any one year from this source: 164,000_l._ had been remitted from
England since the Restoration, but large arrears were still owing
to the army. The annual cost of Government was about 190,000_l._,
and there was a deficit of some 37,000_l._ a year. Even with the
greatest economy Ormonde did not see his way to do without 30,000_l._
a year from England. The restraint upon the cross-Channel trade in
fat cattle had made matters worse, for the usual cash return was not
made, and there was an actual scarcity of coin in Ireland, so that
it was almost impossible to make any payments in ready money. The
garrison of Carrickfergus exhausted their credit in the town, and
were irritated by stoppages for the insufficient clothing supplied to
them. The first outbreak, in January 1666, was easily suppressed; but
the officers, who knew the sufferings of their men, were not supposed
to have behaved very well. In May a large sum of subsidy-money was
brought into Carrickfergus for transmission to Dublin; but the soldiers
of four companies swore that it should not be removed until they had
received nine months' pay; and the townsmen, who saw some chance of
shop debts being settled, sympathised with them. The mutineers were
not above 200, many of whom surrendered to Lord Donegal, the governor;
but there were enough left to hold the town, as they threatened to
do, until they were paid. Of four captains, only Captain Butler was
on the spot, the others being on leave. The chief ringleader was
Corporal Dillon, but the non-commissioned officers were generally
staunch. The statement of grievances was drawn up by illiterate men,
and Lord Donegal's representative found them 'so drunk that no one
can make them understand any reason ... mighty hot in their ale.' As
soon as the news reached Dublin, Ormonde sent off ten troops of horse
by land and 400 men of the Guards under his son Arran. He himself
rode to Dundalk in one day, and to Hillsborough on the second. Before
he could reach Belfast, Arran had already landed, in spite of bad
weather, forced the wall, driven the mutineers into the castle, and
seen Dillon killed. He refused all terms, and six hours after his
landing, the garrison surrendered at discretion. One hundred and ten
men were tried by court-martial and found guilty, for there could be no
doubt of the facts. Ten were selected for execution, and nine actually
suffered. The rest were conveyed by sea to Dublin, and Ormonde at
first intended to send them to the West Indies, but they begged to be
allowed to redeem their offence, were formed into a separate company,
and afterwards did good service. Ormonde had many enemies at Court, but
Clarendon said that in his opinion, at least, the mutineers had not
been too severely treated.[62]

[Sidenote: Exclusion of Irish cattle.]

Theoretical claims of the English Parliament notwithstanding, internal
affairs were subject to the local legislature. In commercial matters,
however, the power of the larger kingdom was unquestioned. Whatever
benefit could be derived from Cromwell's Navigation Act was shared
by Ireland, and there was free trade between the two islands. But
after the Restoration Irish members came no more to Westminster, and
the usurper's enlightened policy was abandoned. In 1663, by the 'Act
for the encouragement of trade,' as it was absurdly called, Ireland
was excluded from the colonial trade, and the importation of Irish
cattle into England was forbidden between July 1 and December 20 in
each year. All depended on grass, for the days of turnips and feeding
cakes were still far off, and this was the season when stock were in
good condition. A fine of 20_s._ was imposed for every beast landed
notwithstanding, half to the King and half to the informer, for the
influx of Irish fat cattle was considered 'of infinite prejudice to
most counties in England.' Among the peers Anglesey only protested,
and he had a strong case, though his first reason was the amazing
one that the Act allowed free export of money and bullion which the
wisdom of our ancestors had always restrained. But he also maintained
the rights of people in Ireland 'they being by law native Englishmen
but debarred from the English markets,' thus giving a monopoly to
some of the King's subjects to aid ruining others. It was erroneously
supposed that English rents were depreciated by Irish cattle. Petty
showed how impossible it was for imported cattle, whose gross value
was 132,000_l._, to affect seriously a rental of 8,000,000_l._, which
had fallen by one-fifth. Pepys more truly attributed the depression of
agriculture to the low price of wheat. Shaftesbury, though he swelled
the partisan chorus against Irish cattle, told the King that the
mischief was really owing to depopulation, the plague and the Dutch war
having added at least a quarter of a million to the normal number of
deaths. There was also a constant stream of emigrants to the American
colonies, where they might 'enjoy the liberty of their mistaken
consciences.'[63]

[Sidenote: The Canary Company.]

In spite of remonstrances from the Irish Government, the Act for
excluding fat cattle came into force on July 1, 1664, and was to
continue till the end of the first session of the next Parliament,
which did not, in fact, meet for many years. Another question
affecting Irish trade then became prominent for a time. The trade with
the Canaries was entirely in the hands of the English, who had 'an
immoderate appetite' for the wine, and the islanders therefore obtained
very high prices. Certain London merchants represented that these
prices would be reduced by giving them a monopoly, and though there
was much opposition, a charter was granted in March 1665, followed by
a proclamation in May. Promoting the privileges of the Canary Company
was afterwards made an article of impeachment against Clarendon, and it
was said that he received a bribe of 4000_l._ He admits having favoured
the grant and received a present, but with the King's knowledge and
approval, and he says that every preceding Chancellor had done the
same in like case. One object of the monopolists was to prevent a
direct trade between Ireland and the islands carried on in part by
enterprising Jews who worked the business from Dublin. The question
had been discussed and the charter granted before Ormonde left England,
but when he was ordered to issue a proclamation as in England, the
Irish merchants at once protested. In those days cash payments for
foreign goods were considered a drain upon the national wealth, and
England had to balance her account with Canary by sending out specie,
whereas the meat, fish, butter, leather, pipe-staves, and frieze sent
from Ireland exceeded the value of the wine, the difference being paid
in pieces of eight. As to the liquor being dear, Ormonde said that 'if
men will drink canary they should pay for their delicacy, and whatever
they shall so pay is spent among us.' He was ready to obey the King's
positive commands, but on no other ground would he consent to deprive
Ireland of her most lucrative trade. In September 1666, he had to issue
the proclamation, but the plague, the fire, and the Dutch war were
all against the monopoly. The Spanish authorities gave every possible
opposition, interloping merchants were allowed to compete, and in the
end the company were fain to surrender their charter, which was much
disliked by the English House of Commons. Ireland imported some 2000
pipes of Canary wine annually, but it is not improbable that some of
this found its way to England, as the defeated monopolists asserted.[64]

[Sidenote: Question of prohibiting Irish cattle.]

The plague followed the Court to Salisbury and drove Charles to Oxford,
where Parliament sat for three weeks in October 1665. Clarendon says
that the members, for want of time and fear of contagion, 'rejected
all other businesses but what immediately related to the public,' one
of which was the atrocious Five-mile Act. Ormonde had hoped that the
restrictions on Irish cattle might be repealed, but quite a contrary
spirit prevailed, and a Bill for total prohibition passed the House
of Commons. The first Act had been freely evaded, and a much more
stringent one was called for. The King had no wish to be unjust
unless it was very inconvenient to be just, and the Lords, not being
subjected to Court pressure, held the Bill over until the prorogation.
When the Houses met for business at Westminster nearly a year later,
the question soon came up again. Pepys says the Prohibition Bill was
the work of the western members, 'wholly against the sense of most of
the rest of the House; who think if you do this, you give the Irish
again cause to rebel.' The event, however, showed that the majority
was the other way, and that it included the northern counties, but
others, particularly Norfolk, Suffolk, and Kent, whose business it
was to feed, and not to breed, made the Irish cattle welcome. The
larger towns, whose interest it was to have cheap meat, had little
power, and both landlords and farmers were generally against Ireland,
the former because they thought low prices affected their revenue,
and the latter because their produce was subjected to competition.
Sir William Coventry, whose character was much better than that of
most contemporary public men, threw his weight into the scale against
Ireland, persuading the King that he would get no supply if the Commons
were thwarted, that their fury would soon burn itself out, and that
the rejection of the Bill could then easily be compassed in the House
of Lords. Coventry's judgment was certainly not infallible, for it
was his advice that made the Chatham disaster possible. But Clarendon
was strongly opposed to the Cattle Bill, and animosity towards him
may have affected the action of the younger statesman. Finch, the
Solicitor-General, eloquently opposed the Bill at every stage, and
Anglesey was sent to London to present the case of the Irish Government
against it.[65]

[Sidenote: Irish cattle worse than starvation.]

The fire of London was a calamity of such proportions as in modern
times would arouse the sympathy and perhaps excite the generosity of
the whole civilised world. Ninety years later England gave 100,000_l._
to the sufferers from the Lisbon earthquake. Even in 1666 it was
natural that Ireland should wish to help, and it was proposed to send
over 30,000 head of 'our proper and indeed our only coin.' Instead of
receiving the thanks of the House of Commons, this gift inflamed its
fury, and was looked upon as a trick. The houseless citizens begged
that they might be allowed to enjoy the supply, but the cavalier
squires reviled them for their selfishness, and the pressure upon
the reluctant Lords was increased. With much difficulty the Commons
were induced to allow the importation in the form of salt beef, but
under such restrictions that the city was not likely to profit much.
Buckingham, who had neither conscience nor shame, and whose own
rents had been reduced, saw that popularity was to be gained at the
expense of Ireland, and Ashley, who knew better, found his account in
fanning the flame. He excused himself in private by saying that he
was in favour of a legislative union under which neither island would
have power to hurt the other. In debate the Achitophel of Dryden's
great satire could find no better argument than that the rejection of
the Bill would cause Irish rents to rise as those of England fell,
and that the Duke of Ormonde would soon be richer than the Earl of
Northumberland. Ormonde's prosperity might indeed excite the envy of
many who did not choose to remember that his loyalty had endured exile
and penury while they lived at home at ease under the Protector. Some
thought that Ashley was anxious to be Lord Lieutenant himself, but
of this there does not seem to be much evidence. Ossory, whose temper
was hot, and who was enduring great provocation, reproached the future
Chancellor with having been one of Cromwell's counsellors, for which
he had to apologise in the House of Lords; but most readers of history
will nevertheless sympathise with him.[66]

The Duke of Buckingham hated the Chancellor, who stood in his way.
He also hated and envied Ormonde, whose fiery son resented his
insinuations, so that lookers on foretold a quarrel. At last Buckingham
said in debate that anyone who opposed the Cattle Bill must have an
Irish estate or an Irish understanding. Mindful of the mistake he had
made in Ashley's case, Ossory forebore to answer, but a conversation
outside led to a challenge, which Buckingham accepted, though he was
thought to have taken good care that there should be no meeting. Ossory
denied that he had intended to fight on account of words spoken in
the House; Arlington and the Duke of York, who were both interested
in Irish land, testified that the quarrel was of long standing. The
challenger was sent to the Tower and his adversary committed to Black
Rod's custody, but they were soon released. Buckingham's arrogance at
this time was such that he suffered detention a few days later for a
scuffle with the irascible Lord Dorchester in the House itself. Ormonde
admitted that the Lords had dealt fairly with his son, and thanked
Arlington for taking a friendly part in the matter.[67]

[Sidenote: Irish cattle voted a public nuisance.]

The Bill as introduced applied to Scotland as well as to Ireland,
but this was altered after much discussion, and the final struggle
was as to whether Irish cattle should be declared a nuisance. The
word was insisted on by the Commons because it was thought likely
to secure strict administration, since the King could not very well
favour what he had himself declared to be a public nuisance. There
were many conferences between the two Houses, but the Commons stood
stubbornly by the obnoxious term. The Lords were willing to join in a
petition to the King not to grant any licences, but the Lower House,
by 116 to 57, voted to adhere to their word. If Charles had remained
firm, he might have carried the peers with him, but he wanted money
too badly. Some advised a dissolution, but he could hardly hope for
a better House of Commons than one which contained nearly a hundred
placemen and pensioners, and which was still stirred by the loyal
tempest of 1660. Having been at first the strongest opponent of the
Bill, he became its most strenuous supporter. Sir George Carteret, the
King's Vice-Chamberlain, was thought to have been chiefly instrumental
in converting his master, who made it a personal matter with peers to
swallow the word Nuisance, his conduct, in Clarendon's words, 'giving
those who loved him not great argument of triumph, and those who loved
him very passionately, much matter of mortification.' Between fear and
favour the Lords yielded, and four days later the Bill became law. The
Poll Bill, which was the price of the King's surrender, received his
assent at the same time. Charles soon prorogued Parliament, telling the
Commons that their session had borne little fruit, and that it was high
time for them to be in the country. Eight peers protested against the
Irish Bill, chiefly on the ground that the importation of cattle was
no nuisance, and that the word was professedly introduced to limit the
dispensing power, 'a just, necessary, and ancient prerogative inherent
in the Crown,' as a means of dealing with unforeseen emergencies.[68]

[Sidenote: Irish cattle totally prohibited]

Ireland, said the Irish Government while there were still hopes of
stopping the dreaded Bill, 'is a country generally proper only for
breeding and grazing of cattle, which, with what commodities proceed
from them, are their chief merchandises.' Gookin, the friend of
Ireland, said the same thing many years before. So it had always been,
and so it is likely to remain, for there is no finer cattle country in
the world. The winters are so mild that the beasts need not be housed,
while the grass begins earlier and lasts longer than elsewhere, but
corn suffers from the abundance of rain and the want of sunshine.
A time came when Irish rents were raised by high protective duties
on grain, the mass of the people living on potatoes, and suffering
annually between the old crop and the new. There were many Irish
famines before 1846, but they are forgotten. When the potatoes failed
and the duties were abolished the area under corn gradually shrank,
and the production of meat again became the national and natural
industry. The evils foretold by Ormonde and his advisers followed
upon the restrictive legislation, and cattle became a drug on the
market. Efforts were, however, made to continue the trade, since the
Act which forbade importation into England had no force to prevent
exportation from Ireland, and the extreme cheapness of the stock was a
great temptation. By the Act such cattle might be seized unless they
were declared on oath to be of British origin, half the proceeds of
sale going to the informer and half to the poor of the parish. But the
speculators sometimes compounded with the churchwardens beforehand, and
the smuggling went on, though the risks attending the traffic were so
great that no perceptible relief was given to the Irish stockmasters.
An amending Act was passed next year which made the ships liable to
seizure and the sailors to the common gaol. Even then the possibility
of great profit tempted the blockade-runners. There had always been a
trade between Ireland and Minehead, and a struggle was made to maintain
it. 'So little,' says a local historian, 'were the wants of the poor
or so considerable were the forfeitures that in the year 1675 an
accumulated surplus sum of about 500_l._ was in hand, and then laid out
in the purchase of a freehold estate in the parish of Ottery St. Mary,
which estate still retains the name of the Cow-lands.' The proceeds
of this investment are even now applied on each New Year's Day to a
distribution of blankets, and this is always called the Cow Charity.[69]

[Sidenote: Evil effects of the exclusion policy.]

The trade with England in fat cattle having been destroyed by the Act
of 1663, Ireland was full of young stock which the Act of 1667 left
upon their owners' hands. They were excluded from Scotland as well
as from England. The immediate loss was of course very great. Many
tenants deserted their holdings, and rents were everywhere hard to
collect. The contraband business did not pay very well, but foreign
ports were open, and the great Dutch market seemed to offer the easiest
remedy. Very little hay was made in Ireland, and the young animals,
half starved in winter upon withered grass, were in no condition to
thrive on the spring herbage. The meat was too soft to salt well, the
curing was ill done, much of it was uneatable when landed and had to be
destroyed. Hides were sold by weight, which was increased by exporting
them dirty, so that the credit of the trade was low. Butter was badly
and dishonestly packed, making a good show at the ends of each firkin,
with inferior stuff in the middle, and even stones sometimes. But
the Irish stockholders were quick to learn. They kept their bullocks
until age made them fit for salting, and two years after the passing
of the prohibitory Act some of their beef reached Holland in as good
condition as English produce, while their butter was even better. The
second Dutch War interrupted the trade for a time, but it was resumed
later, and England by denying a market to Ireland had only succeeded in
creating a formidable competitor abroad.[70]

[Sidenote: The woollen trade.]

English rents were not raised by the interruption of the cattle trade;
for even the breeding counties lost more on their wool than they gained
on their calves, Irish landowners having turned their attention to
sheep. By English statutes passed since the Restoration it had been
made felony to transport wool from England or Ireland to Scotland or
to any country outside England. When Charles tried to repair the loss
to Ireland, it was not thought possible to make wool free. The King's
power to pardon a felony was not disputed, but even prerogative lawyers
doubted whether it could be done before the fact. The restrictions
were imposed in the manufacturers' panic caused by Dutch competition,
which was successful partly on account of cheap Irish provisions; but
Petty thought such exorbitantly 'fierce ways of prohibition' might do
twice as much harm as the trade was worth. England suffered by her
own legislation, which promoted a glut in the market, for Irish wool
was produced so cheaply that it could be sent over Channel in vast
quantities in spite of the heavy licence duty. English flockmasters
were injured, but the profit to Ireland was small. Irish wool was good,
and better prices were to be had from foreigners, so that smuggling was
found to pay well, and a trade was begun which reached vast proportions
in later days.

Ireland was thinly peopled, but there was so little employment that
labour was cheap, and there was plenty of available land. English
commercial jealousy was thus excited, and the House of Commons forgot
that they were really dealing with the Protestant settlers and showing
them how to seek support from other and perhaps hostile nations. The
Roman Catholic majority had always done so, and would do it again when
opportunity offered. Petty saw that a legislative union was the only
real solution of the problem, for without it the colony was starved,
while the natives were at the mercy of those who had supplanted them.
In the meantime he wrote in 1676: 'It is wonderful that men born
in England, who have lands granted to them by the King for service
done in Ireland to the Crown of England, when they have occasion to
reside or negotiate in England should by their countrymen, kindred,
and friends there, be debarred to bring with them out of Ireland food
whereupon to live, nor suffered to carry money out of Ireland, nor to
bring such commodities as they fetch from America directly home, but
round about by England with extreme hazard and loss, and be forced
to trade only with strangers and become unacquainted with their own
country; especially when England gaineth more than it loseth by a free
commerce.' The prohibition of cattle alone had destroyed a carrying
trade which employed one hundred English ships, and things became
much worse when the bulk of Irish wool was smuggled away in foreign
bottoms.[71]

[Sidenote: Ireland retaliates on Scotland.]

As soon as the Cattle Bill became law the Irish Government addressed
the King with a view to lessening its effects, Anglesey, Burlington,
and Conway, three of the protesting peers, being authorised to press
the case in London. They told the King that Ireland was ruined by the
exclusion of her stock from England and Scotland, that the people,
being deprived of their usual occupation, were driven into rebellion,
that the revenue would suffer, and that the means of repelling foreign
invasion would be taken away. They suggested as a remedy that Ireland
should be allowed to export freely to foreign countries, and to keep
out Scottish goods till such 'times as the restraint upon Irish cattle
and commodities in Scotland be taken off.' This would keep a little
money in the country, and repress 'the luxury and humour of the people
after outlandish commodities.' In the meantime it would be necessary
to send 50,000_l._ in specie from England to pay the army and defray
the expense of government. In a little more than a month after the
three lords presented their memorial Charles took steps to defeat by a
side-wind the law which he had insisted on making in its worst form.
The matter, he said, had been several times discussed at the Privy
Council, with whose advice he granted much of what Ormonde and his
friends asked for; believing that Ireland, exhausted as she was by
long wars, could not do without trade, and that her loyalty deserved
all the tenderness and care that he could show. But the people were
to be encouraged to avoid the consumption of luxuries that could not
be produced at home. The restraints upon exportation from Ireland
to foreign parts were therefore taken off, saving the rights of the
Canary, Turkey, and East India Companies, and subject to the existing
law about trade with the Plantations. The Lord Lieutenant was empowered
to grant licences accordingly, and the Duke of York, as Lord High
Admiral, was directed to grant the necessary passports. Ormonde lost no
time in issuing a proclamation giving effect to the King's orders, and
excluding all the commodities of Scotland as a measure of retaliation.
Anglesey as vice-treasurer would carry over the necessary 50,000_l._
Proclamations were made and licences issued without much delay, but the
money was long in coming.[72]

[Sidenote: First Dutch War. A descent feared.]

When England came to be at war with both France and Holland at the
beginning of 1666, it was natural to suppose that there might be danger
of a descent on Ireland. Orrery, who was an alarmist, thought there
would be a rebellion; and he dreaded the sectaries and Presbyterians
almost as much as the more numerous natives. Ormonde, who always kept
cool, had little fear. There were indeed plenty of disaffected people,
but they were not united, and he thought that the Government would
always be too strong for any discontented party. As the spring came on,
the Duke of Beaufort's fleet was thought to be dangerous, and there
were signs that Ireland was not forgotten by the French. In April one
of their men-of-war entered Kenmare Bay, took soundings, and explored
it thoroughly while three others lay outside. A little later on an
Irish vessel from Galicia came into the Shannon with the usual cargo
of fruit and soap, but twelve pieces of heavy ordnance were found in
her hold. In June thirty-nine vessels came into Kinsale together; they
had been reported long before they reached the coast and were generally
believed to be French, but proved to be the Virginia fleet. Orrery
did not believe in the landing of a great French army, for the game
would not be worth the candle, and the country could not support it.
A small force might, however, be sent as a nucleus round which Irish
disaffection could gather. Cork harbour and many smaller havens lay
practically open. The Tories were always available to keep the small
army in Ireland busy, and a Dutch cruiser plying between Waterford
and Youghal carried off a cargo of cattle to France, which showed how
imperfect were the naval preparations of England. Irish gunsmiths were
at work in many places, and it was not to be supposed that this was for
any good purpose. Most of the Protestants had been disarmed after the
plot in 1663, and indeed many of them were hardly to be trusted, but
Orrery did not believe that any except a few really damnable fanatics
would join a foreign invader and so play into the hands of Irish
papists. But the uneasiness was general, and whenever a few sail were
descried they were declared to be part of Beaufort's fleet.[73]

[Sidenote: Ormonde's military precautions.]

While thinking an invasion improbable, Ormonde nevertheless considered
it necessary to be prepared, and the most obvious precaution was a
militia. About 16,000 foot and 4000 horse would be enough, but there
was no statute available as for the trained bands in England and
therefore no means of defraying the expense. Something was got by the
sale of prizes taken by King's ships in the Irish seas, and some money
was afterwards sent from England; but it was not intended to keep the
militia embodied when the immediate crisis had passed. Orrery, who had
been urgent in recommending a militia, took care that in his province
no man should be enrolled without taking the oaths of allegiance
and supremacy. The old soldiers of the Parliament were available in
large numbers. When this work of armament was well advanced, Ormonde
determined to visit Munster himself, since that was the quarter most
open to attack. In inviting him to his new house at Charleville,
Orrery, who knew his tastes, promised him a boiled leg of mutton daily.
Mallow was then the only bridge over the Blackwater, that at Cappoquin
not having been repaired since the war. At Limerick, whence he had
been so obstinately excluded in 1650, the Lord Lieutenant was welcomed
with all possible honour, the satisfaction of the citizens being
expressed by the recorder in an eloquent speech. At Cork his reception
was equally good, Bishop Synge providing comfortable quarters, and at
Kinsale he was entertained by Robert Southwell, and saluted by forts
and shipping, including the Mediterranean merchant fleet, which had
just arrived with cargoes of currants and oil for England. They had not
seen a ship since leaving the Straits of Gibraltar except one hostile
cruiser off Cape Clear which fired forty shots without disabling any
vessel. After giving orders to the sovereign of Kinsale as to keeping
the channel open, Ormonde returned to Cork, whence he went by Youghal
and Clonmel to his own house at Carrick. He believed that unless the
enemy got command of the sea an attempt to invade Ireland would be 'as
fatal to them as once Ireland was to the Spaniards or Gigery to the
French. All the countries I have passed through have appeared with
good numbers of serviceable horse with old soldiers on their backs and
good officers in the head of them, and if the proportion holds, as I
doubt not it will, in other countries, I presume we may be at least
5000 good horse when it shall be needful to draw them together.'[74]

[Sidenote: Fortifications at Kinsale.]

The disaster at Chatham in June 1667 revived the panic in Ireland, and
Ormonde gave orders for strengthening the defences of Kinsale so as to
make it a safe retreat for British shipping. 'The greatest prejudice
we can probably expect this year from without is the forcing of our
harbours.' Orrery showed much diligence in carrying out the work, and
the port was soon safe from attack. Mr. Chidley or Chudleigh, who was
employed about this business, was apparently the same as he who built
the boats which enabled Ludlow to take Ross Castle in 1652. There
does not seem to have been any serious plan of invasion either by the
French or Dutch, but the latter had cruisers or privateers which took
many prizes. On the other hand, there were a good many Dutch prisoners
taken, and their treatment was not creditable to the governing powers.
They were detained at Cork and Bandon in a state almost of starvation,
Captain Crispin, who was in charge of them, complaining that no money
was provided. Orrery protested, 'for though they are now enemies, yet
they are Christians, and they may be our friends again.' This was in
July 1666, but things were no better fourteen months later. The English
inhabitants were charitable, but the prisoners were so miserable that
they rose against their guards and twice tried to burn Bandon. When
Orrery visited them, 'they all on their knees weeping begged to be
hanged.' He gave them some relief from his own pocket. Captain Crispin
could do nothing, and dared not throw up his appointment for fear of
losing all arrears due to him. And so it continued to the end of the
war.[75]

[Sidenote: Fall of Clarendon.]

The fall of Clarendon had only an indirect effect upon Ireland. He was
driven from office and into exile by such people as Lady Castlemaine
and the Duke of Buckingham, and by the base ingratitude of a sovereign
who would not have been restored without him. The fifteenth article of
his abortive impeachment was 'that he procured the Bills of Settlement
for Ireland, and received great sums of money for the same in most
corrupt and unlawful manner.' That the first minister was more or less
responsible for those Acts is true, and it is no less true that much
injustice was done, but that Clarendon was actuated by corrupt motives
is a charge resting on no evidence at all. His enemies in the House of
Commons were unable to formulate an indictment, while Bishop French,
writing on behalf of the dispossessed proprietors, is equally vague,
and can only gloat over the misery of the fallen statesman. 'This
proud Haman,' he says, 'who jointly with some few others, to get money
for themselves, and estates for their children, contrived the general
extirpation of the whole Irish race ... was forced, for his own safety,
and the preservation of his life, to quit his fine house, forsake his
family, and bid his country farewell, and to travel in his old age, in
the dead of winter, through so many dangers at sea and incommodities by
land, to seek for some shelter abroad, seeing he could not be secure at
home.'[76]

[Sidenote: Clarendon's defence.]

That Clarendon frequently 'swore with a great oath that the Irish
should all be extirpated root and branch' is contradicted by
innumerable documents, and as his accusers give no particulars of
corrupt dealing, his own statement is entitled to belief. The King
called him a fool for his slowness to enrich himself when so many
deserving cavaliers were in distress, adding characteristically that
it was better to be envied than pitied. The adventurers and soldiers
left in possession at the Restoration gave half a year's rent to his
Majesty to repair the losses 'of such as we shall judge have most
eminently acted for and suffered with us'; and of these Clarendon was
surely one. Charles ordered that what was due in Meath, Westmeath,
Kilkenny, and Wexford should be collected by Massereene and Orrery and
paid over to the Chancellor, who was not to be told anything about
it until the money was ready. In due course he was informed that his
share would amount to about 25,000_l._, half of which he was to receive
immediately. He did get 6000_l._, and never another penny, for the
Irish Government seldom had any ready cash. In the belief that at least
12,000_l._ would be sent at once, Clarendon embarrassed himself by
buying some property in Wiltshire which he had not the money to pay
for. As for being the author of the Irish Settlement, Clarendon had
begged to have no share in it, and his responsibility was no greater
than that of any other Privy Councillor or of the King himself.[77]

[Sidenote: Ormonde and Clarendon.]

By the death of Southampton and the exile of Clarendon Ormonde was left
with but little support at court. His old friend's dismissal was quite
unexpected by him, and at first he did not think his own position would
be much affected. The King's main argument was that the Chancellor's
unpopularity, faithfully reflected in the House of Commons, made
it impossible to carry on the government, and against this Ormonde
protested. No prominent statesman, he said, could escape popular
clamour, and the advantage of yielding to it was very uncertain, and
'should never be brought in competition with honour and justice, which
are the only lasting supports to greatness.' Charles replied that his
old servant's humour had become unsupportable to him and to all the
world; but, he added, 'I assure you that your former friendship to the
Chancellor shall not do you any prejudice with me, and that I have not
in the least degree diminished that value and kindness I ever had for
you, which I thought fit to say to you upon this occasion, because it
is very possible malicious people may suggest the contrary to you.'[78]

[Sidenote: Ormonde and Orrery.]

Clarendon left England at the end of November 1667, and in the
following February the King sent for Ormonde, directing him to make
Ossory his deputy and to give him such instructions as he thought fit,
but not to start if his health would be likely to suffer, nor until
the state of business was such that he could be spared. He had long
hesitated about the policy of going to confront his enemies or staying
to look after his own interests, and he shrank also from the expense
of moving. The return of Ossory to Ireland early in March turned the
scale. He left Ireland in the middle of April, and Orrery, who had been
detained by illness, followed him in June. Ormonde had been warned
by his son some time before that the Lord President of Munster was
intriguing against him, but was very unwilling to believe it in view
of the latter's constant expressions of goodwill. Perhaps, indeed,
he protested rather too much, but Ormonde trusted him so far as to
send a copy of the anonymous articles of impeachment secretly devised
against himself: 'I desire your lordship that no copy may be taken of
them, lest it may thereby come to be suspected how I came by them.'
But before Orrery got to London it was well known that he was working
against the Lord Lieutenant, though the latter was anxious for his
presence as likely to be useful to the service. After three months'
experience he was telling everyone that Orrery was no friend of his.[79]

[Sidenote: Ormonde recalled.]

Of all the bad men in a bad time Buckingham was perhaps the worst,
without shame, honour, or decency. He amused Charles and those about
him, and his career is disposed of in a single line of Dryden--he had
his jest and they had his estate. Ormonde was an offence unto him both
for his high character and for the universal respect in which he was
held. Nevertheless he made some approaches to Ossory, who refused to be
reconciled to him unless he would act a friendly part to his father. In
fact he intrigued incessantly against him, trying first to capture his
position as Lord Steward, and when that failed, hoping to succeed him
as Lord Lieutenant, going so far as to make nominations to offices in
Ireland. Arlington, whose wife was Lady Ossory's sister, did not openly
oppose Ormonde, though he gave him little help. He had to hold his
own against Buckingham, and did in fact secure the weight of business
while his rival made a show in public. An attempt was made to prove
financial mismanagement in Ireland, and this involved Anglesey, who
had lately resigned the Vice-treasurership. The attack failed, and the
idea of an impeachment was soon dropped. Ormonde seldom used strong
language, but in writing to his son he said that Buckingham was a vile
man, that Orrery's gout was the least of his infirmities, and that
Lord Meath, upon whose articles it was hoped to found an impeachment,
had lost more than he could spare of the sense God gave him. Meath's
name was struck off the Irish Privy Council, and Charles repeatedly
affirmed his confidence in the Lord Lieutenant. Towards the end of 1668
well-informed people still thought that he would not be removed, and
even in February he wrote himself to that effect. Four days later his
supersession was finally decided on, which, says Pepys, 'is a great
stroke to show the power of Buckingham and the poor spirit of the King;
and little hold that any man can have of him.' But to the end Charles
continued to speak well of Ormonde, who told the Irish Chancellor that
he was much more surprised at the praise than at the recall.[80]

FOOTNOTES:

[61] _Irish Commons Journal_, January to August, 1666. _Irish Lords
Journal_, July 16, and August 3 and 7. Ormonde to Arlington, January 17
and April 4, State Papers, _Ireland_; Leigh to Williamson, _ib._ August
6. Writing to Ormonde, August 14, Arlington regrets that the Bill of
Indemnity had not passed--'the persecutions all parties, at least two
considerable ones, are exposed to for want of it,' were certain to give
trouble.--_Miscellanea Aulica_, p. 413.

[62] Ormonde to Arlington, January 20, 1665-6, May 25 and 30, State
Papers, _Ireland_; letters, May 25-29, _ib._; G. Warburton to
Williamson, June 27, _ib._; a memorandum, July 17, _ib._; Clarendon to
Ormonde, July 7, _Carte Transcripts_, vol. xlvii.; Arran's account, May
28, _ib._ vol. xxxiv.

[63] _Statutes at Large_, 15 Car. II. cap. 7. Petty's _Political
Anatomy of Ireland_, chap. x. On January 1, 1668, Pepys heard much
about the almost miraculous cheapness of corn, 'so as the farmers
can pay no rent, but do fling up their lands,' and he had noted the
same thing at April 9, 1667. Shaftesbury to the King in Christie's
_Life_, vol. ii. appx. 1. His estimate of losses from plague is more
than confirmed by Clarendon, _Life_, Cont., p. 821. Anglesey's protest
against the 1663 Act is in Rogers' _Protests of the Lords_, i. 27.

[64] Clarendon's _Life_, Cont., pp. 610-630. Lister's _Life of
Clarendon_, ii. 424, iii. 530. Evelyn's _Diary_, October 27, 1664.
Pepys has frequent notices, particularly at October 8, 1666, and June
27, 1667. State Papers, _Ireland_, July 1665 to July 1668, particularly
Ormonde to Arlington, July 25 and 27 and August 26, 1666.

[65] Ormonde to Arlington, September 12, 1666, State Papers, _Ireland_.
Pepys' _Diary_, October 8. Clarendon's _Life_, Cont., pp. 691, 955-964.
Arlington to Ormonde, October 12, 1665, _Miscellanea Aulica_, p.
362, and to Temple, October 15, _Letters_, ed. Bebington. Writing in
1673, Temple said a higher standard of living and love for foreign
commodities, and depopulation caused by war, had really caused the
agricultural depression in England, and 'not this transportation of
Irish cattle, which would have been complained of in former times, if
it had been found a prejudice to England. Besides, the rents have been
far from increasing since.'--_Works_, iii. 20. See Andrew Marvell's
letters to his constituents, October 22 and November 2, 1665. On May
18, 1665, Sir Ralph Verney writes that the market was at a stand, owing
to a report that the Lords would not pass the Bill 'against bringing in
foreign cattle.' Cows were daily sold at from ten to fifteen shillings
apiece which had formerly been well worth five times as much.--_Verney
Memoirs_, iv. 117.

[66] Clarendon's _Life_, Cont., pp. 967, 969. Christie's _Life
of Shaftesbury_, chap. x. In his monograph, 1888, the late H. D.
Traill thought Butler's lighter lash more suitable to Shaftesbury's
tergiversations than 'the resounding scourge of Dryden,' but his
conduct about the Cattle Bill and the Irish branch of the Popish Plot
justify the heavier implement. Arlington to Ormonde, October 20 and
November 20, 1666, _Miscellanea Aulica_, p. 427 _sqq._

[67] Details as to the quarrel between Ossory and Buckingham are given
by Clarendon, _Life_, Cont., p. 969 _sqq._, and in Arlington's letter
to Ormonde, October 20, 1666, _Miscellanea Aulica_, p. 424.

[68] Pepys' _Diary_, January 7, 9, 14, and 18, 1666-7. Clarendon's
_Life_, Cont., p. 988. Rogers' _Protests of the Lords_, i. 31. The
protesting peers were the Earls of Cardigan, Bridgewater, Burlington,
Anglesey, and Castlehaven, Lords De La Warr, Conway, and Berkeley of
Stratton. See Marvell's letters to his constituents on December 22,
1666, January 5, 15, and 19, 1666-7.

[69] Lord Lieutenant and Council to the King, August 15, 1666, February
9, 1666-7, State Papers, _Ireland_; Ormonde to Arlington, March 30,
1667, _ib._ Collinson's _Hist. of Cheshire_, ii. 29. Information kindly
supplied by the Rev. F. McD. Etherington, Vicar of Minehead. The author
of a _Letter from a Gentleman in Ireland to his Brother in England_,
1677, says Irish corn was only fit for home use, 'being by reason of
the climate not so large, firm and dry a grain that it should be fit
for transportation.'

[70] See the very clear account in Temple's essay on Irish trade,
_Works_, iii. 7-16. Rawdon's letters at this time in State Papers,
_Ireland_, show the effects of the prohibition on certain estates.
Robert Leigh to Williamson, _ib._ March 19, 1666-7.

[71] Petty's _Treatise on Taxes_, 1662, xi. 17, and his Report of
Council of Trade, 1676, affixed to _Political Anatomy_. _Letter from
a Gentleman in Ireland_, 1667. The author of _Reasons for a Limited
Exportation of Wool_, 1677, says the Dutch could have Irish beef at
one penny per lb. Instructions to Lord Robartes, July 23, 1669, State
Papers, _Ireland_. _The Grand Concern of England explained_, p. 5,
1673. Compare Miss Murray's _Hist. of Commercial Relations_, pp. 42-48.

[72] Lord Lieutenant and Council to the King, February 9, 1666-7; State
Papers, _Ireland_, Memorial of the three lords, _ib._; the King's
answer, March 23, ib.; Proclamation of June 7 reciting that of April 1,
_ib._; Ormonde to Arlington, July 31, _ib._ Carte's _Ormonde_, ii. 344.

[73] _Orrery State Letters_, March 2, 1665-6, to July 3. Ormonde's
letters for the same period in State Papers, _Ireland_. For Beaufort's
movements, see Corbett's _England in the Mediterranean_, chap. xxi.

[74] Ormonde left Kilkenny August 30, 1666, and returned there
September 15, State Papers, _Ireland_. Ormonde's letter to Arlington,
_ib._ September 4. Orrery to Ormonde, August 20, _Orrery State Papers_.
Dr. Denton wrote in 1670, 'if Ormonde do chance to come to you a byled
leg of mutton is his beloved dish for dinner,' _Verney Memoirs_, iv.
229. Gigery, now Jijelli, half-way between Algiers and Bona, was
garrisoned by Beaufort in 1664, but disaster followed. Caulfield's
_Kinsale Council Book_, p. 97, where September 14 is wrongly given for
7.

[75] _Orrery's State Letters_, ii. 51, and all his letters from July 3,
1667, to September, _ib._ pp. 203-285, and in State Papers, _Ireland_,
July 12, 29, and 31. The treaty of Breda, ending the first Dutch War,
was signed on July 21.

[76] Bishop French's _Narrative of the Earl of Clarendon's Settlement
and Sale of Ireland_, Louvain, 1668. I have used the Dublin reprint
of 1846. This tract is in the form of a letter 'to a leading member
in the House of Peers in England and much relied upon in the House of
Commons,' possibly to Buckingham. A MS. copy is calendared among State
Papers, _Ireland_, under 1667, p. 543. French renewed his attack on
Clarendon in the 'Bleeding Iphigenia,' 1674.

[77] Clarendon's _Life_, Cont., pp. 81, 107, 277, 1197, 1324. His
discourse by way of vindication, dated Montpelier, June 24, 1668, is
in _Miscellaneous Works_, 2nd edition, 1751. The _Life_, written three
or four years later, contains the same matter, but some expressions
are softened: for instance, the 'impudence' of the Irish spokesmen in
the former becomes 'imprudence' in the latter. The King to the Lords
Justices, April 21, 1662, in State Papers, _Ireland_, is the warrant
under which the 6000_l._ was paid, and Clarendon's statements are
supported by the letters printed in Lister's _Life of Clarendon_, vol.
iii. nos. 66, 109, 120. The money was levied under section 33 of the
Act of Settlement.

[78] Ormonde to Arlington, September 3, 1667, as given in Carte's
_Ormonde_, ii. 352. Arlington's answer, September 14, printed in
Lister's _Life of Clarendon_, iii. 470, and the King's letter,
September 15, printed in Ellis's _Original Letters_, 2nd series, iv. 39.

[79] Letters from October 25, 1667, to September 24, 1668, in Carte's
_Ormonde_, ii. appx. pp. 41-64. Pepys' Diary, May 3, 1668. Burnet, _Own
Times_, i. 266.

[80] Ormonde to Ossory, May 19, 1668, to February 9, 1668-9, printed in
appx. to Carte's _Ormonde_, vol. ii. Pepys' _Diary_, November 25 and
December 5, 1668, and February 12, 1668-9. Ormonde to Archbishop Boyle,
March 8, 1668-9, _Carte MSS._ vol. cxlvii.




CHAPTER XLV

ROBARTES AND BERKELEY, 1669-1672


[Sidenote: Robartes Lord Lieutenant.]

Lord Robartes was again chosen for the post which he had scorned to
occupy eight years before. Perhaps the King's main object was to get
rid of him, for he must have been one of the most disagreeable men
in England--morose, overbearing, and impracticable. Upon this point
Clarendon, Burnet, and Anthony Hamilton are for once agreed, and,
according to the last two, he was also something of a hypocrite.
His knowledge of business, the popular opinion of his ability, and
the reputation which he enjoyed among the Presbyterians made him a
personage whom it was not safe to neglect. Charles announced the
appointment at Council, speaking without his usual hesitation, and
emphatically declaring his undiminished confidence in Ormonde.
Robartes, who was present, accepted with civil expressions to the
outgoing Viceroy, who answered in the same strain, acknowledging
the other's fitness and wishing him success. Pending the new Lord
Lieutenant's arrival in Ireland, Ossory was retained as the King's
Deputy by patent. 'My Lord of Orrery,' wrote the Duchess of Ormonde
with very pardonable malice, 'is as little satisfied with this change
that is made, and the Duke of Buckingham, as if my Lord had continued;
and I am of opinion that they will find cause, at the least I wish
it may fall out so, and so I am sure do many more.' Buckingham,
however, had the satisfaction a little later of driving Coventry from
office, and thus clearing the ground for what we still call the Cabal.
Ormonde charged his son to treat the new Viceroy with proper respect,
to silence the murmurs of his friends, and to take, if possible,
more trouble than ever; 'and if you can get the Tories suppressed,
that His Majesty's kingdom may be delivered up in as much peace and
order, as I found it in war and confusion when I was first Lord
Lieutenant.' Robartes lingered long in England after his nomination,
and his instructions were not settled for more than five months. The
King thought of reserving military appointments to himself--probably
Buckingham wished to have the jobbing in his own hands--but Ormonde
successfully objected on the ground that this would be unfair to
Robartes and derogatory to the great office which he himself had held
twice and might hold again. The instructions about revenue matters, in
which Ormonde's enemies hoped to find some means of attacking him, were
also modified at his suggestion.[81]

[Sidenote: The Tories.]

[Sidenote: Costigan.]

[Sidenote: Costello.]

[Sidenote: Nangle.]

Ossory was not destined to have the happiness of putting down the
Tories. There had always been many in Ireland who were willing to
fight, but not to work, and Chichester had much trouble with them. When
the Civil War came to an end Cromwell encouraged their emigration,
and at the Restoration the dispossessed Irish, many of whom had
followed the King's fortunes abroad, expected to be restored also.
Crowds of priests and friars came to Ireland, and their meetings
caused alarmist reports about an intended rising. Orrery generally
put the worst construction upon such facts as came to his knowledge,
and there were certainly some outrages, but Ormonde thought the
Cromwellian soldiers and sectaries much the most dangerous, and the
Castle plot showed that he was right. Later on, as it became evident
that Adventurers and soldiers would keep a good deal of what they had
got, the disappointed Irish gathered here and there in bands, and
leaders were not wanting. John Costigan, with several followers, long
haunted the woods and bogs on both sides of Slieve Bloom, but seems to
have been taken at last through an informer, who thus purchased his
own pardon. Many others were taken or slain by like means, but in the
case of Dudley Costello, Lord Kingston, the President of Connaught,
found it 'more difficult than he believed to make one Irishman betray
another.' Costello was the heir to estates in Mayo from which he was
driven during the Civil War. He distinguished himself in Flanders as
a captain in the Duke of York's Irish regiment, and was named in the
Act of Settlement as one of the 232 'Ensignmen' who were restorable,
but not until reprisal had been made to the Adventurers and soldiers
in possession. There was not land enough to satisfy both interests,
and Costello's hopes were destroyed by the Act of Explanation. In
the summer of 1666 he was joined by Cornet Edward Nangle, another
Connaught malcontent, and the two entered Ulster with a considerable
party. They spent much of their time drinking whisky and quarrelling
among themselves, but there were always plenty of sympathisers to
give the alarm, and the Governor of Charlemont had to be satisfied
with driving them back into their own province, where they wandered
about as proclaimed traitors. Englishmen's dwellings were burned,
while the Irish were spared. Nangle was soon killed in an attempt to
storm Lord Aungier's house at Longford, but the band was not broken
up. Thomas Viscount Dillon, who had been restored to his estate in the
same district, warned his tenants against sheltering Costello, who had
been his companion-in-arms, but offered to intercede for him if he
would come under his protection. Ormonde's rule was to give no pardon
for nothing, and if Costello expected mercy, he would have to bring
some fellow-outlaw to justice, 'especially one Hill and one Plunket,
who lately committed great outrages in the north and are come into
Connaught.' Costello preferred ordering all Lord Dillon's Mayo tenants
to leave their farms. This warning was given in August, and on a late
November night Costello with thirty men burned Mr. Ormsby's house at
Castlemore, 'having entered by means of a turf stack placed against
the outside of the bawn.' All the native population sympathised with
him, but the soldiers kept up a hot pursuit. Like the great Sicilian
brigand in our own times, he never slept within two miles of the spot
where he supped, nor lay two nights running in the same place. But
he could always get a party together when the soldiers' backs were
turned, and he burned seven or eight villages within three weeks of
the Castlemore exploit. Ormonde retaliated by quartering troops on
the Irish inhabitants and ordering the apprehension of the 'Popish
titulary clergy residing in those parts so infested by the Tories,' who
had already been warned by the Lord President that they would be held
responsible for their flocks. At last one evening at the beginning of
March, Costello, driven to desperation or made rash by impunity, met
Captain Theobald Dillon in the open field and was shot dead at the
first fire. He had about forty men with him, who all escaped in the
darkness. His head was sent to Dublin and stuck upon St. James's Gate
with the face towards Connaught. Nangle's had been mouldering there for
several months. But other Tories carried on the war in many different
districts, and informers were deterred from earning blood-money by
threats, which were sometimes acted on, of having their tongues cut
out. The banditti were no doubt a grievous burden to the people, and in
one case, as a noted outlaw stooped to enter a boat in Connaught, the
ferryman cut off his head with a hatchet. 'This honest Charon,' wrote
Williamson's correspondent, 'was an Irishman as well as the Tory,' and
refused the reward, saying that the honour of the action was enough.[82]

[Sidenote: Ossory and Robartes, 1669.]

Neither Orrery or Buckingham having been chosen to succeed him,
Ormonde had no real cause of complaint. He doubtless knew that Robartes
would never be popular, and charged his son not only to yield him the
respect due to his position, but to let it be known that he would not
be a friend to any who acted otherwise. These directions were strictly
followed. As the time drew near for the new Lord Lieutenant's arrival,
Ossory refused to enter on any fresh business, and made careful
arrangements for his reception by the Lord Mayor, the Guards, and the
Militia. The Duchess of Ormonde wrote on behalf of Lady Robartes, who
knew scarcely anybody in Ireland, and whom she found a very virtuous
and worthy person. The Lord Lieutenant landed at Howth on September
18, and was entertained by Lord Howth, many of the officials attending
him with a written programme of reception ceremonies. Robartes would
have none of it, and made his way without ceremony to the castle.
Three troops of cavalry met him on the road, and a miscellaneous
collection of people on horseback and in carriages attended him to
the bridge, where he was welcomed by the Lord Mayor and Aldermen with
a congratulatory speech, to which he replied civilly but briefly. He
found Ossory in the Council Chamber, and received the sword from him,
the departing Deputy saying that he expected much good through his
successor's great abilities, and heartily wishing him a prosperous
reign. No one could have been more considerate, but the Dublin people
showed in their own way that they were not pleased at the change. Lord
and Lady Ossory were treated with rather more respect than ever, and
when they left on different days for Kilkenny, were escorted by seventy
or eighty coaches, most of them with six horses, carrying peers,
bishops, and Privy Councillors. It was rather hard on a plain man of
business like Robartes to have to follow this gracious and popular
couple.[83]

[Sidenote: Policy of Robartes.]

[Sidenote: Resignation of Robartes.]

It is generally admitted, even by his critics, that Robartes was a just
man and very clever about business. He favoured the Presbyterians,
and blamed Archbishop Boyle, the Chancellor, with very good reason,
for undertaking more than any man could do. He set his face against
pluralities generally, and of course made enemies in this way. His
instructions for the army were to see that the men mustered were
actually available for service, to allow no officers to be absent from
their quarters without his permission, and not to give more than three
months' leave in any year. This Robartes construed in the strictest
way and without respect of persons. Even the ordinary allowance for
servants was cut off. Lord O'Brien was ordered to Boyle, more than
a hundred miles both from Dublin and his own district, and in the
'devilishest Tory country in Ireland.' He stayed there for a few days,
but soon got leave direct from the King, and went to London with an
unfavourable account of the Lord Lieutenant's proceedings. Sir Nicholas
Armourer, who loved wine and company, complained bitterly to his friend
Williamson that the jolly parties in Dublin were ended, and that he
could not get leave to go to England on urgent private affairs. The
army in Ireland had seldom been regularly paid, and there were arrears
of long standing. Some officers mustered ineffective men in their
private employment. Others retained money which ought to have been
given to the men, and such robbery deserved the severest punishment,
but the captains of 1670 could not well be held responsible for the
defaults of 1662. Nevertheless a number of privates entered into
an agreement among themselves to demand all that was due for eight
years, and the Lord Lieutenant approved of this approach to mutiny,
even rebuking officers publicly in the presence of their men. Charles
wrote to say that this would not do, that persons of quality should
have due consideration, and that a spirit was being fostered which it
might be very difficult to suppress. It would be sufficient to see that
there were no frauds in the last muster. Care for the future was much
more important than the raking up of old grievances. 'Be confident,'
said the King, 'that I will protect and vindicate your authority
as long as you serve me there, notwithstanding this freedom that I
use to yourself.' Robartes had moreover claimed the right to hold no
correspondence with the Secretaries of State like all his predecessors,
and was told that any such pretension was quite inadmissible. Charles
concluded with an assurance that this was only 'a private admonition,'
and that the changes suggested might be carried out by the Lord
Lieutenant as of his own motion, 'and I shall protect you and your
authority.' When he received this letter, Robartes at once tendered his
resignation, and begged as his only suit not to be further employed. He
had no friends at court, and as the greedy crew there wanted his place,
he was taken at his word. Serious people were ready to believe that he
was recalled for his virtues, and not for any fault.[84]

[Sidenote: Berkeley succeeds Robartes.]

Robartes was ready to go at once if he might appoint a Deputy, but he
was told to wait until he could deliver the sword to Lord Berkeley,
who did not arrive until April 21. The ceremony took place the same
day, the outgoing Lord Lieutenant making a speech of four lines. Next
morning he stole away quietly in his wife's coach, leaving her to
follow as she might. Besides his general dislike to formalities, it was
thought that he preferred no leave-taking to a paucity of leave-takers
which could only accentuate his unpopularity. When Lady Ossory came to
Dublin a few days later on her way to England, she was met by eighty
coaches, half of them with six horses. He sailed from Skerries, having
first been entertained by Mr. Cottington, who provided a very good
dinner. On reaching the boat he informed his host that his house was
on fire, which turned out to be true. Everything was burned to the
ground, and Lady Robartes hurried back to condole with the sufferers,
but her husband went straight on board ship and again sent word to her
to follow him.[85]

[Sidenote: Attempt to impeach Orrery.]

The obscure intrigues against Ormonde, while successful in depriving
him of the Irish government, had failed to get him impeached; and
Orrery's share in the attack did not save him from being assailed in
his turn. He had had much to do with the agrarian settlement, and had
maintained with vigour the system founded on it. While repressing the
Tories on one hand, he held the Cromwellians in check on the other, and
enlisted no one in the militia who refused the oaths of allegiance and
supremacy. The first steps towards the Dover treaty were taken at the
beginning of 1669, and Clifford is reported to have said that no good
could be done in Ireland as long as Orrery was President of Munster.
But he might hope to succeed Ormonde as Lord Lieutenant, and to that
end may have given Charles and James hopes of his co-operation. He had,
however, many enemies, and articles by way of petition were presented
to the House of Commons in the names of Sir Edward Fitzharris and
Philip Alden. Fitzharris was a Limerick landowner, a Roman Catholic,
who had been a minor and royal ward when the rebellion of 1641 broke
out, had afterwards adhered to Ormonde's peace, and had been reinstated
in his property when he returned from exile after the Restoration.
Alden was described by Orrery himself as a representative fanatic and
notorious villain. He had been concerned in the Castle plot of 1663,
and had broken prison, but gave useful information and received a full
pardon. Additional lands were assigned both to Fitzharris and Alden in
the summer of 1669.[86]

[Sidenote: Failure to show treason.]

The petition was presented to the House of Commons on November 25,
and a debate followed, the opinion of lawyers being divided as to
whether the charge amounted to treason. Maynard, who remembered his
part in the Strafford case, thought that it did, while Heneage Finch
inclined the other way, saying that he 'never knew much good done in
Parliaments where many impeachments were.' Edward Seymour, who had
brought in the impeachment of Clarendon, followed Maynard, observing
that no charge would have been brought against Orrery had not that
against Ormonde been abandoned. Sir Robert Howard throughout supported
his fellow-dramatist, but upon a division it was resolved by 182 to
144 that there was matter of treason, a copy of the articles was
sent to Orrery, and he was ordered to attend and answer them, the
serjeant-at-arms to leave a keeper with him until his gout allowed him
to move.[87]

[Sidenote: The impeachment abandoned.]

Seymour had made a rather cruel joke about a fit of gout being curable
by impeachment. This was only partially the case, but Orrery, who was
a member of the House of Commons, did manage to appear at the bar a
week later. To a friend who condoled with him as he painfully mounted
the stairs he is said to have replied that if his feet would but carry
him up he would promise that his head should bring him safe down again.
On Howard's motion he was allowed to speak sitting, and had little
difficulty in showing that no act of treason was charged against him.
The tenth article did indeed accuse him of saying that if the King
did not confirm the estates of the soldiers' and adventurers' party,
he 'should be compelled to do it with 50,000 swords.' There was some
doubt as to whether the word was 'should,' which would be a threat,
or 'would,' which would be only a prophecy. Orrery denied having ever
said anything of the kind, and no time or place was mentioned. The
third article alleged that Orrery had used armed force to expel Edmund
Fitzgerald of Cloyne from Rostellan and to give it to Inchiquin, whose
son had married his daughter. To this Orrery replied that he had only
done his duty in helping the Sheriff to execute a legal process, adding
that Fitzgerald was attainted of murder, robbery, and treason, and a
notorious papist, and that Rostellan was 'a stronghold and near the
sea'--commanding the best harbour in Ireland at a time when a French
invasion was feared. Even Clifford thought the foundation too slight
for an impeachment, Maynard and Finch agreeing that the accusers should
be left to their remedy at law. This was carried, but only by 121 to
118. Ten days later there was another debate, but nothing came of it,
the King having directed the Duke of York to use his influence with
members in Orrery's favour. Robartes, moreover, threatened to supersede
officers with seats in Parliament if they left Ireland without leave,
and this seems to have been enough to stop all further proceedings.[88]

[Sidenote: Qualifications of Berkeley.]

John Lord Berkeley of Stratton had long been specially attached to
the Duke of York. Soon after the Restoration the King suggested that
he might be made Deputy of Ireland, if no better could be had. 'Do
you think,' said Clarendon, 'you shall be rid of him by it? for that
is all the good of it.' 'The truth of it is,' replied Charles, 'being
rid of him doth incline me something to it; but when you have thought
round, you will hardly find a fitter person.' He had generally failed
in all employment requiring tact or discretion, but his services as
a soldier were respectable, and when he was made a peer at James's
request he took a title from the battle he had helped to win in 1643,
for he did not possess an acre of his own. Being without fortune, his
great object was to gild the coronet and so to put money in his purse
by the most dishonest means. He thought himself fit for the highest
place and was a loud and boastful talker. When Mountrath died towards
the close of 1661, it had already been decided to make Ormonde Lord
Lieutenant, and Berkeley applied for the Presidency of Connaught,
with a view to making money of it. He had not the least intention of
doing the work or of living in exile at Athlone, and Ormonde complained
bitterly that the Presidency was a mere hindrance, and that he could
not be held responsible for the government of Ireland, when one quarter
of the island was in such hands. The duties were at least partially
performed, sometimes by Berkeley's nephew, Sir Maurice, and sometimes
by Lord Kingston, who became joint-president in 1665, the office being
granted to him and to Berkeley for life. The latter was content with
the profits and took no further interest in Ireland until he was sent
to govern it five years later.[89]

[Sidenote: Berkeley and his secretary.]

[Sidenote: Corruption of the latter.]

Andrew Marvell says, and we can well believe him, that Berkeley was
'a man unthought of' for the Lord Lieutenancy. His appointment was no
doubt part of the scheme for subjecting the British islands to French
and papal supremacy, but it is not at all likely that such a loose
talker would be allowed to know about the secret part of the treaty
of Dover. The Lord Lieutenant knew how the court wind blew, and was
ready enough to go with it, but his instructions, whatever private
hints or orders he may have had, were of the usual character. The
established Church was committed to his care, and since the labourer
is worthy of his hire, he was ordered to protect the property secured
to her by James I. in the plantation. Since the end of Ormonde's
Government the Remonstrants had been oppressed or threatened, and
Berkeley was commanded to execute the law against such titular prelates
or vicars-general as had offended in this way. Sir Ellis or Elisha
Leighton, a younger brother of the good Archbishop of Glasgow, went to
Ireland as the Lord Lieutenant's secretary. Roger North, in agreement
with other contemporaries, calls him 'the most corrupt man then or
since living,' who took all the bribes he could get. Pepys found him
good company at a meal, but he was not ashamed to be drunk even at the
viceregal table. He had been an adherent of Buckingham, and, without
making any pretence of religion had become a Roman Catholic and was
ready to carry out the policy of Clifford and the rest while laughing
at the doctrine of transubstantiation.[90]

[Sidenote: Indulgence of Recusants.]

[Sidenote: Oliver Plunket.]

[Sidenote: The Remonstrants thrown over.]

Six weeks after Berkeley received the sword all were reported as
pleased with the change except a few incorrigible fanatics. The Ulster
Presbyterians, indeed, feared oppression, but Sir Arthur Forbes was
able to protect them, and Primate Margetson, who was no persecutor,
restrained the zeal of some northern bishops. The Conventicle Act had
just been renewed in England, but the treaty of Dover was signed only a
month after Berkeley's arrival, and the Declaration of Indulgence was
impending. The Roman Catholics at once felt the benefit of the change.
Oliver Plunket, whom Clement IX. had just made Primate of Ireland,
reached Ireland a few weeks before Berkeley. Writing from London, where
he was received by the Queen, Plunket noted that Peter Walsh was there,
'hated by all.' Peter Talbot, made papal Archbishop of Dublin a little
earlier, reached his see about the same time as Plunket, and both were
present at a national synod convened by the latter in June. During
the latter days of Robartes' government Plunket found it necessary
to assume the character of Captain Brown, with sword, pistols, and a
wig. Berkeley, on the contrary, received him often, though secretly,
assuring him and other priests that they had nothing to fear if they
behaved themselves, exercising their office quietly, but eschewing
politics. Before the end of the year Plunket was able to report that he
had driven all the Remonstrants out of Ulster. In the following May he
added that Walsh's adherents were prostrate, and that they could not
raise their heads during the existing administration, Lord Chancellor
Boyle being unfavourable to them. Berkeley, though bound by his
instructions to protect them, did nothing and would not allow Margetson
to say a word on their behalf. Plunket was blamed by some for accepting
too many invitations to the Castle, but he said that he could hardly
refuse, since Lady Berkeley and the chief secretary were secretly
Catholics. He even thought he could see some sparks of religion in
the Lord Lieutenant. Peter Talbot, now Archbishop of Dublin, was also
a frequent visitor to Berkeley, who lent him hangings for a church
ceremony, and is said to have expressed a hope of seeing high mass
at Christ Church in a few months. Both archbishops had a grant of
200_l._ a year from the King, but it seems that very little of this was
paid.[91]

[Sidenote: Blood's attack on Ormonde.]

Though no longer Lord Lieutenant, the Duke of Ormonde had still
much influence in London. He was Lord Steward of the household, and
his immense popularity was an offence to such men as Buckingham. It
occurred to Blood, the author of the plot in 1663, that it might be
possible to seize his enemy and to hang him at Tyburn. Clarendon House,
the expense and the ostentation of which had been so fatal to its
builder and owner, had been lent to him by the Chancellor's son, and on
the night of the 16th he had nearly reached it after an entertainment
in the city given to William of Orange, when he was pulled out of his
coach by Blood and others. The ruffians mounted him on horseback behind
one of the gang, who carried him down Piccadilly past his own door and
past the other great house built by Lord Berkeley, where Devonshire
House now stands. Ormonde managed to get his foot under that of the
rider, and the two fell to the ground together. Help came, and the
Duke, who was sixty, was carried home in an exhausted condition. Two of
the gang fired their pistols at him, but missed, and he escaped with
some bruises. Blood had ridden on to fix a rope on the gallows, not
much more than the length of Park Lane distant, and met his discomfited
followers on his way back. It was generally believed that Blood was the
tool of Buckingham and the Duchess of Cleveland. He was not brought to
justice, and a few months later distinguished himself by his attack
on the Crown jewels. In that case he was arrested but pardoned by
Charles, who had, however, the decency to ask Ormonde's leave. When
Arlington brought the message, Ormonde told him that if the King could
forgive him for stealing his crown, he could easily forgive him for
attempting his life; 'since it was His Majesty's pleasure, that was
a reason sufficient for him, and his lordship might spare the rest.'
Guesses are vain as to what cause or which favourite procured the royal
clemency. The cases of Sir John Coventry and Tom Thynne show what might
be done in connection with that corrupt Court. Blood was in frequent
communication both with Arlington and Williamson.[92]

[Sidenote: The Act of Settlement attacked.]

[Sidenote: Finch deprecates fresh agitation.]

[Sidenote: Prince Rupert's Commission.]

All who held themselves aggrieved and all who hoped to gain by a fresh
agitation, now thought the time propitious for an attack on the Acts
of Settlement and Explanation. A commission signed by six peers and
fifty-two others was given to Richard Talbot, who had been all along
engaged in similar business, as their plenary agent, with power to
call in two or more assistants and to promote petitions to King and
Parliament. They set forth that, contrary to the royal declaration and
intention, they had been 'exposed to extreme exigencies, groaning these
many years past under the insupportable burden of misery and poverty
for want of subsistence and having no refuge left but to prostrate
at His Majesty's feet for justice and compassion.' A few weeks later,
Talbot accordingly petitioned the King in Council, and a committee,
which included Ormonde, was appointed to consider the question. Talbot
and the Irish barrister whom he was allowed to employ enlarged upon the
great services of the Irish generally instead of relying on cases of
individual hardship. They ignored the rebellion, represented Ormonde
as having been driven from Ireland by the Cromwellians alone, objected
to the constitution of the Irish Parliament, and demanded an Act of
Indemnity. They desired an impartial enquiry, and that in the meantime
no undisposed land should be granted away. Ormonde was thus driven to
recall the facts of the war, the broken peaces, and the excommunication
launched against himself. Before proceeding further a report was
called for from Finch, now Attorney-General, who had drawn the Act of
Explanation, and in a few days he made a very able statement, which was
afterwards committed to writing. In this document a clear account is
given of all the proceedings connected with the settlement. Finch does
not deny that there were cases of hardship, but he altogether objected
to upset in the English Parliament what had already been done after
the greatest deliberation in Ireland, 'for the consequence of this
would be that Ireland should be always settling, but never settled.' He
strongly asserted the power of the English Parliament to make laws for
Ireland, subject, however, to nullification by the legislature there.
As to an Act of Indemnity, certainly it would be a good thing for
Ireland, provided it was not used to upset the arrangements as to land.
But the Irish rebellion was specially excepted from the English Act of
Oblivion, and it was doubtful whether Parliament would change that.
Probably Talbot and his friends would care very little for any relief
that did not alter the title to land, 'for few Irish rebels are less
than fifty years old now, and no man goes about to trouble them for
that crime.' Finch's opinion, coinciding as it did with Ormonde's, made
it evident that nothing could be expected from the first committee. It
was therefore superseded by another, from which Ormonde was excluded,
but of which Buckingham, Ashley, and Lauderdale formed part. This was
afterwards turned into a royal commission, with Prince Rupert at its
head, and very full powers of inquiry were given as to the settlement
of Ireland.[93]

[Sidenote: Lady Clanbrassil.]

Lord Berkeley was much under the influence of the beautiful and witty
but most unscrupulous Countess of Clanbrassil. He had her worthless
and foolish husband made a Privy Councillor. Whether she favoured the
Roman Catholics or not, she was certainly hostile to the Presbyterians,
having had one of their meeting-houses pulled down. She occupied
rooms in the Castle, and was much in favour with Lady Berkeley, as
well as with the Lord Lieutenant, who was by no means young. Patrick
Adair records with evident pleasure that she was hurt by the fall of
the gallery when present with the viceregal party in the Smock Alley
Theatre on St. Stephen's Day. Adair says the play was called 'The
Nonconformist,' wherein 'the poor shadow of a nonconformist minister is
mocked and upbraided.' It was Ben Jonson's _Bartholomew Fair_, which
Pepys thought an admirable play, 'but too much profane and abusive.'
Robartes had suppressed the players 'as well as other vicious persons,'
but that did not last long. The theatre had been built by subscription
in 1662, and Adair says the bishops contributed largely, 'though they
refused at the time to give countenance or assistance for building
a church at Dame Street, where there was great need.' The house was
repaired and continued to be used as a theatre until near the end of
the eighteenth century.[94]

[Sidenote: Inefficiency of the Government.]

Berkeley went to England in June 1671, was well received, and had the
honour of entertaining the King and Queen at his house at Twickenham.
Lady Clanbrassil went with him. 'She thinks,' says Lord Conway, 'to
trip up Nell Gwyn's heels, and you cannot imagine how highly my Lord
Arran and many others do value themselves upon the account of managing
Lady Clanbrassil in this affair.' Whether Charles admired her or not
does not appear, but she certainly did not get the better of Nell
Gwyn. Pending promotion she amused herself with Harry Killigrew, and
her intimacy with the Berkeleys continued as long as they stayed in
Ireland, whither she returned with them in September. Sir Nicholas
Armourer, the jovial governor of Duncannon, thought her beautiful and
dangerous, but did not admire the administration of which she was so
bright an ornament. 'An army fifteen months in arrear, the Treasury
locked up, and a mutinous city, a country in apprehensions for their
Act of Settlement. What shall we say unto these things?'[95]

[Sidenote: The dispensing power exercised.]

During the Commonwealth and Protectorate the corporate towns had lost
many of their inhabitants and much of their trade. It had not been
found possible to replace the ancient inhabitants by a sufficient
number of English Protestants, and in May 1661, barely one year after
the Restoration, Charles II. directed the Irish Government to allow
facilities for trade 'without making any national distinction between
our subjects of that our kingdom, or giving any interruption upon
pretence of difference of judgment or opinions in matters of religion.'
But by the Act of Settlement houses in corporations were assigned as
security to officers serving before June 5, 1649, and by the Act of
Explanation no one was to be allowed to purchase such houses without
taking the oaths of supremacy and allegiance, except by the Lord
Lieutenant's licence first obtained. The loop-hole left was not wide
enough to admit any very large number of recusants, and a further
step was taken early in 1671. The Lord Lieutenant was directed to give
a general licence to all persons, irrespective of race and religion,
to buy or hire houses in towns, and so restore trade to its former
flourishing state, as intended by the King's letter in 1661. Papists
were to be restored to all the privileges they enjoyed under Charles
I. on taking the usual oath of allegiance without that of supremacy.
A proclamation to this effect was issued a few days later, but the
results were inconsiderable, for Berkeley's government came to an end
very soon afterwards and a different policy prevailed at Court.[96]

[Sidenote: Riots in Dublin.]

How far religious differences were concerned does not appear, but
Berkeley was involved in difficulties with the citizens of Dublin
during his whole term of office. He promoted the building of a wooden
bridge over the Liffey at the west end of Ussher's Island. Whether the
citizens disliked the expense or whether those interested in the ferry
objected is uncertain, but in July 1671, when the Lord Lieutenant was
absent in England, a large mob of apprentices attacked the unfinished
structure. Soldiers quickly appeared, and about thirty of the rioters
were arrested. A few days later, when the prisoners were being escorted
to a more permanent place of confinement, another mob of apprentices
with swords and staves effected a rescue on Merchants' Quay, but the
guard fired and three men were killed. After this there was a strong
inclination towards further disturbances. More than a year later Essex
reported that these riots had left an uneasy feeling. The bridge was,
however, finished, and afterwards replaced by a stone one, which was
called the Bloody Bridge even in our own times.[97]

[Sidenote: Berkeley discredited.]

[Sidenote: Corruption of Leighton.]

Whether the affair of the bridge was cause or effect, it soon appeared
that there were two parties in Dublin. Sir John Totty, the Lord Mayor,
and the majority of the common councillors, took one side and were
favoured by the Lord Lieutenant. Sir William Davis, the Recorder, with
most of the aldermen, joined the other party. Enraged by opposition,
and finding the disorder likely to increase, Berkeley called upon
Davis to frame rules for the conduct of the city business which would
have had the effect of making the corporation very close. Knowing that
this would be unpopular, the Recorder exacted a promise that his name
should not be mentioned, but this promise was not kept. The rules
were declared temporary, and really came to nothing. Essex thought
the main object of them was to enable a party in the corporation to
job the water-rate. Davis was married to the Chancellor-archbishop's
daughter, and he consulted his father-in-law, whom the Lord Lieutenant
treated with great rudeness. In the end Totty, who had been knighted
by Berkeley in church, called an irregular meeting at which Davis was
removed from his place along with seven aldermen. Sir Ellis Leighton
was then appointed to the lucrative office of Recorder, and Totty made
himself clerk of the tholsel, where fees were, of course, to be had.
Totty was a needy man, and Leighton is described by one whom he had
robbed as 'worse than any Jew--pity he should be suffered to compound
so palpably for his bribes.' Davis went to London as soon as he could,
and found that it had already been decided to supersede Berkeley, who
received strict orders to make no more appointments, particularly in
Dublin, where disorders had followed upon his changes.[98]

[Sidenote: Fire at the Castle.]

Besides the riots and the theatre accident, Berkeley's short reign
was distinguished by a fire at the Castle during a calm night in May
1671. Some thought it was malicious, others that it was the result
of carelessness. Fortunately there were but two or three barrels of
powder, one of which was used to blow up an adjacent building, having
been carried through the fire by Ormonde's younger son John and Anthony
Hamilton, author of the famous Grammont memoirs.[99]

FOOTNOTES:

[81] As to the character of Robartes, see Clarendon's _Life_, Cont.,
p. 198; 'vicious under the appearances of virtue,' Burnet's _Own
Times_, i. 98; 'vieux sacripante, &c.,' _Mem. de Grammont_, chap.
viii. Carte's _Ormonde_, ii. 378 _sqq._, Ormonde to Ossory, February
16, 1668-9, _ib._ appx. On the other hand, Lord Herbert of Cherbury
thought his conversation most pleasing. The instructions to Robartes
are in State Papers, _Ireland_, calendared at July 29, 1669, and drafts
of them in the same vol. pp. 740-746. Duchess of Ormonde to George
Mathew, February 1668-9, _Ormonde Papers_, new series, iii. 442. The
Presbyterian Patrick Adair, while praising Robartes, does not deny that
he was 'somewhat morose in his temper and carriage,' _True Narrative_,
chap. xviii.

[82] As to the Tories from 1664 to 1667, see 32nd _Report_ of the
Deputy Keeper of Public Records, pp. 92-97; as to Nangle, State Papers,
_Ireland_, July 17, 18, 1666; as to Costello, _ib._ March 11, 16,
1666-7. There is much about Tories and highwaymen in Orrery's _State
Letters_, particularly those to Ormonde in March 1666-7. Proclamation,
June 3, 1668, State Papers, _Ireland_. Sir Peter Pett to Williamson,
May 23, _ib._

[83] Ormonde to Ossory, February 16, 1668-9, in appx. to Carte's
_Ormonde_, vol. ii. Cal. of State Papers, _Ireland_, pp. 1-6. There is
a good deal about Lady Robartes in _Mem. de Grammont_, chap. viii.,
but the scandalous chronicler cannot say much against her. Duchess of
Ormonde to George Mathew, March 6, 1668-9, _Ormonde Papers_, iii. 442.

[84] Lord O'Brien's letters to Williamson in October 1669, State
Papers, _Ireland_; Armourer to same, October 31, _ib._; Lord Herbert
of Cherbury to same, October 4, _ib._; the King to Robartes, December,
n.d.; Robartes to the King, December 7, _ib._ Marvell's letter of
March 21, 1670. Airy's edition of Burnet with the notes, i. 482. 'I
am,' said Locke, 'more a friend to the clergy and their calling than
those amongst them who show their forwardness to leave the word of God
to serve other employments. The office of a minister of the Gospel
requires the whole man,' _Third Letter for Toleration_.

[85] Arlington to Robartes, February 19, 1669-70, State Papers,
_Ireland_; Frowde to Williamson, April 23, May 14, _ib._; Leigh to
Williamson, June 11, _ib._

[86] State Papers, _Ireland_, February 20 and March 23, 1661, for
Fitzharris. Orrery to Arlington, _ib._ November 8, 1665. Warrant for
Colonel Edward Vernon and others, _ib._ July 1669. Vernon had received
Alden's confidences in 1663, Carte's _Ormonde_, ii. 262.

[87] Grey's _Debates_, November 25, 1669; Marvell's _Letters_, nos. 128
and 129, but the latter is dated November 4 in Grosart's edition, which
cannot be right, probably a mistake for December.

[88] Grey's _Debates_, November 25, December 1 and 10, 1669. Articles
of impeachment and answers in Orrery's _State Letters_, i. 109.
Macpherson's _Original Letters_, i. 56, wrongly placed under 1670.
Marvell's letter, no. 129, _ut sup._

[89] Macray's _Notes_ of conversations between Clarendon and Charles
II. in July 1660, Roxburghe Club. Character in _Clarendon's State
Papers_, iii., supplement, lxxiv. Burnet's character is to the same
effect, adding 'corrupt, without shame or decency,' _Own Times_, i.
266. 'The greatest vapourer in the world,' Pepys' _Diary_, December 3,
1665, and very dishonest, 'guilty of one of the basest things that ever
was heard of a man,' _ib._ September 27, 1668. Marvell says he gave
10,000_l._ for his place to the Duchess of Cleveland, letter of August
9, 1671.

[90] Marvell's letter of March 21, 1670. Berkeley's instructions are
in Cox's _Hibernia Anglicana_, Charles II., ii. 9. As to Leighton, see
Burnet's _Own Times_, i. 137, and Foxcroft's _Supplement_, p. 13. In
a note to his edition of Burnet, Mr. Airy says he is 'not aware of a
single word extant in his favour.' North's _Examen_, iii. chap. vi.
89--'being secretary in Ireland he extorted most outrageously and being
expostulated with for it, answered, "What a pox, d'ye think I come here
to learn your language?"'

[91] Cardinal Moran's _Life of Plunket_, particularly chaps. vi.
and xvii. Brady's _Episcopal Succession_, i. 227. Alderman Matthew
Anderton to Perrott (Williamson's clerk), April 20, 1670, State Papers,
_Domestic_. Patrick Adair's _Narrative_, p. 300.

[92] Carte's _Ormonde_. Remarks on the _Life and Death of Mr. Blood_,
1680. _Verney Memoirs_, iv. 228. _Letters to Williamson_, ed. Christie,
i. 14, ii. 120. Sir Walter Scott made good use of Blood in _Peveril of
the Peak_.

[93] Copy of the petition of November 28, 1670, appointing Talbot
agent, _Trinity College MSS._ 844-849. Carte's _Ormonde_, ii. 426
_sqq._, and Finch's Report of February 1, 1670-1, _ib._ appx. 91. State
Papers, _Domestic_, July 2 and August 1, 1671, and also at p. 595 in
Cal.

[94] Patrick Adair's _Narrative_, pp. 290, 303. Pepys' _Diary_, June
8, 1661. For details concerning Lady Clanbrassil (Lady Alice Moore),
see Lowry's _Hamilton MSS._ Dorset's verses 'On an antiquated coquette'
have been thought to refer to her.

[95] Dr. Lancelot Bolton to Conway, May 13, 1671, State Papers,
_Domestic_. Armourer to Williamson, June 6, July 27, _ib._ Conway to
Rawdon, June 20, _Rawdon Papers_.

[96] King to Lords Justices, May 22, 1661, State Papers, _Ireland_.
King to Lord Lieutenant, February 26, 1671-2, State Papers, _Domestic_.
Proclamation, _ib._ March 8.

[97] Rawdon to Conway, July 13, 1671, State Papers, _Domestic_. Leigh
to Williamson, July 18, _ib._ Essex to Arlington, September 14, 1672,
_Essex Papers_.

[98] Letter to Williamson, March 30, 1672, State Papers, _Domestic_,
Phelim O'Neill to Conway, May 23, 1671, _ib._ The King to Berkeley,
April 30, 1672, _ib._

[99] Leigh to Williamson, May 19, 1671, State Papers, _Domestic_.




CHAPTER XLVI

GOVERNMENT OF ESSEX, 1672-1677


[Sidenote: The Earl of Essex Lord Lieutenant.]

The corrupt administration of Berkeley and Leighton could not be called
a success, and much to his own surprise the Earl of Essex was named for
Lord Lieutenant quite early in 1672. He was made a Privy Councillor
along with Halifax in February, and some thought that the latter would
go to Ireland. Berkeley's letter of recall did not reach him till May,
and he was forbidden to make any appointment during the remainder of
his time, particularly in Dublin, where disorders had lately followed
on a change of officers. Some years later the viceroyalty was offered
to Halifax, but he said he did not like dining to the sound of the
trumpet and with thirty-six dishes of meat. It is not easy to see what
caused Essex to be selected, for he could never have been a party to
the policy of the treaty of Dover. But his firmness of character was
known, and Charles may have thought that by leaving Ireland in strong
hands he made it easier to get his own way in England.[100]

[Sidenote: State of the corporate towns.]

Essex reached Ireland early in August 1672, and was involved at once
in the business of the corporations, for the power to make rules under
the Act of Explanation expired at Michaelmas. Berkeley's temporary
regulations had been quite abortive, and one of his latest acts had
been to recommend Totty as Lord Mayor for another year. The policy of
the English Government since the Restoration had been vacillating. In
1661 the King gave orders that the Irish or Roman Catholic inhabitants
of towns should be restored to trading privileges, and this was
repealed in 1672. The first letter had, however, been followed by
another, which expressly declared that it had never been His Majesty's
pleasure to admit the Papists to any share in magistracy or government.
In 1670 it was ordered that no one should act as head or member of a
corporation without taking the oath of allegiance and such other oaths
as were of force in Ireland. Thus the first question that Essex had to
decide was whether the oath of supremacy should be enforced or not.
He thought that it should be, as otherwise every corporation would
be flooded with Roman Catholics. But he would allow the oath to be
dispensed with by special favour. He believed that otherwise wealthy
Protestant traders would withdraw themselves and their capital from
Ireland. This policy was approved of, and Charles ordered the oath
of supremacy to be enforced 'as a general rule,' and the dispensing
power to be exercised by the Lord Lieutenant. This was in harmony with
the Declaration of Indulgence which Parliament had not yet had an
opportunity of condemning.[101]

[Sidenote: New rules made.]

Rules were made for Dublin accordingly. To be of any effect the
choice of Lord Mayor, Sheriffs, Town Clerk, and Recorder had to be
ratified by the Lord Lieutenant. In the case of the Lord Mayor,
sheriffs, and treasurers the elective power was confined to the Lord
Mayor and not less than eight aldermen. All officers, aldermen,
common councillors, and members of guilds had to take the oaths of
allegiance and supremacy, the like obligations being imposed upon
foreign traders and artisans, who were encouraged to become denizens
with the same privileges as natives. Power was reserved to the Lord
Lieutenant to dispense with the oath of supremacy at his discretion
'by writing under his hand.' Similar rules were made for all the other
corporations in Ireland, which thus retained their Protestant character
until the viceroyalty of Tyrconnel. By the Act of Explanation, rules
made in conformity with it had full statutory force and could not be
abrogated without another Act, and no Parliament met in the meantime.
The dispensing power was at once exercised, and some Roman Catholics
were admitted as common councilmen with the King's full approval, who
nevertheless suspended the operation of the rules by letter until
they had been discussed in Council. Anglesey alone opposing, they
were approved in due course. The delay caused Essex much trouble and
annoyance, for copies of the royal missive were circulated with a view
of impairing his authority. The most notable malcontent was the learned
and eccentric Dudley Loftus, but the intrigues of Anglesey added fuel
to the flame. Loftus, who was a master in chancery, publicly declared
that the rules were illegal, which they certainly were not, and was
placed under arrest by the Lord Lieutenant. Complaints of the rules and
petitions against them continued for some time, but they had the force
of law and could not be interfered with. As the validity of the Acts of
Settlement seemed to be attacked, there was general consternation among
the holders of property, and the King was forced to declare that he had
not the slightest intention of interfering with their operation.[102]

[Sidenote: Agitators in Dublin.]

Essex reported that the population of Dublin had almost doubled since
the Restoration, and recommended that a citadel should be built to
secure order. Lives having been lost in the bridge riots, there was an
undercurrent of discontent which lasted for two or three years, and was
sedulously fostered by one Nevill. This man had several aliases, and
having been 'a prompter to plays was afterwards Sir Ellis Leighton's
broker to make his bargains.' The first thing was to decide as to the
legality of the late proceedings. This was tried before the Privy
Council, and Essex says he scarcely ever heard a clearer case. By a
unanimous vote Sir William Davis was restored to the recordership
and the excluded aldermen to their places. Sir John Totty lost his
position as clerk of the tholsel, but continued to stir up discontent,
in which he was supported by one Philpot, who had been under arrest
for contempt of the Council's decrees, and by three or four other
agitators. 'These have been observed never to be in their shops, but
all day long at taverns or coffee-houses, perpetually sending about for
several citizens, persuading them to further or promote these seditious
designs, which prime movers are men of small estates, and no doubt
their aim was to be employed as agents in England, thereby to have got
some collection of money from the city, as a little before my coming
one Nevill (an unworthy instrument of Sir Ellis Leighton's) did.'[103]

[Sidenote: Phoenix Park granted to the Duchess of Cleveland.]

[Sidenote: Essex saves the park.]

The success of Swift's attack upon Wood's halfpence was partly owing
to the fact that the Duchess of Kendal was intended to be a gainer.
A much worse injury to Ireland was projected by Charles II. when he
granted the Phoenix Park to the Duchess of Cleveland, who, if we are
to believe Marvell, had already made 10,000_l._ out of Berkeley as
the price of his office. Later on he was ready to bribe her successor
if she would get him reappointed. It was arranged that the grant of
the park should not take effect in Essex's time, and Arlington, whose
daughter was betrothed to the favourite's son, seemed to think that
his consent was a matter of course. But Essex declared that the honour
of his office was in his keeping and that the fact of his own immunity
only made him the more determined not to injure his successors. To
alienate the Phoenix Park would be to deprive every future viceroy
of the only place where he could ride or walk in comfort, for the
Castle was a house merely, and a very bad one. The venison was also
a consideration. With the recent additions made under Ormonde, which
had cost the King 10,000_l._, the area of the park was over 2000 acres
and its value was certainly more than double that sum. All this it was
proposed to settle on the Duchess and her natural sons by the King
successively in tail male. Shaftesbury was Lord Chancellor, and to him
Essex appealed as the proper person to prevent this monstrous job. He
reminded him that Charles II. had learned to appreciate a chancellor
who repeatedly refused to obey him in making grants which he knew were
against his interests. We have not Shaftesbury's answer, but the scheme
was abandoned, though Essex was fain to find other lands of equal value
for the rapacious Barbara. Ten years earlier he might have been unable
to save the park, but poor Alinda was growing old and her numerous
infidelities were well known to Charles. Nell Gwyn was and remained in
favour, and Louise de Keroualle was fairly installed as the official
mistress.[104]

[Sidenote: The provincial presidencies suppressed.]

Essex was ordered by his instructions to suppress the presidencies
of Munster and Connaught which had been established in 1569. Ireton
thought these provincial governments an unnecessary charge to the
country, and Ormonde was much of the same opinion. Sir George Rawdon,
who had found that Ulster did very well without a special governor,
said it was 'better for a son to have only a father than a grandfather
also.' Lord Berkeley, whose interest in the presidency of Connaught
was merely pecuniary, objected to its abolition unless an income was
secured to him; this was granted, and Lord Kingston, who was a local
magnate and had done the work, was also provided for. Orrery secured
royal favour by prompt resignation, and was very liberally treated as
to money. He remained in command of the troops in Munster, but was
refused leave to have six iron guns mounted at Castlemartyr, and his
licence to keep cannon at Charleville was also withdrawn. He was never
trusted by Essex, and long cherished the hope of superseding him.[105]

[Sidenote: Intolerance of the English Parliament.]

The Parliament which passed the Test Act was not likely to let Ireland
alone. On March 8 the King cancelled his Declaration of Indulgence one
month after he had publicly 'resolved to stick' to it. A week later the
House of Commons took Irish grievances into consideration. Some Roman
Catholics had been made Justices of the Peace and some admitted to
corporations, and disorders had taken place. At Clonmel in particular,
when the Protestant Mayor and corporation were returning on November
5 from the service commemorating the Gunpowder Plot, they were set
upon by the mob, but no great harm was done. Archbishop Peter Talbot
had been using his power to oppress loyal Papists, and the country
was swarming with priests and friars. Colonel Richard Talbot had a
troop of horse, and it was against him that the main debate turned,
since he was agent for the recusants and had obtained the commission
which was daily threatening the Revolution settlement. Henry Coventry
used his influence to calm the House, but on the following day it was
unanimously decided to address the King about Ireland.[106]

[Sidenote: Address of the Commons.]

A week later the address was brought up and agreed to without a
division. The Commons demanded that the commission of enquiry into the
Acts of Settlement should be revoked, as tending to the overthrow
of those Acts and the disturbance of the kingdom. They required that
Papists should be disarmed and that none should be suffered to be or
to remain Judges, Justices of the Peace, Sheriffs, Coroners, Mayors,
Sovereigns, or Portreeves. Titular bishops and abbots, especially Peter
Talbot, were to be exiled as well as all regular clergy, 'Convents,
seminaries, and other public Popish schools' to be suppressed. English
Protestant settlers were to be encouraged, and it was specially desired
'that Colonel Richard Talbot, who has notoriously assumed to himself
the title of agent of the Roman Catholics of Ireland, be immediately
dismissed out of all command, either civil or military, and forbid an
access to Your Majesty's Court.' Such was the result of the treaty of
Dover and the second Dutch war.[107]

[Sidenote: The King's surrender.]

[Sidenote: Proclamation against titular bishops.]

[Sidenote: Proclamation against convents, &c.]

In a letter of the previous year Charles had directed that there
should be no further prosecution for things done during the Civil
War, thus carrying out the principle of the Act of Indemnity. He
hesitated about cancelling this wise letter, and took no notice of
the demand that Richard Talbot should be forbidden the Court. But on
every other point his surrender to the Commons' address was complete.
It was known that Talbot had talked about his intention to tear up
the Act of Settlement, but he was allowed to sell his troop and to go
abroad. The Rupert commission of enquiry was recalled in July, after a
debate in the English Privy Council, and the hopes of the dispossessed
Roman Catholics were deferred until the day when Talbot should return
in triumph to govern Ireland. In the meantime, Essex was ordered to
encourage the English planters and Protestant interest and to 'suppress
the insolency of Irish Papists.' A proclamation was accordingly issued
forbidding them to keep firearms without a licence, but it was not
very strictly executed, for the Lord Lieutenant discriminated between
arms kept for offence or defence, and he had no intention of depriving
gentlemen of their swords. By another proclamation titular bishops and
other dignitaries, and all regulars were ordered out of the country,
Peter Talbot being mentioned by name. Most of the bishops had to go,
but there was a difficulty about the friars, because some of them had
been useful, particularly the few remaining of Peter Walsh's party,
whose lives would hardly be safe abroad. On this point Essex wrote
direct to Ormonde, whose policy about dividing the Roman clergy he
exactly followed. John O'Molony of Killaloe, 'the most dangerous
because the wisest man of their clergy, made a composure of all the
differences among the men of their religion,' and the only chance of
profiting by their dissensions was to encourage a few friars 'who
always have their little wrangles with the secular clergy.' O'Molony,
who played an important part later, had private means, and Essex
thought him a pensioner of France, whither he now retired. Talbot
went to Paris. Oliver Plunket remained in Ireland, but he thought it
prudent to hide for a time and suffered considerable hardship, though
in his case Essex had certainly no wish to be strict. On the whole
the proclamation was very slackly executed, of which there were many
complaints, and the King enjoined increased severity. A second and
more stringent proclamation was accordingly issued with orders that
all 'convents, seminaries, friaries, nunneries, and Popish schools in
Ireland be forthwith utterly suppressed.' Ordinary secular priests were
not included in either proclamation and were not seriously interfered
with. The bishops and friars were a great source of expense to the
impoverished gentry, and the Lord Lieutenant thought their banishment
would not be unpopular, but, he added, should it be resolved to use
like measure with all the seculars, it must be remembered that there
were several hundred thousand Roman Catholics in Ireland and he would
not undertake to keep the peace without at least fifteen or twenty
thousand men regularly paid and available for duty.[108]

[Sidenote: Ormonde and Essex.]

During the time of Berkeley's viceroyalty and for long afterwards
Ormonde was more or less in disgrace and was carefully excluded from
consultations concerning Ireland. When Cary Dillon, afterwards Earl of
Roscommon, asked for his help, saying he had no friends but God and
his Grace, the Duke answered that no two persons had less interest
at Court. But he had influence in Parliament, and Essex sent him his
proxy early in 1674, hoped to see him soon in Ireland, and acknowledged
former friendly offices. In July he arrived at Kilkenny, and the Lord
Lieutenant again expressed a wish to see him and to have an opportunity
of consulting 'one of so much experience as your Grace in the business
of this country and of whose integrity there is so large testimony, as
it may seem a lessening to your Grace even to name it.' This was almost
an invitation to Dublin, but Ormonde's short visit to the capital was
not an unequivocal success. He was the first subject in Ireland, though
out of favour at Court, and his popularity was evident. Perhaps Essex
thought that he rather overshadowed him, or it may be that his visitor
did not care about a private position in a city where he had always
been the chief person. But the friendly attitude of the two men was
nevertheless steadily maintained, though courtiers tried to excite
mutual jealousy. Essex refused to build barracks at Clonmel without
the consent of Ormonde, who was chief owner of the place, and thanked
him in 1676 and 1677 for efficient parliamentary support. At this time
Ormonde was again summoned to the Council and was sometimes consulted,
though the King was as cold in his demeanour as ever. Buckingham's
influence was at an end, and Ormonde became Lord Lieutenant again. He
was as anxious for his predecessor's honour as if it had been his own,
and reminded him that great pains had been taken to make bad blood
between them, but that he had nevertheless been always his sincere
friend.[109]

[Sidenote: The Tories still troublesome,]

[Sidenote: especially in Ulster.]

During the whole time of Essex's government there was great trouble
with brigandage. Every here and there some leader appeared who had
suffered by the Settlement, and a band was soon formed. The Dutch
war, the legislation against cattle, and the poverty of the country
generally encouraged idleness, for there was no money to pay even those
who were willing to work. The gaols were often crowded, but little
justice was done, for the chief sufferers were the poor, and their
helplessness made them afraid to give evidence. Orrery and most of
the extreme English party wished for a strong Protestant militia, but
against this Essex set his face. He said the regular army was able to
keep order, and no doubt it would have been had it been regularly paid.
A good deal of republican feeling lingered among the survivors of the
Protectorate, and where the Scots were strong the militiamen would be
sure to sympathise with the Presbyterians of Scotland whenever they
made a move. Orrery would be over the militia, and would thus be able
to advertise his Protestant zeal and to show his importance to the Lord
Lieutenant's detriment. Essex said it would even be better to exercise
martial law, an illegal course but one which had always been taken in
Ireland when necessity required. He objected to giving a reward for
bringing in offenders dead or alive, since it would lead to people
wreaking private vengeance in the name of order. The worst outrages
were in Ulster, but the mountainous parts of Kerry, Cork, and Waterford
were seldom altogether free from predatory outlaws. In the winter of
1673-4 the Tyrone farmers had to seek refuge in the towns, and no one
dared keep any money at home. Before the end of January some thirty
offenders were taken and hanged, but the horses in Sir George Rawdon's
troop were worn out before the spring by bad quarters and 'jaunting
after tories.' Before midsummer Essex was fain to issue a proclamation
against giving protections to robbers and Tories, advantage having been
taken of them to commit murder and burglary with impunity. A month
later there was a further proclamation reciting an Act of Henry VI.,
which authorised all persons to kill any one found housebreaking by
day or night, a reward for so doing to be levied off the barony. But
in the following winter Armagh was again infested by highway robbers.
In the year before the proclamation communications between Cork and
Kerry were interrupted, and some parish priests in the latter county
declared their willingness to excommunicate all Tories, murderers,
thieves, and robbers with their aiders and abettors, and generally to
help the authorities provided they were not required to give evidence
themselves.[110]

[Sidenote: Essex goes to England.]

Before Essex had been three years in Ireland there were many schemes
for upsetting him and many rumours as to his successor. Orrery,
Halifax, Lauderdale, Ormonde, and Conway were all named, but there
seems to have been no real intention of recalling him. In the summer
of 1675 he went to England for what he meant to be a short visit. The
King said he wished to consult him on Irish affairs, and named the
Primate and Sir Arthur Forbes as Lords Justices. Essex had asked for
such an opportunity of explaining matters as had been twice allowed
to Strafford, of clearing up the remaining difficulties under the Act
of Settlement, of making arrangements for collecting the revenue,
and of discussing measures for an Irish Parliament in contemplation.
On reaching London he found that he had enemies at Court, but that
they had made no impression on the King. Revenue matters detained
him unexpectedly for several months, during which he frequently met
Ormonde at the Privy Council, and for a long time after this there was
no further misunderstanding between them.[111]

[Sidenote: Financial irregularities, Lord Ranelagh.]

[Sidenote: Hearth-money.]

Richard Jones, Viscount Ranelagh, Orrery's nephew and grandson of
the prelate who had married Tyrone to Mabel Bagenal, had been much
befriended by Ormonde, who procured his appointment as Chancellor of
the Exchequer in 1668. The insight thus obtained into Irish finance
no doubt caused him to conceive the idea of getting the whole revenue
into his hands. The opportunity was afforded by Lord Aungier the
Vice-Treasurer, who produced a paper showing the state of the finances
for the five years ending with Christmas 1670. Ranelagh offered to
collect all the taxes and to pay all the expenses of government.
The revenue at this time amounted to about 200,000_l._, consisting
of quit-rents and other land taxes, and of imposts settled upon the
Crown by the late Parliament independent of anything that subsidies
might produce. These were the customs and excise leviable according
to rates fixed by law, ale-house duties, and the hearth-money granted
as compensation for the abolition of knight-service and of the Court
of Wards. Two shillings upon every fireplace or stove does not seem
a very heavy charge, but it was leviable by distress and involved
domiciliary visits, and it was manifestly unfair as between rich and
poor. It was abolished in England by William III., but continued long
afterwards in Ireland. 'It still remains,' wrote Howard in 1776, 'a
most oppressive burden on the occupiers of the wretched hovels in many
parts of this kingdom.' In the hands of farmers it was capable of great
abuse. Ranelagh and his partners were given complete control of the
finances from Christmas 1670 to Christmas 1675, and the Vice-Treasurer
was forbidden to interfere with them. The farmers behaved after their
kind. Poor men were often charged twice over, but the establishment
expenses were nevertheless badly paid. In the summer of 1676 nine
months' arrears, amounting to 139,000_l._, were due to the army alone,
and an unpaid army, Essex truly said, was like tinder. He could not
rest well until he saw these poor creatures righted. He believed that
if the Lords Justices had had 10,000_l._ they might have nipped the
rebellion of 1641 in the bud, but the Exchequer was empty and they had
no credit. He himself was in much the same position, and there were
small mutinies at Drogheda and Kinsale. Everything connected with the
army was out of order. There were scarcely 300 barrels of good powder
in the country, nor 500 good muskets. 'There is not one company in the
whole army completely armed, their muskets being many of them out of
order and of different bores and the pikes half of them broken, all
guns and fieldpieces in the several garrisons generally unmounted.'
Ranelagh was himself made Vice-Treasurer in June 1674, so that there
was no supervision whatever.[112]

[Sidenote: Essex, Ranelagh, and Ormonde.]

Though deprived of effective control Essex tried to keep the farmers
in order, but they appointed numerous private collectors, and it was
almost impossible to say who had a right to demand money. Moreover,
the King and the Lord Treasurer did what they could to thwart him, and
a letter signed by the one and countersigned by the other blamed him
obliquely for 'encroaching on the office of our said Vice-Treasurer.'
Many allowances were made for Ranelagh and much extra time was given
him, but he could not be brought to account. The real reason of the
extraordinary favour he enjoyed at Court doubtless was that he gave
Charles ready money behind the Lord Lieutenant's back, and if it be
true that one of his daughters became the King's mistress, as Henry
Sidney reports, that might be an additional argument. Both Cleveland
and Portsmouth made money out of Ireland. The King cared more about
putting cash into his Privy Purse than about the public service. His
state policy was influenced by this, as Louis XIV. well knew, and
smaller people could play the same game. In March 1677, Ranelagh at
last handed in an account up to the end of 1675, but declared that it
was not final and that the items were liable to reconsideration. As it
was confessedly imperfect, Essex refused to pass it. In the meantime,
Ranelagh had fallen foul of Ormonde, attributing his own troubles
to the mismanagement of Irish finance in the ten years preceding
1671, during the greater part of which the Duke was Lord Lieutenant.
Ormonde had not much difficulty in defending himself, and retorted
by showing how oppressive had been the system of collection under
Ranelagh. The inferior tax-gatherers did not hesitate to remedy their
own deficiencies by squeezing those whom they thought unable to defend
themselves. On the Ormonde estate alone 13,000_l._ were demanded from
tenants who were able to show that they owed only 657_l._, and where
less powerful landlords were involved it was easy to imagine that the
irregularities would be still worse. The King, after a full enquiry,
exonerated Ormonde from all blame, but continued to heap favours on
Ranelagh, who received an Earl's coronet at the end of 1677. In 1681 a
very large sum was still due, which Charles freely forgave. At a later
date Ranelagh was Paymaster-General for many years, and was expelled
from Parliament in 1702 for defalcations amounting to 72,000_l._[113]

[Sidenote: Scheme to make Monmouth Viceroy.]

[Sidenote: Charles sups with Ormonde.]

Essex returned to Ireland in May 1676, but it did not seem likely that
his future stay would be long. The King was inclined to think that he
had been viceroy long enough, and there were plenty of candidates
for the succession. Ormonde wished to be back in the Government, but
in the meantime he supported Essex. He has, wrote Aungier, now Earl
of Longford, 'stuck to your Excellency with the zeal and courage of a
true friend.' Danby, who was not particular in money matters, supported
Ranelagh, but the King refused to order Essex to pass an unsatisfactory
account. Early in 1677 Ranelagh and Danby, with the help of the Duchess
of Portsmouth, devised a scheme for making Monmouth Lord Lieutenant.
He was to remain in England while Conway governed Ireland as Deputy
with part of the salary and allowances, paying a round sum down and
defraying many expenses himself. Ormonde said he would never visit
Ireland while Conway governed it, and sought the help of the Duke of
York, which was readily given. At the beginning of April Charles, who
had not spoken to Ormonde, sent him word that he would come and sup
with him. A splendid repast was provided at a cost of 2000_l._, and
before leaving the King announced his intention of making his host
Lord Lieutenant. Yonder, he said next day, 'comes Ormonde; I have done
all I can to disoblige that man, and to make him as discontented as
others, but he will not be out of humour with me, he will be loyal
in spite of my teeth, I must even take him in again, and he is the
fittest person to govern Ireland.' Long before, to judge by their
demeanour, Buckingham had remarked that it was hard to say whether the
Duke of Ormonde was in disgrace with the King or the King with the
Duke of Ormonde. Essex was recalled with many handsome expressions,
his successor stipulating that the same complimentary words should be
used as in his own case. The letter had been signed, but Charles made
the desired addition on the margin in Coventry's presence. The new
appointment was made without consulting Danby, and Essex was told that
he might appoint Lords Justices and come away or wait for Ormonde's
arrival, just as he pleased.[114]

[Sidenote: Ireland terrorised by outlaws.]

With all his diligence Essex had not succeeded in getting rid of the
Tories and other disturbers of the peace. Orrery was an alarmist, but
he found it hard to get even murder punished. One very bad offender
had his bonds cut by an Irish constable, and many local magistrates
'living in lone houses, fearing their activity might cause revenge, are
remiss.' Lord Massereene reported that the southern part of Londonderry
county was full of idle people 'supporting themselves and their clans
by the spoil of others.' In Connaught Dr. Thomas Otway, Bishop of
Killala, was particularly active, and had an equally low opinion of the
justices, but approved the conduct of some Scottish iron-workers who
cut off the heads of such Tories as they could catch. 'This chopping
of their heads doth much more terrify others from running out than
hanging, though that doth pretty well when they come to it, but it
is a long time first, they have so many friends not only Irish but
English and some of them sitting on the bench ... all our justices
are tantum non Presbyterians and I wish they were but tantum nons.'
The Presbyterians, said Otway, were nearly as subtle proselytisers as
the Jesuits, and many scandalous papers against episcopacy were in
circulation. Even the gentle Margetson reported that there were great
meetings for no good, though they were professedly only to 'hear the
word.' Considering the state of Scotland at the time there was some
cause for alarm.[115]

[Sidenote: Ormonde returns to the Government.]

[Sidenote: Irish doctors at Oxford.]

Ormonde left London early in August 1677, and paid his first visit to
Oxford as Chancellor by the way. He entered the town from the east
with at least fourteen coaches and accompanied by the Duchess and
several ladies. Anglesey was one of those who travelled with him. It
was market day and the High Street was crowded with butchers' stalls,
but the Chancellor halted at St. Mary's and heard a speech from South,
who had long been public orator. From Carfax to Christ Church the
street was lined by the undergraduates, more speeches being delivered
at various points, and there was a dinner at Magdalen. The next day
being Sunday the Lord Lieutenant heard two sermons at St. Mary's and
dined with Bishop Fell at Christ Church. Next day twenty-two degrees
were conferred at the Chancellor's request. Fell had begged him to be
merciful, as plenty of unworthy persons might take advantage of such an
opportunity, but Ormonde said he would be responsible for his men. They
were nearly all more or less connected with Ireland, among them being
Lord Longford, Sir Robert Southwell, and Robert Fitzgerald, who played
a distinguished part in 1690. Then there was another speech from South,
and Ormonde set out at once for Holyhead by the Banbury road. He had to
time the journey so that all his coaches could pass by the beach round
Penmaenmawr, over which there was no road. At Dublin he was received
with great honour. To show his sense of the Duke's friendly behaviour,
Essex had not applied for Lords Justices as he had leave to do, but
handed over the sword himself. There was not to be another change as
long as Charles II. lived.[116]

FOOTNOTES:

[100] Arlington to Essex, January 6, 1671-2, _Stowe MSS._, vol. cc.
Orrery to Essex, February 3, _ib._ Burnet's _Own Times_, i. 396, 476.
The King to Berkeley, April 30, 1672, State Papers, _Domestic_.

[101] Essex to Arlington, August 24, 1672, _Essex Papers_. The King to
Essex, August 31, _ib._

[102] The rules under the 82nd clause of the Act of Explanation are
printed in _Irish Statutes_, iii. 205 _sqq._, under 25 Car. II. The
slight difference in the case of Drogheda seems to arise from the fact
that rules had been made for that town by Ossory in 1668, see Essex's
letter of August 17 and D'Alton's _Hist. of Drogheda_, i. 191. Essex to
Arlington, January 20, 1672-3, and July 19, _Essex Papers_. Proceedings
in the English Privy Council reported by Southwell, _ib._ July 26. The
King to Essex, November 5, 1672, and January 14, 1672-3, State Papers,
_Domestic_.

[103] Essex and Boyle to Arlington, September 21, 1672, State Papers,
_Domestic_. Essex to Arlington and to the King, July 22, 1673, _Essex
Papers_ to W. Harbord, _ib._ March 21, 1673-4; to Danby, February 10,
1674-5, _ib._ Totty carried his grievances to London, and on June 15,
1675, Essex described him to Coventry as the 'principal incendiary in
Dublin, a trooper many years in Cromwell's army, wretchedly poor and
has patched himself up by presents and otherwise out of collections
from several corporations of the city, to encourage and promote these
broils.'--_Essex Letters_, p. 345.

[104] Andrew Marvell's letter of August 9, 1667, _Works_, ii. 392. In
his _Last Instructions to a Painter_, 1667, he says Castlemaine was
growing old, but she was then only twenty-six. Essex's three letters to
Shaftesbury, March 8, April 12, and May 3, 1673, are printed in full
in Christie's _Life_, appx. iv. Warrant for the grant, February 26,
1672-3, State Papers, _Domestic_. Godolphin to Essex, July 16, 1674,
_Essex Papers_, vol. i. H. Coventry cautiously resisted a grant to Nell
Gwyn, _Essex Papers_, ed. Pike, 145.

[105] Essex to Arlington, September 17, 1672, State Papers, _Domestic_.
Berkeley to Arlington, July 10, 1673, _ib._ The King to Essex, January
13, 1674-5, _ib._ Orrery to Essex, August 16, 1672, _Essex Papers_;
Essex to Arlington, August 27, _ib._ And for Orrery's case, see _Liber
Munerum Publicorum_, Part ii. 185. He tried to keep an annual allowance
of 66_l._ for house-hire after the Munster Presidency was abolished,
but Essex had it stopped, State Papers, _Domestic_, 1675, pp. 502, 558.

[106] Grey's _Debates_, ii. 118-129, 132, March 17 and 18, 1672-3. For
the Clonmel riot see Ford to Arlington, November 25, 1672, and Essex to
same, February 18, 1672-3, State Papers, _Domestic_.

[107] The text of the address is in Grey's _Debates_, ii. 159, March
29, 1673.

[108] _Letters to Williamson_, ed. Christie, July 4, 1673. Letter
from the Privy Council ordering compliance with the Commons' address,
September 26, 1673, State Papers, _Domestic_. Essex to Capel, October
13, _Essex Papers_; to Arlington, October 28, _ib._; to Ormonde,
November 14, _ib._; to W. Harbord, January 25, 1673-4, _ib._ Ormonde to
Essex, December 9, _ib._ The proclamations of October 27 and November
8, 1673, and April 27, 1674, are in State Papers, _Domestic_, with the
King's letter of March 31. Brady's _Episcopal Succession_, ii. 120.

[109] Essex to Ormonde, February 3, March 10, July 8, September 3,
1673-4, _Stowe MSS._, vol. ccxiv.; September 12, _ib._ vol. ccxvi.;
March 6, 1676-7, _ib._ vol. ccxvii. Ormonde to Essex, April 20, 1677,
_ib._ vol. ccxi. Carte's _Ormonde_, ii. 443, 446. Writing to Ranelagh
on June 1, 1675, Essex notes 'what an interest remains of a great man
who commanded here many years, by reason of the absolute power he had
of gratifying multitudes of people.'--_Essex Letters_, p. 299.

[110] Sir George Rawdon's letters from 1673 to 1675 in State Papers,
_Domestic_. Sir Henry Ingoldsby to Lord O'Brien, _ib._, January 26,
1673-4 Proclamation of March 2 and December 14, 1674, June 10 and July
7, 1675, _ib._ Letters during the same period in _Essex Papers_, pp.
117, 148, 177, 264; proposals from Kerry priests, _ib._, p. 306.

[111] Essex to the King, to Danby, and to Coventry, May 22, 1675,
_Essex Letters_.

[112] Ranelagh's patent was dated August 4, 1671. Essex to Danby,
March 11, 1676; to the King, September 8; and to Ormonde and Orrery,
September 12, _Stowe MSS._, vol. ccxvi.; to Orrery, January 30, _ib._
vol. ccxvii. Howard's _Hist. of the Exchequer_, i. 89. Macaulay's
_History_, chaps. iii. and xi. Petty's _Treatise on Taxes_, chap. xv.
11.

[113] W. Harbord to Essex, April 4, 1674, _Essex Papers_. Conway
to Essex, _ib._ p. 221. Essex to H. Coventry, May 22, 1675, _Essex
Letters_, much more outspoken than those of the same date to Charles
and Danby. Lord Lieutenant and Council to Williamson, March 2, 1676-7,
_Stowe MSS._, vol. ccxvii. The contest between Ormonde and Ranelagh is
given in Carte's _Ormonde_, ii. 451-463, including the scene at the
Privy Council in November 1675, and Ormonde's written defence after
Ranelagh had given particulars on March 1, 1675-6, also his memoir
for the King in 1675, _ib._ appx. no. 92. After reading Ormonde's
statement Essex wrote to him on May 23, 1676, that he was right, _Stowe
MSS._, vol. ccxvi. Ormonde to Essex, July 2, _ib._, vol. ccx. Burnet's
_Own Times_, i. 398, and Airy's note. See the article on Ranelagh in
_Dictionary of National Biography_. Henry Sidney's _Diary_.

[114] Longford to Essex, August 26, 1676, _Stowe MSS._, vol. ccx. H.
Coventry to Essex, July 5, 1676, _ib._, January 9 and April 20, 1677,
_ib._ vol. ccxi. Sir H. Capel to Essex, April 16, 1677, _ib._ Clarke's
_Life of James II._, i. 507. Carte's _Ormonde_, ii. 463-466. Writing
to Essex at the moment of his recall Ormonde says, there have been and
will be great pains taken to stir up bad blood between them, but that
he will always be truly his friend, April 20, 1677, _Stowe MSS._, vol.
ccxi.

[115] Orrery to Essex, December 15 and 29, 1676, _Stowe MSS._, vol.
ccx. Bishop of Killala to Essex, January 22, February 14, March 28,
1677, _ib._ vol. ccxi. Primate Margetson to Essex, August 26, 1676,
_ib._ vol. ccx. Massereene to same, October 31, _ib._

[116] A. Wood's _Life and Times_, ed. Clark, ii. 385. Carte's
_Ormonde_, ii. 465-469. Essex to Ormonde, April 28, 1677, _Stowe MSS._,
vol. ccxvii. Ormonde to Fell, June 16, and to Essex, August 4, _Ormonde
Papers_, N.S.




CHAPTER XLVII

GOVERNMENT OF ORMONDE, 1677-1685


[Sidenote: Revenue abuses.]

On his return to Ireland Ormonde was at once involved in revenue
difficulties. Ranelagh was allowed to collect arrears long after his
contract had expired, and the Lord Lieutenant had the worst opinion of
Sir James Shaen, who was the chief man among the new farmers. Indeed
it was amply proved that great abuses are inseparable from a system of
farming, and that a complete change would have to be made. The farmers,
said Petty, 'have done all that knaves and fools and that sharks and
beggars could do.' He was himself named as one, but Ranelagh and Shaen
managed to keep him out, and he had endless trouble with them. The
system indeed was essentially bad. The army was too weak, but small as
it was the pay was always in arrear. Ormonde saw his way to increasing
the revenue gradually, and was anxious to increase the army too, but
not until accounts could be balanced. He proposed to hold a Parliament
and obtain twelve subsidies amounting to 180,000_l._ payable in three
years. But the farmers of the revenue objected to this on the ground
that the additional burden on the taxpayer would make it impossible
for them to fulfil their contracts. The King, Coventry wrote, 'is much
more desirous of a revenue than subsidies, and would have your chief
application be to improve that to 300,000_l._ a year, and he hath
commanded me to tell your Grace you may assure them it shall all be
spent in the kingdom and none sent over hither.'[117]

[Sidenote: A Parliament contemplated.]

[Sidenote: Unceasing scramble for land.]

[Sidenote: Proposed remedial legislation.]

In June 1678 it was decided that there should be a Parliament before
Christmas, and the heads of sundry bills were sent over. The work
of the Land Settlement was incomplete, and there was much property
without a clear title and liable to be seized under one pretence
or another. Borrowing an expression from Temple, Essex, who also
desired to hold a Parliament, declared that the lands of Ireland had
been 'a mere scramble,' that the minds of all men were consequently
disturbed, English settlers frightened away, and the application of
capital prevented. The King was fully aware of this, but he added
to the confusion by making grants of concealed lands to importunate
suitors. Things were particularly bad in Connaught and Clare, where the
transplantation had made titles even more uncertain than elsewhere.
Charles was induced to withdraw some of his piratical letters, but
the courtiers were not much discouraged in their endeavours to obtain
Irish estates without paying for them. Ormonde now had a Bill prepared
to put an end to this state of things, but there was great opposition
to it on the ground that it would confirm intruders who had entered on
lands to which they had no right. It was proposed to have a commission
lasting five years for the confirmation of titles, but it was feared
that this would expose all alike to the danger of having to take out
new patents. A Bill of Oblivion was also under consideration, by which
malicious prosecution would be prevented for offences of very old date,
but it was not likely that this would pass easily in a legislature
where the Adventurers and soldiers commanded a majority. Old arrears of
taxation were also to be wiped out. It was further proposed to modify
the intolerable burden of the hearth-money, the collectors having power
to seize the poor cabin-holder's bed and the pot in which he boiled his
potatoes. The loss of revenue was to be made up by increased licensing
and excise duties. But all these plans were destined to come to
nothing, for on September 28 Oates and Tonge appeared before the Privy
Council.[118]

[Sidenote: The Popish Plot.]

[Sidenote: Alarmist measures.]

According to the first informers Ormonde was to be murdered as well
as the King. The Protestants were to be massacred as in 1641, and
Ireland taken charge of by a papal nuncio with the assistance of Louis
XIV. A little later the extreme Protestants were denouncing the Lord
Lieutenant as favourable to the plot. He hardly knew what to make of
the news, and even Coventry was puzzled for a time. Orders of the most
stringent kind were soon sent from England, and there was nothing to
do but to obey them. The English Government were assured not only
that Ormonde was to be killed through Peter Talbot's contrivance, but
that the nuncio had been already sent, and also 40,000 black bills to
arm the Irish. Ormonde was at Kilkenny when he received Southwell's
letter with a report of the first day's proceedings at the English
Privy Council. 'I have the honour,' he said, 'to be singly named with
the King. Who may come in after I know not, but sure His Majesty was
to be better attended than by me alone.... I hope I shall rather go
alone than in the company they designed me; though it be the best in
the world.' On his return to Dublin he found Archbishop Talbot already
in close custody. 'Peter Walsh,' he wrote, 'is able to say something
of Peter Talbot's threats against my life, but I would not have him
called to testify anything without his own free consent.' Officers and
soldiers were recalled to quarters, and the oath of supremacy ordered
to be strictly enforced. Popish residents for twelve months in garrison
towns were not disturbed, but strict rules were made against fresh
ones coming in, and in the cases of Drogheda, Cork, Wexford, Limerick,
Waterford, Youghal, and Galway, fairs and markets were to be held
outside the walls. Roman Catholics were forbidden to keep arms without
licence, and their dignitaries as well as all Jesuits and regulars were
ordered to leave the kingdom. As usual in former cases, the latter
order was very imperfectly obeyed, and three months later a reward
was offered for apprehension of the most important ecclesiastics--ten
pounds for a bishop or Jesuit, and five pounds for any of the
others.[119]

[Sidenote: Ormonde accused of favouring the Papists.]

William Ryan, superior of the Jesuits, was apprehended, but there was
nothing material against him and he was put on board a ship bound for
foreign parts. Orders came from England to arrest Lord Mountgarret, but
he was bedridden, and that was considered to be imprisonment enough.
His son Richard, a foolish young man with a sensible wife, was arrested
and so was Colonel Richard Talbot, but the latter was allowed to go
abroad as his health suffered from confinement. No evidence of any plot
was discovered, but anonymous letters were scattered about the streets
of Dublin professing to give information of a conspiracy against
Ormonde's life, and a reward of 200_l._ was offered by proclamation for
a full discovery. In the meantime he was accused in London of treating
the Protestants badly, and Anglesey in his character of candid friend
carefully related all that he heard. One charge was that the Lord
Lieutenant had given twenty-one days to the Papists for the surrender
of their arms, thus warning them to hide all weapons, 'whereas in 1663
the poor English were searched by surprises and their arms taken away
and not restored to this day.' To this the answer was easy, that the
Roman Catholics, being fifteen to one, could not be quickly disarmed,
and that firearms concealed in damp cellars would soon be very
harmless. As to the plot of 1663, it was the work of persons who were
Protestants only in so far that they did not call themselves Papists,
but who were as ready to upset governments and murder kings as any
disciple of Suarez. He was accused of neglecting the safety of Dublin
and of keeping the powder carelessly in a dangerous place, but he
showed that the garrison was sufficient, that the magazine was where he
found it, and that there was no other available building. As to having
Papist soldiers in Ireland, they were sent there by the King, who had
recalled them from the French service, and he wished them away 'but
not in France lest we should have them here too soon again.' The last
article of accusation mentioned by Anglesey was that Lord Mayor Ward
was a dull fool, but to this the Lord Lieutenant had a full answer:
'He had wit enough to get to be rich and an alderman, and I think by
those steps men get to be Lord Mayors. If I could have foreseen the
plot I would have interposed for an abler politician.' Anglesey made
great professions of friendship, but neither Ormonde nor Ossory trusted
him.[120]

[Sidenote: Ormonde and Orrery.]

Students of Irish history have to guard themselves against seeing
things too exclusively through Ormonde's eyes. He looms so large,
compared with other Irish or Anglo-Irishmen of his day, that there is
some danger of being unjust to others. But Burnet was not an admirer
of his, yet he stigmatises Anglesey and Orrery, his chief critics,
as 'two men of a very indifferent reputation.' Anglesey indeed, he
says, was very corrupt, 'stuck at nothing and was ashamed of nothing.'
His letter, mentioned above, was no doubt mainly founded on Orrery's
information. The ex-president, whom Ossory called the 'Charlatan of
Munster,' was a persistent alarmist who posed as the champion of the
Irish Protestants and thought the Lord Lieutenant altogether too
favourable to the Roman Catholics. A French invasion was, in his view,
a thing to be daily expected, and the preparations to oppose it were
quite insufficient. He was still major-general in his own province
and wished to be at the head of a great Protestant militia, about the
embodiment of which he thought the Lord Lieutenant too inactive. There
does not seem to have been any idea of a French descent on Ireland,
and after the conclusion of the peace of Nimeguen there could be no
real danger. But Orrery continued to complain of inadequate military
arrangements, and to lament that the Irish Government were blind to the
Irish ramifications of the plot. He was not satisfied with warning
statesmen in England, but circulated his complaints among courtiers and
private members of Parliament, thus aggravating the general atmosphere
of suspicion and panic. Ossory complained to the King, who merely said
that he knew Orrery for a rogue and that he would ever continue so.
No French soldiers came, and no attack on Protestants was made until
Charles II. and Ormonde were both dead and until the latter's policy
had been completely reversed. Ormonde tried to end the controversy with
his critic by one full letter, but gave it up in despair, 'his lordship
being impossible to be satisfied and of inexhaustible invention.' After
Orrery's death in October 1679, his sister, Lady Ranelagh, continued to
make mischief in Munster, but she was 'not so inventive.'[121]

[Sidenote: Shaftesbury attacks Ormonde.]

Shaftesbury used the plot for all it was worth. As to Ireland, he said,
'I am credibly informed that the papists have their arms restored, and
the Protestants are not, many of them, yet recovered from being the
suspected party. The sea-towns, as well as the inland, are full of
papists. That kingdom cannot long continue in the English hands if some
better care is not taken of it.' That this was a reflection on Ormonde
no candid reader will deny. And the speech as spoken may have been a
good deal stronger than the version published by Shaftesbury. But he
afterwards declared that his real object was to attack Lauderdale, and
that much more was said about Scotland. Ossory, however, who was an
old antagonist, took up the cudgels in what Achitophel's apologists
call a violent manner. His answer was at once printed in Holland, and
William of Orange admired it greatly. Ossory was wrong in saying that
Shaftesbury advised the stop of the Exchequer, but he said nothing
against it, and he was Lord Chancellor at the time. The most faithful
of biographers could not deny the _delenda est Carthago_ speech. But
Ossory's language, though in the main justified by facts, was not
opportune, and both Arlington and Southwell advised his father to write
in an apologetic or at least pacific strain. He did so, very much
against the grain, congratulating Shaftesbury upon becoming President
of the Council. He regretted Ossory's speech, but could not be 'much
offended at the mistake or transport of a near relation, who might
imagine I was glanced at, in which of all things in the world he knew
I was most tender in, and valued myself most upon, and I take the
liberty to believe that supposing the case your own, your lordship
would have the same indulgence for a son of yours.' This was all, he
told Southwell, he could 'obtain of himself to say.' Shaftesbury took
no notice of the letter, but he received it, and Christie found the
original among his papers nearly two hundred years later.[122]

[Sidenote: Intrigues about the viceroyalty.]

Sir William Temple's attempt to bridle the House of Commons with a
Privy Council of thirty is well known. It was to consist half of
official and half of independent members, and there was to be no
cabinet. The landed property of this body of magnates would nearly
equal that held by the Lower House in the aggregate. Barillon saw
at once that the plan would not work. The new Council was too large
for an executive and could not have the authority of a legislative
body. Having with great difficulty been induced to admit Halifax,
the King, much to Temple's disgust, brought in Shaftesbury and made
him President. The result was that a cabinet was almost immediately
formed consisting of Temple himself, Sunderland, Secretary of State;
Essex, First Lord of the Treasury; and Halifax, who was soon afterwards
made an Earl. Shaftesbury was surrounded by another little knot of
advanced exclusionists, and intrigue was the order of the day. It was
again reported that Halifax would be Lord Lieutenant. He refused the
offer, though some of his friends thought that he had been appointed.
Essex, on the contrary, was most anxious to return to Ireland, both the
emoluments and the position being to his taste. He kept up an interest
in the country by supporting Sir James Shaen and the revenue farmers
who gave Ormonde so much trouble and prevented him from having leave to
hold a Parliament. In the following year his designs on the viceroyalty
were clearly visible. 'My Lord,' said Shaftesbury, 'if you will come in
to us never trouble yourself, we will make you Lieutenant of Ireland.'
Temple calls these shameless words, but they had no direct result. It
does not appear that the King had any idea of superseding Ormonde.[123]

[Sidenote: 'The Plot' in Ireland.]

No evidence bearing upon Oates' plot had been discovered in Ireland,
but Shaftesbury did not neglect that fertile field. There was a scheme
to remodel the Irish Government without Ormonde, his place being filled
by Orrery, Conway, or Granard. That cowardly villain, Lord Howard of
Escrick, was thought of for Chancellor, and the Council was to be
filled with the most extreme men of the Protestant party. But the
King would have nothing to say to this precious plan, and it came to
naught. Under orders from England, Ormonde sought for witnesses, but
their stories did not fit in with those that had been told in London.
The first Irish case of any importance was that of Richard, Earl of
Tyrone, whose professed Protestantism was perhaps naturally doubted,
since he became a Roman Catholic at the beginning of the next reign.
He declared, however, that he was ready to sacrifice himself for the
Protestant religion in which he had brought up his two sons. He had
committed one Hubert Bourke, an attorney, for an assault upon a smith
named MacDaniel, and Bourke, being a man of bad character, was unable
to get bail. While in Waterford gaol he made charges against Tyrone,
who was summoned to Dublin and examined by the Council. Nothing of
importance appeared, but the Earl was indicted at Waterford Assizes,
in August 1679, for conspiring to bring in the French. The Grand
Jury ignored the bill, and Bourke's evidence of treasonable talks
was not believed. A further indictment in the following March had
the same fate, Chief Justice Keating presiding on both occasions.
Another informer, a Limerick gentleman named David Fitzgerald, made
similar charges against Lord Brittas and others, whom he accused of
a comprehensive scheme to massacre the Protestants and bring in the
French. Some of the accused were bailed for want of evidence, and in
other cases bills were ignored by the Limerick Grand Jury. Oates'
patrons in Parliament found it necessary to take other measures,
and the hatching of an Irish plot was entrusted to a sub-committee
consisting of Shaftesbury, Essex, Burlington, and Falconberg. A Mr.
Hetherington, apparently a person of some education, acted as agent and
stage-manager for Shaftesbury.[124]

[Sidenote: Abortive charges of treason.]

Tyrone was married to Anglesey's daughter, and an attempt was made to
implicate the latter, but it was too absurd to have any success. He
was himself confined for some time in the Gatehouse, and the Lords
declared themselves fully satisfied that there was and long had been
'a horrid and treasonable plot and conspiracy, contrived and carried
on by those of the Popish religion in Ireland for massacring the
English, and subverting the Protestant religion, and the ancient
established government of that kingdom.' They desired the concurrence
of the Commons, about which there was no difficulty, but Capel,
Hampden, and Russell were determined to involve James, and it was
added to the Lords' vote 'that the Duke of York's being a Papist, and
the expectation of his coming to the Crown, hath given the greatest
countenance and concurrence thereto as well as to the horrid Popish
Plot in this kingdom of England.' According to the Maguire precedent
Tyrone could be tried as a commoner in England, but the House preferred
to resolve unanimously that he should be impeached of high treason.
The charge came to nothing, for Parliament was dissolved a few days
later. For the same reasons the proceedings against Thomas Sheridan
were dropped, and he played an important part in Ireland during the
next reign. He was a son of Dennis Sheridan, who befriended Bedell and
others in 1641, his brother was Dean of Down and became a bishop next
year. Being imprisoned by the House of Commons on vague and almost
unintelligible charges, he sued out his Habeas Corpus, and when other
judges shirked the task Baron Weston had the courage to grant it. The
impeachment of Weston had also been voted for something he said at the
Kingston Assizes. Sheridan told the House that he had defended the
Protestant faith against the Jesuits and against friars of every order,
that he had communicated yearly since he was seventeen, and that he had
taken the oath of supremacy eleven times.[125]

[Sidenote: Spies and false witnesses.]

[Sidenote: Oliver Plunket accused.]

To expose once more the perjuries of Oates and his imitators is but
to slay the slain. Charles never believed in the plot, but he took no
steps to check the panic, and there was a golden time for spies and
informers. On returning from Kilkenny in October 1679, Ormonde found
Archbishop Talbot a close prisoner in Dublin Castle. He had been long
living openly and unmolested in his brother Richard's house. Archbishop
Plunket had been quiet in his province since the departure of Essex,
but came to Dublin in November 1679 to attend the deathbed of his
relative, the aged Bishop of Meath. A few days later he was arrested
by a party to whom Hetherington acted as guide. For a few weeks his
imprisonment was close, but there was nothing against him, and the
rule was soon relaxed. He was a prisoner only because he had not
left Ireland under the late proclamation, but a case of high treason
was gradually trumped up. The witnesses were instructed in London,
and Ormonde, rejecting their application for a postponement, had the
venue laid at Dundalk, where both they and the prisoner were known.
The result was that no evidence was offered and no Bill found. This
was in July, and the case was then adjourned to Dublin, where the
witnesses were in less danger of being arrested as thieves and Tories.
The Archbishop petitioned that he might be tried by a Louth jury, for
even a jury of Protestants who knew him and his accusers were not to
be feared. Before this point was finally settled, orders came that he
should be sent to London for trial, and he was lodged in Newgate before
the end of October 1680. Neither Ormonde nor his son Arran thought the
witnesses deserving of credit, but the latter foresaw that they would
be believed in England and that the Archbishop's fate was certain.[126]

[Sidenote: Plunket sent to England for trial.]

Ormonde thought that the evidence against Plunket was strong enough
if uncontradicted to justify his being sent for trial. But it is not
easy to reconcile the statements of liars, and the Westminster Grand
Jury ignored the Bill. The foreman, who was a zealous Protestant,
told Burnet that the witnesses evidently contradicted each other, and
when we consider their characters it is hard to see how they could
be believed under any circumstances. John MacMoyer and Hugh Duffy
were Franciscans of bad reputation--who consorted with the Tories and
were suspended by the Archbishop. Edmund Murphy, the parish priest
of Killevy, was also implicated in the prevailing brigandage, and
the respect due to him may be measured by his sworn admission that
it was indifferent to him whether he was a Protestant or a Priest.
Another witness was Henry O'Neill, who was hanged at Mullingar for
robbery a few months later, having fully confessed his perjuries,
which were chiefly instigated by John MacLane, a suspended priest,
who had also been one of the witnesses and was then in prison on a
charge of robbery. Henry O'Neill's son Neill also appeared against the
Archbishop. Other witnesses were Florence Wyer, related to MacMoyer;
Owen Murphy, who did not pretend to know anything; John Moyer, who
retailed gossip gathered in Italy and Spain; and one Hanlet or Hanlon,
who did much the same. These nine men, carefully selected out of a host
of informers, swore away Plunket's life with the entire approval of
three judges and of a deluded public.[127]

[Sidenote: A true bill found.]

[Sidenote: Nature of the evidence.]

The witnesses having been better drilled, a True Bill for High Treason
was eventually found, and on May 3 the Archbishop was arraigned at the
bar of the King's Bench. He was told that the abortive proceedings
in Ireland had not led to a trial, and that he might therefore be
legally tried in England for treason committed beyond channel. There
were precedents for this, and it is only necessary to mention the case
of Lord Maguire in 1645. Plunket then asked time to get his evidence
from Ireland, and the trial was fixed for June 8, five weeks off. This
seems a liberal interval, but in reality it was wholly insufficient,
for the Archbishop had hardly any money and expeditious travelling
was expensive. Moreover, the officials in Ireland would not give
copies of necessary records without an actual order of the Court. 'The
servants,' he said, 'that I sent hence and took shipping for Ireland
were two days at sea and came back again, and from thence were forced
to go to Holyhead and from Holyhead, in going to Dublin, they were
thirteen or fourteen days, the winds were so contrary, and then my
servants went about to go into the counties of Armagh and Derry.'
Even willing witnesses, being Roman Catholics, were afraid to start
without passports. The prisoner only asked for an adjournment till the
21st, when he was satisfied to be tried whether they had arrived or
not. Some of them had got as far as Coventry on the day of the trial,
but he was told that he had already had an extraordinary allowance
of time and that the fears and hesitations of Irish witnesses were
beyond the control of the Court. The keynote was struck by Sawyer
the Attorney-General: 'May it please your Lordship and you gentlemen
of the Jury, the character this gentleman bears as Primate under a
foreign and usurped jurisdiction will be a great inducement to you
to give credit to that evidence we shall produce before you.' Wyer
was the first witness, and he showed that Plunket received money and
exercised jurisdiction among the clergy, but failed to connect him,
except through the loosest hearsay, with any plot. There had been
intrigues with France in 1667 following upon the disappointment of the
Irish after the Act of Settlement, and there was an attempt to make
out that the conspiracy had gone on ever since and that the Archbishop
was at the head of it, the object being to further a French descent
at Carlingford. In Wyer's evidence, and in that of other witnesses,
papers were frequently referred to, and MacMoyer produced two, of which
one purported to be a translation from a copy made at Capranica, near
Rome, five years before, but which the Archbishop said was an absolute
forgery. The other was a copy in Plunket's own hand of statutes, as
they were called, concerning clerical contributions from Ireland to
Rome. Both documents were confessedly stolen out of a packet addressed
to the Secretary of Propaganda, and the original had been altered by
interpolating a figure. Edmund Murphy, who took credit for being one of
the first discoverers of the plot, but was now an unwilling witness,
tried to avoid repeating what he had sworn before the Grand Jury, and
said he had forgotten it. He hesitated and prevaricated, though pressed
by the Court, and in the end he was committed. When the evidence for
the Crown was concluded, a person in Court, whose name is not given,
handed Plunket a slip of paper with the names of three persons who
had received subpoenas. David Fitzgerald, who might have helped him
if he had had the courage to appear, did not answer his name, nor did
Eustace Comyn, whose 'mad narrative,' as Ormonde called it, was an
important element in the mass of hearsay and falsehood. The third was
Paul Gormar, who said he had never heard anything against Plunket, and
believed he had done more good than harm in Ireland.[128]

[Sidenote: Unfairness of the trial.]

[Sidenote: Execution of Plunket.]

According to the barbarous practice of the age Plunket was not allowed
counsel, and had to fight his battle alone before hostile judges,
against Sawyer, Jeffreys, Finch, and Maynard. His witnesses did not
arrive in time. He did not deny that he had exercised the jurisdiction
of a popish Primate to the full, but as to the French invasion it was
'all plain Romance--I never had any communication with any French
minister, cardinal, nor other.' As to his plan for having 70,000 men to
welcome the French at Carlingford, a glance at the map of Ireland would
show that it was a most unsuitable place for a descent. He might be
convicted of a præmunire under the Act of Elizabeth, but as to treason
he was quite innocent, 'as you will hear in time, and my character you
may receive from my Lord Chancellor of Ireland (Archbishop Boyle), my
Lord Berkeley, my Lord Essex, and the Duke of Ormonde.' According to
Pemberton there could not be a greater crime against God than trying
to propagate the religion of Rome, that, he said, 'was the bottom of
your treason.' The chief justice prided himself on the eminent fairness
of a trial in which he had constantly leaned against the prisoner. He
had had five weeks to prepare his case, and it was no concern of the
Court if that time was insufficient or if a priest educated abroad was
ignorant of the formalities necessary to obtain copies of records. On
the scaffold at Tyburn Plunket repeated his protestations of innocence.
He was executed on the same day as Fitzharris. The credulity of the
public was, however, nearly exhausted.[129]

[Sidenote: Character of the witnesses.]

[Sidenote: Ormonde's estimate of the evidence.]

According to what Echard believed to be unquestionable authority, Essex
told the King that the charges against Plunket could not be true, and
that Charles said the Earl might have saved him by saying as much at
the trial, but that he himself dared not pardon him. Burnet seems to
admit the royal plea as to Coleman because 'the tide went so high.' But
two and a half years later it had much subsided, and there was little
to be afraid of after the dissolution of the Oxford Parliament. At the
time of Plunket's trial Hetherington, who had contrived his arrest,
was in prison for seditious speeches. A cloud of Irish witnesses
continued to obscure the truth, and the weapon which Shaftesbury
had sharpened was soon turned against him. David Fitzgerald shifted
with the tide, and from being an informer became conspicuous against
the plot, and declared his intention to 'break Shaftesbury's knot.'
He said he could get forty Irishmen for 40_l._ to swear whatever he
wished, and that Hetherington and the other witnesses were all rogues,
thieves, gaolbreakers, and turbulent persons. Soon after the judicial
murder of Plunket Ormonde began an action of _scandalum magnatum_
against Hetherington, who was bailed by Richard Rumbold, the Rye House
conspirator. The evidence at the trial was strong and the defence weak,
so that a substantial Surrey jury found a verdict without leaving the
Court. The damages were assessed at 10,000_l._, though Ormonde had
only asked for 1000_l._, and Hetherington went to prison in default of
payment. Shaftesbury had already died in exile, and the Irish witnesses
were no longer paid or countenanced. Ormonde had long before said they
were all perjurers who 'went out of Ireland with bad English and worse
clothes and returned well bred gentlemen, well caronated, periwigged
and clothed. Brogues and leather straps are converted to fashionable
shoes and glittering buckles, which next to the zeal tories, thieves,
and friars have for the Protestant religion, is a main inducement to
bring in a shoal of informers.... The worst is they are so miserably
poor that we are fain to give them some allowance; and they find it
more honourable and safe to be the King's evidence than a cowstealer,
though that be their natural profession.[130]

[Sidenote: Castlehaven's Memoirs.]

[Sidenote: Anglesey answers him.]

In 1680, about the time of Sir Miles Stapleton's acquittal at York,
but before the trial of Lord Stafford, Castlehaven contributed to
the general confusion by publishing his memoirs. As a Roman Catholic
royalist with a good personal record for courage and honourable
conduct, he had not been molested, but his little book gave great
offence to those who were interested in the parliamentary settlement
of Ireland. Anglesey lost no time in answering Castlehaven, whom he
calls 'an enemy as keen as generous,' condemning the whole conduct of
the late war and asserting that the 'Irish did the English more hurt
and advantaged themselves more by the cessation and two first peaces
than ever they did or could do by force after the first massacre.'
This was to reflect on Charles I., who had ordered the truce of 1643
and the peace of 1646, and upon Charles II., who had confirmed the
peace of 1649. As to the Irish, they were all guilty of treason and
liable to forfeiture, their grievances being dismissed as 'crocodile
tears and groundless complaints.' Ormonde, whose relations were all
Roman Catholics, had helped them, but was himself a great gainer by the
confiscations, and so were Arlington and the Duke of York. The King did
not at first take the trouble to read Anglesey's pamphlet, but he let
it be known that he thought an answer was required. Ormonde hesitated
about a printed controversy with 'a man I have seen detected in public
of misinformation and mean artifices for sordid sums and yet never
blush at the matter, but appear the next day as brisk and confident
as his favourite Thornhill, when convicted of forgery in an open full
court.' A year later, after the Oxford dissolution, he saw less reason
for caution, and published a letter in which he says he had at first
supposed Anglesey's production to be that of a suborned libeller. It
was reported that his opponent was writing a regular history, and
he was ready to help him with documents contradicting his endless
misstatements. As for the present instalment he supposed it would be
allowed to die after it had 'performed its duty in coffee-houses.'
Anglesey printed and circulated an answer, asking for particulars
and threatening revelations, especially as to Ormonde's peaces with
the Irish. He employed Edmund Borlase to write a second answer to
Castlehaven, condemning the peaces and reflecting on Ormonde's conduct
throughout the Civil Wars.[131]

[Sidenote: Anglesey is turned out of office.]

When Ormonde returned to London in May he found the controversy raised
by Anglesey raging, and a general expectation that his antagonist
should be fully answered, if not by him, at least by an inspired
writer. By this time the King had Anglesey's pamphlet at his fingers'
ends, talked of it to all about him, and fully justified Ormonde's
conduct as to the first truce and two subsequent peaces with the Irish.
In his application to the King and Council Ormonde said he had been
in constant intercourse with his assailant for twenty years without
hearing of the accusations now made, which were evidently timed to suit
the prevailing atmosphere of suspicion. Anglesey's knowledge of Ireland
could not be denied, and 'his pretended candour and impartiality'
might make people believe him. The accuser now became the accused, and
he was carried before the Council in a fit of gout. Finding little
disposition to favour him, he boldly denied their authority to try a
peer for pretended libelling, and demanded an impartial jury. Charles's
answer was to deprive him of the Privy Seal and give it to Halifax,
whose services against the Exclusion Bill were thus in some degree
rewarded.[132]

[Sidenote: Irish outlaws. Redmond O'Hanlon.]

Brigandage in one form or other had annoyed all governors for
centuries. As the tribal system yielded gradually and grudgingly
before English law, there was never any lack of discontented men who
would fight but who would not work. The 'swordsmen' whom Chichester
strove to employ in foreign wars became 'tories' later, and after that
'rapparees,' when the older title had been assigned to an English
party. The most famous leader of these outlaws was Redmond O'Hanlon,
an educated gentleman who had lost his property through the operation
of the Acts of Settlement and Explanation. He had been abroad, and
his exploits were chronicled in France as those of Count Hanlon. For
many years he kept great part of Ulster in terror, many murders being
charged against him. He sometimes retired to Connaught, and even
ventured upon raids in the south. His chief place of abode was in the
mountains to the north of Dundalk. From the ranks of the Tories came
many of the witnesses for the plot, and spies retained for one purpose
could often be used for another. At the end of 1680 there was a reward
of 200_l._ for Redmond's head and 100_l._ for his brother Loughlin's.
Redmond's bitter enemy was Edmund Murphy of Killevy, who had to pay
him regular tribute, and it may be that he put Ormonde on the scent.
The Lord Lieutenant gave a special commission to Lieutenant William
Lucas, who by a judicious use of threats and money procured the death
of Redmond in the following April and of Loughlin a little later.
Sir Francis Brewster, when reporting the death of Redmond O'Hanlon,
had to go back to the fifteenth century for a parallel--'considering
the circumstances he lay under and the time he continued, he did in
my opinion things more to be admired [that is, wondered at] than
Scanderbeg himself.'[133]

[Sidenote: Southern Tories. Richard Power.]

The destruction of the O'Hanlons did not put an end to Ulster
brigandage, and Captain Hamilton, who was indefatigable against the
outlaws, earned the title of Tory Will. In Leinster the O'Brennans,
who had lost most of their land in Strafford's time, were the most
troublesome, and in Munster Richard Power was the chief offender. Hugh
Anderton, one of Ormonde's chaplains, was attacked while reading the
burial service in his own parish of Kilmallock, and he died of his
wounds. There were riots in Tipperary, and the O'Brennans were bold
enough to enter and rob Kilkenny Castle which the Lords Justices had
omitted to watch. Primate Boyle said 'Power is an absolute ubiquitous,
and tarries in no place long enough to be discovered and taken. He is
sometimes in the county of Waterford and sometimes in Kilkenny, and
immediately after we hear of his pranks in the county of Limerick and
in Kerry and Cork.' At last a spy earned the fifty guineas which was
his share of the price placed upon Power's head. He was surrounded by
soldiers in a house near Charleville and made a desperate resistance.
As he refused quarter, the officer in command ordered the building to
be set on fire. Power yielded rather than be burned to death. He was
brought out badly wounded, and hanged at Clonmel three weeks later,
'dying very magnanimously by the help of three bottles of sack, which
he took that morning for his morning's draught.'[134]

[Sidenote: Renewed attack on the Settlement.]

[Sidenote: A Court of Grace established,]

[Sidenote: which effects very little.]

Ormonde was in England from the end of April 1682 until August 1684,
leaving his son Arran as Deputy, who did very well but without
rivalling his much lamented brother. There were two quiet years in
Ireland, but for the trouble given by the Tories. Yet sufferers by the
Act of Settlement had not been silenced, and it was thought possible
at Court to make peace by confirming the titles of men in possession
on payment of fines, out of which some compensation might be given to
those who had just claims but for whom there was no available land.
Ormonde's brother-in-law, Colonel John Fitzpatrick, who was one of
the more fortunate Recusants, favoured the new plan, and a commission
was issued in March 1684 to the Chief Governor, the Chancellor, the
heads of the Treasury, and several of the judges, under which a
Court of Grace was established. It did not sit until June, and was
then occupied by disputes about fees which were to be reduced to the
detriment of existing officials. The terms of the Commission were so
wide that all patents had to pass that way. Richard Talbot was no doubt
favourable, for he was at this time urging his co-religionists to
moderation. Fitzpatrick had already been under the lash of the House
of Commons, and the Court of Grace was evidently disliked by the
extreme Protestant party, who were against anything tending to modify
the operation of the Act of Explanation. It was believed that some of
the fees were to go to the Duchess of Portsmouth. Anglesey attacked the
Commission violently as soon as its provisions were known and before he
had seen the text. He said it would only enrich lawyers and officials,
who were too well off already, and the wrongdoers, who had for years
been holding lands to which they had no title. The Court of Grace had
not time to do much, for the Commission expired with Charles II., and
three weeks after his death it was known that it would not be renewed.
Talbot, who then became Earl of Tyrconnel, no doubt saw his way to
something much more drastic.[135]

In spite of commercial restraints Ireland had prospered under Charles
II. The revenue doubled in twenty years. At first money had to be sent
from England, but later there was a surplus, which the King promised
should be spent in the country. Yet it was often not so spent, though
the soldiers' pay might be in arrear. Charles's leniency towards
Ranelagh may be explained by His Majesty having received money without
accounting for it publicly. The system of farming was at last condemned
after much unseemly wrangling between Ranelagh and Sir James Shaen,
which some well-informed people thought a sham. The former had been
Vice-Treasurer since 1674, and was dismissed in 1682, but in spite of
his huge defalcations he was well compensated for loss of office. The
collection of the taxes was handed over to Revenue Commissioners, with
Lord Longford, a skilled financier, at their head.[136]

[Sidenote: Last days of Charles II.]

[Sidenote: The policy of the next reign foreshadowed.]

[Sidenote: Recall of Ormonde.]

In May 1682 Ormonde reached London, and the Duke of York finally
came back from Scotland. From that until the end of the reign the
heir-presumptive exerted a great though not always a paramount
influence. The Rye House plot and other events connected with it
had nothing to say to Ireland, so that when Ormonde returned to his
government in August 1684 he had no reason to expect any change, and
he left Halifax and Rochester to struggle for supremacy. Before the
month was out the former had succeeded in driving his rival from the
Treasury and seeing him 'kicked upstairs' to the presidency of the
Council. Rochester hardly attempted to hide his vexation in writing
to Ormonde: 'The King hath given me a great deal of ease and a great
deal of honour.' In the meantime, James was planning the new policy for
Ireland which he was so soon and so unexpectedly enabled to carry out.
The first thing was to separate the command of the army from the Lord
Lieutenancy. Ormonde could hardly be deprived of privileges which he
had always enjoyed, and the scheme was kept secret until his back was
turned. Sunderland proposed to get rid of Rochester by sending him to
Ireland; and Richard Talbot was above all things anxious to have Roman
Catholic officers appointed. The King was induced to write a letter
saying that it was absolutely necessary for his service to make great
changes in Ireland, both civil and military. This would involve parting
with some office-holders whom Ormonde had appointed. Rochester had,
therefore, been chosen to succeed him whose ability was not doubtful
and who would be agreeable to him on account of near connection by
marriage. He might choose his own way of surrendering office, and live
either in England or Ireland. If he preferred the latter, Charles would
see that proper respect was paid him, and would in any event treat him
with unabated confidence. It was Ormonde's principle to honour and obey
the King, but in writing to his intimate friend Southwell he confessed
to being out of countenance, though at his age he was not sorry to be
relieved. And when he heard that the restrictions on his successor were
so great as to deny him power to appoint a single subaltern, then he
admitted it would have been very hard for him to fill the place, though
duty would not let him 'refuse to serve the King upon any terms or
in any station. From this difficulty, I thank God and the King, I am
delivered.'[137]

[Sidenote: Death of Charles II.]

Rochester was not destined to cross St. George's Channel on this
occasion. Charles II. died on February 6, 1685. Within six weeks
Halifax lost the Privy Seal, though he had been the chief instrument
in securing James's succession, and Rochester became Lord Treasurer.
Sunderland, who had voted for the Exclusion Bill and whose intrigues
reached everywhere, remained a Secretary of State. A few days later the
Chancellor-archbishop Boyle and Lord Granard were made Lords Justices
by patent to take effect as soon as it suited Ormonde's convenience to
swear them in. This was done on March 20, and by the end of the month
he was in London, having been met on the road by an unprecedented
number of coaches. St. James's Square was crowded with people who had
no coaches, but who showed their admiration of his character by their
shouts. In the month following the late King's death there had been
more robberies in Ireland than during a whole year before, the Tories
expecting that there would be no circuits and perhaps pardons at the
coronation.[138]

FOOTNOTES:

[117] Fitzmaurice's _Life of Petty_, p. 174. H. Coventry to Ormonde,
June 18, 1678, _Ormonde Papers_, N.S. Carte's _Ormonde_, ii. 469-473.
'The Earl of Essex told me that he knew the King did often take money
into his privy purse to defraud his exchequer,' Burnet, i. 398.

[118] Essex to Harbord, March 28, 1674, _Essex Papers_. H. Coventry to
Ormonde, June 18, 1678, _Ormonde Papers_, N.S. Longford to Ormonde,
_ib._ August 24, September 14, and October 5, Carte's _Ormonde_, ii.
472.

[119] A brief account of the conspiracy, &c., _Ormonde Papers_, N.S.,
iv. 181, calendared at August 13, 1678, but the date must be considered
doubtful. Southwell to Ormonde, September 28, _ib._ p. 454. Ormonde to
Lord Chancellor Boyle, October 7, _ib._ Narrative of proceedings of
Lord Lieutenant from October 7, 1678, to April 5, 1679, transmitted to
Coventry, _Ormonde Papers_, 1st series, ii. 254. Ormonde to Southwell,
October 5, _ib._, and the proclamations, _ib._ pp. 350-359. Account of
the public affairs in Ireland since the discovery of the late plot,
London, 1679 (after April 7).

[120] Anglesey to Ormonde, November 23, 1678, and the answer, November
29, which was considered satisfactory, _Ormonde Papers_, N.S. Ossory to
Ormonde, October 23 and December 10, _ib._

[121] Among the many letters in _Ormonde Papers_, vol. iv., the
following are the most important: Ossory to Ormonde, November 26, 1678;
Ormonde to Burlington, December 21; Ormonde to Orrery, January 11,
1678-9 (unfinished, with the above quotation endorsed); Burlington to
Ormonde, January 10; Orrery to Lord Chancellor Boyle, January 28, and
the answer March 8. A correspondent of Ormonde, writing from London,
May 13, 1679, says, 'Lady Ranelagh defames your Grace more maliciously
than ever, and there have been and daily are frequent meetings, both
public and private, for that purpose.'

[122] Shaftesbury's speech, March 25, 1679, is in his _Life_ by
Christie, ii. appx. vi., and Ormonde's letter to him, May 25, _ib._
ii. 337. Ossory's speech and William of Orange's comments (French) in
Carte's _Ormonde_, ii. appx. 93 and 94. Ormonde to Southwell, May 24
and November 8, _Ormonde Papers_, 1st series, ii. 288, 293. Southwell
to Ormonde, _ib._, N.S., April 22, iv. 505.

[123] 'Monsieur Barillon said it 'was making _des Etats_ and not _des
conseils_,' Temple's _Memoirs_, 3rd part. Many details in Courtenay's
_Life of Temple_, chap. xxiv. See the remarks in the second chapter of
Macaulay's _History_. Henry Savile to Halifax, May 17, 1679, in _Savile
Correspondence_. Halifax favoured the reappointment of Essex in 1679,
Burnet, i. 470. Later on Shaftesbury accused him of bargaining with the
Court to make him Lord Lieutenant, _ib._ 537.

[124] _Lords Journals_, xiii. 643. _Hist. MSS. Commission_, xi. 2.

[125] Grey's _Debates_, December 9, 10, and 15, January 6 and 7,
1680-1. Burnet's _Own Times_, i. 485. An independent version of the
January debates in _H.M.C._, 12th Report, appx. ix. 106.

[126] Plunket's account of the proceedings at Dundalk and afterwards
in Cardinal Moran's _Life_ of him, p. 289. Arran to Ormonde, November
6, 1680, _Ormonde Papers_, v. 477, and April 16, 1681, _ib._ vi. 36.
_The present state and condition of Ireland_, but more especially of
the province of Ulster humbly represented to the kingdom of England by
Edmund Murphy secular priest and titular chanter of Armagh, and one of
the first discoverers of the Irish Plot, London, 1681.

[127] Francis Gwyn to Ormonde, February 12, 1680-1, _Ormonde Papers_,
v. 580. Ormonde to Arran, February 19, _ib._ 586. Burnet's _Own Times_,
i. 502. Moran's _Life of Plunket_, chaps. xxv. and xxvi. Writing to
Sir John Malet, May 13, 1679, Orrery says Murphy had deposed very
circumstantially at Dublin, but was said to be a man of crazed brain
and therefore not much to be believed, _Additional MSS._ 32095, f. 186.

[128] State Trials, iii. 293.

[129] State Trials, _ut sup._ For the opinion of Essex and the King's
comments on it, see the notes to Airy's edition of Burnet, ii. 292,
and Burnet's own opinion. Luttrell does not seem to have had much
misgiving, for he considered the charge fully proved and 'the defence
very weak, alleging only that he wanted his witnesses and papers which
were in Ireland,' June 9 and July 1, 1681. _Hibernia Dominicana_, p.
130.

[130] _The Irish evidence convicted_ by their own oaths by W.
Hetherington, London, 1682. Power of attorney from Ormonde, September
1, 1681, _Ormonde Papers_, vi. 306; to Arran, June 26, 1683, _ib._ vii.
52. Luttrell, March 26 and May 3, 1683. Newsletter to Lady Weymouth,
May 3, _Additional MSS._, 32095, f. 212. Ormonde to Arran, November 17,
1681, in appx. to Carte's _Ormonde_, no. 126, contains the curious word
'caronated.' It appears in the original MS., but the late Sir James
Murray was unable to pronounce on the etymology. Writing to Ormonde on
May 20, 1682, Arran says, nine of the King's witnesses petitioned for
not less than 20_l._ apiece. He gave 40_l._ among them, 'part to defray
their charge at the inn where they lay, the rest to carry them home,
where I doubt not but they will follow their other trade and come to
the gallows that way.'--_Ormonde Papers_, vi. 365.

[131] Burnet, who was not prejudiced in Ormonde's favour, says (i. 97)
Anglesey 'stuck at nothing and was ashamed of nothing,' that he was
loved and trusted by no man of any party, had no regard for truth or
justice, sold everything and 'himself so often that at last the price
fell so low that he grew useless.' Essex thought he intrigued against
him, and Lord Mountjoy said he had no friends. Correspondence in the
_Ormonde Papers_, beginning with Lord Burlington's letter of October
12, 1680, and Ormonde's of February 19 following. Mountjoy's narrative
in 2nd Report of _Hist. MSS. Commission_, p. 213. _Athenæ Oxonienses_
(Bliss), iv. 181. I have used the Dublin 1815 reprint of Castlehaven's
_Memoirs_ from the revised edition of 1684: Anglesey's letter is
appended. In the _Supplement_ to his History, ed. Foxcroft, p. 62,
Burnet says Anglesey 'often begun a speech in Parliament all one way
and (upon some secret look that wrought upon him) has changed his note
quite and concluded totally different from his beginning ... I never
knew any one man that either loved him or trusted him.'

[132] _A true account of the whole proceedings_ between his Grace James
Duke of Ormonde and the Rt. Hon. Arthur Earl of Anglesey, late Privy
Seal before the King and Council, London, 1682 (attributed to Bishop
Morley). Lord Longford to Ormonde, February 25, 1681-2, and March 28,
_Ormonde Papers_, vi. 324, 325. Foxcroft's _Life of Halifax_, i. 360.
Luttrell, August 10, 1682. Anglesey's account of the Irish Civil War is
unfortunately lost. His son told John Dunton that the MS. was in hands
which would not let it all appear, Dunton's _Conversation in Ireland_,
1699.

[133] Carte's _Ormonde_, ii. 512; _Ormonde Papers_, vols. v. and vi.,
particularly Captain Charles Poyntz to Sir William Flower, May 3, 1681.
Edmund Murphy's pamphlet quoted above. Other details in Prendergast's
_Cromwellian Settlement_, 2nd edition, p. 352, and in the same writer's
_Ireland from the Restoration to the Revolution_. Notes to Hill's
_Montgomery MSS._, p. 119. Article on Redmond O'Hanlon in _Dict. of
National Biography_.

[134] Letters in vol. vii. of the _Ormonde Papers_, particularly W.
Hamilton to William Ellis, January 2, 1683-4; Primate Boyle to Ormonde,
October 3, 17, and 27, 1685; Longford to Ormonde, October 27.

[135] Arran's letters of May 27 and 30, and June 5, 1684, in _Ormonde
Papers_, vol. vii.; Anglesey to North and Halifax, _ib._ March 13;
Sir C. Wyche to Ormonde, _ib._ February 24, 1684-5. Cox's _Hibernia
Anglicana_, ii., Charles II., p. 16. _Secret Consults of the Romish
Party_, London, 1690, p. 40.

[136] Statement of Revenue for 1664, signed by Anglesey as
Vice-Treasurer, March 20, 1664-5, State Papers, _Ireland_: the total
is 153,205_l._ 19_s._ 8_d._ Abstract of Revenue for 1683 in appx. v.
to _Clarendon and Rochester Correspondence_, vol. i.: the total is
300,953_l._ 17_s._ 6_d._ _Liber Munerum Publicorum_, part ii. 133.
Among a host of letters in _Ormonde Papers_, see particularly Longford
to Ormonde, March 21, 1681-2, vi. 349, and Arran's letter with Report
on arrears following September 22, 1683, _ib._ vii. 135. See also the
article on Ranelagh in _Dict. of National Biography_.

[137] Charles II. to Ormonde, November 19, 1684, Carte's _Ormonde_
ii. appx. 128. Ormonde to Southwell, _ib._ 135 and 139. Rochester to
Ormonde, August 26, _Ormonde Papers_, vii. 266.

[138] Carte's _Ormonde_, ii. 542 _sqq._ Ormonde to Sunderland, March 6,
1684-5, in _Ormonde Papers_, vii. 266.




CHAPTER XLVIII

CLARENDON AND TYRCONNEL, 1685-1686


[Sidenote: Accession of James II., February 1685.]

[Sidenote: Public uneasiness.]

As soon as the bad news reached him, Ormonde called the Council
together. All leave was stopped, officers were ordered to their
quarters, and on the following day King James was proclaimed with great
pomp, but with many gloomy forebodings among the Protestants of Dublin.
The Lord Lieutenant's commission expired with Charles II., Lord Granard
and Archbishop Boyle remaining Lords Justices. But Ormonde gave a
dinner to all the officers then in Dublin, at the Royal Hospital, just
built most appropriately upon the site once occupied by the Priory of
St. John and dedicated to the use of worn-out soldiers. Raising his
glass, he said, 'Look here, gentlemen! They say at Court that I am now
become an old doating fool; you see my hand doth not shake, nor does my
heart fail, nor doubt but I will make some of them see their mistake,'
and so drank the new King's health. He then left Ireland for the last
time. On the road he chanced to see in the _Gazette_ that his regiment
of horse had been given to Richard Talbot without any notice to him.
Many of those Protestants who were in a position to do so, followed
their protector to England, many sought the colonies, and the shadow
of coming change was over those that remained. Even before Ormonde's
arrival in London, rumours were rife there that the repeal of the Act
of Settlement was intended.[139]

[Sidenote: Purging the army.]

Just three months after his accession, James made Talbot Earl of
Tyrconnel. The new peer was soon back in Ireland busying himself in
remodelling the army, though Granard ostensibly remained at its head,
much blamed for his complete surrender to the favourite. Monmouth's
invasion gave an excuse for disarming the Protestant militia; he
was outlawed as in England, and the arrest of those who spread his
declaration was ordered. Irish troops were sent to Ulster, and
communications with Scotland were maintained by sea, with a view to
frustrating Argyle's expedition. In the meantime the cashiering of
English officers and the substitution of Irish ones went on steadily.
Soon after the failure of both the English and Scotch adventurers,
Tyrconnel and Granard jointly reported that they had made many changes,
but that those who lost their commissions were mostly somebody's
servants, 'no officers and good for nothing, as most of the lieutenants
and cornets of this army are at present.' Colonel Justin MacCarthy
asked for the dismissal of Captain Bingham, absent without leave,
and the appointment of Thomas Nugent, who had served under him in
France, and had lost an estate during the usurpation. One reason given
for taking their arms from the militiamen was that they were often
carelessly kept, and might get into bad hands. In the autumn the arms
surrendered were accordingly stored at Dublin or Athlone for Leinster;
at Cork, Kinsale, Limerick, Waterford, and Duncannon for Munster;
at Galway or Athlone for Connaught, and for Ulster at Londonderry,
Carrickfergus, and Charlemont. Tyrconnel knew where to find them when
they were wanted for his own purposes later.[140]

[Sidenote: Influence of Tyrconnel.]

Tyrconnel, though as yet only a colonel, assumed the position of an
Inspector-General, and everybody gave way to him because he was
believed to represent the King's views. Orders were given to get rid
of all officers and soldiers who had served under Cromwell, upon which
Ormonde remarked that there were indeed a few who, after serving
Charles I. to the end, and Charles II. after Worcester, 'took service
in Ireland against the Irish barely for subsistence, and yet had
served the Crown as long as it had a foot of ground to fight upon.'
To represent such men as Cromwellians was a cruel injustice, and some
of them were among the best in the army. 'This I take to be the case
of one Quartermaster Benson in the Lord Blessington's troop, and may
be of more in the army.' His representations were allowed no weight,
and he believed that officers appointed by him were more certain to be
cashiered than others.[141]

[Sidenote: Clarendon made Lord Lieutenant.]

Rochester as Lord Treasurer, and his elder brother Clarendon as
Lord Privy Seal, seemed all-powerful for a time, since their royal
brother-in-law was still anxious to conciliate the Church of England,
and fidelity to that Church was the one point upon which the Hydes
showed resolution. In other respects they were both very subservient,
and the King hoped that the doctrine of Filmer's foolish book would
prevent them from ever asserting their independence. To get him
out of the way, Sunderland had recommended Rochester for the Lord
Lieutenancy, and for the same reason Rochester recommended Sunderland;
but neither of them would go. In September, Clarendon was nominated,
to the general joy of the Church party, but the best informed did
not envy his position. He was not required to resign the Privy Seal,
but Commissioners, of whom John Evelyn was one, were appointed to do
the work during his absence in Ireland. Tyrconnel prepared to go to
England, where he might undermine the Viceroy by his direct influence
with the King. Even among those of his own religion, his schemes caused
an uneasy feeling, and the gallant Colonel Grace, who became Governor
of Athlone, put information which reached him from Ireland into
Clarendon's hands.[142]

[Sidenote: Clarendon's arrival, January 1686.]

The new Lord Lieutenant left London on the 16th of December, escorted
by the fashionable world in two hundred carriages, some of which went
as far as St. Albans. He did not reach Dublin until January 9, his
mode of travelling being leisurely in the extreme. At Coventry he met
a servant of Sarsfield, who expressed surprise, the latest letters
from England saying that his appointment to Ireland was cancelled.
The same man announced that Tyrconnel was just leaving for England.
Clarendon noted that the two Coventry churches were well filled, thanks
to 'executing the law upon the non-conformists in making them pay.'
He was sumptuously entertained at Chester and at St. Asaph, where he
heard many stories about Tyrconnel. One of them was that he entered
the church at Whitechurch where a Talbot was buried whom he claimed as
ancestor. 'This church,' he said, 'was in better order when you took
it from us Catholics, but we shall have it shortly again, and then you
shall pay for all.' There was in those days no road over Penmaenmawr,
and it was customary to send heavy vehicles by water from Chester or
Neston. Sometimes the journey could be made from Conway by the sands,
but on this occasion tides did not serve. To Clarendon's great surprise
his servants managed to drag the carriages over the mountains, the
horses drawing in single file and four or five men shoving behind,
'so that this journey will be famous, three coaches and a waggon
having been brought over Penmaenmawr.' Lord Bulkeley entertained the
Lord Lieutenant at Beaumaris, the terrors of the Menai Straits were
successfully overcome, and the sea-sick company reached Dunleary at
last, in the early morning of January 9. The Primate sent his coach,
and Clarendon was sworn in the same day, his head still swimming from
the waves. 'I have,' he told the Council, 'the King's command to
declare upon all occasions, that whatever imaginary (for they can be
called no other) apprehensions any men here may have had, His Majesty
hath no intention of altering the Acts of Settlement.' Tyrconnel
reached London on the same day, having purposely missed the Lord
Lieutenant at Holyhead, though he thought it worth while to give out
that he was most anxious to meet him. 'Count Tyrconnel is come,' says a
London letter, 'and kindly received as he can wish: played the devil on
the road for horses.'[143]

[Sidenote: Revocation of the Edict of Nantes.]

Just before Clarendon's departure for Ireland, the French King took
a step which profoundly affected the history of Europe, and of
England and Ireland particularly. After having long been shamelessly
infringed, the Edict of Nantes was formally revoked in October 1685.
The Protestant Chapel at Charenton was pulled down by the mob of Paris.
It was pretended that there were no longer any heretics in France,
and that therefore the law which still partly protected them, was no
longer necessary. In official correspondence, the reformed faith was
known as the R.P.R. (religion prétendue réformée). Thousands conformed
insincerely, but a vast number preferred expatriation at the risk
of their lives, and carried their industry, their skill, and some
of their capital into Holland, Germany, and England. The tale which
these refugees had to tell fell upon no deaf ears, and great sums were
subscribed for their relief, but James II. took care that as many
as possible should remain unrelieved. The newspapers and gazettes
controlled by the Court were silent on the subject of the persecutions,
but private letters of news got into print, and the appearance of
the fugitives in person was more eloquent than any article. The King
could not prevent a great collection in their favour, but he directed
that no one should benefit by it who would not take the Anglican
sacramental test. Sincere French Calvinists were thus excluded from
relief. This was the period of his reign when James, deceived by the
slavish doctrines of some High Church divines, thought it possible to
be a despot with the help of the Established Church. When he found
that there were limits to what that Church would bear, he turned to
the Nonconformists in the name of religious liberty. After the failure
of his schemes, the victorious Protestants were guilty of grievous
persecution, but they remembered that James was the ally of the King
who had ruthlessly destroyed the religious liberties of his own
subjects.[144]

[Sidenote: Refugees from France and Ireland.]

[Sidenote: James attacks the Church establishment.]

While Huguenot visitors excited the anger and pity of English
Protestants, Irish Roman Catholics kept pouring into London to remind
them of dangers nearer home. Tyrconnel's countrymen gathered round him,
and it was soon known that he would return to Ireland as generalissimo,
and that great military and judicial changes would follow. Rumours of
all this, and even the names of those who were to lose their places and
of their successors were known in Dublin long before any intimation was
given to the Lord Lieutenant, who found that he had very little power.
The archbishopric of Cashel was vacant, and he proposed to fill it by
making two translations and a new appointment: 'though there be but one
see vacant, yet, for the enlargement of His Majesty's first-fruits,
and to make them as considerable as I can upon this occasion, I have
humbly proposed these removes.' This was for the King, but in writing
to Sancroft the Lord Lieutenant did not think it necessary to mention
his plan of supporting the Church by taxing her. The process was too
slow for James, who preferred to keep vacant sees in his own hands. By
this means the establishment might be made to pay for the clergy of the
King's religion. When Clarendon had been a little more than two months
in Ireland, Sunderland informed him that the King had long thought it
necessary to make great changes there, and that these could no longer
be delayed without much prejudice to his affairs. Catholics were to be
admitted to the Council and to be sheriffs, magistrates, and members
of corporations. New commissions in the army were already prepared and
would soon be sent over.[145]

[Sidenote: Protestant judges turned out.]

As a preliminary to the general remodelling, Primate Boyle was deprived
of the Great Seal, and no bishop has held it since. He was approaching
his eightieth year, and accepted dismissal with a good grace,
declaring, with imperfect apprehension of an archbishop's duties, that
he had made the whole business of his life to serve the Crown. Roman
Catholics had found him impartial, and even Tyrconnel admitted this,
but attributed it to craft, 'and, by God, I will have him out.' It
was thought prudent to appoint a Protestant successor until the King
felt strong enough for more extreme measures. The man chosen was Sir
Charles Porter, who was needy and extravagant and thought likely to be
subservient, but who afterwards showed unexpected independence. The
next step was to remove three judges--Sir Richard Reynell from the
King's Bench, Robert Johnson from the Common Pleas, and Sir Standish
Hartstonge from the Exchequer. They were all able men and nothing
could be said against them, but they were Protestants, and that was
enough. Johnson had been sixteen years a judge. Clarendon had pointed
out that the Act of Supremacy obliged all officials to take the oath;
if the King dispensed with that, he suggested that English Roman
Catholics should be sent over. James answered that he did not see how
employing some Catholic natives could harm 'the true English interest
there, so long as the Act of Settlement is kept untouched, which it
must always be, though many ill and disaffected people are secured in
their possessions by it.' Ten days later Lord Chancellor Porter reached
Dublin and publicly announced the King's resolution not to have the
Acts of Settlement shaken.[146]

[Sidenote: Roman Catholic judges appointed.]

The new Chancellor had heard the common report that there were to be
three Roman Catholic judges, but he was told nothing officially, and
the appointments were almost ostentatiously made without consulting
him or the Lord Lieutenant. The vacancy in the King's Bench was filled
by Thomas Nugent, a son of the late Earl of Westmeath, who boasted
about his promotion, and had his robes made in Dublin long before.
Clarendon says he was 'a man of birth indeed, but no lawyer, and so
will do no harm upon the account of his learning.' He and Lyndon,
the other puisne judge, squabbled 'like two women' about precedence.
Viceroy and Chancellor agreed that Nugent was foolish and troublesome.
The new judge of the Common Pleas was Denis Daly, 'one of the best
lawyers of that sort,' says Clarendon, 'but of old Irish race, and,
therefore, ought not to be a judge'; otherwise there was nothing
against him except that he was 'very bigoted and national.' He had
been bred a lawyer's clerk, and made money, which he invested in land
under Settlement titles. The appointment to the Exchequer was in some
ways the most important of the three Courts, because it was the only
one from which no writ of error lay in England. Charles Ingleby, an
English Roman Catholic, having refused to go to Ireland, the place was
given to Stephen Rice, whose abilities as a lawyer were not disputed.
Clarendon was not even formally consulted, though his patent gave him
the appointment of all judges and officers of the Exchequer except the
Chief Baron. Nugent, Daly, and Rice were dispensed from taking the oath
of supremacy, which had been invariably required ever since the second
year of Elizabeth.[147]

[Sidenote: A new Privy Council.]

[Sidenote: Tyrconnel made commander-in-chief.]

Clarendon was ready to do anything that the King wished, but he
usually gave good advice, which was very seldom taken. Indeed,
James said plainly that he had made up his mind to remodel the
administration, both civil and military, and would go to work at once
quite irrespective of anything the Lord Lieutenant might say, who,
having been only a short time in Ireland, could not possibly give His
Majesty 'so good an account as he had already received from persons of
undoubted integrity and zeal for his service.' Having begun with the
bench, he went on to name nineteen Roman Catholic Privy Councillors,
who were not to take the oath of supremacy. Among them were the three
new judges, Richard Hamilton, Lord Galmoy, Justin MacCarthy, and
Tyrconnel. Clarendon did not think that the dignity or usefulness
of puisne judges would be enhanced by making them politicians, and
neither Rice nor Daly were anxious for such promotion, though it
flattered the vanity of Nugent, who was much the least able of the
trio. Nagle, whose fees exceeded a Chief Justice's salary, agreed with
the Lord Lieutenant that a practising barrister was unfitted for the
position. Having a large family, he could not afford to lose briefs,
and he declared, and perhaps at this time really fancied, that he
was not ambitious. In the meantime it became known that Tyrconnel,
in pursuance of the scheme hatched before Charles II.'s death, was
about to return as lieutenant-general, with power over the army,
independent of the Viceroy, who was informed by Sir Robert Hamilton
that he had seen the commission. Clarendon thought the creation of such
a potentate absurd, as indeed it was, and he professed to disbelieve
the story; but a fortnight later Rochester wrote to confirm Hamilton's
statement. Alarmed by such reports and by what they saw going on,
several Protestant families left Ireland every week, carrying with them
what they could realise. Industry was paralysed, and large employers
of labour prepared to wind up their business and to make haste out of
the country. The Government and the judges on circuit tried to settle
men's minds, but it was persistently rumoured that by Christmas Day no
Protestant would be left in the army. At last Tyrconnel arrived, and
the alarmists were soon seen to be better informed than those who cried
peace when there was no peace.[148]

[Sidenote: Catherine Sedley in Ireland.]

The struggle for supremacy at Court between Rochester and Sunderland
was still undecided, but the latter gradually gained ground, though he
had supported the Exclusion Bill, while Halifax, who had been largely
instrumental in rejecting it, was turned out of the Government, and
even out of the Privy Council. Sunderland was ready to increase his
power over James by turning Roman Catholic, while Rochester, who would
not go that length, was willing to let the King believe that he was
open to conviction. The reputation of Sunderland is so bad as to need
no remark, but Rochester, who did suffer for his religious opinions,
was not above supporting Catherine Sedley, James's ugly but witty
mistress, against Mary of Modena. With Father Petre's help, the Queen
won, and Catherine, who became Countess of Dorchester in January 1686,
was ordered to retire into Flanders, but resolutely refused to inhabit
any country where there were convents, and preferred Ireland, where
the Lord Treasurer's brother could protect her. She was through life
immoderately proud of her ill-gotten rank, and insisted upon being
fully recognised. When Clarendon went to the Curragh races he did
not take his wife, because Lady Dorchester would have gone too. She
was commonly the first at church in the morning, and Lady Clarendon
thought she might make a very good Irish saint 'if our preachers do
not make her despise them.' But after a time she found Ireland dull,
and returned to England in August. The discarded favourite ceased to
be politically important, but she had pensions, and used to dine with
Clarendon both before and after the Revolution. He and his brother lost
influence at Court by supporting her, and in Irish matters their loss
was Tyrconnel's gain.[149]

[Sidenote: Protestant officers and soldiers got rid of.]

While still at Court, Tyrconnel had devoted his attention to the Irish
army, since there was no immediate prospect of gaining the viceroyalty
for himself. To the King he said his main object was to get Cromwellian
officers and soldiers dismissed, and Clarendon, who clung to office,
was willing to go a good way with him. Lord Granard, who commanded the
forces under the Lord Lieutenant, was superseded with a pension and
the post of President of the Council; but there had never been such an
office in Ireland, and the old soldier felt himself quite unfit for
work of that sort. In the end he had the pension without the place.
The ground having been thus cleared, Tyrconnel was sent over with a
lieutenant-general's commission, making him quite independent of the
viceroy. He desired Thomas Sheridan, who was in favour at Court, to
help Sunderland in undermining Rochester while he was in Ireland.
Sheridan said he did not want to burn his fingers 'like the cat in
the apologue,' but it was arranged that he should correspond with
Tyrconnel, visit Sunderland at times, and tell the King as much as was
desirable for him to know. The new general carried with him a long list
of officers to be removed in favour of his own friends and relations.
He wished to have some thousands of Irish Catholics incorporated in
the English army, excluding the native Irish. In this scheme Sheridan
refused to help, saying that the O's and Macs were ten to one of
the others. During the whole time of his power Tyrconnel continued
to favour the Anglo-Irish at the expense of the old Irish, and this
preference was a source of weakness to the Jacobite cause. The King had
to pension some of the loyal Protestants who had been cashiered, and a
much greater number carried their swords and their grievances to the
Prince of Orange. The same process was going on in the ranks, and in
nine months 2300 recruits were enlisted, of whom five-sixths were Irish
Roman Catholics. But the pace was too slow to satisfy Tyrconnel, who
landed on June 5.[150]

[Sidenote: Contest between Clarendon and Tyrconnel.]

[Sidenote: Hard cases.]

The Lord Lieutenant and the Commander-in-chief had a preliminary
interview on the day of the latter's arrival. On the morrow they met
for business, and Tyrconnel made a long rambling speech of which
Clarendon took notes at the moment, and which may be taken as the key
to what followed: 'My Lord, I am sent hither to view this army and to
give the King an account of it. Here are great alterations to be made,
and the poor people who are put out think it my doing, and, God damn
me, I have little to do in the matter: for I told the King that I knew
not two of the captains nor other officers in the whole army. I know
there are some hard cases, which I am sorry for; but, by God, I know
not how to help them. You must know, my Lord, the King, who is a Roman
Catholic, is resolved to employ his subjects of that religion, as you
will find out by the letters I have brought you, and therefore some
must be put out to make room for such as the King likes.' Meritorious
officers were displaced without pity, and Clarendon mentions a few
specially ill-treated men among the multitude who were in the 'common
calamity of being put out.' Thus Captain Brook was deprived of his
troop, for which he had paid 1600_l._ two years before, and Lieutenant
Pargiter of his commission for which he had given 800_l._ The privates
were treated in the same way. When a troop or company was mustered
Tyrconnel merely sent an order to the captain to dismiss such men as
Colonel Richard Hamilton marked upon the list. 'Could not I have done
that as well?' asked the Lord Lieutenant pathetically. Four hundred
men were thus turned out of the regiment of Guards in one day. The
General himself was so little of a soldier that he could not draw up a
regiment, and his orders sometimes disgusted officers of his own Church
as much as the Protestants. He told Lord Roscommon to admit only Roman
Catholics into Ormonde's regiment. Major Macdonnell, who had served
in Germany, received the same order, and gave it out on parade, but
in his walks about Kilkenny freely declared that he had never known a
distinction between soldiers on the score of religion. Tyrconnel denied
his orders, but Roscommon was as outspoken and as sure of his fact as
Macdonnell. The men dismissed were often physically superior to those
who supplanted them, and many recruits spoke no English, which in
Dublin excited the mockery of street boys. The disbanded men despised
their successors, and 'rapped them soundly at fisticuffs.' To make sure
of getting good Catholics, one of the places selected for recruiting
was St. John's Well, resorted to by pilgrims at Midsummer.[151]

[Sidenote: Tory Hamilton's case.]

Captain William Hamilton had been in the King's service ever since he
could carry a musket. He had almost cleared Ulster of Tories, and Sir
William Stewart, afterwards Lord Mountjoy, suggested that he should
be made a magistrate for Armagh, Monaghan, and Tyrone until some more
substantial reward could be given. Hamilton's success was largely
due to the clever way in which he employed two soldiers as spies, but
he was ready enough to risk his own life. 'Neal O'Donnell,' he wrote,
'fled a considerable way, but being overtaken by my cousin, Archibald
Hamilton, when his feet could not carry him off, he turned and first
snapped his gun at me, and then fired a pistol at my cousin, who was
not above four yards from him, on which my cousin fired at him, and,
being the better marksman, knocked the rogue over, so that he had
as fair play for his life as ever any Tory had.' Among the changes
following the death of Charles II., Tory Will, as he was called, lost
his military employment, great zeal in the service of Government
having never been a sure way to promotion in Ireland. He had, however,
many friends, including Rochester, and by purchase or patronage he
managed, after a visit to England, to secure a troop of horse. His old
lieutenant was cashiered, and Tyrconnel appointed Daniel Magennis, with
whom and his brother Murtagh he had had a dispute, saying that they
would soon make friends in the same troop. The Lord Lieutenant thought
differently. By blood or fosterage many outlaws had interest with the
native gentry, though in this case Clarendon thought the Magennises
were chiefly anxious to appropriate some of the credit which had been
given to Hamilton. The quarrel came to a head at Downpatrick. Murtagh
refused to withdraw in writing some charge which he had made against
Hamilton, who seems to have struck, or at least threatened, him with
his cane, but without drawing his sword. Magennis's friends held
Hamilton while he stabbed him to death, also wounding a Mr. Maxwell
who was with him. The Assizes were going on, Nugent and Lyndon being
the judges, and when the first report came that Magennis was the
victim, the former said they would try the case at once. 'But quickly
after the truth was brought that Magennis had killed Hamilton; upon
which the whole court was emptied in a minute, and only the judges
and the prisoners left in it.' The coroner's jury found a verdict of
murder, and even Nugent made some difficulty about bail, but Tyrconnel
overruled everyone, saying that it was often given in murder cases;
and he took Magennis with him to England to get a pardon.[152]

[Sidenote: Aston's case.]

In another case William Aston, whose father had been a judge in the
last reign, slew Mr. Keating in a sudden affray on the Quay. It was
said that an English or Protestant jury would certainly acquit, since
the victim was an Irishman, and Clarendon was pleased when a conviction
followed. The fact of the homicide is not disputed, but Aston gave
a paper to the sheriff on the gallows stairs in which he denied
the malice prepense which is of the essence of murder. He said his
intention was to wound Keating slightly for having grossly insulted his
wife. He died a Protestant, and recorded that great efforts had been
made by many priests to make him confess and be absolved according to
Roman practice. The last of these visitors was Lord Abbot Taafe, who
said he came thirty miles to save the prisoner's soul, 'which could
not otherwise but be damned, if I died in the faith of the Church of
England; and that he was anointed in Germany, but that our ministers
had no ordination.' Clarendon refused to interfere, but both he and the
judges, Nugent and Lyndon, interceded for Aston's family, and his small
property was not confiscated.[153]

[Sidenote: The King throws over Clarendon.]

The army in Ireland consisted of about 7000 men, and was soon
purged sufficiently to make it a safe tool. In August Sheridan, by
Sunderland's orders, wrote to say that the pear was nearly ripe,
and that Tyrconnel was wanted in London. He went over accordingly,
accompanied by Nagle, by Dominic Maguire, the Roman Catholic Primate,
and by Bishop Tyrrell of Clogher. The weight of all four was exerted to
oust Clarendon. James shrank from the odium of appointing a successor
who would not only be disagreeable to all Protestants, but to all who
dreaded French influence. Tyrconnel, with characteristic duplicity,
told Sheridan that he could give up Ireland to France without being
Lord Lieutenant, but employed him to persuade James that the thing
was impossible. Sheridan argued that England must always have the
preponderating power in Irish politics, since the old Irish, who were
ten to one, favoured Spain, and the Anglo-Irish France, while neither
faction would submit to the other. But Tyrconnel was determined to be
Viceroy. As the price of his help Sunderland might have 5000_l._ a
year in Irish land or 50,000_l._ down. The Queen, who hated him, might
be bribed with a pearl necklace worth 10,000_l._, which Prince Rupert
had given to Margaret Hughes. Sunderland, as greedy and as extravagant
as Catiline, was willing to take the money, though not the land, and
offered Tyrconnel a lieutenant-general's place in England with 5000_l._
a year extra pay, and the reversion of the Lord Lieutenancy as soon as
the penal laws were repealed. He said James could only be ruled by a
priest or a woman, and that everything would follow if the Queen and
Father Petre were made safe. But nothing less than the government of
Ireland would satisfy Tyrconnel, though he was willing to be called
Berwick's deputy provided he had all the power. If the King wanted to
get him out of the way, he would go abroad for 10,000_l._ and 4000_l._
to pay the expenses of his late journeys to and from Ireland. Petre,
who hoped for a red hat, and the archbishopric of York to support it,
helped him, and James gradually yielded, though with many misgivings.
Early in October Tyrconnel was made an English Privy Councillor, and
in November it was generally known that he had carried his point, and
was openly preparing for the Irish journey. Lord Powis had been talked
of, but the King said very truly that there was rough work to be done
in Ireland which no English nobleman would do. He pressed Sheridan
to go as secretary, with Alexander Fitton as Chancellor, for he knew
Tyrconnel too well to trust him without good advisers to moderate or
counteract his violence. It would take twelve or eighteen months to
reform the army, to call in the charters, and to get such corporations
appointed as would elect the right sort of Parliament. When all that
was done he would provide handsomely for Sheridan. Since James himself
had no confidence in the man he was sending to represent him, it is not
surprising to find Evelyn noting his appointment 'to the astonishment
of all sober men and to the evident ruin of the Protestants in that
kingdom, as well as of its great improvement going on.'[154]

[Sidenote: 'Lillibullero.']

In times of public excitement little things sometimes have a great
effect, and are better remembered than more important events. Such
were the letters of obscure men in the German Reformation, the
_Marriage of Figaro_ before the French Revolution, John Brown's march
in the American civil war, and such, in the Irish branch of our own
revolution, was the song of 'Lillibullero.' Thomas Wharton, afterwards
Marquis and Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, boasted that by this ditty he
had sung a king out of three kingdoms. It had a success altogether
out of proportion to its merit, and in the next century my uncle
Toby whistled the lively air on all occasions. The words allude to
the period of suspense when James still hesitated about Tyrconnel's
appointment.

    Ara! but why does he stay behind?
    Ho! by my shoul, 'tis a Protestant wind.
            Lillibullero, bullen-a-la.

His landing was to bring commissions galore and to ruin the heretics
of Ireland. Swift had some justification for calling Wharton the most
universal villain he had ever known; but he was the shrewdest of
politicians, and his doggerel tells exactly the same story as Evelyn's
grave reflections.[155]

[Sidenote: Clarendon's weakness.]

In adopting the rash policy represented by Tyrconnel, James parted
with his two brothers-in-law, in whom the Church of England trusted.
Rochester was dismissed from the Treasury, though with a large pension,
and Belasyse, a Roman Catholic who had suffered by Oates's plot, was
made First Lord. The Privy Seal was not restored to Clarendon, but
given to Lord Arundel of Wardour, who had signed the secret treaty
of Dover. Clarendon had been a painstaking governor, but he did not
deserve much sympathy, for he was ready to support his master's
arbitrary policy though he did not approve of it. That the King should
be dissatisfied with one of his letters was, he said, a 'mortification
beyond anything that can befall me in this world ... to live under
your Majesty's displeasure is impossible for me.... I have made it
the study of my life to practise obedience ... you will find a most
resigned obedience in me.' This was very shortly before his dismissal,
and after the blow had fallen he goes on in the same strain, talks of
casting himself as quickly as possible at His Majesty's feet, and of
obedience to him having been the business of his life. The same flavour
of servility permeates his letters to his brother and to Sunderland.
Short of changing his religion, there seems to have been no degree of
compliance at which he would have stopped.[156]

[Sidenote: He leaves Ireland.]

When taking leave of his Council, Clarendon defended the English in
Ireland from the charge of fanaticism. They were, he said, good Church
of England men, and had been the first of the late King's subjects to
restore him. They had also been against the Exclusion Bill, and were
most ready to acknowledge royal authority. He pointed with some pride
to the Irish Exchequer. Under Ormonde the annual revenue had risen to
over 300,000_l._ a year without subsidies, and his successor had made
it cover the expenses. All charges had been defrayed as they became
due, and the army was paid up to the last month of his reign. James had
indeed no fault to find with him but his religion. Having personally
delivered the sword to Tyrconnel, Clarendon returned to England, and
on March 3 Evelyn drove out of London to meet him. He was received at
Court very soon after.[157]

FOOTNOTES:

[139] Proclamations of February 10 and 11, 1684-5, Carte's _Ormonde_,
ii. 543. Ormonde's letters of February 22, March 1 and 4, in Singer's
_Correspondence_ of Clarendon and Rochester. Luttrell's _Diary_, March
27. The story of the officers' dinner is in _Secret Consults of the
Romish Party_, 1690. Ormonde's arms were placed over the entrance to
the new hospital.

[140] Proclamations of Lords Justices against Monmouth and his
adherents, June 13 and 22; as to the militia arms, June 20 and October
16, 1685. For Argyle's expedition, Earl of Antrim to Lords Justices,
May 18, and Captain Thomas Hamilton of the _Kingfisher_ to Granard,
June 17, in State Papers, _Ireland_, vol. cccli. As to the removal of
officers, Tyrconnel and Granard, August 12, _ib._, and Justin MacCarthy
to Granard, _ib._ Ormonde to Primate Boyle, October 17, 1685, _Ormonde
Papers_, vii. 374. Tyrconnel reached Ireland before May 29, _ib._ 341.

[141] Correspondence between Ormonde and Roscommon, particularly August
15 and September 17, 1685, _Ormonde Papers_, vol. vii.

[142] Clarendon to Rochester, December 28, 1685, _Clarendon
Correspondence_. Writing on December 20, 1685, Bishop Fell wishes
Clarendon 'good luck with his honour, which to me seems sufficiently
hazardous,' _Hatton Correspondence_. According to the _Sheridan MS._,
Sunderland had suggested Clarendon to the King, 'for mending his
fortune, of which he stood in need, pacifying Tyrconnel by saying that
the two brothers would be ruined by being kept apart.

[143] Evelyn's _Diary_, December 16, 1685. Clarendon's letters,
December 21 to January 10 and January 23, 1685-6. _Ellis
Correspondence_, i. 9, 11. Luttrell's _Diary_, December 16 and 18,
1685. Clarendon's speech on taking office is in the _Clarendon and
Rochester Correspondence_, ii. 475.

[144] Evelyn's _Diary_, November 3, 1685. A newsletter to Colonel Grace
from Dublin, November 11, in _Clarendon's Correspondence_, notices the
silence of the _Gazette_ there about the French persecutions and the
persistence of unauthorised sheets: 'if it be a fiction, as certainly
it is for the most part, why does not the Government take notice of
it?... great concern that those of Geneva--Dublin have for their
Calvinist brethren in France.' The latest lights are in Lavisse's 7th
and 8th vols. and Rousset's _Hist. de Louvois_, iii. chap. vii. For
the dragonnades in Bearn, Henry IV.'s own country, see Sainte-Beuve's
article on the intendant Foucault, _Nouveaux Lundis_, vol. iii. In 1686
Avaux found there were 75,000 French refugees in Holland, Lavisse and
Rambaut's _Hist. générale_, vol. vi.

[145] Clarendon's letters, February and March 1686, particularly that
of February 14. Sunderland to Clarendon, March 11. An acute observer
notes that the Irish Protestant refugees in England were too proud to
complain and less noticed than the French, though they were 'our bone
and our flesh.' Every Frenchman was distinguished by garb and speech,
but those from Ireland by neither, and so in the crowd not discerned.
_Character of the Protestants of Ireland_, May 1689, p. 8.

[146] Clarendon to Rochester, March 14 and April 17. James II. to
Clarendon, April 6. In Burnet's _Hist._ i. 654, the remarks on Porter
are much softened compared to his original MS., _Supplement_, ed.
Foxcroft, p. 170.

[147] Clarendon's letters of April 17, 20, and 24.

[148] Clarendon to Rochester, April 17, 20, and 24, 1686; to
Sunderland, April 24 and 27; to Rochester, May 11 and 15. Sunderland
to Clarendon, March 11, May 22. In his diary on January 31,
1686-7, Clarendon says Nagle pretended that he had no wish to be
Attorney-General, but 'I do not believe him in the least, for I am sure
he is both a covetous and an ambitious man.'

[149] Clarendon to Rochester, May 1, 1686; Lady Clarendon to Rochester,
March 15. Luttrell's _Diary_, January 19 and February 24. Evelyn to
Clarendon, September 1686, appended to the _Diary_, iii. 425.

[150] _Sheridan MS._ Clarendon to Sunderland, May 30, June 1, and
July 20, 1686. King's _State of the Protestants_, chap. iii. sec. 2.
Luttrell's _Diary_, June 8. After the Revolution Sunderland thought it
wise to disclaim any share in the Irish business: 'My Lord Tyrconnel
has been so absolute there that I never had the credit to make an
ensign or to keep one in, nor to preserve some of my friends, for whom
I was much concerned, from the least oppression and injustice, though
I endeavoured it to the utmost of my power,' letter in H. Sidney's
_Diary_, ii. 378. Tyrconnel cashiered about 4000 Protestant soldiers
and 300 officers, Fortescue's _History of the British Army_, iv. chap.
1.

[151] Clarendon to Rochester, June 8 and July 4. St. John's Well was at
Kilmainham, near where O'Connell Road now crosses the railway, and the
name is perpetuated in the intersecting road. A 'pattern' fair, which
became very disorderly, was held here till about 1835, when the well
was swallowed up by builders. See Frazer's _Balder the Beautiful_, i.
205 (Golden Bough).

[152] Letters in _Clarendon and Rochester Correspondence_, vol. i.,
particularly August 4 and 19, 1686. _Ormonde Papers_, vols. vi. and
vii., particularly Sir W. Stewart to Arran, February 13, 1682-3; Tory
Hamilton to W. Ellis, January 2, 1683-4, and Longford's letters in
August 1686. King mentions the murder, chap. i. section 7. In the
correspondence of the time Hamilton is generally called a very honest
fellow. _Ellis Correspondence_, i. 166.

[153] Letters in vol. i. of _Clarendon and Rochester Correspondence_.
Aston's dying declaration is appended to that of June 3. King's remark
is (chap. iii. sec. 2), 'they might kill whom they pleased without
fear of law, as appeared from Captain Nangles' murdering his disbanded
officer in the streets of Dublin; but if any killed or hurt them they
were sure to suffer; as Captain Aston found to his cost, who was hanged
for killing a Papist upon his abusing the captain's wife in the street.'

[154] _Sheridan MS._ _Ellis Correspondence_, November 30, 1686.
Luttrell's _Diary_, December 1. Evelyn's _Diary_, January 17, 1686-7.
Sunderland was considered bribable, see his own statement in _Diary of
H. Sidney_, ii. 379.

[155] The air of 'Lillibullero,' originally composed by Purcell for
another song, is still whistled in Ulster under the name of 'Protestant
Boys.' The words have been often reprinted, see Wilkin's _Political
Ballads_, i. 275, and (with variants) the third part of _Revolution
Politicks_, 1733. Purcell's music is given in the 1873 edition of
Sterne's _Works_, i. 93, at the end of _Tristram Shandy_, 2nd part,
chap. iii. See also Croker's _Historical Songs of Ireland_, pp. 1-11.

[156] See in particular Clarendon's letters to the King of October 23,
1686, and of February 6, 1686-7 (in the appendix). Evelyn's _Diary_,
March 3 and 10.

[157] Clarendon's parting speech, February 12, 1686-7, is in the
appendix to King's _State of the Protestants_. No mention is made of
the Ulster Scots. Evelyn's _Diary_. Luttrell's _Diary_, March.




CHAPTER XLIX

GOVERNMENT OF TYRCONNEL, 1687-1688


[Sidenote: Tyrconnel Lord Deputy, February 1687.]

James forced Sheridan upon Tyrconnel as secretary, and made him
chief commissioner of revenue to make the Irish service worth his
while. Clarendon thought him a 'wicked, cheating man,' and the new
Lord Deputy objected to him, not on that ground, though he accused
him of dishonesty, but because he knew he was sent to be a drag
on him. He could not avoid taking him, but did so with a very ill
grace, advising him to give up drinking, and not imitate Sir Ellis
Leighton or Mr. Ellis, 'the first having ruined Lord Berkeley, and
the other, the blackest and most corrupt of villains, my Lord Arran.'
Sheridan answered that he was the most abstemious of men, that he
abhorred corruption, and that for all he cared Tyrconnel might give
the secretary's place to his nephew, Sir William Talbot. He at first
refused to go unless he had a seat at the Irish Council, but Tyrconnel
said he had asked the King for this and been refused. Nevertheless,
when Lord Bridgeman spoke about it to James, he at once consented,
saying that Tyrconnel had never mentioned the matter to him. In January
the new Viceroy and Sheridan were at Chester, where Cartwright was
now installed as bishop, along with Richard and Anthony Hamilton and
two Irish lords. Fitton joined them at Holyhead, and they all talked
of Irish affairs while waiting for a wind. Tyrconnel suggested that
Christ Church should be taken from the Protestants, that a Catholic
militia should be raised and trained, and that Catholics should fill
all places. Sheridan and Fitton disagreed, 'both of them knowing
these things were contrary to His Majesty's intentions and interest.'
It is clear that they were against his interest, but not that they
were against his intentions. On reaching Dublin, Sheridan was sent
to Clarendon with the King's letter of recall, repeating one from
Sunderland in which he was directed to give up the sword to Tyrconnel
within a week of his arrival. Before he received the sword, and
while still a private person, the latter demanded the surrender for
punishment of one of Clarendon's servants who had attributed the
change to the dog Talbot. Tyrconnel was sworn in as Deputy, not Lord
Lieutenant, on February 12, and Clarendon was Cartwright's guest at
Chester a few days later. He heard a sermon from Mr. Peake in the
cathedral on the duties of governors, and it seems not to have been
pleasant, for the bishop thought of suspending the preacher, though
both Lord Derby and Mr. Cholmondeley interceded for him. Ten days
afterwards Cartwright sent his carriage to meet Porter, and found the
ex-Chancellor's children 'set in a stage-coach broke in the quicksands
three miles from Chester.' They were rescued, and next day their father
and mother were brought safely from Neston.[158]

[Sidenote: The Coventry letter.]

When Nagle left Ireland it was thought probable that he would return as
Attorney-General, and that part of his business would be to attack the
Act of Settlement. The King had assured Clarendon that it 'must always
be kept untouched, though many ill and disaffected people are secured
in their possessions by it.' Nagle was back in November, and neither
then or later did Clarendon have any intimation from the English
Government that a change of policy was intended. It was not until
January, shortly before his recall, that he received through private
hands the copy of a letter from Nagle to Tyrconnel purporting to have
been written on the road at Coventry, but doubtless composed in London
as the result of careful deliberation. In it the Acts of Settlement and
Explanation and the administration of them were vigorously attacked.
About the same time the Benedictine Philip Ellis, afterwards Bishop
of Segni, was allowed, or, as some thought, bribed, by the Irish in
London to preach at St. James's against the Acts. Tyrconnel admitted
that he had inspired the sermon and promised Ellis the bishopric of
Waterford as a reward. The contents of Nagle's letter were known in
Ireland before Clarendon got his copy, and the writer complained of its
surreptitious publication. Tyrconnel had the original, and his denial
is worth little. Both letter and sermon were disliked by moderate men,
but they evidently foreshadowed extreme measures. Less than a year
after the date of Nagle's manifesto, Barillon knew that James had made
secret preparations for repealing the Act of Settlement.[159]

[Sidenote: The Land Settlement threatened.]

The commission of grace issued less than eleven months before the
late King's death expired with him. The court constituted by it had
not time to do much, but it excited hopes and fears, for the old
proprietors expected to get money in exchange for their claims,
while the men in possession saw that their titles were endangered.
Clarendon found men's minds much disturbed, and thought the best way
to quiet the country would be to renew the commission. He believed
the Protestant holders under the Act of Settlement, as well as the
many Roman Catholics who had bought land from them, would be willing
to pay well for confirmation of their titles, and 150,000_l._ might
thus be raised to compensate the most deserving sufferers. Lord
Chancellor Porter sounded the men of his own profession, and found
them generally favourable to such a policy. Chief Justice Keating was
strongly of that opinion, and at first James seemed inclined to agree,
but contrary influences prevailed, and Clarendon was informed that the
King preferred a parliament to a commission. He was to take counsel
with Tyrconnel and others as to how much landowners would be willing
to pay for clear titles, with a suggestion that the parliamentary way
might bring in the larger amount. Rice and Nagle supported Tyrconnel,
who inveighed against the idea of a commission with much cursing and
swearing, holding that it would bring in little money, 'but would
confirm those estates which ought not to be confirmed.' In the meantime
many secret meetings were held among the Roman Catholics. A letter
found at Christ Church after morning prayer on the last day of August
professed to be written by one who 'politically went to mass' in order
to gain admission to these conclaves, which he said were attended by
nine bishops, ten Jesuits, and eighteen friars, and that letters were
received from the Queen, from Lord Castlemaine, from the Pope and
cardinals, and from the King of France. All this was no doubt greatly
exaggerated, and the writer's name did not transpire, but Clarendon
knew from other sources that there were many private consultations at
which Tyrconnel attended, and that at one of these it was resolved
to send Nagle to England. When he returned, after having written the
Coventry letter, there was more uneasiness than ever, and he soon
became Attorney-General, displacing Domville, who had held that office
ever since the Restoration. As a practising lawyer, says Archbishop
King, Nagle 'was employed by many Protestants, so that he knew the weak
part of most of their titles.'[160]

[Sidenote: Protestant corporations attacked.]

In order to carry out their policy, James and Tyrconnel saw that an
Irish Parliament would have to be called, and one of a very different
character from the last. There were thirty-two counties, in each
of which the freeholders were entitled to return two members, and
one hundred cities and boroughs where two members were eligible by
the burgesses. In the counties Government could generally maintain
itself through subservient sheriffs, and it was resolved to attack
the charters in virtue of which the boroughs existed. The process of
transforming the municipalities by prerogative alone began as early
as June 1686, when Tyrconnel brought over a letter from the King
directing the Lord Lieutenant to admit freemen without tendering the
oath of supremacy. Even the English oath of allegiance was thought
too strict, and he was ordered to be satisfied with a shorter oath
of fidelity. Acting by the advice of Judge Daly and other reasonable
Roman Catholic Privy Councillors, Clarendon aimed at appointing
English and Irish in equal numbers, 'which they say is the best way
to unite and make them live friendly together.' Had this wise course
been persevered in, an understanding might have been arrived at, but
Tyrconnel's faction thought the mere fact of being a Roman Catholic was
qualification enough for anything. As it was, all who could make out
any sort of hereditary claim were accepted as freemen, though they did
not live in the towns and were engaged in no trade or business.[161]

Those who were encouraging James to take extreme measures tried to make
out that most Irish Protestants were Cromwellian fanatics or their
descendants. Clarendon said that there were not many adventurers or
soldiers, nor many of their children remaining. Land had been freely
bought by men who wanted to make fortunes by buying in a cheap market.
These new purchasers and the representatives of settlers before 1640
formed the bulk of the colony, six-sevenths of the trade being in
their hands. They had hitherto had things much their own way, but it
was now determined to humble them to the dust. By the statutory rules
made under Essex, every mayor or other municipal officer was required
to take the oath of supremacy, but might be dispensed from so doing by
name and in writing by the Lord Lieutenant and Council. The result of
these rules had been to keep the Protestants in power, though the Roman
Catholics, scattered for the most part in the country, but claiming
the hereditary freedom of old towns, were more numerous. Corporations
of recent origin had been the creation of the colonists, and had
always been in Protestant hands. The changes made by Clarendon were
considerable, but the process was too slow for a man of James's temper.
In August he summoned Tyrconnel to meet him at Chester. The King was
attended by Sunderland, and the Deputy by Nagle, Rice, William Ellis,
and a Jesuit named Johnson. Richard Hamilton was also at Chester.
Tyrconnel wished to keep Sheridan back in Ireland, but orders came from
Sunderland that he was to come over, and they went on to Shrewsbury
together to meet James, who sent for Sheridan early next morning, and
told him he should expect a full report at Chester. There were heated
discussions about the Act of Settlement, but no decision was come to.
'God damn you,' said Tyrconnel, 'for making you a Privy Councillor!'
to which the secretary replied that the King made him. The Deputy
then damned himself for making him secretary, and told him to go to
the devil. Rice and Nagle tried to smooth matters by attributing all
this to Sunderland's wine, but Sheridan says he was sober. Next day
Tyrconnel thought it prudent to apologise, pressing the other to dine,
'and taking him about the neck and hugging him.' The quarrel broke out
again as soon as they got back to Dublin.[162]

[Sidenote: Municipal charters annulled.]

Tyrconnel had been able to report at Chester that the transformation
of the corporations was already well begun. Dublin had resisted
successfully for a time, but _quo warrantos_ were brought against all
the corporations, except a few that surrendered at discretion. Soon
after his return from the Chester conference, James wrote to Tyrconnel
announcing that judgment had been given against most of the cities
and towns, and that suits were pending for the rest. The Deputy was
empowered to issue new charters appointing the officers and members of
all municipalities by name, with power to fill up vacancies and to
return two members to Parliament. He was to reserve power for himself
and his successors to remove all magistrates and officers by Order in
Council, both they and the freemen being obliged to swear 'that it is
not lawful upon any pretence whatsoever to take arms against the King.'
This, of course, made all the corporations absolutely subservient to
the Government. The charters were brought into the Exchequer, the only
Irish court whence no writ of error lay in England, and were nearly
all declared forfeited. Rice and his brethren took advantage of every
legal quibble, and it does not appear that any case was tried upon its
substantial merits. Strafford had long since discovered how easy it was
to find technical flaws in letters patent, and Rice before he was a
judge had said that he could drive a coach and six through the Act of
Settlement. The general result was that two-thirds of each corporation
were Roman Catholics who could be trusted to return members of their
own persuasion when the time came for a parliament. In many old towns
this was no doubt only a return to the state of things that had existed
before the Civil War, but the new boroughs were chiefly the creation
of English Protestants. No exception was made, Londonderry and Belfast
faring like the rest. The colonists were placed in the power of men
who had seldom any substantial commercial interest, and who were often
descended from the insurgents of 1641.[163]

[Sidenote: Panic among the Protestants.]

Tyrconnel's proceedings in general had driven many Protestant families
from Ireland. In June 1686, 120 went to Chester in one ship, and
multitudes hastened to realise their property. The certainty of his
being made Viceroy caused a greater exodus, and while he was waiting
for a wind at Holyhead, Ormonde wrote that many men and more women had
fled, 'but I think a less matter than the dread of my Lord Tyrconnel
will fright a lady from Ireland to London.' It was natural that the men
who stood their ground should wish to place their families in safety,
for Clarendon reports that many merchants and others were going, though
he tried to steady them by saying that all would be well. As they left
Dublin their places were filled by crowds of officers who came to meet
the rising sun. After his arrival Tyrconnel lost no time in proclaiming
his intention of dealing justly with all according to the known laws.
The prevailing terror had, he said, been much heightened 'by some few
fiery spirits in the pulpits, by taking upon them to treat of matters
that do not lie within their province.' The Protestants, nevertheless,
continued to leave Ireland when they could, though magistrates and
officers were empowered by proclamation to stop them. Many were unable
to go because they could not afford the journey or because they had
everything invested in stock or buildings. Officials generally stood
their ground from a sense of duty, or lest their places should be taken
by hostile Roman Catholics, and many clergymen were actuated by the
same motives. But the drain steadily continued, and after William's
invasion at a greatly increased rate.[164]

[Sidenote: Lord Chancellor Porter dismissed.]

Lord Chancellor Porter, though nothing could be truly said against him,
proved less accommodating than was expected, and as early as June 1687
it was rumoured that he would be recalled. Tyrconnel worked incessantly
to that end, and accused him of taking a bribe of 10,000_l._ from the
Whigs, 'which, upon my conscience,' said Clarendon, 'is as true as that
he has taken it of the Great Turk.' General MacCarthy was satisfied
of Porter's probity, and Mr. Nihill, a young Roman Catholic King's
Counsel, admitted that if Tyrconnel took a dislike to a man, he had
'a sly way,' and would ruin him while pretending to be reconciled.
Tyrconnel emerged victorious from the obscure struggle at Court, and
Porter shared Clarendon's fate. They dined together on January 4, and
within a week both were recalled. The Lord Chancellor was treated with
marked discourtesy, for he only heard of his removal from a third
person.[165]

[Sidenote: Fitton succeeds him.]

No explanation was offered to Porter, the King treating him with
studied coolness, and merely remarking that it was all his own fault.
He returned to the English bar, and was counsel for Sir Alexander
Fitton, his successor as Irish Chancellor, in one of his numerous
lawsuits. Fitton, who was released from prison and knighted by the
King, seems never to have had any practice to speak of, but he was a
convert to the Church of Rome. He had been engaged in long litigation
with Lord Gerard, and was accused of setting up a forged deed. A jury
found against the document, and he was fined and imprisoned by the
House of Lords. He apparently owed his appointment to Father Petre
and to James himself, rather than Tyrconnel, whom he accompanied to
Ireland. Archbishop King, who was in Dublin during the whole time
that he held office, has represented Fitton as not only partial and
tyrannical, but quite incompetent to perform his judicial function,
while a modern biographer who examined the records of Chancery declares
that all was done in order. Possibly the legal knowledge was supplied
by two new Masters in Chancery appointed to strengthen the Court. One
of these was Felix O'Neill, whose father had been a member of the
Confederate Council in 1642; the other was Alexius Stafford, a priest
who may have been a learned civilian. Both Stafford and O'Neill were
killed at Aughrim. King may or may not have painted Fitton in too dark
colours, but Sheridan, who was closely associated with him, says he was
'a most poor and timorous man, having nothing to maintain him but his
office, to which dignity he was surprisingly raised from a tedious
imprisonment of many years in the King's Bench in England for debt and
pretended forgery in the business of the estate in dispute between him
and Lord Macclesfield.'[166]

[Sidenote: Judges and magistrates.]

At the time of Clarendon's recall one judge out of three in each Common
Law Court was a Roman Catholic; under Tyrconnel the proportion was
reversed. In the Exchequer, which became much the most important, Rice
was made Chief Baron, and was supported by Sir Henry Lynch, who pursued
the same policy. Baron Worth was a Protestant, but not much trusted
by his own co-religionists, and in any case always in a minority.
Probably he tried to be impartial. The same policy was adopted in
the case of local magistrates, whose personal fitness was not always
considered. Porter had no objection to Roman Catholics, but he had
some regard for his own reputation. He received lists of candidates
from the judges and rejected only those for whom no person of position
would vouch. Among these was Primate Maguire's brother. 'He is a poor
country fellow,' he told General MacCarthy, 'lives upon six pounds a
year, which he rents of Sir Michael Cole, and has nothing else in the
world. After all this, if you think fit for the King's service to have
such a man come upon the Bench, he shall be a justice of peace.' 'No,
in good faith,' answered MacCarthy, 'I do not think it fit.' Even the
degree of independence which Porter showed was not to be expected from
Fitton.[167]

[Sidenote: Sheriffs.]

The appointment of sheriffs was of the highest importance. They were
not only the chief officers for enforcing the laws of property between
man and man, but they might exercise great influence in the case of a
general election. Clarendon had to nominate them immediately after his
arrival, and before he had time to make a wide personal acquaintance.
He got the best information he could, and thought he had made a happy
selection, but the list was sent back to him with criticisms which,
according to Tyrconnel, were made by Sheridan and Sir Robert Hamilton.
He answered them all in detail and with much confidence. Sir William
Evans was objected to as Sheriff of Kilkenny because he was Cromwell's
baker's son. The answer was that his father had been a baker in England
before the war, that he had made a fortune near Kilkenny, married
Captain Coote's daughter, been made a baronet, 'and since a justice of
peace, which office he has discharged very honestly.' But Tyrconnel was
not satisfied, though he owned that the Lord Lieutenant had done his
best. 'By God, my Lord,' said he, 'you must not wonder if the Catholics
do think you a little partial after your making such a set of sheriffs,
who are four parts out of five rogues; but, by God, I justified you to
the King,' and so forth. Long before the year was out Clarendon had
orders not to name any sheriffs for 1687, instead of which Tyrconnel
handed him a list drawn up by himself and Nugent, and purporting to
make no religious distinction. Clarendon remonstrated, telling the King
that the judges were the proper persons to suggest names, and that
many of those now proposed were obviously and scandalously unfit for
positions of trust. When the appointments were at last made, Tyrconnel
was Deputy, and every county was committed to the charge of a Roman
Catholic except Donegal, where one Hamilton was pricked by mistake
for another. It is easy to believe that many of these sheriffs were
unfit men. Protestants were also turned out of all the minor offices
connected with the law.[168]

[Sidenote: Rice and Nugent in London, 1688.]

The corporations, the judicial bench, the army, and the shrievalty
having been remodelled to his liking, Tyrconnel wished to hold a
parliament. Rice and Nugent were sent over early in 1688, and their
presence tended to increase the general unrest in London. Their
coach, when they appeared in the streets, was escorted by a mob
carrying sticks with potatoes at the ends, and calling upon all men
to make room for the Irish ambassadors. They brought with them heads
of a Bill for repealing the Act of Settlement, and were authorised
to offer 40,000_l._ to Sunderland, who loved money even more than he
loved power. In the negotiations that took place, Rice showed his
great ability and Nugent his conspicuous want of sense. Sheridan was
in London part of the time trying to rebut the charge of corruption
brought against him by Tyrconnel. He told Sunderland that the Lord
Deputy had been bragging about the money he had offered the minister,
and about the Queen's necklace. The result was that the bribe was now
refused with becoming indignation. To the King himself Sheridan said
that Tyrconnel hated him for objecting to turn out Protestant officers
'for being such only,' and for differing with him in opinion about the
Act of Settlement. Nugent and Rice did not stay long in London, and
they failed in their immediate object. Bellasyse and Powis opposed
them, the former with many severe expressions about Tyrconnel's rash
folly. A year was still to elapse before the land legislation of
Charles II. was repealed by an Irish Parliament.[169]

[Sidenote: The Declaration of Indulgence.]

The Declaration of Indulgence was republished in Dublin one week after
its appearance in London. For the relief of the Roman Catholics it
was hardly necessary, since the Statute of Elizabeth and the oaths
depending on it had been virtually suspended even under Clarendon;
but the prospect of general toleration was pleasing to the Ulster
Presbyterians. Three or four loyal addresses were presented from
Nonconformists in Dublin and Belfast and in Munster, but on the
whole their attitude was cautious, for they could not forget what
James had done quite lately in Scotland. Halifax's famous letter to
a Dissenter does not appear to have been reprinted in Ireland, but
no doubt it circulated there, and its argument is conclusive to all
who reject Filmer's theory and the doctrine of passive obedience. If
a King can sweep away the statute law at pleasure, he is absolute,
and Parliaments and courts of justice are superfluous. In the end
the Irish Presbyterians had to say Yes to Halifax's short question,
'whether you will join with those who must in the end run the same fate
with you?' The Episcopalians were, of course, not pleased, for all
that the King would promise was less than what the law already gave
them. There was an address from the Irish Quakers, which may probably
have been due to Penn. In the meantime very few Protestants were left
in the army, while they were placed in a minority on the bench and
in civic administration. Those who could leave Ireland did so, and
cashiered officers helped to fill the gaps in the Prince of Orange's
forces, made by those who obeyed the King's order of recall. In less
than a year after the Declaration of Indulgence the King forbade all
foreign enlistment, and his proclamation was republished in Dublin,
with stringent directions to magistrates and port authorities to stop
all who endeavoured without licence 'to transport or to enter and list
themselves in the service of any foreign prince or state.'[170]

[Sidenote: Tyrconnel and the army.]

In about five months after his arrival as Deputy Tyrconnel had granted
over one hundred commissions in the army, and the names show that few,
if any, were Protestants. Among them were Anthony Hamilton and his
brother John, both of whom became generals. Before he had been three
months in the country he found that the private soldiers, especially in
the infantry, were in great misery and more likely to cause disorder
than to be useful in keeping the peace. The most he could do was to
give each soldier of the line threepence-halfpenny a day, with a
promise, which was not kept, of another halfpenny at the end of the
year. Out of this the man had to feed himself. He was to receive fresh
clothing free every eighteen months, the solitary coat to be turned
without charge at the end of ten. It was found that some officers had
been in the habit of enrolling recruits, keeping them for awhile, and
then turning them away without pay, thus making a handsome profit in
each case. In July 1687 he assembled a force in camp at the Curragh
with a free market for victuallers, the soldiers having strict orders
to pay ready money and 'in all things to behave themselves as becomes
good and peaceful subjects.' When the camp broke up Sheridan advised
Tyrconnel to send the regiments of Mountjoy and Forbes, the only two
Scotch Protestant colonels, to Munster, and Catholic regiments to
Ulster, where the Presbyterians had been assembling in great numbers.
Mountjoy dissuaded him from this course, with important results both to
himself and to the country.[171]

[Sidenote: Irish soldiers in England.]

[Sidenote: Tyrconnel raises fresh regiments.]

The attack on Magdalene College, the persecution of the seven bishops,
and the proceedings of the Ecclesiastical Commission had little
direct effect in Ireland, but they caused many Protestants to make
haste out of Tyrconnel's reach and spread terror among those who were
unable to get away. In July 1688 the Irish army was again encamped
at the Curragh, and James, unwarned by his father's and Strafford's
fate, determined to use it for his own purposes in England. In the
camp at Kildare all Roman Catholic soldiers--that is, the great bulk
of them--were to confess regularly and to forfeit three months' pay
if they failed to produce a priest's certificate of having received
the Sacrament at least twice a year. In the camp at Hounslow loud
cheers hailed the acquittal of the bishops. There were a few Irishmen
there, and one of them murdered a comrade. He was promptly hanged as
the only means of stilling the consequent uproar. A few weeks later
Evelyn reports that 'many murders had been committed by Irish Popish
soldiers.' Officers forfeited their commissions rather than admit
Irish recruits at the King's command. Nearly a whole regiment laid
down their arms rather than declare against the tests. In the face of
this popular feeling James persevered in his determination to bring
over Irish troops. There were not enough of them to be of any real
use, and they were guilty of many disorders on the road. Probably
they were unpaid, and had to steal or starve. Tyrconnel was weakened
by the loss of trained troops. Some 5000 were brought over in all,
including about one-half of the Irish standing army of seven or eight
thousand. Sarsfield and his men behaved well at Wincanton, but the
skirmish there could not influence events. When the Revolution was
accomplished most of the Irish were disarmed and kept in the Isle of
Wight, whence William III. sent about two thousand as a present to
the Emperor for employment against the Turks, thus contributing to
the discomfiture of France and indirectly to that of their dethroned
king. When the Dutch descent on England was imminent, Tyrconnel began
to raise new regiments. He told James that Ireland was rich in men and
provisions, but without money, and he sent full particulars through
Sarsfield. The supply of competent officers was at once seen to be
insufficient, and many non-commissioned officers and men left their
colours in the old army with a view to getting promotion with the
new levies. Before the end of the year Tyrconnel gave out that His
Majesty's revenue had decreased and was daily decreasing, and the clear
pay of a soldier of the line was reduced to twopence halfpenny a day.
Hundreds of commissions were issued in a very irregular way, and the
new officers, in Archbishop King's words, 'were without money, estate,
or any visible means to raise their troops and companies and to subsist
[so they termed maintaining] them for three months from the first of
January, a thing impossible without allowing them to steal and plunder.
It was this struck so much terror into Protestants, and made them so
jealous and apprehensive of danger that they fled into England in great
numbers, especially when they found that the new raised men, as they
surmised, began to make havoc of all things.'[172]

[Sidenote: The Duke of Ormonde dies.]

On July 21, less than a month after the acquittal of the seven bishops,
the Duke of Ormonde died at Kingston Hall in Dorsetshire. It was the
anniversary of his wife's death four years before, and the end of his
life was clouded by many other losses. His eldest son Ossory, who had
a reputation scarcely inferior to Philip Sidney's, had died in 1680,
and his much less satisfactory brother Arran followed in 1685. As soon
as the news reached Oxford, Convocation was hastily summoned, and the
Duke's grandson and successor was chosen Chancellor. A royal mandate
to stop the election came too late, and the University was saved the
indelible disgrace of seeing Jeffreys at its head. In one respect
Ormonde was happy in an opportune death, for he did not have to choose
between the King and the law. It would have been a bitter thing for
him to come under another sovereign when James was still alive, but he
opposed his policy. Only a year before his death he signed a protest
against admitting a pensioner to the Charterhouse without taking the
oath of allegiance and supremacy as required by an express Act of
Parliament. The governors who protested with him were Sancroft, a
non-juror, Craven, whose loyalty was absolute, Halifax the cautious,
Danby and Compton, who signed the invitation to William of Orange, and
Nottingham, who was privy to it but shrank from signing. The King and
Jeffreys were cowed by this powerful opposition. Besides his anxiety
about public affairs, Ormonde was troubled by want of money, for
Tyrconnel's proceedings had interfered with Irish rents, and he foresaw
discomforts such as he never expected to feel 'during the reign of
any of the race of King Charles the First.' His health was gradually
failing, though he travelled much almost to the last, but he felt that
the time for field sports was over, and that 'the steps downwards are
very natural from a field to a garden, from a garden to a window, from
thence to a bed, and so to a grave.'[173]

[Sidenote: His character.]

Ormonde's character has sufficiently appeared in the course of these
volumes. His patience was boundless. Burnet, who had not much in common
with him, says he was 'firm to the Protestant religion, and so far
firm to the laws that he always gave good advices: but even when bad
ones were followed, he was not for complaining too much of them.' His
distinguishing principle was loyalty to the person of the sovereign
and to the Crown as an institution. Thus, he fought for Charles I.
as long as he had any party, and then he surrendered Dublin to the
Parliament rather than damage the value of the reversion. Having begun
by repressing the Irish rebels, he joined them when they were fain to
call themselves royalists. During the interregnum he followed Charles
II., and even risked his life in London when Cromwell was at the
height of his power. During his three years of retirement after the
accession of James, he continued to give good advice, and followed the
King as long as he was able to go about. In Ireland he was undoubtedly
popular, though an offence to extreme men on either side. Those who
were ruined by the Act of Settlement thought he did not do enough
for them. The Settlement, however, was not specially his work, but
the result of the political situation, and for many he was able to
secure special terms. By the Roman ecclesiastics he was, of course,
hated, but they had done him all the harm they could in their day of
power, and he made no secret of his wish to divide them. Most of his
relations were Roman Catholics, but he stood staunchly by the Church
of England. For persecution he had no taste, and he did much to soften
the action of the English House of Commons. He did not neglect his own
interests, though he might have had much more than he got, but some
critics forgot that he had been in dire poverty during several years
of exile. He, or rather his Duchess, was extravagant, as when 2000_l._
was spent on Charles II.'s supper, but his own tastes were very simple,
and a boiled leg of mutton was all he insisted on. As a soldier he
distinguished himself in the early part of the Civil War, but the
disaster at Rathmines damaged his military reputation. He had a very
bad army there, and Michael Jones had a very good one. His whole career
is a comment on Wellington's question--How is the King's government
to be carried on? The sovereigns whom he served were unworthy of such
loyalty, but both England and Ireland profited by it.[174]

[Sidenote: Disturbed state of Leinster.]

[Sidenote: Price's case.]

The state of the country after a year of Tyrconnel's government may be
inferred from such reports as have survived of the Spring Assizes in
1689. Chief Justice Keating and Baron Lynch, one of the new judges,
presided at Wicklow. John Price, lately Receiver-General, but dismissed
since Clarendon's departure, was under his successor's protection. When
the new levies were in progress 'the Merryboys,' urged on by some of
their clergy, made a general attack on the Protestants. Plunder was the
order of the day. Price lived at Ballinderry in the Wicklow hills, and
his neighbours gathered round him for mutual safety. Colonel O'Toole,
who was said to have collected twenty-six loads of miscellaneous booty,
demanded their horses and arms, which were refused. Colonel Sheldon
was then sent with a strong force, and to him they submitted. On
these facts Price and a hundred other Protestants were indicted for
high treason. A true bill was found, but the multitudinous defendants
challenged all Roman Catholics. For want of Protestant freeholders
no petty jury could be had, so that the trial failed. A juror named
Saville was discharged as destitute. Even his wife's and his children's
clothes had been taken. Keating asked him the value, and he answered,
'Truly, my lord, I have not yet computed my loss, but they have taken
away all.' In his charge to the Grand Jury the Chief Justice said the
country generally was in an ill state, 'but here they spare not even
wearing clothes and habits of women and children, that they are forced
to come abroad naked without anything to cover their nakedness.' He
prayed for the preservation of his sacred Majesty King James II.,
'for the protection of dutiful subjects, and for the subversion and
eradication of all those who desire the subversion of his government
either by foreign force or inbred conspiracy.' He told the Roman
Catholics that their turn would come. They knew that there had been
'an invasion in England of a foreign enemy, the Prince of Orange, and
the same is designed on this kingdom.' When these words were spoken
William was actually King of England, and it is not surprising that the
Protestants, when they regained power, should have considered Keating a
traitor, or at the very least a trimmer.[175]

[Sidenote: Opinions of two judges.]

At the same Assizes Maurice Cavanagh and two men named Poer and Boland,
were indicted for robbery with violence. Cavanagh gave evidence against
his accomplices and was acquitted. In sentencing Poer and Boland to be
hanged, Keating said the worst of the three had escaped; and he drew a
vivid picture of the condition of those who had put the labour of their
whole lives into cattle and lost all in a night. There was, he said,
nothing so barbarous this side of the Cape of Good Hope. Cavanagh swore
that his parish priest had ordered him to have a skean, that similar
orders had been given in other parishes, and that companies were thus
everywhere collected armed with skeans or half-pikes. A letter dated
March 2, addressed by Tyrconnel to the judges, was read in court.
The Chief Justice having returned to Dublin, the Grand Jury gave in
their answer to Lynch. The Lord Lieutenant complained of a falling
revenue, and demanded a voluntary aid to be raised by the sheriffs,
but they said in writing that the country was poor through the daily
ruin of the English, and they could hardly live, much less subscribe.
In discharging them the judge said their paper was a reflection and
scandal to their country, and would be very ill taken by Government. He
ordered it to be torn out of the minute-book, lest it should be used in
evidence against them, and this was accordingly done.[176]

[Sidenote: Case of Sir Thomas Southwell, March 1689.]

Cork and Bandon, Mallow and Castlemartyr, being in Jacobite hands,
about a hundred of the Munster gentry who were determined not to
submit, prepared to join Lord Kingston at Sligo. Sir Thomas Southwell
of Castlematras, near Rathkeale, was the leader of this expedition.
Avoiding Limerick, they crossed the Shannon at O'Brien's Bridge and
made their way through Clare with slight opposition. At last they were
captured in a narrow pass by James Power, sheriff of Galway, at the
head of a strong force. It seems clear that the conditions were not
faithfully kept, but the prisoners were all taken unharmed to Loughrea
and thence to Galway. They were tried before Martin, one of the new
judges, who went to court preceded by a piper instead of a trumpeter.
The facts could not be denied, and the whole party were sentenced to be
hanged, drawn, and quartered, and even ordered to prepare for immediate
death, but there were several reprieves, and all were suffered to live
until William's arrival altered the situation. Southwell himself made
friends with Kenneth, Lord Seaforth, who was allowed to carry him off
after several months' captivity. James granted him a pardon, though
Nagle said he was then precluded by the Act of Attainder from doing so.
As Southwell was by that time safe in Scotland, the validity of King
James's clemency remained undecided.[177]

[Sidenote: William's attempt to gain Tyrconnel.]

Tyrconnel was a partisan of France, and in 1686 boasted that he could
hand over Ireland to her whether he became Viceroy or not. Barillon
said much the same, adding that only time and a Parliament could
restore their property to the Catholics of Ireland. In the meantime
James thoroughly approved of the Lord Deputy's proceedings in that
direction. There is no evidence that Tyrconnel at any time contemplated
making terms with William, but he may have wished it to be thought that
he did. He told Archbishop Marsh and others that he was weary of the
government, but could not quit it without his master's leave. 'What,'
he said, 'shall I do with the sword? There is nobody to receive it.
Shall I throw it into the kennel?' He may have had a moment of despair
when he saw the thanes leaving their misguided master, and there is a
letter written by Chief Justice Keating with his approval, which hints
that he and his co-religionists would be satisfied if they could be
placed in as good a position as they had held under Charles II. If
James gave the order he was ready to disband his new levies. Keating's
letter was addressed to Sir John Temple, whose nephew advised William
to send over Richard Hamilton, one of the officers sequestered in the
Isle of Wight. It is uncertain whether Hamilton had an understanding
with Tyrconnel, or whether he really thought he could persuade him
to accept William's terms. However that may be, it was known in a
month that the emissary would not return as he had promised, and he
doubtless confirmed Tyrconnel in his determination to resist. John
Temple was blamed for the bloodshed that followed, and his tragic death
was the result of remorse.[178]

[Sidenote: Unrest in Ulster,]

[Sidenote: and in Dublin.]

'It pleased God,' said George Walker, 'so to infatuate the councils of
my Lord Tyrconnel that when the 3000 men were sent to assist his master
against the invasion of the Prince of Orange, he took particular care
to send away the whole regiment quartered in and about Londonderry.'
The air was full of rumours, and the prevailing panic was increased by
an anonymous letter announcing that there would be a massacre of the
Protestants on Sunday, December 9. Many copies were circulated, one
of which, addressed to Lord Mount Alexander, was found in the street
at Comber in Down. The letter was doubtless an impudent fabrication,
but it had a great effect, for 1641 was not forgotten. Copies reached
Dublin on Friday, Sunday was the fatal day, and 3000 Protestants
managed to get away by sea on the Saturday. Tyrconnel did not lose a
moment before issuing a proclamation against false news, and he sent a
yacht after the fugitives, but they could not be persuaded to return.
The alarm spread to the country, and for several successive Sundays
Protestant congregations worshipped with armed sentries at the door,
like the Scotch field conventicles in Lauderdale's time. The panic in
London owing to false reports brought by countrymen took place a week
later, and may have been an echo of the Comber letter, but the truth
will never be known. Londonderry became a city of refuge, with vigorous
support from Enniskillen and Sligo, which Tyrconnel had also neglected
to garrison.[179]

[Sidenote: Non-resistance. Dr. King.]

[Sidenote: Lord Mountjoy.]

The English colonists in Ireland were naturally most unwilling to break
with the King. The Scots were less so, though the Presbytery of Belfast
had in some sort taken the part of Charles I. against the Parliament.
The position occupied by the covenanted King before Worcester had not
increased their respect for the royal office, nor had the boot and the
thumbscrew done much to revive it. Ezekiel Hopkins, Bishop of Derry,
was for non-resistance at any price. Dr. William King, who succeeded
him after the Boyne, held the same doctrine, but he realised that
James was on the road to ruin, and has left an interesting account of
the steps by which he came to see that his allegiance was due to King
William. It was a comfort to him to reflect that he had done nothing
to bring about the change, and might become an archbishop under the
sovereign whom Parliament had chosen. Less fortunate was William
Stewart, Viscount Mountjoy, whose father had fought against Cromwell
at Dunbar, who had been Master of the Ordinance since 1684, and who
had seen foreign service. It was his regiment which was withdrawn from
Londonderry to replace one sent to England. On account of his great
influence the purge had been sparingly used in this case, and many,
perhaps most, of Mountjoy's men were Protestants. After Londonderry had
shut its gates Mountjoy was admitted alone, but the town was induced
to receive two companies, chiefly Protestants, under the command of
Lundy, who has thus gained an unenviable place in history. Mountjoy
then went to Dublin, where Tyrconnel persuaded him to go to James in
France, to say that he would destroy Ireland, but not save it, and to
ask leave for the Deputy to treat with the usurper. Tyrconnel promised
upon his word and honour not to raise or arm additional troops and to
sign no fresh commissions, to keep the new levies in quarters, and to
send no more into Ulster, to molest no one for any tumultuous meeting
or disorder before January 10, and to quarter no soldiers in any
private gentleman's house. The sequel is well known. Chief Baron Rice
accompanied Mountjoy to Paris with secret orders directly opposite to
those avowed. The deceived soldier was at once shut up in the Bastille,
where he remained for over three years, and was then exchanged for
Richard Hamilton. Having by this time had enough of passive resistance,
he joined William as a volunteer, and was killed at Steenkirk. James
was no party to the imprisonment, and would have been satisfied to let
Mountjoy leave France. Tyrconnel at once proceeded to do all the things
he had promised on his word and honour not to do--the honour which
stooped to traduce Anne Hyde, and the word which had gained him the
name of lying Dick Talbot. The treacherous detention of Mountjoy was a
blunder, for the Protestants found other leaders, and were confirmed in
their opinion that no faith would be kept with heretics.

[Sidenote: The gates of Londonderry shut, December 1688.]

On the same day that the Comber letter reached Londonderry there came
another from George Philips of Limavady, who had been governor in
Charles II.'s time. He was a descendant of that Philips who had been
conspicuous in the Ulster Settlement. He informed the townsmen that
Lord Antrim was near with his regiment, and cautioned them against
admitting it. Antrim's men were raw levies, some 1200 Highlanders and
Irish, not properly clothed and very imperfectly armed, and, of course,
all Roman Catholics. The men on the wall saw the motley crowd, and
thought that they had come to fulfil the predicted massacre. Against
the advice of the bishop and disregarding the fears of their elders,
some young apprentices shut the gates in the face of Lord Antrim's
officers. He withdrew to Coleraine, and ten days later Tyrconnel
ordered him to be ready to march at a moment's notice. The Lord Deputy
was about to send an army against the rebellious town, and would follow
himself in a short time. In the meantime Mountjoy had received a
somewhat apologetic letter from the citizens, in which the apprentice
boys are called a rabble; but in writing to the Irish Society in London
the same men say only that 'just as the soldiers were approaching
the gates, the youthhood, by a strange impulse, ran in one body and
shut them.' Old and young combined to form themselves into companies.
Philips accepted the office of governor, and, while seeking a pardon
from the Lord Deputy, the offenders made it quite clear that they
would stand on their defence. Mountjoy entered the town alone, but it
was agreed that two companies of his regiment, chiefly Protestants,
should be quartered there under Colonel Robert Lundy, who became
governor, and that future reinforcements should be at least one-half
Protestant. When the flight of James was known, the determination to
hold out became stronger, and when William actually became King of
England all restraint was withdrawn. Lundy received a commission from
the new sovereign. When James landed in Ireland he found the state of
war fully established between his own Government and the Protestants of
Ulster.[180]

[Sidenote: Enniskillen determines to resist.]

'We stand upon our guard,' said Gustavus Hamilton, governor of
Enniskillen, 'and do resolve, by the blessing of God, rather to
meet our danger than expect it.' The great men of the neighbourhood
were timid or lukewarm, but the people did not hesitate, and their
chosen governor identified himself with them. His grandfather, who
was Archbishop of Cashel, had died in exile after being plundered by
the rebels in 1641. His mother was a Swede, his father and uncle had
served under the great Gustavus, and he himself had been turned out of
the army by Tyrconnel. At Enniskillen, as at Derry, there was great
unwillingness to oppose King James, but circumstances were too strong,
and the party of resistance soon got the upper hand. The Comber letter
arrived on December 7, and the effect was immediate. The Irish were
drilling and arming in the neighbourhood, and the news from Dublin
grew daily worse. It was hard to get a horse shod, for the country
smiths were busy making pikes, and staves were being cut openly in the
woods. On December 13 came news that two companies were actually on
their way to garrison the town. From that moment country people with
horses and arms flocked in to reinforce the inhabitants, who were under
a hundred in number. Three days later the dreaded companies, with a
convoy of arms for the rabble, reached Lisbellaw, some four miles away.
By this time the townsmen could muster 200 foot and 150 horse, and they
resolved to be the attacking party. Hamilton had raised another 100
horse on his own account, and was ready to support them. The invaders
fled without striking a blow to Maguire's Bridge, and the next day to
Cavan. Hamilton then accepted the office of governor, and a few days
later the news came of James having left London, after which there was
no hesitation, though it was long before the full facts were known.
Some said he had gone to Rome, others to a monastery, and others that
he was dead. Until after his landing in Ireland there was no further
attempt against Enniskillen. Lundy was accepted as commander-in-chief,
and on March 11 William and Mary were joyfully proclaimed with as much
ceremony as circumstances admitted.[181]

[Sidenote: Sligo.]

The panic extended to Sligo, and the gentry there, chiefly under
the guidance of Robert, Lord Kingston, determined to resist. As at
Londonderry and Enniskillen, Roman Catholics were excluded from the
town, and the Protestants resolved to cast in their lot with the
English Government and Parliament. Troops and companies were formed,
Kingston and Colonel Chidley Coote were chosen commanders-in-chief,
and care was taken to provide for communication with Enniskillen. One
outpost was at Manor Hamilton, which had played a part in 1641, and
another at Dromahaire, the old O'Rourke stronghold near Lough Gill. The
Protestants of Roscommon, Mayo, and Leitrim flocked to Sligo, and when
James landed it was still in Protestant hands.

[Sidenote: Ineffective resistance in Ulster.]

[Sidenote: The Break of Dromore.]

The Protestant gentry of Down and Antrim met at Comber and formed an
association. Lord Mount Alexander, who was only a nominal soldier,
was made commander of the forces raised, which were considerable in
point of number. A council was established at Hillsborough, where
there was a fort, and stores were collected there; but from the first
ill-success attended the movement. The general showed little ability,
and his heart was not really in the business, while he complained of
being ill seconded by others. The local magnates quarrelled among
themselves. No real leader made himself known. A plot to seize
Belfast and Carrickfergus, which were undefended, failed through want
of promptitude, and an attempt to surprise the latter place after
it had received a garrison was ill-managed and unsuccessful. Just
before James landed in Ireland, Tyrconnel sent Richard Hamilton with
a thousand good soldiers and twice that number of raw levies to the
North. The Protestants were scattered about in small bodies and never
came properly together. Those at Rathfriland and Loughbrickland fled
at Hamilton's approach. A stand was made at Dromore, but he fell upon
them before they were all assembled, and a complete rout followed.
Tradition says the struggle was so short that a woman left her baking
to see the fight, and on her return found the bread not burnt. Some
delay was caused by the strong fort at Hillsborough, but there was
no serious resistance. The general and most of the chief men fled to
England or Scotland, and the rest flocked to Londonderry and Coleraine.
By the time that James reached Dublin opposition to him was practically
confined to the territory controlled by Londonderry and Enniskillen.
Sligo was evacuated by special orders from Lundy, who laid the blood
of all Ulster on Lord Kingston's head, if he did not come at once to
the relief of Londonderry. The holder of King William's commission was
obeyed, but when the Sligo men got to Ballyshannon they were ordered
to stop there and defend the Erne. Afterwards they were told to go
to Cladyford, but the order came too late. Lundy, who had at first
demanded every man, then offered to take in a few as a sort of favour.
Lord Kingston made his way to England, but he left Colonel Lloyd
behind, who became the fighting hero of the Enniskillen garrison.'[182]


FOOTNOTES:

[158] _Sheridan MS._ Cartwright's _Diary_, January 17 and February 21
to March 5, 1686-7. Clarendon's _Diary_, February 6, and his letters of
October 2 and January 8.

[159] The Coventry letter, dated October 26, 1686, is in the _Jacobite
Narrative_, ed. Gilbert, appx. i., and in _Ormonde Papers_, vii. 464.
Clarendon's _Diary_, January 4, 1686-7. _Sheridan MS._ The King to
Clarendon, April 6, 1686. Barillon to Louis XIV., October 16, 1687, in
_Dalrymple_, ii. 262.

[160] Clarendon's letters of March 14, April 17, 1686, May 8, 11, 15,
25, and 30, and June 1 (to Ormonde). Sunderland to Clarendon, June 14.
Anonymous letters of warning to Clarendon and the Protestants are in
_Clarendon and Rochester Correspondence_, i. 369, 498, 563.

[161] Sunderland afterwards claimed to have prevented James from
allowing Tyrconnel to hold a parliament, though he was offered
40,000_l._ to agree to the repeal of the Act of Settlement in that way.
This may be believed, as he appealed for confirmation to Godolphin, as
well as to Nugent and Rice, _Diary of H. Sidney_, ii. 379.

[162] Rules for Corporations in _Irish Statutes_, pp. 197-239.
Clarendon's letters, particularly that to the King of August 14, 1686.
Cartwright's _Diary_, August 1687. _Sheridan MS._

[163] James's letter of September 20, 1687, is in Harris's _Life of
William III._, appx. viii. The _quo warranto_ to Belfast and the new
charter are printed in Young's _Town Book of Belfast_. King's _State of
the Protestants_, chap. iii. section 5. _Apology for the Protestants of
Ireland_, 1689. The proceedings in the Londonderry case are given by
King, appx. vii.

[164] Clarendon's letters of June 22 and August 14, 1686, and of
January 22 following--his last from Ireland. Ormonde to Southwell,
February 5, 1686-7, in _Ormonde Papers_, 1899. Proclamations of
February 21, 1686-7, and April 4, 1688. _Life_ of James Bonnell, p.
273, and his letter to Strype, January 21, 1688-9, in _English Hist.
Review_, no. 74.

[165] Clarendon's letters of June 26, July 27 and 31, August 26, 1686,
and his _Diary_, January 4, 10, and 11, 1686-7. The Duke of Berwick
agreed with Mr. Nihill that Tyrconnel was 'fort rusé.'

[166] _Sheridan MS._ King's _State of the Protestants_, chap. iii.
section 3. O'Flanagan's _Irish Chancellors_, i. 470, 487.

[167] Clarendon's letters of June 19 and July 31, 1686. King _ut sup._
In _Secret Consults of the Romish Party_ Worth is represented as their
chief tool, but Tyrconnel said he was 'by God, a damned rogue ... by
God, I will have it brought to the Council Board, the King has an ill
opinion of him, and I will do his business.'

[168] Clarendon's list of sheriffs for 1686 is printed with his letter
of March 2, 1685-6. Tyrconnel's list for 1687 is in King, appx. vii.
Clarendon's letters of June 12 and 15. The King to Clarendon, October
8, and the answer, October 16.

[169] The two judges left Dublin on March 17, 1688, St. Patrick's Day,
_Secret Consults of the Romish Party_, pp. 115, 120. They had left
London on their return before April 25, Luttrell's _Diary_, i. 438.

[170] Tyrconnel's proclamations of April 11, 1687, and April 4, 1688.
As to Irish Nonconformist addresses, see Reid's _Presbyterian Church_,
ii. 351, and Luttrell's _Diary_, June to August 1687.

[171] List of Commissions in Dalton's _Army List_, i. 10, from February
12 to June 21, 1687. Proclamations of February 24 and July 18.
_Sheridan MS._

[172] Avaux fully sustains King. He says most regiments were raised
'par des gentilhommes qui n'ont jamais été à l'armée, que ce sont des
tailleurs, des bouchers, des cordonniers qui ont formé les compagnies
qui les entretiennent à leur despens et en sont les capitaines,'
to Louvois, April 16, 1689. Tyrconnel's proclamations of July 20,
August 24, December 29, 1688. Luttrell's _Diary_, July 6, August 27,
September 8, December 15, 19, and 30, 1688, January 1, and April 24,
1689. Evelyn's _Diary_, July 23, October 7, 1688. Hoffmann to the
Emperor Oct., Doc. 626 in Campana Cavelli. Tyrconnel to James II.,
Oct. 3/13, _ib._ Doc. 633. King's _State of the Protestants_, chap.
iii. sec. viii. 5. It was absurdly reported in France that William had
interned the Irish in a little island that they might all perish there,
_Memoirs_ of De Sourches, January 12/22, 1689.

[173] Carte's _Ormonde_, ii. 547, and see Macaulay's remarks on the
Charterhouse case in chap. viii. Ormonde to Southwell, November 18,
1686, in _Ormonde Papers_, O.S., ii. 306; and to Temple, June 15, 1687,
_ib._ N.S., vii. 494. A. Wood's _Fasti Oxonienses_ and his _Life and
Times_, ed. Clark.

[174] Burnet's _Own Times_, i. 95, and the _Supplement_, ed. Foxcroft,
p. 60. The two characters should be compared, that in the published
History, written in 1702, being kinder to Ormonde than the original
draft written in 1683. Burnet tells us that he had associated more
with Ormonde's enemies than with his friends, and looking back at the
Caroline court from a convenient distance, he was able to see the
old cavalier's superiority. I have read Nicholas French's _Unkind
Deserter_, 1676, which is not convincing, though the Bishop proves that
Ormonde got larger grants of land than Scævola and Horatius Cocles. A
defence of his hero in money matters is in Carte's _Ormonde_, ii. 308
_sqq._, 430. Burnet notes that Ormonde 'writes the best of any man that
has no learning that I ever knew.'

[175] Proceedings against John Price, &c., Wicklow Assizes, March 6,
1688-9, 1 William and Mary, Howell's _State Trials_, xii. no. 363. The
reporter says he was present in court. The author of _Secret Consults_
is unfair to Keating, but points out (p. 75) that he had 'always been a
servant of the Duke of York'; he had done his law business in Ireland,
_Hist. MSS. Com._ (House of Lords), 11th Report, ii. 219.

[176] Howell's State Trials, xii. no. 364.

[177] The fullest account of this matter is in Lodge's _Peerage of
Ireland_, ed. Archdale, vi. 20. Hardiman, in his _History of Galway_,
p. 155, note, says Lodge's account is unfairly coloured, but does not
dispute the facts. King's appendix no. 16. _Account of the Transactions
of the late King James_, &c., licensed July 7, 1690, p. 3. Luttrell,
i. 517. Two Ponsonbys, a Percival, and a Purdon were among Southwell's
companions.

[178] _Sheridan MS._ Letters of Barillon, September 13/23, 1686, and
September 6/16, 1687, and of Bonrepaus, August 25/September 4 1687, in
notes to Macaulay, chap. viii. Luttrell, i. 495, 500. King, iii. 8, and
Keating's letter of December 29 in appx. xiv. Evidence of Sir Robert
Colville and John Philipps to the House of Lords, _Hist. MSS. Com._,
appx. to 12th Report, part vi. 1689.

[179] Walker's _True Account_. The Comber letter is in King, appx.
xii., and in many other places. _Secret Consults of the Romish Party._
Proclamations of October 15 and December 7. The 'Irish night' in London
is sufficiently described by Macaulay, chap. x. _Ellis Correspondence_,
ii. 356. Writing to her cousin Abigail Harley on December 13, 1688,
Mrs. Pye says, 'The watch called all up that the Irish were near, and
at Knightsbridge had killed man, woman, and child, and were resolved
for to fire and massacre. I bless God I was not much frighted as might
be expected,' _Portland Papers_, iii. 420.

[180] _Faithful History of the Northern Affairs_, &c., licensed
December 10, 1689.

[181] Andrew Hamilton's _True Relation_, 1690. He says there were
public masses through the North 'for the furthering of that which they
called Inteneragh--that is, a secret intention.'

[182] _Faithful History of Northern Affairs_, 1689.




CHAPTER L

JAMES II. IN IRELAND, 1689


[Sidenote: French designs on Ireland.]

At the beginning of 1686, Bonrepaus, a high official in the French
marine, was sent by Louis XIV. on a special mission to England.
He found the navy there in very bad order, also discovering that
Sunderland and Barillon were closely allied, and that the French
diplomatist was no match for the English politician. He believed that
in this way many important secrets became known to the Prince of
Orange. Avaux wrote to the same effect from Holland, and even Skelton
formed a similar opinion. Tyrconnel thought he could utilise Bonrepaus
and defeat Sunderland, and when the former returned to England in the
summer of 1687, he pressed him to come to Chester and arrange with
James for the separation of Ireland from England in the event of a
Protestant succeeding him on the throne. Tyrconnel and Sunderland were
both with the King in August, but Bonrepaus trusted neither of them and
kept away from Chester. James had no idea that he would be dethroned
in little more than one year, and thought Ireland might be in a fit
state after five of leisurely preparation, but Tyrconnel, who may have
seen more clearly that his master was on the road to ruin, pressed for
more speedy measures, and made all the military preparations that he
could. Seignelay particularly cautioned Bonrepaus not to let Barillon
know anything about his dealings with Tyrconnel. Sunderland, however,
told the ambassador a good deal, adding that the King was determined
to repeal the Irish Act of Settlement, and that in the opinion of all
Englishmen this would lead to an entire separation of Ireland from
England. The announcement that Mary of Modena was likely to become a
mother, cut the scheme short, but when William became King of England
the Irish Government was prepared to go on with the original plan.
French and Irish were united as to the desirability of making Ireland
depend only on France, but James was always too much an Englishman to
take that view heartily.[183]

[Sidenote: Mission of Pointis.]

[Sidenote: His report.]

When James fled to France it soon became evident that Ireland was his
only chance. In order to find out the true state of affairs there,
Seignelay sent Pointis, an officer of marine artillery who had done
good service at Genoa and Algiers and had already been on a mission to
James in England. He was accompanied by Captain Michael Roth of the
Irish foot-guards, by whom he was to be guided. Pointis produced a
detailed report, which shows clearly the state of Ireland after William
reached London and before James left France. He had been particularly
instructed to consult Tyrconnel and to inquire whether the majority
were strong enough absolutely to subdue the Protestant minority. No
hope was to be held out of any help from France except in arms and
ammunition. Pointis found that in Ulster about half the population
was Protestant, but only one twentieth in the other provinces. They
had arms, money, and good horses. Mountjoy had had the address to
put Protestant garrisons into Londonderry and Sligo, but the towns
generally were in Catholic hands. The Governor of Duncannon was a
Protestant, but his men were not. There were 2300 good cavalry and
3500 infantry of the old army, and about 40,000 Catholics raised by
the gentry but without arms or officers. He did not believe Tyrconnel
could take either Sligo or Londonderry, though unfortified, for
there were no gunners or artillery officers. This he attributes to
the machinations of Mountjoy, who was Master of the Ordnance, but it
is sufficiently accounted for by the general neglect prevalent under
Charles and James. Dr. King had been all over Ireland some months
before. He rejoiced in the nakedness of every garrison town, which
would make it easier in good time to subdue the 'papistical faction'
to whom James had entrusted all. Pointis returned to Ireland after
reporting, and gave some trouble as Seignelay's representative.
He claimed to be independent of Avaux and almost independent of
Louvois.[184]

[Sidenote: Pointis on the new army.]

Pointis found a general expectation that the heretics would be crushed
before help could come from England. In the three southern provinces
they were easily disarmed, there was a daily exodus of Protestants, and
hundreds quitted Ireland at the mere news of his arrival. Tyrconnel's
raw recruits were willing enough to be drilled, but they had only rusty
muskets and pikes or mere sticks with nails at the end. Even the women
begged on their knees for arms from France. There was no money to pay
or feed them, but the number of men might be easily raised to 100,000
if none were rejected, and Lord Antrim, who hesitatingly followed his
brother's footsteps, had a commission from some Highland chiefs to join
his force to theirs. Present help was necessary, but in the end Pointis
thought Ireland could pay her way provided the wool trade were diverted
to France. An invasion of England might even be possible, and in any
case, William would be kept so busy as to make it impossible for him to
do anything against French interests elsewhere.[185]

[Sidenote: Tyrconnel invites James to Ireland.]

Captain Roth carried a letter from James to Tyrconnel, and brought
back his answer, containing the same information as Pointis gave to
Seignelay, and urging him to appear himself in Ireland: 500,000 crowns
would be wanted at once, with at least 16,000 muskets and 12,000
swords. Many good officers should be sent, including all those who had
followed their King to France. 'I beg of you,' he added, 'to consider
whether you can with honour continue where you are when you may possess
a kingdom of your own, plentiful of all things for human life.' He
could live well in Ireland on what the King of France allowed him.
Vauban wrote to the same effect. Ireland was James's last stake, and
he ought to play it in person. It was his only chance, and, even if
he failed, the diversion would be useful to France against her many
enemies. Evidently James was not anxious to start. His insensibility
and want of dignity in misfortune were generally remarked, while his
Queen was praised and admired. But French and Irish opinion left him no
choice, and the expedition was decided upon after he had been at St.
Germain about six weeks.[186]

[Sidenote: James II. in France.]

[Sidenote: The Emperor.]

[Sidenote: The Pope.]

It has often been said, and is probably true, that if Louis XIV. in
September 1688 had besieged Maestricht instead of Philipsburg, William
of Orange would have been fully occupied in defending Holland and could
not have invaded England. France might then have lorded it over Europe
for an indefinite time. But James, before his affairs became desperate
in England, had in one of his fits of independence refused the French
King's help because it would be unpopular. The revocation of the Edict
of Nantes and the persecution both before and after, made the idea
of a French alliance hateful to England. But after his flight James
found that Louis was his only friend. He appealed for help to all the
Catholic powers, but in vain. The league of Augsburg had been defensive
against the overweening ambition of France, but Germany had been
confirmed by the devastation of the Palatinate. Meanwhile, the Emperor
Leopold reminded him that he had slighted his advice sent through
Kaunitz, and that the favourable time had passed. He himself had to
employ all his resources in defending the frontiers of Christendom,
while the French ravaged German lands and burned the palaces of
princes. 'It has,' he said, 'become a diversion to them to commit all
manner of insolencies and cruelties in many places, but chiefly in
Catholic countries, exceeding the cruelties of the Turks themselves,'
and they were as dangerous to the Holy Roman Empire as to smaller
potentates. The Pope supported the Emperor, for Gallicanism under such
a king as Louis seemed to him a greater danger than Protestantism.
James, while professing to tolerate and protect all creeds, privately
proposed to root out heresy by military force, but success did not seem
very probable while the most Christian King was actually threatening
to occupy Rome. Louis expected the Pope to give money, but would make
no concession on his part. In 1687, while James was still really King,
Castlemaine's mission to Rome had failed entirely. James Porter,
Endymion's fifth son, had no better fortune later, and was not allowed
to go to the next Pope for fear of interfering with Melfort. By good
and skilful government Innocent had replenished an empty treasury,
and all that he could spare was wanted to repel the Turks. Of course
he wished for the success of a Catholic monarch, but the prospect of
good to the Church by James's plan of invading Scotland from Ireland
and England from Scotland did not recommend itself to him. Innocent
XI. died two days after the relief of Londonderry, but the election
of Ottoboni, who became Alexander VIII., brought no relief to James,
though considered a victory for the French faction. Louis yielded
some points in dispute, but the Pope said he could not afford to fight
against Turks, Vaudois, and English. He mourned in tears of blood and
was ready to sell his cassock, but he had no money. Melfort's diplomacy
was not likely to improve matters.[187]

[Sidenote: Tyrconnel prepares for war.]

[Sidenote: General disorder.]

It is possible, though not probable, that Tyrconnel may have hesitated
a moment about his attitude towards the Dutch invader, but, if so, he
was confirmed in his allegiance to James by the news of his escape
to France. The Lord Deputy had always belonged to the French party,
and he doubtless exaggerated William's difficulties, though they were
great enough. His mind once made up, he proceeded to enlist men as fast
as possible though he could not arm, clothe, or feed them. Those who
would undertake to support the recruits for three months from January
1 received commissions, 500 being issued in one day. The resulting
confusion was indescribable and was felt for long afterwards. The
colonels were men of family though not always soldiers, but the real
recruiting was done by men of inferior rank, who became captains and
subalterns. The new levies were begun in December, and by February
over 50,000 had been enlisted. As for the most part they could not be
armed, they were exercised with sticks three feet long tipped with iron
or hardened in the fire. They were willing enough to be drilled, and
were not accustomed to luxury, but they could not live without food,
and being unpaid, they took what they wanted and more. The robberies
and depredations could not be denied. They were daily, said Tyrconnel
officially, 'committed by loose and idle people, which are by some
imputed to the new levies.' He showed that he thought the imputation
not ill-founded by ordering officers to keep strict discipline, to see
that the soldiers took nothing without payment and behaved civilly
to all, and to restore to their rightful owners such stolen horses,
cattle, and other goods as could be recovered. Three weeks later he
issued another proclamation announcing that the Prince of Orange was
coming, and that to prevent his seizing them, arms and horses in
private hands were to be immediately confiscated. Those who neglected
to give them up at once were to be subjected to domiciliary visits
on pain of being punished and of 'risking the ill consequences which
may fall upon them by the disorders of the soldiers.' This applied to
Dublin and the suburbs. Four days later the Lord Deputy had discovered
that the associations in the North were armed and had rebellious
intentions. The principle of confiscating arms and horses was therefore
extended to all parts of the country, with saving clauses for those who
did not appear to be rebels. Travellers were not to be molested except
in Ulster and Sligo. As for the associated Protestants there, they
were called upon to deliver up arms and horses, and on submission were
promised protection, but Lord Kingston and ten principal gentlemen in
North-East Ulster were excluded from favour or mercy.[188]

[Sidenote: Attempts to resist Tyrconnel.]

[Sidenote: Bandon.]

[Sidenote: Kenmare.]

In Leinster there was no resistance to Tyrconnel's Government. In
Connaught the Protestants were comparatively few, but some found their
way to Sligo from adjoining counties. In Munster the Protestants
were in a hopeless minority, and a conspiracy to seize Cork was
betrayed and ended in nothing, but where Lord Cork and Sir William
Petty had left their marks something was attempted. At Bandon, in the
neighbourhood of which robberies were openly committed, there was a
small garrison under Captain Daniel O'Neill, who had doubtless good
reasons for doubting whether he could trust the inhabitants. The
corporation had been reformed here as elsewhere, but the oath was
generally refused. O'Neill called upon all to give up their arms,
but not many obeyed. A few days later Lord Clancarty threatened the
town with a stronger force, but the Protestants resolved not to admit
him. The garrison were suddenly overpowered in the night or early
morning, and a few who resisted were killed. The captured arms enabled
the people to man the wall, but the old cannon were neglected and
useless. Lord Inchiquin advised them to make the best terms they could,
and when General MacCarthy appeared with an army, nothing effectual
could be done and the town was soon in his hands. He proposed to hang
ten of the ringleaders and to burn the place, but Dr. Brady, the
versifier of the Psalms, who had not yet abandoned the doctrine of
non-resistance, interceded for his native town. MacCarthy, who was a
civilised warrior, agreed to take an indemnity of 1500_l._ in ready
money, full restitution being also made to soldiers who had been
stripped of their arms or otherwise injured. Tyrconnel and James blamed
the General for giving such easy terms, and some of the Bandonians
were afterwards indicted for high treason. Many of the townsmen found
their way to Londonderry, and thence to the Boyne. Petty's settlement
at Kenmare had long been threatened by the natives. The Protestants,
who were chiefly engaged in the iron works and in fishing, were not
one in 500 of the population in those parts, and they began to think
of 1641. Petty's agent was Richard Orpen, who was specially unpopular
for his determination in bringing malefactors to justice. Among them
was a MacCarthy, who in 1680 had robbed and murdered a smelter in open
day, and Owen Sullivan (a loose gentleman), who in the same year
had treacherously run Orpen himself through the back on a dark night
for seeking to recover a debt. In 1685 Teague a Glauna had murdered
a pursuivant for trying to arrest papists in Kerry. In 1686 Daniel
MacDermot, with half a score more, had robbed some French Protestant
fugitives who had taken refuge in Kenmare River. In 1687 Daniel Croly
and seven more Tories attacked Orpen and his brother, who shot three
of them. 'Being made prisoners they lived till they were hanged at the
assizes following. The greatest part of all these malefactors were
severely prosecuted by Richard Orpen; some of them were hanged, some
burnt in the hand, some remained in gaol, and the rest dispersed and
fled out of the country.'[189]

[Sidenote: Siege of Kenmare.]

Though suffering from occasional robberies, the settlers managed to
live in tolerable comfort until the new policy was adopted in 1685,
after which it became daily harder to get any redress. When the fresh
levies began in November 1689, the officers, 'being persons of broken
and desperate fortunes, not able to maintain themselves or their
soldiers, were forced to filch and steal black cattle and sheep.' The
thieves appeared in bands, sometimes seventy at a time and well armed,
and openly drove away the cattle by scores through the neighbouring
glens. The corn was carried off, and by the beginning of January the
Kenmare people were reduced to what they had in their houses. They
appealed to MacCarthy, who had the chief command in Munster, and to
Sir Valentine Brown, who governed Kerry under him; and after a week's
delay they sent back warrants to be executed by the plundered people
themselves, which of course they were unable to do. In the meantime
six of their houses were sacked. Sir Richard Aldworth of Newmarket
was consulted, who said there was nothing for it but to retreat to
the nearest garrison, but there were forty miles of mountains between
them and Bandon, and they determined to stand on their defence. On the
rocky peninsula of Killowen, in the estuary above the present town of
Kenmare, Petty had built a house for his agent, 44 feet long by 22 feet
wide, and containing four rooms and a garret. Here, under the command
of Orpen and of his father-in-law, the Rev. Thomas Palmer, who held
Kenmare and other Kerry livings, 42 families congregated numbering 180
persons, of whom 75 were fighting men. They had four blunderbusses and
40 guns of various kinds, besides pistols, swords and pikes, and 170
pounds of powder. Half an acre was enclosed by a bank 14 feet high and
12 feet thick, and wooden cabins were erected of such materials as
might be easily pulled down if an assault were threatened. The house
stood in the middle, and was strengthened with balconies and flankers.
The country people about, who had lived mainly on wages paid by the
colonists, made no difficulty about doing the rough work. On the last
day of January an association was formed under seal, and all swore on
the Gospel to obey Orpen and Palmer until they had orders from the
Prince of Orange, 'in defence of our lives and religion against the
enemies of the Protestant Church.' Stolen goods may be sweet, but in
the long run they tend to poverty. The wild people who had driven
off the cattle took no steps to till the ground, but lived on the
plunder. People who had been used to potatoes or oatmeal with meat
perhaps four times a year, now 'gorged themselves with flesh, half-raw,
half-roasted, sometimes half-boiled, half-rotten and stinking for want
of salt, sometimes moving towards the boiler by the assistance of the
wriggling crawlers, that lately before received their birth from the
same piece of flesh.'[190]

[Sidenote: Kenmare capitulates.]

[Sidenote: The garrison escape to England.]

Having provided a temporary place of refuge, Orpen thought he might
make an effort to execute Sir Valentine Brown's warrants. He sallied
forth by night with a strong party and captured six of the robbers
with stolen property in their possession. The goods were retained at
Killowen, but the men were handed over to the authorities and soon
released 'upon insolvent bail.' On February 25, the day appointed for
disarming the Protestants, Captain Phelim MacCarthy arrived at one
o'clock in the morning hoping to surprise the little garrison, but good
watch was kept. At daylight there was a parley, and the Irish captain
produced a letter from Sir Valentine Brown authorising the seizure of
their horses and arms and promising to make good any condition made
on surrender; otherwise he was empowered to use fire and sword. The
garrison stood on their guard, but sent out a spy to gather news,
who returned in four days saying that the Protestants of Cork were
disarmed, that Colonel Henry Boyle had surrendered Castlemartyr, and
that Bandon was in little better condition. There was no sign of help
from England, and Orpen and Palmer, knowing that they could not resist
cannon, capitulated on condition that the garrison were not plundered
or molested, but suffered to retain their swords, as Sir Valentine
had promised, and to leave the country or stay in it, as they thought
fit. The house was nevertheless invaded by a mob, and the contents
carried away. The garrison, with the women and children, embarked on
two vessels of about 30 tons each, where they were 'packed like fish
one upon the other.' They were not allowed to sail until Orpen had
given a bond in 5000_l._ that they would all go to Cork and surrender
to the governor there. He resolved to ignore the bond, which would
be valueless if William succeeded, and sailed at once for England.
The boatmen could not lay a course, but the two gentlemen, who knew
geography if ignorant of navigation, managed to reach Bristol on March
25, after a full fortnight at sea. They had salt beef, meal, and water
enough to support life, but little or no shelter, and they had lost
all they possessed. On landing, three died of exposure. Many more had
fever, dysentery, and 'a more than ordinary sort of measles.' Petty was
dead, but on reaching London his widow, now Lady Shelburne, and others,
relieved them. Most of the men enlisted in the army intended for the
reduction of Ireland.[191]

[Sidenote: James arrives in Ireland, 1689.]

[Sidenote: French officers.]

[Sidenote: A French ambassador.]

[Sidenote: Royal progress to Cork.]

James landed at Kinsale on March 12. He was escorted by a strong French
squadron, but no enemy appeared, and the passage was quite uneventful.
At this time he would not have accepted the help of a French army, and
in any case Louis had no troops to spare, but he sent over 100,000_l._
in money, 20,000 muskets or carbines with ammunition, and 30,000
swords. Among the French officers sent by their sovereign to help his
brother king were De Rosen, Lieutenant-General; Maumont, Marechal de
Camp; and three brigadiers, Pusignan, Boisseleau, and Léry. Pointis
accompanied them to superintend the artillery and, above all things,
to represent Seignelay's interest against that of Louvois. There were
also a few French officers of lower rank, and some 200 English and
Irish. Still more important was the appointment of Avaux as ambassador.
Barillon was considered too fat and, moreover, he had been duped
by Sunderland, while his rival's good advice from Holland had been
neglected at the English Court. Among James's own subjects were Lord
Dover, Lord Powis, whom he had just made a Duke, Berwick, and his
other son Henry Fitzjames, on whom he had bestowed the empty title of
Grand Prior of England. Some Jesuits, without whom the King could do
nothing, were not wanting. There also was Bishop Cartwright of Chester,
and above all Lord Melfort, who was James's evil genius during the
following months. The English officers, who were as yet unattached,
landed at once, collected all the good horses for miles round, and
hurried off to Dublin before travelling became difficult and before
everything on the road was eaten up by the crowds following the King.
Such animals as could be found were employed to take James and his
baggage to Cork two days later. Pipers played and girls danced before
him all the way. Cloaks and garlands were strewed in his path, and if
some of the latter were made of cabbage stalks, it should be remembered
that flowers are scarce in the first half of March, and that evergreens
were not as common then as they are now. The French generals had to
stay behind at Kinsale with the stores. There were no carts, only a
sort of sledge (traineau) upon which a cargo of 250 lb. could be drawn
by one horse at the rate of twelve miles a day. After four days, thirty
quadrupeds were produced without saddles, bridles, or halters, enough
rope to make reins being hardly procurable.[192]

[Sidenote: James at Cork.]

[Sidenote: Brown's case.]

Tyrconnel met the King at Cork, made his report as to the state of
affairs, and was created a Duke. James stayed there six days, lodging
with the Dominicans. The Franciscans, in the dress of their order,
escorted him through the streets to hear Mass in their new chapel. He
granted Prebendary Brady's request so far as to spare the walls of
Bandon, though Avaux strongly pressed their demolition. The people
there continuing to show their political colours, an order to level the
walls was at last given, but not obeyed, and they were left standing.
During his stay, Nugent presided at the Assizes, and some Protestants
looked upon him as an Irish Jeffreys. A gentleman named Brown had
started with Sir Thomas Southwell's party, thought the adventure
hopeless, and returned to his own house. He was brought before Daly at
Limerick and discharged, but was arraigned at Cork, and found guilty
of treason under the Chief Justice's direction. The High Sheriff took
it on himself to put off the execution for a fortnight so that the
prisoner's wife might have time to petition, and she appeared before
James at Dublin with five or six children. 'Woman,' he is reported
to have said, 'your husband shall die.' The sheriff was reprimanded
for his humane action, and Brown was hanged, drawn, and quartered. In
spite of his pardon to the Bandonians, for which he claimed the name
of a gracious king, James allowed some of them to be indicted. A true
bill was found, but the Assizes ended before a trial could be had.
When Nugent would have tried them later MacCarthy interfered, much to
his credit, and insisted that his word should not be broken. It was
generally believed that Nugent on both occasions acted under direct
orders from the King.[193]

[Sidenote: Royal progress to Dublin.]

[Sidenote: His reception there.]

James left Cork on March 20 and travelled by Lismore, Clonmel,
Kilkenny, and Kilcullen to Dublin, which he reached on the 24th. The
hedges were lined by half-pike men, something between bandits and
soldiers, and the whole journey was attended by rejoicing crowds as
upon the first day from Kinsale. At Carlow, we are told, 'he was
slabbered with the kisses of the rude country Irish gentlewomen, so
that he was forced to beg to have them kept from him.' He entered
Dublin on horseback, great preparations having been made for his
reception. Troops lined the streets which were freshly gravelled, and
stands were erected for musicians, who played loyal and joyful tunes.
And so, amid the shouts of the populace and the roar of cannon, James
reached the Castle, above which waved a flag with the legend 'Now
or Never, Now and Forever.' All was fair to the eye, but Avaux had
misgivings from the first. The King of England, he said, vacillated
continually and often came to the wrong decision at last. He minded
small things and neglected great ones, having so little foresight as
to wish to leave Kinsale before the stores were landed. Of ten fat
bullocks sent as a present to His Majesty at Cork, two were stolen on
the way. Bands of plunderers were everywhere, and the newly raised
troops, being unpaid, added to the confusion. Avaux reported that
within one month of the King's landing over 5000 cattle were killed for
the skin only, the bodies being left to rot unburied. A beast would be
slaughtered to make a pair of brogues, sometimes the hide was used to
boil part of the flesh in. Meanwhile the troops south of Dublin were
not armed or even divided into regiments.[194]

[Sidenote: Louis XIV.'s orders to Avaux.]

Avaux had orders from his sovereign to stay with James wherever
he went. He was particularly charged to allay the fears of the
Protestants, to assure them that the King of England would make no
difference between his subjects on religious grounds, and that zeal
in his service would be the only title to his favour. A little later
Louis reminded him that Cromwell had divided the land among the
Protestants, but that the regicides' portion had since been given to
James, who would have to surrender it to create a fund for compensating
Catholics. In future Protestants who joined the Prince of Orange should
be considered traitors who forfeited their lands by English law. Other
Protestants were to be promised quiet possession and be persuaded that
they had no violence to fear from the Catholics. Avaux lost no time in
telling his master that it was hard to distinguish between Protestants,
for the Irish said none were loyal. Melfort wished to confirm all
Protestants in their estates, but the ambassador disagreed, for the
Catholics only were really faithful to James. Some of the bishops
had gone to the Prince of Orange, and Avaux proposed that they should
be treated as dead and not replaced. By that means all their property
would be gradually made available for Catholics. Louis understood
enough of English politics to know that James would never recover his
kingdoms without the goodwill of Protestant England. He thought it
possible by pursuing a tolerant policy in Ireland to take advantage of
the unpopularity which was certain to beset William and his foreigners
when the first flush of the Revolution was over. In any case there
might be a long struggle in England, Scotland, and Ireland, during
which the Prince of Orange would be able to do little against France on
the continent. Louvois soon came to see that the real business in hand
was to make Ireland absolutely secure. So little did James appreciate
the facts, that he wanted to go to Scotland before he had been in
Ireland a month. Avaux saw that it would be madness for him to leave
the island until it was all in his hands, and that could not be as long
as Londonderry held out.[195]

[Sidenote: The Jacobite Government. Melfort.]

To those who were not in the secrets of James's Court he seemed to be
entirely dominated by the French ambassador, but Avaux himself knew
better. The King cared little for Ireland and only wished to make her
a stepping-stone to Great Britain. The Frenchman cared even less for
Ireland, but wished to make her an appendage of France and to keep
William busy. Tyrconnel had always been a French partisan, and Avaux
found that he acted like a Frenchman to all intents and purposes. Both
ambassador and Lord Lieutenant did their best to drive away Melfort,
who was Secretary of State and in whom James most confided, though he
thought only of England and Scotland. Tyrconnel was indolent and often
ill, and it was with the secretary that Avaux had to work. Melfort was
dilatory and neglected the most important business. His promises were
valueless, and he spent much precious time in walking or driving with
his wife, of whom he was absurdly jealous. Lady Melfort was beautiful,
but at thirty-six one might suppose that she could have taken care
of herself. Rosen and Pointis sustain Avaux on this point, and the
latter hints that the ambassador, who was handsome and insinuating, was
himself the cause of the secretary's jealousy.[196]

[Sidenote: Proclamations. A parliament to be held.]

The day after his arrival in Dublin James held a council from which
Granard, Keating, and others were excluded. Among their successors
were Avaux, Bishop Cartwright, and Colonel Dorrington, who had been
Tyrconnel's chief instrument in raising the new troops. Tyrconnel's
own promotion to a dukedom was announced on the same day, and a
proclamation was issued summoning Parliament for May 7. By another
proclamation James promised protection to all and the full exercise
of their religion, provided nothing was preached or taught among
them 'which may tend to alienate the hearts of our people from us.'
As for his Irish subjects then in England and Scotland, he promised
such protection if they returned within forty days, but only to those
who fled from fear and without doing anything more against their
allegiance. No one who had resisted his government in any way would be
covered by this, and it had no effect at all. By another proclamation
he admitted that many persons not of the army had armed themselves
with pikes and skeans in fear of invasion by the Prince of Orange, and
seized great numbers of cattle 'upon pretence that the owners were in
actual rebellion against us: which if true the same could be no ground
for such irregular actions.' Stolen property was to be restored to the
owners, and if they could not be found or had been in rebellion, then
to be delivered to the sheriff. The half-pikes and skeans were not
to be given up, but to be kept at home and not carried to fairs and
markets. But by another proclamation a week later, all loyal people
were to be armed and ready for active service at a moment's notice.
The King then turned his attention to the affairs of the North, and by
proclamation ordered a free market for all who brought provisions to
his army. They were to be paid in ready money, and no violence was to
be offered to them on pain of death.[197]

[Sidenote: Fighting in Ulster.]

[Sidenote: Coleraine evacuated.]

[Sidenote: George Walker.]

Richard Hamilton came to James at Dublin to say that he had routed the
Protestants at Dromore, but that his force had been insufficient and
that he had been repulsed from Coleraine. That town was defended by
Colonel Gustavus Hamilton, afterwards Viscount Boyne, who must not be
confounded with the Governor of Enniskillen. With him were Sir Arthur
Rawdon and the remains of the beaten forces. Lundy, who was from the
first suspected, was not allowed to enter. He advised that the place
should be abandoned, and this was ultimately done, though not before
the Irish army had been beaten back after an attempt to carry the town
by assault. Hamilton had only five or six small fieldpieces, and the
gunners could not hit any house. The garrison retired across the Bann
to Londonderry, destroying the bridge behind them, and everything else
they could find between the two towns. James sent Pusignan and Berwick
towards Coleraine, and after some skirmishing they passed the Bann
at Portglenone. Thenceforth the seat of war was on the left bank of
that river. George Walker, rector of Donaghmore in Tyrone, had raised
a regiment and occupied Dungannon, but by Lundy's orders he left the
place before the evacuation of Coleraine. Other small Protestant
garrisons did the like, and before the end of March nearly all the
Ulster Protestants who had not accepted protection from James were
collected at Enniskillen and Londonderry.[198]

[Sidenote: King William proclaimed at Londonderry.]

On March 20, three or four days before the desertion of Coleraine,
Captain James Hamilton arrived in Lough Foyle with 1000_l._ in money,
480 barrels of powder, and arms for 2000 men. He brought also a
commission as governor for Lundy, with orders to administer the oath
of allegiance to William and Mary to all officers, civil and military.
Lundy took it himself, but some thought not with enough publicity.
Hamilton was, however, specially ordered to swear him on board ship
in presence of the chief civil magistrate. If he refused the oath,
the commission was not to be delivered. After this the new governor
and thirty-five others made a public declaration, by which they bound
themselves to resist the Irish enemy to the last. If the latter should
prove too strong in the field, they undertook that 'the said Lord
Blaney, Sir Arthur Rawdon, and their forces and all other Protestant
friends shall be readily received into this city, and as much as in
us lies be cherished and supported by us.' Lundy was, therefore,
thoroughly bound both to King William and to the townsmen. He was
instructed to spend the 1000_l._ in buying stores and in strengthening
the works. The new sovereigns were proclaimed with great joy and
solemnity, and Philips, the late provisional governor, was sent to
England for supplies.[199]

[Sidenote: James goes to Ulster.]

[Sidenote: Skirmish at Cladyford.]

James found it hard to believe that Londonderry would be a serious
obstacle, and Melfort, whose eyes were fixed on Scotland, encouraged
this view, but Avaux opposed it, fearing that, in the absence of
Tyrconnel, the King would be entirely led by Melfort in the English
interest. Tyrconnel also wished him to stay in Dublin, to devote his
attention to forming a strong army, and not to dream of Great Britain
until he had thoroughly secured Ireland. He decided at last to go
North, and started on April 8, Pusignan having already gone thither
with reinforcements for Hamilton. The King was accompanied by Avaux,
Rosen, and Melfort, while Tyrconnel occupied himself with the new
levies, whom there was no money to pay and whom he tried to get clothed
at the expense of the officers. Before reaching Armagh, which had been
stripped bare by the Protestants and afforded scant lodging for a
court, James heard that Coleraine had been evacuated. At Charlemont,
Pusignan, who said the country was like Arabia, found all military
matters in a very bad way; and at Dungannon, James himself saw a
regiment in which not a hundred muskets were fit to fire. Order after
order was sent to expedite the arms from Cork, Kinsale, and Waterford,
but when he returned to Dublin nothing had yet been done, nor were
any tools being prepared for siege-work. The French ambassador was
disgusted with everything he saw, but admired the wonderful hardiness
of the Irish soldiers, who would swim a river thrice in a day's march,
and with no sustenance but thin oatcake and bad water. Such beer as
could be had was no better, and would not keep at all. Louvois took
note that French soldiers could not live on this fare, but required
bread, half of wheat and half of rye. Only three wretched cabins
were passed between Charlemont and Omagh, where the chimneys were
demolished, the windows broken, even the locks and bolts carried off.
As they drew near the city of refuge, the fugitive Protestants had had
more time to make a desert behind them. Hearing that Lundy was in the
field with a large force, and that English ships had appeared in Lough
Foyle, James lost heart and went back to Charlemont, on his way to
Dublin. But Lundy had taken care that the King's road northward should
be safe, for he posted thirty men at Cladyford on the Finn, with only
three rounds of ammunition. They were commanded by Adam Murray, who was
the bravest of the brave, but he was forced to retire. Lord Kingston
was ordered up in support, but the summons was sent when it was already
too late. A panic seized some other regiments, and Rosen was able to
cross at Strabane without loss. It was proposed to throw harrows into
the ford, but this precaution was not taken. Lundy set the example
of flight, and from five to ten thousand men went crowding back to
Londonderry without striking a blow. Among them was Walker's regiment,
which was shut out, and did not gain admission till next morning, 'with
much difficulty and some violence upon the sentry.'[200]

[Sidenote: Vacillation of James.]

[Sidenote: He comes before Londonderry.]

Throughout his stay in Ireland James showed a proper regard for his
own safety, and he turned back from Omagh though unwilling that the
French should have the credit of taking Londonderry. Some chance shots
fired by his own men filled him with apprehension of an attack. Before
setting out he had the news of Rosen's victory, but that general took
care not to ask for the royal presence. At Charlemont an express came
from Berwick saying that negotiations for surrender were on foot, and
that if the King appeared nothing could or would withstand him. Melfort
warmly encouraged the idea, and Avaux resisted in vain. After a day's
rest the poor horses, which had not had a proper feed for four days,
were again called upon, and James started for the North. The French
ambassador, having no taste for the discomforts of a camp and nothing
to do there, returned to Dublin, where he might hope to expedite too
long neglected preparations. The King pushed on to St. Johnstown, five
miles from Londonderry, and sent a letter to the garrison suggesting
a parley for the purpose of a surrender. A clergyman named Whitlow
was the messenger. Lundy assembled his council with the officers of
Cunningham's and Richards' regiments, taking care to exclude the
fighting party. They agreed that the town was untenable and that it
would be necessary to surrender, and the English ships sailed away.
The King went no further than to promise them protection if they gave
up the place and their arms. On the night of April 17 one of the town
gates stood open and the keys were missing. An officer noticed it, and
doubled the guards on his own responsibility. Muggeridge, the town
clerk, disclosed the proceedings at the council. Jacobite emissaries
were within the walls, and there can be little doubt that Lundy
meditated treachery. Next day Adam Murray, who had been driven from
Cladyford by want of ammunition, appeared at the gates. Lundy refused
him admission, and even Walker hesitated about the men, though he
offered to pull their leader with a rope over the wall. James Morrison,
captain of the Guard, cut the knot by throwing open the gate. Murray
brought in his followers, and became the great fighting hero of the
siege. Next day James came near the gate, believing that his presence
would work wonders, and that nothing was to be feared from Lundy. A
shot from the wall killed an officer at his side, and the great siege
began. Hamilton had promised not to come within five miles during the
negotiations; but Rosen, though he knew this, moved up his troops
without orders from James, and the men on the wall naturally supposed
that they were betrayed.[201]

[Sidenote: French fleet at Bantry.]

[Sidenote: John Stevens.]

[Sidenote: Naval action.]

The ships that accompanied James to Ireland returned to Brest, and his
English, Irish, and Scotch subjects gathered there from different parts
of northern France. There were also French officers sent by Louis, and
many adventurers who hoped for plunder or promotion. One who had been
cashiered for a fatal duel was allowed to serve in Ireland at Mary
of Modena's request. Others, who could not show themselves at Paris,
did likewise. Among the English loyalists was John Stevens, whose
account has been fortunately preserved. His father was in Catherine of
Braganza's service and had been known to the elder Clarendon at Madrid.
Young Stevens, who was a Spanish scholar, hankered after military
distinction, and was recommended by the Lord Lieutenant Clarendon for
a cornetcy--'a colours would make him very happy.' Tyrconnel would, of
course, do nothing on his predecessor's recommendation, but Stevens
found employment as an exciseman at Welshpool. He learned something
of the language and found it useful in Brittany. [The strength of his
royalist and anti-Protestant feelings may be guessed from his calling
the seven bishops champions of Satan. Ken and Sancroft champions of
Satan!] Stevens followed his King to France, and was on the road
to Brest before the end of February. There was no discipline among
the horde of exiles who flocked to the naval port, and they were
'guilty of all sorts of disorders that could have been acted by a
dissolute army in an enemy's country.... I have since seen some of the
greatest rascals in the company preferred to considerable posts.' The
poverty-stricken crowd were treated with contempt by the French naval
officers during the long delay at Brest and the passage to Ireland.
They lay on boards without blankets, and those who were fortunate
enough to find hammocks were cut down at night by the sailors. On the
last day of April they entered Bantry Bay. The English fleet under
Herbert being soon descried in the offing, the French Admiral, Count
Château Renaud, ordered all the passengers, treasure, and arms to
be landed from his light vessels, while he prepared for action. The
battle or skirmish of May 1 was quite indecisive, but the French fleet
was much the stronger of the two, and Château Renaud gained his main
object, which was to land the passengers and stores. Herbert was made
an Earl, and James ordered a _Te Deum_.[202]

[Sidenote: General mismanagement.]

[Sidenote: The army neglected.]

The means of locomotion were of the poorest, and it was three weeks
before Avaux could report that all the French officers had reached
Dublin, except a few whom Boisseleau kept at Cork. James made the
senior captain a lieutenant-colonel, the rest majors, the lieutenants
were made captains, and fifteen cadets became lieutenants. Most of
them were sent to Londonderry. When the arms came to be distributed
they were found to be very bad, muskets of many patterns, and swords
even worse. Louvois was a man of detail, and it seems likely that he
purposely allowed refuse stores to go to Ireland. It took Stevens a
fortnight to get from Bantry to Dublin, generally on foot, for it
was seldom possible to hire a horse. Parliament was sitting, and but
little attention was paid to military matters. The royal army, on the
highest estimate, was about 50,000, but everything was expected from
France, and there was talk of arms arriving sufficient for the host of
Xerxes. A commission was what Stevens wanted, but he was too modest to
apply to James. Lord Limerick, Maguire the Roman Catholic Primate, and
the Duke of Powis, who had known him in prosperous days, all put him
off with empty promises. More forward applicants had better success,
and were not deterred by the divinity that hedges a king. Stevens was
horrified to see an ensign pluck His Majesty by the sleeve because he
had passed without noticing him, while he himself was not only not
employed but almost starving. He sold every valuable he had, including
his father's rings and the silver hilt of his sword, 'so that I might
be truly said to live by my sword,' though as yet no soldier. The only
kindness he received was from a Protestant to whom he had been civil
in Clarendon's time and who volunteered to lend him 10_l._ The money
was repaid, but the borrower deeply regretted that he had never been
able to requite the kindness. When Londonderry was relieved, officers
flocked to Dublin, and among them Usher, a captain in the Grand Prior's
regiment, who had travelled with Stevens from England and easily got a
lieutenancy for him.[203]

FOOTNOTES:

[183] Bonrepaus' letter of September 4, 1687, and Seignelay's answer
of September 29 in Lingard x. appx. IIII., and other extracts in
appx. KKKK. Bonrepaus says: 'Tyrconnel presse incessament le roi
d'Angleterre pour que cela se fasse en moins de temps; et effectivement
Sa Majesté Britannique y a envoyé [to Ireland] depuis huit-jours un
vaisseau chargé de poudre, armes, et mortiers à bombe.' Dangeau,
January 11, 1686, and May 6, 1687. See also Macaulay, chap. iii. Bishop
Cartwright's Diary, August and September 1687. Barillon to Louis XIV.,
October 16, 1687, in Dalrymple, ii. 262.

[184] Seignelay's instructions to Pointis, January 12, 1689, in
Campana-Cavelli, doc. 529, and the report in the following month. 'Quo
magis nuda erant castra et fortilitia eo facilius prevideam eos posse
ad obedientiam reduci.'--Archbishop King's _Autobiography_.

[185] Pointis reported to Louis himself in Seignelay's presence.

[186] Tyrconnel to James II. January 29,/February 8, 1689, in
Campana-Cavelli, doc. 771. Abbé Melani to Grand Duke of Tuscany January
17/27 and February 18/28--'buonissimo, ma non di quella elevatura che
da principio aveva publicata la fama'--'tranquilla et cosî insensibile'
that he would have stayed in France hunting and praying but for the
'stimoli' applied by Tyrone and the French Court, _ib._ docs. 728,
769. Dangeau's Journal and Madame de Sévigné's letters for January and
February. On February 2/12 the latter writes: 'La Reine d'Angleterre a
toute la mine, si Dieu le voulait, d'aimer mieux régner dans le beau
royaume d'Angleterre, où la cour est grande et belle, que d'être à
S^t Germain, quoique accablé des bontés héroïques du Roi. Pour le roi
d'Angleterre il y paroit content, et c'est pour cela qu'il est là.'
Vauban's letter of February 15/25 is in Rousset's _Louvois_, iv. 187.

[187] In his letter to Cardinal d'Este, his Queen's uncle, at Rome,
James says: 'J'espère que Sa Sainteté croira que l'occasion qui se
présente _de détruire l'érésie avec une armée Catholique_ n'est pas
de celles qu'on doit perdre, et qu'il n'épargnera pas les trésors de
l'Église où j'expose si franchement ma propre vie,' February 14/24,
1689. Campana-Cavelli, doc. 759. Writing to the Cardinal four days
later Mary of Modena hopes the Pope's acts will correspond with his
words: 'quali sole in questa congiuntura non ci bastano,' _ib._ doc.
760. In the scarce _Hist. de la Révolution d'Irlande arrivée sous
Guillaume III._, Amsterdam, 1691, attributed to Jean De la Brune is the
following passage: 'Malheureusement pour ce prince nous sommes dans un
siècle où l'on comprend que deux et deux font quatre, et que ceux qui
renversent et foulent aux pieds les droits et les libertés d'un état
n'en sont point les protecteurs et les défenseurs.' Leopold's letter,
March 30/April 9, is in _Somers Tracts_, x. 18, and Clarke's _Life of
James II._ Louis's policy at this time is discussed by Lavisse, viii.
16. Rousset's _Louvois_, iv. 152. For the Pope's relations to James see
Charles Gérin's paper in _Revue des questions historiques_, 1876. Both
Porter and Melfort were paid by Louis. Melfort took his orders from
Croissy and corresponded with him weekly.

[188] Proclamations of February 2 and 25, March 1 and 7, 1688-9.

[189] Bennett's _Hist. of Bandon_, chaps. xv. and xvi., besides the
plain facts records interesting traditions. 'During his stay at Cork
Mr. Brady, the minister of the place and ten men from Bandon petitioned
him (James) for pardon for that town, which he granted, saying, "You
may now see you have a gracious king." And when the Earl of Clancarty
and Duke of Berwick urged the destruction of that nest of rebels: to
the first he said that he was a young man, and to the latter that he
was a fool.... Two days after, notwithstanding the King's pardon to
those of Bandon, several were indicted at the assizes, insomuch that
30 or 40 of them fled by this opportunity and came to Bristol, being
frightened at the bloody proceedings against one Mr. Brown, who was
hanged, drawn, and quartered at the same assizes,' _Full and True
Account_ of the landing of King James at Kinsale ... a letter from
Bristol, April 1, 1689. See also a letter from Tyrconnel to MacCarthy,
March 10, 1688-9, in Smith's _Hist. of Cork_, ii. chap. vii. _Exact
Relation of the Persecutions_, &c., sustained by the Protestants of
Kenmare in Ireland, 1689.

[190] _Exact Relation_, _ut sup._

[191] _Exact Relation_, _ut sup._ Orpen says eight families were
detained by the Irish officers 'as slaves to work for them at their
iron-works, which none of the natives were skilful in.' Fifteen hundred
pounds worth of bar and pig iron was left behind. There is a picture
of the 'white house' of Killowen in its present ruined state in
Fitzmaurice's _Life of Petty_.

[192] The rank of the French officers is mentioned by Rousset, but
according to Dangeau, Boisseleau was only a captain in the Guards,
while Pusignan was already a marechal de camp. Abbé Bronchi to Duke of
Modena, March 11/21, in Campana-Cavelli; Rosen to Louvois, March 16/26,
_ib._; De Sourches, iii., February 5/15 and 15/26. _A full and true
account of the landing_, &c., April 1, 1689. The Marquis de la Fare
notes in his memoirs that Barillon realised how he had been duped by
Sunderland, 'et je crois qu'il est mort de regret.'

[193] King, iii., xiii. 2. _A Short View of the Methods made use of
in Ireland_, &c., by a clergyman lately escaped from thence, licensed
October 17, 1689, dedicated to Burnet. Smith's _Cork_. Leslie in his
answer to King says Brown resisted the sheriff and that a man was
killed in the scuffle, this accounting for James's unusual harshness
in that case. Sir Lawrence Parsons, who was included in the great Act
of Attainder, had defended his own house at Birr. He surrendered it
on conditions, and Baron Lynch sentenced him to be hanged, drawn, and
quartered for articling with the King, but he did not actually suffer.
Howell's _State Trials_, xii. no. 364.

[194] _Full and true account of the landing, 1689. A Light to the
Blind. A Short View of the Methods_, _ut sup._ Avaux to Louvois, April
14; to Louis XIV., April 23.

[195] Louis XIV.'s instruction to Avaux, February 1/11, 1688-9, and
March 2/12, and Avaux's answer, March 17/27. Avaux to Louvois, April
4/14. Louvois to Avaux, June 3/13.

[196] Avaux to Louis, May 27. Writing to Croissy on October 21 he calls
Melfort 'grand fourbe et qui ment plus effrontément qu'aucun homme
que j'ai jamais vu.' For Melfort's opinion of Avaux, see Pointis on
September 5 in Rousset's _Louvois_, ii. 214. Afterwards, when Melfort
was at Rome, Mary of Modena insisted on his forgiving Tyrconnel. He
obeyed: 'but without a fault to let loose a pack of about fifty nephews
against me, besides the females, and all the time protest all manner of
friendship and respect for me, swearing he could not tell what could be
done when I was gone, to send his Duchess to cry an hour at my lodgings
and make me cry too for company, and all this while harbour malice
in his heart is horrible,' Ellis's _Original Letters_, 2nd series,
iv. 187. 'The King went to Ireland only in order to go to England,'
Melfort's memorial of October 20, 1689, in Macpherson, i. 334.

[197] Proclamations of March 25 and April 1, 1689.

[198] Mackenzie's _Narrative_. Macpherson's _Original Papers_. Avaux to
Louvois, March 4/14. Belfast was effectually protected by King James's
Government until Schomberg's arrival made it no longer necessary,
document in Benn's _Belfast_, p. 165.

[199] Instructions to Lundy, February 21, and to James Hamilton,
February 22, in Mackenzie. Declaration of Union in Walker's _True
Account_.

[200] Walker's _True Account_. Mackenzie says a shot was fired and
threats made to burn the gates. _Light to the Blind._ Avaux to Louis
XIV. and to Louvois, April 13/23 and 15/25.

[201] Walker and the author of _Light to the Blind_ substantially
agree. Clarke's _Life of James II._, ii. 333. Macpherson, i. 186.

[202] Stevens says 1500 English, Scotch, and Irish were landed, but
Dangeau (April 20) says 'plus de quatre mille,' which must include
those in the first fleet. _Life of Sir John Leake_, chap. iii. Troude,
_Batailles navales de la France_, pp. 189-194. _Clarendon and Rochester
Correspondence_, ii. 45, 65. Captain Mahan observed (_Sea-power_, chap.
iv.) that in spite of Bantry Bay and of the numerical superiority of
the French at sea, Rooke never lost command of St. George's Channel.
Schomberg landed unopposed, and 'the English communications were not
even threatened for an hour.'

[203] Stevens, pp. 54-59. Avaux to Louvois, and May 28/June 7 and June
17/27. Stevens followed what was afterwards the mail-coach road from
Cork to Dublin by Clogheen, Clonmel, and Callan to Kilkenny. The MS.
of his journal in the British Museum has been published with valuable
notes by Dr. Robert H. Murray, Oxford 1912.




CHAPTER LI

THE PARLIAMENT OF 1689


[Sidenote: King James's Irish supporters. Tyrconnel.]

Among James's advisers during his reign in Ireland Tyrconnel was by far
the most important. As a thorough French partisan Avaux supported him,
and Berwick, whose sympathies were also French, while noting that he
was rich, says he was not accused of getting money unfairly. Anthony
Hamilton, who knew him very well, says he did save some property for
sufferers by the Cromwellian settlement, and was well paid for his
services. His disregard for truth was shown in his dealings with the
younger Clarendon and with Mountjoy. The elder Clarendon tells us
that he was mixed up in a plot to assassinate Cromwell, and that he
had threatened Ormonde with a like fate, since there was no chance of
killing him in a duel. He was personally brave, but no soldier. He
cursed and swore with a force and frequency remarkable even in that
age. As a Gentleman of the Bedchamber he was in the secret of James's
many amours, and was one of the 'men of honour' who tried to blast the
character of Anne Hyde, notwithstanding which he remained her husband's
trusted servant. James doubted his judgment, even when following his
advice. Sheridan is a hostile witness, but his opinion of Tyrconnel
has much support from other sources. 'He was a tall, proper man,
publicly known as the most insolent in prosperity and most abject in
adversity, a cunning dissembling courtier of mean judgment and small
understanding, uncertain and unsteady in his resolutions, turning with
every wind to bring about his ambitious ends and purposes, on which he
was so intent that to compass them he would stick at nothing, and so
false that a most impudent notorious lie was called at Whitehall and
St. James' one of Dick Talbot's ordinary truths.'[204]

[Sidenote: Justin MacCarthy.]

Donough MacCarthy, the Muskerry of the Civil War, was created Earl of
Clancarty before the Restoration, and after it regained most of his
property. He had married Ormonde's sister, and his third son Justin,
who served long in the French army, returned to England with the rank
of colonel at a time when the no-popery feeling was at its height.
Justin promoted the marriage of his nephew Donough, the fourth Earl,
with Sunderland's daughter. The young lord, though he had been brought
up a Protestant by Fell, was not kept safely by him at Oxford, and
soon returned to the Church of Rome. His romantic story has been told
by Macaulay, and the tale was dramatised by Tom Taylor. His uncle
had married Strafford's daughter, and was thus by several alliances
connected with the most powerful people at the English Court. When
Charles first entertained the idea of remodelling the Irish army he
thought of employing MacCarthy as a fitting instrument. Halifax warned
him of the danger of meddling with an army 'raised by a Protestant
Parliament to secure the Protestant interest; and would the King give
occasion to any to say that where his hands were not bound up he
would show all the favour he could to the Papists?' Since the Oxford
dissolution Charles no longer feared Parliament, and replied that he
did not care what people said. He repeated the whole conversation to
MacCarthy, which was hardly the way to secure honest advice. Soon after
the accession of James, Justin was in command of a regiment at Cork,
and became very popular, even with the Protestants of that town. When
Clarendon arrived his relations with him were at first quite amicable,
but he was more or less in co-operation with Tyrconnel, and a coolness
soon arose. He seems to have made love to the Lord Lieutenant's married
sister, which did not mend matters. MacCarthy became major-general in
April 1686, when Tyrconnel was made lieutenant-general, and, like him,
was sworn of the Privy Council.[205]

[Sidenote: Sarsfield.]

Patrick Sarsfield resembled Tyrconnel in his great stature, but in
nothing else, except that he also was an Anglo-Irishman of the Pale. At
the Restoration the estate of Lucan was in the hands of Sir Theophilus
Jones, who was protected by the Act of Settlement. William Sarsfield,
Patrick's elder brother, who married Charles II.'s daughter by Lucy
Walters, was declared innocent by the Court of Claims, his father
having been innocent; and so the remainder was saved. Jones held on at
Lucan until he was fully compensated, but ultimately Patrick became his
brother's successor to about 2000_l._ a year. He served for several
years in France, and afterwards in Charles's guards with the rank of
captain. He was always ready to resent any insult to his country or
countrymen, and was wounded dangerously in a duel when he seconded
Lord Kinsale. Both the principals were lads of twenty. He commanded
a regiment after the accession of James, served with distinction at
Sedgemoor, helped Tyrconnel to remodel the Irish army, and fought
bravely at Wincanton. In Ireland afterwards he commanded the regiment
of horse which bore his name and was raised through his influence,
and his popularity was boundless. Berwick praises him, though without
allowing him much military talent. Avaux had a high opinion of him,
and Englishmen acknowledged that he always kept his word. James was
inclined to depreciate him at first as having no head, but afterwards
saw good reason to better his opinion. It took the joint efforts of
Avaux and Tyrconnel to get him made a brigadier.[206]

[Sidenote: The Hamiltons.]

Of the six Hamilton brothers, Ormonde's nephews, three survived to take
part in this war. They were grandsons of the first Earl of Abercorn,
but probably born in Tipperary. George was killed at Saverne, having
married Fanny Jennings, who, as Tyrconnel's second wife, played an
important part. Anthony, famous as a courtier, but above all as a
writer, was much liked by the Lord Lieutenant Clarendon, and did not
approve of the way in which good soldiers were turned out of his own
regiment only because they were Protestants. A younger brother, John,
was killed at Aughrim, but not otherwise distinguished. Richard was
perhaps the most important of James's Anglo-Irish officers. He fought
gallantly at the Boyne, but showed little ability as a general. Melfort
disliked the family, and no doubt the feeling was reciprocated. He said
Lady Tyrconnel had a black heart, and that both Anthony and Richard
deserved to be hanged, the one for running away at Crom, the other for
mismanaging the siege of Londonderry. All the brothers had served in
France.[207]

[Sidenote: Meeting of Parliament.]

[Sidenote: The Peers.]

[Sidenote: The Commons.]

On May 7 Parliament met according to the proclamation in the King's
Inns, the suppressed Dominican priory where the Four Courts now stand.
James wore a crown, and was generally present at sittings of the Upper
House, where he was always sure of a majority. The Protestants were
indeed two to one on paper, but scarcely half a dozen temporal peers
remained in Ireland, and but seven bishops. Primate Boyle, Gore of
Waterford, and Roan of Killaloe were excused for infirmity, but four
took their seats. Their leader was Anthony Dopping of Meath, who was
supported by Digby of Limerick, Otway of Ossory, and Wetenhall of Cork
and Ross. James did not venture to summon any prelates of his own
Church, for the lawyers knew that it would have a disastrous effect in
England. He did create some temporal peers, and could create more if
they were wanted. Lord Clancarty, who was under age, was allowed to
sit. In the Commons the Protestants were an insignificant minority,
for no returns were made from the districts commanded by Londonderry
and Enniskillen. In the counties the sheriffs had been appointed by
Tyrconnel, and most of the boroughs had been remodelled by him. He
sent letters to the returning officers, and nothing more was required.
Strafford had done much the same, and in Charles II.'s Parliament there
had been no Roman Catholics in the House of Commons. In 1689 Protestant
freeholders had for the most part left the country, and in the
reconstructed boroughs Protestant freemen were always in a minority. Of
the whole number of 230 not many more than 60 bore Celtic names, the
rest being of Norman or English origin. Tyrconnel was always accused
of favouring the Pale at the expense of the Irish natives, which
may in some measure account for the predominance of the Anglo-Irish
element. They were all new to parliamentary work, and the King himself
instructed them in procedure as far as he could. An assembly of men
impoverished by war and by the legislation of the victors, and long
excluded from public life, found themselves in power, and were above
all things anxious to regain the possessions of their ancestors.[208]

[Sidenote: The King's speech.]

James opened the proceedings with a speech in which he thanked the
Irish nation for their loyalty, and declared for liberty of conscience.
His former attempts to establish it had, he said, unfortunately failed,
but he was nevertheless determined that where he had power there should
be 'no other test or distinction but that of loyalty.' He was anxious
to relieve sufferers by the Act of Settlement 'as far forth as may be
consistent with reason, justice, and the public good of my people.'
Nagle, the great assailant of the Settlement, was at once chosen
Speaker of the Commons, Fitton the Chancellor and Chief Justice Nugent
being summoned to the House of Lords by writ as Barons of Gosworth and
Riverston.[209]

[Sidenote: Influence of Avaux.]

[Sidenote: The Land Settlement attacked.]

[Sidenote: Proposed confiscation.]

In his opening speech James handsomely acknowledged his debt to the
Most Christian King, without whose help he could never have reached
Ireland, and he gave Avaux a copy for transmission to France. He often
resented the Ambassador's arrogance, who, on his part, took no pains to
hide his contempt for His Britannic Majesty's incapacity. But everyone
knew that the Frenchman was in power, and that his counsels were all
but commands. Many members of the House of Commons wished to thank
Louis XIV. directly for the services mentioned in the royal speech, but
Nagle said this should be left to the King himself. The great work of
the session was the repeal of the Acts of Settlement and Explanation.
James saw that such a revolution would destroy his chances in
England; but he was in the hands of the Irish, who would not hear of
any compromise. Not only members of Parliament, but the soldiers in
the street, said that if he would not restore them to their own, they
would not fight to restore him to his. The Commons insisted on total
repeal, but there was opposition on one point. Since the Parliament
of 1661 much property had changed hands for value, and it was now
proposed to confiscate the land and all the improvements. Compensation
to Protestant purchasers was scarcely thought of, but there were many
Roman Catholics in the same position, and among them two or three
judges. The lawyers might have been willing to make allowances, but
the ignorant majority of the Commons would listen to nothing. Those
who bought forfeited lands, they said, bought stolen goods, and had
no rights at all. Within a few days of the opening of Parliament, and
while the Repeal Bill was as yet not quite ready, an address to the
King was presented by Lord Granard on behalf of the purchasers. It was
written by Chief Justice Keating, who showed that the credit of the
country and the royal revenues would be destroyed if property legally
acquired were to be confiscated without regard to two solemn Acts of
Parliament or to the promises of two Kings. The Protestants had already
been deprived of their movable goods by the Rapparees, 'that is, the
armed multitude,' and would be completely and finally ruined if they
lost their lands also. 'The thriving Catholics who were purchasers (as
most of the province of Connaught are) are likewise to be turned out
of their estates and possessions, and their own and the improvements
of those who hold under them utterly lost.... What is to become of the
frequent declarations made by the Earl of Clarendon, and the Earl (now
Duke) of Tyrconnel, of Your Majesty's fixed resolutions never to lay
aside the Acts of Settlement and Explanation? Why did the judges in
their several circuits declare in all places where they sat, unto the
countries there assembled, that Your Majesty was resolved to preserve
the Acts of Settlement and Explanation, and that they were appointed
by the then Chief Governor here to declare the same unto them;
from whence they took confidence to proceed in their purchases and
improvements, and (with submission be it spoken), if this Bill pass,
are deluded.'[210]

[Sidenote: Parliamentary independence.]

[Sidenote: Violence of the Commons.]

A Bill for recognition of the King's title received the royal assent on
the fourth day of the session. No difficulty was made about declaring
the Irish Parliament independent, nor about annulling all patents
conferring office during life or good behaviour, but the Commons would
do nothing further until the Act of Settlement had been repealed; and
many of the old proprietors seized upon land without waiting for the
legal sanction. A Bill introduced into the Lords by Chief Justice
Nugent provided that half of the land disposed of by the Acts of
Settlement and Explanation should be restored to the old proprietors,
but the Commons would have none of it, and insisted on total repeal.
A Bill for the desired purpose brought in by Sir Ulick Bourke, member
for Galway county, was received with loud huzzas, and read a first and
second time on the same day. One member moved that anyone who opposed
the repeal was an enemy to King and country; another that the horrid
and barbarous law should be burned by the common hangman. But James saw
clearly enough that to annul the legislation of his father and brother
would be fatal to his chances in England. After consulting Avaux, who
saw how Ireland, which he hoped to make a dependency of France, would
be impoverished, the King conferred privately with some members of
both Houses, and found that he could struggle no longer, but it was
agreed that purchasers under the Settlement should have reprisals out
of forfeited land. Bishop Dopping made a gallant but vain effort to
stem the tide. The King, he said, would have no regular revenue, for
the Protestants were already stripped by the Rapparees of all but
the bare walls. It was now proposed to take them also, and improving
Catholics would be in no better case. 'The old proprietor comes poor
and hungry into his estate, and can pay nothing until his tenants
raise it; and the present possessor loses the benefit of his purchases
and improvements, and who then is able to supply the necessities of
His Majesty? Besides this, in many parts of the kingdom the land is
hardly able to pay the King's quit-rent by reason of the universal
depredations that reign everywhere; and can it be imagined but that
things will grow far worse when the ablest Catholic merchants, and the
most wealthy purchasers of that communion are ruined and undone?'[211]

[Sidenote: The Act of Settlement repealed.]

In the House of Lords many attempts were made to soften the measure of
repeal, but they were as constantly resisted by the Commons, and no
other business could be done until the royal assent was given about the
middle of June. The Bishop of Meath, with three of his brethren, and
four temporal peers, recorded their dissent, James telling them that
they must not use the word protest, which had grown up in rebellious
times. They were not allowed to set out their reasons. The Acts of
Settlement and Explanation, and every transaction growing out of them,
were 'absolutely repealed, annulled, and made void to all intents,
constructions, and purposes whatever, as if the same had never been
made or passed,' and the land restored to the representatives of those
who possessed it on October 22, 1641, the day before the rebellion
broke out. Real property belonging to anyone who had been in rebellion
since August 1, 1688, or in communication with those who had, was
forfeited without trial and vested in the King. The property of the
London companies in Ulster was confiscated. There were some provisos
for the relief of a few highly favoured persons, and the King was
empowered to grant reprisals in specially meritorious cases. Land
formerly belonging to any monastery, and used for public purposes, was
vested in His Majesty, to be disposed of to 'such pious and charitable
uses' as he should think fit. Reprisals to purchasers for valuable
consideration might be made out of the forfeitures. All outlawries of
the ancient proprietors were reversed. A few Protestants whose titles
were older than 1641 might have escaped the operation of the Act, and
it was resolved to draw the net still closer.[212]

[Sidenote: The Act of Attainder.]

The preamble to the Act of Attainder, passed before the end of June,
sets out that 'a most horrid invasion' had been made by the King's
unnatural enemy, the Prince of Orange, supported by many of his
traitorous subjects. To quell this rebellion, Tyrconnel had raised an
army, promises of pardon having been given by proclamation to all, with
very few exceptions, but this clemency had been without effect. The Act
affected some 2400 persons, of whom more than half, from the Primate
and the Duke of Ormonde down to yeomen and shopkeepers, whether 'dead
or alive, or killed in open rebellion, or now in arms against Your
Majesty or otherwise,' were attainted of high treason, and subjected
to all its penalties, unless they voluntarily surrendered by the 10th
of August. Others who had been absent from Ireland, presumably for 'a
wicked and traitorous purpose,' since November 5, 1688, were given
till September 1, while those already living in Great Britain or the
Isle of Man had till October 1. Among the latter was Henry Dodwell,
the most learned of the non-jurors. A few whose residence had always
been in England might surrender there up to November 1, in case the
King had then been in that kingdom for a month. A certain number of
persons, among whom was Robert Boyle, 'by reason of sickness, nonage,
infirmities, or other disabilities,' could not come to Ireland, but it
was not desirable that their Irish incomes should be paid beyond the
channel, and therefore their lands were vested in His Majesty, for the
defence of the realm. If they were innocent, they might come over and
prove it to the satisfaction of Fitton or Rice, or of the commissioners
appointed to execute the Act. A special clause repealed the private Act
by which Monck, the chief instrument of the Restoration, had sought to
secure his share of the forfeited estates. A royal pardon was to have
no effect unless it was enrolled in Chancery before November 1. James
afterwards complained that he had been induced to assent to this clause
without fully understanding it, and it was indeed as great an act of
political suicide as his father had committed when he gave up the power
of dissolving the Long Parliament without its own consent.[213]

[Sidenote: Extreme harshness of the new law.]

Most of the absentees mentioned in the Act stood attainted unless they
surrendered in Ireland within a few weeks; none were given longer
time than four or five months, and there was no official publication.
The earliest list, printed in London, and without authority from
the Irish Government, was not circulated till four months after the
latest date at which the King could pardon. A few well-known names had
been published earlier, but no one could be expected to face Rice or
Nugent without accurate knowledge of the position. Commissioners were
appointed to carry out this Act and the Act of Repeal, but many of the
old proprietors took possession before they were passed. All titles
deriving from the Act of Settlement had been annulled, and the refugees
could have had nothing even if they returned. Whether the text of the
Act of Attainder had been purposely kept secret or not really makes
very little difference. It remained in manuscript, though the general
drift of it was, of course, quickly known in London. Those concerned
were scattered all over Great Britain, and many of them in extreme
poverty, having nothing but the little they had been able to carry
away. Men who had owned thousands of cattle were living on charity, and
in no condition to employ lawyers. And those who had fled for their
lives were not likely to trust themselves empty-handed in Dublin.
Communication with Ireland was exceedingly difficult, and letters from
such Protestants as stood their ground could only increase the distrust
of those who had gone. It was evident to all thinking men that the
difference between the two Kings and the two Parliaments could only be
decided by arms.[214]

[Sidenote: Hasty legislation.]

[Sidenote: Case of Trinity College.]

The Act of Attainder was drafted and passed in a great hurry. Many of
the persons included are insufficiently described, and the Christian
name, so necessary for identification, was often omitted and sometimes
wrongly given. This occurs even in the case of several peers. Less
known names were given in by the members of the House of Commons, whose
accuracy there was neither means nor time to test. Joseph Coghlan, who
sat for the University, was called on to give a list of the members of
Trinity College, Provost Huntingdon and all but four of the fellows
having gone to England, but he said he could not do this without the
buttery book, and he took care that the butler should not be found
until after the Bill had passed into law. Perhaps the King had had
enough of colleges. The power of appeal from the Irish to the English
courts of law was taken away by a separate Act, which also declared
the independence of the Irish Parliament. Another Act vested in the
King the personal property, including arrears of rent and unreaped
corn, of persons who had left Ireland, 'thereby endeavouring to weaken
Your Majesty's interest, and showing an apparent diffidence of Your
Majesty's protection.' It must be admitted that their fears were well
founded, for James was not his own master.[215]

[Sidenote: King James is powerless.]

[Sidenote: Protestant refugees in London.]

'What, gentlemen, are you for another '41?' said James to those who
would have gone still greater lengths against the Protestants; and we
are told that the Irish never forgave him for this speech. More than
forty-seven years had passed since the fatal October 23, and it had
become the fashion to say that the Puritans or Protestants had been
rebels from the first and their opponents the loyal subjects. The
parliamentary majority cared little for the Crown unless its wearer
would be their very humble servant, while he only thought of how
to regain England and Scotland. Avaux, who cared for none of these
things, but thought only of thwarting the Prince of Orange by gaining
a dependency for France, encouraged the separatist tendency. An Act
had been passed in 1662 reciting the events of 1641, and appointing
October 23 as an anniversary holy day for ever. That Act was now
repealed, but the dreadful memories of the rebellion could not be so
effaced either in England or Ireland. James's old assailant, Thomas
Pilkington, who had been cast in 100,000_l._ damages and spent nearly
four years in prison, was now a knight and Lord Mayor of London. With
the sheriffs and several aldermen he attended the anniversary service
in Bow Church, where the Irish Protestants in London met to hear a
sermon from Archbishop Vesey of Tuam, who had been plundered, but did
not leave Connaught until he thought his life in danger. The preacher
reflected upon those half-hearted Protestants who would fain have
submitted quietly, forgetting the past and prophesying smooth things
for the future. 'They were,' he said, 'almost made to believe the
Paris massacre was a fable by those that affirmed there was no dragoon
reformation in France, that the gunpowder conspiracy was a Protestant
plot, that the murders in Ireland were committed by the Protestants
upon themselves. They were almost persuaded of their great moderation
in the use of power, till by the gnashing of their teeth, they saw
their grinders.' While this sermon was being preached in London,
Schomberg's army was still rotting at Dundalk.[216]

[Sidenote: Treatment of the clergy.]

Two archbishops, seven bishops, and more than eighty other clergymen
were included in the Act of Attainder, and the number of those who
left Ireland was probably much greater. Those who stood their ground,
or who went no farther than Dublin, were reduced to poverty, and
three Acts were passed which made their position desperate. By one of
these, tithes due by Roman Catholics were made payable to the Roman
Catholic incumbents, 'and to no other person, or persons of whatsoever
religion or persuasion soever.' Impropriate tithes were at first
excepted, but by a second Act all such tithes as formerly belonged
to bishops and other dignitaries were to be paid by Roman Catholics
to the corresponding persons of their own church. The decision as to
who was entitled to each bishopric and deanery was left to the King,
archdeaconries and other patronage being vested in the bishop or
archbishop so acknowledged. Advowsons belonging to Roman Catholics were
preserved for the presentation of their co-religionists. A third Act
abolished the impost popularly called Ministers' Money, payable to the
incumbent out of household property in corporate towns. In no case was
any compensation given. As the Rapparees had stripped them bare, most
of the Protestants could do little by voluntary contributions; but they
made an effort to support such clergymen as remained at home. 'Many
dissenters of all sorts,' says King, '(except Quakers) contributed
liberally to this good end, which ought to be remembered to their
honour.' Apologists for James draw attention to the fact that the word
Protestant does not occur in his Act of Attainder, but it was not
wanted. He established liberty of conscience by law, but sought help
from Rome to destroy heresy with a Catholic army, and in the meantime
he had sheriffs, judges, and officials to begin the work.[217]

[Sidenote: Commercial legislation.]

[Sidenote: English coal prohibited.]

In considering the dealings of England with Ireland, nothing has
been more justly blamed than the commercial restraints imposed by
the stronger country upon the weaker. Trade from Ireland to the
plantations was forbidden except through England. The Irish Parliament
now abolished this restriction, but it was not forgotten that James
was still nominally King of England, and therefore colonial goods
might be transported in Irish bottoms to Great Britain as well as to
Ireland, thus dispensing with English legislation to the contrary. It
was recognised that Ireland possessed but few merchant vessels, and
the building of more was encouraged by large premiums. Shipwrights
and artificers were offered great privileges if they would settle in
Ireland, and schools of navigation were to be established at Dublin,
Belfast, Waterford, Cork, Limerick, and Galway. But while thus moving
in the direction of free trade the Irish Parliament passed another Act
prohibiting the importation of English, Scotch, or Welsh coal, on the
ground that it prevented the employment of poor people in supplying
turf and fire-wood. If, nevertheless, fuel ran short, the Lord
Lieutenant might grant licences to bring in a strictly limited quantity
on the requisition of the Lord Mayor and Corporation of Dublin; thus
securing a monopoly to the licensees. It was, however, feared that
the proprietors of Irish coal mines, at Kilkenny and elsewhere, might
raise their prices; and a maximum was accordingly established in
their case. When winter came the shivering soldiers broke into empty
houses for the sake of the woodwork, and it became necessary to offer
special encouragement to people who would bring coal from Kilkenny to
Dublin.[218]

[Sidenote: Imperfect records of this Parliament.]

[Sidenote: Daly's case.]

[Sidenote: Scramble for property.]

[Sidenote: Small revenue from confiscations.]

It is not likely that any reports of debates in this Parliament ever
existed. The documents concerning it are scanty, for the Parliament
of England lost no time in declaring all its proceedings void, and
the Parliament of Ireland in 1695 further ordered all records to be
destroyed, imposing heavy penalties upon officials for not surrendering
those in their keeping. But we have some evidence that the proceedings
were disorderly, as was to be expected in an assembly of inexperienced
men violently excited by the prospect of regaining the power and
property they had lost. Mr. Justice Daly was a Roman Catholic, and
strongly Nationalist, but Clarendon had no objection to him except
that he thought no native Irishman should be a judge. He was a man of
high character, who had made a fortune at the bar and had invested it
in land of which the title was derived from the Act of Settlement.
His interest was therefore opposed to the repeal of that measure, and
he fought hard on the same side as Bishop Dopping. Disgusted by the
turbulence of the majority, he declared in private conversation that
this was no Parliament, but a Masaniello's assembly, and that men whose
property was taken by the King could not be expected to fight for
him. The members were squabbling for estates instead of preparing to
resist the Prince of Orange, dividing the bear's skin before they had
killed the bear--'All the honour we do to His Majesty is by reflecting
on his father and brother as wicked and unjust princes, charging them
with enacting those laws that were contrary to the laws of God and
man.' This incautious speech was reported to the House of Commons,
and articles of impeachment were quickly agreed to. Daly refused to
withdraw his words, saying he would rather emigrate to Jamaica. But his
friends persuaded him to promise some sort of apology. Edmund Nugent of
Carlanstown, who represented Mullingar, was sent to tell the judge that
he would be pardoned on submission. Perhaps he thought the proposed
apology insufficient; at any rate he announced that there would be a
full one, and also that Londonderry was taken. The members cheered
loudly and threw up their hats, with shouts of 'No submission--we
pardon him'; but the truth was soon known, and Nugent was threatened
with being brought to the bar for playing this trick. The scramble
for the property of absentees had begun even before the meeting of
Parliament, and it was clearly necessary to make some attempt at
order. In March, military officers, acting, or professing to act, by
Tyrconnel's authority, seized the goods of absentees all over the
country, but not in Dublin, where the quays were crowded like a fair.
Nearly everything of value was sent to England. In May, when Parliament
was sitting, the Commissioners of Revenue continued the work of the
soldiers by royal warrant. By that time much of the goods already
taken had been sold, and the officers concerned, being at the siege of
Derry, could not be brought to account. On the last day of the session
an Act was passed at the instance of the Commissioners, vesting in the
King all the personalty, including arrears of rent, left by absentees
mentioned in the Act of Attainder, or who aided and abetted the Prince
of Orange. In August, when Parliament had risen, the Commissioners
extended their operations to Dublin, but they were instructed not to
strip houses or injure trade. The business was so mismanaged, and there
was so much dishonesty, that His Majesty had little profit from the
widespread ruin. Six months after the passing of the Act Avaux reported
that the King had not received, and he believed never would receive,
more than one thousand crowns out of confiscated property worth two
millions.[219]

[Sidenote: French efforts to capture trade.]

[Sidenote: French wines.]

[Sidenote: Irish wool.]

Avaux did not believe James had much chance of gaining England and
Scotland, though the sanguine English Jacobites kept him constantly
informed as to the general discontent and as to William's personal
unpopularity. But in any case the ambassador was sure that the complete
reduction of Ireland was a necessary preliminary. In the meantime
he sought to advance French interests. One plan was to naturalise
all Louis's subjects in Ireland, and a Bill for this purpose passed
the House of Commons, but James insisted that the privilege, such
as it was, should be extended to all foreign visitors. He was asked
sarcastically by members of the Lower House whether Kirke and Schomberg
were included, but he had his way. Avaux also sought special terms
for French wines, instead of which an Act was passed giving the King
general power to regulate the duties on foreign commodities, and he
ordered the Revenue Commissioners to remit tonnage and other dues
in the case of French importers. By far the most important of Irish
commodities was wool, the exportation of which to foreign parts from
England or Ireland was felony by an English Act of Charles II. Avaux
now proposed to make the export of wool to France free, and at the same
time entirely to prohibit its being sent to England. By this means
English manufacturers would be deprived of their raw material for the
benefit of their French competitors. A Bill for the double purpose
found favour with the House of Commons, but the King again interposed,
and the ambassador had to be contented with a promise that all French
ships should be allowed to take cargoes of wool. The Irish Parliament
had declared itself independent, but the English Act remained in force,
and the sailors of a St. Malo vessel refused to load the forbidden
goods, with the chance of being taken at sea and hanged in England.
The Englishman in James was always asserting himself, while he knew
that his only effective supporter was the French King. Avaux saw that
great profits might be made if these difficulties could be got over,
and he offered to share them with Louvois, who administered a dignified
rebuke. He would have nothing to say to such traffic, and 'the King,
our master,' would take it very ill.[220]

[Sidenote: End of the Parliament.]

The Irish Parliament was prorogued on July 18, and it did not meet
again. Londonderry was relieved twelve days later, and Schomberg landed
in less than a month. Many of the members had already dispersed to
look after the forfeited lands, the repeal of the Act of Settlement
and the measures against absentees having exhausted their interest in
parliamentary matters. One of the last Acts passed secured 15,000_l._
a year to Tyrconnel. At least one chief reason for assembling a
Parliament was to get money for the war, and 20,000_l._ a month was
voted, but it was hard to collect, and proved quite inadequate.
Supporters of James who were not mainly interested in the land
question thought the Parliament had done much more harm than good,
many officers and the best of the country people being engaged at home
and leaving the war to take care of itself. It was evident to every
clear-sighted person that arms must decide, not only whether James or
William should rule Ireland, but whether the King of England should
be King in Ireland also. The pretension of the smaller country to act
independently of the greater had been defined by the late legislation,
and was evidently incompatible with the facts, nor did James venture
to separate the two islands by repealing the law of Poynings. The
penal laws that followed are accounted for, though not excused, by
the conduct of the native Irish Parliament during its short tenure of
power. The treatment of the French Protestants by James's patron had
also done much to embitter the feelings of the victors.[221]

Clever men saw at the time, and everyone can see now, that James's
Irish adventure was hopeless. He thought of Ireland only as a
stepping-stone to England, and his French supporters thought only
of diverting William's attention from the Continent, and thus
strengthening the position of their own King. The Irish very naturally
thought first of regaining their lands, and hoped, with the aid of
French power, to hold the country in spite of England. The English
colony would have been destroyed if James had been victorious, and the
Protestant landowners, who received no mercy from an Irish Parliament,
were not likely to show much when their turn came.

FOOTNOTES:

[204] _Sheridan MS._ The character in _Macariæ Excidium_, p. 83, is
much to the same effect; O'Kelly and Sheridan both accusing Tyrconnel
of favouring the Anglo-Irish and depressing the native Celts. In his
memoir, printed at the end of Avaux's _Negotiations_, Hugh Balldearg
O'Donnell says Tyrconnel was particularly hostile to the Ulster
Irish. _Light to the Blind_, attributed to a Plunket, always praises
him. 'Infiniment vain et fort rusé,' says Berwick. 'Talbot s'était
dès long-tems porté pour patron des Irlandais opprimés. Ce zèle
pour sa nation était fort louable; mais il n'était pas tout-à-fait
désinteressé. De tous ceux que son crédit avait fait rétablir dans une
partie de leurs biens il avait écorné quelque petite chose; mais comme
chacun y trouvait son compte, personne n'y trouvait à redire,' _Mem. de
Grammont_, chap. ix. Clarendon's _Life_, Cont., pp. 929 _sqq._ Burnet,
i. 176, 227, and the Supplement, 255.

    Next Talbot must by his great master stand,
    Laden with folly, flesh, and ill-got land;
    He's of a size indeed to fill a porch,
    But ne'er can make a pillar of the Church.

  Marvell's _Advice to a Painter_, p. 67.


[205] Burnet, i. 602, information from Halifax himself. _Clarendon and
Rochester Corr._ 'Colonel MacCarthy's carriage has been so differing
from the others that he has by his great civility recommended himself
highly to the affections of the people of Cork, though they are
notoriously fanatic.' Longford to Ormonde, September 7, 1685, in
_Ormonde Papers_, vii. 358. When Boisseleau was governor there he
treated the 'fanatics' very harshly.

[206] 'Sarsfield n'est pas un homme de la naissance de Milord Galmoy,
ny de Makarty, mais c'est un gentilhomme distingué par son mérite, qui
a plus de crédit dans ce royaume qu'aucun homme que je connoisse,'
Avaux to Louvois, October 21, 1689. Berwick married Sarsfield's widow.

[207] Melfort's letters, cited in note, p. 142, to O'Callaghan's
_Macariæ Excidium_. _Sheridan MS._ Madame de Sévigné, July 1, 1676. For
an estimate of Anthony Hamilton, see Sainte-Beuve's article, _Causeries
du Lundi_, vol. i. For the early adventures of the brothers, see the
_Mem. de Grammont_. Melfort told Avaux that the Tyrconnels had hunted
him out of Ireland, 'pour sauver Antoine et Richard Hamilton, qu'on
avait peur qu'il n'accusast.' Avaux to Louis XIV., August 20/30, 1689.
Madame de Lafayette says Anthony was driven from the French Court for
making love to the Princesse de Conti, who liked talking to him better
than to anyone else. 'Richard alla mourir chez sa nièce, quoique pauvre
elle-même, mais moins pauvre que lui, pour ne pas mourir de faim,' St.
Simon's addition to Dangeau, December 20, 1717.

[208] A catalogue of the Acts of this Parliament, numbered from 1 to
35, was published in London with an 'Exact List of the Lords, &c.,'
licensed November 13, 1689. The text of many of them is in a _List of
Such of the Names_, &c., licensed March 26, 1690. The Act of Attainder
is in an '_Account of the Transactions_ of the late King James in
Ireland', licensed July 7, 1690.

[209] James's speech to both Houses, published by his order, May 10,
and the Parliament's address in reply are in the appendix to Leslie's
Answer to King. The latter document has no allusion to the King's
pronouncement about the Act of Settlement. A French version of the
speech was sent by Avaux to Louis XIV. on May 8/18.

[210] Keating's address (early in May 1689) is in King's appendix no.
22 and in other places. Avaux to Louis XIV., May 26/June 5, 1689.
King James to Clarendon, April 6, 1686, in _Clarendon and Rochester
Corres._, vol. i. Clarendon to Rochester and to the King, April 17:
'Your Majesty's often gracious professions that the Acts of Settlement
shall not be touched, does extremely quiet the minds of men,' _ib._
Sunderland to Clarendon, June 14, _ib._ Writing to Rochester on October
12, Clarendon says: 'In almost every letter I have had the honour to
receive from the King he has declared the Acts of Settlement must not
be touched, and that he will support the English interest,' _ib._
vol. ii. After this date he began to see more clearly, and on January
4 received a copy of the Coventry letter, which left no doubt as to
Tyrconnel's plans, _ib._ ii. 142.

[211] Avaux to Louis XIV., May 26/June 5, 1689. _Journal of the
Proceedings_ of the Parliament in Ireland from May 7 to June 11, and
a letter appended carrying the narrative nearly to the end of July,
London, licensed July 6, 1689. The journal and letter are reprinted
in _Somers Tracts_ as if they had been published separately. There is
also a journal by another hand ending May 20, _Somers Tracts_, xi. 426.
Bishop Dopping's speech, June 4, is in King, appx. no. 23. _A True
Account of the Present State of Ireland_, by a person that with great
difficulty left Dublin, June 8, 1689.

[212] The Act of Repeal is in a _List of Names_, &c., licensed March
26, 1690. _Journal of Proceedings_, _ut sup._ Avaux to Louis XIV., May
16/26.

[213] The Act of Attainder is printed from a copy certified by a clerk
in the Rolls Office in King's appendix, published anonymously late in
1691. A _List of the Names_ had already appeared in a pamphlet licensed
March 26, 1690. The discrepancies are just such as Paley would have
considered proofs of genuineness. For instance, King's Lieutenant
John Newton of Drogheda is St. John Newton in the earlier list, while
Katherine, Viscountess Ranelagh, and Anne, Viscountess Dungannon, first
appeared as Katherine Vir, Countess of Ranelagh, and Anne Vir, Countess
of Donegal. No doubt King's list is the more trustworthy of the two.
In the _Transactions of the late King James_, licensed July 7, 1690,
p. 33, it is noted that some names in the list already published,
pp. 30-31, were wrongly added, and this is confirmed by comparing
the two pamphlets with King. He believed, and gives good reasons for
believing, that the Act was kept hidden away, so that no one could take
any advantage under it. See also _An Apology for the Protestants of
Ireland_, dated May 27, 1689, and a _Character of the Protestants of
Ireland_, licensed November 13, 1689.

[214] Chief Justice Keating, who tried hard to keep terms with James,
and who even excused Tyrconnel, said he was 'confident and assured
that the Government of England will and must at length take place here
against all opposition whatsoever,' letter to Sir John Temple, December
29, 1688, in King's appendix no. 14. _London Gazette_. Luttrell's
_Diary_, June 2: Keating committed suicide in 1691, Cal. of State
Papers, _Domestic_, October 20, 1691, p. 548; James Reilly's letter
from Poitiers, January 3, 1692, in _Spicilegium Ossoriense_, ii. 309.
In troubled times a man who tries to be impartial is likely to find
himself without friends. He had been indicted for high treason and his
place given to another, see the article on him in _Dict. of National
Biography_ and Luttrell, ii. 139. The treason consisted in taking a
commission from King James after February 17, 1688-9.

[215] King says (iii. 13) that Coghlan consulted Vice-Provost Acton,
and he may have been guided by Dopping, who was still Vice-Chancellor.

[216] Lestie's Answer to King, p. 124. Irish Statutes, 14 & 15 Car.
II. cap. 23. _A Sermon preached to the Protestants of Ireland_, &c.,
London, 1689, dedicated to Pilkington and published at his request.
'He spoiled his business in Ireland by his over great indulgence
towards them. He was infatuated with this rotten principle--provoke
not your Protestant subjects,' _Light to the Blind_. _A Short View of
the Methods_, &c., by a clergyman lately escaped from thence, licensed
October 17, 1689. The writer fled from Vesey's province of Tuam, and
the tract is dedicated to Burnet.

[217] King knew that great reforms were desirable in the Established
Church, and he did what he could. But he saw clearly that the great
exodus to England would cause fatal jealousies between those who stuck
to their duty and those who ran away, Bonnell to Strype, August 5, 1690.

[218] Act 29 for the advancement of trade. Act 21 for excluding English
coal. Proclamations of November 24, 1689, against wrecking empty
houses, and of November 29 for encouraging the conveyance of coal from
Kilkenny. On November 14/24 Avaux writes to Louis XIV., 'Ce qu'on avait
de bois et de charbon pour un écu en coûte quatre, et il faut envoyer
bien loin à la campagne pour en pouvoir trouver.'

[219] _Journal and a Letter_ from Dublin, licensed July 6, 1689. _True
Account of the State of Ireland_, 1689. Act 24. _List of the Names_,
&c., licensed March 26, 1689, p. 41. Copies of the orders, &c., in
King's appendix no. 24. Avaux to Louis XIV., February 1/11, 1690. In
a report to James dated June 4/14, 1689, Avaux had written: 'Votre
Majesté sait que les sheriffs et les particuliers qu'on employe à la
recherche de ces biens sont les premiers à souffrir qu'on les detourne
moyennant quelques presens qu'on les fait.'

[220] Acts 19 and 27. Avaux to Louvois, April 6/16, 1689, and the
answer, June 13. Writing to Louis on June 30/July 10, Avaux says James
'a un coeur trop anglais pour se determiner à rien qui puisse chagriner
les Anglais, c'est-ce qui arreste l'affaire des laines.'

[221] _Light to the Blind_, p. 70. 'By the sitting of this Parliament,'
says John Stevens, p. 70, 'the army was much damaged and weakened, the
King lost the assistance of many of his friends, and gained a vast
number of irreconcilable enemies.' King James, says Colonel O'Kelly,
'convoked the states of the kingdom, and as if in time of peace and
leisure spent in unnecessary consultations the whole summer season,
which might be better employed to go on more rigorously with the
siege of Londonderry,' _Macariæ Excidium_, p. 33. King says it was
'manifestly against his interest to call a Parliament,' chap. iii. sec.
12, 5. Besides anything given to Tyrconnel by his private Act, there
appear to have been other grants. According to the _Sheridan MS._,
James regretted at St. Germains that he had been tricked into giving
him 50,000_l._ a year while only intending 12,000_l._ The extreme Irish
party, of which Bishop O'Molony was the soul, condemned this Parliament
for not repealing Poynings' Act, Macpherson, i. 339.




CHAPTER LII

LONDONDERRY AND ENNISKILLEN, 1689


[Sidenote: The siege of Londonderry.]

[Sidenote: Difficulties of the besiegers.]

It was the remark of a brilliant writer that trying to describe the
siege of Londonderry after Macaulay was like trying to describe the
siege of Troy after Homer. No elaborate copy need be attempted here.
The heroism of the defenders it is scarcely possible to exaggerate, but
the weakness of the attack was largely responsible for their success.
Hamilton had never seen a siege, and Rosen, though an experienced
soldier, was wanting in initiative. There was the worst feeling
between French and Irish, the latter complaining that the foreigners
got all the good appointments, and the former that they were exposed
without support. At first Avaux thought the town could not hold out
long, but very soon he changed his opinion. On the same day that he
wrote to Louis of his hopes, he confided his fears to Louvois. A
week later he was in despair. Maumont and Pusignan were killed, with
several other French officers. Pointis, who commanded the artillery,
was badly wounded. The besieging army was then under 3000 men, and
not one musket in ten was serviceable, so that they had to entrench
themselves against the attacks of the garrison. Even at the end of May
most of the soldiers had no swords. Some carried iron-tipped sticks,
and others pike-staffs without heads. In the long June days, the
Enniskilleners extended their raids to within forty miles of Dublin,
and James sent Rosen to check them. At Trim, where he had been promised
four battalions of infantry, a regiment of dragoons, and nearly two
regiments of cavalry, he found two battalions, one very badly and the
other very indifferently armed. The dragoons did not appear at all,
and of cavalry there were but five ill-mounted troops, the men without
pistols or carbines, and most of the horses without saddles or bridles.
There were some guns, but the shot did not fit, so that only one in six
could be fired. Then it was reported that Kirke's fleet had been seen
in Lough Foyle, and Rosen was sent to Londonderry, where he found that
there were only thirty pickaxes, and no available cannon, and that the
unpaid soldiers were deserting in great numbers. The battering train
was throughout inadequate. By the middle of July only five out of
thirty-six French gunners were fit for service, and Massé, the chief
engineer, was killed while laying a gun, since no artillery officer
was to be had. Avaux says Lord Melfort was not sorry for the French
officer, who had complained that he was abandoned, and given none of
the promised requisites for a siege.[222]

[Sidenote: Character of the town.]

[Sidenote: Baker and Walker governors.]

The Londonderry of the siege, standing entirely on the left bank of
the Foyle, was nearly oblong in shape, extending about half a mile
from north to south, and something less from east to west. It was
surrounded by a strong wall without any ditch, having a small bastion
at each angle. There were four gates, and in front of the southern, or
Bishop's gate, a slight ravelin had been thrown up by Lundy as his sole
contribution to the defence. The besieged had twenty guns, none of them
as large as a twelve pounder, and many much smaller. The men bearing
arms at the beginning of the siege were over 7000, divided into eight
regiments, the total number of people within the walls being thirty
thousand. There were about 300 cavalry under Adam Murray's command.
Major Baker and George Walker were chosen joint-governors, both of
them being colonels of regiments. According to the accounts hostile to
Walker, he was only an assistant in charge of the stores, and no doubt
that was his most important duty, but he was commonly called Governor,
and always signed first, which can hardly have been without the
general consent of those chiefly concerned. Many, perhaps most, of the
defenders were Scots Presbyterians, or inclined that way, but sectarian
differences were got over while the siege lasted. The Episcopalians had
the cathedral in the morning, and the Presbyterians in the afternoon,
and sermons did much to keep up the spirit of the garrison. Walker was
afterwards accused of preaching in a discouraging tone, but his extant
sermons do not sustain this. By the wise connivance of both Baker
and Walker, Lundy was allowed to escape in disguise. On April 21 the
Jacobites opened fire with one light gun from the right bank of the
river, doing little damage, and on the same day the garrison made a
sally towards Pennyburn Mill lower down the water, on their own side.
The fighting was indecisive, but Maumont fell, perhaps by Murray's own
hand. Two days later Culmore surrendered, thus giving the besiegers
the means of preventing relief from the sea. On the 25th, there was
another sally in the same direction, and Pusignan received a wound
from which he died for want of a surgeon. On May 6 there was a sally
towards Windmill Hill, on the south side of the town, to prevent an
attack there, and the besiegers suffered severely, Brigadier-General
Ramsay, a distinguished Scotch officer, being among the slain. The guns
used by the Jacobite army were never of calibre sufficient to damage
the wall seriously, and nothing like a breach was made at any time.
Three mortars appear to have been used, which killed a few men and did
much damage to the houses, but none to the defences. Two hundred and
sixty-one shells were thrown in, each weighing 272 pounds, without the
charge, and 326 of 34 pounds.[223]

[Sidenote: Fight at the windmill.]

The fiercest fight during the siege was on June 4. The garrison had
dug a ditch, and thrown up a bank across the Windmill Hill, which
protected St. Columb's Wells. These were very important, for the wells
inside the walls were made turbid by the constant firing. The windmill
itself, which still stands, had been strengthened by earthworks, and
two or three small guns were mounted on it. Hamilton ordered nearly
all his available infantry and some cavalry to advance against the
bank, which for the most part was about twelve feet high. No attempt
was made to loosen the newly made work, there were no ladders, and
the foot-soldiers were quite unable to surmount the obstacle. They
fell fast under the fire of the besieged, whose fowling pieces carried
farther than their muskets. Only one-third of the defenders fired
at a time, and thus a continuous hail of bullets was kept up. The
assailants' right wing of cavalry was commanded by Colonel Edmund
Butler, Lord Mountgarret's eldest son. He was exceptionally well
mounted, and galloped to the top of the bank, which at the waterside
did not exceed seven feet. On descending within the enclosure he was
at once made prisoner. About thirty men tried to follow, but only
two officers jumped successfully, one of whom was killed, the other
escaping after his horse had been shot under him. Of the Irish, at
least 200 were killed, besides many officers, the besieged only losing
one officer and six men.[224]

[Sidenote: An English squadron appears,]

[Sidenote: but is forced to retire.]

[Sidenote: Schomberg interferes.]

[Sidenote: Debate in the English Parliament.]

Three days after the fight at the windmill, the spirits of the garrison
were momentarily raised by the appearance of three English ships. Most
of the Irish guns had been moved to the riverside below the town, but
the mortar battery was placed in an orchard on the right bank. The
frigates exchanged shots with Culmore fort, but the _Greyhound_ took
ground, and lay exposed with a heavy list. Even with this advantage the
garrison of Culmore could not sink her, but some French gunners were
brought up, who made nine good shots out of fourteen. Nevertheless,
the vessel got off with the tide, having been hit seventeen times.
The experience gained was enough to show that it would not be easy
to relieve the town by water. A week later Kirke's fleet, twenty-six
transport and store ships under convoy of four men-of-war, was descried
in Lough Foyle, the fighting squadron under Rooke, with Leake among
the captains. But a council of war, comprising both naval and military
officers, was held on board the _Swallow_, where, after the manner of
such councils, it was unanimously decided that the thing could not be
done. There appeared to be a boom across the river, and it was wrongly
suspected that boatloads of stones had been sunk in the channel. As
soon as the result of the council of war reached the English Government
Schomberg gave the order which saved Londonderry. The sunken ships, he
said, were only guessed at, and the boom might not be formidable. Kirke
was told to get better information, 'and to consult for that purpose
the sea-officers whether it may not be possible to break the boom and
chain and to pass with the ships, and that you attempt the doing of
it for the relief of the town.' A considerable reinforcement of horse
and foot was at once despatched. In the meantime Kirke seems to have
thought that he could relieve Londonderry by land, and he established
a post on the Isle of Inch in Lough Swilly, scarcely five miles from
the walls, to which the Protestants of the country round flocked for
protection. After sending what help he could spare to Enniskillen,
Kirke obeyed Schomberg's orders, and sailed round again to Lough
Foyle. The long delay in rescuing the beleaguered city had caused much
indignation in England. 'When I speak for money,' said Birch, 'I would
lay the fault where it is. I will not talk of account of money now.
'Tis pity these brave fellows in Ireland should be deserted; we are
likely to lose those 10,000 brave men, to our shame all the world
over.' The dreaded boom, he added, could probably be cut, and if not,
there was nothing to prevent the landing of a relieving army.[225]

[Sidenote: Sufferings of the besieged.]

The garrison of Londonderry were never short of powder, in spite of the
constant firing. The stock of cannon balls failed before the end of
June, and the want was supplied by covering pieces of brick with lead
so that the size and weight were right, and good practice was made with
these rude projectiles. Food soon became scarce, dogs, cats, and rats
being readily eaten and sold at high prices. Rations of salted hides
were served out and tallow mixed with starch. The latter compound was
found to be a cure for dysentery. At the last distribution, before the
end of the siege, the allowance for a fighting man was half a pound of
meat and a pound and a half of horse flesh. There were no vegetables,
of course, and a handful of sea-wrack or chickweed fetched a penny or
twopence. Fuel was not much wanted in summer except for cooking, and
there was very little to cook, but fires could be made with the roofs
shattered by shell-fire. Only eighty soldiers were slain by the enemy,
but famine and sickness reduced their number from 7500 to about 4300,
of whom more than a fourth were unserviceable. Governor Baker died on
the last day of June, after naming Michelburn to succeed him. Murray
was shot through both thighs on July 17, and the starving troops had
not the advantage of his leadership during their last feeble sallies.
The very last was on July 25, when they issued from the Bishop's Gate
and the Butcher's Gate simultaneously in hopes of driving in some of
the enemy's cattle. They killed many of the besiegers, but caught no
cows, and returned as hungry as before, having lost a few men. Starch
was found in the pockets of the slain, and one dying soldier said he
had nothing else for five days.[226]

[Sidenote: Cruel action of Rosen.]

[Sidenote: Indignation of James.]

Conrad De Rosen was a Livonian, and King James had occasion to call
him a barbarous Muscovite, but he was a good officer, and was made
field-marshal-general. He wrote French well and knew how to behave
in good society, but was subject to fits of rage in which he was
little better than a madman. As Hamilton made no progress with the
siege, Rosen was sent to see what he could do, and he reached the
camp on June 20 with his badly armed reinforcements. His arrival gave
some encouragement to the besieging army, which was on the point of
dispersing spontaneously. He devoted himself to strengthening the force
for guarding the river, and at the same time tried to push approaches
up to Butcher's Gate with a view to blowing it in. His men got so
near that the garrison drove them off with stones. The weather was
very wet and the ditches filled with water which was kept back by the
high tide, so that it was found impossible to work in them. When he
heard Rosen's report, Avaux had little hope of the town being taken.
But Kirke was daily expected to attempt something, and Hamilton made
an effort to do by treaty what he could not do by force. The town
was summoned to surrender on such terms as might be agreed on, with
a general promise that there should be no distinction made between
Catholic and Protestant. Protection was offered to all, and favour to
those who would serve King James. It was particularly insisted that
Rosen had no power to interfere concerning the siege, that he was
sent only to stop the English succours, and that 'all conditions and
parleys' depended on Hamilton, who had power to grant such articles
as he thought fit. In spite of all this, Rosen took everything into
his own hands three days later. He issued a declaration requiring the
garrison to accept Hamilton's terms within twenty-four hours, and to
send hostages. Failing this, all the men, women, and children of their
party (_cabale_), whether under protection or not, from Enniskillen to
Charlemont, and from Charlemont to the sea, should be driven under the
walls, without any provisions or shelter. The garrison might admit them
if they liked, otherwise they would have the pain of seeing the death
by starvation of their 'fathers, mothers, wives, children, brothers,
sisters, and, in short, all their relations, for not one single one
shall be left at home, and they shall have nothing to eat.' Those who
had taken refuge in towns were to be turned out and driven along with
the rest. Orders to this effect were at once sent to the commandants
at Coleraine, Antrim, Carrickfergus, Belfast, Dungannon, Charlemont,
Belturbet, and Sligo, and to the Duke of Berwick, who had a flying
column on the Enniskillen side. All mills and houses belonging to the
rebels and their adherents were to be burned, all horses and cattle
driven off or killed; so that if English troops were to land they would
find only a desert. On the same day Rosen wrote to inform King James
of what he had done and meant to do. James at once replied that he
should have been informed of the Marshal's plan beforehand, and that he
thoroughly disapproved of it, though he had no objection to ravaging
the country for military reasons. He positively ordered commanding
officers to disobey the Marshal except in that one particular, and to
send back to their homes all who had already suffered. He had promised
protection to all who lived peacefully, and they should have it. Rosen,
who cared nothing for His Majesty's favour, rejoined that he was much
too full of benevolence to rebels, who were thus encouraged in their
insolence. James was greatly annoyed at his word being broken and at
the General's presumption in acting without his orders. Avaux tried
to plead that the time had been too precious to stand upon ceremony,
and that neither he nor Rosen had official knowledge of the King's
promises, but he admits that his arguments had no effect. Melfort, who
could not lose such an opportunity of annoying the ambassador, said
that if the Marshal had been the King of England's subject he would
have been hanged. 'I found the expression very strong,' said Avaux,
'but made no answer, for the King was already very angry.'[227]

[Sidenote: Determination of the besieged.]

Rosen may have hoped to frighten the town into surrender without
carrying out all his threats. If so, he was completely mistaken. In
the evening of Monday, July 1, about 200 victims were gathered under
the walls and a thousand more appeared in the morning. Many of these
had been living peaceably under the King's protection. Throughout
that day and the next the number increased, being brought in from
the surrounding country. It does not appear that Rosen's orders were
fully carried out in more distant parts, probably because of James's
action. Even before the King's letter arrived the Marshal saw that
his bolt had missed, and had merely furnished the garrison with an
irrefutable argument. They erected a gallows on the south-western
bastion, and warned the prisoners, who had hitherto been very kindly
treated, to prepare for instant death. There were twenty of them,
and they appealed to Hamilton, who gave them no comfort but the
assurance that their deaths should be revenged on many thousands of
people, innocent or guilty, both within and without the city. As to
the proposals for capitulation, the governors said that they could
not trust the besiegers, Rosen's manifesto being inconsistent with
Hamilton's suggestions. Besides, the latter's commission was dated May
1, since which a Parliament had sat in which their lives and estates
were forfeited. Meanwhile neither the besieged nor the starving people
outside had any thoughts of surrender. On the fourth day Rosen allowed
the victims of his scheme to return to their devastated homes, and King
James renewed Hamilton's commission. A few of the strongest outside
slipped into the town, and many of the weakest within seized the chance
of escape. The governors thought their food would not last beyond July
26, and might have yielded if time had been given to that day, but it
was refused, and all negotiations came to naught. Help did not come
until after the last ration of famine-fare had been served out.[228]

[Sidenote: The town relieved by sea.]

From the time that Kirke appeared upon the coast until the end of
the siege there were many attempts to establish communications.
Daily signals were made from the cathedral and answered from the
ships, but were not well understood on either side, though it seems,
from the account of Captain James Roche, that there was so much of
a preconcerted code as enabled him to tell Kirke how many more days
the town could hold out. Roche was induced by the promise of 3000
guineas to carry a letter, and this he succeeded in doing, by swimming
under great difficulties; but even he could not get back, and had to
stay till the end. Another messenger was drowned, and a third taken
and hanged. A little boy afterwards succeeded in bringing a letter.
The investment was very close, but the besiegers gave up any hope of
succeeding except by starvation, and Kirke's chief advice by Roche
was to husband the provisions. On July 20 Hamilton held a council at
which six generals attended, all of whom agreed with him that the town
could only be taken by famine. Rosen was in bed, and disclaimed all
responsibility, saying that he was always against the siege, and that
his advice had been slighted. The guns, said the others, were quite
insufficient, and the besiegers had suffered so much that they were not
numerically superior to the besieged. On Saturday, July 27, the day of
Killiecrankie, Captain Ash wrote in his diary, 'Next Wednesday is our
last, if relief not does arrive before it.' About six in the evening of
the day following that on which these despairing words were written,
three ships were seen coming up the Foyle. They proved to be the
_Dartmouth_, of forty guns, commanded by John Leake, the _Mountjoy_,
under Micaiah Browning, a native of Londonderry, and the _Phoenix_ of
Coleraine, under Andrew Douglas. If we consider what Rooke and Leake
did together in after years, we may believe that they would have made
the attack much sooner, but they were under Kirke's orders, and he was
a landsman. The _Dartmouth_ anchored opposite Culmore and engaged the
fort, the man-of-war having probably better guns, and certainly better
gunners. Meanwhile the two merchant-ships, accompanied by boats from
the fleet, sailed or were towed up to the boom, at each end of which
a fort had been built. The boats' crews hacked at the obstacle, and
before it was quite cleared the _Mountjoy_ struck against its timbers,
and went ashore. A shout of triumph went up from the Irish army, and
the hearts of the men on the wall sank. But a gap had been made and
the _Phoenix_ passed up to the Quay. The larger vessel--her burden
was only 135 tons--used what guns she had, and the concussion, joined
to the rising tide, soon brought her off, but not before her brave
captain had been killed by a cannon-ball. He died, says Macaulay, 'by
the most enviable of all deaths, in the sight of the city which was
his birthplace, which was his home, and which had just been saved
by his courage and self-devotion from the most frightful form of
destruction.'[229]

[Sidenote: Cost of the siege.]

The _Phoenix_ carried three or four thousand bushels of Scotch meal,
the _Mountjoy_ was laden with biscuit, cheese, pork, and pease, and
as Hamilton's only hope was in famine, the siege was virtually over.
It lasted 105 days, and cost some 15,000 lives, more from fever and
starvation than from wounds. The mortality among the women and among
those who were too old or too young to fight was far greater than
among the soldiers. Michelburne lost his wife and all his children.
For two days the Irish continued to fire from their trenches, but
they were preparing to go. Everything within reach was destroyed, and
on the night of July 31 they set fire to their camp and marched off
to Strabane. Some of the late besieged, who had no horses, attempted
pursuit, but the Irish rearguard turned on them and killed seven men.
The battle of Newtown Butler was fought on the day that the siege was
raised, and when the news reached Strabane, Hamilton's army retired,
abandoning their guns, and burning everything until they got near
Charlemont. Avaux reported that they were completely ruined, and that
the double disaster had demoralised the Irish everywhere.[230]

[Sidenote: Defence of Enniskillen.]

[Sidenote: Repulse of Galmoy.]

While Londonderry was beset Enniskillen kept her assailants at arm's
length. The north-east side was protected by the garrisons left by Lord
Kingston in Donegal and Ballyshannon, but on the north-west Sarsfield
had a good force of Connaught men at Sligo and Manor Hamilton, and in
June he fixed a camp at Bundrowes, where the waters of Lough Melvin
reach the sea. To the south, Colonel Crichton maintained Crom Castle.
The Protestants living in the open country knew that they had nothing
to expect from Lundy, who had ordered the evacuation of Dungannon,
and done what he could to prevent Enniskillen from resisting. All the
help he gave the defenders was five barrels of powder and some old
gun-barrels, which they managed to fix with locks and stocks. They
had no other ammunition for months, except what they took from the
enemy. In March Lord Galmoy with a strong force approached Enniskillen
and on March 30 the defenders saw the Protestants of Cavan pouring
in. First came some horse and foot, then 'the whole inhabitants with
their women and children to their middle in clay and dirt, with
pitiful lamentations, and little or no provision to sustain them.'
They did their best to persuade the Enniskilleners to fly with them to
Londonderry. After two days' rest they were told that if the men went
the women and children should be turned out. Some remained with their
families, but the majority went on. Galmoy came as far as Belturbet,
whence he sent a party to besiege Crom. He had no battering guns,
but made a show with two pieces consisting of tinplates covered with
buckram, and bound round with whipcord. A wooden ball was fired from
one of these machines, which quickly burst, and did not frighten the
garrison, who were soon strengthened by a detachment from Enniskillen,
conveyed partly in boats. Galmoy advanced as far as Lisnaskea, but drew
back towards Crom on the approach of the whole Enniskillen force. The
men in the castle and those who came by road then attacked the Irish
simultaneously, and Galmoy retired with loss to Belturbet, leaving his
buckram batteries behind him.[231]

[Sidenote: Galmoy's cruelty.]

At Cavan, on his passage northwards, Galmoy captured Captain Dixie, son
of the Dean of Kilmore, whom he was anxious to exchange for an officer
named Maguire, a prisoner at Crom. This was agreed to, and Maguire was
given up accordingly, but Galmoy nevertheless tried Dixie and another
by court-martial and ordered them to be hanged. Their heads were then
cut off, and kicked about like footballs. This atrocious act satisfied
the Protestants that no faith would be kept with them, and added much
to the bitterness of the struggle. Maguire was so much disgusted at the
use to which he had been put that he resigned his commission.[232]

[Sidenote: Exploits of Colonel Lloyd.]

[Sidenote: The Break of Belleek.]

A month after the attack on Crom the Enniskilleners, now reinforced
by many of Lord Kingston's men, set out, under Lloyd's command, to
prevent a Jacobite garrison from being established at Trillick.
Having succeeded in this, they made a like expedition to Augher, and
returned by Clones, which they found burned. A great many cattle were
driven off, and during the whole time that Londonderry was starving,
Enniskillen enjoyed plenty. So successful were the foragers that a
milch cow could sometimes be bought for eighteenpence, and a dry one
for sixpence. When horses were caught, they were used to bring in
foodstuffs and fodder. Two days after their return from the raid into
Tyrone, Lloyd's men were again engaged. A large body from Connaught
attacked Ballyshannon, and the relieving force met them at Belleek.
Lough Erne was on one hand and a great bog on the other. Lloyd provided
his troopers with faggots to make a causeway, but a guide suddenly
offered himself and showed them a sound passage. The Irish were routed,
and near 200 of their horse slain. Sixty men whom they left in the
fish-island at Ballyshannon were taken, but the rest of the foot made
their way through bogs back to Sligo. The Enniskilleners did not lose
a man. This affair is known in history as the 'Break of Belleek.'
Before the end of May, Lloyd, with something over 1500 men, attacked
and took Redhill and Ballinacargy in Cavan, and penetrated as far as
Kells in Meath, only thirty miles from Dublin, returning with 5000 head
of cattle and sheep, and 500 horses laden with provisions. The small
garrison of Trillick were equally successful in an attack on Omagh, and
the horses of three troops were surprised and led away.

[Sidenote: Attempt to relieve Londonderry.]

[Sidenote: Victory at Belturbet.]

So great was the reputation of the Enniskilleners that Dublin was
hardly considered safe, their numbers being, of course, enormously
over-estimated. The besiegers of Londonderry were throughout hampered
by their fear of them, and Berwick with a flying column was constantly
occupied in trying to keep them at a distance. Governor Hamilton
resolved to relieve the beleaguered city if possible, but the
expedition was mismanaged. It was food, and not men, that the defenders
wanted, whereas the relieving party did not take enough even for
themselves. They occupied Omagh, but Lord Clancarty was reported to be
on his way, and Sarsfield being at Manor Hamilton, it was feared that
the unfinished fort at Enniskillen might be attacked. The expedition
was accordingly given up, though some thought that it might have
succeeded if Lloyd had been in command. Immediately after his return,
Hamilton had news that Brigadier Sutherland was at Belturbet with a
daily increasing force, but the Jacobite general promptly retreated
even before Lloyd appeared with his dragoons. The garrison was easily
overcome, 300 becoming prisoners with their arms and 700 muskets which
had been stored for the use of a newly raised regiment. Two barrels of
much-needed powder were also taken, with fifty troop-horses, and enough
red coats to dress two companies. Two hundred able men were kept to
work at the unfinished citadel. Thirteen officers were detained, but
the rest of the prisoners with the women and children were allowed to
go free.[233]

[Sidenote: Kirke in Lough Swilly.]

[Sidenote: Defeat at Trillick.]

[Sidenote: Arrival of Wolseley.]

A fortnight after the affair at Belturbet, news was brought to
Enniskillen of Kirke's arrival in Lough Swilly. Communications were
opened with him at once, and he promised thirty barrels of powder
and the help of some officers. Before they came, Berwick crossed the
Barnesmore Gap and attacked Donegal, where Lord Kingston had left
a garrison. He burned the town, but could not take the castle, and
afterwards joined Sutherland at Trillick. He was attacked by Governor
Hamilton, Lloyd having gone to meet Kirke, and here the Enniskilleners
suffered their only serious check, losing fifty men killed, and as
many prisoners. On July 28, a fortnight afterwards, the officers sent
by Kirke reached Enniskillen by water, under the command of Lieut.-Col.
William Wolseley, whose Protestant zeal was well known. He brought
acting commissions for two regiments of cavalry and three of infantry,
a supply of powder, 1600 muskets and firelocks, and eight field-pieces.
On the very evening of his arrival, Wolseley learned that MacCarthy
had come before Crom, where there were no cannon, with a considerable
army and with eight guns, not made of buckram. Next day, being July
30, every available man was brought up from Ballyshannon, and Colonel
Berry, the second in command, was sent on as far as Lisnaskea,
MacCarthy raising the siege as he drew near.

[Sidenote: MacCarthy threatens Enniskillen.]

Early in the morning of July 31, Berry, after spending the night in
the open, moved forward as far as the little village of Donagh, where
his scouts brought word that MacCarthy was advancing. He drew back
accordingly through Lisnaskea, and took up a position among the marshes
near the Colebrooke River. Some of his troopers, who had behaved badly
in the fight near Trillick, now swore to support him, and they kept
their word. The enemy consisted of thirteen companies of dragoons
under Anthony Hamilton, who dismounted his men when they got into the
difficult ground. The Enniskilleners were skilfully posted, and much
the better shots, so that when the Jacobite dragoons were withdrawn,
their retreat rapidly changed into a headlong flight. Berry's horsemen
followed them through Lisnaskea and for a mile beyond, taking thirty
prisoners and killing two hundred men. Hamilton himself was badly
wounded. At the approach of MacCarthy's main army, the victors drew
back to Lisnaskea before nine o'clock, and waited for Wolseley, who was
coming to their rescue with all his available forces. Of the two roads
to Lisnaskea, Berry had taken that to the right, Wolseley that to the
left, and they met at the junction at about eleven o'clock.[234]

[Sidenote: Victory of Newtown Butler.]

Wolseley had left Enniskillen in a great hurry and without provisions.
He had, therefore, no choice but to fight or to fall back, for
Sarsfield was at Bundrowes, and might attack Enniskillen in his
absence. The men were consulted, and all decided to advance. Beyond
Donagh the two armies came in sight of one another. The first encounter
was in crossing a bog with a paved causeway through the middle.
Apparently MacCarthy intended only a reconnaissance at this point,
for he retired after some skirmishing without bringing his guns into
action. The Jacobites kept their ranks through Newtown Butler, and set
fire to the town as they left it. About a mile beyond there was another
causeway through a bog. The position was strongly held by infantry,
who nearly all fought under cover, but failed to stem the advance of
Wolseley's foot. The causeway was swept by cannon, which at first
prevented his cavalry from moving, though the practice was so bad that
no one was hurt. At last the wings under Lloyd and Tiffen got up to
the guns and killed the gunners, who resisted bravely. The causeway
was then cleared, and the Enniskillen horse advanced very quickly
without much attempt at order. The Jacobite cavalry, posted on rising
ground, made no attempt to charge, but galloped away towards Cavan.
When they had ridden their horses to death, they threw away their arms
and clothes so as to run faster. The infantry scattered among the bogs
in the direction of Wattle Bridge, where great numbers were killed.
Of 500 who took to the water all but one man were drowned. When King
James heard the news he nearly took the advice of Melfort, who wished
him to retire to Rathfarnham, where he would be safe from the Dublin
Protestants, but Tyrconnel, Nugent, and Rice persuaded him that he was
in no danger, and that to leave the capital without a garrison might
cause an insurrection, in which many good Catholics would perish.[235]

[Sidenote: MacCarthy a prisoner.]

[Sidenote: Retreat of Sarsfield.]

Deserted by all but his own troop, MacCarthy made a desperate attack on
the infantry who guarded the captured guns, but he soon fell covered
with wounds. He was taken to Enniskillen, where he was very well
treated, as Avaux testifies, and King James sent a doctor and a surgeon
with wine and other luxuries. There were over 300 prisoners, most of
whom were afterwards employed by Kirke to clean and repair the rescued
but almost ruined city of Londonderry. The unfortunate runaways were
mercilessly killed among the reeds and bushes. The pursuit lasted all
night, and no quarter was given until the morning. The victors excused
this bloody work as a natural revenge for Lord Galmoy's perfidy. Avaux
reported that a regiment of dragoons and three battalions of infantry
had almost entirely disappeared. When MacCarthy was taken, a letter
from Sarsfield was found in his pocket saying that he was encamped at
Bundrowes and ready to attack Enniskillen on the west if MacCarthy and
Berwick would attack it on the east. The French ambassador thought it
much more likely that the garrison would crush the three armies in
succession; and, in fact, Wolseley lost no time in marching towards
Bundrowes, but Sarsfield, as soon as he heard of the rout at Newtown
Butler, broke up his camp and retreated to Sligo. Berwick, who was
threatening Donegal, also retired at the news, and effected an exchange
of prisoners. Those who returned to Enniskillen had seen Hamilton's
ruined army march away from Londonderry. They had no wish to meet
another victorious garrison, and Wolseley's scouts saw their rearguard
pass through Castle Caulfield, so that pursuit was impossible. One
regiment of cavalry, two of dragoons, and three of infantry were formed
from the defenders of Enniskillen. Of these Cunningham's became the
Inniskilling Dragoons, famous at Waterloo and on many other fields, and
Tiffen's grew into the Inniskilling Fusiliers. The fame of these troops
was great in their own day, and when a London regiment made a loyal
address to Queen Mary shortly before the Boyne, Tories and Jacobites
called them Inniskillings in derision, while good Whigs hoped that they
would be found such.[236]

[Sidenote: Kirke at Londonderry.]

[Sidenote: Walker in England.]

Tangier was a bad school, and Kirke showed during the Monmouth
insurrection that he had learned its lessons only too well. Very little
credit was due to him personally, but he treated Londonderry like a
conquered city. The late garrison was made into regiments, and the
claims of some who had done much were ignored. But Michelburn, who had
served under him in Africa, was continued as Governor, and Walker, who
hastened to get rid of his military character, was sent to London with
the news and an address from the defenders to King William. While he
was on his way, William's letter of thanks and congratulation arrived
addressed to the Governors, for only the bare facts of the relief had
then reached London. Kirke filled up the blanks with the names of
'George Walker and John Michelburn, Esquires.' Walker travelled by
way of Scotland, receiving the freedom of Glasgow and Edinburgh. Sir
Robert Cotton, the great antiquary's son, drove out as far as Barnet
to meet him, and crowds followed him in the streets. He was presented
to the King, who gave him 5000_l._, which was paid next day, adding
that that was only a small part of what he owed him. On receiving the
thanks of the House of Commons he made little of his own services. At
William's request Cambridge agreed to make him a Doctor of Divinity,
but he did not go there to receive the degree. At Oxford, which he
visited on his return journey in company with Archbishop Vesey, the
same distinction was conferred on him in convocation as the defender of
Londonderry, 'and by that fact, as we hope, the preserver and avenger
of all Ireland.' In London, says Luttrell, he was caressed by all sorts
of people, and entertained at dinner, and has the character of a very
modest person.' Tillotson said his modesty was equal to his merit, and
that everyone was pleased at hearing that he was to be made a bishop.
He spent about six months in England, exerting himself to obtain
rewards and recognition for those who had suffered by the siege, not
forgetting the services of the seven dissenting ministers.[237]

[Sidenote: Burnet on the siege.]

[Sidenote: Walker's True Account.]

[Sidenote: Mackenzie's _Narrative_.]

After giving a slight sketch of the events at Londonderry, Burnet
originally wrote that 'there was a minister in the place, Dr. Walker,
who acted a very noble part in the government and defence of the town;
he was but a man of ordinary parts, but they were suited to this work,
for he did wonders in this siege.' In the published history this was
left out, and Macaulay was at a loss to explain the omission. Swift and
Routh both blame the Bishop for not mentioning Walker. The explanation
is not, however, far to seek. Burnet, writing in the summer of 1691,
agreed with his friend Tillotson, and with society generally, in giving
a lion's share of credit to Walker, but he pretended to no exact
knowledge of Irish affairs, and when the time came to publish his work
he remembered that the late governor had detractors who were chiefly
Scotch Presbyterians, remaining dissenters in Ulster, but established
in the Bishop's own country. He therefore prudently decided not to
mention any individual hero, but to praise the resolution of the
defenders generally. In other respects the revised narrative gained
in accuracy what it lost in picturesqueness. Walker wrote an account
of the siege, and published it by request soon after his arrival in
London. It was done in a hurry, and to meet a pressing want--that
the demand was great is shown by the three extant editions bearing
date 1689, and by the translations into Dutch and German. Walker was
soon attacked for claiming too great a share in the siege, for giving
less praise than was due to Murray and others, and, above all, for
not naming the seven dissenting ministers whose good service he had
acknowledged. He then published a Vindication, saying that he did not
know the names which he was accused of suppressing, and supplying the
omission after inquiry. Some months later, when Walker had returned
to Ireland, the Rev. John Mackenzie, who had been through the siege,
published a more detailed pamphlet, declaring, among other things,
that Walker was never governor, and giving nearly all the glory to
the Presbyterians. Candid readers will not agree, but Mackenzie added
largely to the facts recorded and is historically very valuable. His
narrative is, however, dull reading compared to Walker's account and
the public had had enough of the subject. There were several minor
publications connected with this quarrel. We can only regret with
the very prosaic poet who wrote the Londeriad that the union between
Protestants which danger produced should have passed away with it.[238]


FOOTNOTES:

[222] Avaux's despatches, April 26/May 6 to July 30/August 9, 1689.
Rosen wrote to James on July 5 that the troops lately sent him had to
take such arms as were given them, 'mostly damaged and broken, and
accordingly useless, as you have not in all your army a single gunsmith
to mend them.' Hamilton's soldiers were still worse off, no battalion
stronger than 200 men; and more than two-thirds without swords. No
troop of cavalry had more than fourteen serviceable men.--Macpherson's
_Original Papers_, i. 205. The account of the siege in Witherow's
_Derry and Enniskillen_, 3rd edition, 1885, would leave little to be
desired but for the writer's violent antipathy to Walker.

[223] Walker and Mackenzie. Sermons and speeches by Walker are
reprinted in Dwyer's edition of the _True Account_. Sir Charles
Lyttleton, writing to Lord Hatton on August 8, 1689, says he had talked
the day before to a gentleman who was storekeeper in Ireland, who
confirmed all he had heard about the Irish want of guns. There were
only a few heavy ones in the country, and the ground about Londonderry
was so 'rotten' that they could not be drawn thither.--_Hatton
Correspondence._ Walker and Mackenzie both call the work at Bishop's
Gate a ravelin, but as there was no ditch it should probably be called
a demi-lune.

[224] Walker and Mackenzie. _Light to the Blind_, p. 77.

[225] Walker and Mackenzie. Pointis to Louis XIV. or Seignelay, June
13, 17, and 22, State Papers, _Domestic_. Colonel Birch's speech, June
19, in Grey's _Debates_, ix. 351. Schomberg's order to Kirke is printed
from the copy among the Nairne MSS. in Dwyer's edition of Walker: it
was apparently written on June 29 and despatched with a postscript on
July 3. Avaux to Louvois, June 16/26. The author of the _Light to the
Blind_ says a sunken gabbard or two would have destroyed the channel,
but that James had forbidden this for fear of lessening his customs
revenue.

[226] 'I myself,' says John Hunter, a private soldier, 'would have
eaten the poorest cat or dog I ever saw with my eyes. Many a man,
woman, and child died from want of food. I myself was so weak from
hunger that I fell under my musket one morning as I was going to the
walls, yet God gave me strength to continue all night at my post there,
and enabled me to act the part of a soldier as if I had been as strong
as ever I was; yet my face was blackened with hunger.'--Journal in
Graham's _Ireland Preserved_, p. 335.

[227] Hamilton's proposals, June 27, are in Walker's appendix and
elsewhere. Rosen's declaration, June 30, is enclosed in Avaux's letter
to Louvois, an English version being printed by Walker and elsewhere.
Rosen's correspondence with James, June 30 to July 5, is in Macpherson,
i. 204-210. See Berwick's account of Rosen, and Avaux to Louvois, July
5/15.

[228] 'One pound of oatmeal and 1 lb. of tallow served a man a week,
sometimes salt hides. It was as bad as Samaria, only we had no pidgens'
Dunge. I saw two shillings a quarter given for a little dog, horse
blood at 4_d._ per pint, all the starch was eaten, the graves of
tallow, horse flesh was a rarity, and still we resolved to hold out ...
I believe there died 15,000 men, women, and children, many of whom died
for want. A great fever--all the children died, almost whole families,
nor one left alive.' Narrative of George Holmes in _Le Fleming Papers_,
p. 265. Macpherson i. 312.

[229] Walker and Mackenzie. _Light to the Blind._ The written opinions
of Hamilton and his council of war are in Macpherson, i. 217. James's
letter of July 22 ordering the siege to be turned into a blockade,
_ib._ p. 218. Roche's story is in Harris's _Life of William III._,
appx. xxix., and see Cal. of Treasury Papers, February 14, 1693-4.
Writing to Louis XIV., August 4/14, Avaux says: 'L'estacade était si
mal faite qu'elle n'a pas resisté aux chaloupes qui remorquaient les
deux petits bastiments qui portaient des vivres, et nous avons déjà
sceu plus d'une fois que cette estacade se rompait souvent par le
vent; et par la seule force de la marée.' Though the Rev. James Gordon
can scarcely be credited with the relief of Londonderry, his local
knowledge may have been useful to Kirke, or rather to Rooke and Leake:
Reid's _Presbyterian Hist._, ed. Killen, ii. 387 and notes. Pointis,
who was destined to meet Leake again in later years, gave a description
of the boom (to Seignelay, probably), which he thought he had made
very strong, State Papers, _Domestic_, June 13, 1689. It was partly
attached to a great stone, which may still be seen, though moved from
its original place, in the grounds of Boom Hall, and partly to a great
tree, of which the stump remains.

[230] Walker and Mackenzie. Avaux to Louis XIV., August 4/14.
McCarmick. There is an independent account by George Holmes, who was
all through the siege and was made a major by Kirke; it is dated from
Strabane, November 16, _Le Fleming Papers_, p. 264.

[231] Hamilton and McCarmick.

[232] Hamilton and McCarmick.

[233] McCarmick.

[234] The roads through the boggy flats of upper Lough Erne were paved.
Mr. Thomas Plunkett, of Enniskillen, who knows more than anyone of the
subject, has found some bits of these causeways, but the exact line
taken by Wolseley and Berry cannot now be traced. The drainage works at
Belleek have done much to dry the country.

[235] Hamilton and McCarmick. Wolseley's own account to Kirke is dated
August 2 in _London Gazette_, 2481. Kirke's letters of August 5, _ib._
Avaux writes to Louis XIV., August 4/14: 'Ceux d'Enniskillen estant
venus à la debandade mais fort hardiment attaquer My lord Moncassel, la
cavalerie et les dragons ont lâché pied sans tirer un coup depistolet,'
and on the same day to Louvois: 'Ces mesmes dragons qui avaient fuy le
matin lâcherent le pied, &c.' MacCarthy's force was much the larger of
the two, but it is impossible to give exact numbers. For the reception
of the news by James, see Avaux to Louis XIV., November 14/24. Harris's
account is taken from Hamilton. A _Light to the Blind_ minimises the
defeat, but Kirke says it was the greatest blow to the Irish since
Scariffhollis. _Macariæ Excidium_, chap. xxxvi. Under August 16,
Luttrell's _Diary_ says Wolseley had 2000 men and MacCarthy 7000, which
is doubtless much exaggerated. MacCarmick says the Irish were estimated
at 6000, and that only some 2000 escaped.

[236] MacCarmick. Letter to Abigail Harley, May 9, 1690, _Portland
Papers_, iii. 448. Colonel Filgate has traced the history of many Irish
regiments.

[237] Walker's _True Account_ and papers printed with it and the
_Vindication_. Note 113 to Dwyer's edition of the same. Luttrell's
_Diary_, August and September 1689. Wood's _Fasti Oxonienses_, p.
234, February 26, 1689-90, and his _Life and Times_, ed. Clark, ii.
326. Tillotson to Lady Russell, September 19, 1689, in her _Letters_.
Dawson's memoir of Walker in _Ulster Journal of Archæology_, ii. 129.

[238] Naming Walker, Mackenzie, and other preachers, the author of the
_Londeriad_ says:--

    From sun rising to sun setting they taught,
    While we against the en'my bravely fought.
    Thus Heaven assists those actions which proceed
    From Unity in greatest time of need.

In my copy of Mackenzie's _Narrative of the Siege_ (March 31, 1690)
is written in a contemporary hand: 'A partial account against Kirk,
Walker, &c., on behalf of the fanatick party.' The controversy is
handled by Macaulay, chap. xv., with the titles of the pamphlets in
a note. It is fully but not impartially treated in chap. viii. of
Witherow's _Derry and Enniskillen_, 3rd edition, Belfast, 1885. Burnet,
ii. 19, and the _Supplement_, ed. Foxcroft, 321.




CHAPTER LIII

JAMES II. AND SCHOMBERG, 1689-1690


[Sidenote: Schomberg's preparations.]

Before leaving London, Schomberg had ordered Kirke to relieve
Londonderry. If the town could hold out, and if his orders were
obeyed, he had no doubt that it would be safe to land in Ulster, but
he feared that Kirke could not be depended on (_un homme capricieux_).
The boom was broken on July 30, and the good news reached Schomberg
at Chester on August 3, though at first he could hardly believe it.
Three days later one of the warships from Lough Foyle came in with
the official account, and the captain wanted to go on to London, but
Portland, who had come to Chester, preferred to carry the message
himself. Kirke's account got to Edinburgh as early as August 1. Dundee
received his death-wound only three days before the breaking of the
boom, and after that Schomberg knew that there was no danger on the
Scotch side. On arriving at Chester, Schomberg found nothing to his
liking. He blamed William Harbord, Essex's old secretary, who had been
appointed paymaster-general, in the belief that he made money unduly by
taking advance of the exchange, while the brass coin made all values
uncertain. Harbord had a company, but the old general says scornfully
that he had seen nothing of it but the colours in his room. It was
said that he employed the officers at civil work. As to John Shales,
the chief commissary, Schomberg is quite outspoken, and in the end he
sent him to England to stand his trial. Shales had great experience,
and that was why he was appointed, but the extreme Whigs naturally
believed evil of all who had served the late King. Most likely the
mismanagement and the peculation were much what the general described,
but Shales probably knew that greater men than himself were involved,
and the charges against him were never sifted to the bottom. Schomberg
had a poor opinion of the English officers generally, and they were
particularly unfit to train raw recruits during actual warfare.
Cromwell's plan had been to enlist men in England and to send over half
a battalion at a time to join the more seasoned soldiers and to learn
the rest of their business from them. Yet even Cromwell lost many men
by disease during his first campaign. As it was, hundreds, perhaps
thousands, of village lads were swept into the ranks who had never
fired a gun, and some who had never seen one fired. The infantry were
thinly clothed, and had no great coats. The cavalry were rather better
off, but the officers, for the most part, did not mind their men's
comfort, and the privates would hardly take the trouble to groom their
horses. Schomberg stayed over three weeks at or near Chester, grumbling
much and with good reason, but working hard to make up for the defects
of bad administration. In the meantime a fleet of transports was
assembled in the Dee with enough men-of-war to guard against possible
attack by French cruisers.[239]

[Sidenote: Schomberg reaches Ireland.]

[Sidenote: Weakness of the Jacobite army.]

On August 5 Portland arrived with William's last injunctions, and
probably with orders to hasten the embarkation. He had an hour's
private talk with Schomberg, even lieutenant-generals knowing nothing
of what was said. The two men visited one or more of the ships. The
certain news from Londonderry came next day, and on the third Schomberg
went on board. All were ready to sail at a given signal as soon as the
wind came south-east. Belfast Lough was their destination, and it was
arranged that if any vessels were driven out of their course there
should be a rendezvous at Ramsey, in Man. On August 12 the signal gun
was fired, the wind held all the way, and the whole squadron were off
Bangor, in Down, after thirty-one hours' sail. The shore was crowded
with Protestants of both sexes and every age, 'old and young falling
on their knees with tears in their eyes thanking God and the English
for their deliverance.' In mid-channel a crazy little boat had been
picked up containing a poor minister, his daughter, and a servant girl,
who were flying to Scotland to escape King James's men. Schomberg took
them on board and carried them to a place of safety. The little harbour
of Groomsport was utilised for the disembarkation. Ten thousand men
were landed and lay with their arms for the first night. They were not
interfered with, though an enterprising officer might have done much,
since Schomberg had at first no cavalry with him. The horses of one
regiment had all perished at sea through mismanagement. The Jacobites
fell back to Lisburn, leaving a garrison in Carrickfergus, who
promptly burned the suburbs, and Belfast was occupied by the invaders
on August 14 without any resistance. On the 20th, Carrickfergus was
invested. Having to leave a good detachment in Belfast and another
near the landing-place, Schomberg reported that he had only 6000
effective foot for the siege and no horse. Brigadier Maxwell, who
commanded in Ulster for James, was much blamed for not attacking him
at once, but he overrated the strength of the English, and feared to
be hemmed in between them and the combined forces of Kirke and the
Enniskilleners. Avaux wondered that Schomberg did not march straight
to Drogheda, where there were scarcely 2000 men ready to oppose him.
Berwick says he could easily have taken Dublin, and that the Jacobites
were infinitely obliged to him for amusing himself at Carrickfergus.
Londonderry and Newtown Butler had destroyed so many that for the
moment it seemed almost impossible for James to get an army together.
An artillery officer named Dean had deserted from Schomberg immediately
after landing, and no doubt his account led Avaux to believe that the
invaders were in overwhelming strength. He did not realise that the
English regiments, who formed the bulk of Schomberg's army, consisted
chiefly of raw recruits. Before the cavalry from England and the
victorious Protestants under Kirke and Wolseley assembled it seemed
better to take Carrickfergus, whose guns were an annoyance to the
shipping.[240]

[Sidenote: Schomberg takes Carrickfergus.]

The Governor of Carrickfergus was Charles MacCarthy More, who had never
seen a shot fired, but Colonel Owen MacCarthy was the real chief. There
were no regular works, no skilled gunners, and no surgeon, but the two
regiments of Munster infantry fought well. Approaches were made and
batteries with guns and mortars erected on the north, east and west
sides, while English men-of-war annoyed the Castle from the sea. The
bands played 'Lillibullero' to encourage the gunners. A breach was made
near the north gate of the town, but the garrison drove cattle on to
it. As the poor beasts fell they were piled up to make a breastwork,
from behind which the Irish fired. When bullets failed, they stripped
lead from the Castle roof. The bombardment of the town did little harm
except to certain Protestant inhabitants, but powder ran short and,
to save time, Schomberg was content on August 28 to let the garrison
march out with the honours of war after a week's siege. The terms of
capitulation were observed by the army, but the Protestant mob, who had
suffered much from the garrison, were very violent, stripping the women
and threatening the men. Schomberg himself, pistol in hand, exerted
himself to protect them, otherwise the country people, says Story,
'would certainly have used the poor Irish most severely, so angry were
they one at another, though they live all in a country.' Some of the
Irish-Scots particularly would have fallen on them in spite of the
capitulation. The only excuse for what happened was that the garrison
were said to be carrying off private property contrary to the articles,
and that the owners recognised it. Carrickfergus once taken, James
no longer held anything in Ulster except Charlemont and the eastern
portion of Cavan.[241]

[Sidenote: Desolation of the country.]

[Sidenote: Berwick evacuates Newry.]

[Sidenote: Want of provisions.]

Having thus secured his communications by sea, Schomberg encamped about
Belfast, where he received a letter from Berwick addressed to him as
Count, but he sent it back unopened because the title of Duke was
withheld. He ordered the horses and train of artillery to come from
Chester to Carlingford, and then marched in a leisurely way to guard
that bay. At and round Dromore, where the Protestants were routed early
in the year, not so much as a sheep or cow could be seen, and very few
people. At Loughbrickland it was much the same, the reaped corn lying
unbound on the ground under the rain. Here the Enniskillen horse joined
the army, badly equipped but ready to advance against any odds if
allowed. They said they would never thrive as long as they were under
orders. When these enterprising horsemen appeared three miles from
Newry, Berwick set the town on fire, destroying all except an old keep
and five or six houses, and throwing one gun over the bridge into the
river. He had only 1600 men with him, but made such a show that he was
thought to be much stronger. Schomberg sent a letter to say that if the
enemy burned any more towns it would be the worse for the prisoners at
Enniskillen and Londonderry. He was answered that the terms granted at
Carrickfergus had been infringed, and that until they were fulfilled
King James would make reprisals. But Dundalk was not burned, and
Schomberg occupied it unresisted. No attempt was made to obstruct him
at the Moyry pass where there was so much fighting in Elizabeth's time.
There was, however, considerable difficulty in feeding the army, for
the country north of Dundalk had been devastated and baggage animals
were almost entirely wanting. The ships did not reach Carlingford for
some days, and even when they came, artillery horses had to be used, to
the great disgust of the officers, in bringing provisions from thence.
Two thousand of Lord Bellew's sheep were soon eaten, and for some
time there was little or no bread. Story, the historian, had to dig
potatoes for dinner, and he says many better men were glad to have that
resource. In the meantime, James was steadily increasing his force,
and Schomberg's army of about 14,000 was soon confronted by superior
numbers. Many of the Irish were raw recruits, but the English were for
the most part no better. They were ready to fight, but knew nothing of
firearms, scarce one in four being able to discharge his matchlock, and
they had no idea of looking after themselves. Being undisciplined, they
could scarcely be got to work even for their own good, lying on the wet
ground rather than build huts; both French and Dutch showed a marked
superiority in these respects.[242]

[Sidenote: Flight of Melfort.]

[Sidenote: James's proclamation.]

[Sidenote: Schomberg refuses battle.]

When Schomberg landed he was, of course, unaware that James had no
more than 2000 effective men available for the defence of Dublin. It
was even proposed to fall back on Athlone at once. On the night of
August 25 Melfort stole out of Dublin for fear of the Irish. He had
long been aware of his own extreme unpopularity, and had sought to be
relieved. James made a pretence of sending him on a mission to France.
At the French Court his discomfiture was attributed to the failure
of his intrigues to oust Tyrconnel. Under pressure from the Irish,
James made Nagle secretary-at-war in his place--a very good lawyer but
entirely ignorant of military matters. Rosen thought Dublin could not
be saved, and advised a withdrawal to Athlone, but James could not
neglect the wishes of Tyrconnel and of the Irish generally, who would
leave him if he despaired. The removal of the hated minister worked
miracles. Men were collected from all sides. Eight thousand pike-heads
from France which had lain idle were at last fixed on staves. Many
scythe-blades were used in the same way, and made a brilliant show when
the hostile armies faced each other in the sunshine. Unserviceable
muskets were repaired as far as possible, but this was not easy, for
the armourers were all Protestants and took care not to do their work
too well. On the day after Melfort's departure James went to Drogheda
with 200 horse. There he issued a general order to officers to join
their regiments. By proclamation, all who served under Schomberg,
irrespective of nation or religion, were invited to desert him,
officers being maintained by their legitimate king in their old rank
at least, and soldiers receiving a bounty of 40_s._ The army generally
was encouraged by the promise of aid from France, and the ranks filled
fast. No opposition was offered to James's progress through Louth, and
by September 16 he had 26,000 men, nearly double Schomberg's force,
encamped along the line of the Fane River, little more than three
miles from Dundalk. Five days later he offered battle on a bright
autumn morning, his right wing moving very near Dundalk, but Schomberg
remained within his entrenchments, where he felt safe. He argued that
a defeat would be disastrous to William, and that he could not risk it
with a force much inferior in numbers and ill-provided with shoes and
clothing. He believed that if his half-trained army were once broken
he would never be able to get it together again. The Irish lords,
who were anxious to get back to their homes and properties, favoured
a bolder policy, and of course the London gossips blamed the old
general without moving him. A sort of opposition was headed by Loftus
of Rathfarnham, lately created Lord Lisburn, and Schomberg considered
him a dangerous influence in the army. But even William thought more
activity might have been shown. On the other hand, there were many
among James's followers who wished to attack Dundalk, but James would
not risk it, and a few days later drew back towards Ardee, where he
began some fortifications and lay encamped till the end of October. By
that time all the forage was consumed within a radius of four miles,
most of the soldiers had neither shoes nor stockings and their clothing
gave little protection against torrents of cold rain. James was as
improvident as ever, and Nagle, though active and zealous, knew nothing
about the business of an army.[243]

[Sidenote: Military conspiracy.]

The inducements held out had no effect on the fidelity of Schomberg's
English and Dutch troops, but in the so-called Huguenot regiments many
Roman Catholics had enlisted, and among them a serious conspiracy came
to light. The ringleader, who was said to have instructions from the
Jesuits, was Duplessis, formerly a captain in the French service, who
had fled from justice for some act of violence. The plan, in case of
a battle, was to open fire on the rear of Schomberg's army. Duplessis
was broken on the wheel, and five others were hanged. About 200 Roman
Catholics were found in the ranks, who were all sent to Carlingford,
and thence to England. The real Huguenots were to be trusted, but by
their overbearing manners they incurred the dislike of the English, who
were jealous of their superior industry and efficiency. Even amongst
British troops there was a tendency to desert and join King James.
Sir John Lanier, who was not conciliatory, had much trouble with his
men.[244]

[Sidenote: Sufferings of the army at Dundalk,]

[Sidenote: and at Belfast.]

Schomberg thought it might be possible to risk a battle when his army
had been reinforced by a promised Danish contingent, who would be
useless if they arrived after a defeat. Owing to French intrigues,
and other diplomatic hindrances, these valuable allies did not reach
England until November. They were about 5000 foot and 1000 horse, 'old
disciplined soldiers, and very civil, and the Duke of Wirtemberg their
general.' By that time Schomberg had retired from Dundalk, where the
mortality had been frightful, and the state of things in the Belfast
hospital was no better. Story, who was an eye-witness, and who did
what he could to help the poor soldiers, has left notices of these
scenes which, in their simple brevity, vie with the descriptions of
Thucydides and Manzoni. They were quite demoralised, not caring much
for the death of comrades, but resenting their burial because they
could then no longer make shelters with the bodies. During the retreat,
two men died at Newry among a number who cowered in a ruined stable.
The survivors begged the chaplain to get them a fire, 'which I did,
coming in about two hours after they had pulled in the two dead men to
make seats of.' The cavalry suffered less than the infantry because
they had cloaks. Further on in the winter, when thousands had already
died, 18,000 great-coats were ordered in London. Regimental surgeons at
4_s._ 6_d._ a day with assistants at 2_s._ 6_d._ were not likely to be
very efficient. Apothecaries received but 1_s._ The supply of medical
stores was altogether inadequate, very little for wounds, and nothing
at all for fever and dysentery, which were the real destroyers. The
mortality was not quite so great among the officers, who were better
clad and had more foresight than their men, but many died. With some
exceptions, the English officers, many of whom drank hard, were not
careful enough of those under them, and compared unfavourably with the
professional foreign soldiers. Count Solms, in particular, was said
to be a father to his men. The fever, originating in the camp, spread
all over the north. Vessels lay off Belfast entirely filled with the
dead, like the phantom ships in Campbell's poem, and the greatest
mortality was among people who lived near the hospital there. At first
the Irish army suffered less, for they escaped much of the rain which
fell upon Dundalk. The superstitious attributed this to a judgment,
but Story who was not superstitious, says 'it was because we lay in
a hollow at the bottom of the mountains, and they upon a high sound
ground ... they were born in the country and were used to bad lying and
feeding.' Between the camp, the transport, and the hospital about half
of Schomberg's army perished. Before he retreated, the mortality among
James's men was nearly as great, and they confessed to a loss of 7000.
Of Schomberg's army, 1700 died at Dundalk, 800 on ship-board, and 3800
in the Belfast hospital, leaving only 7700 survivors.[245]

[Sidenote: Mismanagement and corruption. Harbord and Shales.]

When military affairs go wrong, it is the common practice to seek for
a scapegoat. Schomberg was disposed to blame the paymaster, William
Harbord, whom he thought more attentive to his own perquisites than to
the business of his place. He was superseded early in the following
year, but was employed elsewhere. A French apothecary was put under
arrest for not providing the necessary medicines. But both the general
and the public agreed in condemning Commissary-General Shales, whose
experience had been gained in victualling King James's army during
the Monmouth affair, and afterwards in the camp at Hounslow. He had
lingered long in England after Schomberg took up his position at
Dundalk, and it was scarcely denied that he had been guilty, but he
said that if pressed he would put the saddle on the right horse. His
conduct was the subject of a very hot debate in the House of Commons.
'Whoever put this man into this trust,' said Birch, 'are friends to
King James and not to King William,' and that was the opinion of the
majority who addressed the King for the removal of Shales and for the
name of the person who recommended him. Somers suggested that His
Majesty should be merely asked to dismiss the person who had given the
advice; but the more violent course was adopted. William readily agreed
to dismiss Shales and impound his papers, but said it was impossible
for him to name his adviser. There is some reason to suppose that the
statesman aimed at was Halifax. Shales was sent over to England, but
not until after the dissolution, and nothing further seems to have been
done.[246]

[Sidenote: Sligo taken and retaken.]

The Jacobites, though their challenge was not a very determined one,
claimed to have had the best of the campaign. But between the two main
armies there was no serious fighting. Towards the end of September,
Colonel Lloyd left Sligo with a small force of Enniskilleners, passed
the Curlew hills, and defeated a much larger body under O'Kelly,
killing many and taking many prisoners, besides a great quantity of
cattle. So complete was the victory that he was able to occupy Boyle
and Jamestown on the Shannon. Schomberg, who was glad to have any
chance of encouraging his men, made much of this affair, paraded all
the Enniskillen men in camp, and rode along their ranks with his head
bare. Three rounds of musketry were fired, and also salutes from
some of the big guns. The noise excited wonder and some alarm in the
Irish camp, but James's men professed to be ignorant of any defeat.
Sarsfield and Henry Luttrell were, however, sent to the West a few
weeks later with a considerable force. Schomberg had not men enough
to operate in that direction, and Lloyd was soon driven from his new
conquests back into Sligo, and from thence to Ballyshannon. The fort
commanding Sligo was gallantly defended for three days by St. Sauveur,
a French captain, but provisions and water failed, and he was forced to
surrender, marching out with arms and baggage. Sarsfield kept his word
strictly, and as the garrison filed past he offered five guineas and a
horse and arms to any soldier who would serve King James. One Huguenot
accepted his offer, but carried the guineas, the horse, and the arms
to Ballyshannon. All the rest declared that they would never fight for
the 'papishes.' Sligo was the key of Connaught, and the whole province
remained in James's hands until after the Boyne.[247]

[Sidenote: Sufferings of James's army.]

[Sidenote: State of Dublin.]

James was inclined to cling to the position at Ardee with its
unfinished fortifications, which Avaux had always said would be
useless. But the ambassador prevailed upon him to remove his
headquarters to Dublin, where at least the soldiers would not have to
live in huts that did not keep out the rain. Scarcely any of them had
shirts, one-half were without shoes and stockings, and one-third were
bare-legged. The country was exhausted, and the magazines recommended
by Avaux and Rosen had never been built. When the camp was evacuated,
many dying men were left behind without food or care. In the hospital
established between Ardee and Drogheda, there were 300 sick without
provisions, wine, or beer. There was no doctor, no baker or cook, not
even an attendant to bring a glass of water. At Drogheda there were
over 200 more in a disused church. One-third had palliasses, the rest
lay on the ground, with scarcely any food, and no drink but bad water.
Dublin itself was given up to riot and dissipation during the winter
and early spring. The city, says Stevens, 'seemed to be a seminary of
vice, an academy of luxury, or rather a sink of corruption, and living
emblem of Sodom.' Other Jacobite accounts are much to the same effect.
Among the worst drunkards was James's son Henry, who enjoyed the empty
title of Grand Prior. He was Stevens's colonel, but scarcely ever fit
for duty. Dining one day with some Irish officers he began to quarrel
with them, and Berwick tried to smooth matters by drinking confusion to
Melfort. The Grand Prior then declared that Melfort was his friend and
an honest man, and ended by breaking his full glass on Lord Dungan's
nose. James was willing that his son should fight, but Dungan very
wisely passed the matter over as a childish ebullition.[248]

[Sidenote: Incompetence of James.]

[Sidenote: Lauzun is sent to Ireland.]

King James did little to improve the state of affairs. He seldom
made up his mind until it was too late, and would scarcely listen
to those who sought to establish discipline. There were many French
officers who could be of little use, for they had no direct charge of
the soldiers, and received commissions as majors and colonels with
no duties attached. Some of them indeed, in Boisseleau's language,
were good neither to boil nor to roast. There were also many French
swashbucklers, who did nothing but increase the ill-feeling between
their countrymen and the Irish. Tyrconnel, Avaux, and Nagle worked
together to evolve order out of chaos. They suppressed over a hundred
loose companies, and aimed at reducing the army to twenty battalions of
800 men, seven regiments of cavalry, and seven of dragoons. Louis made
up his mind to send over six or seven thousand men as soon as he could
spare them, receiving in exchange a like number of Irish for his own
army. About the beginning of 1690 it was known that troops were going
to Ireland and that Lauzun would command them. The decision to send a
force had been come to early in the previous summer; the appointment of
such a general was owing to Mary of Modena, to whom Louis paid frequent
visits. La Hoguette was made second in command. He did not like the
work or the general, but prepared to obey. Bussy Rabutin said the
exiled Queen was mad to raise a man of so little merit as Lauzun, for
himself he would always have the meanest opinion of him, though he were
given the Golden Fleece in addition to the Garter and the Holy Ghost.
Louis XIV. realised that it was impossible to put Avaux and Lauzun
together, as they were on the worst of terms. The ambassador and Rosen
were to return with the Irish contingent in the ships which brought
over the French. Lauzun lingered in Paris as long as he decently
could, but at last followed his men to Brest, whence he sailed on St.
Patrick's Day 1690.[249]

[Sidenote: Irish troops sent to France.]

James was at first unwilling to have the assistance of a French army,
lest the control of the country should be taken out of his hands.
But after less than six months' experience he despaired of doing
anything without this dreaded help, and as France could not spare men
until the continental campaign was finished, he thought of leaving
Ireland. Louis warned him that to do so would be to give up all hope
of ever regaining his crown. But jealousy of his great ally continued
to animate him. He did not like Sarsfield, whom he had promoted very
unwillingly; but when Avaux proposed to send him in charge of the
Irish going to France, he said the ambassador wished to steal all
his best officers. It was the same in Lord Kilmallock's case, and in
that of every competent candidate. Louis refused to have any of the
Hamiltons, and the command was given to Mountcashel, who was peculiarly
fit for the work, and who, from the circumstances of his escape from
Enniskillen, could not serve again in Ireland. Very few tolerable
officers were to be had, and it was not easy to collect the stipulated
quota of privates, but in the end five strong regiments were embarked,
numbering 5300 men. Many of the officers were shopkeepers and artisans,
and they could not be refused for fear of stopping the recruiting, but
it was intended to change them in France. As may be imagined under
these circumstances, the health and cleanliness of the rank and file
were neglected, and many were sick on arriving at Brest. Louvois gave
orders to have them cared for and to force their officers to cleanse
them from the vermin by which they were devoured. Yet these same men
served gloriously in many a continental battle.[250]

[Sidenote: French Opinion.]

[Sidenote: Advice of Louis XIV.]

Even before his failure at Londonderry, many at the French Court
thought James's presence in Ireland did more harm than good. During
the lull between the arrival of Lauzun and the expedition of William,
Madame de Sévigné reported the general opinion that James had spoiled
his own business there and earned all his misfortunes. With a greatly
superior force he was just able to check Schomberg's advance, and yet
he talked of a descent on England or Scotland. He hated Ireland, and
lent a ready ear to secret emissaries from both his lost kingdoms, who
assured him that William was most unpopular and that all were ready
to welcome their rightful king. His Queen received many messages to
the same effect, but for some months she did not think it would be
safe for her husband to invade England with less than 20,000 men.
About the time that the two armies were going into winter quarters,
she thought it might be attempted with any force he could command and
without French help, except at sea. He gave a list of the Irish troops
which he proposed to send. Avaux, Louvois, Vauban, and Louis XIV. all
impressed upon him that the business in hand was to make himself master
of Ireland, and the latter said he would never risk his ships in St.
George's Channel until he had command of the sea. The opportunity did
not come till the battle of Beachy Head, but that was on the eve of
the Boyne. Quite late in the winter, when James feared that Schomberg
would be reinforced and that an English force might land in Munster, he
began to talk again about going to England. Louis finally declared that
this was not to be thought of until there was a party under arms strong
enough to resist William's army, until there was a fortified port
ready, garrisoned and victualled, and until all the conditions of his
return were fully settled. Above all, he must wait until the passage
was made safe by a naval victory. James was cautioned not to believe
those who gave contrary advice and who were very probably secret agents
of the Prince of Orange, but he went on talking of invading England
even when William was making his final preparations for attacking him
in Ireland. We know from Jacobite sources that the English Government
was always well informed about what happened at St. Germain.[251]

[Sidenote: Brass money.]

Pikes could be made in Ireland, where ash-trees are plentiful, for
3_s._ 10_d._ apiece, but firearms and even swords had to be imported
from France. Textile fabrics of all sorts ran short. In the winter of
1689 some armourers were at work in Dublin, but the supply of steel
was insufficient. Wool was abundant, and cloth for uniforms could be
produced. But the most important manufacture under James's rule was
brass money. Needy governments have been tempted in all ages to tamper
with the currency. Gallienus, and other late Roman emperors, carried
the practice very far. Leather money was issued by Indian princes at
a very early date, with the usual result. The credit of paper, which
is the modern equivalent, depends upon the ability of the government
to make good its nominal value. In the American Civil War, the notes
of the seceding states became depreciated as the end drew near, and
when all was over were sold very cheap as curiosities. Three months
after James's arrival in Dublin he issued a proclamation setting
forth that money was scarce, and that he proposed to remedy this by
coining sixpenny pieces out of brass or copper. These were made legal
tender, except for the payment of duties on foreign commodities,
of money held in trust, or of judgment debts already due. Interest
accruing thereafter on mortgages, bills, bonds, or obligations might
be satisfied with the new currency, and also the principal of debts
'where the debtor or his goods are or shall be taken in execution of
the same.' Refusal to accept the new coin was to be punished with the
utmost rigour of the law as contempt of the royal prerogative, but
actual importers of foreign goods were excepted for the first payment.
The King declared that the expedient was only temporary, and promised
to pay the full value in gold or silver when the base coin should be
cried down. A few days later an issue of shillings and half-crowns was
proclaimed on the same terms.[252]

[Sidenote: A depreciated currency.]

The full effect of these measures in destroying credit and paralysing
trade was not felt at once. Within a month of the first proclamation
Avaux reported that the copper coins were everywhere taken as ready
money, and that this was a great relief to King James. The precious
metals soon disappeared from circulation. Even copper ran short, and
the ambassador applied to the French King for at least fifty tons.
Steel to make dies was also wanted, and men who could use it; for
the whole supply of money depended on a single Protestant engraver
who might go away at any moment. When French troops were expected,
it was decided, after much discussion, to pay them in French money,
and this made matters worse. Prices rose to an undreamed-of height in
anticipation of brass having to compete with gold and silver. Cannon
were converted into coin, and the total issue ultimately reached a
million or more. Every sort of rubbish was used to make up for the want
of good brass or copper. Half-crowns were converted by re-stamping
into crowns, and at last a guinea, which at the beginning of 1689 was
worth 24_s._ Irish, became exchangeable for base metal to the nominal
value of 5_l._ As in the old Greek tale, gold made its way in spite of
brass. The Protestants hoarded it or smuggled it to England. Writing to
the exiled Queen on December 12/22, Tyrconnel says, 'Not a farthing of
silver or gold is now to be seen in this whole nation.' All attempts
to arrest the depreciation of course failed. By one proclamation the
Government undertook to receive any quantity of currency by way of
loan, to be repaid in specie when it was decried, interest being fixed
at six per cent., and afterwards at ten; but the public liked not
the security. All the exceptions made in favour of creditors were
abrogated, and brass or pewter money was declared universal legal
tender. To counterfeit it was high treason, and to refuse it contempt
of the prerogative. Only a fortnight before the Boyne a guinea was
officially rated at 38_s._, and no one was to give more on pain of
death. When William gained possession of Dublin he lost no time in
crying down the base money. The best of the crowns and half-crowns
were made legal tender for one penny, and the smaller pieces in
proportion.'[253]

[Sidenote: Fight at Newry.]

[Sidenote: Wolseley takes Belturbet]

[Sidenote: and Cavan.]

The military operations between Schomberg's retirement from Dundalk
and the landing of King William were not very important. Boisseleau
made an attempt to surprise the ruined town of Newry, but his party
was beaten back by the small garrison consisting chiefly of sick men.
Some who could not stand managed to fire with their backs propped
against the walls of the roofless houses, and others shot from the
windows. Among the slain Irish was Magennis, who killed Tory Hamilton
at Down in 1686. After this Schomberg sent regular reliefs, and Newry
remained his outpost on the side of Belfast. The outpost on the side
of Enniskillen was Belturbet, which Wolseley surprised early in
December. More than two months later Berwick led an expedition to
recapture it, and concentrated a considerable force at Cavan. Wolseley
was well informed and determined on a night attack before the whole
of the enemy arrived. He had with him about a thousand men, and the
English accounts say that Berwick's force along with the garrison was
four times as large. This is probably an exaggeration, but the odds
were certainly not less than two to one. Wolseley was delayed on the
march, and did not reach Cavan till after daybreak. The surprise was
not therefore complete, and the assailants were met by a smart fire.
The Irish retired through the town to the fortified castle, and the
Enniskilleners, who imagined their victory complete, began to plunder
in all directions. A sally followed, and Wolseley had to set fire to
the houses to get his men out. They fell back on the reserve, and
he then advanced in good order. Berwick's success was short-lived.
His cavalry, as he tells us himself, fled for a distance of twelve
miles, and he owns to a loss of 500. Wolseley lost thirty men and two
officers. Among the slain was Brigadier Nugent, a brave soldier, much
regretted by the Irish, and many officers were taken prisoners. Berwick
had a horse shot under him. The victorious soldiers took 4000_l._ in
brass money, but they threw it about the streets as not worth carrying
away. The Castle was too strong to attack, and Wolseley marched back
to Belturbet, which was not molested afterwards. Soon after this Sir
John Lanier threatened Dundalk, but found it too strong to attack.
A detachment took Bellew Castle, and 1500 cattle were driven off.
Schomberg had garrisons at Clones, Monaghan, and Armagh, and his
headquarters were at Lisburn. There were frequent skirmishes along the
line between Lough Erne and Newry, but beyond it Charlemont was the
only place holding out for King James. The rest of Ireland was in his
power.[254]

Avaux and Rosen were both recalled to please James and because neither
of them could get on with Lauzun. Avaux did his best to hide his
contempt for the King, but did not quite succeed. Rosen was scarcely
civil to His Majesty and was moreover hated by every officer in the
Irish army.

[Sidenote: Intrigues in France. Melfort.]

[Sidenote: Mission of Dover.]

Melfort was generally hated on both sides of St. George's Channel.
In Scotland, Dundee was thought to be his only friend, and was an
extremely candid one. But he had Mary of Modena's ear, and he always
worked against Avaux and against Tyrconnel as head of the French party
in Ireland. In the three months preceding his journey to Fontainebleau
at the beginning of October, Louis paid the exiled Queen no less than
fourteen visits at St. Germain, and Melfort had influence in this
way. Even when recalling the unpopular favourite, the King of France
rebuked Avaux for being too hard on him. At Dublin Lord Dover tried to
steer a middle course, realising Melfort's incompetence and working
with Tyrconnel, though he hated his French tendencies. In July, when
Londonderry was still unrelieved, James sent him on a mission to
France, and Avaux evidently feared his action there while defying him
to contradict anything he had said about the mismanagement of affairs
in Ireland. Dover was commissioned to ask for 6000 French infantry,
a considerable sum of money, a hundred thousand pounds of powder, a
train of artillery with the necessary officers, and a vast quantity
of small arms and other munitions of war. On reaching Versailles he
spoke slightingly of Tyrconnel and favourably of Melfort, with whom
he was supposed to have some understanding, but court opinion was
entirely with the former. Dover pressed Louis hard to give all that
James had asked for, but he was told that it was impossible to do this
with English and Dutch fleets at sea, but that when December came the
men should be sent and as much of the other things wanted as could be
spared. The visits to St. Germain had done their work, and when they
were resumed after the excursion to Fontainebleau, the exiled Queen
was informed to her great joy that 6000 men were going, and that her
favourite Lauzun was to command. This had been known for some time in
official circles. That James and his wife should have been foolish
enough to wish for such a general is surprising, but that Louis should
have granted their prayer passes all understanding. Bussy Rabutin,
expressing the general opinion, says Lauzun was one of the smallest
of God's creatures, both in body and mind. Dover was sent back to
Ireland with 2000 muskets and ammunition. He reached Kinsale safely in
December, but the vessel containing arms was captured by the English
off the Scillies. Avaux was afraid that Lauzun's intrigues would injure
him at Versailles, but Louis reassured him on this point. As neither
he nor Rosen could serve with the new general, they were ordered to
return with the fleet that brought him to Ireland. The King of France
showed that he valued his ambassador's services by inviting him to
all the much valued, but very uncomfortable parties at Marly, and by
sending him on a mission to Sweden. Rosen obtained an important cavalry
command.[255]

[Sidenote: Lauzun reaches Ireland.]

Exactly twelve months to a day after King James Lauzun sailed from
Brest and arrived in Cork harbour with over 7000 French troops. One
regiment contained many Dutch Protestants, and had to be closely
watched. The general had not yet got the ducal coronet which he had
tried to stipulate for, but he wore the Garter and the Order of the
Holy Ghost. Tyrconnel warned Avaux that there would not be horses
for the officers nor carts to carry stores. It was no business of
the retiring ambassador's and he could only warn Lord Dover, who was
responsible for embarkation and quarters. When Avaux and Rosen were
gone, Lauzun, who thought only of the King of France, had difficulties
with Dover, who thought of James as King of England. Much merchandise
had come with the fleet, and the Frenchman sought favourable terms
for the traders, while the Englishman was chiefly anxious that his
sovereign's rights should not be infringed. Lauzun thought, perhaps
rightly, that under existing circumstances not one guinea would reach
King James out of the duties thus insisted on, that Ireland should be
regarded as a besieged city, and that famine could only be averted by
opening the ports. This reasoning prevailed, and three weeks after
his landing Lauzun persuaded James to issue a proclamation remitting
the customs on all foreign goods except silk and tobacco. But the
difficulties about transport and storage continued. La Hoguette thought
King James improvident, but it was Lauzun's cue to lay the whole blame
upon Dover. Cork, he said, was a tomb very hard to get out of. As soon
as Avaux and Rosen had embarked with the Irish regiments, he and Dover
went to Dublin, but the French troops could not move for some time.
Even the flour they brought with them had to be stored in a ruined
building, and half of it was washed away or reduced to a condition in
which the dough would not rise. Much of what remained was lost in the
carriage to Dublin on horses' backs.[256]

[Sidenote: The Protestants disarmed.]

[Sidenote: Dr. William King.]

On February 25, 1689, Tyrconnel, having heard all that Richard Hamilton
could say, issued a proclamation for disarming Protestants. They had
to carry their weapons to their parish churches on pain of being
subjected to disorderly searches by the soldiery. Three thousand
firearms besides bayonets, swords, and pikes were seized, and horses
were taken also. Both before and after this, crowds went to England
and others found their way to the North. Many fled from their country
homes to Dublin in hopes of escaping thence or perhaps supposing that
the law could protect them there. The established clergy got away in
large numbers, Francis Marsh, Archbishop of Dublin, among them. He left
Dean King authority to act as his commissary, and the chapters of St.
Patrick's and Christ Church submitted in spiritual matters to Dopping,
Bishop of Meath. Some other Dublin clergymen stood their ground, and
with the help of the fugitives from country districts King managed to
arrange for the duties of every parish in the diocese. When the Irish
Parliament had been prorogued just before the relief of Londonderry and
only a little before the landing of Schomberg, King was imprisoned in
the Castle. No evidence was ever produced against him, and Sir Edward
Herbert was for releasing him on bail, but Nugent was hostile, and
he remained in confinement for more than four months. He was allowed
to see his friends, and had many visitors, Roman Catholics as well
as Protestants, who kept him well informed. The possible approach
of Schomberg made his gaolers stricter, but in November Nagle said
the invading army was mouldered to the Devil, and he saw no use in
prisoners; in the following month King was released. Even when the
watch was pretty close he mentions a venison pasty for supper, and
Father Harold the Franciscan, who helped to eat it. Lest his diary
should fall into the hands of the enemy he always entered James as King
and William as Prince of Orange. In June 1690 when the deliverer was at
hand, a state of siege was established in Dublin, and there were some
3000 Protestants in custody. Lists were made of all male Protestants
from 16 to 80, any arms that still remained among them were ordered
to be given up on pain of death, none were to leave their houses from
ten at night till five in the morning, and it was a capital offence
cognisable by court-martial for more than five of them to assemble
anywhere or at any time.[257]

[Sidenote: Protestants in Dublin. James Bonnell.]

Vast numbers of Protestants had been leaving Ireland ever since the
death of Charles II., but many remained because they could not get
away or because they had no means elsewhere. Many placemen stood
their ground, for patents could not be voided without some process
of law, and the depositaries of official knowledge might reasonably
hope to be found indispensable. Among them was the accountant-general,
James Bonnell, who took up the active duties of his office in 1685.
Clarendon, while acknowledging him to be 'ingenious,' did not think
him strong enough for the work, but there were trained clerks, and he
soon learned the business. He had travelled, and saw that Versailles
was sucking the life-blood of France as clearly as Arthur Young did
more than a century later. He was a remarkably good and religious
man, and his Anglican orthodoxy is certified by many bishops, and by
the fact that his familiar friend was the Rev. John Strype. Bonnell
was, nevertheless, willing to meet the Presbyterians half-way on the
question of orders. He spent his salary and his spare time in relieving
the wants of others during the time of Tyrconnel and James II. The
doctrine of passive obedience weighed heavily with him, but he 'could
not but secretly wish success to King William,' and accepted the result
gladly. When Bishop Cartwright, of whom historians have little good
to say, died in Dublin in April 1689, Bonnell gives him credit for
fidelity to the Church of England, and a sort of disinterestedness--'he
was buried decently from the Bishop of Meath's house, and at his
charge, for he had no money.' On July 3, 1690, Bonnell saw his
fellow-Protestants 'congratulate and embrace one another as they met,
like persons alive from the dead.' Later on, when Aughrim had been
won and Limerick taken, Bonnell wished to have a parliamentary union
as in Cromwell's time and to make all English laws since Henry VII.
applicable to Ireland. By these means the English and Protestant
interests might be preserved.[258]

[Sidenote: Refugees in Dublin.]

[Sidenote: Case of Trinity College.]

As the principal traders, the skilled artisans and the officials
were mostly Protestants, and as they were the chief sufferers the
tradition of the Brass Money has naturally been preserved among their
descendants. The crowd of fugitives from country visitors added to
the confusion. Men who had been rich were reduced to penury, and the
holders of power and influence were either in exile or reduced to the
condition of a conquered population. As in 1641 the established clergy
and laymen with property guaranteed by the Act of Settlement were often
surprised at what happened. They found the conquered people friendly
enough in common life, and often failed to see that they were perfectly
certain to retake their own when they could, and in doing so often to
take what never belonged to them. Trinity College, Dublin, though the
fellows had escaped personal attainder, was not spared. Under Tyrconnel
no rents were paid and but one meal a day was given in the hall, 'and
that a dinner, because the supper is the more expensive by reason of
coals, &c.' But fourpence a day was allowed to each fellow for kitchen
and buttery. All arms and horses were taken away. When James landed,
Vice-provost Acton and his three remaining colleagues waited on him
and were promised protection and encouragement. But six months later
the college was turned into a barrack and prison for Protestants. The
government grant to the scholars was stopped. The chapel plate--all
that was left of a rich store--was sent to the custom-house by
Luttrell, but preserved by a friendly commissioner of revenue. The
chapel itself was re-consecrated and Mass said there, but later it
was made a magazine. All the woodwork in the college was destroyed,
first by way of searching for arms, and then no doubt for fuel, of
which there was a famine in Dublin. Dr. Michael Moore, a distinguished
scholar and a man of high character, was made Provost by James, but
soon had to resign as a punishment for having preached against the
Jesuits. Another priest, Tiege MacCarthy, had charge of the library,
and is honourably distinguished for having preserved the books and
manuscripts. Provost Huntingdon and the fellows returned immediately
after the Boyne.[259]

FOOTNOTES:

[239] Schomberg's letters to William, calendared in State Papers,
_Domestic_, July 21 to August 3. Journal in Kazner's _Schomberg_, ii.
282. Hamilton to Melville in _Leven and Melville Papers_, August 1,
1689.

[240] Journal in Kazner's _Schomberg_. Story's _Impartial History_.
Avaux to Louvois, September 10/20. Schomberg to King William, August
16, State Papers, _Domestic_. Dean's information is in Clarke's _Life
of James_, Original Mem., ii. 374. Berwick's _Memoirs_. Contemporary
letter in Benn's _History of Belfast_, p. 171.

[241] Story's _Impartial History_, pp. 7-10. Schomberg to King William,
August 27, State Papers, _Domestic_. _Light to the Blind._ The articles
of capitulation are in Story's _Continuation_ and in McSkimmin's
_History of Carrickfergus_, part i. Letter printed in Benn's _History
of Belfast_, p. 171. Nihill's Journal in Macpherson's _Original
Papers_, i. 222. Letter of September 2 in _Le Fleming Papers_.

[242] Story's _Impartial History_, pp. 10-16, 38--'A regiment of
Dutch were so well hutted that not above eleven of them died the
whole campaign.' Schomberg letters of September 20 and 21 and January
9, 1689-90, in State Papers, _Domestic_, and Dalrymple. He says the
English were 'si delicatement élevés,' that in all countries he had
seen them die off at the beginning of a campaign. Early in the journal,
in Kazner appx. no. 85, it is said that the English nation 'veut assez
être conduite à son sens et n'aime que peu la subordination quoiqu'au
reste très belliqueuse,' and under September 9 the writer says the
English soldiers liked no law but 'leurs fantaisies.' Writing on
October 8, 1689, Schomberg says his levies were as raw as those of King
James, but the latter twice as numerous, _Leven and Melville Papers_.
General Douglas's opinion of the English soldiers is in Evelyn's
_Diary_, February 19, 1689-90: they were very brave and very badly
treated. Dumont de Bostaquet, whose _Mémoires inédits_ were published
in 1864, was with Schomberg in September 1689, and describes the
Enniskilleners as very good troops, but 'trop picoreurs.'

[243] Story's _Impartial Hist._, pp. 17-28. _Light to the Blind._ Avaux
to Louis XIV., August 20/30, August 28/September 7, September 10/20,
September 17/27. In the last it is mentioned that Rosen visited the
outposts at midnight and found all sentries and vedettes asleep, 'sans
en excepter pas un.' Same to same, October 21/31. Nihill's journal
in Macpherson, i. 222. _Memoires_ du Marquis de Sourches, September
19/29. Schomberg to William III., September 15, 20, 27, October 3, 6,
State Papers, _Domestic_; and Dalrymple. Lord Lisburn to Shrewsbury,
September 25, _ib._ A Jacobite account is in _A relation of what
most remarkably happened_, 1689. On October 28 Dangeau notes that
Avaux had told the French King that James's army was in a good state,
twenty-eight battalions of 600 men, sixteen squadrons of cavalry and
ten of dragoons. He offered battle in two lines, leaving a reserve
under Sutherland. Hamilton was at the centre of the first line with the
King, Tyrconnel on the right, Rosen and Galway on the left. Berwick was
at the centre of the second line with Sarsfield on the right. A diagram
sent by Avaux is in Dangeau's _Diary_, iii. 23.

[244] Schomberg to William III., September 20-27 and November 14, State
Papers, _Domestic_. Caillemote to Shrewsbury, September 23, _ib._
Story's _Impartial History_, p. 25. Letter in _Le Fleming Papers_,
October 24. Dumont, who had fled from Normandy to Holland to escape
the dragonnades, throws light on the sincerity of official conversions
in France: he had received absolution from a conscientious priest at
Rouen, who told him to take his time and not to go to church till he
had reflected, 'ce que j'ai executé fort religieusement, n'ayant jamais
entendu de messe ni participé à leurs mystères.' Luttrell, i. 613.

[245] Story's _Impartial History_. Schomberg's letters from September
to December 1689, in State Papers, _Domestic_. W. Harbord to William
III., October 23, _ib._ Newsletter of November 28, _ib._ Luttrell's
_Diary_, October and November, particularly November 15, where it
is noted that letters from Ireland report a mortality of at least
10,000 in the Jacobite army. Evelyn's _Diary_, February 19, 1689-90.
Mr. Waller's evidence in Grey's _Debates_, November 26. During the
terrible days of December 1812, after Napoleon deserted his army,
Segur testifies to the extreme demoralisation of the survivors: 'Tels
que les sauvages, les plus forts dépouillaient les plus faibles: ils
accouraient autour des mourants, souvent ils n'attendaient pas leurs
derniers soupirs.' Dumont lay in the Dundalk hospital for four weeks
with enteric fever and actually recovered.

[246] Schomberg's letters, _ut sup._ Story's _Impartial History_, vol.
i. _Commons Journal_, November 26, December 2 and 16. Grey's _Debates_,
November 26. A defence of Shales is attempted in Walton's _Hist. of
the British Army_, p. 74. Foxcroft's _Halifax_, ii. 82. On February
19, 1689-90, Evelyn met General Douglas at dinner, who mentioned 'the
exceeding neglect of the English soldiers, suffering severely for want
of clothes and necessaries this winter, exceedingly magnifying their
courage and bravery during all their hardships.'

[247] Story's _Impartial History_, pp. 25, 34. Avaux's narrative sent
to Seignelay on November 24/December 6, 1689. Luttrell's _Diary_,
October 3, November 15. State Papers, _Domestic_, November 28. Clarke's
_Life of James II._, ii. 383.

[248] Stevens, p. 72. _Light to the Blind_, p. 90. _Macariæ Excidium_,
p. 38. Avaux to Louis XIV., November 14/24 1689, and February 1/11,
1689-90.

[249] Louis XIV. to Avaux, May 24 and November 16, 1689. Avaux to Louis
XIV., November 24. Dangeau, January 6, 1689-90. De Sourches, November
19, February 20. Bussy Rabutin to Madame de Sévigné, March 23, 1689.

[250] Avaux to Louvois, October 11/21, 1689, and April 2/12, 1690.
Louvois to Buridal, May 11, 1690, in Rousset, iv. 383. Schomberg
considered that MacCarthy had broken his parole, but he was acquitted
by a Court Martial in France. A sergeant whom he had bribed was
executed. The regiments that sailed were those of MacCarthy himself,
Butler, O'Brien, Fielding, and Dillon.

[251] Avaux to Louis XIV., November 14/24 and January 15/25 1689-90.
Louis XIV. to Avaux, December 25/January 4. De Sourches, April 18,
1689. Madame de Sévigné, May 31, 1690. Lauzun to Louvois, May 10/20,
in Ranke's appendix. Letter of Rizzini in Haile's _Mary of Modena_, p.
261. Louis privately cautioned James against trusting Albeville, who
was known to be corrupt.

[252] Clarendon to Rochester, February 8, 1685-6. Proclamations of
June 18 and 27, 1689. On September 19 Dr. King notes in his diary that
'the great gun which lay in Castle yard was taken away in order to be
melted and coined.' Avaux to Louis XIV., December 12/22. On December
26/January 5 Louvois wrote to Avaux: 'Comme le roi a veu par vos
lettres que le Roy d'Angleterre craignait de manquer de cuivre pour
faire de la monnoye; Sa Majesté a donné ordre que l'on mist sur le
bastiment qui portera cette lettre une piece de canon du calibre de
deux qui est eventée, de laquelle ceux qui travaillent à la monnoye
du Roy d'Angleterre pourront se servir pour continuer à faire de la
monnoye, en attendant que les soixante et quinze milliers de cuivre que
le Roy envoye soient arrivez.'

[253] Proclamations of February 4 and 28, March 28, April 21, June 9
and 15, 1690; and July 10 (William III.). Avaux to Louis XIV., July
5/15, 1689; to Louvois, June 30/July 10; to Louis XIV., August 20/30
and September 10/20; to Louvois, November 1/11, November 26/December 6,
1689, and January 22/February 1, 1689-90. _Light to the Blind._ King's
_State of the Protestants_, chap. iii. section 11. _Transactions of the
Late King James in Ireland_, licensed July 7, 1690, p. 57. _Character
of the Protestants of Ireland_, licensed November 13, 1689. This last
well-written tract has been attributed to Halifax, but neither Miss
Foxcroft nor Sir W. Raleigh mention it. Story's _Impartial History_, l.
93. Lauzun to Louvois, June 16/26, in Ranke's appendix. King makes the
total base coinage 965,375_l._ Story learned from treasury officials
that 'not much above' 1,100,000_l._ had been coined. The _True and
Perfect Journal_, 1690, states the amount at about two millions.
Tyrconnel's letter is in Haile's _Mary of Modena_, p. 258.

[254] Captain Kennedy to the Scotch Council, December 12, in _Leven and
Melville Papers_. Story's _Impartial History_, November to February,
1689-90. The author of _Light to the Blind_ says the attack on Newry
was a mere reconnaissance and that there was no repulse. Schomberg says
Boisseleau was there, State Papers, _Domestic_, December 6. As to the
action at Cavan, besides the above and Berwick's memoirs, there are
accounts in State Papers, _Domestic_, particularly Schomberg's letter,
February 19, and that of Gustavus Hamilton, ambiguously calendared
under March 21, 1689 (Addenda, p. 571).

[255] Melfort's unpopularity is sufficiently shown by Dundee's letters
to him, June 27 and 28, Napier, iii. 599. Notices in Dangeau and De
Sourches. Avaux's letters, particularly that of July 16/26, enclosing
James's requirements, Louvois to Avaux, September 7/17. Madame de
Sévigné marvelled greatly at Lauzun's 'second volume.' The reference
to her letters and to Bussy Rabutin's concerning him are collected
in the Grands Ecrivains edition of La Bruyère, i. 335, 535, where
he is characterised under the name of Straton. Madame de Caylus in
her memoirs notes the good luck of Lauzun in being in England at
the critical time, gaining honour and glory for helping William by
assisting the flight of James.

[256] Lauzun to Seignelay, April 6/16, in appendix to Ranke's History
and to Louvois, _ib._ June 16. Proclamation of March 25/April 4. It
was known at the French Court that Lauzun was 'extrêmement ulceré
avec raison' against Dover, De Sourches, April 24/May 4. Compare the
extracts in Miss Sandars's _Lauzun_. _True and Perfect Journal_, June
16.

[257] Simon Luttrell's orders as Governor of Dublin, May 3 and June
18, 1690, in appendix to King's _State of the Protestants_, nos. 30
and 31. Besides King's principal book on this subject we have his
autobiography, the original Latin printed in _English Historical
Review_, vol. xiii., an English version in King's _A great Archbishop
of Dublin_, and his diary edited by Dr. Lawlor in the _Irish Journal of
Archæology_, 1903.

[258] Archdeacon Hamilton's _Life of Bonnell_, 3rd edition, 1707,
particularly pp. 60, 273. Bonnell to Strype, August 20, 1684, January
21, and April 17, 1689, and August 5, 1690, in _English Historical
Review_, xix. 122, 299. _Clarendon and Rochester Corr._, i. 245, 266.
Cartwright was buried in Christ Church with a full choral service, all
the principal people in Dublin attending, _Athenæ Oxonienses_, p. 831.
Bonnell to Harty, _Portland Papers_, November 3, 1691.

[259] College register for 1689-90 printed in Stubbs's _Hist. of the
University of Dublin_, pp. 127-133. Harris's _Ware_, ii. 288. King,
iii. 15.




CHAPTER LIV

WILLIAM III. IN IRELAND, 1690. THE BOYNE


[Sidenote: The French contingent. Dover and Lauzun.]

Lauzun and Dover were in Dublin together early in April, and continued
to quarrel there. The Englishman made light of the French contingent,
saying that Louis was plainly deceiving King James, who would be well
advised to make terms with the Prince of Orange. Uncle and nephew might
then join their forces to those of the Augsburg allies and attack
the tyrant of Europe. The old courtier proposed to go to William and
make terms for himself, but James could not countenance this, though
willing to give him a pass for Flanders, since he could not venture
into France. In the end he was allowed to live and die unmolested in
England. As for Lauzun, he had no hopes of successfully resisting the
Prince of Orange, and proposed to burn Dublin and destroy the country
entirely while retreating from point to point, but James thought this
policy too cruel. In the meantime the French general exerted himself
in the work of arming and organising the Irish, and in this he made
considerable progress. He could not speak or understand English,
and his attendance at the Council was waste of time, so he proposed
to do business with the King and Tyrconnel. The three accordingly
met daily, and Lauzun succeeded in making friends with the Lord
Lieutenant, who had been cautioned by Avaux not to trust him lest he
should usurp all power, seeing that he had already ruined his career
by vaingloriousness, and was not likely to be much changed for the
better. But he assured the French minister that he was a chastened man
and worked with a single eye to the interest and wishes of his own
King.[260]

[Sidenote: Siege of Charlemont.]

[Sidenote: Attempt to relieve it.]

[Sidenote: Fall of Charlemont. Teague O'Regan.]

While Lauzun and Tyrconnel tried to make up for lost time amid the
dissipations of Dublin, Schomberg was growing stronger every day by
the arrival of fresh troops from England and Scotland, including 6000
Danish veterans under the Duke of Würtemberg. Long before William
left London the old general saw that a stand would probably be made
at the Boyne, and he was anxious to take Charlemont, so that no enemy
should be left in the rear. It was James's last stronghold in Ulster,
and Mountjoy had chosen the position well. The castle, which stood on
the right or Armagh bank of the Blackwater, a few miles above Lough
Neagh, had been fortified in modern fashion, and was well armed and
manned. The town or village had been levelled, and the fort was nearly
surrounded by bogs and fields subject to flooding. It was considered
unassailable, except by placing batteries on the left bank of the
river, and Schomberg, who reconnoitred the place, thought it too strong
to attack with the means then at his command. In March Colonel La
Caillemote brought up a small force in boats to stop the garrison from
making incursions into Tyrone. He set fire to the bridge, and drove
the Irish out of two small outworks. Paul Rapin, the historian, was
wounded in this skirmish, and it is much to be regretted that we have
no account by him. As his force increased, Schomberg massed troops
all round Charlemont. Nevertheless, at the beginning of May Colonel
Macmahon, who held Castleblaney, managed to elude the post at Armagh
and brought 500 men, well armed but badly clothed, with provisions
and ammunition, to the blockaded fort. Having got within the lines,
they were quite unable to break out again, and had to encamp miserably
between the inner and outer works, for the governor would not have them
inside. This relief only hastened the end, for men could not carry much
food through bogs and hills, and there were so many additional mouths.
At last starvation-point was reached, and Schomberg was glad to have
the place surrendered without a formal siege. The garrison marched out
with all the honours of war, and made their way to Dundalk. As they
passed, it was noticed that many were chewing pieces of hide with
the hair on. They left nineteen pieces of ordnance behind them, but
nothing eatable. Teague O'Regan himself was a grotesque figure, with
worn-out clothes and draggled wig. He had been drinking brandy--and
it naturally affected the head of a half-starved man. His charger, a
vicious old screw, would scarcely allow him to salute Schomberg, who
remarked that Teague's horse was very mad and himself very drunk. But
William met no braver enemy, and he afterwards defended Sligo with the
same courage and tenacity. The victorious general ordered bread to be
distributed among the vanquished. About 800 marched out, with 200 women
and children. When Schomberg was told that the Irish would not stay in
garrison without their wives and mistresses, he said there was more
love than policy in it. Story himself saw papers in the late governor's
room which showed that he had information as to what was going on
outside. James very rightly knighted O'Regan as soon as he reached
Dublin.[261]

[Sidenote: King William and Ireland.]

It was known at the beginning of 1690 that King William had resolved to
go to Ireland in person. There was strong opposition on the part of the
Whigs, who argued that there were too many active Jacobites in England
for the sovereign to leave it safely. Better to lose Ireland than
England, said some. Nor would he be safe himself, for his courage led
him into danger, in which he furnished a strong contrast to the King of
France. He was reminded of Richard II.'s fate and of his own insecure
position. 'When any one at meat,' said Delamere, 'has unnecessarily
risen from his chair to reach over to the other side of the table, if
by design or chance his stool has been removed, who, suspecting no such
thing, his breech has found the ground instead of his chair--there has
been more in the company who have been pleased with it, than concerned
for him.' An address against the Irish voyage was contemplated in
both Houses, and might have passed had not William prorogued and
afterwards dissolved the Convention Parliament. The general election
was favourable to him, and preparations began in earnest. The Commons
did not give all that the King wished, but they provided money enough
for the immediate purpose. Harbord was superseded for a time, and the
duties which Shales had neglected were committed to others. Both Houses
adjourned on May 23, and did not meet again for business until after
William's return from Ireland. The Government was left in Mary's hands
with a special council of four Whigs and five Tories.[262]

[Sidenote: William reaches Ireland.]

[Sidenote: He marches towards Dublin.]

[Sidenote: He Maintains discipline.]

The King, accompanied by Portland, set out from London on June 4,
and slept that night at Northampton. On Sunday, the 8th, he attended
service in Chester Cathedral, and heard a sermon from Dr. Stratford,
who had succeeded Cartwright in that see. On the 12th he took ship at
Hoylake and arrived with 300 sail at Carrickfergus on the 14th. An
eye-witness says that the total number of vessels assembled was 700,
and that Belfast Lough looked like a wood. William mounted his horse
as soon as possible and rode amid cheering crowds through the town on
his way to Belfast. At Whitehouse, Schomberg met him with his coach,
and they drove together; a second carriage was sent by the General to
bring up some of the grandees who had landed. At the north gate of the
town the illustrious visitor was met by the Corporation in their robes,
accompanied by Dr. Walker and a dozen other clergymen. All the way to
the castle there were shouts of 'God save King William,' 'God save
our Protestant King.' At night the streets and all the country round
blazed with bonfires. They were seen, and the signal guns heard by one
of Lauzun's spies, who brought him the news two days later. Next day
being Sunday, William heard Dr. Royse preach in the Cathedral on 'Who
through faith subdued kingdoms,' and on the Monday received an address
from the clergy, with Walker at their head. Good order was kept,
and necessaries were cheap, for the ships brought vast quantities of
provisions, and even of hay and straw. 'We fear no more Dundalk wants,'
says one letter, and the army was thoroughly well provided; but of
money there was no great plenty. William spent four days at Belfast,
reviewing the troops and making arrangements. Sick of inaction and not
fully paid, officers and soldiers longed for active service, and were
not disappointed. On the 19th William dined with Schomberg at Lisburn,
having previously issued a proclamation against plundering or taking
goods without payment, and on the next day he was at Hillsborough,
spurring those in authority under him to fresh efforts. He had not,
he said, come to let the grass grow under his feet. Lest there should
be any doubt about the meaning of his proclamation, he here issued a
special order against pressing horses belonging to the country people
without permission under the sign manual, which was afterwards refused
even for ambulance purposes. A soldier transgressing this order was
to run the gauntlet thrice through the whole regiment. A few months
before Schomberg had rather made light of seizing the little country
horses. On the 22nd William was at Loughbrickland, and by the 27th the
whole army, mustering about 36,000 men, encamped a little to the south
of Dundalk. During the whole campaign the King and Prince George of
Denmark lived each in a wooden hut designed by Sir Christopher Wren,
and capable of being carried on two wagons. When William inspected
his troops he was not satisfied with seeing them march past from a
comfortable eminence, but went in among the ranks, regardless of heat,
wind, and clouds of dust. When a fuss was made about the wine for his
table, he said he would drink water rather than that the men should
suffer. He was deficient in courtly graces, but he was the kind of king
whom soldiers will follow cheerfully against any odds.[263]

[Sidenote: Skirmish near Newry, June 22.]

Before making a general advance, William took care to have the line of
march thoroughly reconnoitred. At a boggy spot about half-way between
Newry and Dundalk, where there was a broken bridge, a party of 200 foot
and dragoons fell into an ambuscade on the day that the King reached
Loughbrickland. Lauzun takes credit for having laid the snare, and he
had reason to know the place, for his horse had fallen under him there
only two days before. The morning was foggy and the surprise complete.
Captain Farlow, who led the infantry detachment, was taken prisoner
with several others, and Colonel Dempsy, who commanded the Irish, was
mortally wounded. There was a sharp skirmish, and the English were
decidedly worsted, but not pursued. From Farlow James had the first
certain news of William's landing.[264]

[Sidenote: James leaves Dublin, June 16.]

[Sidenote: He falls back without fighting.]

Two days after King William's landing, King James left Dublin to join
his army near Dundalk. They were encamped about Roche Castle, and the
prisoners taken with Captain Farlow reported that William was on the
road to Newry with 50,000 men, which was an exaggeration. On the day
after the skirmish there was a general retreat to the old position at
Ardee, where entrenchments had been left unfinished the year before.
James's main object in advancing had been to exhaust the country
through which his rival would have to march, but William, with the
sea open, was in no want of supplies. The guns of the English fleet
could be heard by both armies. The difficult ground about Moyry and
Ravensdale had been the scene of much fighting in Elizabethan times,
and had been slightly fortified by James, who was blamed for not trying
to stop the invader there; but Berwick says that, with the force at
his disposal, William could easily have turned the position from the
Armagh side. Dundalk itself, though well fortified, was judged to be
untenable, and Lauzun evacuated it five days before the final struggle.
He abstained from burning the soldiers' huts because some of last
year's infection still hung about them and might do the enemy more
harm than want of shelter at midsummer. But both Dundalk and Ardee
were thoroughly sacked by the Irish. On June 28, twelve days after
leaving Dublin, James recrossed the Boyne, half of his army marching
through Drogheda and the other half over the ford at Oldbridge, where
entrenchments were begun but not finished, owing to the want of labour.
Lord Iveagh was Governor of Drogheda, with 1300 men, and had he been
an enterprising man he might have done much to cover the Jacobite
right. The left wing, extending up the river, was evidently open to
a flank attack, but James rightly says that the country afforded no
better position. Sarsfield's division, which had been detached to guard
against a possible attack on Athlone, joined the main body on June 26,
their leader having satisfied himself that all the troops about Cavan
and Belturbet had drawn towards Armagh, so as to fall in with William's
line of march.[265]

[Sidenote: William's march to the Boyne.]

[Sidenote: He is wounded, June 30.]

On June 27 William's army was encamped a little to the south of
Dundalk. He intended to attack the enemy at Ardee, but a party of
cavalry found that position already abandoned. On the 30th the whole
army marched towards the Boyne, the King himself diverging a little to
the left so as to view Drogheda and the course of the river from the
hill at Tullyesker. Schomberg was with him, and also Prince George,
the Duke of Ormonde, Sidney, Solms, and Scravenmore. The latter, who
had seen many armies, remarked that James's was a small one, but
William said there might be more in the town and behind the hills.
A deserter said they were about 25,000, and the Williamite chaplain
admits that his King had some 36,000. The line of march was through a
deep depression, where a modern road runs to the east of Townley Hall,
which is still known, and will always be known, as King William's Glen.
Thomas Bellingham, an officer who had connections in the country,
took the opportunity of paying Mr. Townley a visit. About noon the
head of the column came out into the open, and took up ground facing
Oldbridge on the other side of the Boyne. William sat down to eat and
rest a little higher up. A party of five officers, of whom Berwick,
Tyrconnel, and Sarsfield were three, were observed riding slowly along
the opposite bank, and shortly afterwards two field guns were quietly
brought up and fired as soon as William was in the saddle again. A
six-pound shot ricochetted and struck him on the right shoulder,
tearing his coat and breaking the skin. He merely remarked in Dutch
that it was near enough. Thomas Coningsby, afterwards an earl, applied
a handkerchief to the bleeding wound, and William made light of it,
retiring to a tent to have it dressed and then remounting. He remained
on horseback for three hours without changing his coat, and laughed at
one Dr. Sangrado who proposed to bleed him. The enemy, says Captain
Parker, 'concluded he was killed, and this news soon flew to Dublin
and from thence to Paris, where they had public rejoicings for it.'
About three o'clock his artillery came up, and both shot and shells
from small mortars were sent across the river, doing some mischief, but
without altering the situation. At sunset there was a council of war,
and Schomberg advised that a strong force should be sent up the river
at midnight, so that James's army might be taken in flank and rear and
cut off from Dublin. William, however, who was supported by Solms and
other Dutch officers, decided upon a frontal attack, somewhat to the
veteran's disgust. Many of the Enniskillen officers knew all the fords,
and with their help the order for next day's battle was arranged. At
twelve o'clock William rode by torchlight through the whole army.
He was a man who kept his own counsel, but his unwillingness to take
Schomberg's advice and perhaps gain a victory as complete as Ulm or
Sedan may fairly be ascribed to his dread of catching James. As at
Rochester, a means of escape was provided, and experience had shown
that it would not be neglected. The necessity of sparing Mary's
feelings and the political danger of a captive king might well prevail
against purely military considerations.[266]

[Sidenote: Battle of the Boyne, July 1.]

Whatever William may have said or thought at the evening council, he
did not entirely reject the idea of a flank movement. Very early in
the morning of July 1 he despatched Meinhart Schomberg with a strong
body of horse and foot and five guns to cross at the bridge of Slane.
They marched by the straight road, leaving the bend of the river far to
their left. Sir Neill O'Neill with his dragoons were sent to guard this
pass, and the bridge itself had been broken down, but there had been
several very hot days, and the river, not being affected by the tide
above Oldbridge, was fordable in many places. Schomberg's men crossed
with ease, partly near Slane and partly at Rossnaree lower down, the
dragoons were beaten back, and O'Neill himself mortally wounded. This
was at about half-past nine. Warned by the trumpets and drums of
Schomberg's force, Lauzun had already begun to extend to his left, and
when he saw what had happened developed this movement gradually in
order to secure the means of retreat. Seeing that Schomberg's party was
in danger, William sent Lieut.-General Douglas with a much larger force
of infantry to his aid. A bog prevented the hostile wings from coming
to close quarters, but Lauzun gained Duleek, which commanded the Dublin
road. In the meantime the passage at Oldbridge, where Richard Hamilton
commanded with eight battalions, had been forced, and soon after noon
most of the Irish infantry were in full flight, nor is this to be
wondered at, for less than a week before, many of them had not learned
how to fire their pieces. The baggage had been sent off at daybreak;
the tents and knapsacks became the prey of the victors. Stevens saw
the hills covered with fugitives running past like sheep before a
wolf. 'The shame of our regiment,' he says, 'only afflicted me before,
but now all the horror of a routed army, just before so vigorous and
desirous of battle, and broke without scarce a stroke of the enemy, so
perplexed my soul that I envied the few dead.'[267]

[Sidenote: Victory of William.]

Schomberg was over the Boyne before the left and centre of William's
army began to move, but at a quarter past ten the Blue Dutch Guards,
eight or ten deep, entered the water opposite the unfinished works at
Oldbridge, their drums beating until they reached the bank. They were
up to their waists, and crossed under a heavy but ineffectual fire,
reserving their own until they reached dry land. The first to climb
the bank was a lieutenant who formed up the leading files, and then
crouched down for them to shoot over his head. The Irish foot abandoned
the first ditch, but their cavalry, under Berwick's command, charged
the Dutch furiously before they were fully in order. They stood firm
against this and several other attacks, gradually pressing the Irish
infantry backwards, and in the meantime the French and Enniskillen foot
passed the river a little farther down, several English and Danish
regiments still lower. The tide was rising, so that some of the men
were up to their arm-pits, and on the extreme left, horses had to swim.
Some of the Danish infantry carried their guns over their heads, but
others fired steadily as they waded over. William was looking on, and
said he had never seen anything better done. They were at once attacked
by the Irish cavalry, and there was hard fighting for half an hour.
A regiment of French Huguenots was broken by a charge, and Colonel
La Cailemotte was carried off the field mortally wounded, but still
encouraging his men, 'A la gloire, mes enfants, à la gloire!' Seeing
his friends in difficulties, Schomberg crossed himself, reminding
them that their persecutors were before them. He fell, shot through
the neck, and with sabre wounds on the head. Dr. Walker, the still
unconsecrated Bishop of Derry, was killed soon afterwards, and his
brother clergyman Story, offers as an excuse for his presence, that he
was going to look at the wounded general. Walker, says the chaplain,
was stripped at once, 'for the Scots-Irish that followed our camp were
got through already, and took off most of the plunder.' When the news
of Schomberg's death was brought to William, he laid his finger on his
lips, and lost no time in passing the river himself with the left wing
of his cavalry, Dutch and Dane chiefly, with Wolseley's Enniskilleners
and Cutts's English regiment. His right arm was stiff from yesterday's
wound, and he carried a stick only. He was unable to bear his cuirass,
and when he drew his sword later, had to hold it in his left hand. He
crossed where the little Drybridge stream enters the Boyne, but his
horse stuck fast in the boggy ground beyond the river, and he had to
dismount before it could be extricated. He was at once engaged in the
thickest of the fight, and a bullet which struck the heel of his boot
killed a horse close by. He put himself at the head of the Enniskillen
cavalry, saying, 'What will you do for me?' Owing possibly to a
mistake, the Enniskilleners were driven back for a short distance, and
then William led on his steady Dutch. The Enniskilleners soon recovered
themselves, and the Irish foot were pressed backwards, but the cavalry
for the most part fought bravely, making repeated and often successful
charges, but being gradually overborne by the disciplined troops
opposed to them. Lord Dungan was killed early in the fight, and his
dragoons would do nothing afterwards. Lord Clare's yellow dragoons also
ran away, and some of them never stopped until they got far beyond the
Shannon. The broken troops rode right through the retreating foot as if
they had been enemies. But Tyrconnel's and Parker's regiments of horse
performed prodigies of valour. The latter was wounded, and Sheldon,
who commanded the former corps, had two horses killed under him.
Berwick's was shot, and rolled over his rider. Hamilton, who headed the
last charge, was wounded and taken prisoner near Plattin House, which
stands two miles back from the river. William said he was very glad
to see him, and asked if the cavalry would make any more fight. 'Upon
my honour,' said the prisoner, 'I believe they will.' 'Your honour!'
said the King; and that was his only revenge. Hamilton was sent to the
Tower as a prisoner of war, and was exchanged for Lord Mountjoy in
the spring of 1692. Neither of them saw Ireland again, and Mountjoy,
whom William made Master of the Ordnance, was killed at Steenkirk soon
after his release from the Bastille. He had had enough of passive
obedience. There was no more fighting, but the Irish cavalry rallied
to protect the retreat with the unbroken French contingent. The flying
infantry threw away their arms, and even their boots, and not many were
overtaken, though little quarter was given. The loss of the victors
was about one-third as great. The pursuit continued as far as Naul,
when the light began to fail. Drogheda surrendered the next day, the
garrison marching out without arms, rather than undergo the horrors of
an assault. The terms offered were pretty much the same as Cromwell's,
forty years before, and the memories attaching to his siege were not
favourable to resistance.[268]

[Sidenote: Flight of James.]

On the fatal morning King James posted himself near the church at
Donore, whence he could see both armies. He took no part in the battle,
and as appears from his own account was chiefly concerned lest his
retreat should be cut off. As soon as the danger seemed imminent he
drew off to the left and joined Lauzun, who strongly advised him to
take care of himself. He needed but little pressing, and with four
troops of horse and four of dragoons he passed Duleek first and led
the way back to Dublin. The French kept their ranks and prevented the
victors from pressing too hard upon the routed army. Berwick reached
Duleek about the same time as William himself, and had to gallop hard
to avoid being intercepted. Lauzun and Tyrconnel kept together. The
loss in James's army was perhaps 1500, that in William's about 500. To
compare the conduct of the two Kings, it need only be said that one led
the advance and the other the retreat.[269]

[Sidenote: Importance of the battle.]

From the military point of view, the battle of the Boyne is not
interesting, and French writers dismiss it as a skirmish, in which
Marshal Schomberg happened to be killed. With a much superior force,
both in numbers and quality, William forced the passage of a small
river which was fordable in many places. The importance of the action
lies in its international character, and its political effect was
enormous in checking the overweening ambition of France. There have
been other occasions on which very small battles have decided very
great causes. At Valmy the forces engaged were greater than at the
Boyne, but the number of casualties was less than one-half, and yet
the effect is felt to this day. At Calatafimi the killed and wounded
altogether were only about 400, but that fight went far to change
the map of Europe. The great French victory at Fleurus and the great
English disaster off Beachy Head were both neutralised on the banks of
the Boyne. Lauzun's despatch is dated sixteen days after the battle,
and it was a fortnight later that the full news reached Louis XIV. But
King James had arrived at Brest, with the tidings of his own defeat,
laying all the blame on the Irish, and giving faint praise even to the
cavalry who had fought so well. Soon after this it was known that the
Prince of Orange had been hit, and confidently reported that he was
dead. Without any encouragement from the authorities, the Parisians
abandoned themselves to rejoicing. How much the French feared William,
said Bolingbroke, 'appeared in the extravagant and indecent joy they
expressed on a false report of his death.' The citizens dined in
the streets, casks of wine were broached, there were bonfires and
fireworks everywhere. Effigies of William were cast on dunghills,
thrown into the Seine, or broken on the wheel. First President Harlay
and Advocate-General Talon had to drink the King's health, and Bossuet,
though he protested that he was on his way to say mass, was forced
to do the same. Police officers sent to suppress the unauthorised
rejoicings had to drink with the rest. Even in the inner court at
Versailles the guards could hardly prevent the people from lighting a
fire. The excitement spread to remote villages, and was not allayed for
weeks. Even after the middle of August the Abbé de Choisy made a bet
with La Fontaine that the Prince was dead, staking the price of the
poet's works against the books themselves. The report reached Modena,
but with the puzzling addition that James was at St. Germain. Then the
truth came in English and Dutch papers. At Rome, too, the event was
long uncertain. Melfort at first heard that the Prince of Orange was
killed, and he enlarged on King James's opportunity. This was the time
to take the power of the purse from Parliament, to repeal the Habeas
Corpus Act, and to abolish trial by jury in cases of treason. If an
amnesty was found necessary, the list of exceptions should be as long
as possible, and not one of those excepted should ever be pardoned
on any consideration. Alexander VIII., who thought more of enriching
his family than of rescuing England, was horrified that _Te Deums_
should be sung in Austrian cathedrals for William's victory; but he
had no money to spare, and could not venture to go against the general
sense of European sovereigns. Even the French, though they would have
welcomed the death of their great antagonist, had very little sympathy
with his dethroned rival.[270]

[Sidenote: State of Dublin.]

In the morning of July 1 Dublin was full of rumours that a battle was
imminent. The gates were closely guarded, and Protestants kept their
houses. Every hour brought a fresh report. The French were in Dublin
Bay. An express from Waterford had announced that the Isle of Wight was
in French hands, and the victors going to Dover. The English right wing
on the Boyne had been completely routed. But at five in the afternoon
stragglers arrived on tired horses, who said the Irish had the worst,
and an hour later others declared that the rout was complete. 'Till
one that night all the entries of the town were filled with dusty,
wounded, and tired soldiers and carriages perpetually coming in.' A
little before ten King James arrived with 200 horse in disorder, and
was received by Lady Tyrconnel at the Castle gate. He was followed
two hours later by the bulk of the Irish cavalry in good order, 'with
kettledrums, hautboys, and trumpets.' Next morning came the French with
all their guns and many of the Irish foot. But the King was already
gone. He saw some of his Council--Herbert, Fitton, the Duke of Powis,
Price, Nagle, and Albeville being among them--and asked whether the
news of the battle of Fleurus was not a reason for going to France.
He seems to have thought that Louis would seize the opportunity of
invading England while William was away. His advisers urged him to run
no risk of capture, since the victorious enemy might appear in the
morning. At midnight a message came from Berwick to say that he had
rallied some of the fugitives and asking for cavalry. His father sent
a few troops that had not been in the battle, but the gathering soon
dispersed. Tyrconnel sent his chaplain to advise His Majesty to lose
no time, and to send all the troops to meet him and Lauzun at Leixlip.
La Hoguette and other superior officers appeared in Dublin without
their men, which was explained by a mistaken order having been given
to meet Lauzun at Dunboyne. At five in the morning, after a few hours'
rest, James sent for the Mayor and made a speech to him and others
present. Everything, he said, was against him. In England he had an
army that would have fought if they had not proved false; in Ireland
his soldiers were loyal enough, but would not stand by him. He had now
to seek safety for himself, and advised his hearers to do the same.
They were not to wreak present vengeance on the Protestants, nor to
injure a city in which he still had an interest. He then took horse
for Bray, ordering Simon Luttrell to evacuate the town and to do no
mischief. La Hoguette and the other French officers asked for horses,
but he had none to give them, and they were left to follow as best they
could. Brigadier Wauchop was posted near the north end of Dublin to
turn the stream of fugitives towards Limerick. Luttrell was the last
man to leave his post, and by sunset the Castle was in sole charge of
Captain Farlow, who had been a close prisoner since the skirmish near
Ravensdale.[271]

Louvois had strictly charged Lauzun not to attempt any dazzling
exploit, but to devote himself entirely to gain time and to prolong the
war. From the slavish way in which he addressed the great minister,
belittling himself and claiming no merit but in strict obedience, it is
evident that Lauzun distrusted his own powers. He had no belief in the
cause for which he was fighting, and his main objects were to get King
James safely back to his wife and to restore to King Louis his money,
his guns, and as many of his soldiers as possible. Above all things he
longed to get out of Ireland himself. The glory of defending Limerick
was left to Boisseleau, the credit of keeping the French troops
together after the retreat from the Boyne chiefly belongs to the Swiss
Colonel Zurlauben and to a captain named La Pujade, of whom little
else seems to be known. John and Anthony Hamilton as well as Tyrconnel
accompanied Lauzun in the retreat to Limerick. La Hoguette and several
other field officers seemed only anxious to get to the sea. During
the battle the only French officer of rank killed was the Marquis
d'Hoquincourt, who commanded an Irish battalion. Finding that his men
would not stand, he charged alone and fell covered with wounds. Lauzun
certainly gained no glory, and was quite unfit for the task in hand,
but he maintained order during the retreat on the day of the Boyne, and
the rear was then the post of honour. Long imprisonment may have shaken
his nerves, but it seems hard to call him a coward, as Rousset has
done, and he is more fairly to be judged by what he wrote to Louvois
from Galway shortly before sailing for France:--'The bad state of
affairs and my small capacity will cause me to make many mistakes, but
I beg you to excuse me to His Majesty; and at least I can assure you
that death would be sweeter than what I suffer here.'[272]

King James had been most careful to provide for his own escape. More
than a week before the battle he sent Sir Patrick Trant to prepare
a ship at Waterford, and on the day after it he rode hard in that
direction. Leaving Dublin about five in the morning, he soon reached
Bray with two troops, which he left behind with orders to defend the
bridge until twelve. No man pursued, and he travelled unmolested
through the Wicklow highlands to Arklow, where there was a halt of two
hours. Soon after leaving this place he was overtaken by La Hoguette
and his three comrades, who had succeeded in mounting themselves, and
who declared that they had been followed by troops. This was certainly
not the case, but James was easily persuaded to mend his pace. At
Enniscorthy he entered the house of Francis Randall, a Quaker, who
observed that 'the dejected monarch' had been riding with his pistols
at full cock. The man of peace set this right, prevented his men from
seizing the King in hope of reward, and provided fresh horses. James
reached Duncannon Fort about sunrise. La Hoguette and his friends went
to Passage, higher up the Suir, where they found a ship of St. Malo
mounting twenty-eight guns. The captain, who may have been in treaty
with Trant, dropped down with the tide and was out of the river before
night. King James's Tower at Duncannon still preserves the memory of
his flight. When safe at sea the Frenchmen wished him to go straight
to Brest, but he preferred Kinsale, which was reached in the morning.
There he found ten out of the twenty-five French frigates, provided
at Mary of Modena's request to secure her husband's retreat and, if
possible, to stop William's supplies. The rest of the squadron did not
reach Ireland. Before sailing finally James wrote to Tyrconnel giving
him power to continue the struggle or to make terms at his discretion,
and leaving him 50,000 pistoles, which was all the money he had. He
reached Brest on the ninth day after the Boyne, bringing the first news
of his own overthrow to France. Louis XIV. was as kind and hospitable
as ever, but took care not to trust his guest with another army.[273]

The ground over which the Jacobite army retreated was so difficult
that no very close pursuit was made. Some scattered horsemen hung
about Lauzun's flanks next morning, and added to the confusion of the
beaten army, but without making any real impression. The glen at Naul
formed an obstacle not to be attempted when daylight was failing.
William went back to Duleek and spent the night in his carriage, the
army bivouacking round him. The night was cold, though the day had been
hot, and the soldiers made fires out of four or five thousand pikes
and muskets which the fugitives had thrown away so as to run faster.
Next morning, parties were detached to bring the tents and baggage
from beyond the Boyne. Suspense reigned in Dublin during the day after
the battle. Simon Luttrell had intended to carry off some of the chief
Protestant inhabitants as hostages, but was prevented by rumours of a
force landing near the town. Most of the well-to-do Roman Catholics
followed him southwards, but their poorer co-religionists were soon in
as bad a position and subjected to as great fear as the Protestants had
been. They were protected by Captain Robert Fitzgerald, uncle of the
Earl of Kildare, who lived in England. But some outrages were committed
by the Galway Protestants, who had been long prisoners. Fitzgerald had
been turned out of the army by Tyrconnel, deprived of his troop, for
which he had paid 2000_l._, and imprisoned for some time. He now formed
a guard of the most respectable Protestants, who prevented plunder, the
hope of which had drawn some of King James's men back into the town. A
French soldier was caught trying to burn the thatch in Kevin Street,
but was released after two days because he had acted under the orders
of his major. Dublin narrowly escaped the fate of the Palatinate.
Fitzgerald occupied the Castle immediately after Luttrell had left it,
and in the morning a committee of nine, of which Dr. King was one,
took charge of the city, and appointed him Governor until the King's
pleasure should be known. At noon he sent a letter to William, asking
for help lest the enemy should return and injure the town. During the
day the rescued Protestants ran about saluting and embracing each
other, and blessing God for their wonderful deliverance, as if they
had risen from the dead, and when at eight in the evening a troop of
dragoons came in with an officer to take charge of stores, they hugged
the horses and almost pulled the men off in their joy. When the King
himself arrived, the rejoicings were not so great as for that first
troop. Early on July 4, a large body of cavalry came in accompanied by
the young Duke of Ormonde as a volunteer, and the Blue Dutch Guards
followed later. William encamped at Finglas, and on Sunday, July 6,
rode into Dublin to attend service at St. Patrick's and hear a sermon
from Dr. King. He returned to camp afterwards, and next day issued a
declaration offering protection for person and property to 'all poor
labourers, common soldiers, country farmers, ploughmen, and colliers,'
and inhabitants of towns who had fled, provided they returned home
by August 1, surrendered their arms, and gave their names for
registration. Tenants were to pay their rents to Protestant landlords,
but in other cases to hold the money until further orders. All disorder
was to be sternly repressed, but 'the desperate leaders of the present
rebellion,' who had called in the French, oppressed the Protestants,
and rejected pardon offered a year before--these were to be left to
the event of war unless they showed themselves fully penitent. William
would have given better terms to the hostile landowners, but the
men who had been included in the great Act of Attainder were in no
forgiving mood, and he had to yield. When the time allowed had expired,
this declaration was found to have had little effect, and the period of
grace was extended to August 25, somewhat better conditions being given
to the tenants and labourers. But for men of superior rank and quality,
and for holders of office, no course was left but to surrender and
betake themselves to some town where they might be allowed subsistence
if destitute. Foreigners who came into the King's quarters, might have
passports to go home to their respective countries.[274]

[Sidenote: Final ruin of the Stuart cause.]

The reign of the Stuarts ended with the second flight of James II.,
though the military reduction of Ireland was deferred for more than
a year. Owing chiefly to Sarsfield's exploit, William abandoned the
siege of Limerick, the defence of which forms a kind of counterpart
to that of Londonderry. The international character of the contest is
emphasised by the fact that in the decisive battle of Aughrim, the
English army was commanded by a Dutchman, and the Irish by a Frenchman.
Later on no Jacobite insurrection took place in Ireland, but vast
numbers of Irishmen entered the French service and worked against
England though they were unable to do anything for their own country.
Sarsfield fell at Landen. At Paris in 1715, said Bolingbroke, 'care
and hope sat on every busy Irish face. Those who could write and read
had letters to show, and those who had not arrived to this pitch of
erudition had their secrets to whisper. No sex was excluded from this
ministry. Fanny Oglethorpe kept her corner in it, and Olive Trant was
the great wheel of our machine.' But Ireland herself was quiet during
the ill-starred movements in Scotland and in the North of England. In
1745 again nothing happened in Ireland, though the refugees had much to
do with the events of that year, and were largely instrumental in the
English defeat at Fontenoy. Of the seven men of Moidart who stood by
Charles Edward on the Inverness-shire shore, at least two were Irish,
one being a son of Tyrconnel's secretary, Thomas Sheridan.

Sir Charles Wogan, who escaped from Newgate in 1715 and served both
France and Spain, secured Maria Clementina for the Pretender. He told
Swift that Irish soldiers abroad 'had always the post of honour allowed
them, where it was mixed with danger, and lived in perpetual fire,' but
that their reward was systematically scanty. Promises made to them were
not kept. But they continued to fight bravely, to plot, and to hope
against hope. During the dreary period of the penal laws the exiles
damaged England without benefiting Ireland, but many of them or their
children achieved success abroad. The names of O'Donnell, Macmahon, and
Wall have a place in continental history.

FOOTNOTES:

[260] Lauzun to Seignelay, April 6/16 and July 16/26, in Ranke's
appendix.

[261] There is a full account of the Charlemont episode in Story's
_Impartial Account_, and an accurate contemporary plan in the
_Continuation_. Compare Schomberg's letters in State Papers,
_Domestic_, December 26, March (p. 534), May 5, 11, 12, and 19.

[262] Delamere to Carmarthen, n.d., but calendared in State Papers,
_Domestic_, under 1689, p. 381. _Grey's Debates_, ix. 512, x. 2, 150.
'Is the King so cock-sure of his army?' was one of Delamere's questions.

[263] Story's _Impartial Hist._ June 1690, and _Continuation_, chap.
ii. Proclamations of June 19 and 24. General order of June 20 among the
_Clarke MSS_. Colonel Culter's application, endorsed, 'Not granted,'
July 10, _ib._ Luttrell's _Diary_, ii. 12, and throughout the first
half of the year. Contemporary letters in Benn's _Hist. of Belfast_, p.
180-182. Lauzun to Louvois, June 16/26. The _Clarke MSS._ are rich in
details as to the preparations.

[264] Story's _Impartial Hist._, p. 68. Lauzun to Louvois, June 23/July
3, in Ranke's appendix. _Light to the Blind_, p. 96.

[265] Lauzun to Louvois, June 21/July 1 to June 26/July 4, and to
Seignelay, July 16/26. Clarke's _Life of James II._, original memoirs,
ii. 391-393. _Light to the Blind_, p. 97. Lauzun quite understood that
William was well supplied by sea, but the author of _Macariæ Excidium_
imagined that he was dependent on the resources of Ulster. Stevens's
_Journal_, June 23-29. Two Scotch ensigns who deserted to William said
it had been resolved to defend the Moyry pass. _Diary_ of Dean Davies,
June 22.

[266] Story's _Impartial Hist._, pp. 70-8, and _Continuation_, pp.
19-22. Bellingham's _Diary_, June 26-30. Parker's _Memoirs_, p. 21.
General Douglas's letter of July 7 to his brother, Queensberry,
printed in Napier's _Dundee_, appx. vi., has the following as to
William's wound: 'He said nothing, only three words in Dutch, _T'hoobt
niet naeder_--that is, it needs not to come nearer.' See Portland to
Melville, July 4/14, in _Leven and Melville Papers_. Dean Davies's
_Diary_, June 30. Stevens's _Journal_, June 27-July 1. William said to
Burnet (ii. 46): 'that the going against King James in person was hard
upon him, since it would be a vast trouble both to himself and to the
Queen if he should be either killed or taken prisoner.' In a note to
this Dartmouth says William gave orders to the fleet to take James at
sea and convey him to Holland, but the real order to Herbert was to
do so if he 'took any vessel in which the late King should happen to
be.' The original letter in Nottingham's hand is printed in Ellis's
_Original Letters_, 2nd series, iv., 186. A captive king in Holland
would be much less dangerous than in England.

[267] In his letter of July 7 Douglas, whose authority on this point
seems superior to all others', says the original detachment under
Meinhart Schomberg was 4000 horse and 3000 foot, and that he was sent
to support him with 12,000 foot. Lauzun says: 'Le petit jour venu, nous
les vîmes marcher en colonnes cavalerie et infanterie de l'autre côté
de la rivière droit à Slaine sans que le camp qui était devant nous
branlât ou fît aucun mouvement.' _Light to the Blind_ says Slane bridge
was broken down. G. Bonnivet, whose journal is _Sloane MS._ 1033, was
with Douglas's wing.

[268] Payen de la Fouleresse stood close to William while the Danes
were crossing and heard him praise them: he wrote his letter on a drum
next day. In his letter above cited Douglas says, 'The enemy's horse
fought wonderfully bravely as ever men could do.' Payen's letter to
his sovereign Christian V. of Denmark, July 2, 1690, is in _Notes and
Queries_, July 1877.

[269] 'A saying of Sarsfield's deserves to be remembered; for it was
much talked of all Europe over. He asked some of the English officers
if they had not come to a better opinion of the Irish by their
behaviour during this war; and whereas they said it was much the same
that it had always been; Sarsfield answered: As low as we now are,
change but kings with us, and we will fight it over again with you.'
This was after the capitulation of Limerick.--Burnet, ii. 81. Lauzun
to Seignelay, July 16/26. Clarke's _Life of James_, ii. 397, Original
Memoirs. Berwick.

[270] Dangeau, July 23/August 2 and following days. De Sourches, July
17/27. Abbé de Choisy to Bussy-Rabutin, August 13/23, in the latter's
_Correspondence_, vol. vi. Duke of Modena's letters, July and August,
in _Stuart Papers_, i. Melfort's letters, August and September, in
Ellis's _Original Letters_, 2nd series, vol. iv. Writing to Madame
de Sévigné on May 21/31, less than six weeks before the Boyne,
Bussy-Rabutin says: 'Les affaires d'Irlande vont assez bien; il n'y a
que le roi Jacques qui gâte tout, et qui montre tous les jours par sa
conduite qu'il mérite ses disgrâces.' Writing to Louvois on July 15/25,
a fortnight after the battle, when James was back in France, Luxembourg
says (in Rousset, iv. 423): 'Ceux qui aiment sa gloire ont bien à
déplorer le personnage qu'il a fait.' The Marquis de la Faro says the
rejoicings for William's supposed death were the greatest possible
compliment to him. He had fought like a lion, while James had lost a
throne without fighting, 'malgré la ferocité des Anglais.' The author
of _Light to the Blind_ repeatedly calls the Boyne a skirmish and a
paltry combat.

[271] _Life of James_, ii. 391, Original Memoirs. _True and Perfect
Journal._ Lauzun to Seignelay and to Louvois in Ranke's appendix.

[272] In his éloge prefixed to Berwick's memoirs, Montesquieu says the
English rightly regarded this war as all-important, and the French
merely as 'd'affection particulière et de bienséance. Les Anglais
qui ne voulaient point avoir de guerre civile chez eux, assomèrent
l'Irlande; il paroît même que les officiers français qu'on y envoya
pensèrent comme eux qui les envoyaient: ils n'eurent que deux choses
dans la tête, d'arriver, de se battre et de s'en retourner. Le temps
a fait voir que les Anglais avaient mieux pensé que nous.' Macaulay
sought in vain for the full account of the battle which Lauzun must
have sent to Louvois. His despatch has been printed by Ranke, vi. 117,
but it is to Seignelay and not to Louvois, and written from Limerick,
July 16/26.

[273] _True and Perfect Journal._ Clarke's _Life of James II._, ii.
403, 406. According to De Sourches (May 20, 1690), a letter from
Dublin seldom reached Paris under thirteen days; nine days was a
'diligence surprenante.' Both he and Dangeau complain that the truth
about Ireland was hard to come by. A pair of gold sleeve-links are
preserved at Castleboro' by Lord Carew, whose ancestor is said to have
met and assisted James at Aughnacoppal bridge, and to have received
this keepsake from him. See Mahan's _Sea-power_, chap. iv. Randall's
_Narrative_.

[274] Letter of Payen de la Fouleresse from Duleek, July 2. King
William's declarations of July 7 and August 1, 1690. _True and Perfect
Journal. The Full and True Account of the late Revolution in Dublin_,
dated August 15 and licensed September 15, is attributed in Harris's
_Ware_ to Robert Fitzgerald, but was more probably written by another
from facts furnished by him. The letter to William included in it,
dated Dublin Castle, Thursday, August 3, 8 A.M., is signed by Lords
Ross and Longford, the Bishops of Limerick and Meath, Dr. King,
Fitzgerald himself, and three others. Eight of the eleven signed
Fitzgerald's commission as Governor.




CHAPTER LV

SOCIAL IRELAND FROM RESTORATION TO REVOLUTION


[Sidenote: After the Civil War.]

Macaulay thought that under the Protectorate Ireland was probably a
more agreeable residence for the higher classes, as compared with
England, than at any time before or since. This may be true if we
understand by the higher classes the men whose property was granted
or confirmed by the Settlement after the Civil War. People bought and
sold with confidence and with little fear of coming change. Nor was
this confidence altogether misplaced, for we have seen that Charles
II., however unwillingly, was forced to leave most of the Protestant
settlers in possession. A certain number of Roman Catholic royalists
were restored more or less completely, but they were not enough to
disturb the balance of power, and in the Parliament of 1661 the House
of Commons was entirely composed of Protestants. The position of the
re-established Church was unassailable, and the Presbyterians, though
troublesome to bishops, could not seriously disturb social relations.
The destruction of property during the war had been great, but from
1652 onwards much was done to repair the damage. Ireland is studded
with ruined castles, but there are many modern houses where the thick
old walls have been utilised, and the process of conversion may be
readily traced.

[Sidenote: Country houses. Portmore.]

Civil war seeming unlikely to recur, it was natural that country houses
should be built or improved. One of the finest was erected soon after
the Restoration by the third Lord Conway at Portmore on the lake of
the same name, not far from his town of Lisburn. His predecessor's
library had been burned by the rebels at Brookhill, which belonged to
Sir George Rawdon. Rawdon, who acted as Conway's agent and married his
sister, built Moira on his own account. Portmore had every attraction
that a great mansion could possess. A park of 2000 acres, well stocked
with deer, magnificent oaks, a rabbit warren, a decoy, a glen specially
planted for woodcock, flocks and herds, hawks and hounds, racehorses,
vast stables, gardens, orchards, and fisheries are mentioned; and
Rawdon is to be praised for providing the Lisburn district with the
best roads in Ireland. Jeremy Taylor was brought over by Conway under
the Protectorate and became Bishop of Down. He in turn brought over
George Rust, who became Bishop of Dromore. Neither Conway nor Rawdon
loved the Presbyterians, but Lady Conway became a Quaker, and her
husband thought her circle would be too dull for Rawdon's daughter,
a lively girl who married Lord Granard's son. Valentine Greatrakes,
who was brought from the county of Waterford to treat Lady Conway's
headaches, was unsuccessful in her case, but successful in many others.
He practised a kind of massage, which, of course, did not suit every
patient, and Archbishop Boyle was inclined to call him an impostor; but
Robert Boyle thought there was something in the matter. Greatrakes,
who was not excessively modest, had more followers in England than in
Ireland. Conway in later life was much involved in Court intrigues,
but Rawdon remained generally in Ireland and continued his civilising
work.[275]

[Sidenote: Charleville.]

The Boyle family were great builders, both in England and Ireland.
In 1661 Orrery founded Charleville, abolishing what he called 'the
heathenish name of Rathgogan' in honour of his master. This great
house had an even shorter life than Portmore. Orrery had a patent
for fortifying it and mounting eighteen guns, and he sought a similar
privilege for Castlemartyr. Essex refused this request, and succeeded
in getting the clause in the patent surrendered. He feared that other
great men might arm in the same way, and then combine against the King
like the barons of England in former times. Castlemartyr, with or
without guns, made a faint attempt at resisting Tyrconnel in 1688. In
1690, when the owner of Charleville was a child and absent, the Duke of
Berwick, having dined in the house, ordered it to be fired and stood by
to see it consumed. According to Evelyn, it was a stately mansion and
had cost 40,000_l._[276]

[Sidenote: Kilkenny Castle.]

Such time as Ormonde could spare from his duties in London as Lord
Steward, or in Dublin as Viceroy, he spent at Kilkenny Castle, which
had escaped during the Civil War, and enjoyed a holiday there as only
a hard worker can enjoy one. Hawking was his favourite sport. 'I am
gotten hither,' he wrote in August 1667, 'and am yet in the happiest
calm you can imagine. Fine weather, great store of partridge, a cast
of merlins, and no business; and this may hold for a week.' Strafford
found partridge so scarce about Dublin that he had to take to hawking
blackbirds; and the garrison were great poachers then and later.
Ormonde had gone fox-hunting with Castlehaven in the midst of the Civil
War, and afterwards had a pack of beagles at Kilkenny who were so well
trained that they always turned homewards at the sound of the castle
dinner-bell. He kept bloodstock, importing both Barbs and Arabs, but
was not very successful as a breeder, though he took some pleasure in
the reflection that Irish horse-flesh generally would be improved.
There is, indeed, no pursuit in which money is more easily lost or
less easily got, unless it is made the chief business of life. We have
inventories of the plate, furniture, and tapestry in Kilkenny Castle
at the end of Charles II.'s reign. There were also many pictures,
including three or four portraits of Strafford, and a library of nearly
a thousand volumes. The catalogue contains Shakespeare, Ben Jonson, and
many lesser dramatists; Milton and Taylor, Hobbes and Stillingfleet,
are well represented. There are many Latin and French books, and a few
Italian. Inventories are also extant of Ormonde's property in Dublin
Castle when he was Lord Lieutenant in 1679. The clerks and upper
servants were well lodged, but eight boy scullions had only four beds
between them, and 'two scavengers in the dark kitchen' probably had no
beds at all.[277]

[Sidenote: Dublin Castle.]

[Sidenote: A viceregal progress.]

As long as Charles II. lived, life in town and country was easy, except
for occasional mischief done by Tories. During his short reign as
Viceroy, Clarendon saw much company in Dublin Castle, but it is to be
noted that ladies and gentlemen do not appear to have mixed at meals.
He was accused of not taking enough notice of the King's birthday,
though he gave a state dinner to twenty persons at his own table,
'besides the ladies who were with my wife and at other tables in the
house.' On New Year's Day the Lord Mayor and aldermen dined with him
and played cards afterwards. When the Lord Lieutenant withdrew, the
men all went to the cellar, and after that it was perhaps as well
that they did not have to join the ladies. Three days later all the
citizens' wives dined with Lady Clarendon, and his Excellency had to
take refuge with the Lord Chancellor. There was, however, no objection
to ladies attending the Curragh races, but Clarendon's wife did not
care to do so in company with Lady Dorchester. He found the racecourse
much larger, and with much finer turf than Newmarket Heath. Later in
the year he made a progress in the south. Lady Clarendon was left
at Kilkenny Castle, Ormonde about the same time making some stay at
Cornbury. At Waterford the Lord Lieutenant was very well received
publicly, Lords Tyrone and Galway attending him, but not one of the
many considerable Roman Catholics making any sign. He dined with Henry
Boyle at Castlemartyr, and at Lismore; where Lord Burlington had
given orders that he should be sumptuously entertained, he 'destroyed
some of my lord's salmon.' He visited Kinsale and Bandon, and at Cork
Major-General MacCarthy brought Bishop Creagh and four Roman Catholic
merchants with him, but not ten of his Church paid their respects all
the way from Kilkenny. 'Our people are mad,' said one priest at Cork;
'our clergy have forbidden gentlemen to appear.' At Limerick things
were a little, but only a little, better, the Irish citizens showing a
determination to keep apart from the English. The see of Limerick was
vacant, but Dr. Brenan, the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Cashel, was
very civil. At Thomastown in Tipperary, Clarendon stayed with Ormonde's
half-brother, Captain George Matthew. 'This,' he said, 'is a very fine
place, and the most improved of any situation I have seen since I came
into this kingdom, especially considering that it is but fifteen years
since he first sat down upon it, when there was not a house upon it.'
Clarendon admired the rich country about Clonmel, 'but all pasture and
employed in sheep walks, and feeding black cattle.' Here and elsewhere
he notes the want of population, which the exodus of Protestant
settlers did not improve.[278]

[Sidenote: An Irish Tunbridge Wells.]

Macaulay's description of Tunbridge Wells in the days when fine
gentlemen, sick of the airs of actresses and maids of honour, refreshed
themselves by flirting with the farmers' daughters who brought them
cream and butter, had a sort of counterpart in Ireland. Near the West
Gate of Wexford is a mineral well which was brought into fashion by Dr.
Patrick Dun, a Scotch physician, whose name is still well remembered
in Dublin. While prescribing syrup of buckthorn as an addition to the
waters, he did not forbid good claret if it was to be had in the
town. The spa was nasty enough, but one grave visitor thought the
'fantastical ladies, and fops, and lampoons in Wexford doggerel' were
as bad. The dietary in vogue was dry roast mutton and chicken without
sauce, and the conversation turned, as at other watering-places, on
the visitors' ailments. Good lodgings were scarce, but Lord Chancellor
Fitton, Accountant-General Bonnell, at least two bishops, and Dr.
William King, afterwards the famous Archbishop, were among those who
underwent the cure.[279]

[Sidenote: Condition of the poor.]

In general it may be said that people who were well-to-do lived in
Ireland much as their equals did in England, and from the abundance
of food money went farther in the poorer country. But in 1672, when
the Restoration Settlement was well established, the great mass of the
people lived miserably enough. In the absence of proper statistics,
we must depend on Petty's estimates, which in most important points
are sustained by a cloud of witnesses, though his figures, by the
nature of the case, may be inexact. He gives the total population as
1,100,000. Of the inhabited houses 16,000 had more than one chimney,
24,000 had only one, leaving 160,000 without any. Three-fourths of the
land and five-sixths of the houses belonged to British Protestants, and
'three-fourths of the native Irish lived in a brutish, nasty condition,
as in cabins, with neither chimney, door, stairs, nor window, fed
chiefly upon milk and potatoes.' These cabins, which he elsewhere calls
sties, were not in all worth more than 50,000_l._ Fifteen years later,
Petty believed that the population had increased to 1,300,000. The
160,000 chimneyless cabins which sheltered the mass of the people could
not be kept free from vermin or animals, and all the eggs 'laid or
kept' in them were musty. Some cottars might have afforded a chimney,
but preferred the warmth of the smoke. With or without one, they had
to pay hearth-money. Even in a small farmer's house near Kilkenny,
Stevens found no food but milk, and had to lie on straw. Straw, indeed,
was the usual bedding, and it was not always clean. Turf was abundant
in most places. Between Dublin and Kildare Clarendon saw fine-looking
men, poor and half-naked, idle, except when starvation stared them in
the face, and ready to steal if they could not easily get work; the
women did nothing but mind two or three cows, on whose milk they lived.
'Their habitations,' he said--'for they cannot be called houses--are
perfect pig-sties; walls cast up and covered with straw and mud; and
out of one of these huts, of about ten or twelve foot square, shall
you see five or six men and women bolt out as you pass by, who stand
staring about. If this be thus so near Dublin, Lord! what can it be
farther up in the country?' During his tour in the south, he lamented
the want of population, miserable as the people were. Yet improvements
had been made, and there might be more if any encouragement was given.
The rich county of Tipperary was given up to cattle, but the number of
beasts had decreased because capital was frightened away by Tyrconnel's
proceedings. There was very little tillage. What could be expected
of people when whole families, with sometimes a travelling stranger,
or pack-carrier, or pedlar or two, lay nine or ten of them together,
naked, heads and points? The bare necessaries of life could be had with
little labour. Fourpence a day was the current rate of wages, while the
lowest class of workmen in England received a shilling. 'Their lazing'
seemed to Petty not so much natural as caused by want of employment
and inducement to work. These people were content with potatoes, and
one man's labour could feed forty. They liked milk, and in summer one
cow would supply three men. Fish and shell-fish were easily got, and a
house could be built in three days. Why should they breed more cattle
since it was penal to import them into England? Trade was so fettered
that capital was kept away, and even land was not safe from legal
trickery. Temple said much the same as Petty, and their almost verbal
agreement suggests that they had consulted each other.[280]

[Sidenote: Ploughing by the tail.]

Ploughing by the horses' tails had been made illegal by Strafford's
Parliament, but custom is often stronger than law, and the Confederates
stipulated with Ormonde that the Act should be repealed. This excited
Milton's ridicule, but the practice continued long after his time. In
the stony barony of Burren in Clare, Dineley, in 1681, saw horses four
abreast, drawing by their tails, 'tolerated here because they cannot
manage their land otherwise, their plough gears, tackle, and traces
being (as they are all over the rest of the kingdom) of gadds or withs
of twigs twisted, which here would break to pieces by the ploughshare
so often jubbing against the rock, which, the gears being fastened by
wattles or wisps to the horses' tails, the horses being sensible stop
until the ploughman lifts it over.' Seven or eight years earlier Temple
found the custom general, and proposed more drastic legislation, but
it survived in remote parts, and found defenders there as late as the
earlier years of Queen Victoria.[281]

[Sidenote: Dublin.]

In 1685, the year of Charles II.'s death, there were 6500 houses in
Dublin. No estimate gives less than five persons for each house,
and some raise the average to eight. The population was therefore
a good deal more than 32,000. There was a great increase between
the Restoration and the end of the reign. The town was larger than
Bristol, then the second in England, where there were 5307 houses. It
was exceeded by London, Paris, and Amsterdam, and apparently by Venice,
but the information about foreign cities at this time is scanty.
During the first half of the eighteenth century, at least, Dublin was
reckoned the fourth or fifth in Europe. A great number of houses were
very poor, which is not to be wondered at, for about a quarter of
them were inhabited by sellers of liquor. In this respect there had
been no improvement since Elizabethan days. According to Petty, there
were in 1672, 164 houses in Dublin with more than 10 chimneys, Lord
Meath's having 27. The Castle had 125, but no Lord Lieutenant found it
comfortable. Clarendon says it was the worst lodging a gentleman ever
lay in, each shower finding its way through holes in the roof or chinks
in the windows. He was unwilling to spend his own or the King's money
on such a place, but Tyrconnel, who laughed at his scruples, made some
improvements. There were serious fires in Strafford's time and in 1684,
and a much worse one in 1711, when many records were lost, after which
the Castle was gradually modernised. The country house at Chapelizod
was preferred by viceroys as a residence during the Restoration period.
The great town-houses in Dublin, many of which still stand, and are
converted to public uses, belong to the eighteenth century. Two
older ones, which have now disappeared, deserve mention. Cork House,
adjoining the Castle, was built by the first Earl of that name, turned
to various purposes after his death, and demolished in 1768. Chichester
House, where the Bank of Ireland now stands, was originally built by
Sir George Carey for a hospital, and was afterwards sold to Sir Arthur
Chichester. Here Lord Justice Borlase was living when the rebellion of
1641 broke out, and here sat the Parliaments of 1661 and 1692, after
which it became the regular place of meeting. The old house was pulled
down in 1728, and the fine building which succeeded it was taken by the
Bank after the Union.[282]

[Sidenote: After the Revolution.]

In spite of much well-grounded discontent, Ireland prospered under
Charles II. After his death there was an interval of doubt followed
by civil war. In the two years preceding the Boyne a vast number of
houses and cattle were destroyed, nor did the mischief cease until the
full establishment of William's government. Penal laws and commercial
restraint notwithstanding, capital was gradually accumulated during the
next century, and fine houses were built both in town and country. But
the mass of the rural population were badly off, for reliance on the
potato long prevented improvement and kept thousands upon the verge of
starvation. There was nothing to make Irish peasants forget that their
ancestors had been reduced to poverty or driven into exile.[283]

FOOTNOTES:

[275] Rawdon's letters among the Conway papers are calendared with the
Irish and Domestic State Papers. Some of Conway's are in Berwick's
_Rawdon Papers_. The great Lisburn estate came later to the Marquis
of Hertford, and that of Moira to the Marquis of Hastings. Archbishop
Boyle to Conway, July 29, 1665. Dobbs's description of Antrim in Hill's
_Macdonnells of Antrim_, appx. 385. _Ulster Journal of Archæology_, i.
250. Miss Masson's _Robert Boyle_, p. 264. Gosse's _Jeremy Taylor_.
The great house at Portmore was entirely demolished in the eighteenth
century. Some idea of its magnificence may be formed from the number of
painted tiles--from Holland, no doubt. The bulk were broken through bad
packing, but 7000 were saved.

[276] Essex to Arlington, August 27, 1672, _Essex Papers_, i. 21,
and January 25, 1673, in State Papers, _Ireland_. Story's _Impartial
Hist._, p. 145. Evelyn's _Diary_, October 26, 1690, where Ossory is
named in mistake for Orrery. Smith's _Cork_.

[277] _Ormonde Papers_, vol. vii. Temple on Irish horses, _Works_, vol.
iii. Kilkenny Castle was never sacked, and John Dunton describes its
grandeur in 1699.

[278] Clarendon's letters to Rochester, May 4, 1686, and from September
9 to October following, and a letter to Ormonde of September 28,
in _Ormonde Papers_, vol. vii. John Dunton saw the Curragh races
in September 1698. He found the plain partly covered with heath,
sheltering grouse and hares. _Life and Errors_, ii. 606. In 1673 Temple
gave Essex elaborate advice as to the encouragement of horse-racing,
_Works_, iii. 23.

[279] James Bonnell to John Ellis, August 7, 1688, _Ellis
Correspondence_, ii. 112. Dr. Dun to Dr. King, April 8 and 26, 1684,
in King's _A Great Archbishop of Dublin_. Dun was fond of claret and
of good living generally, see his prescription in Gilbert's _Hist. of
Dublin_, i. 177.

[280] Petty's _Political Anatomy_ of Ireland, published in 1691 after
his death, but written much earlier; his _Political Arithmetic_, and
his _Treatise of Ireland_, written for James II. in 1687. Clarendon's
letters of May 4 and September 28, 1686. Stevens's _Journal_ in
1689, p. 49. Dineley's _Tour_ in 1681, pp. 18, 21. Sir W. Temple's
observations on the United Provinces in his _Works_, ed. 1814, i. 165,
and his Advancement of Trade in Ireland, _ib._ iii. 3. In the quarto
edition of Arthur Young's _Tour_, 1780, there is a good picture of an
Irish cabin without chimney or window and with smoke rolling out of the
doorway. There were many such cabins a generation ago, and there may
still be a few in out-of-the-way places. The mode of constructing them
and the state of their inhabitants are described by John Dunton, who
saw many in 1699, _Life and Errors_, ed. 1818, ii. 605.

[281] Dineley's _Tour_, p. 162. Sir W. Temple on trade in Ireland,
_Works_, iii. 17. See above, vol. i. p. 124.

[282] Petty's _Political Anatomy_, chap. ii., _Dublin Bills_, appx.
(Graunt), further _Observations_ on these Bills (1681), postscript,
_Political Arithmetic_ (1686). Sir Charles Wogan to Swift, February
27, 1732-3, in Swift's _Works_, ed. Scott, xvii. 457. Walter Harris's
_Hist. of Dublin_, 1766, chap. v. Gilbert's _Hist. of Dublin_, ii. 11,
iii. chap. ii. _Clarendon and Rochester Correspondence_, ii. 101. See
the first two essays in C. L. Falkiner's _Illustrations of Irish Hist._
Not many years ago there was but one set of dining tables between the
Castle and the Lodge in Phoenix Park, and they had to be carried to
and fro. For the Dublin ale-houses, see my _Ireland under the Tudors_,
iii. 448. In _Additional MSS._ 14422, an 'exact account' makes the
population of Dublin 40,508 in January 1695, including Trinity College
and Kilmainham. Lord Meath's great house had formed part of St.
Thomas's Abbey.

[283] John Stevens found the Bantry people so poor that half a crown
could hardly be changed, 'and guineas were carried about the whole day
and returned whole.'




CHAPTER LVI

THE THREE IRISH CHURCHES


[Sidenote: The Establishment.]

In the year 1756 Archbishop Stone made a speech in the Irish House
of Lords which the reporter said was much the best he had ever heard
there. Stone showed that the Reformation never had a fair chance in
Ireland. In England the people had been ripe for change, but in the
smaller island it was far otherwise: 'The establishment at first
of the Protestant religion was an act of power quite opposite to
the inclination of the natives, who were, during the reign of Queen
Elizabeth, generally in rebellion, with the Spanish Court to inflame
them more on this account.' During the reigns of the first two Stuarts
this feeling continued unabated, and after the massacre of 1641 all
attempts to reclaim the natives were hopeless. Strafford had done
something, and would have done more 'had he not been entirely governed
by a peevish, weak, narrow-spirited Archbishop Laud, who placed more
importance in the colour of a rag or erecting a monument in the east or
middle of a church than in the great essentials of religion.' Ussher,
the only man who might have united the Protestants, was laid aside,
and the Scotch colony prevented the settlement of Ulster from serving
the Church. Papists were encouraged by these dissensions, and would
have driven the Reformation altogether out of Ireland but for the
constant support of England. Stone was an Englishman and by no means a
model Primate, but he had studied without prejudice the history of the
country in the government of which he had so large a share.[284]

[Sidenote: Jeremy Taylor.]

Bramhall, whom Cromwell called the Irish Canterbury, naturally
became Primate at the Restoration, and the Laudian system was fully
established. The difficulties surrounding the Church may be understood
from the experiences of Jeremy Taylor. Poor and unbeneficed, in 1647
he had published the 'Liberty of Prophesying,' and had endeavoured to
determine the true relation between Church and State. 'The temporal
power,' he said, 'ought not to restrain prophesyings, where the public
peace and interest are not certainly concerned.' He knew that 'a union
of persuasion is impossible to be attained.' Taylor came to Ireland in
1658 with the Protector's licence and protection, and worked quietly as
a clergyman under Lord Conway's patronage. At the Restoration he became
Bishop of Down and Connor and administrator of Dromore, and little more
than two years later he preached Bramhall's funeral sermon. The Primate
had been softened by age, perhaps his mind had been enlarged by foreign
travel and by controversy with Hobbes, and it was against the Bishop
of Down that the Presbyterians exerted their full force. The gentle
Margetson, who succeeded to Armagh, was not one to make the rent worse.
Taylor found a great difference between philosophising as a scholar
and governing as a bishop. The ministers told him that they would
not acknowledge his office, and that they believed the Presbyterian
polity to be of divine right. After several attempts at conciliation he
treated thirty-six parishes as vacant and filled them with incumbents
from England. The Presbyterians turned their faces to Scotland, and
their organisation grew without any reference to the Established Church
of Ireland. Bishop Taylor died in 1667, much of his later time being
occupied in the hopeless task of trying to convert the Roman Catholics
by argument, and in answering the critics of his 'Dissuasive from
Popery.' The diocese was not fortunate in the shepherds who succeeded
him.[285]

[Sidenote: A bad bishop.]

Roger Boyle was Bishop of Down for only five years, and made no
particular mark. Margetson checked his efforts to repress the
Presbyterians. His translation to Clogher was promotion in point of
money, and was also desirable because Lord Ranelagh would get something
out of the first-fruits. He was followed by Thomas Hacket, whom Essex
recommended as a fit person long known to him and to whom he had given
a living in Hertfordshire. Hacket was English by birth, but educated
at Trinity College, Dublin, and he had been Dean of Cork. According to
his own account, he found both Papists and Presbyterians impossible
to deal with, and he soon ceased to try; keeping out of his diocese
as much as possible. The King ordered strict residence, but Clarendon
found that Hacket had been six years absent. He had some good men under
his nominal charge who gave a lamentable account, 'many of the clergy
being absent from their cures and leaving them to mean and ignorant
curates, such as will serve cheapest, which gives a grievous advantage
to the adversaries of our religion.' One of these incumbents was Robert
Maxwell, who drew 900_l._ a year from several benefices 'but never
resided upon any.' The lame foot of justice halted until 1694, when a
royal commission suspended Hacket for non-residence, and then deprived
him for simony. He was one of the worst enemies that the Church of
Ireland ever had.[286]

[Sidenote: Bishops ignorant of Irish.]

The twelve bishops consecrated together at the Restoration were all of
British birth or parentage. Three had been educated at Oxford, three
at Cambridge, the rest at Trinity College, Dublin, but some of the
latter were Oxford doctors also. Robert Leslie, who was particularly
obnoxious to the Presbyterians, had been at Aberdeen as well as
Oxford and Dublin. Most of them were worthy men, many of them great
benefactors to the Church in which they filled high places, but it
does not appear that any spoke Irish. They could, therefore, have no
missionary influence in the wilder districts. This was all in pursuance
of the Laudian policy. Strafford trusted no Irishman nor anyone born
in Ireland, and he thwarted the efforts of Bedell to reach the native
Irish through their own language, leaving that work to the friars.
Jeremy Taylor's idea of civilising the Celts was to make them learn
English. The Scotch in Ulster, whom Strafford tried to destroy and
who instead destroyed him, were also estranged by the determination
of the Irish Government and most of the bishops to acknowledge none
but what the sceptic Petty called 'legal protestants,' and to treat
Presbyterians and Anabaptists as 'fanatics.'[287]

[Sidenote: Condition of the clergy.]

The dignitaries were much too numerous for the requirements of the
Church, and they were pretty well paid. From a report made for
Ormonde's information in 1668 by Dean Lingard of Lismore, we know
that Primate Margetson had over 3500_l._ a year, including his fees
as Prerogative Judge and King's Almoner. Archbishop Boyle of Dublin
had 1200_l._ a year and the expectation of more: he was also Lord
Chancellor. Dr. Mossom of Derry received 1800_l._ Of the others,
twelve had incomes from 1600_l._ to 1000_l._, five between that and
600_l._ The poorest bishoprics were Clonfert and Kildare, being
worth respectively 400_l._ and 200_l._ Christ Church, Dublin, worth
600_l._, was the best deanery. 'The inferior clergy of Connaught,'
adds Lingard, 'are very poor, the whole country being swallowed up
by impropriations.' Bedell, and later Robartes, fought against
pluralities, and no doubt there were some scandalous cases, but there
were a great many parishes in which no clergyman, and especially no
married clergyman, could live decently on glebe and tithe. At the
beginning of the seventeenth century this had gone very far. The abbeys
had got hold of the tithes generally, and after the dissolution the
Crown granted them to laymen. The greatest deficiency was in Connaught,
where the vicar who did the work got commonly but 40_s._ a year and
sometimes only 16_s._ At the beginning of the eighteenth century
things were not much better. When engaged in obtaining the remission
of first-fruits and tenths, Swift reported that hardly one parish in
ten had a glebe and still fewer a house. The livings were so small
that five or six had to be joined to make up 50_l._ a year. The clergy
'for want of glebes were forced in their own or neighbouring parish
to take farms to live on at rack-rent.' So much went to collectors
that the first-fruits and tenths were worth only 500_l._ a year net
to the Crown, and Swift succeeded in getting them remitted. He was
less successful with impropriations still in the Queen's hands worth
about 2000_l._ annually to her and a great impoverishment to the Irish
Church, amounting to one-third or one-half of the real value of each
benefice affected. Goldsmith's good parson

            to all the country dear
    And passing rich with forty pounds a year

was in Ireland, and Chaucer's fuller portrait of such a man might find
application there too.[288]

[Sidenote: The Bible in Irish.]

An Act of 1537 provided that English should be the general language
and that all children should be brought up to speak it, spiritual
promotion in particular being confined to those who could do so. If
a person not so qualified was admitted to orders, he was to be sworn
under penalties to learn English as soon as possible, and the bishop
was subject to a fine of 3_l._ 6_s._ 8_d._ if he failed to administer
the oath. The New Testament was, nevertheless, translated into Irish
in 1602, and James I. ordered that it should be read in Irish-speaking
places. The book soon became scarce, for the Roman Catholic clergy
bought up as many copies as possible. The Irish types provided by
Queen Elizabeth found their way to Douai, and did service against
the Reformation. There was no attempt to translate the Old Testament
from the original tongue, but after the publication of the Authorised
English version, Bedell managed to get it done into Irish. Strafford,
Bramhall, and Chappell all opposed him; nothing was printed, and the
poor Irish scholar employed by the bishop was persecuted and denied
his reward. When Bedell died, his friend Denis Sheridan preserved
the manuscript. During the Civil War nothing could be done, but the
sheets were preserved by Bishop Jones. It was not until long after the
Restoration that the work was again taken in hand, the translation
being then a 'confused heap, pitifully defaced and broken.' Andrew
Sall, a converted Jesuit, was employed; Narcissus Marsh and Price of
Cashel being active in the matter. The Chancellor-Archbishop Boyle was
afraid of the Act of Henry VIII., and Dopping was affected by the same
consideration. Robert Boyle, who wished to do something for the country
whence he drew an income, furnished the funds, fresh types were cut, a
second edition of the New Testament was published in 1681, and a first
edition of the Old in 1685. The belated work was perhaps more useful
in the Scotch highlands than in Ireland, for the time had long passed
since the Reformation might have appealed to a Roman Catholic people in
their own tongue.[289]

[Sidenote: The Presbyterians.]

The Protestant sects of English origin gave little trouble after the
Restoration, though the Castle plot in 1663 showed that some of the
old leaven was still working. But the Presbyterians, who were in fact
a colony from Scotland, had powerful support from that country, and
active ministers could pass to and fro without difficulty and with
little interference from Ormonde, who was not naturally intolerant.
Most of his relations belonged to the Church of Rome. When Robartes
succeeded him in 1669, some favour was shown to the Presbyterians,
but the reign was too short to do much. Berkeley showed very marked
indulgence to the Roman Catholics, and it was not his cue to persecute
Nonconformists. Essex was inclined to toleration, but did not underrate
the difficulties. When Ormonde returned to Dublin Castle in 1677
he found things very much changed. By the law of 1665 no minister
not of episcopal ordination could administer the Sacrament without
paying 100_l._ each time. It was, nevertheless, constantly done,
thousands assembled to hear preachers who often came from Scotland,
and Presbyterian Church government was quietly established. Ormonde
thought the most dangerous party in Ireland to the King's government
was that of the Protestant Nonconformists, 'taken simply by themselves
without the consideration of foreign incitement or assistance.' He knew
that men came from Scotland to escape Lauderdale and his myrmidons,
but it was impossible to prosecute them without doing the same with
the Papists, and after many years tacit toleration that would make
great trouble. If both parties were attacked the prisons would be
full, the population driven from their homes and work, and the revenue
destroyed. His advice was to let things alone without any pronouncement
for toleration, since that would be ascribed to fear. Ulster, he said,
was full of 'the worst Protestants and Papists in the whole kingdom.'
The latter would very probably rebel if they saw a chance, and the
great thing was not to give one. Speeches in the Long Parliament about
the extirpation of Popery in Ireland were 'some cause or at lease some
pretence for the beginning of that rebellion in 1641, as the prospect
of the division between the late King and the two Houses of Parliament
was the encouragement. I have to spread the army very thin to keep
Tories in awe and the English in heart.' The main strength of Irish
Presbyterianism was, and is, in Ulster, but when Ormonde was writing
the above its organisation had been extended to several places in
the other three provinces. There was some active persecution during
the period of reaction after the Popish plot was exploded, but all
Protestants, except the Quakers, joined in the great effort against
James II. When the danger was over, full toleration was still denied to
the Nonconformists.[290]

[Sidenote: The Roman Catholics.]

The Church of Rome retained her hold on the native population of
Ireland. Though in constant danger, a number of priests stayed in the
country during the Commonwealth period, and the Act of Abjuration only
made things worse. Ormonde tried to divide the Roman Catholic clergy,
but he failed to get the Remonstrance adopted. He thought he might even
then have succeeded had he been left longer in the Government, but in
this he was probably wrong. Peter Walsh's party dwindled fast, and
to modern eyes it appears that this was inevitable. The appointment
of Berkeley, coinciding with the treaty of Dover, stopped all active
repression for the time, and Essex, who tried to copy the dividing
policy of Ormonde, had even less chance of success. Occasional fits of
Protestant zeal in England might for a time banish some bishops and
drive some friars and Jesuits into hiding, but the framework of the
Church and the secular clergy were not much disturbed. Ambitious and
restless priests had something to fear from the English Government,
but nothing to expect. Promotion came from Rome; a safe asylum and
sometimes good means of support were afforded by France and Spain.

[Sidenote: Oliver Plunket.]

Oliver Plunket, whose judicial murder has been dealt with above, was
appointed Primate by Clement IX. in 1669. On his way he made some
stay in London, where he was well received by Queen Catherine, and
reached Dublin in March 1670. Robartes was Lord Lieutenant and, search
having been made for the new Archbishop before he came, he thought it
prudent to move at night only. When Berkeley arrived, all was changed.
Plunket was received at Dublin Castle, though not quite openly, and
he explained that he could not help going there often, since Lady
Berkeley, the chief secretary, and others were of his own faith. He was
on good terms with his rival Margetson. There were at that time 1000
secular priests in Ireland and from 600 to 800 regulars who came and
went. When Essex became Lord Lieutenant he was inclined to tolerate
the Roman Catholic clergy if they kept quiet, but the pressure of the
English Parliament in 1673 obliged him to take steps which drove most
of the Roman Catholic bishops from Ireland and many of the regulars.
He tried to protect the remnant of the Remonstrants which Berkeley had
been ordered to do, but did not. Plunket, not otherwise given to harsh
judgments, was very bitter against Peter Walsh, and against anything
that looked like Jansenism. He himself remained in Ireland under the
name of Thomas Cox, and he was not seriously molested until the days
of Oates's plot. He held provincial assemblies, established schools,
and in four years confirmed 48,655 persons, some of whom were sixty
years old, and repressed vice to the utmost. Drunkenness he especially
abhorred, and forbade the clergy to indulge in whisky; to give an
example, he himself did not drink at meals. 'Give me,' he says, 'an
Irish priest without this vice, and he is assuredly a saint.' It must
be remembered that the clergy were extremely poor and that this devoted
Primate had not more than 20_l._ in the world.[291]

[Sidenote: Peter Talbot.]

[Sidenote: O'Molony.]

Peter Talbot became Archbishop of Dublin nearly at the same time as
Plunket was appointed to Armagh, and the two were soon in controversy
about precedence. Talbot was a political priest much practised in
intrigues and altogether different from the Primate. He was supported
by the Duke of York, but not much liked by any party. Both Archbishops
were imprisoned for supposed complicity in the 'Popish plot,' but no
real evidence appeared against either. Talbot died in the Castle of
stone, from which he had long suffered, and Plunket forced his way to
him and administered the last rites. Probably the warders were not
very unwilling. More important than Talbot was John O'Molony, 'the
most dangerous because the wisest man of their clergy,' in Essex'
opinion. He was appointed to Killaloe in 1671, and showed his ability
by bringing about a good understanding between Plunket and Talbot
and between Talbot's brother, the future Tyrconnel, and Ormonde's
brother-in-law, Colonel Fitzpatrick. He had good preferment in France,
so that he could spend some money if required. Essex feared that if
the divisions were healed he would be unable to get any information.
O'Molony had influence at the French Court even before he became a
bishop, and he conferred with Plunket when at Paris on his way to
Ireland.[292]

[Sidenote: Some other bishops.]

O'Molony, though he evidently liked being in France, did not neglect
his duties in Ireland. After three years' uninterrupted residence, he
escaped in 1681 just before the execution of Plunket, and gave a short
account of the ecclesiastical state of Ireland. In Ulster the only
bishop remaining at the moment was Patrick Tyrrell of Clogher, who
wandered about as secretly as possible. In Leinster there were James
O'Phelan, who managed to live among friends in his diocese of Ossory,
and Mark Forstall of Kildare, who was a prisoner in Dublin Castle.
In Munster, Brenan, Archbishop of Cashel, lived quietly with his
relations, while Peter Creagh of Cork lurked in hiding near Killaloe;
he was betrayed by a servant who mistook him for O'Molony. Wetenhall,
the Protestant Bishop of Killaloe, had Creagh arrested and imprisoned
at Limerick, but he was afterwards sent to Dublin and left at large
under surveillance. James Duley, Bishop of Limerick, was taken before a
magistrate, but allowed to go free on account of his age and infirmity.
In Connaught, where the Protestant minority was small, De Burgo of
Elphin and Keogh of Clonfert were able to live quietly, though not
quite safely. The inferior clergy throughout Ireland were practically
tolerated, not being considered as directly under foreign jurisdiction
like the bishops. O'Molony was specially suspected on account of his
known dealings with the French Government, and was supposed to be the
contriver of the imaginary invasion which brought Oliver Plunket to the
scaffold. He came to believe that 'there is no Englishman, Catholic
or other, of what quality or degree soever alive that will stick to
sacrifice all Ireland for to save the least interest of his own in
England.'[293]

[Sidenote: Recusants after James II.]

James II. naturally wished to provide for the endowment of his own
Church, and he proposed to create a fund by keeping vacant the
archbishopric of Cashel and three other sees. Bishop O'Molony's
advice was to take all benefices, giving a pension to the Protestant
incumbents who could 'pretend' to nothing more than a lease for life.
The Acts of Attainder and of Absentees would have gone a long way
towards carrying this out without troubling about life interests. When
the Jacobite cause was finally lost, the Irish penal code came into
being. Being in a minority, the victors never felt quite safe, and
having suffered much were not in a forgiving mood. As to the results
of this oppression Berkeley asked, 'Whether it be not a vain attempt
to project the flourishing of our Protestant gentry exclusive of the
bulk of the natives?' In another place he says, 'The house of an Irish
peasant is the cave of poverty; within you see a pot and a little
straw; without, a heap of children tumbling on the dunghill.' Swift at
various periods asserted that the Roman Catholics of Ireland were in
point of power no more considerable than women and children; and in
1731, when the persecution had done its work, he added that the estates
of Papists were very few, 'crumbling into small parcels, and daily
diminishing.' In 1745, the year of Swift's death, Berkeley besought
the Roman Catholics of his diocese of Cloyne not to rise in favour of
the Pretender, lest they should lose the little that was left to them.
Four years later he addressed the priests, dwelling upon their common
Christianity and urging them, as the only people who had the necessary
influence, to use it for the advancement of industry among their
people. Respecting his character more than his office, the priests,
or at least many of them, took his advice in good part, but Petty had
long before pointed out that the idleness of the Irish was less due to
original sin than to the absence of inducement to work.[294]

[Sidenote: Slow growth of toleration.]

In Locke's opinion 'that Church can have no right to be tolerated by
the magistrate, which is constituted upon such a bottom, that all those
who enter into it do thereby _ipso facto_, deliver themselves up to
the protection and service of another prince. For by this means the
magistrate would give way to the settling of a foreign jurisdiction
in his own country, and suffer his own people to be listed, as it
were, for soldiers against his own government.' Notwithstanding this
consideration, which used to weigh heavily with statesmen, full legal
toleration has long been achieved. Intolerance between man and man
will, it is to be hoped, become less bitter and less baleful with
time. Clerical influence in civil affairs will continue to diminish,
but will still be strong for long years to come. In the meantime we
have the three Irish Churches keeping the peace between themselves,
but distinctly divided. The Protestant Episcopalians look back to St.
Patrick and trace their succession to the early days of Christianity,
but in modern Ireland they represent mainly the immigrants from England
since the Tudor re-conquest. The Presbyterians are the Scotch colony
in Ulster with some outposts in the other provinces. The bulk of the
native population adheres to Rome.[295]

FOOTNOTES:

[284] _Additional MSS._ 38538. The report is signed William Henry,
apparently he who was Dean of Killaloe in 1761; it is addressed to a
duke, probably Newcastle.

[285] Patrick Adair is very hard on Taylor, showing little reverence
for his learning and eloquence; as for his theology, 'he had sucked
in the dregs of much of Popery, Socinianism and Arminianism,' _True
Narrative_, p. 245. Later lights on Taylor's Irish experience are in
Mr. Gosse's biography, 1903. Writing to Conway on July 4, 1665, Rawdon
says: 'His lordship is so close at his study replying to the answers to
his book against Popery, that he is hardly got out of his closet,' Cal.
of State Papers, _Ireland_.

[286] Essex to Arlington, August 17, 1672, State Papers, _Ireland_;
Hacket to Conway, _ib._ December 13. Clarendon to Hacket, May 25, 1686,
in _Clarendon and Rochester Corr._, i. 404.

[287] Mason's _Hist. of St. Patrick's_, p. 193. 'The numerous companies
of priests and friars amongst them take care they shall know nothing
of religion, but what they design for them; they use all means to keep
them to the use of the Irish tongue, lest if they learn English they
might be supplied with persons fitter to instruct them; the people are
taught to make that also their excuse for not coming to our churches,
to hear our services, or converse with us in religious intercourses,
because they understand us not, and they will not understand us,
neither will they learn that they may understand and live.'--Taylor's
_Dissuasive from Popery_, preface, _Works_, x. 124. Bedell said 'Those
people had souls which ought not to be neglected till they would learn
English'--_Two Lives_, p. 41.

[288] Macaulay saw only part of the question when he wrote (chap.
vi.): 'The most absurd ecclesiastical establishment that the world
has ever seen. Four Archbishops and eighteen Bishops were employed
in looking after about a fifth part of the number of churchmen who
inhabited the single diocese of London. Of the parochial clergy a large
proportion were pluralists and resided at a distance from their cures.
There were some who drew from their benefices incomes of little less
than a thousand pounds a year, without ever performing any spiritual
function.' Lingard's report to Ormonde, 1668, calendared among State
Papers, _Ireland_, p. 674. Collier's _Ecclesiastical Hist._, vii. 383.
Swift to Harley, September or October 1610, in his _Correspondence_,
ed. Ball, i. 200.

[289] A sufficient account of the Irish translation of the Bible is
in Bedell's _Life_, copiously annotated by the editor, T. Wharton.
Jones, 1872. See also my _Ireland under the Tudors_, chap. liv., and
the article on Andrew Sall in the _Dictionary of National Biography_.
_Irish Statutes_, 28 Hen. VIII., cap. 15.

[290] Writing to Arlington, October 12, 1673, _Essex Papers_, i. 174,
Essex says the Dissenters in Ulster had increased from under 14,000 of
all sorts in Strafford's time to about 100,000 men fit to bear arms.
On October 19, 1674, he praises the moderation of the Bishop of Down
towards Dissenters, _ib._ p. 262. For a less tolerant episcopal view,
see Bishop Otway of Killala to Essex, _Essex Papers_, ed. Pike, pp.
94, 113. Ormonde to H. Coventry, September 4, 1677, _Additional MSS._
32095. Reid's _Presbyterian Hist._, ii. 336. In 1679 the Presbytery of
Down acknowledged Ormonde's 'favour and noble candour' to them, _ib._
p. 572. Avaux repeatedly mentions the favour shown by James to Quakers.
Writing to Strype on August 5, 1690, Bonnell says they 'at first took
civil offices under King James, and were looked upon by us and by the
Roman Catholics as the same with them; but latterwards, when they
saw how things were like to go, they sided more with us.' It was not
forgotten that Robert Barclay had been educated by Jesuits, and it was
easy to say that the Quaker leaders did 'inwardly own Ignatius Loyola
as their founder,' _Secret Consults of the Romish Party_, p. 90.

[291] Moran's _Life of Plunket_, chaps. v. to viii. _passim_. 'I made
use of some friars, who always have their little wrangles with their
secular clergy, to set up factions against some of their Bishops,
&c.'--Essex to Ormonde, November 14, 1673, in _Essex Papers_.

[292] Bishop Forstall's letter of June 5, 1680, in _Spicilegium
Ossoriense_, ii. 257. Rev. John O'Molony to Propaganda from Paris,
July 19, 1669: 'In aula apud regni administros non sum ignotus, in
rebus agendis et tractandis non penitus ignarus,' _ib._ i. 488. Essex
to Ormonde, November 14, 1673, _Essex Papers_. Brady's _Episcopal
Succession_, ii. 47, 120.

[293] Bishop of Killaloe to the Propaganda from Havre, June 13,
1681, _Spicilegium Ossoriense_, ii. 258. O'Molony calls his rival
Wetenhall 'heterodoxus Laonensis vir ex omni isto clero pessimus
et mendacissimus.' Letter of the same, also from France, to Bishop
Tyrrell, March 8, 1689, in King's _State of the Protestants_, appx. 17.
At Paris in 1689 O'Molony was a thorn in Melfort's side, Macpherson, i.
339.

[294] O'Molony to Tyrrell, _ut sup._ Swift's Letter on the Sacramental
Test, 1708, Drapier's sixth letter, 1724, Presbyterians' Plea of Merit,
1731. Berkeley's _Querist_, no. 255, Letter to the Roman Catholics of
Cloyne, 1745, Word to the Wise, 1749, _Works_, ed. Fraser, vol. iii.

[295] Locke's letter concerning toleration (the first).




APPENDIX

ORMONDE TO BENNET


Bodleian Library, MS. Carte 143. [Pages 164-169.]

  To M^r Secretary Bennett         Dublin, _August 22, 1663_.

  S^r

As it is my duty by yo^u to give his Ma^{tie} frequent accoumpts of his
commands when I receive them, and of the state of his Affaires vnder my
management, soe when any thing extraordinary happens or may reasonably
be apprehended I conceive it a more speciall duty to represent it
seasonably that his Ma^{tie} may apply such remedyes and preuentions as
may be proper to obviate the disturbance of his Goverment.

It is well knowne to his Ma^{tie}that when he arriued in England this
kingdome was absolutely in the power and for the most parte in the
possession of such as one way or other had been engaged against his
interest, and that the endeauours of some and acquiescence of others
for his restoration was vpon confidence and vpon something very neere
a promis on the Kings parte that they should enjoy what was in their
hands as Adventurers by the Act past in England in the 17 of the last
King & as souldiers according to the lotts that fell to their share by
the distribution of the vsurpers. Soone after his Ma^{ties} comeing
to London applications weare made to him by such a representatiue of
those that had the power of the Kingdome as could most obleege them.
Their first addresses consisted of recognitions, congratulations, and
a present, afterwards propositions weare made for the reduction of the
kingdome to be governed in spiritualltys and temporaltyes by the good
old way established by law, and last of all a petitionary addresse
to be secured in their propertyes pursuant to his Ma^{ties} gracious
intentions made knowne to them by his declarations and more private
vndertakeings. In the two former there was noe difficulty his Ma^{tie}
graciously accepted the one and readyly consented to the other, but
the latter tooke vp much tyme, by reason of the irreconcileable
pretentions of the English & Irish, and of the difficulty of his
Ma^{ties} complying with those as irreconcileable obligations that were
vpon him to many of both nations, to those Irish that had redeemed
their defection by their hearty endeauour (though vnsuccessefull) to
keepe his Ma^{ties} goverm^t ouer them, and to those English that
with successe had redeemed their faileings by an early invitation and
voluntary submission to his Goverment, yet at length a declaration and
then an Act was past after much debate betwixt the English and Irish
before the King and his Councell there, a liberty without president
at the consideration of a bill, but yet perhaps reasonable in this
case of w^{ch} alsoe there was noe example against the exposition made
by his Ma^{ties} Com^{rs} of this bill and their decrees giuen vpon
it, the cry on the English side is great some of them affirming that
not aboue the 6^{th} parte of those that claymed as innocents being
heard yet 800000 acres are restored to old proprietors. Whether the
cry be reasonable or the computation right I will not indeed I cannot
determine. The King made choice of Com^{rs} of good reputation for
ability & integrity, and I presume whateuer the cry may be they will
giue a good account of their proceedings. That w^{ch} most satisfyed me
in the Act was that his Ma^{tie} haueing diuested himselfe of the power
of Judgeing & distributeing possessions and that in a way satisfactory
to two Protestant Councells and a Protestant Parliam^t and named
Protestant vnconcearned Com^{rs}. It would thenceforth be impossible
to fix vpon him the scandall of partiallity towards Irish and papists,
then w^{ch} a more dangerous cannot in my opinion be invented, and I
thought this the more out of danger in that his Ma^{tie} voutchafe[296]
to assure me he would not by his letters interpose in the Judiciall
parte of the settlement of this Kingdome. Two things weare by the Act
intrusted with his Ma^{tie} the one vpon emergencies where the Justice
of Particular cases should appeare to him to require it to direct the
putting in of claimes, the other was to direct whome of the former
proprietors of Howses in Corporations (who should be found innocent)
should be restored to their Howses, and not to valueable exchanges in
landes adjacent, the first of these powers was left in the King that
if by any vnavoydable accident some person might be soe remote as that
he could not put in his claime by the limited tyme his Ma^{tie} might
vpon the euidence of such accident releeue such a person, but those
letters (as one may guesse by y^e number of them) haue not been refused
to any that haue sought for them, and the Com^{rs} haue his Ma^{ties}
command in such reuerence that they haue giuen way to the retracting
of old & putting in new claimes vpon letters soe directing, though
thereby some doe beleeve they violate the intention of the Act vnder
collour of obedience to the King's command and it is more then probable
that thereby alsoe a way hath been opened to the forgeing of such
conveyances & settlements as experience had shewen would be of force
and in consequence of that to perjury in prooveing such deedes.

The other power his Ma^{tie} reserued to himselfe to the end that
whereas provision was made in the Act that though the former
inhabitants in Corporations should be found innocent they should not
be restored to their Howses but to equivalent satisfaction for them,
that the townes might be for publique security inhabited by Protestants
and English, yet in case of extraordinary merritt His Ma^{tie} was
trusted to dispence with the rigor of that provision and restore such
meriting person to his antient dwelling, but in this as in the other
case it should seeme that noe pretender to such fauour hath been
refused and some provisionall letters haue beene sent that in case such
a person should be found innocent he should be restored to his Howses
in Corporations, and for some men will be restored to 20 some to 90
and some to 100 Howses in one Citty and be at liberty to lett in what
inhabitants he thinks fitt to the vtter disappointment of that security
and improvem^t w^{ch} was designed by the Act, If this be the case as I
doubt it is very like it, the conclusion will be that those powers left
in his Ma^{tie} for the releefe of particular extraordinary cases haue
been extended promiscuously without examination to all pretenders to
them.

There remained nothing now to compleate a beleefe in this people
of his Ma^{ts} extraordinary fauour to the Irish but to interpose
his authority in poynt of Judgement and to direct the Com^{rs} that
whateuer euidence should be produced against my L^d of Antrym of the
highest guilt from the beginning to the ending of the Irish Rebellion
yet they should iudge him innocent and that vpon the ground of haueing
receiued precedent instructions from the late King & subsequent
approbation for all his actings, some Inferences naturally arriseing
thence I will not mention. I pray God there may neuer come a tyme
when they may be easylyer vrged then well answered, but it is very
frequently & too plausibly said this breakeing in vpon the prescribed
methode of the Act cutts of all present & future security that the
King may as well declare any of them who haue most contributed to
his restoration to be nocent within the rules by w^{ch} the English
are to be tryed and that without proofe, as my L^d of Antrim to be
innocent against proofe, and that if there be noe security in an Act
of Parliam^t they know not where to seeke for it or when they haue it,
from this liberty w^{ch} it is not possible to restrayne proceede my
apprehensions.

All the ill people planted heere by the vsurpers and all the officers &
souldiers that haue been disbanded since the Kings coming in are still
heere and put togither I doubt they are the greater number of English.

There is noe mony in the Treasury noe victuall in any Garrisson or
store ammunition is scant enough, there are noe necessarys to make
a trayne of Artillery march, and w^{ch} is wors then all this if a
quarrell should be raised and stated to be betweext an English and an
Irish Interest (as to the vulgar it would) the common souldier could
not be trusted nor would many officers I doubt be ouer keene in the
Service, & God defend vs from a necessity of Armeing Irish.

A question is raised whether the tyme prefixed by the Act for Judgeing
of Innocents ended not the 2^d of July. Whether it did or noe diuers
English as I heere & particularly those on my Lord of Antrims estate
resolue not to giue vp possession vpon any decree made since the 2 of
July: The issue to be expected is that either the sherriff will refuse
to demaund possession or he will be opposed if he doe, his legall
remedy in case of opposition is to rayse the power of the county and
such assemblys at this tyme are not I think to be wished, and if he
think himselfe not warranted to give possession there does not appeare
to me any authority to force him to it or punish him for not doeing it,
the standing courts of Justice are armed but the Act as I am told by
those that vnderstand it hath not giuen any such to y^e Com^{rs}. The
difficulty I fore see I may be in is that the Kings officer and his
Authority will in appearance receiue an affront or I must apply some
extraordinary and perhaps vnseasonable remedy to it. I humbly desire I
may receiue the Kings direcions in this poynt.

Though this description of the condition of this Kingdome be long yet
I haue omitted many circumstances & consequences deducible from what
I haue said, by w^{ch} the hazardous state wee are in might be made
more euident, what I haue presumed by yo^u to represent to his Ma^{tie}
is to the end he should haue before him the disorders that may happen
w^{ch} yet I shall imploy my vttermost industry to preuent.

Since I began this letter I haue receiued yours of the 15 currant but
shall aske your leaue to deferr the answering any thing requireing
answer till the next post.

  S^r

  Your most affectionate
  humble servant

You will receiue this post seuerall letters for the promotion of some
B^{hps} one in favour of S^r Tho: Wharton on very iust grounds, and one
for S^r Theophilus Jones a person exceedingly merriting in the worke
of his Ma^{ties} restoration and very fitt at this tyme and alwaies to
receiue fauour and encouragem^t.

Heere goes alsoe a letter for Coll. Milo Power w^{ch} is but the Coppy
of one graunted to him before but in some way lost by him.

FOOTNOTES:

[296] _Or_ (?) vouschafe.




INDEX

TO

THE THIRD VOLUME


  Abercorn, James Hamilton, 1st Earl of, 222

  Acton, Richard, 285

  Adair, Patrick, 4, 90, 104

  Albemarle, George Monck, 1st Duke of, Lord Lieutenant 1660 ... 5, 16, 24,
      229

  Albeville, White, Marquis of, Irish intriguer with Spanish title, 275,
      302

  Alden, Philip, 37, 96

  Aldworth, Sir Richard, 204

  Alexander VII. (Chigi), Pope, 53

  Alexander VIII. (Ottoboni), Pope, 199, 301

  Anderton, Rev. Hugh, 143

  Anglesey, Arthur Annesley, 1st Earl of, Vice-treasurer 1660-1667 ... 5,
      16, 40, 44;
    protests against the Cattle Bill, 69, 72, 75, 79, 80, 110, 123, 128,
        129;
    dismissed from the Privy Seal, 140-143;
    his lost History, 142

  Antrim, Randal Macdonnell, 1st Marquis of, 25;
    restored to his estate, 39-43;
    Ormonde's reflections on, 335, 336

  -- Alexander Macdonnell, 3rd Earl of, 197

  -- county, 193

  Arabia, Ireland like, 214

  Ardagh, 55

  Ardee, fortified by James II., 267, 271, 272, 293

  Argyle, Archibald Campbell, 9th Earl of, 149

  Arklow, 304

  Arlington, Henry Bennet, 1st Earl of, 11;
    founds Portarlington, 27-29, 67, 74, 131, 141, 333

  Armagh, 288, 292, 293

  -- county, 113, 137, 157, 160, 288

  Armourer, Sir Nicholas, Governor of Duncannon, 94, 105

  Arran, Richard Butler, Earl of Duke of Ormonde's son, Lord Deputy 1682
      ... 68, 135, 144, 167, 182

  -- Islands, 39

  Arundel of Wardour, Henry Lord, 165

  Ash, Captain J., 249

  Ashley: _see_ Shaftesbury

  Aston, Captain William, 162

  Athlone, 99, 149, 151, 265, 266, 293

  Aubigny, Ludovic Stuart seigneur de, 53, 58

  Aughrim battle, 175, 222, 284

  Aungier, Lord: _see_ Longford

  Avaux, Jean-Antoine de Mesmes, Count of, French Ambassador to James II.,
      195, 197;
    his instructions, 209, 210, 211, 213-215, 217, 219, 222;
    his contempt for the King, 224, 226, 231, 236, 237, 239, 240, 246, 247,
        250, 256, 262, 272;
    his hostility to Lauzun, 273, 274, 275, 277, 280;
    leaves Ireland, 281, 282, 287, 326


  Baker, Major Henry, Governor of Londonderry, 240, 241

  Ballinacargy, 252

  Ballyshannon, 193, 271

  Bandon, 186, 202, 205, 313

  Bangor, co. Down, 261

  Bantry, 217, 218

  Barberini, Cardinal Francesco, 57, 61

  Barillon, French Ambassador, 187, 195, 206

  Barnesmore Gap, co. Donegal, 253

  Barry, Sir James, Chief Justice: _see_ Santry

  Beachy Head, 275, 300

  Beaufort, Duke of, in France, 81, 83

  Beaumaris, 151

  Bedell, William, Bishop of Kilmore, 54, 134, 323, 324

  Belfast, charter forfeited, 173, 189, 193, 261, 262, 264;
    mortality in the hospital, 269;
    arrival of William III., the Lough like a wood, 290, 291

  Belleek, 252

  Bellew, Walter, 2nd Baron, 265

  -- Castle, 279

  Belturbet, battle at, 253, 278, 279

  Bennet, Sir Henry: _see_ Arlington

  Benson, Quartermaster, 150

  Berkeley of Stratton, John, 1st Baron, President of Connaught 1662-1666,
      Lord Lieutenant, 1670-1672, his character, 98, 99, 100, 101, 104-108,
      112, 138, 167, 325, 327

  Berkeley, Sir Maurice, 99

  Berry, Colonel, 254

  Berwick, James FitzJames, Duke of, Arabella Churchill's son, 163;
    accompanies James II. to Ireland, 206, 212, 220, 222, 253, 256;
    burns Newry, 264, 272, 278, 292;
    at the Boyne, 294, 296, 298;
    burns Charleville, 311

  Beverley, Sir Thomas, member of Court of Claims, 30, 42, 43, 46

  Bingham, Captain, 149

  Birch, Colonel John, 21-23, 270

  Blackwater river (in Ulster), 288;
    (in Munster), 82

  Blake, Sir Valentine, 25

  Blayney, Henry Vincent, 5th Baron, 213

  Blessington, Murrough Boyle, 1st Viscount, 150

  Blood, Thomas, the conspirator, 35, 37, 38, 101, 102

  Boisseleau, French brigadier, 206, 217, 273, 278

  Bolingbroke, Viscount, 300, 308

  Bonnell, James, Accountant-General, 284, 314, 326

  Bonrepaus, French diplomatist, 195

  Borlase, Sir John, Lord Justice in 1641 ... 53, 317

  -- Edmund, author of the 'Execrable Irish Rebellion,' 141

  Bourke, Hubert, 133

  Bow Church, 232

  Boyle, Michael, Primate and Chancellor, 20, 39, 94, 101, 138, 147, 148,
      154, 223, 228, 310, 322

  -- Henry, 205, 313

  -- Robert, 229, 324

  -- Roger, Bishop of Down, 321

  -- family, 310;
    _see_ Blessington, Orrery, Burlington

  -- co. Roscommon, 271

  Boyne river, 203, 257, 275, 286, 288, 293, 294;
    the battle, 295-299;
    its historical importance, 300, 301, 303, 305, 318

  Brady, Rev. Nicholas, 202, 207

  Bramhall, Primate John, 8, 10, 320

  Bray, 302, 304

  Brecknock, Ormonde's English earldom, 7

  Breda, declaration of, 11

  Brenan, Archbishop John, 329

  Brest, 217, 273, 305

  Brewster, Sir Francis, 143

  Bridgeman, Sir Orlando, 48

  -- Lord (apparently meaning the 1st Baron Bradford), 167

  Bristol, George Digby, 2nd Earl of, 43

  Brittas, Theobald Bourke, 3rd Baron of, 133

  Broghill: _see_ Orrery

  Brook, Captain, 160

  Brookhill, co. Antrim, 309

  Brown, Geoffrey, 18, 25

  Browne, Sir Valentine, 204, 205

  Browning, Micaiah, 249

  Buckingham, George Villiers, 2nd Duke of, 74, 84, 87-90, 92, 101, 116,
      122

  Bulkeley, Robert, 2nd Viscount, 151

  Bundrowes, 251, 255, 256

  Burgo, Bishop Dominic de, 329

  Burke or de Burgo, Archbishop John, 60

  Burlington, Richard Boyle, 1st Earl of, 79, 133, 313

  Burnet, Gilbert, Bishop of Salisbury, 65, 89, 90, 232, 258

  Bury, Sir William, 4

  Bussy-Rabutin, Count, 273, 281

  Butler, Colonel Edmund, 242

  -- Captain, 68

  -- family: _see_ Arran, Galmoy, Mountgarret, Ormonde, Ossory


  Caillemote, Colonel La, 288, 297

  Canary Company, 70, 71, 80

  Capel, Sir Henry, 133

  Cappoquin, 82

  Capranica, 137

  Capuchins, 54

  Carey, Sir George, 317

  Carlingford, 137, 138, 264, 268

  Carlow, 16, 208

  Carmelites, 54

  Caron, Redmond, Franciscan, 56-58, 65

  Carrickfergus, 68, 149, 193;
    siege by Schomberg, 262-264;
    William III. lands, 290

  Carteret, Sir George, 75

  Cartwright, Thomas, Bishop of Chester, 168, 206;
    dies in Dublin, 284, 290

  Castle Caulfield, 257

  Castleblayney, 288

  Castlehaven, James Touchet, 3rd Earl of, his memoirs, 140, 141, 311

  Castlemaine, Roger Palmer, Earl of, 170, 199

  -- Lady: _see_ Cleveland

  Castlemartyr, 113, 186, 311

  Castlemore, co. Mayo, 92

  Catherine of Braganza, Queen, 327

  Catiline, 163

  Cavan, flight of Protestants from, 252, 255;
    combat there, 278, 279

  Cavanagh, Maurice, 165, 166

  Chapelizod, 317

  Charenton, 152

  Charlemont, 91, 149, 214, 215, 246, 250;
    capitulates to Schomberg, 288, 289

  Charles V., Emperor, 112

  Charles II., proclaimed in Dublin, 3;
    sanctions the Irish Convention, 5;
    receives money from Ireland, 6;
    holds out expectations, 7;
    fills vacant sees, 8;
    bound by his father's legislation, 11;
    his Declaration, 13;
    excuses its imperfections, 16;
    his hand forced on the land question, 23;
    his grant to Arlington, 28;
    'horribly angry' with the Irish Parliament, 32, 34;
    his action in the Antrim case, 39-43;
    his rash promises, 45;
    his influence on the Cattle Bill, his inconsistency, 80;
    his treatment of Clarendon, 84-86;
    led by Buckingham, 88;
    never loses confidence in Ormonde, 89;
    rebukes Robartes, 95;
    his opinion of Berkeley, 98;
    pardons Blood, 102;
    exercises the dispensing power, 105, 109;
    gives away the Phoenix Park, 111;
    abandons his tolerant policy, 113-115;
    restores Ormonde to favour, 116;
    defrauds his Exchequer, 120, 125;
    sups with Ormonde, 122;
    makes improvident grants, 126;
    his opinion of Orrery, 130;
    afraid to pardon Oliver Plunket, 139;
    dismisses Anglesey, 142;
    under his brother's influence, 146

  Charles Edward, the young Pretender, 308

  Charleville, 113, 144, 310, 311

  Charnock, Stephen, 35

  Chester, Clarendon at, 151;
    Tyrconnel at, 167, 168;
    James II. at, 195;
    Schomberg at, 260, 261, 264;
    William III. at, 290

  Chichester, Sir Arthur, 142, 317

  Cholmondeley, Mr., 168

  Chudleigh, Thomas, 83

  Churchill, Sir Winston, Commissioner of Claims, 28, 30, 43, 46, 49

  Cladyford, co. Tyrone, 194, 214, 216

  Clanbrassil, Henry Hamilton, 2nd Earl of, and his wife (Lady Alice
      Moore), 104, 105

  Clancarty, Donough MacCarthy, 1st Earl of, 15, 17, 36

  -- -- -- 4th Earl of, 220, 223, 253

  Clanmalier, Lewis O'Dempsey, 2nd Viscount, 28, 29

  Clanricarde, Ulick Do Burgh, 1st Marquis of, 12, 21

  Clare, 6, 14, 15, 46, 126, 316

  -- Daniel O'Brien, 3rd Viscount, 298

  Clarendon, Edward Hyde, 1st Earl of, Lord Chancellor of England, 4, 6, 8,
      11, 12, 24, 25;
    his opinion of Arlington, 27, 30-32, 40, 41, 43-46, 53;
    opposes the Cattle Bill, 70-72, 74, 75;
    Irish attacks on him, 84-86, 98, 101, 216

  Clarendon, Henry Hyde, 2nd Earl of, Lord Privy Seal, 150;
    Lord Lieutenant, 151;
    his idea of toleration, _ib._;
    his journey to Holyhead, _ib._;
    his ideas on Church patronage, 153;
    his opinions about Irish lawyers, 155;
    supports Catherine Sedley, 157;
    overshadowed by Tyrconnel, 159;
    his subservient spirit, 165;
    leaves, Ireland, 166, 167-172, 174-176, 216, 218, 222, 225, 226, 284;
    his wife entertains at the Castle, 312, 313, 321

  Clarges, Sir Thomas, Monck's brother-in-law, 43

  Clement IX. (Rospigliosi), Pope, 100, 327

  Cleveland, Barbara Villiers, Lady Castlemaine and Duchess of, 1, 84, 102;
    enriched at the expense of Ireland, 111, 112, 120

  Clifford, Thomas, Lord, 96, 98

  Clones, 252, 279

  Clonmel, 11, 113, 116, 144, 208, 313

  Cloyne, 97

  Coghlan, Joseph, 231

  Cole, Sir Michael, 176

  Colebrooke river, 254

  Coleman, Edward, 139

  Coleraine, 190, 193, 212, 213, 246

  Comber, 188, 190, 191

  Compton, Henry, Bishop of London, 182

  Comyn, Eustace, his 'mad narrative,' 138

  Connaught, 6, 14, 15, 46, 91, 92, 99;
    Presidency suppressed, 112, 126, 250, 252, 271

  Conway, North Wales, 151

  -- Edward, 1st Earl of, 105, 118, 122, 132, 309, 320

  Cooke, Colonel Edward, 46

  Coote, Sir Charles: _see_ Mountrath

  -- Captain, 177

  Cork, 3, 21, 117, 118, 127, 149, 186;
    James II. at, 208, 281, 282, 313, 329

  -- Richard Boyle, 1st Earl of, 207, 317

  Costello, Dudley, 91, 92

  Costigan, John, 91

  Coventry, 151;
    letter from, 168

  -- Henry, 30, 113, 122, 125

  -- Sir William, 72

  -- Sir John, 102

  Craven, William, Earl of, 182

  Creagh, Bishop Peter, 329

  Crichton, Colonel David, 251

  Crispin, Captain, 83, 84

  Croly, Daniel, 203

  Crom Castle, co. Fermanagh, 251, 254

  Cromwell, Henry, 35

  -- Oliver, 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 17, 35, 39, 73, 90, 150, 183, 189, 209, 261,
      284, 299, 320

  Crookshanks, John, 38

  Culmore, 241, 243, 249

  Cunningham, Colonel John, 215

  Cunningham's Dragoons, 257

  Curlew Mountains, 271

  Curragh of Kildare, 180, 312, 313

  Cutts, John, afterwards Lord, 297


  Daly, Patrick, 59

  -- Dennis, made a judge by James II., 155, 156, 208;
    threatened with impeachment, 235

  Danby, Thomas Osborne, 1st Earl of, 120, 122, 182

  Danes in William III.'s service, 268, 288, 297-299

  Darcy, Bishop Oliver, 54, 56, 57, 59

  Davies, Sir William, 107, 111

  Dean, deserter from Schomberg, 262

  Dease, Bishop Oliver, 59

  Dee river, 261

  Delamere, Henry Booth, 2nd Baron, 289

  Dempsey, James, 59

  -- Colonel, 292

  Derby, Lord, 168

  Digby, Simon, Bishop of Limerick, 223

  Dillon, Corporal, 68

  -- Cary, 116

  -- Thomas, Viscount, 40, 91

  Dixie, Captain, 251

  Dodwell, Henry, 229

  Dolben, John, Archbishop of York, 65

  Dominicans, 207

  Domvile, Sir William, Attorney-General 1660-1686 ... 5, 17, 18, 40, 170

  Donagh, co. Fermanagh, 253, 254

  Donegal, 177, 253

  -- Arthur Chichester, 1st Earl of, 68

  Donore, 299

  Dopping, Antony, Bishop of Meath, 223, 227, 231, 236, 283, 284

  Dorchester, Lord, 74

  -- Lady: _see_ Sedley

  Douai, 324

  Douglas, Andrew, 249

  -- General James, 270, 295, 296

  Dover, Treaty of, 114, 165, 327

  -- Henry Jermyn, created Baron, 206, 280-282, 287

  Down, 134, 193, 261, 320, 321

  Downpatrick, 161

  Drogheda, 66, 127, 266, 272, 293;
    surrenders to William III., 298

  Dromahaire, 192

  Dromore, co. Down, 54, 56, 193, 212, 264, 310, 320

  Drybridge, 297

  Dryden, John, 73, 74, 87

  Dublin, welcomes the Restoration, 3;
    riots there, 106;
    agitators there, 111;
    qualifications for a Lord Mayor of, 129;
    recruiting there, 160;
    welcomes James II., 208;
    Parliament there, 223;
    riotous winter there, 272;
    brass money there, 274-276;
    state of Protestants there, 284-286;
    James II. there after the Boyne, 302;
    William III. welcomed there, 306;
    population of, 110, 316

  Duffy, Hugh, 135

  Duleek, 296, 299, 305

  Duley, Bishop James, 329

  Dun, Sir Patrick, 313, 314

  Dunbar, 189

  Dunboyne, 35, 302

  Duncannon Fort, 46, 105, 149, 196, 304

  Dundalk, 68, 143, 232, 264;
    sufferings of army there, 268-270, 288, 291-293

  Dundee, John Graham, Viscount, 280

  Dungan or Dongan, Walter, Lord, 272, 298

  Dungannon, 212, 214, 251

  Dunleary, 151

  Duplessis, a mock Huguenot, 267


  Ellis, William, Secretary to Tyrconnel, 167, 172

  -- Bishop Philip, 168, 169

  Enniscorthy, 304

  Enniskillen and the Enniskilleners, determine to resist, 188, 191, 194,
      239;
    successful defence, 250-257, 264, 271, 274;
    at the Boyne, 297-298

  Erne, lough and river, 194, 252

  Essex, Arthur Capel, Earl of, 65, 108;
    Lord Lieutenant, 112-123;
    saves the Phoenix Park, 112;
    leaves Ireland, 124;
    wishes to return, 132, 133, 134, 138, 139, 260, 311, 325-328

  Eustace, Sir Maurice, Lord Chancellor, 4-6, 20, 67

  Evelyn, John, 1, 43, 53, 150, 164, 166, 311


  Fane river, co. Louth, 266

  Farlow, Captain, 292, 303

  Fell, John, Bishop of Oxford, 124, 220

  Filmer, Sir Edmund, 150, 179

  Finch, Sir Heneage, afterwards 1st Earl of Nottingham, 23, 24, 44, 45,
      72, 97, 98, 103

  -- Daniel, 2nd Earl of Nottingham, 138, 182, 295

  Fingall, Luke Plunkett, 3rd Earl of, 56

  Finglas, 306

  Fitton, Sir Alexander, Lord Chancellor, 164, 167, 175, 176;
    titular Baron of Gosworth, 224, 229, 302, 314

  Fitzgerald, David, 133, 138, 139

  -- Edmund, 97, 98

  -- John, Knight of Kerry, 47-49

  -- Hon. Robert, 124, 306, 307

  Fitzharris, Sir Edward, 96

  -- Edward, 139

  Fitzjames, Henry, second son of James II. by Arabella Churchill, 206,
      218, 272;
    _see_ Berwick

  Fleurus, battle of, 300, 302

  Forbes, Sir Arthur: _see_ Granard

  Forstall, Bishop Mark, 329

  Fox, Sir Stephen, 53

  Franciscans, 57, 62, 63, 135, 207, 283

  French, Bishop Nicholas, 23, 52, 55, 61, 64, 84

  Fuller, William, Bishop of Lincoln, 8, 9


  Galmoy, Pierce Butler, 3rd Viscount, 156, 251, 256, 312

  Galway, 127, 149, 186, 312

  -- Lord, _recte_ Galmoy _q.v._

  George of Denmark, 291, 293

  Gerard, Lord: _see_ Macclesfield

  Goldsmith, Oliver, 323

  Gookin, Vincent, 76

  Gore, Hugh, Bishop of Waterford, 223

  Gormar, Paul, 138

  Grace, Colonel Richard, 150

  Granard, Arthur Forbes, 1st Earl of, 100, 110, 132, 147-149, 180, 211,
      225, 310

  Greatrakes, Valentine, 310

  Groomsport, 262

  Gwyn, Eleanor, 105, 112


  Hacket, Thomas, Bishop of Down, 321

  Halifax, George Savile, 1st Marquis of, 108, 118, 131, 132, 142, 146,
      147, 157, 178, 179, 180, 220, 222, 270

  Hamilton, Anthony, author of the 'Memoires de Grammont,' 89, 161, 167,
      179, 222;
    before Enniskillen, 254, 303

  -- George, 222

  -- Gustavus, Governor of Enniskillen, 191, 192, 212, 253

  -- -- afterwards Lord Boyne, 212

  -- Captain James, 213

  -- John, 179, 303

  -- Richard, 156, 160, 167;
    deceives William III., 187, 193, 212-214, 222, 239, 246-248, 250, 256,
        282;
    at the Boyne, 296, 298

  -- Sir Robert, 177

  -- William, called 'Tory,' 143, 160-162, 278

  -- the six brothers, 222, 274

  Hampden, Richard, 133

  Harbord, William, 260, 290

  Harold, a Franciscan, 283

  Hartstonge, Standish, Baron of Exchequer, 154

  Henrietta Maria, Queen, 40, 43

  Herbert, Arthur, afterwards Earl of Torrington, 217

  -- Sir Edward, titular Earl of Portland, 283, 302

  Hetherington, William, informer, 133, 134, 139

  Hill, an outlaw, 91

  Hillsborough, 193, 291

  Hobbes, Thomas, 320

  Hoguette La, French field officer, 273, 282, 302-304

  Holyhead, 27, 59, 136, 152

  Hopkins, Ezekiel, Bishop of Derry, 189

  Hoquincourt, Marquis de, 303

  Hounslow, 132

  Howard of Escrick, William, 3rd Baron, 132

  Howard, Sir Robert, 97

  Howth, 27, 93

  Hoylake, 290

  Hughes, Margaret, 163

  Huguenots, 267, 268, 271, 297

  Huntingdon, Robert, Provost of Trinity College, 231, 286


  Inchiquin, William O'Brien, 2nd Earl of, 202

  Ingleby, Sir Charles, 155

  Ingoldsby, Sir Henry, 36

  Inniskilling Dragoons and Fusiliers, 257

  Innocent XI. (Odescalchi), Pope, 199

  Ireton, Henry, 66, 112

  Iveagh, Magennis, Viscount, 293


  James II., Duke of York, 24, 26, 74, 80, 98, 122, 133, 146;
    proclaimed in Dublin, 148;
    has no intention of disturbing the Settlement, 152;
    turns out Protestant judges and officers, 154-158;
    hard cases, 159-162;
    throws over Clarendon, 162-166;
    meditates an Irish Parliament, 169;
    at Chester, 172;
    his Declaration of Indulgence, 178;
    brings Irish troops to England, 180;
    his flight or abdication, 190;
    his separatist plans, 195;
    an exile in France, 198;
    his appeal to foreign powers, 199;
    reaches Ireland, 206;
    his reception in Dublin, 208;
    does not care for Ireland, 210;
    despises Londonderry, 213;
    goes to Ulster, 214;
    repulsed from Londonderry, 216;
    his chief supporters, 219-222;
    opens Parliament, 224;
    forced to repeal the Settlement, 224-228;
    gives up his power to pardon, 229;
    not his own master, 281;
    profits little by confiscations, 236;
    flouted by Rosen, 245-247;
    thinks of deserting Dublin, 255;
    parts with Melfort, 265;
    tries to gain Schomberg's men, 266;
    his vacillating character, 272;
    unwillingly seeks French help, 273-275;
    issues brass money, 276-278;
    prefers Lauzun to Avaux and Rosen, 280-282;
    his treatment of Trinity College, 285;
    joins his army, 292;
    his flight from the Boyne, 299;
    his ungracious speech, 302;
    his flight to France, 304;
    final ruin of his cause, 307;
    his notion of toleration, 200, 233, 330

  Jamestown, 61, 271

  Jeffreys, George, Lord Chancellor, 138, 182

  -- Colonel, 36

  Jennings, Fanny, 222

  Jephson, Alexander, 35-38

  Jermyn: _see_ St. Albans and Dover

  Jesuits, 326, 327

  Johnson, Robert, judge, 154

  -- a Jesuit, 172

  Jones, Henry, Bishop of Clogher and Meath, 8

  -- General Michael, 184

  -- Richard: _see_ Ranelagh

  -- Sir Theophilus, 16, 19, 36, 37, 337


  Kaunitz, Austrian diplomatist, 199

  Keating, John, Chief Justice of Common Pleas, at Wicklow Assizes,
      184-186;
    slighted by James, 211;
    opposes violent legislation, 225, 226;
    commits suicide, 230

  -- Mr., 162

  Kells, co. Meath, 252

  Ken, Thomas, Bishop of Bath and Wells, 217

  Kendal, Duchess of, 111

  Kenmare, 81;
    siege of, 202-206

  Keogh, Bishop Thady, 329

  Keroualle: _see_ Portsmouth

  Kerry, 117, 118, 144

  -- Knight of: _see_ Fitzgerald

  Kilcullen, 208

  Kildare, 315

  -- Wentworth Fitzgerald, 17th Earl of, 19, 20

  Kilkenny, 47, 85, 116, 144, 208;
    coal there, 234, 315

  -- Castle robbed by Tories, 143;
    establishment and library, 311, 312

  Killigrew, Harry, 105

  Killowen, 205

  Kilmallock, 143

  -- Sarsfield, Viscount, 274

  Kilmore: _see_ Bedell

  King, Dr. William, Dean of St. Patrick's, afterwards Archbishop of
      Dublin, 175, 181, 197, 233, 306, 314

  -- John King, 1st Baron, 19, 20, 99

  Kingston, Robert King, 2nd Baron, 186;
    holds Sligo for William III., 192-194, 201, 250, 252

  Kinsale, 81-83, 149;
    James II. lands there, 206-209, 214;
    James sails from, 305, 313

  Kirke, General Percy, 237, 239;
    ordered to relieve Londonderry, 243, 248, 249, 253, 254, 256, 257, 259


  Lane, Sir George, afterwards Lord Lanesborough, Secretary of State, 17

  Lanier, General Sir John, 268, 279

  Laud, Archbishop, 319, 322

  Lauderdale, John Maitland, 1st Duke of, 118, 130, 188, 325

  Lauzun, Count and afterwards Duke De, chosen to command in Ireland, 274;
    his unfitness for the task, 281, 282, 292;
    at the Boyne, 295;
    and after, 299;
    his account of it, 300, 302-305

  Leake, John, Captain and afterwards Admiral, at Bantry, 217;
    at Londonderry, 243, 249, 250

  Lecky, Rev. William, 38

  Leighton, Archbishop, 99

  -- Sir Elisha, 99-101, 107, 108, 110, 111, 167

  Leinster, 149

  Leixlip, 302

  Leopold I., Emperor, 199

  Lestrange, Roger, 142

  Lillibullero, 164, 263

  Limavady, 190

  Limerick, 127, 149, 186, 284, 303, 307, 313

  -- William Dungan, Earl of, 218

  Lingard, Richard, 322

  Lisbellaw, 192

  Lisburn, 262, 279, 291

  -- Adam Loftus, Viscount, 267

  Lisle, John, 39

  Lismore, 251, 254

  Lisnaskea, 251, 254

  Lloyd, Colonel Thomas, 194, 252, 253 271

  Locke, John, 95, 331

  Loftus, Dudley, 110

  -- of Rathfarnham: _see_ Lisburn

  Londonderry, 38, 149;
    charter forfeited, 173;
    left by Tyrconnel without a garrison, 188, 189;
    the gates shut, 190, 191-193, 196;
    the siege, 239-250, 257-259, 261, 264, 301

  Londeriad, poem on the siege, 259

  Longford, Francis Aungier, Earl of, 20, 91, 122, 124, 145

  --, 91

  Lorraine, Duke of, 61

  Loughbrickland, 191-193, 264

  Louis XIV., 121, 273-275, 280-282, 289

  Louth, 266

  Louvois, French minister, 197, 218, 237, 274, 302

  Lucan, 19, 36

  Lucas, Lieutenant, 143

  Ludlow, Edmund, 2, 35, 37, 39, 83

  Lundy, Robert, Governor of Londonderry, 181, 191, 193, 194, 212-216, 240,
      251

  Luttrell, Henry, 271

  -- Simon, Governor of Dublin, 285, 302, 303, 305

  Lynch, Bishop Andrew, 62, 64

  -- Sir Henry, Baron of the Exchequer, 176, 186

  Lyndon, John, judge, 161, 162


  Macaulay, Lord, 239, 249, 258, 309, 313, 323

  MacCarthy, General Justin, titular Viscount Mountcashel, 149, 156, 174,
      176, 202, 208;
    account of, 220;
    at Newtown Butler, 254-256, 274, 313

  -- Charles, 263

  -- Owen, 263

  -- Phelim, 205

  -- Rev. Teague, 286

  Macclesfield, Charles Gerard, 2nd Earl of, 176

  MacCormick, Andrew, 38

  MacDermot, Daniel, 203

  MacDonnell, Major, 160

  MacGeohegan, Bishop Anthony, 54

  Mackenzie, Rev. John, 259

  MacLane, John, 136

  Macmahons in the French service, 308

  MacMoyer, John, Franciscan, 135-137

  Magdalen College, Oxford, 124

  Magennis, Daniel and Murtagh, 161-162, 178

  Magill, Captain John, 47-49

  Maginn, Rev. Patrick, 59

  Maguire, Connor, 2nd Baron, 134, 136

  -- an officer, 251, 252

  -- Primate Dominic, 176

  Maguire's Bridge, 192

  Mainwaring, Sir Philip, 6

  Mallow, 82, 186

  Manor Hamilton, 250, 253

  Margetson, James, Primate, 100, 101, 320-322, 327

  Marly, 281

  Marsh, Francis, Archbishop of Dublin, 187, 283

  Marvell, Andrew, 73, 99, 111, 220

  Mary of Modena, Queen, 163, 195;
    procures Lauzun's appointment, 273, 275, 280, 281, 305

  Massé, French engineer officer, 240

  Massereene, Sir John Clotworthy, 1st Viscount, 5, 12, 17, 19, 20, 22, 38,
      39, 85

  -- -- Skeffington, 2nd Viscount, 19, 123

  Matthew, George, 313

  Maumont, French field officer, 206, 239, 241

  Maxwell, Thomas, Jacobite Brigadier, 262

  -- Mr., 161

  Maynard, Sir John, serjeant-at-law, 97, 98, 138

  Mayo, 193

  Meath, 35, 54, 59, 85

  -- William Brabazon, 3rd Earl of, 87, 317

  Melfort, John Drummond, 1st Earl and titular Duke of, 199, 200;
    secretary to James II. in Ireland, 209-211;
    forced to leave Ireland, 265, 266;
    generally hated, 280;
    his absolutist ideas, 301

  Menai Straits, 151

  Mervyn, Sir Audley, 6, 17;
    Speaker, 18-20, 26, 27, 32;
    a specimen of his oratory, 33, 38, 67

  Michelburne, John, Governor of Londonderry, 250, 256

  Milton, John, 316

  Modena, 300, 301

  Moira, 310

  Molyneux, Adam, 66

  Monaghan, 160, 209

  Monck: _see_ Albemarle

  Monmouth, James, Duke of, 122, 149

  Montesquieu, 304

  Montgomery: _see_ Mount Alexander

  Montrose, James Graham, 1st Marquis of, 39

  Moore, Lord, 40

  -- Dr. Michael, 286

  Morrison, James, 216

  Mossom, Robert, Bishop of Derry, 322

  Mount Alexander, Hugh Montgomery, 1st Earl of, 17, 19

  -- -- -- 2nd Earl of, 188, 193

  Mountcashel, _see_ MacCarthy, Justin

  Mountgarret, Viscount, 242

  Mountjoy, Charles Blount, created Earl of Devonshire, 288

  -- William Stewart, 1st Viscount, 160, 180, 189;
    treacherously imprisoned in France, 190, 196, 197, 298

  Mountrath, Charles Coote, 1st Earl of, 1, 3-6, 9, 16, 17, 21, 24, 54, 55,
      98

  Moyry pass, 264, 292

  Muggeridge, town clerk of Londonderry, 216

  Mullingar, 136

  Munster, 38, 49;
    Presidency suppressed, 112, 113

  Murphy, Edmund, false witness, 135-137

  -- Owen, 136

  Murray, Adam, defender of Londonderry, 216, 240, 241, 244, 259

  Muskerry, 220


  Nagle, Sir Richard, Attorney-General and Secretary for War to James II.,
      156, 157, 163;
    his Coventry letter, 168-170, 172, 224, 266, 267, 283

  Nangle, Edward, 91

  Nantes, edict of, 152

  Naul, co. Dublin, 298, 305

  Neagh, Lough, 288

  Neston, 151, 168

  Netterville, Lord, 40

  Newry, 264, 268, 278, 279, 292

  Newtown Butler, 250;
    battle of, 255, 256, 262

  Nicholas, Sir Edward, 27

  Nihill, James, 174, 175

  Nimeguen, 129

  North, Roger, 100

  Northumberland, Percy, Earl of, 73

  Nottingham, Earls of: _see under_ Finch

  Nugent, Nicholas, Chief Justice and titular Lord Riverston, 149, 155,
      150, 161, 162, 177, 178, 208, 224, 230

  -- Brigadier, 279


  Oates, Titus, 126, 133, 165, 327

  O'Brenan clan, 143

  O'Brien, William, Lord, 94

  O'Brien's Bridge, 186

  O'Connolly, Owen, 16

  O'Dempsy clan, 28, 29

  O'Donnell, Neal, 161

  O'Donnells in Spain, 308

  Oglethorpe, Fanny, 308

  O'Hanlon, Redmond and Loughlin, 142, 143

  Oldbridge, 293-296

  Omagh, James II. at, 214, 215, 252, 253

  O'Molony, Bishop John, 115, 238, 328-330

  O'Neill, Daniel (died 1664), 5

  -- Captain Daniel, 202

  -- Felix, 175

  -- Henry, 136

  -- Hugh, 11

  -- Sir Neill, 295

  -- Neill, 136

  O'Phelan, Bishop James, 329

  O'Regan, Sir Teague, 289

  O'Reilly, Archbishop Edmund, 54, 56, 59-62, 64

  Ormonde, James Butler, 1st Duke of, Lord Lieutenant 1661-1669 and
      1677-1685 ... 6-8, 12, 15, 16, 22-24;
    reaches Ireland, 27;
    dealings with Parliament and Court of Claims, 32-45 and appendix;
    brings over the Bill of Explanation, 46;
    sees it through Parliament, 47-50;
    plots against him, 35-37;
    his dealings with the Hierarchy chapter, 43;
    dissolves Parliament, 66;
    his financial difficulties, 67;
    puts down a mutiny, 68;
    opposes the Irish Cattle Bills, 69-80;
    his precautions during war, 82, 83;
    suffers from Clarendon's fall, 85;
    recalled, 87;
    his opinion of Buckingham, Orrery and others, 87;
    active against Tories, 90-92;
    abortive attempts to impeach him, 96, 97;
    attempt to kidnap him, 101;
    good friends with Essex, 116;
    Charles II. ashamed of neglecting him, _ib._;
    gives Irishmen degrees at Oxford, 124;
    his disputes with Orrery and Shaftesbury, 129-132;
    his relations with the 'Popish Plot,' 132-135;
    his opinion of the evidence, 138-140;
    attacked by Anglesey, 140-142;
    active against Tories, 142-145;
    finally recalled and leaves Ireland, 146-148;
    increased the revenue, 166;
    on the panic caused by Tyrconnel, 174;
    death and character, 182-185, 323

  -- Duchess of (Elizabeth Preston), 47, 93

  -- James Butler, 2nd Duke of, 228, 293, 306

  Ormsby, Mr., 92

  Orpen, Richard, 202-206

  Orrery, Roger Boyle, 1st Earl of, President of Munster and Lord Justice,
      1-6;
    manages elections, 16-18, 22, 24, 38, 44;
    controls Munster representation, 49, 52, 81;
    helps Dutch prisoners, 83, 85;
    intrigues against Ormonde, 86, 89, 92;
    his impeachment voted and abandoned, 96-98;
    his presidency abolished, 112, 117-119;
    the 'Charlatan of Munster,' 129;
    Charles II.'s opinion of him, 130, 132

  Ossory, Thomas Butler, Earl of, Lord Deputy in 1664 and 1667, his perfect
      manners, 44;
    challenges Buckingham, 74, 90, 93;
    disputes with Orrery and Shaftesbury, 129-131;
    his death, 182

  -- Lady, 28, 47, 93

  O'Toole, Colonel, 184

  Otway, Thomas, Bishop of Killala and Ossory successively, 123, 233, 326

  Oxford, Ormonde and, 123, 124, 182


  Palmer, Barbara: _see_ Cleveland

  -- Rev. Thomas, 204-206

  Pargiter, Lieutenant, 160

  Paris, Irish mission to, 190, 273;
    reputation of James II. there, 198, 301;
    rejoicings for the Boyne there, 300

  Parker, Captain Robert, 294

  -- John, Bishop of Elphin, 19

  -- Colonel John, 298

  Parsons, Lord Justice in 1641 ... 53

  -- Sir Lawrence, 208

  Passage, co. Waterford, 304

  Peake, Rev. Mr., 168

  Pemberton, Sir Francis, Chief Justice, 138

  Penmaenmawr, 124, 151

  Penn, William, 179

  Pepys, Samuel, 70, 72, 88, 100, 104

  Petre, Edward, S.J., James II.'s confessor, 157, 163

  Petty, Sir William, 17, 25, 30, 70, 78, 125, 202, 206;
    on Irish population, 314-317, 322, 330

  Philips, George, 190

  Phoenix Park, 111, 112

  Pigott, Colonel Thomas, 20

  Pilkington, Sir Thomas, 232

  Plattin, 298

  Plunket, Archbishop Oliver, 63, 100, 101, 115;
    his trial and execution, 134-139, 327-329

  -- Sir Nicholas, 7, 12, 20, 23, 43, 45, 59

  -- Bishop Patrick, 55, 59, 62, 64, 134

  -- an outlaw, 91

  Pointis, French artilleryman, 196, 197, 211, 250

  Ponce, John, 53

  Portarlington, 29

  Porter, Sir Charles, Lord Chancellor, 154, 155, 174-176

  -- James, Endymion's son, 199

  Portglenone, 212

  Portland, William Bentinck, 1st Earl of, 260, 261, 290

  Portsmouth, Louise de Keroualle, Duchess of, 112, 122, 145

  Power, James, 186

  -- Colonel Milo, 337

  -- Richard: _see_ Tyrone

  -- -- an outlaw, 143, 144

  Powis, William Herbert, 1st Marquis and titular Duke of, 163, 178, 206

  Presbyterians, 241, 325 _sqq._

  Price, John, 184

  Pujade, Captain La, 303

  Pusignan, French field officer, 206, 213, 214, 239


  Rainsford, Sir Richard, a Commissioner of Claims, 30, 43, 46, 48

  Ramsay, Brigadier-General, 241

  Ramsey, 261

  Randall, Francis, 304

  Ranelagh, Richard Jones, 1st Earl of, 121, 122, 125, 130, 145, 321

  Rapin, Paul, 288

  Rapparees, 225, 227

  Rathfarnham, 257

  Rathfriland, 193

  Rathgogan, 310;
    _see_ Charleville

  Rathkeale, 186

  Ravensdale, 292

  Rawdon, Sir Arthur, 212, 213

  -- Sir George, 16, 25, 112, 118, 309, 310

  Redhill, 252

  Reynell, Sir Richard, judge, 154

  Rice, Sir Stephen, Chief Baron under James II., 155, 156, 169, 172, 173,
      176-178, 215, 229, 255

  Richards, Colonel Solomon, 215

  Rinuccini, papal nuncio 1645-1649, 39, 51-53

  Riordan, a bravo, 39

  Roan, John, Bishop of Killaloe, 223

  Robartes, John, 1st Earl of Radnor, Lord Lieutenant 1669 ... 5, 89, 90,
      93-96, 100, 104, 323, 325, 327

  Roche, Captain James, 248

  Rochester, Laurence Hyde, 1st Earl of, 146, 147, 150, 156, 157, 161

  Rome, news of the Boyne at, 301

  Rooke, George, afterwards admiral, 217, 243, 249, 250

  Roscommon, 3, 193

  -- Wentworth Dillon, 4th Earl of, 29

  -- Cary Dillon, afterwards Earl of, 116, 160

  Rosen, De, French general, with James II. in Ireland, 206, 211, 214-216,
      239, 240;
    disagrees with James, 245-248, 272;
    disliked by the Irish, 280;
    approved by Louis XIV., 281

  Rospigliosi, James, internuncio at Brussels, 51, 61, 62

  Rossnaree, 295

  Rostellan, 98, 99

  Roth, Captain Michael, 196

  Routh, Dr. Martin Joseph, of Burnet's History, 258

  Rumbold, Richard, 139

  Rupert, Prince, 104, 114, 163

  Russell, William, Lord, 133

  Rust, George, Bishop of Dromore, 310

  Ryan, William, 128

  Rye House plot, 139, 146


  St. Albans, Henry Jermyn, 1st Earl of, 40, 43

  St. John's Well, Dublin, 160

  St. Patrick's Cathedral, 283, 306

  St. Sauveur, French officer, 271

  Sancroft, Archbishop, 151, 154, 182, 217

  Sandwich, Edward Montagu, 1st Earl of, 64

  Sankey, Sir Jerome, 30

  Santry, Sir James Barry, created Lord Chief Justice, 5, 6, 18

  Sawyer, Sir Robert, 137, 138

  Sarsfield, Patrick, titular Earl of Lucan, General, 19, 36, 57, 181;
    regains his estate, 221;
    Avaux's high opinion of him, 222, 250, 253, 256, 274, 293, 294;
    his estimate of the rival kings, 299, 307

  Scanderbeg, 143

  Schomberg, Frederick, Duke of, commands William III.'s army in Ireland,
      232, 236;
    his order saves Londonderry, 243;
    reaches Ireland and takes Carrickfergus, 260-265;
    refuses battle, 266;
    sufferings of his arms, 267-271, 274, 275;
    holds Ulster, 279;
    takes Charlemont, 288-291;
    killed at the Boyne, 295-297, 299

  -- Meinhard, 3rd Duke of, son of the preceding, commands extreme right at
      the Boyne, 295, 296

  Scilly Islands, 281

  Scravenmore, Dutch field officer, 293

  Sedley, Catherine, 157, 312

  Seignelay, Colbert, Marquis de, 195-198, 304

  Sévigné, Madame de, 198, 222, 274

  Seymour, Sir Edward, 97

  Shaen, Sir James, 125, 132, 145

  Shaftesbury, Anthony Ashley Cooper, 1st Earl of, favours exclusion of
      Irish cattle, 73, 74;
    bolsters up the 'Popish Plot,' 130-133, 139

  Shales, John, 260, 261, 270, 290

  Shannon river, 271, 298

  Shapcote, Robert, 35

  Shelburne, Lady, 206

  Sheldon, Colonel Dominic, 184, 298

  Sheridan, Thomas, 134, 158, 162-164;
    secretary to Tyrconnel, 167, 168, 172, 175, 177, 178, 180, 219, 308

  -- Dennis, 134

  Sidney, Henry, afterwards Earl of Romney, 120, 293

  Skeffington, Sir John: _see_ Massereene

  Skerries, 95

  Sligo, 188, 192, 193, 196, 201, 256, 271, 289

  Smith, Sir Edward, Chief Justice, 30, 44

  Solms, Count, 269, 293, 294

  South, Dr. Robert, 124

  Southampton, Thomas Wriothesley, 4th Earl of, 85

  Southwell, Sir Robert, 82, 124, 131, 146

  -- Sir Thomas, 186, 207

  Stafford, William Howard, Viscount, 140

  Stanley, city-major, 64

  Staples, Major Alexander, 38

  Stapleton, Sir Miles, 140

  Steenkirk, battle, 190, 298

  Stevens, John, 216-218, 272, 296

  Stone, Primate, 319

  Story, George, military chaplain and historian, 263, 265, 268, 289, 297

  Strabane, 250

  Strafford, Thomas Wentworth, 1st Earl of, 6, 18, 42, 67, 97, 175, 180,
      220, 311, 312, 317, 319, 322

  Strype, Rev. John, 284

  Suarez, 128

  Suir river, 304

  Sullivan, Owen, 202

  Sunderland, Robert Spencer, 2nd Earl of, 131, 146, 147, 150, 154, 162,
      163, 165, 168, 172, 195, 200

  Sutherland, Colonel Hugh, 253

  Sweden, 281

  Swift, Jonathan, 111, 164, 258, 308, 323, 330

  Swilly, Lough, 243, 253

  Swiney, Bishop Eugene, 54

  Synge, Edward, Bishop of Limerick, 82


  Taaffe, Theobald, Lord, afterwards 1st Earl of Carlingford, 40

  -- a priest called Lord Abbot, 162

  Talbot, Archbishop Peter, 101, 113-115, 127, 134, 328

  -- Richard: _see_ Tyrconnel

  -- Sir Robert, 25

  -- Sir William, 167

  Taylor, Jeremy, Bishop of Down and Connor, his Restoration sermon, 8;
    preaches to Parliament, 18;
    his troubles in Ulster, 9, 310, 320, 322

  Temple, Sir John, Master of the Rolls and historian, 25

  -- Sir William, son of the last, 19, 45, 72, 78, 131, 132, 315, 316

  -- Sir John, brother of the last, solicitor and afterwards
      Attorney-General, 19, 20, 25, 40

  Thomastown, co. Tipperary, 313

  Thompson, Captain, 38

  Thornhill, Captain, 141

  Thynne, Thomas, 102

  Tiffen, Colonel, 255, 257, 258

  Tipperary, 143

  Tonge, Israel, 126

  Totty, Sir John, 106-108, 111

  Townley Hall, co. Louth, 294

  Trant, Sir Patrick, 304

  -- Olive, 308

  Trillick, 252, 253

  Trim, 239

  Trinity College, Dublin, 231, 285

  Tuam, 18

  Tullyesker, 293

  Tyrconnel, Richard Talbot, Earl and titular Duke of, 27, 28, 43;
    agent for Irish Recusants, 102;
    attacked by the English Parliament, 113, 114;
    allowed to go abroad, 128, 134, 144, 145;
    his contest with Clarendon, chap. xlviii.;
    Lord Deputy, chap. xlix.;
    welcomes James II. at Cork, 207;
    account of him, 219, chap. li., 237-238, 255, 266, 273, 277, 280-285;
    at the Boyne, 298, 302, 305, 306, 329


  Ulster, 101, 117, 160

  Upton, Archer, 49

  Usher, Captain Ignatius, 218

  Ussher, Archbishop, 319


  Vauban, Marshal of France, 198, 275

  Vecchiis, Jerome de, 57, 58

  Vernon, Colonel, 35, 39

  Vesey, John, Bishop of Tuam, 232


  Walker, George, raises a regiment, 212, 215;
    Governor of Londonderry, 241 and all chap. lii.;
    controversy about his 'True Account,' 257;
    welcomes King William at Belfast, 290;
    killed at the Boyne, 297

  Wall, Richard, Spanish minister, 308

  Walsh, Peter, Franciscan, author of the Remonstrance, all chap. xliii.;
    defeat of his party, 100, 127, 326, 327

  Ward, Peter, Lord Mayor, 129

  Warren, Colonel Edward, 38

  Waterford, 47, 127, 133, 149

  -- county, 117, 144, 310

  Wattle bridge, 254

  Wauchop, Colonel Francis, 303

  Welshpool, 217

  Westmeath, 85

  Weston, Baron, 134

  Wetenhall, Edward, Bishop of Cork, 223, 329

  Wexford, 85, 127;
    the spa there, 314, 315

  Weyer, Florence, 136, 137

  Wharton, Thomas, 1st Marquis, 164, 337

  Whitehouse, 290

  Whitlow, Rev. Mr., 215

  Wicklow, 35, 304

  Wight, Isle of, 181, 187, 301

  William III., 130;
    proclaimed at Enniskillen, 192, 198;
    Londonderry swears allegiance to him, 213, 270, 278;
    Whig opposition to Irish journey, 289;
    lands near Belfast, 290;
    at the Boyne, 293 and all chap. liv.

  Williamson, Sir Joseph, 94

  Wincanton, 181

  Wogan, Sir Charles, 308

  Wolseley, William, General, victorious at Newtown Butler, 253-256, 278,
      279

  Worth, Baron William, 176

  Wren, Sir Christopher, 291

  Würtemberg, Ferdinand, Duke of, commands Danish contingent, 266, 288


  Xerxes, 218


  York, Duke of: _see_ James II.

  Youghal, 21, 127

  Young, Arthur, 284


  Zurlauben, Colonel, 303


THE END


  AT THE BALLANTYNE PRESS
  PRINTED BY SPOTTISWOODE, BALLANTYNE AND CO. LTD.
  COLCHESTER, LONDON AND ETON, ENGLAND

[Illustration: IRELAND

To illustrate the reign of James II

_Longmans, Green & Co. London, New York, Bombay, Calcutta, & Madras._]




TRANSCRIBERS' NOTES:


General: No attempt has been made to standardise capitalization on names
 such as FitzJames and MacDonald
Page 6 [Footnote]: Jluy corrected to July
Page 9, 151: Variable hyphenation of non(-)conformists as in the original
Page 28, 29, 347: Inconsistent spelling of O'Dempsey/O'Dempsy as in the
 original
Page 38, 346: Inconsistent spelling of McCormick/MacCormick as in the
 original
Page 54, 346: Inconsistent spelling of McGeohegan/MacGeohegan as in the
 original
Page 58: Vechiis standardised to Vecchiis
Page 58 [Footnote]: Roxburgh corrected to Roxburghe
Page 85: Masserene standardised to Massereene
Page 88 [Footnote]: 1568 corrected to 1668 for letter to Archbishop Boyle
Page 120, 212, 254: Variable hyphenation of field(-)pieces as in the
 original
Page 121: 1881 corrected to 1681
Page 136, 137, 351: Inconsistent spelling of Wyer/Weyer as in the original
Page 139: Rye-house standardised to Rye House
Page 143, 347: Inconsistent spelling of O'Brennan/O'Brenan as in the
 original
Page 162: Nangles' as in the original
Page 180 [Footnote]: 1887 corrected to 1687
Page 188 [Footnote]: 1889 corrected to 1689
Page 213, 340: Inconsistent spelling of Blaney/Blayney as in the original
Page 255: reconnaisance corrected to reconnaissance
Page 268, 288, 351: Inconsistent spelling of Wirtemberg/Würtemberg as in
 the original
Page 276 [Footnote]: 1889 corrected to 1689
Page 279: drections corrected to directions
Page 279 [Footnote]: Opening parenthesis added before Addenda to balance
 closing parenthesis
Page 288, 341: Inconsistent spelling of Castleblaney/Castleblayney as in
 the original
Page 289: 1889 corrected to 1689
Page 293 [Footnote]: June 26/July 4 as in the original
Page 312 [Sidenote]: progess corrected to progress
Page 317: Chapelziod corrected to Chapelizod
Page 333: Inconsistent spelling of BENNET/Bennett as in the original
Page 341: Caillemotte standardised to Caillemote
Page 349: Ryehouse standardised to Rye House; Sevigne standardised to
 Sévigné