THE HISTORY OF IRELAND FROM THE REFORMATION TO THE UNION. BY DR. R. HASSENCAMP, Head Master of the Royal Gv.mnasium, Ostrowo. TRANSLATED FROM THE GERMAN KY E. A. ROBINSON, AND SPECIALLY ANNOTATED BY THE AUTHOR. 1 ^^^^»^^^^j 1 ^^^^^^8; ji ^^^^m^0^m^'i ;^^'^^^;^^^^^; ^^^^ I^^M^^^^^ ^S; «^^ ipw!^iSf :£n^^^^ vjflf ■ 'K#Ml i ^^^Kl 1 fcA-RTlVA -aV/E - PVI-CR4^ LONDON : SWAN SONNENSCHEIN & CO., PATERNOSTER SQUARE. iSSS. BOSTON COLLEGE LIBRARr CHESTNUT HLTj ,^ MASSj Butler & Tanner, The Selwood Printing Works, Fro.me, and London. iZGZ± AUTHOR'S PREFACE TO THE GERMAN EDITION. The following work originated in a treatise of mine on " Ire- land from 1660 to 1760," which appeared about Easter of the year 1883, in connection with the curriculum of the Royal Gymnasium at Ostrowo. This dissertation received favour- able notice in several newspapers and periodicals, and numer- ous requests were made to me, both personally and by letter, urging me to amplify and extend the work, and, in its enlarged form, to give it to the public. In acceding to the request, I have been mainly influenced by the fact that there exists no recent history of Ireland in the German language ; and that in view of the peculiar role which this island has for many years played in the history of the British empire, not only professional students of history, but also many educated people feel the necessity of more accurate information respecting the past of that country. It is obvious that a history of Ireland can only possess any great interest for us Germans, in so far as it stands related to the events which have transpired in the powerful neighbouring kingdom. For this reason the Reformation appears to present the "most natural starting-point for our historical research, inasmuch as before this period the dominion of England over the western isle existed more in name than in reality. As regards the tcnninus ad qiiem, I was strongly disposed to con- tinue the historical narrative to the present time, or, at least, to the date of Catholic emancipation ; nevertheless, I have felt bound to resist this temptation, because, to me, it seems scarcely possible yet to arrive at a definite and conclusive judgment on the history of the present century. I have accordingly preferred to break off with the accomplishment of the Union ; for this event, which annihilated the indepen- dent Irish Parliament, and put an end to the separate political iv Preface. existence of Ireland, is surely an epoch of eminent importance, and one, therefore, with which it does not appear inappro- priate to close our narrative. The period which was treated in the dissertation above referred to thus occupies but a small section of the present work (chaps, v.-viii.); and it is possible that I may be charged with having handled the earlier period too summarily, while devoting too great a space to the representation of the last twenty years. In my judgment, however, the time from 1780 to 1800 — that is, the era which embraces the struggle for inde- pendence, and the succeeding years of legislative freedom ; which witnessed the effects upon Ireland of the French Revo- lution, the formidable rebellion of 1798, and the proceedings in connection with the Union — belongs to the most eventful portion of Irish history. Moreover, as "Grattau's Parliament," and "legislative independence," are the watchwords adopted by Parnell and the party of Home Rule, this period possesses for us a certain present interest. On this account there may be many persons desirous of obtaining some more definite information respecting the years in which legislative indepen- dence actually existed in Ireland. AUTHOR'S PREFACE TO THE ENGLISH EDITION. For my German readers I considered that a detailed system of notes might properly be dispensed with, and, therefore, in the original edition of this work, I merely appended a short bibliographical index, for the guidance of those who might wish to acquaint themselves more fully with any particular period of the history. But to the English public, to whom these authorities are, in general, easier of access, I judged that continuous notes might possibly be more acceptable, and I accordingly decided to annotate the English edition. It has been necessary, however, that the notes should be pre- pared somewhat hurriedly, and for this reason I would ask the indulgence of the reader, if, perchance, among the refer- ences an occasional small error may have crept in. CONTENTS. CHAPTER I. Introduction. — Ireland before the Reformation. Manner of Ireland's subjugation. — Reasons for the easy conquest. — Why it was so difficult to retain. — Feudalism unsuited to Irish conditions. — ]\Iistakes in administration. — Absenteeism of English landlords. — Amalgamation of the English colonists with the native Irish. — Impolitic measures for the prevention of the growing Celticism of the English landlords. — Effects of the system of separation. — ^Waning of English influence. — Condition of Ireland in the time of Henry VII. — Administra- tion of Sir Edward Poyning pp. i-8. CHAPTER II. Ireland until the Death of Queen Elizabeth.— Attempts to Introduce the Reformation. — National Insurrections. Condition of Ireland at the time of the Reformation. — Severance of the Irish Church from Rome. —Its re-organization. — Resistance of the Irish Catholics to the Reformation. — Strengthening of the royal authority in Ireland. — Alliance of the native princes with the Crown. — Disturbances in the reign of Edward VI. — Progress of the Reformation during the reign of Edward VI. — Re-establishment of Catholicism under Mary, 1553-1558. — The Parliament of 1556. — The inauguration of confiscation and colonization in Ireland. — Changes occasioned by the accession of Elizabeth. — The Parliament of 1560. — Attitude of the higher clergy towards the Reformation. — Attitude of the Irish people. — Condition of some of the Irish dioceses in 1576. — Rebellion of Irish chieftains under Elizabeth. — Shane O'Neill's revolt. — Rebellion in Munster.— Attitude of the papal see under Gregory XIII. with respect to Ireland. — The invasion of Fitzmaurice.— The Earl of Desmond's participation in the rebellion. — Second invasion. — Issue of the struggle. — The colonization of Munster. — Administration of Sir John Pcrrot. — The Composition of Connaught in 1585. — Perrot's recall and fate. — Ireland during the administration of Lord Justice Fitzwilliam. — Fresh troubles in Connaught and Munster. — Change in the command of the English troops. — Conduct of Essex. — Tyrone's alliance with Spain and the papal see. — Change in the conduct of the war under the new Governor, Lord Mountjoy. — Unsuccessful Spanish invasion. — Horrors of the struggle. — Submission of Hugh O'Neill pp. 9-34. CHAPTER III. Ireland from the Death of Queen Elizabeth until 1641. — The Period of Colonization, and of the Systematic Land Spoliation. Disturbances in the Irish towns. — Retirement of Lord Mountjoy. — Carew's rule. — Lord-lieutenancy of Sir A. Chichester. — Attitude of the viceroy towards the Catholics. — Hostility of Tyrone. — He is suspected of complicity in a conspiracy. — Tyrone and Tyrconnell flee to the Con- tinent. — Measures of precaution taken by the English Government — Chichester's colonization schemes. — Rebellion of O'Dogherty. — Chi- chester's plans modified in London. —Method of colonization. — Working of the colonization scheme.— The Parliament of 1613. — Progress of the religious struggle. — Parliament resumes its labours. — English greed for b VI Contents. Irish land. — Disco\erers. — The Crown joins in the machinations against the landed estates of Ireland. — Accession of Charles I. — The "graces." — l^rotestant opposition to the toleration shown towards the Catholics. — Fall of Falkland. — Character of the administration of Cork and Ely. — Administration of Sir Thomas Wentworth. — His absolutism. — Increase of the army and of the royal revenue. — Wentworth's proceedings against the landed gentry of Connaught. — He conceives the idea of confiscating Connaught. — Favourable aspects of Strafford's administration. — Results of Strafford's policy. — Recall of Strafford. — His trial and its issue. PP- 35-56- CHAPTER IV. Ireland from 1641 to 1660. — The Period of the great Irish Rebellion, and the Complete Subjugation of the Country BY Cromwell. Character of the new administration. — Fears of the Irish Catholics for their religion. — The causes of the insurrection. — The leaders of the con- spiracy. — Outbreak of the rebellion. — Exaggerated statements made by English historians relative to the extent of the Ulster rebellion. — The spirit of the rebellion more national than religious. — Relations between the Irish and the Scotch. — Reasons for the spread of the rebellion. - Alliance between the Catholic nobles of the Pale and the Celts. — Fresh reasons for the spread of the insurrection. — The Synod of Kilkenny. — First general assembly of the Irish confederates in Kilkenny in 1642. — Change in the character of the rebellion. — The position assumed by the king with regard to the rebellion. — Truce of 1643. — How the truce w-as regarded by the various parties. — Despatch of Irish troops to Scotland. — Counter-measures of the English Parliament. — The Earl of Glamorgan's peace negotiations. — Rinuccini appointed papal ambassador to Ireland. — Attitude of the king towards the nuncio. — Rinuccini's instructions. — His landing in Ireland. — Rinuccini's reserve. — Ormond effects a peace between the Royalists and the Irish. — How the peace is regarded by the nuncio and the different parties in the country. — Growing influence of the nuncio. — The nuncio proposes to sever the connection between England and Ireland. — Ormond opposes his tactics, and surrenders Dublin to the Parliamentary army. — Effect of this action. — Increasing opposition to the nuncio. — The great majority of Rinuccini's followers desert him. He therefore quits Ireland. — Ormond concludes a new treaty with the Irish. — A fresh impetus given to the Royalist cause. — Ormond attempts to recover Dublin, and is joined by O'Neill. — The English Parliament adopts counter-measures. — Cromwell is appointed leader of the campaign in Ireland. — Character of the war. — Capture of Drogheda and Wexford. — Results of Cromwell's victories. — The Clon- macnoise Manifesto. — Cromwell's reply. — Further military achievements of Cromwell, and his return to England. — Condition of things at the time of Cromwell's departure. — Further British successes under Ireton. — Ormond leaves Ireland. — Adventurous policy of the Bishop of Ferns.^ — Progress of the war. — Appointment of a civil commission. — Effect of the barbarous conduct of the war. — End of the struggle. — Retrospect of the various phases of the conflict. — Robber-bands still to be subdued. — Condition of the country after the war. — Decrease of population. — Emi- gration. — Transportation to the West Indies. — Colonization schemes. — Confiscation according to the Act of August, 1652. — Details of the Act regulating the migrations of the Irish and the re-settlement of the land. —Complete isolation of the Irish in Connaught. — Social condition of the remaining provinces during the English Commonwealth, pp. 57-93- Contents. vii CHAPTER V. Ireland from the Accession of Charles II. to the Treaty of Llmerick (1691)- — The Period of the Restoration. Accession of Charles II. — Negotiations between the Irish and the Crown relative to the restitution of Irish property. — Provisions of the Act of Settlement.- — Difficulties in the way of carrying out the Act. — The Act of Explanation. — Economic differences between England and Ireland. — England's action with regard to colonial trade. — The impor- tation of Irish cattle into England prohibited. — Lord Ormond's interest in the economic development of Ireland. — Religious questions during Ormond's administration. — Remonstrants and anti-remonstrants. — Pre- dominance of anti-remonstrants after Ormond's downfall. — Excitement in Protestant circles, and revolution in public feeling in Ireland. — Resignation of the Earl of Essex and retiun of Lord Ormond. — Fresh religious disorders under Ormond. — Ormond falls into disgrace. — Death of Charles 1 1. — Complete change of system under James 1 1. — Tyrconnell's policy. — Tyrconnell becomes sole administrator. — His hatred of the Act of Settlement. — Expulsion of James II. from England. — Effect of the Revolution on Tyrconnell. — Landing of James II. in Ireland. — The siege of Londonderry. — Meeting of the Irish Parliament. — Decrees of the Irish Parliament. — Repeal of Poyning's Act. — The Toleration Act. — The regulation of tithes. — The revision of titles. — The High Treason Act. — Complete change in the situation brought about by the landing of William's troops. — The battle of the Boyne and the flight of James. — The Irish prosecute the war after the departure of James. — The capitu- lation of Limerick. — Confiscations. — Condition of the country, /A 94-1 15- CHAPTER VI. The Religious Persecution of the Irish in the Period be- tween the Treaty of Limerick (1691) and the Accession of George III. (1760). The Treaty of Limerick is altered to the detriment of the Irish. — Attitude of the Irish Parliament towards the Catholics. — The Catholics are gradually deprived of all civil rights by the legislature. — Laws to hinder Catholics from engaging in trade on a large scale. — Harsh mea- sures against the Catholics with regard to the possession of land. — Laws against mixed marriages. — Measures to prevent the instruction and education of Catholics. — Laws against the celebration of Divine worship by the Catholics. — Notwithstanding these severe measures conversions are few. — The number of Catholic priests is not reduced. — The real aim of this legislation is, however, attained. — The Catholics are deprived of all influence in the country. — The Catholics refrain from all attempts at insurrection. — Isolated cases of Protestants advocating a relaxation of the penal laws. — Tolerant administration of Lord Chesterfield. — Change in the policy of the Government with regard to the Catholics. — Catholic writers in Ireland.— Founding of the Catholic Association. — Conduct of the Catholics on the occasion of Thurot's invasion . pp. 116-131. CHAPTER VII. The Period of Ireland's Economic and Political Restrictions, FROM the Reign of William III. to that of George III. The economic policy inaugurated under Charles II. is continued after the Revolution. — .Suppression of the Irish woollen industry by England. — Result of the suppression of the woollen trade in Ireland. — The ex- viii Contents. pectations of the Irish Parhament that England would encourage the linen industry prove illusory. — Ineffectual attempts of the Irish Parlia- ment to ameliorate the social distress. — Swift's pamphlet on the prevail- ing destitution. His proposals. Government measures against the publication. — Minor political rights of the Irish. — Character of the Irish Parliament. — The House of Lords. — The House of Commons. — Long duration of Irish Parliaments.— The irregularity with which they were summoned. — Dependence of the Irish Parliament upon England.— The highest court of appeal in England. — Only Englishmen are invested with the office of Lord Lieutenant.^Absenteeism of the majority of the viceroys. — Other high offices of State filled, for the most part, by Englishmen. — High salaries of the Irish officials. — Numerous pensions out of Irish funds bestowed upon Englishmen . . pp. 132-145. CHAPTER VIII. The Period of the Struggles of the Anglo-Irish Colony FOR Independence.— From the Reign of William III. to THAT OF George III. Gradual estrangement between the English colonists and the mother- country. —First constitutional conflict between England and Ireland, in the year 1692. — In 1698 Molyneux advocated Ireland's independence.— Fresh constitutional controversy in 17 19.— Conflict between England and Ireland in 1722 on the subject of Wood's halfpence. — Swift's " Drapier's Letters." — Effect of the " Drapier's Letters.'' — Withdrawal of Wood's patent. — Gradual development of an opposition party among the landed gentry. — Triumph of the opposition in the year 1 731. —Growth of the opposition, 1 740-1 750. — Fresh parliamentary struggles on the question of the national debt. — Further increase of the opposition. — Growing dis- content in the country. — Popular rising in 1759 . . //^. 146-156. CHAPTER IX, From the Accession of George III. (1760) to the Administra- tion OF Lord Townshend (1767). — The Period of Agrarian Disturbances. The elections of 1760 are accompanied by great excitement.— Charac- ter of the House of Commons elected in 1760. — Another constitutional controversy between England and Ireland in 1760. — Details respecting the session of 1761-62. — The commencement of agrarian disturbances. — The social distress existing among the rural population, and its cause. — First appearance of the Whiteboys. — The injustice of the Irish tithe- system one cause of the renewed agrarian disturbances. — The Whiteboy proclamations. — Cruel penalties inflicted by the Whiteboys. — Terrorism caused by them. — The English falsely attribute religious and political motives to the agrarian outrages. — Attitude of the Government towards the Whiteboys.— Agrarian disturbances in the north, caused by the Oakboys.— The insurrection of the Steelboys.— Attack on the pension system during the administration of the Duke of Northumberland. — Attempts to procure the shortening of the duration of Parliaments. pp. 157-171- CHAPTER X. From the Commencement of Lord Townshend's Administra- tion (1767) to the Organization of the Irish Volunteers (1778). It is made obligatory that the lord-lieutenants shall permanently Contents. ix reside in Ireland. — The first acts of the new viceroy. — The Act for shortening the duration of Parhaments is passed in 1768. — Defeat of the Government scheme for the augmentation of the army. — Ineffectual attempts of the lord-lieutenant to crush the influence of the " Under- takers." — The constitutional conflict of 1769. — The lord-lieutenant adopts severe measures against the Parliament. — Great dissatisfaction in consequence of these proceedings. — Press opposition. — Townshend'* measures. — In the Parliament of 1771 Townshend obtains a majority. — Corruption of the Parliament by Townshend. — His recall in 1772. — Lord Harcourt's administration. — Attempt to impose an Absentee Tax. — Com- mercial concessions to Ireland. — Significance for Ireland of the conflict between England and America. — Ireland's relations to America. — The Irish Parliament declares against the Americans. — The Government obtains the right to send Irish troops to America. — Discontented con- dition of the country. — Dissolution of Parliament in 1776. — Government influence brought to bear on the elections. — The lord-lieutenancy of the Earl of Buckinghamshire. — Financial embarrassments of the Govern- ment, and the increasing social distress of the country — The embargo. — Necessity for the Government to surrender its policy of prohibition. — Lord Nugent's proposals in the English Parliament for the relief of Irish commerce. — Agitation in the British manufacturing towns against the proposed abandonment of commercial restrictions. — Lord North sacri- fices the righteous cause of the Irish to this agitation. — A measure affording some trifling relief is carried. — The first step in the relaxation of the penal code. — Political reasons which impelled the English to be more just in their treatment of the Catholics. — Gardiner's IdIU for the amelioration of the condition of the Catholics. — Danger threatens the bill. — Modification of the bill in England. — Its ultimate acceptance in Ireland. — The bill favourably received by the Catholics . pp. 172-196. CHAPTER XL From the Org.^nization of the Volunteers (1778) to the Attainment of Legislative Independence for Ireland (1782). Wretched state of Ireland's defences. — Origination of the volunteer force. — Attitude of the Government towards this movement. — Social distress. — The non-importation agitation. — Danger of invasion. — Loyal attitude of the Catholics. — Growth of the volunteer movement. — The Parliament of 1779. — The Commons demand free trade. — Formal pre- sentation of the address. — Demonstration of the volunteers on the celebration of the birthday of William III. — Mob riots in the capital. — The Government proposals to impose fresh taxation are rejected. — The Commons will only agree to a six months' Budget. — Brilliant speech by Burgh. — The opposition in England attacks the ministry on account of its conduct of Irish affairs. — Lord North resolves to remove all restric- tions on trade with the colonies. — The Irish, not satisfied with these con- cessions, demand legislative independence. — Government opposition to these demands. — Grattan introduces his " Declaration of Rights " on April 19th, 1780. — Yelverton's motion for the repeal of Poyning's Law. — Bushe's Mutiny Bill. — Opposition of the volunteers to the Perpetual Mutiny Act. — Change of administration. — Buckinghamshire is succeeded by Lord Carlisle. — Government embarrassments. — Fresh rumours of invasion. — Energetic action of the volunteers. — The services rendered by the volunteers are recognised. — Session of 1781. — Yelverton's scheme for the formation of a navy. — Motions by Grattan and Flood for the repeal of the Perpetual Mutiny Act. — Renewed attempt to abolish X Contents. Poyning's Act. — Passing of the Habeas Corpus Act. — Gardiner's bill for the relief of the Catholics. — The volunteer convention at Dungannon. — Grattan advocates the views of the Dungannon Convention in Parliament. — His proposals are rejected. — The lord-lieutenant's position with regard to these proposals. — Yelverton moves that such British Acts of Parliament as have reference to Irish landed property be endued with the force of law for Ireland. — Fall of Lord North's ministry'. — -Discussion on Irish affairs in the British Parliament. — The English ministry wishes to postpone the debate in the Irish Parliament. — The Irish national party declines to comply with this desire. — Proceedings in Parliament on April i6th, 1789. — Ponsonby's motion on the address. — Grattan's speech on the national grievances. — Acceptance of his motion to present an address to the king demanding legislative independence. — The Duke of Portland's attempt to negotiate with the Irish on the question of a formal compact. — The Irish decline to enter into negotiations. — Pro- ceedings in the British Parliament. — The demands of the Irish are con- ceded. — The Irish Parliament votes an address of thanks. — National grant to Grattan -hp. 197-227. CHAPTER XII. The First Years of Irish Independence, until the Period AT which the Influence of the French Revolution began to be felt in Ireland (1791). Difficulties in the way of Ireland's constitutional development. — Per- fecting of the constitution. — Gardiner's Catholic Bill. — The question of "simple repeal." — Change in the administration. — England's formal renunciation of the right to legislate for Ireland. — Institution of an Irish order. — Change in the lord-lieutenancy. — Hostility between the Parlia- mentary majority and the volunteers. — The volunteers demand the reform of Parliament. — Parliament makes an ineffectual attempt to con- ciliate the volunteers. — Breach between Grattan and Flood. — Meeting of the national convention in Dublin. — Political role of the Earl of Bristol. — Want of unanimity as to the methods of Parliamentary reform. — Bristol's proposals are rejected, and Flood is commissioned to draw up a Reform Bill. — Character of his bill. — Flood introduces it on November 29th, 1783.— It is opposed by Yelverton. — Flood's motion is lost. — Reception of this result by the volunteers. — Address to the king. — Flood enters the English Parliament. — Change in the lord-lieutenancy.^ — Flood introduces his Reform Bill a second time on March 13th, 1784. — Dis- tressed condition of the Irish industries. — A demand for a protective tariff to prevent the country from being deluged with English manu- factured goods. Disturbances in Dublin, as well as in the rural districts. Revolutionary conduct of the Earl of Bristol. — The national congress achieves no result. — End of the volunteer movement. — Pitt's position with regard to Irish commerce. — The main propositions contained in Pitt's resolutions on the question of the commercial relations of England and Ireland. Proceedings in connection with this subject in the Par- liaments of England and Ireland. — Pitt's speech on February 22nd 1785. — Opposition of the English manufacturing towns. — Pitt modifies his resolutions. — Proceedings in the British Parliament in connection with them. — Objections in the Irish Parliament. — Pitt withdraws his proposals.— Events of the year 1786. — The Riot Bill of 1787. — Grattan moves for a re-adjustment of the tithe system. — He renews his proposals in 1 789. — Death of Rutland. — Lord-lieutenancy of the Marquis of Buck- ingham. — Conflicting action of the English and Irish Parliaments on the question of the regency in the year 1789. — The measures adopted with Contents. xi regard to those officials who voted with the opposition. — The supporters of the Government are rewarded. — Foundation of the Whig Club. — Change in the administration. — Parliamentary transactions in 1790. — ■ Fresh elections. — The session of 179 1 . . . pp. 228-257. CHAPTER XIII. Ireland under the Influence of the French Revolution, UNTIL the Rebellion of 1798. Influence of the French Revolution upon Ireland, and especially upon the Puritan population of the north. — Organization of the League of the United Irishn-usn. — How the Catholics were affected by the French Revolution. — Formation of a committee for the furtherance of Catholic emancipation. — The question of Catholic emancipation receives support from the acts of the English legislature. — Burke advocates the cause of the Catholics. — Negotiations of the Catholic Committee with Pitt. — Burke's letter to Sir H. Langrishe in 1792. — Split among the Catholics. — Sir H. Langrishe brings in a bill for the relief of the Catholics in 1792. — Opposition from the High Church party — Ultimate acceptance of the bill. — The rejection of petitions demanding the bestowal of further privileges upon the Catholics. — Agitation by the Catholic Committee. — Violent hostility of the ultra-Protestant party. — The United Irishmen show sympathy with France and republicanism. — Agrarian disturbances in the north. — The Peep-of-Day Boys and the Defenders. — Pitt is dis- posed to make further concessions. — Friendly reception of the Catholic Committee at court. — The speech from the throne on January loth, 1793, makes special reference to the condition of the Catholics. — The debate on the address. — Hobart's bill for the relief of the Catholics. — A motion in favour of parliamentary reform is defeated. — The Govern- ment decides to proceed against the United Irishmen by means of exceptional legislation. — The Gunpowder Bill and the Convention Bill. — The speech from the throne on January 21st, 1794. — Ponsonby's second motion on the subject of parliamentary reform. — Proceedings against the United Irishmen. — Advent, trial, and fate of Jackson, the French agent. — During the course of the trial Wolfe Tone, secretary to the Catholic Committee, is compromised. — Pitt makes advances to the Irish Whigs, and is desirous of a change in the lord-lieutenancy. — Pitt and Grattan enter into negotiations. — These statesmen fail to come to an agreement. — After prolonged negotiations, Fitzwilliam is appointed lord- lieutenant. — The new viceroy meets with difficulties. — His impolitic attitude towards the high officers of state. — His action on the question of emancipation arouses the resentment of the English ruling classes. — The recall of Fitzwilliam. — Fitzwilliam tries to justify his conduct. — He is supported by the English Whig party. — Lord Camden is appointed successor to Fitzwilliam. — His reception in Ireland. — Fate of Grattan's Emancipation Bill. — Erection of a Catholic seminary at Maynooth. — Growing influence of the United Irishmen. — Change in their organization. — Excesses of the Peep-of-Day Boys and the Defenders. — Founding ot Orange lodges. — The Catholics driven out of County Armagh.— The Indemnity Bill and the Insurrection Bill (1796). — The efforts of Wolfe Tone to induce the French to undertake an invasion of Ireland. — The mission of Fitzgerald and O'Connor to France. — Debate on the address in the Irish House of Commons. — Suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act. — Hoche's expedition to Ireland. — Loyal attitude of the population of the south. — Condition of the north at the beginning of the year 1797. — General Lake's proclamation ordering the disarmament of the population. — Hostile disposition towards England. — Election of a Directory by the xll Contents. United Irishmen, — Renewed negotiations with France. — The Irish Catholics begin to ciiUivate relations with the United Irishmen. — The con- templated invasion of Ireland by the Dutch is frustrated. — Parliamentary election of 1797. — Grattan retires from public life. — The elections yield an Orange majority. — Rigorous proceedings against the radical press. — Atrocities committed by the Government troops. — Lord Moira brings the excesses of the troops under the notice of the Irish House of Lords. — Lord Clare's reply pp. 258-296. CHAPTER XIV. Ireland from 1798 until 1800. — The Rebellion and the Union with England. Bonaparte's invasion schemes. — Military organization of the United Irishmen. — Final mission to the Continent. — Arrest and trial of O'Connor. —Treachery of Reynolds. — Arrest of three members of the Directory.— Capture and fate of Lord Edward Fitzgerald. — The United Irishmen elect another Directory. — The Government receive further information respecting the conspiracy. — Preparations made by the Government. — Outbreak of the rebellion ; its character and progress. — Serious rising in County Wexford. — Despatch of British troops to Ireland, and Corn- wallis appointed lord-lieutenant and commander-in-chief — Suppression of the rebellion by General Lake. — Cruelty of the British troops.— The lenient counsels of Cornwallis opposed by the Orange party. — Cornwallis causes a bill to be laid before Parliament granting an amnesty to the rebels. — Certain of the leaders are condemned and executed. ^ — ^Dis- closures made by the State prisoners. — Fate of the imprisoned members of the Directory. — Allegation against Grattan, in consequence of which his name is struck off the list of the privy council. — Attempted invasion by the French under General Humbert. — Napper Tandy's unsuccessful landing in Ireland. — Second French expedition to Ireland.- — Fate of Wolfe Tone. — Pitt forms the design of bringing about the Union of England and Ireland.— Reception of the scheme in England and Ireland. — Attitude of the Catholics towards the projected Union. — \'iews of the Irish officials on the question of the Union. — Dissensions in the British Cabinet on the subject. — Pitt resolves to dissociate the questions of the Union and Catholic emancipation. — The principles of the bill are settled in the British cabinet and sent over to Ireland. — Agitation in Ireland. — Proceedings in the British Parliament in connection with the L'nion. — Pitt's speech on January 31st, 1799. — Proceedings in the Irish Par- liament. — The Government is defeated in the Irish House of Commons. — The measure is postponed to the next session. — Cornwallis vainly advocates the simultaneous passing of a measure of emancipation. — Agitation among the anti-unionists. — The Government refuses to dis- solve Parliament. — Castlereagh proposes a method of accomplishing the Union. — The Government resolves to adopt Lord Castlereagh's plan.— Bribery practised. — The opinion of the lord-lieutenant on this mode of procuring support. — The Catholics are won over to the Union scheme. — The opening of Parliament on January 15th, 1800. — The debate on the address is the occasion of a violent conflict on the question of the Union. — Castlereagh introduces his Union scheme in the Commons on February 5th. — Main features of the scheme. — Proceedings in the House ol Commons. — In the House of Lords. — The bill is sent to London.— Proceedings in the British Parliament. — Final proceedings in connection with the Lhiion. — End of the Irish Parliament. — Its character. — Catholic emancipation is again deferred. — Lhifavourable consequences of the delay pp. 297-330. CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION. — IRELAND BEFORE THE REFORMATION. When a nation just emerging from barbarism is subjugated by one possessing a higher degree of civiHzation, it is usually compensated for the loss of its independence by being made the recipient of all those blessings and benefits which are associated with a more advanced culture. But a very dif- ferent state of things is revealed to us in the case of the occupation of Ireland by the English. Instead of endearing British civilization to the hearts of the Irish by a policy of moderation and conciliation, thus paving the way to a gradual union of the conquered with the conquering race, the domi- nant English nation has, by a course of intentional oppression, and by a series of mistakes naturally unintentional, attained this result : that not only has the Celtic race suffered a con- stant deterioration in its social condition, but, on the other hand, it has also become spiritually degenerate, because, from the lack of proper stimulus, the scanty germs of native culture which already existed were arrested in their development, and consequently perished. And yet, that under a politically rational treatment the Irish would not have opposed either amalgamation or the introduction of British civilization, is plainly evident from the very slight resistance they offered at the time of their primary subjection. Let us inquire how the conquest of the island was really effected. Curiously enough, we find that the first impulse to the English acquisition of Ireland was given by the Court of Rome. In the year 1154, Pope Adrian IV., an English- man by birth, issued a bull ceding Hibernia and all the adjacent islands to Henry II., in consideration of the pay- ment to the papal see of an annual tax of one penny on B 2 History of Ireland. every inhabited building ; but it was not until fourteen years later, when MacDermot, ^ Prince of Leinster, having been driven from Ireland by King Roderic O'Connor and the chieftain of Meath, fled to Henry II. and offered to do homage, that a fitting opportunity was presented for the king to turn this grant to his own advantage. At Henry's com- mand several Anglo-Norman barons went over to Ireland, where, notwithstanding the small number of their followers, they achieved such brilliant successes that Henry's jealousy was aroused, and he recalled them ; and it was only with the greatest difficulty that the most illustrious of his vassals, Richard Earl of Pembroke, commonly known as Strongbow, prevailed upon him to countermand the order. The king, however, not satisfied that his barons should reap all the military glory, towards the close of the year 1171 undertook a personal expedition to Ireland. The opposition with which he met was inconsiderable. King Roderic O'Connor was speedily reduced to submission, and the princes of Cork, Limerick, and Ossory did homage, and received their lands as fiefs of the English Crown. The city of Dublin and the surrounding districts Henry appropriated to himself, while the eastern portion of the country he conferred upon the barons in fee, the most richly endowed of these being Earl Strongbow, who received the greater part of Leinster, and who, having married the daughter of MacDermot, had claims upon the succession on the death of his father-in-law.^ Thus, within a period of about three years, the whole of Ireland had submitted to the English. Several causes com- ' The bull is given in the " Expugnatio Hibernije" of Giraldus Cam- brensis, lib. ii. cap. vi., which is to be found in Camden's " Anglica, Hibernica, Normannica" (Frankfort, 1602), p. 787 ; extracted herefrom by Rymer in " Foedera," i. p. 19 ; Mansi, xxi. p. 788 ; by MacGeoghan, in his " Histoire de I'lrlande ancienne et moderne" (Par. 1758), vol. i. p. 460, Compare also Tafife in his " Regesta Pontificum Romanorum " (1851), vol. i. p. 665. Recently, the genuineness of this bull has been impugned {e. ^. by Knopfler in the new edition of Hefele's "Concilien- geschichte," bd. v. p. 682 ; also by Gasquet in the Dublin Review^ 1883, vol. X. p. 83), but in my judgment without sufficient grounds. ^ The most important authority with regard to the occupation of Ireland is Giraldus Cambrensis, in his "Expugnatio Hiberniae," lib. i. ii. (Camden, loc. cii., 755-813). Before the Refoj'mation. 3 bined, it is true, to accelerate the occupation, the principal of which were : a want of united action, owing to the country being split up into many small principalities, which necessarily rendered any energetic opposition difficult ; the earlier Danish invasions, which had weakened the country and lessened its powers of resistance ; and lastly, and chiefly, the winning over to the king's side of the entire ecclesiastical body, which was effected by the Synod of Cashel, held in 1172, under the presidency of Bishop Christian of Lismore, at which the royal chaplain, Nicholas, was present, and which for the first time allotted tithes to the clergy.i The support of this body was of the greatest importance to the king, and facilitated in a high degree the subjugation of the country. But little as we would undervalue these circumstances, it must be admitted that a national antipathy could scarcely have existed among the Celtic inhabitants, otherwise their subjection could not have been accomplished at the cost of so little trouble. Easy, however, as had been the conquest of the country, it was equally difficult to retain it.^ The primary reason of this was that the Irish could not be brought to comprehend the feudal system, which, according to the pattern of the middle ages, the conquerors had established in the land. The consequence was, that although the princes of the north and west all, readily submitted to Henry II., and although, to use an expression employed by Matthew of Paris, " twenty terrified kinglets " subsequently renewed their oath of allegi- ance in the reign of his son John, within a short period they had lost all sense of subordination, and ultimately regarded themselves as independent rulers of their territory. The English dominion was thus substantially limited to the eastern provinces, which were in possession of the Anglo- Norman barons, and in which numerous English colonists had already settled. But even in these districts, in the " Pale" as they were designated, the English Government showed ' Compare Giraldus Cambrensis, loc. cif., lib. i. c. 34 (Camden, loc. cif., P- 777)- • Compare Beaumont's " L'Irlande sociale, politique, et religieuse," (Par., 2 ed., i83i) vol. i. pp. 26 et seq. 4 History of Ireland. itself unequal to the task of colonisation. The authorities in England were above all things concerned that the governor, or lord-lieutenant (the king's representative in the Pale) should not become too powerful ; accordingly, after a short term of office he was invariably recalled, and the fact that in the thirteenth century Ireland had forty-six, in the fourteenth century ninety-five, and in the fifteenth century eighty-five lord-lieutenants,^ must have been one eminently unfavour- able to good government. They came to the country they were expected to rule unacquainted with its circumstances ; and not having the opportunity, during their short official career, of gaining that knowledge of affairs indispensable for wise administration, they committed one blunder after another, and instead of striving to win the attachment of the Irish population by mild and humane treatment, they regarded them as creatures of an inferior mould, who might be enslaved or oppressed at pleasure. Thus, in the thirteenth century the native Irish were prohibited from attaining any of the dignities of the Church ; - their evidence was inadmissible in a court of law ; ^ and in the fourteenth century this system of per- secution had acquired such dimensions that Pope John XXII. took occasion to complain to King Edward II. of the oppres- sions to which the Irish were subjected.^ But while, on the one hand, the native population was treated with harshness and severity, on the other hand, no provision was being made for strengthening and establishing the Anglo-Saxon colony. True, there were Englishmen in abundance to whom Irish lands had been granted, but no effort was made to retain the landlords on their estates ; and 'considering the proximity of England, and its more advanced culture, it is not difficult to understand that many Irish land- lords, who were of English extraction, preferred merely to ^ See Lappenburg, in Ersch and Griiber's " Realencyclopaedie," vide " Irland," p. 67. - Compare the papal brief of Pope Honorius III. to his legate, Jacobus, bearing date the 13th August, 1220, to be found in Theiner's " Vetera IMonumenta Hibernorum et Scotorum historiam illustrantia" (Rom. 1864), p. 16, No. 36. ^ See Theiner, loc. a't., p. 16, No. 38. * Ibid.^ p. 201, No. 422. Before the Reformation. 5 draw the rents from their Irish estates, and to take up their permanent residence in England. The result was that con- siderable sums of money were withdrawn from the country ; while, in consequence of the absenteeism of the landlords, the cultivation of the soil was neglected and the civilization of the native population retarded. Instead of the Celts being transformed into Englishmen, the resident English landlords, on the contrary, and more especially those living in the interior of the land, became by degrees increasingly Celtic. As it was mostly the educated and wealthy proprietors who were absentees, those English landlords who remained in Ireland gradually attached them- selves to the primitive inhabitants of the country, grew less civilized, adopted Celtic manners and customs, and became ' Hibernis hiberniores." In order to prevent this growing Celticism of the English colonists, the Government adopted a course as ill-calculated as possible to attain the desired end. They had, indeed, early recognised the fact that the evil condition of the country was really owing to the prevailing absenteeism of the landlords, and had already, in the reign of Richard IL, imposed a tax on absentees.^ But the only means which appeared to the bulk of the ruling English class likely to put a stop to the ever-increasing Celticism of the land, was a factitious separa- tion of the colonists from the Irish. This was the object of the refusal to grant community of laws." English statutes were only valid in the Pale, and there only for the resident English. The benefit of English laws was denied to the Irish, although they specially requested that it might be ' Comp. Gordon's " History of Ireland" (1806), i. p. 200; also Beau- mont, loc. ciL, i. p. 31. - The refusal to allow the Irish to live under English law is referred to by Davies as constituting a wall of separation between the native race and the English settlers, in his work, " A Discoverie of the True Causes why Ireland was never entirely subdued nor brought under obedience of the Crowne of England until the beginning- of his ^Majesty's happie Reigne " (1612), p. 73. Thus, at a trial for murder, in 131 1, it was pleaded as an extenuating circumstance that the murdered man was " purus Hibernicus." Similarly, some years earlier, a man accused of rape was acquitted on the ground that his victim was an Irishwoman. See Thomas Moore's "History of Ireland," ii. p. 177. 6 Histoiy of Ireland. extended to them. They were consequently confined to their own native " brehon law," and this unequal administration of justice naturally formed a chief wall of partition between Irish and Anglo-Saxon. But this was not enough. In the year 1367, in the reign of Edward III., the notorious "Statute of Kilkenny " ^ was passed, which completed the separation. According to this statute, the English colonists in Ireland were forbidden, on pain of incurring the penalty of high treason, to unite themselves with the Irish either by marriage or sponsorship ; to present a Church living to an Irishman, to receive him into a monastery, or to offer the rights of hospitality in their houses to an Irish bard or minstrel. Im- prisonment and confiscation of property awaited those who even took an Irish name, allowed their beards to be cut after Celtic fashion, or adopted the Irish costume. And that this statute did not exist merely in the statute book, is evidenced by the fact that in the time of Edward IV. an English baron had to lay his head upon the block for having married a wife of Irish race.- What, it will be asked, were the results of this system of forced separation ? One was that a deadly hatred sprang up between the two races, which it was the duty of the adminis- tration to have appeased ; while another result was that the civilization of the Celts made no advance whatever. And how could it possibly have been otherwise? When the British Government refused to govern the native inhabitants of the country according to British laws, the Irish clung, as a matter of necessity, to their own barbarous brehon law, which for every crime and offence had but one pecuniary fine (Eric), and rejecting all claim to private property, recognised only one common possession in which the entire clan had a vested interest. And when, moreover, every Englishman was at liberty to oppress the Irish, and reduce them to a condition of servitude, the Irishman could not fail to regard the Saxon as his direst foe. ^ Comp. Leland's " History of Ireland from the Invasion of Henry II." (1773), vol. i. p. 320 ; also Davies, loc. ctL, pp. 127, 128. ^ See MacGeoglian, loc. cit., ii. p. 192. Before the Reformation. 7 When, therefore, in the fifteenth century, the wars of the Roses broke out in England, and, distracted by internal struggles, the authorities in the mother-country were unable to devote the requisite attention to Irish affairs, it was inevi- table, in the face of these national antipathies, that the Irish should be prepared to make skilful use of the opportunity. It was not only the princes of the west, the chieftains of Connaught and Thomond, who in the reign of Richard II. had renewed their allegiance, who now contrived to throw off the yoke of British supremacy ; British influence was also diminishing year by year in the eastern provinces. The districts in which the British element was but feebly repre- sented likewise renounced their fealty, and those English colonists who had adopted Celticism, and were becoming assimilated to the surrounding barbarism, made common cause with the native inhabitants. They also withdrew from the Irish Parliament, which had been in existence since the beginning of the fourteenth century, and which in those dis- turbed times might have successfully raised the question of incorporation with England and the formation of a United Kingdom. This representative assembly was, consequently, composed simply of delegates from about five or six of the eastern counties and a few towns in which the English colonists had possessed more stability. Accordingly, when Henry VII., the first monarch of the Tudor line, ascended the English throne in 1485, the English Pale was restricted to these few counties. At the time of his accession, the same party feuds which were distracting Eng- land also raged in Ireland. The illustrious family of Geral- dine, or Fitzgerald, sided with the Yorkists ; the Butlers, or the house of Ormond, with the Lancastrians. It was in Ireland, too, that the pretenders, Lambert Simnel and Perkin Warbeck, first made their appearance ; but all the plots against the claims of the House of Tudor were happily frustrated, and by Henry's sagacious policy the Earl of Kildare, who was the chief of the Geraldines, and friendly to the Yorkists, was won over to espouse the king's side. About the same time, under the energetic administration of S History of Ireland. Sir Edward Poyning, a number of laws were passed which at once restricted the power of the Irish nobility and strengthened EngHsh influence in the Pale, and which, on the whole, tended to establish closer relations between England and Ireland. In the first place, the nobles were compelled to diminish the number of their retainers, a similar regulation having already been enforced in England ; while the right to declare war and carry on hostilities on their own account was made wholly dependent on royal permission. It was further or- dained that all former statutes of the English Parliament which aimed at the public well-being should be extended to Ireland, and should have the same validity there as in Eng- land. Finally, in the year 1495 was passed that important ■law, known as Poyning's Act,^ which decreed that no Irish Parliament should be convoked until its collective schemes had been sanctioned by the English Privy Council, and attested by the Great Seal. This law, it is true, paralysing as it did the initiative of the Irish Parliament, and making it completely dependent on England, proved, in after years, the source of endless complications between English and Irish interests ; but at that time the influence exerted by the Act was a wholesome one, inasmuch as it limited the absolute power of the lord-lieutenant, and rendered impossible any policy of the English colony which might be inimical to the mother-country. From this time, therefore, English rule in Ireland was, at least, no longer retrogressive, and had it not been that with the accession of Henry VIII., yet another element of discord was introduced in addition to those already existing, and this a religious one, the later fortunes of the land might have assumed a happier aspect. ' Respecting Sir Edward Poyning's Act, consult Leland, loc. cit., vol. ii. pp. 107, 108 ; also Lord Mountmorres, in his " History of the Prin- cipal Transactions of the Irish Parliament," vol. i. p. 47. For informa- tion concerning the other events of the reign of Heniy VII., see Bagwell's " Ireland under the Tudors" (Lond., 1885), vol. i. chap. viii. CHAPTER II. IRELAND UNTIL THE DEATH OF QUEEN ELIZABETH. — ATTEMPTS TO INTRODUCE THE REFORMATION. — THE NATIONAL INSURRECTIONS. While in Germany the work of the Reformation was evoked by an internal religious need, in the British isles the separation from Rome was accomplished at the beck of a violent and sensual monarch, who, by the aid of servile counsellors, him- self assumed ecclesiastical supremacy, and, like an oriental despot, under menace of the most cruel penalties, utilized the power thus obtained to enslave the consciences of his subjects: But reckless as was the course pursued in England, unhesi- tating as was the determination to proceed, if need be, through blood and murder in the prosecution of this object, in Ireland the Reformation was far more fatal in its results, and even a statesman of Lord Clare's severely Protestant principles has not scrupled to characterise it as " the ruin and curse of Ireland." In 1531, when Henry VIII. allowed himself to be appointed head of the Church by the ecclesiastical convocation, and thus consummated the rupture with Rome, the lord-lieutenant of Ireland was a native nobleman, the powerful Gerald, Earl of Kildare. In consequence of various complaints having reached the king relative to his arrogant and imperious policy, Henry commanded him to appear in London to answer the charges made against him. Appointing his son Thomas deputy lord-lieutenant during his absence, the Earl of Kil- dare, in 1534, obeyed his sovereign's behest; but no sooner had he arrived in the English capital than he was seized and thrown into the Tower. Shortly after this, the false rumour was circulated in Ireland that he had been put to death, w^here- lo History of Ireland. upon his son Thomas raised the standard of revolt. In order to obtain assistance in his conflict with England, he entered into negotiation with Charles V., the more confident in secur- ing the co-operation of this monarch because of the insult which Henry VIII. had offered to the imperial family by the divorce of his first wife, Catherine, who was an aunt of Charles. He also entered into communication with Pope Clement VII., and begged to be invested with the crown of Ireland as the gift of the papal chair, for which he not only promised to pay a yearly tribute to the Roman see, accord- ing to the terms of Pope Adrian's bull, but also to bear arms against the schismatical king of England. In this way the Irish inaugurated the policy of seeking the interference of foreign nations in matters of dispute between themselves and England, a policy which played a part so ex- tremely ruinous for the country, and produced in the English mind an exasperation which vented itself in hideous acts of revenge. In this case, however, the attempts made by Lord Thomas Fitzgerald were unsuccessful. The pope had not yet resigned all hope of reconciliation between England and Rome, and he, therefore, prolonged the negotiations warily and diplo- matically. Charles V., on the other hand, was at that time nursing very comprehensive projects, having just planned his invasion of Tunis, and was, consequently, little disposed to allow himself to be diverted from his purposes by the proposal to enter into conflict with England. Several Irish chieftains, it is true, had taken up the cause of Lord Thomas, and in the beginning of the struggle there seemed a likelihood that for- tune would favour the insurgents. Some bodies of English troops were defeated, and Archbishop Allen, of Dublin, was forced by the rebels to flee, and slain before he could effect his escape. Ultimately, however, the resources of the insurrec- tionists became -exhausted, and his life and liberty having been assured to him by the lord-lieutenant. Lord Thomas saw himself compelled to submit. But Lord Gray, the new viceroy, did not conceive himself to be bound by the engage- ments of his predecessor, and, accordingly, sent him prisoner to London. Here he learnt that his father's life had not been Until the Death of Queen Elizabeth. 1 1 ended by the axe of the executioner, as report had caused him to believe, but that he had been brought to the grave by grief at the rash rebelHon instigated by his son. In London, Thomas Fitzgerald paid the penalty of his revolt on the scaffold, a fate shared by five of his uncles, whom Lord Gray invited to a banquet, and then treacherously caused to be arrested and sent to England.^ After the Government had thus, by a double act of perfidy, rid itself of the Fitzgeralds, the most distinguished family in the Pale, a short period of calm ensued in the country, of which advantage was taken to effect the severance of the con- nection between Rome and the Church in Ireland, and to give to the latter an independent organization. To this end a Parliament was convoked in Dublin, and as it was anticipated that the greatest amount of opposition would proceed from the country clergy or proctors, the first step taken was to deprive them of their right to vote, only permitting them to be present at the sittings and to give the assembly the benefit of their counsel. When the mouth of the opposition had thus been closed. Parliament formally cancelled its oath of allegiance to the Papacy, and interdicted all appeal to Rome. Twelve monasteries were impropriated to the king, and to him the tithes from all ecclesiastical benefices were adjudi- cated. .All the clergy who refused to acknowledge the king as supreme head of the Church were pronounced guilty of high treason, and to all those adherents of the pope who should seek to procure dispensation from Rome was decreed the punishment of imprisonment and confiscation of property, ac- cording to the ancient " Statute of Preemunire." ^ These laws were supplemented, in 1537, by the " Parish School Act," which ' With reference to Thomas Fitzgerald and his defection, comp. Leland, loc. czf.,Yo\. ii. book iii. chap. 6, p. 140 et seq. ; Froude's "History of England from the Fall of Wolsey to the Defeat of the Spanish Armada," vol. ii. pp. 293-325 ; also Bagwell, /oc. cit., vol. i. p. 163 et seq. p. 215. - Concerning the Parliament of 1536, compare Leland, vol. ii. book iii. chap. 7, p. 172 ; Weber's "Geschichteder akatholischen Kirchen in Gross- brittannien " (1845) ^^- i- P- 599 5 ^^so Bagwell, loc. at., i. p. 300. These laws are to be found in the Irish statute-book (" Statutes at large passed in the Parliaments held from 1310 to 1800," 20 vols. Dublin, 1786-1801), and among them this decree also appears, 28 Henry VIII. c. 4. I 2 History of Ireland. rendered the attainment of any ecclesiastical living dependent on a knowledge of the English language, and which, more- over, required every beneficed clergyman, on pain of losing his office, to establish English schools in his parish, and to teach the people to repeat the prayers in the English tongue.^ In the framing of these laws Browne, Archbishop of Dublin, took an especially prominent part, and at the close of one of his par- liamentary speeches, he pointedly declared that the man who did not share the king's views on these matters was not worthy to be called his faithful subject.^ This characteristic declara- tion, as may be imagined, effectually put an end to all further opposition in the House. But the decisions of a pliant Parliament, yielding to high pressure from the Crown, did not obtain the recognition of the country. The new Church regulations were in no single case voluntarily adopted within the Pale, to say nothing of more remote parts of the island, where British authority existed only in name. A portion of the Irish clergy, with Cromer, Arch- bishop of Armagh, at their' head, in opposition to the Arch- bishop of Dublin, remained faithful in their adherence to Rome. When, at last, the bull of excommunication against Henry VIII. had been published by Pope Paul III., the suc- cessor of Clement VII., no means were left untried of placing difficulties in the way of the heretical king. Ireland was overrun with papal agents, whose business it was to fan the flame of opposition to the English monarch. One of these, a Eranciscan monk, who at the moment of his arrest destroyed himself, had in his possession a document from the Bishop of Metz, addressed to the chieftain O'Neill, in Ulster, which con- tained an invocation in the name of Pope Paul III. to wage war with England. In this communication reference was made to an ancient prophecy, which declared that the pros- perity of the Church was inseparably connected with the reign of Catholicism in Ireland.^ These strenuous endeavours ' Irish Statutes, 28 Henry VIII. c. 15. 2 Leland, loc, cit., ii. p. 166. ^ A copy of this communication is to be found in Leland, loc. cit., vol. ii. p. 172; also in Warner's "History of the Rebellion in Ireland" (1767), p. 13. Uiiiil tJie Death of Queen Elizabeth. 13 did not fail of their effect, notwithstanding the cruel harshness of the steps taken by the Government, which, in one case, con- demned a priest to the loss of his right hand, and to death at the stake, ^ for having written a tract in defence of the Papacy. Some of the national-Irish chiefs, among whom were the O'Neills, flew to arms, but this rising was not any more successful than the former one had been. Owing to the dis- order which prevailed among them, and their want of military discipline, the rebels were completely defeated at Bellahoe, in I539> by Lord Gray, who proceeded against the adherents of the ancient faith with an iron hand, destroyed numerous monuments to St. Patrick, and caused the venerable cathedral of Down to be burnt to the ground. But although he, more than any of his predecessors in office, had made the power of England to be respected by the Irish, he, nevertheless, could not avoid arousing the mistrust of his despotic master. He was suspected of having connived at the escape of the youngest brother of Lord Thomas Fitzgerald, was brought to trial on the charge, and ended his life on the scaffold.^ Inspired with new courage by the execution of Lord Gray, the 'rebels renewed their efforts, which were, however, frustrated by the new viceroy, who utterly routed the forces of O'Neill and Morough O'Brien, and dispersed them into the forests. This was followed by the gradual submission of all the chieftains. Quietness having once more been restored, Lord-Lieutenant St. Leger, in 1541, decided to summon a parliament. The object for which this parliament was convened was to abolish, with one stroke, any claims based on Pope Adrian's bull which the papal see might conceive it still possessed upon Ireland, and, at the same time, to strengthen the authority of the Crown. Instead of the title " Lord of Ireland " (Dominus Hiberniae), which, out of respect to the pope as supreme feudal lord, the monarch had hitherto borne, this parliament invested Henry VIII. and his descendants with the title of "Sovereign King of Ireland."^ A certain ' See MacGeoghan, loc. a'L, vol. ii. p. 299. ^ Comp. Leland, vol. ii. p. 172. ^ See Leland, ii. p. 173, where may also be seen the proclan ation issued at that time by the king ; also Bagwell, loc. cit., i. p. 258. 14 History oj Ireland. number of the Irish chieftains acknowledged this claim to royal dignity by special treaties, and as a means of per- manently attaching these chiefs to the English throne, they were liberally endowed with secularised property, while, in compensation for having proclaimed their submission, they were created peers of the Irish Kingdom. These favours from the Crown were gratefully accepted by the nobles, whose subjection was probably facilitated by the fact that, notwith- standing the numerous changes which had been introduced in connection with their religion, the teaching of the Catholic Church had been left untouched, the main alteration consisting in the substitution of one form of ecclesiastical government for another. ^ English rule had now for the first time become something more than a mere name throughout the island, and during the life of Henry VIII. the country remained tranquil. The death of this sovereign and the accession of the young King Edward VI. plunged Ireland into fresh disorder. The efforts of the king's council to spread the Reformation more widely through the British Isles produced a new revolt in Ireland, at the head of which were O'Connor and O'Moore, two barons of Leinster. St. Leger, the lord-lieutenant, how- ever, quickly suppressed this rising ; and the leaders, having been induced by an assurance of pardon to make their submission, were thrown into an English prison, an act of treachery and a breach of faith which aroused fresh exaspera- tion in the minds of the Irish people.^ It was no wonder, therefore, that the country received with general opposition the decree of Edward VI. ordering that the use of the Book of Common Prayer, which had been compiled in the year 1548, should be extended to Ireland. The common people remained firmly attached to the Mass ; and were the less disposed to take kindly to the new liturgy, inasmuch as it was written in the English tongue, a language unknown to them. They paid little heed to the bishops appointed by the Crown, but they clung with devotion to the nominees of the 1 This has been especially pointed out by Ranke in his " Englische Geschichte" (1870), bd i. s. 163. 2 Comp. Leland, loc. cit.^ ii. p. 189. Until the Death of Queen Elizabeth. 15 papal see. France, which at that time was in conflict with England, strove to incite the Irish to resistance, and sent Jean de Moutluc, Bishop of Valence, to Ireland,^ with instructions to bring about an alliance between France and the Irish chiefs ; but as, shortly afterward, peace was concluded be- tween England and the French court, the machinations of this prelate were without result. The Government, meanwhile, continued to pursue the course upon which it had entered ; and in 1551, St. Leger, the lord-lieutenant, received strict commands from the Duke of Somerset, at that time Lord Protector, to introduce the Book of Common Prayer into all the churches of Ireland. In order to make this step less difficult for the Irish clergy, it was pointed out that the liturgy consisted only of selections from ancient forms of prayer which had been in use in the Church for ages. In further pursuance of this object, the lord- lieutenant, in the same year, summoned a national convoca- tion to meet in Dublin. Archbishop Browne here declared that this command proceeded from the king, the bishops, and clergy of England, who had, he said, in the work of compiling the Prayer- Book, adhered closely to the Holy Scriptures ; add- ing these significant words: "To whom (the king) I submit, as Jesus did to Caesar, in all things just and lawful, making no question why and wherefore, as we own him our true and lawful king." The chief representative of this new departure was Archbishop Browne, of Dublin, who was supported by four bishops ; but the majority of the prelates, with Dowdal Archbishop of Armagh, at their head, left the hall." The Government now took more energetic measures. A special edition of the Prayer-Book was prepared for Ireland, — the first book printed in the island,-^ — and arrangements were made for its translation into the Irish tongue. A large pro- portion of the church livings had at this time passed over into the hands of clergy who were devoted to the Crown ; but * See Leland, loc. cit., ii. p. 191 ; Ranke's " Franzosische Geschichte," i. p. 100 ; also Bagwell, loc. cit., i. p. 345. 2 Comp. Mant's "History of the Church of Ireland" (2nd ed.), vol. i. pp. 194-199 ; also Weber, loc. cit. (1853), bd. ii. p. 351. ^ See Mant, i. p. 205. 1 6 History of Ireland. the people remained true to their former priests, and were the more scandaHsed at the proselyting zeal of the new incum- bents, when they saw that, under the pretence of a desire to check superstition, they shamelessly plundered churches and chapels, among which was the venerable and ancient Abbey of Clonmacnoise. With the object of punishing the Archbishop of Armagh for his adherence to the old form of religion, the Primacy of Ireland was transferred from Armagh to Dublin, thus depriving him of the dignity of primate. Dowdal, however, remained steadfast to his opin- ions, and in order to escape further persecution, he resigned his bishopric and went to reside on the Continent. But notwithstanding these proceedings on the part of the Lord-Lieutenant St. Leger, his conduct appeared to the ruling powers in England to be too forbearing. He was, therefore, recalled, and was succeeded by James Crofts, who received unequivocal instructions to enforce the completion of the Reformation in Ireland. He bestowed the archbishopric of Armagh, rendered vacant by the flight of Dowdal, upon a disciple of the new faith and a friend of Cranmer's, named Goodacre ; while the see of Ossory he conferred upon Bishop Bale, a very Hotspur of the Reformation.^ These reckless measures evoked a spirit of intense dissatis- faction in the land,' and the difficulties of the situation for England were still further increased by a fresh national rising headed by Shane O'Neill, the son of the Earl of Tyrone, who had been richly endowed by Henry VIII. Irritated that the English supported the claims of his half-brother, Matthew, to the family inheritance, in opposition to his own, he took advantage of the prevailing discontent arising from Church reforms, to incite the country to insurrection. The whole of Ireland was in a state of extreme excitement, when the death of Edward and the accession of Mary suddenly produced a complete revolution in the aspect of affairs.- ' Concerning the transference of the primacy to the archbishopric of UubHn, see Leland, ii. p. 199 ; respecting Bale of Ossory, see Mant, loc. ctt., i. pp. 220-225 ; also Bagwell, i. p. 380. * See Leland, loc. cii., ii. p. 203 et scq. Until the Death of Queen Elizabeth. 17 Scarcely had the announcement of Mary's accession been made when Shane O'Neill and the rest of the disaffected chieftains proclaimed their fealty to the Crown ; while the Irish Catholics, who discerned in the new sovereign a patron of their religious views, celebrated her accession to the throne by processions and church festivals. Nor were their hopes disappointed, for Mary regarded it as her first and most sacred duty to restore the ritual of the Roman Catholic Church. The exiled bishop was, accordingly, reinstated in his diocese, and the archbishopric of Armagh was reinvested with its former supreme dignity. Those bishops who had been appointed under the Reformation were divested of office, and the married clergy were deprived of their livings. Bishop Bale, of Ossory, the most zealous adherent of the Reformation, was also removed from his diocese, and finding himself in continual danger of persecution from the populace, he fled to the Continent. Archbishop Browne, of Dublin, was likewise deprived of his see, and was succeeded by Hugh Curvvin, formerly Chaplain to the Queen, who received emphatic commands to restore to Dublin cathedral all the pictures and church ornaments which had been removed by the Reformers.^ In this reign Lord Fitzwalter was appointed Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, and the charter of his investiture records that it was his determination to promote the glory of the Roman Catholic faith, to restore the authority of the papal see, and to render secular aid to the clergy for the punishment of heresy ; ~ and that he should regard these as the most important duties of his office. In obedience to his summons a parliament as- sembled in June, 1556, which was of momentous importance. After the reading of the papal bull by Curwin, which granted absolution to the estates of the kingdom of Ireland, and re- ceived them anew into the bosom of the Church, all those laws which were passed by Henry VIII. against the apostolic see were abrogated, and the supremacy in spiritual matters was again vested in the pope, who, on his side, as a concession ' Comp. Mant, loc. cit, i. p. 237 et seq . ; Weber, loc. cil., ii. p. 3S4. - See Mant, loc. cit., ii. p. 243 ; and Bagwell, i. p. 396. C i8 History of Ireland. to the Catholic monarchy, had ah-eady, in 1555, acknowledged the elevation of Ireland into a kingdom, which had been effected by Henry VIII. As regards the ecclesiastical property of Ireland, Parliament did not re-establish the old order of things. Restitution was made of those church and monastic endowments which had devolved upon the Crown, but that portion of the impro- priated property which had been sold to laymen was allowed to remain in the hands of the purchasers. The ancient English statutes, " de comburendo hseretico," which had hitherto not been in force in the island, were now extended to Ireland,^ and thus the Irish were provided with the means of proceeding against the disciples of the new faith with fire and sword ; nevertheless, it cannot be denied that at this crisis the Catholics of Ireland acted wath great modera- tion. There is nowhere any mention of religious martyrs in Ireland, and even in the capital, the adherents of the Re- formed Church were at liberty to hold services conducted by their own clergy under the very eyes of the lord-lieu- tenant himself.- Ireland, therefore, remains free from the stain of those terrible scenes of bloodshed which were enacted in England, and which have earned for the queen the appel- lation of " Bloody Mary." On the other hand, the system of confiscation which subse- quently became so common, was, it is true, first adopted during this reign. When, after the suppression of the insur- rection of O'Moore and O'Connor, their estates were about to be confiscated and occupied by English colonists, the native settlers resolutely refused to acquiesce in the arrangement, alleging that, according to ancient Irish law, the soil did not belong to the chieftain alone, but to the entire clan, and that the septs could not be deprived of their possessions on account of any crime committed by the head of their race. The English Government, however, disputed these conclusions, and, as the Celtic settlers continued in a state of disturbance, 1 See Irish Statutes, 3 & 4 Phil, and Mary, c. i, 2, 3, 4 ; Mant, loc. ciL, ii. pp. 244-247 ; Weber, loc. cit.^ ii. pp. 385, 386. '^ See Mant, loc. cit., ii. p, 248 et seq. Until the Death of Queen Elizabeth. 19 it proceeded against them by martial law. At the instance of Lord Fitzwalter a fearful massacre ensued ; the confiscation was declared to be legal, the estates were transferred to Eng- lish colonists, and two new counties were created, whose names, King's County and Queen's County, with their towns, Maryborough and Philipstown, to-day remind us of the time of Mary, the wife of Philip the Spaniard.^ Elizabeth's accession to the crown, in 1558, once more changed the entire situation. It is well-known how, in con- sequence of the impolitic attitude of several Catholic powers, who, desiring to place Mary Queen of Scots on the throne of England and Ireland, declined to acknowledge the daughter of Anne Boleyn, Elizabeth was driven to espouse the opposite side, and thus became a zealous promoter of the Reformation.- This change in the position of affairs speedily made itself felt in Ireland, without, however, causing a change in the lord-lieutenancy. Lord Fitzwalter, now Earl of Sussex, was certainly recalled, but it was only to return in a short time, as ardent a champion of the Reformation as he had formerly been of Catholicism, an example of the pliancy of the high functionaries of State in those days. During his term of office the Parliament of 1560 was sum- moned, which sanctioned the extension of English ecclesias- tical law to Ireland.'^ The laws passed in Mary's reign against heretics were abolished ; jurisdiction in matters spiritual, as well as in those relating to first-fruits and tithes, was vested in the Crown, as was also the right to appoint bishops to the vacant sees. The oath of supremacy was once more de- manded, and it was decreed that whoever should maintain the validity of any foreign authority in spiritual things should, for the first offence, be punished with the loss of all his offices, and his benefice, if he were a clergyman ; for the second, with • For the law relating to the colonization of Queen's County and King's County, see Irish Statutes, 3 Phil, and Mary, c. 7, 8. Comp. Leiand, loc. cit., ii. p. 208. " See Ranke, " Die romischen Piipste in den letzen vier Jahrhun- derten " (Lpzg. 1874), i. pp. 203, 204. ^ The Acts passed by the Parliament of 1560 are to be found in Irish Statutes, 2 Elizabeth, c. i, 2, 3, 4. Comp. also Mant, loc. cit., i. p. 257 et seq. ; and Weber, loc. cit., ii. pp. 387, 388. 20 History of Ireland. the confiscation of his goods according to the Statute of Prae- munire ; for the third, he should incur the penalty of death as a traitor. This was followed by the Act of Uniformity, which ap- pointed the use of the Book of Common Prayer, and ordained that the services of the Church should bear one uniform character throughout the land. Here, again, the refractory members of the church were threatened with severe penalties ; but as the Irish clergy, as a rule, were unacquainted with the English language, the right was conceded to Ireland to use the Latin tongue in the liturgy and the administration of the sacraments.^ One of the principal adherents of the Reformation was Loftus, the successor of Archbishop Dowdal in the see of Armagh. Under his direction there was published in 1566, " A Short Exposition of Some of the Chief Articles of Reli- gion," which comprised the whole system of doctrine taught by the State Church of Ireland, according to the Thirty-nine Articles. To this declaration bishops and priests were re- quired to subscribe, and to confirm their acceptance of it by oath.^ Among the higher clergy these canons met with but slight opposition, and of the bishops only two refused to take the required oath of supremacy.^ The Irish people, on the other hand, remained faithful in their attachment to their old faith. One reason why the new doctrines proved so unattractive to the Irish was, that they were presented to them by their hereditary foes and oppressors. Moreover, it was all but impossible that the English, un- familiar with the Celtic language, could exert any direct re- ligious influence on the Irish mind, and equally impossible to expect that the Celts should comprehend the prayers com- piled for their use in the English tongue. An attempt was, ' Comp. Mant, loc. cit., i. p. 260 ; Leland, loc. at., ii. p. 225, note. 2 See Mant, i. pp. 272-275 ; Weber, ii. p. 390. ^ Comp. Mant, i. p. 278. Mant's statement has recently been disputed by Brady in "The Irish Reformation; or. The Alleged Conversion of the Irish Bishops at the Accession of Queen Elizabeth" (Lond. 5th ed.), and his views have also been adopted by Bagwell in his " Ireland under the Tudors," ii. p. 367. Until the DeatJi of Queen Elizabeth. 2 i however, made to render the new teaching more accessible to the Irish by means of the language of the country. In 1571, Walsh, Bishop of Ossory, translated the Catechism into the Celtic tongue.^ Shortly before his assassination, he also com- menced the translation of the Bible ; but it was long before a successor could be found to carry on his labours, and it was not until the last year of Elizabeth's reign that the work was completed. As long, therefore, as no Irish Bible existed, the Reforma- tion could with difficulty gain many followers in the country ; but there was another circumstance which also greatly tended to retard the work of reform. Those bishops who, for the sake of retaining their fat livings, were prepared to change their faith at every nod from the powers above, were scarcely the best qualified persons to exert a salutary pastoral influence over their flocks, or to exercise the functions of spiritual overseers. For the most part they spent their incomes in England, giving themselves little or no trouble about their dioceses, an example which was followed by the majority of the better endowed rectors and vicars. But the poor curates, who were principally of Celtic nationality, and upon whom the duties of the pastor mainly devolved, clung in secret to their ancient form of religion, and frequently took advantage of their position to confirm the oppressed Irish people in the faith of their fathers, and in hatred of the luxurious Anglican prelates. We can obtain no better picture of the condition of the Irish Church at this time than is furnished by the report which Sidney, the lord-lieutenant, presented to the queen on the 28th April, 1576.- In this despatch he states that out of 244 parish churches in the diocese of Meath, one of the best regulated districts in the country, there were 105 without a single resi- dent clergyman ; the glebe lands were let to farmers on long leases, and neither rector nor vicar resided on the parochial estate. The care of souls was usually confided to some * Mant, i. pp. 293, 294. " Sir Henry Sidney's report is to be found in Leland, loc. cit.^ ii. p. 320 et seq. ; Mant, loc. cit., i. pp. 298-301 ; and also, in part, in Froude's "History of England," vol, xi. p. 192. 22 History of Ireland. wretched, ignorant curate, and of these curates it was found that only eighteen could speak English, the rest being Irish priests without either learning or education. These all main- tained themselves from the altar dues, the receipts at the mass, confessors' fees, etc., sources of income which had, in fact, been formally abolished. Parsonages were all but non- existent ; in many cases the walls of the churches were falling into decay ; the windows and doors were broken, and some were without even a decent roof If such was the state of the Irish Church in the best ordered diocese in the kingdom, it were easy to infer what must have been its condition in other parts of the country. Some districts were so irreligious that even the sacrament of baptism was not administered. This report, which at the same time suggested a remedy for the existing evils, was not without its effect. The queen made arrangements which were intended to bring about an improve- ment in the position of the Church in Ireland, but the dis- turbances of the following years prevented the carrying out of these peaceful designs. The entire reign of Elizabeth was characterized by continual struggles between the Crown and the national-Irish chieftains; and hardly a year passed in which some native princeling did not take advantage of the ill-feeling existing among the people towards England, to instigate to rebellion against the Government.^ The first rising took place in 1560, under Shane O'Neill, chief of Ulster. He killed his brother Matthew, whose claims to the inheritance had been favoured by England, and was shortly afterward induced to lay down his arms, whereupon he decided to go to London and do homage to the queen in person. When, in 1562, he carried out his purpose, his attend- ants, as they walked bare-headed through the streets of the metropolis, with their saffron coloured shirts, long curling tresses, and shaggy garments, were the objects of general ' The most valuable source of information respecting the insurrections in the reign of Elizabeth is Camden's work, " Annales rerum Anglicarum et Hibernicarum regnante Elizabetha " (Lugd. Bat. 1635', although it is somewhat one-sided and too obviously the work of an Englishman and a Protestant, while, in some particulars, it also stands in need of revision. Until the Death of Qiteen Elizabeth. -J) wonder and amazement.^ He now became, outwardly at least, the friend of England, and joined her in an expedition against the inhabitants of the Hebrides." These apparently friendly relations were, however, but of short duration. In consequence of the Government having lent an car to the grievances of some chieftains whom he had treated with haughty insolence, and who had sought protection from the English, he again, in 1567, rose in rebellion, and from this time his hatred of England knew no bounds. He renounced the titles of Earl of Tyrone and Baron of Dungannon, with which he had been invested by England ; punished with the utmos.t severity any intercourse between his clansmen and the enemy, and even caused some Irishmen to be put to death for having had their bread made according to the English method.^ He entered into communication with Scotland, and offered the crown of Ireland to Mary Queen of Scots ; but, as no help came from that quarter, — the Scottish queen having just at that time been forced by threats and violence to re- linquish her throne, — Shane O'Neill was unable to keep the field, and accordingly fled into the forests, where, after having concealed himself for some time, he was finally assassinated while taking a repast. His estates were seized by the Crown, which, by this means, came into possession of the greater part of Ulster. It was now determined to carry forward the policy of colonization commenced in the reign of Queen Mary, and to assign portions of these confiscated lands to English settlers. The prospect of obtaining large tracts of fertile land without any considerable expense proved so attractive, that numerous English adventurers were found willing to migrate and settle in the sister isle. Accordingly, in the year 1572, a colony was planted at Ardes, in the east of Ulster, in which ^ See Camden's "Annales," p. 69; comp. Fronde's "History of England," vol. viii. p. 30 (1866, 4th ed.). - This did not, however, prevent the viceroy making several attempts to rid himself of the formidable chieftain : it was first sought to entice him to Dublin by stratagem, in order that he might be there taken prisoner ; and as this endeavour failed, an effort was subsequently made to compass his death by means of a present of poisoned wine. See Froude, viii. pp. 38, 49. ^ See Camden, loc. cit., p. 128. 24 History of Ireland. every British trooper was entitled to receive 240 acres of land, and every soldier of the line 120 acres. Although this particular project was a failure, and the prime mover in it, the younger Smith, belonging to the family of O'Neill, was slain, the colonization scheme was shortly afterward resumed on a comprehensive scale by Walter Devereaux, subsequently Earl of Essex. ^ Whereas the above-mentioned rebellion originated merely in the desire for independence experienced by one of the national chieftains, in those risings which now followed in Munster, foreign influence was at work. These disturbances, instigated by those Catholic powers which were hostile to Elizabeth, and encouraged by Spain and the Romish see, were of far more dangerous import to England than any of the national insurrections could possibly be, and were destined to have a much more fatal issue for the Irish people. It is a matter of notoriety that no wish was dearer to the heart of Pope Pius V. than the desire to dethrone the Queen of England, and re-establish Catholicism in the land. To a crusade against England that venerable priest was willing to devote all the property of the Church, not excepting the chalices and the crucifixes, and was even prepared to conduct the expedition in person.- It will easily be understood by those acquainted with the energetic character of Pius V., that, in planning an undertaking of this nature, he largely set his hopes on Catholic Ireland, and that he did not fail to take into account every anti-English movement which occurred in the island. When, therefore, at the suggestion of William Allen in 1568, it was decided to bring the Catholic youth of Ireland into close association at the college of Douay,^ the efforts of which institution were mainly directed towards hindering the progress of the Reformation in the British isles, this enterprise gained the unqualified support of the pope. Rome likewise granted a hearty reception to all Irish refugees. One of these, a notorious adventurer named Thomas Stuckley, ' See Camden, loc. cit., pp. 241, 256. - See Ranke, " Die romischen Papste," i. p. 244. 2 Comp, Sacchini, " Historia societatis Jesu," pars. iii. (Rom. 1649), p. 184. Until the Death of Queen Elizabeth. 25 having fled to the Continent in 1570, went to Rome and pro- cured an audience of the pope. As he here professed to be able with 3,000 ItaHans to drive the English out of Ireland, he soon became a welcome guest at the Court of this ran- corous prince of the Church.^ This aggressive policy against England was also maintained by his successor, Pope Gregory XIII. ; and his son, Giacomo Buoncampagno, born to him before his priestly consecration, having been named as the possible future sovereign of Ireland, Stuckley's designs found in him also a staunch friend. Stuckley was created Marquis of Leinster and Earl of Wexford, and 800 Italians were enlisted on his behalf, whose pay was guaranteed by Philip of Spain.- Meanwhile, another Irish refugee had entered into negotia- tions with the papal see. James Fitzmaurice, after undergoing a term of imprisonment for having occasioned a revolt in Munster in the year 1573,^ ultimately quitted Ireland, and proceeded to France in the hope of inducing this power to render aid to the Irish ; but speedily recognising the futility of his endeavours in this direction, he next turned his steps towards Spain, whose king, through the agency of his ambassador Mendoza, had already, in 1569, been in commu- nication with the disaffected Irish. Here he was referred by Phillip II. to the see of Rome, with the result that Gregory XIII., mainly at the instance of two fugitive priests named Allen and Sanders, issued an edict calling upon the prelates, chieftains, gentry, and common people of Ireland to assist Fitzmaurice in his projected invasion, in return for which he engaged to grant them plenary indulgence, as was the custom at the time of the Crusades.^ English rule in Ireland was, therefore, in imminent danger. But Elizabeth was made aware of the projects of her adver- saries, and she, accordingly, took the necessary measures of defence. Moreover, fortune favoured her in a remarkable ^ Camden, loc. cit.^ p. 193. - Comp. Camden, loc. ciL, pp. 294, 295 ; Ranke, " Die romischen Piipste," V. p. 58 ^/ seq. ; also the autograph diplomatic despatch of Mon- signore Sega, the papal nuncio at the Spanish Court. ^ See Camden, p. 255. ■* J bid., p. 302. 26 History of Ireland, degree. Stuckley, with the troops collected for Ireland, allowed himself quite unexpectedly to be persuaded to join the expedition of Sebastian, King of Portugal, against Africa, where he lost his life ; ^ and hence Fitzmaurice was forced to take his chance single-handed. He landed in Kerry, in 1579, with eighty Spaniards and numerous English and Irish fugitives, and to these adventurous emissaries of the pope great masses of the Irish speedily joined them- selves. Two chiefs of the house of Fitzgerald also cast in their lot with the rebels, though Gerald, Earl of Desmond, the actual head of the family, still held aloof Fitzmaurice was shortly afterward killed in a skirmish, and was succeeded as leader of the insurgents by John Desmond, in whose interest the pope, Gregory XIII., issued another bull;- but he, too, was vanquished in an engagement with the British commander Malby. " Hitherto the Earl of Desmond had taken no part in the rebellion, and had even congratulated the British commander- in-chief on his victory ; but when Malby ordered him to appear before him, the earl, fearing treachery, refused to comply with the summons, upon which the English com- mander marched against Ashketyn, the castle of Gerald Desmond, burning on his way numerous farms, and killing everything that came across his path. This cruelty goaded the earl to insurrection, and he, too, raised the standard of rebellion against England.^ The contest now became less unequal ; and while the fortified town of Carrickfoyle, which * Compare the autograph diplomatic report of Monsignore Sega, the pope's nuncio at the Court of Madrid. This despatch, which covers eighty quarto pages, is in the Royal Library in Berlin (MSS. Bevolk. Ital. No. 29, fol. 309-389), and is of the very greatest moment, not only with regard to the expeditions of Stuckley and James Fitzmaurice, but also to the Spanish invasion of 1580. 2 The bull of Pope Gregory XIII. to John of Desmond, bearing date 13th May, 1580, is contained in MacGeoghan, loc. tit., iii. p. 437, and has been thence transcribed by Hegewisch in his '" Uebersicht der Geschichte Irlands" (1806), p. 281. 3 See Froude's "History of England," xi. (1870), p. 215 et scq. Just at this period (p. 303 et sfq.) Camden is in many places inaccurate and confused, in one instance transferring the battle of Glenmalure to Glendalough. For the subsequent events the despatch of the nuncio Sega has again been utilised. Until the Death of Otieen Elizabeth. 27 was occupied by Spanish soldiers, was captured by the English, and the garrison hanged ; on the other hand, the Earl of Desmond succeeded in defeating Arthur Gray, the new lord-lieutenant, at the battle of Glenmalure. After this victory Philip II. despatched another body of troops to Ire- land, who landed at Smerwick in the year 1580, and proceeded to garrison the so-called " Golden Fort." But the success of the allies was at an end. Surrounded by the English soldiery and deprived of supplies, they were forced to retreat into the fort, whereupon the leaders and some of the officers were taken prisoners, while the main body of the troops was massacred in cold blood. Now that the Spanish auxiliaries were annihilated, every prospect of success for the movement had vanished. From this moment the whole of Munster was laid waste with fire and sword. Not a village nor a farm- house in the revolted districts was spared ; neither women nor children, neither old men nor maidens, found mercy at the destroying hands of the ruthless English soldiers ; and where the sword failed, famine stepped in and completed the work of destruction. Not less than 30,000 persons are said to have died of starvation in the woods and forests of Mun- ster at this time.^ Of the two Desmonds, John had already fallen in open warfare. The earl himself was assassinated in a log cabin, in the year 1583 ; and the estates of both, as well as the possessions of the mass of the rebels, were seized by the Crown. The area of the land confiscated in Munster at this period was 574,628 acres." A portion of the forfeited territory was bestowed upon Englishmen of worth and influence, among whom were the distinguished Sir Walter Raleigh and the poet Spenser, who were both richly endowed with Irish landed property at this time. The remaining districts were parcelled out in grants to English colonists. To this end a proclama- tion was issued in every county in England, inviting younger brothers and sons, in consideration of a very trifling payment, ^ This is the written statement of a prominent Irish official, Warham St. Leger, to Sir John Perrot, in the year 1582. See Froude, xi. p. 249. - See Leland, loc. cit., ii. p. 302 ; ibid., p. 300, treats of the conditions to which the farmers were subjected. 28 History of Ireland. to take possession of these Irish lands ; while they, in their turn, were required to bind themselves to maintain the garrisons at their own cost, and also to let their farms to Englishmen only. After the planting of this colony the conditions in Munster were for a long period unfavourable to the growth of seditious movements ; but, on the other hand, it is obvious that the prohibition against Irish farmers renting the land of English proprietors must have created a fresh feeling of irritation among those Celts who had hitherto abstained from all share in the disturbances. The admirable administration of Sir John Perrot,^ who, from the year 1584, discharged the duties of viceroy, forms an agreeable contrast to the terrible scenes which were enacted in Munster from 1580 to 1584. - He put an end to further bloodshed by proclaiming a general pardon ; and while he endeavoured to remove all grounds for religious controversy, and with this object counselled the queen to dispense with the oath of supremacy, he at the same time honestly strove to extend English law and English justice throughout the country. Connaught was, accordingly, divided into six coun- ties, and sheriffs and judges were for the first time appointed to these districts. Ulster was also partitioned into seven counties, and many of the most prominent chiefs of the north, who had formerly settled their disputes relating to property by an appeal to arms, now declared their readiness to submit them to the jurisdiction of the courts of law. In April, 1585, Perrot summoned a parliament to Dublin, which was attended by several Irish chieftains, who appeared, moreover, in English costume. During this parliament the lord-lieutenant made an attempt to repeal Poyning's Act, and as the provisions of this Act materially limited the power of the Irish legislature, he felt confident that, in taking this step, he would meet with the concurrence of the Irish House of Commons. But the representatives of the Pale were in favour of a different policy. To them, the members ' A special monograph of this administration exists, entitled, " History of the Government of Sir John Perrot" (Lond., 1626). Compare also Leland, ii. p. 192 et seq. ; and, concerning his religious policy, Froude, loc. ciL, vol. xii. (1870), p. 197. Until the DcatJi of Queen ElizabetJi. 29 of the Privy Council, who, according to Poyning's Act, de- termined the scope of their legislation beforehand, were less to be feared than the lord-lieutenant himself, whose influence and authority would be considerably augmented by the repeal of this Act. They, therefore, resolutely opposed Perrot's scheme, and finally compelled him to abandon his purpose. In the same year he applied himself to the regulation of land tenure in Connaught. The nobility and gentry of this province readily agreed to the terms of the " Composition of Con- naught," ^ by which they stipulated to accept patents from the Crown, and to pay a fixed ground rent ; but; on the other hand, in virtue of these patents, they were to be exempted from all further uncertain taxes and imposts. The various clans, who had hitherto been dependent on the head of their race, were, at the same time, released from all obligations to their chiefs, and placed directly under the Crown. This measure, which may be compared to the liberation of the serfs in other states, was one of genuine statesmanship, and the only cause for regret was that its operation was limited to Connaught. The nobles did not, it is true, willingly forego their ancestral manorial claims, and, in fact, under the leadership of the De Burghs, they offered substantial resistance to this attack upon their rights ; but after one of their leaders had been slain in the contest, and the other had been taken prisoner by the English, they were compelled to relinquish the struggle, and to tolerate the existence of free peasant proprietors in their midst. Perrot also devoted considerable attention to the extension of education in Ireland, and under his government the scheme of founding a university in Dublin, which had first been pro- posed by Sidney, approached maturity. But his project of forming an endowment for the university, by appropriating the property of one of the principal churches in Dublin, ^ See Siegerson's " History of the Land Tenures in Ireland," pp. 26-31. For information respecting Perrot's efforts in connection with the founda- tion of Dublin University, and his dispute with Archbishop Loftus, see Leland, loc. cit., ii. p. 323 ct scq. 30 History of Ireland. aroused the hostility of Archbishop Loftus, who so employed his influence as to withdraw from the lord-lieutenant the favour of his sovereign. Perrot was recalled, and some time after was tried and executed on a charg-e of havine been associated with certain Irish chieftains in conspiracy against the queen, and of having entered into relations with Alexan- der of Parma.^ Perrot had endeavoured, by a policy of moderation, to do justice to the Irish people, but his successor, Fitzwilliams,^ like too many of his predecessors, was harsh and cruel in his dealings with the Celtic nation, false to his word, and faithless to his obligations. Several of the Irish cliieftains he thrust into prison, two of whom were devoted to the Government, while others only retained their liberty by the payment of a bribe. These violent measures evoked such a feeling of animosity throughout the country that one chief after another took up arms, among others Brien O'Rorick, in Connaught, and O'Donnell, the chieftain of Tyrconnel ; and at last, in 1594, Hugh O'Neill, Earl of Tyrone, the nephew of Shane O'Neill, — who until now had always been found on the side of the English, and had consequently, in 15 87, had restored to him by Elizabeth the family title and possessions, — impelled by personal grievances, also joined the rebels.^ The position of the English in Ireland was considerably aggravated by the disaffection of these powerful chieftains. The British forces under Lord Norris and the Earl of Ormond, which were sent out against Hugh O'Neill, proved ineffectual ; indeed, at the battle of Blackwater, in 1598, the English suffered a defeat, losing their commandant, General Bagnall, and leaving four- ' See Camden, loc. czt., p. 594. - Comp. the opinion of Gardiner, in his " History of England from 1603 to 1616" (Lond., 1863), vol. i. p. 367. 3 For the insurrections in the latter years of Elizabeth, in addition to Camden, Hollinshed's "Chronicles of England, Scotland, and Ireland"' contain valuable information ; of the greatest importance, however, is Fynes Moryson's "History of Ireland from 1599 to 1603; to which is added a Description of Ireland" (2 vols., Dublin, 1625). This period is also treated in a work by Thomas Stafford, " Hibernia Pacata ; or, His- tory of the Late Wars in Ireland during the Reign of Queen Elizabeth '' (2nd ed. 1820). Until the Death of Queen Elizabeth. 3 i teen colours in the hands of the enemy. In consequence of this victory, the whole of Connaught rose in arms, and the rebellion also extended to Munster. Tyrone himself entered into negotiations with the King of Spain ; and, by means of his agents, he skilfully represented his successes in the most glowing colours, and requested this monarch's assistance in order to secure to himself the results of his victory. Elizabeth, however, redoubled her efforts to maintain Eng- lish supremacy in the land. She levied large bodies of troops, and, her last general having proved himself unequal to the occasion, she conferred the supreme command upon her favourite, the Earl of Essex. But, even in his hands, the course of events was not more fortunate. Prior to his ap- pointment as commander-in-chief, he had taken exception to the military tactics of his predecessor, especially blaming him that, instead of transferring the theatre of action to Ulster, and there vanquishing the Earl of Tyrone at the source of his strength, he had confined his operations to other provinces, and squandered the royal forces in conflicts which brought neither glory to himself nor advantage to the Crown. It was expected, therefore, that under his leadership a vigorous cam- paign would follow; but he, too, wasted his resources in Mun- ster and Leinster, and when at last, at the urgent command of his sovereign, he marched into the north of Ireland, he sustained such a defeat that he was compelled to enter into negotiations with the leader of the rebels. Nor were the demands made upon the earl by the rebel chieftain of Ulster inconsiderable. The conditions upon which alone Tyrone would consent to a cessation of hostilities were : a general amnesty ; liberty for the free exercise of religion ; the restora- tion of confiscated property ; and the transference of all civil offices in the land to the Irish, with the exception of the lord-lieutenancy, which was allowed to remain in the hands of the English. Notwithstanding the magnitude of these de- mands, Essex, fearing a Spanish invasion, recommended their acceptance. The queen, however, emphatically declined to entertain them, and with the object of endeavouring to induce her majesty to regard these stipulations more favourably, 32 History of Ireland. Essex quitted Ireland and went to London, where, as is well known, he was brought to trial.^ Shortly after the departure of Essex, the first instalment of pecuniary aid for the Irish insurgents arrived, and about the same time a papal emissary, in the person of a Spanish priest, delivered to the " Prince of Ulster " a crest of consecrated plumes, accompanied with the pope's blessing. From this time, Hugh O'Neill regarded himself as the appointed champion of the Catholic faith, and, accordingly, in November, 1599, he issued a manifesto to all his fellow-countrymen, in which he summoned them to abjure the degrading tenets of heresy, and to take up arms with him in defence of the freedom of their country and of the Catholic religion.^ In acknowledgment of this action. Pope Clement VIII. immediately afterwards granted a solemn and plenary indulgence to all the followers of Hugh O'Neill.3 Meanwhile, the new lord-lieutenant, Charles Blount, Lord Mountjoy, had arrived in Ireland in February, 1600, when an entirely new method of warfare was forthwith adopted. To quote the words of Gardiner, the historian, " Mountjoy made war with the spade rather than with the sword." ^ Forts, with temporary defences, speedily occupied every commanding position, and blocked every defile. Although these forts were not heavily garrisoned, they were well provisioned, and, therefore, capable of offering a prolonged resistance to the rebels. With the view of reducing the insurgents by starvation, the coinage was debased and the admission of foreign money into the country rigorously pro- hibited. At a low rate of exchange, this debased coinage could be exchanged in London for current coin of the realm, but the owners of the money were required to produce an ^ Concerning the unfavourable judgment passed upon his predecessor in command by the Earl of Essex, see Leland, loc. tit., ii. p. 353 ; also Ranke's " Englische Geschichte," bd. i. p. 337. For the further conduct of the war by Essex, and his treaty with O'Neill, see Moryson, loc. at., i. pp. 80-90. - The manifesto is to be found in Leland, he. cif.. ii. p. 364. ^ A copy of the papal brief is contained in MacGcoghan, loc. ciL, iii. p. 548 ; also in Hegewisch, loc. ci'f.., p. 288. * Comp. Gardiner's " History of England, 1603- 1616," vol. i. p. 369. Until the Death of Qtiecii Elizabeth, ^il) attestation of their loyalty.^ The embarrassments of the Irish thus increased. Soon discontent began to manifest itself among their own ranks, and some of the chiefs of Ulster deserted the national cause, while the system of bribery prac- tised in the south by George Carew, Lord-President of Mun- ster, helped to spread the disaffection. The situation had thus materially changed to the disadvan- tage of the Irish ; and although there appeared for their succour in the harbour of Kinsale, under the command of Don Juan del Aguila, a new Spanish armada conveying 3,400 men, whose numbers were augmented by the followers of O'Donnell, and by O'Neill, who marched through Leinster to join them, this assistance came too late. Lord Mountjoy concentrated his forces, to the number of 15,000, around Kinsale, and com- pletely invested it. After enduring a siege of about three months, and after a storm which cost the Spanish commander nearly 1,000 men, Juan del Aguila, on 12th January, 1602, sur- rendered the port of Kinsale to the enemy.^. On engaging not to bear arms against England again during the present war, the Spanish soldiers were permitted to return to their native country, whither they were accompanied by O'Donnell, who thus quitted the land of his fathers, and settled in Siman- cas, where he was soon joined by many of his compatriots. From this time is dated the alliance between the shamrock and the olive, rendered famous by the beautiful songs of Thomas Moore. Unable longer to maintain the contest, Tyrone fled into the forests of Ulster, in which province Mountjoy continued the war in the same spirit of ferocious cruelty in which Carew was devastating the south of Ireland with fire and sword. In the county of Tyrone alone about 3,000 human beings died of starvation at this time ; while between Tullaghoge and Toome, a distance of fifteen miles, close upon a thousand corpses were found lying unburied. A vivid idea of the extent to which ^ See Gardiner, loc. cit., i. pp. 371, 372 ; Leland, loc. cit., ii. p. 379. ' See Camden ad. a. 1602; also Stafford's " Hibernia Pacata"; for the emigration to Spain, comp. also the "Annals of the Four Masters," ab. 1602. D 34 Histo7y of Ireland. famine reigned in the land may be gathered from the follow- ing description by an eye-witness : — " No spectacle was more frequent in the ditches of the towns," says Moryson in his account, 1 "and especially in wasted countries, than to see multitudes of these poor people lying dead, with their mouths all coloured green by eating nettles, docks, and all things they could rend above ground." It was not mere exaggeration, therefore, when the commander-in-chief, in one of his de- spatches to the queen, wrote : " Your Majesty has nothing to rule over in Ireland but ashes and carcases."^ Thus surrounded on every hand by famine, Hugh O'Neill saw that it was impossible to continue the struggle, and, accordingly, announced his readiness, under reasonable condi- tions, to take the oath of allegiance. Unwilling to return to a policy of negotiation with the insurgents — a policy for which she had visited Essex with her royal displeasure, — and yet weary of carrying on a war which was swallowing up so large a portion of the revenue, while, at the same time fearing another Spanish invasion, Elizabeth hesitated long before she finally gave her consent to this course. At last, however, having received his sovereign's assent, Mountjoy entered into negotia- tions with Tyrone at the abbey of Mellifont, and on the 31st March, 1603, a treaty was concluded, according to the pro- visions of which Tyrone renounced the title of " The O'Neill," and abjured all his foreign alliances, especially the league with Spain ; in return for which he received a free pardon, the restitution of his property, and the right to the free exercise of his religion for himself and his family. But the conclusion of this compact was not witnessed by Elizabeth. Seven days before it was ratified, this monarch, who had played so illus- trious a part in the history of the British isles, passed from among the living. ^ ^ Comp. Moryson, bk. iii. chap. i. p. 200 ; consult likewise Leiand, loc. cit., vol. ii. p. 410, who gives some interesting statements relative to the stupendous advance in prices which took place after the close of the contest. * Comp. Leiand, ii. p. 287. ^ Comp. Moryson, loc. ciL, bk. iii. p. 300 ; also Leiand, ii. p. 408. CHAPTER III. IRELAND FROM THE DEATH OF ELIZABETH UNTIL 164I. — THE PERIOD OF COLONIZATION, AND OF THE SYSTE- MATIC LAND SPOLIATION. With the accession of James I., British rule was once more, after long and bloody struggles, as we have seen, established over the whole of Ireland. But the new monarch found, on ascending the throne, that a very crude state of things existed in the interior of his Irish kingdom. It devolved upon him, therefore, to organise a regular administration in the recently- subdued districts. The establishment of a new order of things was, however, not accomplished without harsh and severe measures, the result being that the commencement of the reign of the first Stuart was marked by fresh rebellions. These disturbances, which, unlike former risings, did not originate with the various chiefs, but took their rise in the towns, began in the first year of his reign. It was in the towns that the injurious effects of the debased coinage, of which mention was made in the foregoing chapter, were most palpably experienced, and it was, consequently, here that the greatest amount of irritation was felt. Another cause of com- plaint was that the military forming the garrisons were quartered on the inhabitants ; and a final grievance was a religious one. The majority of the urban population consisted of Catholics, who, believing that in King James, the son of Mary Queen of Scots, they detected a secret disciple of their own faith, imagined that they had, on this account, the right to give vent to their dissatisfaction with Anglicanism. Ac- cordingly, in some of the towns, the disturbances began by burning the Book of Common Prayer, and openly celebrating the mass ; while in other places, as in Cork, they commenced 36 History of Ireland. by the citizens refusing to lodge the soldiery. In these cases Mountjoy displayed his wonted energy. Waterford, whose inhabitants pleaded their ancient privileges in vain, he forced to capitulate, and shortly afterward Wexford and Cork also submitted. The mutineers were treated with comparative leniency, the ringleaders alone being handed over to martial law.i Quietness having been again restored, Lord Mountjoy obtained his long-desired release, and was succeeded in the lord-lieutenancy by George Carew. When Mountjoy re- turned to London, he was accompanied by Hugh O'Neill and Roderic O'Donnell, the latter being the brother of the chief who had settled in Spain, and there died. They were graciously received by James I., who ratified the agreement which restored to O'Neill his family title and possessions, and also invested O'Donnell with the dignity of Earl of Tyr- connell.^ During Carew's short term of office he was principally occupied in establishing order in the country and in securing the administration of the laws of the realm, to accomplish which ends a decree, ordering the disarmament of the popula- tion, was issued ; and now, for the first time in the history of Ireland, assizes were held in Ulster, presided over by English judges. This new institution gained the hearty goodwill and approval of the Irish lower classes, who earnestly entreated the judges to return and again dispense justice in the land. ^ On February 3rd, 1605, Carew was succeeded by Sir Arthur Chichester, a man of conspicuous energy and eminent states- manship, whose administration exercised a marked influence on the country. While, in order to maintain peace, he, on the one hand, enforced the prohibition of his predecessor against 1 For the earlier portion of the reign of James I., Gardiner's " History of England, 1 603-1616" (2 vols., Load., 1863), chaps, vii., ix. is particularly valuable, being a work the material for which has been in a great measure derived from manuscript sources, and whose authority is especially based on the correspondence of Chichester, the lord-lieutenant. For the dis- turbances in the towns, see vol. i. pp. :i72-'^jS ; also Moryson, vol. ii. p. 330 et seq. ; and Leland, vol. ii. p. 413 ^/ seq. 2 Comp. Leland, ii. p. 417 ; and Moryson, loc. cit.^ vol. ii. p. 345. ** See Gardiner, vol. i. p. 387. From the Death of Elizabeth until 1641. 37 the carrying of arms, and visited with severe penalties every contravention of the law; he, on the other hand, proclaimed a general amnesty, at the same time engaging to take the poor under his especial care, and defend them from injustice. According to this proclamation, all farmers were to be pro- tected in the occupation of their farms and insured against ejectment and arbitrary arrest ; and it finally declared that the Irish were no longer followers or dependants of a native lord or chief,i but henceforth free subjects of His Majesty James I. This dissolution of the union between the chieftain and his clan, although it secured the poor against the oppres- sion of the powerful nobles, had a result which was not wholly beneficial. By a decision of the highest legal court, the King's Bench, the system of a community of property and a common right of inheritance, which had formerly prevailed among the Celts, was pronounced illegal ; ^ and thus all claims^ to the property of the clan, which had hitherto been possessed by its single members, were, at one stroke, declared to be null and void, a decision which inflicted undeniable hardships on the indigenous population. At the commencement of this administration ecclesiastical questions demanded much of the lord-lieutenant's attention. In the early part of his reign, the king had been disposed to show toleration to the Catholics, but alarmed by the Gun- powder Plot of 1605, he gradually assumed a more hostile attitude towards Catholicism ; and on July 4th, 1606, he pub- lished a proclamation ordering the banishment of all Catholic priests, and urging the enforcement of the Recusant Act, a law enacted in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, which imposed a fine of one shilling on every person who absented himself from the services of the Anglican Church. The aldermen of the city of Dublin were, accordingly, summoned to appear before the Castle Chamber, a court corresponding to the Star Chamber in England, when a decree, with penalties attached, was issued against all negligent churchgoers. But although ' See Gardiner, vol. i. p. 390-393. - Comp. "Carte's History of the Life of James, Duke of Ormond" (Lond., 1736), vol. i. p. 13. o 8 History of Ireland. coercive measures were adopted against those who objected to pay the fines, there were but few conversions to record as the consequence of these rigorous steps ; on the contrary, they only resulted in arousing fresh hatred and contumacy. Chichester, therefore, changed his policy. He abandoned all attempts to convert the Irish by force, and, as he wrote to the Privy Council, centred his hopes mainly on the education of the rising generation ; while as one means of winning over the people to the Anglican Church, he caused an Irish translation of the Book of Common Prayer to be printed and distributed throughout the land.^ Meanwhile, the chiefs of Ulster viewed these methods of organization with ill-concealed annoyance. Tyrone especially disapproved of the English administration of justice, and had already, at the beginning of the reign of James I., refused to admit the sheriff into his county. In May, 1606, therefore, Chichester wrote to Salisbury, secretary of state, that it was impossible that the province of Ulster could ever be in a happy condition until it was placed under the well-regulated administration of a president and council. Thereupon Tyrone, who had obtained information of the viceroy's plans, wrote to the king on 17th June, 1606, that he " would rather spend the rest of his days in banishment than be placed under any other government than that of the king and his lord-lieu- tenant." ^ This feeling of resentment between the viceroy and the Ulster chief was intensified by the attitude of Chiches- ter with regard to a dispute which arose between the Earl of Tyrone and his principal vassal, in which the viceroy was prepared to espouse the cause of the latter. The relations existing between them were thus strained to the utmost, when suddenly, on i8th May, 1607, a letter was found at the door of the Castle Chamber, containing the intelligence that a plot had been formed by Tyrone, Tyrconnell, and some other northern chieftains, to murder the lord-lieutenant, and to seize Dublin Castle. This communication was supported by the 1 A detailed account of the disorders which took place in the Irish towns in connection with ecclesiastical questions is to be found in Gardiner, vol. i. pp. 398-408. ' Ibid., i. p. 408. Front the DcatJi of Elizabeth tmtil 1641. 39 statement of a witness, not, it is true, entitled to much credence, who declared that he had been told by the Provincial of the Irish Franciscan monks in the Netherlands, that in Ireland everything was ripe for revolt ; that assistance was expected from Spain ; and that large sums of money had already been collected which were to be handed over to Tyrconnell. It will, of course, always remain a matter of controversy whether the information thus afforded rested upon any basis of truth ; but the fact that both of the earls precipitately fled from the country, and repaired to the Continent, necessarily caused them to be regarded with additional suspicion by the English Government.^ Owing to the belief which prevailed among the English population of Ireland in the existence of a secret under- standing between Spain and the two fugitive earls, and, conse- quently, in the imminence of a Spanish invasion, Chichester felt called upon to take the necessary precautionary measures in Ulster. He caused the garrisons to be strengthened in the north, and suspicious persons to be arrested ; and, in order to conciliate the lower orders, the king issued a proclamation,^ in which he expressly and emphatically stated that it was not his intention to take any steps whatever against the Catholics on account of matters of faith. The flight of the two earls, and the subsequent confiscation of their property, presented to Chichester a favourable oppor- tunity for carrying out his long-cherished scheme of planting . a new colony on a large scale. Shortly after his accession to office, in a letter to Salisbury, secretary of state, he wrote that "it was absurd folly to run over the world in search of colonies in Virginia or Guiana, whilst Ireland was lying desolate. The reformation and civilization of such a country would, in his opinion, be a greater honour for the king than if he could lead his armies across the channel, and could reduce the whole of France to subjection." ^ The nature of the plan which it was his desire to see realized may be clearly gathered from a ^ For O'Neill's conspiracy, see Gardiner, loc. cit., vol. i. p. 416 1?/ seq. ; also Leland, loc. cit.., vol. ii. p. 423. 2 A copy is to be found in Leland, vol. ii. p. 425. ^ See Gardiner, vol. i. p. 380. 40 History of Ireland. statement which he forwarded to the Enghsh Privy Council on the 17th September, 1607 : " Let the king," he wrote, "at once take into his own hands the country which had been vacated by the earls, and let it be divided amongst its present inhabitants. Let every gentleman in the country have as much land as he and all his tenants and followers could stock and cultivate. Then, when every native Irishman had received his share, and not till then, let the vast districts which would still remain unoccupied be given to men who had distinguished themselves in the military or civil service of the Crown, and to colonists from England and Scotland, who might hold their lands upon condition of building and garrisoning castles upon them. By this means everything would be provided for. The country would be put into a good state of defence at little or no expense to the Government, and the Irish themselves would be converted into independent and well-satisfied land- holders, who would bless the government under which they had experienced such an advance in wealth and prosperity.^ The attention of the lord-lieutenant was temporarily diverted from the realization of this scheme by a new revolt. In 1608, Cahir O'Dogherty, the youthful and inexperienced Lord of Innishowen, took up arms against the Government, obtained possession of the Fort of Culmore, and set fire to the town of Derry, the latter act, however, completing the list of his achievements. At the command of Lord Chichester, General Wingfield marched into Ulster, made a sudden attack on O'Dogherty's property and plundered his estates ; and, the Irish chieftain shortly afterward falling in a skirmish with Wingfield, this rash enterprise came to an end.^ Peace having again been restored, the viceroy had now leisure to devote to the execution of his designs in regard to the colonization of Ulster. His plans differed from all preceding ones, in so far as they were conceived in a spirit of justice towards the Irish, and did not aim at punishing the people for the disaffection of their chiefs. He drew up a ' See Gardiner, vol. i. p. 422. ' For Dogherty's insurrection, comp. Leland, vol. ii. p. 428 ; also Gardiner, vol. i. pp. 429-434. From the Death of Elizabeth 7uitil 1641. 41 careful memorandum ^ containing a detailed account of the condition of the six counties of Ulster, namely : Derry, Done- gal, Armagh, Cavan, Fermanagh, and Tyrone ; in which he also further elaborated the principles of the scheme suggested in his letter of September, 1607. On 14th October, 1608, this document was delivered to Lord Chief Justice Ley, and Davies, the Attorney-General, who were deputed to lay it before the English Privy Council. Accordingly, when a com- mission was appointed in London to devise a plan for the colonization of the province of Ulster, Ley and Davies took an active part in its deliberations. Here, however, Chichester's scheme was completely remodelled, and it was determined that the above counties should be settled by colonists from England and Scotland, and retired members of the military and civil services, while the Irish should be excluded as much as possible. Davies, the attorney-general, was a man possessing remark- able qualifications for the position he filled ; but he was a man, to use the words of Gardiner, " who forgot that it was better to carry a small measure of reform with the will and consent of the people, than a large one by force." He it was who overthrew the original plan of Sir Arthur Chichester, and effected the exclusion of the Irish. He was impelled to adopt this relentless, and at the same time unwise, policy, by the desire to divest all future disturbances of a dangerous character, by forcing the Irish out of every position which might be capable of offering any resistance. These views were shared by the celebrated Francis Bacon, subsequently lord chancellor, at that time occupying the post of solicitor-general, who, believing that Ireland was in a state of absolute anarchy, and being desirous of putting an end, with one blow, to the dis- orders prevailing Jn the island, supported, in his report to the king in December, 160S, the plan suggested by Davies, without, for a moment, taking into consideration the sentiments of the native population. ^ In the early part of the year 1609, the prospectus of the Government colonization scheme, which proved to be an ' See Gardiner, vol. i. p. 550 et seq. - Ibid., vol i. pp. 552-554. 42 History of Ireland. almost complete embodiment of the recommendation of the commission, was made public, with the object of attracting adventurers. The lands were divided into allotments of i,ooo, 1,500, or 2,000 acres, which were distributed, not according to Chichester's plan, to the Irish in the first place, but to English and Scotch colonists to the extent of 1 50,000 acres ; in the next place to the servants of the Crown, who received 45,000 acres ; leaving 70,000 as the portion of the Irish. Moreover, the English and Scotch settlers were prohibited from trans- ferring their allotments to the Irish, and from allowing them to reside on their property as tenants : thus, the Celts were not only unfairly dealt with in the partition of the land, but they were likewise placed under disabilities.^ Accordingly, in the year 16 10, the settlement of Ulster was carried out in the appointed manner ; but the regulations of the Government aroused such an amount of discontent among the Irish population, that Chichester was compelled to increase the garrisons in this province. ' Nor was this dissatisfaction by any means unjustifiable. Although, with a stroke of the pen, the Court of King's Bench had abolished the ancient brehon law, it had not removed from the minds of the people their deep-rooted convictions respecting the justice of their claims. The view still prevailed among them, that the land belonged, not to the individual heads or chiefs of a race, but to the race itself, — and that the crimes of a chieftain could never with justice he avenged on the innocent members of his clan. But the course which had been pursued by the Government was in strict contravention of this principle. Of the territory which had been just distributed, only one-fourth part had come into the hands of the Irish ; and, as if from a determination to deprive the disinherited Celts of every means of shelter and defence, and to establish pauperism as a settled institution in the land, the Irish were even excluded from renting the farms to whose absolute possession they deemed themselves entitled. But this violation of justice by the English was destined to be sorely revenged. It is, however, not to be denied that the agricultural in- ' See Gardiner, vol. i. pp. 555, 556. Fi om the Death of Elizabeth until 1641. 43 terests of the province were greatly advanced as the result of the fresh settlement, and the improved cultivation of the soil which ensued. As regards intelligence, energy, and capital, the new colonists had, on the average, a decided advantage over the former proprietors ; and although the opinion of Davies,^ the attorney-general, when he compares the newly colonized territory to the Promised Land, is scarcely to be regarded as coming from an unbiassed source, the fact of the agricultural prosperity of the country is corroborated from other quarters. The settlement made by the City of London Company, 2 which on 27th January, 1613, was endowed by royal charter with the rights and privileges of a corporation, attained to an especially flourishing condition ; and it was this company which rebuilt the towns of Derry and Coleraine, after they had been burnt down during the rebellion, the memory of which Londonderry still retains in its name. In order to give the sanction of law to the numerous changes which had been effected, James resolved to summon an Irish Parliament, an event which had not occurred for a period of twenty-seven years ; and with the object of insuring a ma- jority for his views, he created forty new boroughs, a step which gave rise to fresh excitement in the country. The Irish Catholics, or recusants as they were now called, on account of their refusal to take the oath of supremacy, began to fear that it \<'as the intention of Parliament to extend to Ireland the operation of the penal laws which had been enacted against Catholicism in England. This alarm appeared to be the less groundless, inasmuch as the puritanical element had received a considerable accession through the advent of the Scotch settlers, who were imbued with an intense hatred of Catholic- ism. When, therefore, it was reported that Parliament had been convoked, six Irish recusant nobles made certain repre- sentations to the king ; ^ these, however, being disregarded, ^ In the treatise, " Discoverie of the True Causes why Ireland was never entirely Subdued." ^ See Leland, loc. at., ii. p. 434. 3 For the history of the Parliament of 1613, comp. Leland, /^t^. cif., ii. pp. 441-458 ; also Carte's " History of the Life of James, Duke of Ormond " (3 vols., 1 735-1 736), a work which, on account of the mass of material 44 History of Ireland. the Catholics resolved to make strenuous efforts to secure a majority at the election. Immediately after the new Parlia- ment met on i8th May, 1613, a violent struggle ensued re- specting the choice of the speaker. The candidate of the Crown, the now familiar Davies, having been elected, the party of recusants declined to take any part in parliamentary business, and the excitement attained so great a height that the lord-lieutenant deemed it best to adjourn the House until further notice. But this action of the viceroy by no means calmed the minds of the people, inflamed, as they were, by religious passion. While the Puritans were urgent in their demands for more strin- gent measures against Catholicism, the Catholics sent a second embassy to the king to justify the stand they had taken, and to entreat him to show toleration to their religion. The king granted an audience to the deputation, and, according to the assurance afterward given by one of its members, the monarch declared that he would do no violence to any man's conscience, and that he would hinder no man having a Catholic priest in his house, provided only that those priests were excluded who accorded to the pope the right to excommunicate and depose the king. A declaration such as this, however, was ineffec- tual to appease the storm of excitement which was then raging ; on the contrary, its vehemence still increased when the lord- lieutenant, unable to reconcile this announcement of his master's principles with his general policy, or with the instruc- tions he had himself received, accused the bearer of the mes- sage of treachery, and caused him to be imprisoned. This dispute was not adjusted until 161 5, when the Catholics aban- doned their opposition to the newly created boroughs, as well contained in it, and the care with which it has been collected, is abso- hitely indispensable for the history of this period. In 185 1 a new edition was published in Oxford, in which, however, the paging of the original edition has been retained. The Parliament of 161 3 is treated in vol. i. pp. 19-22. The remonstrance of six Irish recusant peers is to be found in Leland, loc. cit., ii. p. 443 et seq. ; also in Plowden's " Historical Review," vol. i., App. p. 56. Gardiner's new work, " The History of England from the Accession of James to 1642," which comprises, and is a continuation of, the work referred to in note i, page 36, has, unfortunately, not been accessible to me. From the Death of Elizabeth until 1641. 45 as to the speaker nominated by the Crown ; in return for which they were exempted from any further penal enactments. -.Parliament now proceeded to business. It declared Tyrone and Tyrconnell to be convicted of rebellion ; ratified the grants of lands in Ulster ; and voted subsidies to the king. At the same time it abolished those statutes which prohibited marriage, business transactions, and other forms of intercourse between the Irish and the English. The last named measure of the Parliament betrayed, to a certain degree, a desire for closer relations with the Celtic race ; and had this course now entered upon been still further pur- sued, the Irish might possibly, in time, have forgotten the glaring infringement of the laws of right and justice which was committed at the colonization of Ulster. Above all things, justice ought to have been dispensed with an even hand, and the native population, who, as Davies testified, more than any other people under the sun prized and valued an impartial administration of justice,^ should, at least, have had the satisfaction of knowing that, under the protection of Eng- lish laws, they could henceforth enjoy the fruit of their toil in peace and security. Unfortunately, the course of events re- vealed a very different aspect of affairs. The greed for Irish land among the English at home was insatiable, and the re- bellions and the consequent confiscations being now at an end, it became necessary to try other means of obtaining posses- sion of Irish landed property. In the words of Burke, the English statesman, " The war of chicane succeeded to the war of arms." ^ A number of dangerous people, who earned for themselves the name of " Discoverers," made it their busi- ness to examine into the validity of the titles by which the old landed proprietors held their estates ; and in case of the dis- covery of any flaw or defect in the same, to give notice of this to the commission appointed by James for the partition of the land. Were the owners not able to produce and lay before this court the whole of their title deeds, they forfeited ^ See Davies' " Discoverie," etc., pp. 200, 201. - Burke's letter to Sir H.Langrishe, in "Works" (Lond., 1808), vol. vi., P- 336. 4^ History of Ireland. their estates, a portion of which passed to the informer. This lucrative profession aroused the cupidity of others, and soon every register and every record had been narrowly scrutinised by them. Even those landowners who were in possession of their deeds of purchase, or their patents, frequently fell victims to the machinations of the " Discoverers." If it were found, for instance, that there rested certain taxes on an estate, pay- able to the Crown, but for which, during the distractions of the Elizabethan age, no demand had been made, the owner was now required to produce the receipt for those taxes, and should this not be forthcoming, the commission declared the estate to be confiscated.^ These "subtle plunderings," as Burke designated them, grew more frequent from year to year, and more especially after the recall of Lord Chichester, which took place in 1616. In Longford alone twenty-five proprie- tors were forced from their estates without any compensation whatever ; and a case which occurred in County Wicklow was even more scandalous than these. It was that of a landowner named Byrne, whom it was desired to rob of his estate by the methods above described. These methods, however, proving unsuccessful, the agents did not hesitate to prefer a criminal charge against him, and to bribe false witnesses in order to effect the confiscation of his property." But a yet greater evil was perpetrated when the Crown itself adopted the system of the " Discoverers," and pursued to still greater lengths their methods of violence for the acqui- sition of Irish land. In carrying out the provisions of the " Composition of Connaught " effected under the administra- tion of Sir John Perrot (p. 29), some of the transactions had been but imperfectly carried out, the proprietors having frequently neglected to have their surrenders registered, or to take out their patents and pay the necessary fees. In order to rectify these shortcomings, James I., in 1616, appointed a com- mission to supply the failing surrenders, and to issue new patents. Although the landowners, on their part, gladly seized this opportunity to strictly fulfil all their obligations, See Carte's " Life of Ormond,"' vol. i., pp. 25-28. Ibid., vol. i. pp. 27-32. 2 Ibid., vol. i. pp. 27-32 From the Death of Elizabeth tin til 1641. 47 and faithfully paid the fees that were demanded of them, the functionaries of the Court of Chancery, nevertheless, neglected at the time to make an accurate register of the documents. This formal defect, which was entirely chargeable to the officials of the Court of Chancery, the estate owners being perfectly innocent in the matter, was, however, now made the occasion of a course of action which was devoid of every trace of statesmanlike sagacity, and one which could only have been dictated by the meanest avarice and the most sordid greed of territory. The Government caused the collective titles of Connaught, which were not fully and adequately registered, to be pronounced invalid, and declared the whole of the land so voided to be still in possession of the Crown. It is not to be wondered at that this violation of justice should have aroused the greatest excitement and the wildest conster- nation among the landed gentry of Connaught, who, appre- hensive that it was the purpose of the Crown to introduce into Connaught a scheme of colonization similar to the one which had been adopted in Ulster, endeavoured, in their terror, to secure their position by promises of money. They offered to pay to the king, in return for the ratification of their titles, a double annual composition, as well as a gross sum of ^10,000.^ But James I. was prevented from accepting this proposal by his death, which occurred in 1625. When his successor, Charles I., ascended the throne, he found Ireland in a state of the greatest commotion and dis- traction. The landowners of Connaught were still threatened by the perils we have just mentioned, and were casting about for some means by which they might be enabled to retain their estates. In the year 1628, therefore, the Irish landlords offered to the king, through Lord Falkland, the new lord- lieutenant, the sum of ;^ 120,000, on condition of obtaining certain " graces," ^ which should insure to them their property, and protect the Irish Catholics from penal enactments. The landowners of Connaught were, especially, to be secured from all further intrigues by a fresh registration of their titles ; and ' Comp. Carte's " Life of Ormond," vol. i. p. 47 ei seq. ^ Ibid., vol. i. p. 52 et seq. 48 History of Ireland. an undisturbed possession of sixty years should guarantee them against all older claims. It was, moreover, stipulated that the tyranny of the ecclesiastical courts should be re- stricted ; the free exercise of religion be permitted ; and that the right be conceded to Catholics to appear as advocates in the courts of law without being required to take the oath of supremacy. The king accepted the proffered sum of money ; issued instructions to the lord-lieutenant enjoining upon him to fulfil the stipulated conditions, and promised that during the next Parliament the titles of the landowners should be confirmed. This manifestation of indulgence by the Government on questions of religion did not, however, meet with the approval of the Protestant population of Ireland. It was not only the Puritans settled in the north, who denounced these regulations as favouring Catholicism, but the High Church prelates also set their faces against them. An assembly of the chief dignitaries of the Irish Church, held in Dublin under the presidency of Archbishop Usher, declared that it was a grievous sin to extend toleration to Catholics, or to consent to their being allowed the free exercise of their religion ; and that if, in consideration of money payments, — an unmistakable allusion to the transaction effected between Charles I. and the Catholics, — forbearance should be exercised towards them, that would be equivalent to selling religion for gold, and would constitute a still more heinous offence. Owing to these influences, and partly also in consequenee of the complaints made by the English Parliament respecting the spread of Irish Catholicism, Lord Falkland published a proclamation on I St April, 1629, in which he prohibited the practice of the rites and ceremonies of the Roman Catholic Church.^ Falkland, however, had not yet done enough to satisfy the ardour of the anti-Catholic zealots, and, as they were con- tinually besieging the king with lamentations over the increase ' For the attitude assumed by Archbishop Usher with regard to this question, consult especially Bernard's " Life of Usher" (1656); concerning the prohibition of Romish rites and ceremonies, see Carte's " Life of Ormond," i. p. 53, and Leland, iii. pp. 4, 5. From the Death of Elizabeth tuitil 1641. 49 of popery, the sovereign ultimately sacrificed his minister to the intrigues of his opponents. Falkland was recalled in 1629, and pending the arrival of the new viceroy, the admin- istration was placed in the hands of two lords chief-justices. Viscount Ely and Richard Earl of Cork, lord high-treasurer. During this period the antagonism existing between Puritanism and the High Church on one side, and Catholicism on the other, attained its greatest height. While divine service was being held in one of the Catholic churches of the Irish capital, the Anglican Archbishop of Dublin, accompanied by some soldiery, forced his way into the building and attempted to disperse the congregation. This attempt being resisted by those who were assembled for worship, a fight ensued in the church, in which the Protestants were finally worsted. The consequence of this truly Irish excess, however, was that the English Privy Council caused fifteen Catholic churches to be closed, and transferred the use of the newly established Catholic seminary in Dublin to the Protestants.^ And, so long as this administration remained in power, the same narrow-minded spirit of persecution and oppression prevailed. Not until 1632, when Thomas Wentworth, afterward the renowned Lord Strafford, was created Viceroy of Ireland, was a different policy adopted towards the Catholics.^ It is true, that he, too, in his correspondence, has expressly stated it as his opinion that the Crown can never be secure or safe until one uniform mode of divine worship prevail throughout the land ; ^ but, involved in other and far-reaching schemes, he hesitated to arouse the displeasure of the united Catholic population of Ireland, and, therefore, abstained from any direct interference with their religious concerns. It is matter of history that Thomas Wentworth originally ' See Leland, iii. pp. 5-7. " For the administration of Wentworth, Strafford's own letters, pub- lished by Knowler (2 vols. foL, Dublin, 1740), are of primary importance. An appendix has been added to the work in the form of a biography, written by Radcliffe, under the title of an " Essay Towards the Life of my Lord Strafford." A more recent representation of that illustrious man has been furnished by Forster in his " Statesmen of the Commonwealth of England" (New York, 1846). •^ See Strafford's "Letters," ii. p. 39. E 50 History of Ireland. entered the lists as the champion of the parliamentary opposition, and that after the famous Petition of Right he transferred his allegiance to the side of absolute monarchy, to which he was now unreservedly devoting all his powers- Charles I. quickly discerned his energy, and his eminent talents as a statesman, and appointed him to the distinguished position of Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland ; and it was during his tenure of office as viceroy that he attempted to establish absolutism in Ireland, in order that, by the thereby enhanced power of the monarchy, he might be enabled to turn the scale in favour of a despotic government in England. And, never at a loss in the choice of his expedients, he contended for his scheme with an energy and a recklessness characteristic of the man. In the prosecution of his ends, he treated some of the most influential English noblemen resident in Ireland with the utmost indignity, simply with the object of intimidating them, at the outset, from any further opposition. One of them. Lord Mountnorris, was even condemned to death on a charge of sedition and mutiny, merely for having made use of a disrespectful expression with reference to the lord- lieutenant, the representative of the sovereign.^ In Parliament he was equally impatient of opposition. When, in 1634, he summoned both Houses of Parliament, he so contrived matters that neither the recusants nor the Protestants had any considerable preponderance in the House of Commons,- and he was thus enabled, by setting one party in opposition to the other, the more surely to rule both. In the same manner every longing of the Irish Protestant Church for independence was suppressed by Went worth. According to his views, supreme authority in Church matters belonged absolutely and unconditionally to the king. He, therefore, abolished, in 1634, the " Irish Articles," which granted some concessions to Puritanism, and which had been introduced by Archbishop Usher in the reign of James I., and, ^ See Leland. iii. p. 35 ; Carte's " Life of Ormond," i. p. 84. 2 For this point a letter from Strafford to Coke is particularly important (Strafford's "Letters," i. p. 259), the greater portion of which is also to be found in Plowden's " Historical Review," i. p. 122. From the Death of Elizabeth until 1 64 r . 51 at the same time, he united the Irish EstabHshed Church indissolubly with that of England.^ But above all things he considered it to be his duty to in- crease the army, which had hitherto been in a disorganised con- dition, and to put it in a state of complete efficiency ; in order to do this, however, it was of the first importance to augment the revenue of the Crown, and in pursuance of this object he disdained no means. He extorted large sums of money from the Catholics by reminding them that, in case their contribu- tions were too niggardly, there still existed laws against the Papists which could easily be put into operation again. The City of London Company, which some years before had effected the colonization of Londonderry (p. 43), was suddenly called to account for not having fulfilled the stipulations con- tained in its charter, and condemned to pay a fine of £'jo,ooo. In the same spirit he conceived the idea of obtaining additions to the royal exchequer by a fresh settlement of Connaught ; and, accordingly, he induced the Government, regardless of the engagements made some years previously at the granting of the " graces," to re-assert the claims it had formerly advanced to the possession of this province. And now, as in the worst days of James I., there again prevailed the old system of investigation into the validity of the titles by which the landed gentry of Connaught held their estates. Such persons as were practised in disinterring these unregistered titles were looked upon with favour, and as a means of inciting to more vigorous efforts, a premium of twenty per cent, on the receipts realized during the first year by the confiscation of property thus imperfectly registered was guaranteed to the presidents of the commission. With a cynical frankness, Wentworth declared that no money was ever so judiciously expended as this, for now the people entered into the business with as much ardour and assiduity as if it were their own private concern. That, at least, the appearance of justice might be maintained, the cases were decided by juries, to whom, as if in mockery of all impartial * See Carte, loc. cit., i. pp. 83, 84 ; Ranke's " Englische Geschichte." bd. iii. p. 263. 52 History of Ireland. administration of justice, direct instructions were given to return a verdict to the effect that all the titles in Connaught were vested in the king. Most of the juries, intimidated by- threats, delivered the desired verdict, but one jury in Galway made answer to this request with a fearless " No." What, however, were the consequences to these men ? The sheriff who had summoned the jury was condemned to pay a fine of i^i,ooo; and the jurymen were brought before the Castle Chamber, where they were required to declare that, in giving their verdict, they had committed perjury. Refusing to do this, each of them was sentenced to suffer the confiscation of his goods, to pay a fine of ;^4,ooo, and to be kept in prison until the fine was paid.^ Wentworth had thus demonstrated that, as he himself acknowledged in one of his letters, his darts could inflict cruel wounds, even deadly ones.^ The second Galway jury, rendered timid by the fate of their predecessors, returned the required verdict ; and from this time the collective titles of the province of Connaught were at the unlimited disposal of the lord-lieutenant ; and, although, notwithstanding this result, he, at the last moment, recoiled from the final act, and shrank from ejecting the present owners, and re-settling the province, it was not from any conscientious scruples that he refrained from taking this last decisive step: to the man whose motto was " Thorough," such scruples were unknown. Nor was it the disapprobation of his monarch which held him back from the perpetration of this unrighteous deed, for that Charles I. entirely approved of the policy of his lord-lieutenant may be justly inferred from the fact, that shortly after this he created him Earl of Strafford. No ; it was practical con- siderations alone which induced Wentworth to pause in the path upon which he had entered. Just at that time the Crown ' For the proceedings against the gentry' of Connaught, Strafford's '• Letters" are of the first importance (vol. i. pp. 310-352, 442, 443, 451, 454; vol. ii. p. 41); also Leland, iii. pp. 30-37, and Carte's "Life of Ormond," i. p. 80 et seq. 2 Compare the letter to Wandesford : " I am full of belief they will lay the charge of Uarcy the Sheriff's death unto me ; my arrows are cruel that wound so mortally ; but I should be more sorry by much the king should lose his fine." See also Hardiman's " History of Galway," p. 105. From the Death of Elizabeth until 1 64 1 . 53 was engaged in a contest with Puritanism in Scotland, while, in England, the attempts of Charles to make his rule absolute had produced a state of public feeling which was in the highest degree critical ; hence, it would have been nothing short of wanton folly to call up a rebellion also in the third kingdom, a result which must certainly have followed had he proceeded to eject the landed gentry of Connaught from their estates. In view of these considerations, therefore, Strafford postponed the colonization of the western province to a more favourable season. While we turn with just abhorrence from the contemplation of the reckless and despotic acts of this remarkable man, we must not, on the other hand, fail to acknowledge that his administration has features which present a brighter aspect. As we intimated above, in the exercise of a certain toleration, dictated, it is true, only by policy, he declined to meddle directly in the religious affairs of the Catholics.^ His greatest merit, however, consists in having advanced the material well- being of the country. He took a lively interest in agriculture and cattle-rearing, and by causing the rude and antiquated methods of husbandry which prevailed among the Irish agri- culturalists to be superseded by more modern appliances, he contributed very materially to the advancement of this branch of industry. He also largely encouraged navigation, in conse- quence of which the number of Irish ships increased from year to year ; and although it cannot be denied that he endeavoured to suppress the trade in woollen cloth, from an apprehension that it might come into dangerous competition with English manufactures, he, nevertheless, sought to compensate the Irish in other ways, and the development of the Irish linen industry in the north was essentially his work.- Nor did the Crown fail to reap an advantage from the growing prosperity of the country. The Irish revenue annu- ally increased, and the customs returns alone were trebled during the administration of Lord Strafford. He was, accord- ' See p. 49. 2 Concerning Strafford's solicitude for Ireland's material prosperity, see Hume's " History of England" (Lond., 181 1), vol. vii. p. 202. 54 History of Ireland. ingly, in a position to place at the disposal of his royal master a standing army of 9,000 men, by means of which he was, at the same time, enabled to prevent any rising of the native population, and to hold in check any parliamentary opposition on the part of the English and Scotch colonists. It was, therefore, no idle boast, but a statement in strict accordance with the truth, which he made when writing to Archbishop Laud on i6th December, 1634: "I can now say that the king is here as truly absolute as any sovereign in the world can be." At a time when in England the aspect of affairs was decidedly threatening, and the people were already beginning to manifest their hostility to absolutism, even in the year 1640, the Irish assemblies acted in complete har- mony with his wishes. Without any demur they voted him, on March 23, four subsidies for the war against the Scotch insurgents ; and in the preamble to the bill they eulogised the administration of Strafford, and overflowed with expressions of gratitude to a monarch who had sent them a governor so vigilant, so wise, and so just.^ When, therefore, Charles I. recalled his faithful minister from Ireland, where he was supported by a well organised army and a parliament which offered him not the slightest opposition, and sent him to England to confront a nation bitterly exasperated against absolutism, it was a gross political blunder. Strafford himself, it is recorded, rebelled against this mandate, and more than once counselled his master to allow him to remain in Ireland, where, at least, he could be of service to him. Subsequent events showed how correct was his estimate of the situation. On loth November, 1640, Strafford arrived in London, and on the following day, in the House of Commons, this valiant champion of absolute monarchy was impeached by Pym of high treason. The trial of Strafford ~ began in the House of Lords on the 22nd of March, 1641. The Irish House of Commons, which ' See Plowden's "Historical Review," i. p. 129. " See Rushworth's "Historical Collections," viii. ("Trial of the Earl of Strafford," Lond., 1700). Details respecting the attitude wliich the Irish Parliament assumed with regard to the proceedings of the English legislature against Strafford are given by Plowden. From the Death of Elizabeth 2intil 1641. 55 but a short time previously had applauded the administration of the lord-lieutenant, now, that the mighty ruler whom it had once feared was a fallen hero, signified its approval of the action which was being taken against him. It explained that the very laudatory reference to Strafford contained in the preamble to the subsidy bill, which had been entered in the journal of the House during the last Parliament, had been surreptitiously introduced by the lord-lieutenant or one of his partisans, while it also declared that the present unhappy condition of Ireland was to be attributed to the " illegal, arbitrary, and tyrannical administration of Strafford " ; and it deputed representatives of the Irish Commons to be present at the trial. Sundry items in the Bill of Impeachment had, in fact, reference to his Irish administration. The very first article charged him with having attempted to establish an arbitrary and tyrannical government in Ireland, contrary to the laws ; and in particular, that he had treasonably counselled the subjugation of England by the aid of the Irish army ; while a further indictment stated that he had employed his influence and authority to countenance and encourage popery. His proceedings in connection with the jurors of Connaught were likewise adduced against him, and among the numerous accusations included under this head, was the charge that, at his instigation, the jurymen, who had delivered a true verdict according to their consciences, were condemned by the Council Chamber, subjected to heavy fines, and in some cases to plunder ; that certain of them, even, had their ears cut off, their tongues bored, and others were branded on the forehead with a hot iron. The issue of the trial is well known. A Bill of Attainder was passed, and Strafford was sentenced to death; and on the nth of May, 1641, meanly deserted by his sovereign, this last unscrupulous champion of despotism in England ended his life on the block. Such were some of the consequences of Strafford's recall. But the king had not only by this step delivered his devoted servant over to the vengeance of his enemies ; he had, at the same time, exposed to imminent peril his own royal supremacy 5'6 History of Ii-eland. in Ireland. For while, immediately after Strafford's departure, the English and Scotch colonists, for the most part, went over to the side of parliamentary opposition, and, as we have seen, on the question of the impeachment made common cause with the English House of Commons, the native Irish, per- ceiving, on the one hand, that the firm, strong administration was now no more, and that, on the other, England itself was being violently rent in twain by internal party strife, imagined that the favourable moment had at length arrived for crushing English influence in Ireland. They, accordingly, commenced preparations for that terrible revolution which was destined to be, for Ireland, the cause of frightful suffering and unspeakable calamities. CHAPTER IV. IRELAND FROM 1 64 1 TO 1660. — THE PERIOD OF THE GREAT IRISH REBELLION, AND THE COMPLETE SUBJUGATION OF THE COUNTRY BY CROMWELL. On the recall of Strafiford from Ireland, the government of the country was entrusted to the Lords Justices Sir W. Par- sons and Sir John Borlase, the most unfortunate choice which the king could have made. Both men were creatures of the Puritans, and under their administration the House of Com- mons, which in Strafford's time had been wholly on the king's side, was soon won over to the opposition, and the authority of the royal name became undermined. Moreover, one of the lords-justices, Sir William Parsons, had formerly been one of the most formidable of the " Discoverers," and had taken a leading part in the notorious action against Byrne ^ (p. 46). When, therefore, a man of this character, who during the time in which he had filled a subordinate post, had made it his business to rob the Irish of their possessions, was called to occupy the foremost position in the land, it is not surprising that among the Irish population, and especially among the inhabitants of Connaught, the most lively apprehensions should have been aroused lest there was about to be initiated a fresh series of confiscations and a redistribution of the land. That these fears were not groundless may be deduced from the fact that when Charles signified his intention to make a formal ' For a general estimate of Parsons' character, see Warner's " History of the Rebellion and Civil War in Ireland " (Lond., 1767), p. 49 ; for the part he took in connection with the trial of Byrne, conip. Carte's " Life of Ormond," i. pp. 27-32. Recently, it is true, an attempt has been made by Miss Mary Hickson, in " Ireland in the Seventeenth Century ; or, the Irish Massacres'' (Lend., 1884), to present the character of Parsons in a more favourable aspect. 58 History of h^eland. ratification of the " graces," ^ by granting a commission to the lords-justices, these functionaries contrived to prevent the bill being placed upon the statute book by an adjournment of Parliament. But other dangers seemed to be approaching for the Irish. It is no secret that in their conduct towards the Catholics, the Puritan party, especially, were inspired by the wildest fanatic- ism ; and it was just this party which at that time preponder- ated in the Long Parliament in England, and now threatened, through the influence of the highest officers of the Crown, to become dominant also in Ireland. Should the ascendency of the Puritans last, then the fears of the Irish Catholics, who constituted an overwhelming majority of the population, that no toleration would be extended toward their religion, would certainly be realized. Many indications existed that this would be the case. The English House of Commons had already expelled all Papists from the army, and had demanded of the king that two-thirds of the land of all Catholic re- cusants should be confiscated. Pym, one of the leaders of the English Puritan party, boasted — at least so it was reported in Ireland — " that the Parliament would leave not a single popish priest in Ireland." Addresses were presented in the English House of Commons by Irish Presbyterians, praying for the extermination of popery in Ireland ; indeed, rumour went so far as to say that Parsons himself had prophesied at a public banquet that, wnthin a year from that time, not a Catholic would be found in the island. It was, accordingly, not a matter of wonder that from the Puritan regime the Irish apprehended the complete proscription of their faith.~ This double dread — of losing their property and of having to suffer persecution and oppression for their religion — was the essential cause of the rebellion, but there were also other ' This commission may be found in Plowden's " Historical Review," i., App. p. 86 ; comp. also i. p. 131. "^ For the position which Puritanism occupied with regard to Catholicism, comp. Carte's "Life of Ormond," i. pp. 160, 182, 199 et seq. ; 235 et seq. Pym's assertion is to be found in "An Impartial Collection of the Great Affairs of State, from the Beginning of the Scotch Rebellion," by Nalson (1683), vol. ii. p. 536. The Period of the Great Irish Rebellion. 59 circumstances which favoured it. The conduct of the EngHsh in Ulster was not forgotten, nor could it yet be remembered without pain. When we, therefore, take into account the fact that the old wound was still rankling, and recollect that an unwise policy had been striving for many years to raise still higher the wall of partition between Irish and Anglo-Saxon ; and when, finally, we bear in mind that the example of the Scotch, who had just taken up arms in defence of their religion,^ must naturally have excited the emulation of the Irish, we shall not marvel that the Celtic nation, deeming the moment in which England was agitated by internal conflict one too favourable to be lost, should rise up and endeavour to shake off the shackles of Anglo-Saxon rule in their country.- ' Carlyle has drawn attention, in forcible language, to the fact of the Scot- tish rebeUion serving as a model for the imitation of the Irish. See " Crom- well's Letters and Speeches, with Elucidations" (Lond., 1871), vol. i. p. 103. - The sources of our information respecting the revolution of 164 1 are abundant, but turbid in the extreme. Not only the work of Lord Clarendon, Anglican and royalist ("The History of the Rebellion in Ire- land," ed. 1740, Lond.), but also the narratives furnished by the two Puritans, Sir John Temple, who was a member of the Privy Council, and Master of the Rolls in Dublin ("The Irish Rebellion," Lond., 1646), and Edmund Borlase, who was brother of the lord-justice (" History of the Execrable Irish Rebellion," Lond., 1680, fol.), are pervaded by the bitterest hatred of the Irish race, and abound with exaggerations and one-sided statements (see Ger. ed., p. 318). Of the accounts which come to us from Catholic sources, the memoirs of Castlehaven (" Memoirs of Touchettj'Earl of Castlehaven," Lond., 1684) have been written in a calm and temperate spirit, and deserve, for the most part, to be regarded as authentic ; nevertheless, having been compiled from memoiy, and at a considerable time after the occurrence of the events recorded, they re- quire, in some particulars, to be revised ; whereas another contemporary historical work, which has, however, only recently been published ("A Contemporary History of Affairs in Ireland, now for the first time pub- lished by Gilbert, 1871 "), is marked by fanaticism, and is not free from exaggerated statements and even false assertions. Burke was, accordingly, fully justified in saying that, in almost all parts of it, the rebellion had been extremely and most absurdly misrepresented ("Correspondence," i. p. 1},']). An effort was made, it is true, during the last century to refute some of the assertions made by Clarendon and Temple. Thus, on the side of the Catholics, Curry dealt a hard blow at the old traditions maintained by these writers in his " Historical and Critical Review of the Civil Wars in Ireland from the reign of Queen Elizabeth to the settlement of King William" (Dublin, 1786); while among Protestant historians. Carte, in the work to which reference has so often been made, and Warner, in his "History of the Rebellion in Ireland" (1767), have preserved an un- prejudiced and dispassionate judgment. But none the less are the 6o History of Ireland. There was no lack of men to take the lead in the movement. The real originator of the rebellion was Roger O'Moore, a poor, but talented, descendant of one of the oldest Irish families, who had allied himself with some of the chiefs of Ulster, more particularly with Phelim O'Neill and Cornelius McGuire. Ac- cording to the plan of the conspirators, Dublin Castle, with its ample stores of ammunition, was to be seized by O'Moore and McGuire, while a simultaneous attack was to be made by Phelim O'Neill upon the English landowners in Ulster, who were to be driven from their estates. The day fixed upon for the rising was 23rd October, 1641. In consequence of Par- sons having been forewarned of the plot by an Irish Protestant named Owen O'Conolly, the assault on Dublin Castle proved abortive. O'Moore was enabled to escape, but McGuire fell into the hands of his enemies. In Ulster, where, as we above remarked, the insurrection had been organised by Phelim O'Neill, the outbreak took place on the appointed day. By means of a forged document, which purported to be a public proclamation from the king, ^ and represented the rebellion as having the express sanction and approval of the sovereign, O'Neill contrived to carry all the waverers along with him. The Celts rose in a body, and the excited multitude forcibly, and in many cases not without bloodshed, ejected the English landowners from their property. English historians of the seventeenth century, and especially those of them who are animated by party spirit — as Clarendon historical works of later times still too much under the influence of the one-sided representations of Clarendon and Temple, and even so cautious an investigator as Ranke, in his " EngHsche Geschichte, vornehmhch im 17. Jahrhundert" (Bd. II. Lpzg., 1870), has not entirely escaped the con- tagion ; while at a still more recent date, the national antipathy and hatred of Catholicism have put forth fresh and vigorous shoots in Froude's work on " The English in Ireland " (1872). An acknowledgment of in- debtedness is, therefore, due to Lecky for having in the second volume of his " History of England in the Eighteenth Century " (Longman, Green & Co., 1879), pp 123-175, devoted a section to combatingthe widely-prevalent misrepresentations which exist with regard to this event. ' Since Hume wrote his " History of England" (Lond., 181 1, vol. vii. p. 245 et seg.), the theory of forgery has been pretty generally accepted. Before his death, O'Neill himself solemnly confessed that Charles I. was in no way implicated in the rebellion. (See the declaration of Dean Ker in Nalson's " Collections," ii. p. 529.) The Pei'iod of the Great Irish Rebellion. 6i and Temple — represent the rebellion in Ulster as having been inaugurated by a systematically planned slaughter of the un- suspecting English inhabitants, in the course of which, accord- ing to various authorities, 40,000, 50,000, and even 105,000 victims perished. ^ All contemporaneous accounts, however, even the letters of the lords-justices themselves, give the lie to these statements, and prove, on the contrary, that compara- tively few murders took place, that the real object of this rising was merely to eject and plunder the English, and that the story of a deeply-laid scheme of massacre is absolutely without foundation. Equally false are the representations of several narrators who describe the rebellion as a Jesuit plot, and as having been planned by the Catholic priesthood.^ It would, indeed, only have been natural, at a time when there was a prevailing belief among the populace that the highest authorities in the land aimed at the extermination of Catholicism, had the ^ This number is given by Temple in " The Irish Rebellion " (1646), p. 106. Clarendon asserts that the victims numbered ^0,000 ; but in my opinion, Lecky has conclusively proved, in his " History of England" (ii. pp. 128-153), that no such massacre occurred. He relies, in part, on a letter of Lord Chichester, dated October 24, in which, although written immediately after the outbreak of the rebellion in Ulster, he reports that he has heard of the murder of only one man. Moreover, the letters of the lord-lieutenant, notwithstanding the detailed description which they give of the plunder and the pillage committed, contain no reference to any such wholesale murder as that represented by these figures. In fact, in a pamphlet published at that time by an Episcopalian clergyman, which is referred to by Prendergast in his " Cromwellian Settlement of Ireland" (Lond., 1865, p. 5), it is expressly stated that a massacre was indeed, intended, but that it was not carried out. Warner, also a Pro- testant clergyman, and, therefore, a witness equally removed from every suspicion of partiality, and who had carefully examined all the various estimates, says that, according to incontrovertible testimony collected within two years of the outbreak of the rebellion, the total number of per- sons who had been killed amounted only to 4,028. In face of such state- ments, the high figures already quoted cannot be sustained, nor can the estimate of Miss Maiy Hickson in the above-cited work, which gives the number of the victims as 27,000 (a computation which has also been adopted by M. Brosch, " Oliver Cromwell und die Puritanische Revolu- tion " (Frankf, 1S86), p. 220, possibly be supported by evidence. - This supposition is combated by Lecky in his " History of England," vol. ii. p. 168 et seq. ; the same question has recently been discussed in an article on " Die Haltung des katholischen Clerus bei dem Ausbruch der irischen Rebellion," which appeared in the " Historisch-politsche Blatter" (1885), p. 340 et seq. 62 History of hxland. Catholic clergy placed themselves at the head of the move- ment. But the details which are supplied to us tend to show that, at the outbreak of the rebellion, the question of nation- ality, far more than that of religion, occupied the forefront. Carte, the conscientious biographer of the Duke of Ormond, who has scrupulously and carefully examined all the docu- ments of that period, asserts that only about two Irish priests knew anything at all about the rebellion at its commence- ment.^ In fact, it would appear that where the Catholic priests were in any way concerned in the insurrection, their influence was exerted rather to soothe and allay the excitement than to aggravate it. Without adducing any further evidence in con- firmation of this assertion, we shall content ourselves with appealing to the testimony of a contemporary writer intimately acquainted with the existing circumstances, who, by his own personal relations to the events of that period, inasmuch as he was son-in-law, as well as biographer, of the Anglican Bishop Bedell, who lived some months a prisoner among the rebels, is certainly not open to the suspicion of having favoured Catholicism. This writer, whose name is Clogy, cannot for- bear expressly mentioning that during the bishop's captivity he was allowed full liberty for the spiritual exercise of his religion, being permitted to pray and to preach and to worship God according to his own will, "although, in the next room, the priest was acting his Babylonish mass." He further states that the Catholic bishop carried out, without any demur, his wish to be interred in the graveyard of the cathedral, that the Irish Catholics formed a guard of honour at his funeral, and discharged a volley over his grave ; details which, trifling as they are, plainly indicate how little the Irish were inspired by religious fanaticism. But, in addition to this, Clogy directly states, that "the Irish hatred was greater against the English nation than against their religion " ; that " the English and Scotch Papists suffered with the others, and that the Irish sword knew no difference between a Catholic and a heretic." ~ ' Carte's "Life of Ormond," ii. p. 266 ; comp. Lecky, loc. cit., ii. pp. 166, 167. 2 Clogy's " Life of Bedell " (1862), pp. 174, 175. The Period of the Great Irish Rebellion. 63 When we keep in view, therefore, the prominence given to the national aspect of the rebellion, the position primarily assumed by the Irish rebels towards the Scotch colonists is not difficult to understand. Although, as rigid Puritans, the Scotch colonists were decidedly more adverse to the Catholics than were the majority of the English, yet, at the beginning of the rebellion they enjoyed perfect immunity from all molesta- tion; indeed, the rebels issued a proclamation which forbade the insurgents, on penalty of death, to injure a Scot, either in life or property,^ and this not out of regard to their numbers or military skill and equipments, but because they believed that in certain emergencies they could rely on the support and aid of this kindred race. It was only when they saw that the Scotch allied themselves with the English, that the rebels directed their hostilities also against them. With the exception of an agrarian insurrection in County Wicklow, where the Byrne family had been so outrageously robbed of their property, the rebellion was originally confined to the province of Ulster. Greater dimensions were, however given to it by the unwise and unprincipled policy of the lords- justices, who desired to see the Irish as extensively involved in the revolt as possible, in order that the consequent confis- cation of goods might be on a correspondingly wide scale. Thus, it was a grave political mistake to postpone the meeting of Parliament from November 17, 1641, the day for which it had been summoned, until February 24 of the following year, by this means depriving the nation of the opportunity to pre- sent its grievances in a loyal and constitutional manner. Still more unfortunate was it that they demanded from the Catholic nobles of the Pale the surrender of their arms at the very time at which the insurrection broke out in Wicklow. De- prived of their weapons, and no longer able to defend them- selves against the encroachments of the rebels, it was not surprising that the landlords of Leinster felt themselves com- pelled to enter into negotiations with the insurgents. But that which was most effectual in driving the Catholic nobility of the Pale, already smarting under the ill-treatment of the ^ See Warner, loc. cit., p. 75 ; also Plowden, i. p. 138. 64 History of Ireland. Puritan authorities, completely into the arms of the rebellion, was the fatal decree of the English Parliament, passed De- cember 8, 1641,^ which commanded that no toleration should henceforth be shown towards the Catholic religion in Ireland. The alliance between the men of the Pale and the Irish of the north was determined upon at the assembly of Tara Hill, 24th December, 1641. The rebellion now spread through the whole of Leinster. Fresh masses of Irish landowners were forced into the camp of the rebels by the enactment of the English Parliament of February, 1642, which, by directing that two and a half million acres of Irish land should be granted to English adventurers in compensation for sums of money lent to the Irish Parlia- ment, ^ opened up the prospect of a fresh, ejectment of the Irish and the planting of a new colony. The leaders of the Catholics again attempted to negotiate, and addressed a peti- tion to the king in the form of a remonstrance,-'^ in which they enumerated the various kinds of persecution to which they vv^ere subjected on account of their religion, and prayed for redress, otherwise protesting their loyalty in every respect. This remonstrance was delivered to the commissioners ap- pointed by the sovereign at Trim, 17th March, 1642 ; but, as it failed to obtain the Irish any relief, the consequence was that the rebellion continued to spread. Munster, and finally Con- naught, where Lord Clanricarde, himself a Catholic, had long succeeded in maintaining peace, also became involved in the movement. The war now began to assume a far more cruel and savage character than it had hitherto borne, and after the lords-justices had issued orders to the English officers to 1 See Borlase, " History of the Execrable Irish Rebellion," p. 34. M. Brosch, in " Oliver Cromwell," p. 223, proves, from a despatch of Guis- tinian, the Venetian Envoy, dated 22nd Nov., 1641, that a report was in circulation among the Puritan members of the Parliament to the effect that it was the intention of Pope Urban VIII. to emplov the troops which he had been ostensibly raising for service against Parma for the protection of the Irish Catholics ; and to this fact may, perhaps, be ascribed, if not the cruel decree itself, at least the precipitation with which it was promulgated. - Comp. Warner, loc. at., p. 174 ; also Carte's " Life of Ormond," i. p. 301. 3 To be found in " Plowden," i. App. No. 28, pp. 86-101. The Period of tJie Great h-isJi Rebellion. 6 give no quarter/ its horrors were multiplied on both sides. The English forces, under Lord Ormond, succeeded in reliev- ing Drogheda, were victorious at Kilrush and Ross, and had the advantage throughout the Pale generally; while the arrival in Ulster of General Munroe, with io,ooo Scottish troops which had been enrolled by the Parliament, gave the English the ascendency also in this province. Whereupon Phelim O'Neill, recognising his own incompetence as a general, re- linquished the command of the rebel forces in Ulster in favour of his relative, Owen Roe O'Neill, who had formerly dis- tinguished himself in the Spanish army. In the south and the west, however, the rebels held the field. Meanwhile the Irish insurgents were endeavouring to pro- vide themselves with an independent organization. After the English Parliament, by the enactment of December 8th, 1641, had proclaimed its intention to extirpate Catholicism in Ire- land, twenty-nine dignitaries of the Catholic Church, including archbishops, bishops, and heads of religious orders, assembled in the celebrated cathedral of Kilkenny, May loth, 1642, and declared the war in which they were engaged for the defence of their religion, for the maintenance of the ro}'al prerogative (which they now considered to be menaced by the Puritans), and for the security of their lives and property, to be just and lawful; at the same time they expressed their abhorrence of all deeds of robbery and murder, and threatened the perpetra- tors of the same with the severest penalties of the Church. A provincial council, consisting of twenty-four members, was appointed to undertake the temporary direction of affairs in Ireland, the final decisions, however, to be referred to the general meeting of the confederates to be held in Kilkenny, October 23rd, the anniversary of the outbreak of the rebellion.^ Here, on the appointed day, eleven spiritual and fourteen temporal peers, in addition to 226 commoners, met together to deliberate as the Parliament of united Ireland. This assembly adopted measures for carrying on the struggle, for ^ See Borlase, loc. cit., p. 264. ^ For the following events I would especially refer to an interesting article on " The Catholic Rule," in the Edinburgh Review oi iZZoiyoX. 151, pp. 437-483). F 66 History of Ireland. raising troops and levying taxes, and, especially, for the taxa- tion of ecclesiastical property ; it also formulated an address to the king, in which the Irish emphatically protested their allegiance to the Crown, and sought to justify their indepen- dent action. The confederates likewise resolved to send envoys to France, Spain, and the papal court. These Catholic powers, in return, sent their agents to Kilkenny, and in 1643, Pope Urban VIII. issued a bull, which conveyed his special apostolic benediction to the Irish. We have seen how, in the course of a year, the rebellion had entirely altered its character. Originally it was national antagonism, hatred of the English nation, its ancient oppres- sor, which completely dominated the movement ; but after the Puritan Parliament of England had decreed a war of extermi- nation against the Catholics, the struggle assumed a wholly different aspect. The Catholics of English extraction united with those of Irish race, and thus combined, they assigned the foremost place in the conflict to the question of the defence of their faith against the threatening power of Puritanism, one effect of which was that the influence of the priesthood was considerably increased. Let us, for a moment, inquire what was the position occu- pied by the king with regard to the Irish rebellion. When the revolution broke out, Charles happened to be in Scotland. Although in no way implicated in the rising, he at once re- cognised that here, in Ireland, there had arisen a formidable adversary to that Puritanism whose existence, both in Eng- land and Scotland, so embittered his life, and he, accordingly, resolved to utilise the movement for his own advantage. With this object in view, he allowed several months to elapse before he issued the proclamation by which the insurgents were denounced as traitors and rebels ; and when, at last, this proclamation had been extorted from him, he ordered that only forty copies of it should be printed, in order to circum- scribe, as much as possible, the area of its circulation.^ While, however, he was thus openly treating the Irish as rebels, he • This order is to be met with in Guizot's " Collection des memoires relatifs k la revolution d'Angleterre " (1827) torn. vi. p. 378. The Period of the Great Irish Rebellion. 67 was secretly endeavouring to gain them as allies in his con- flict with Puritanism, encouraged by the fact that they had repeatedly, and indeed very recently, at their general assembly at Kilkenny, assured him of their devotion, and at the same time, declared that they had taken up arms in defence of his royal prerogative, which they regarded as in imminent danger from the Puritans. He, therefore, instructed his faithful servant. Lord Ormond, leader of the English troops, to enter into negotiations with the Irish in respect to an armistice. At first Lord Ormond's strong Protestant sentiments re- belled against undertaking any direct transactions with the Irish Catholics, but his sense of loyalty finally overcame these scruples. The circumstance that Parsons, the bitterest foe to the Catholics which the Irish administration contained, had been removed from his post, tended to lessen the breach be- tween the parties, and at length, September i6th, 1643, a truce was effected at Castlemartin, between the Council of Kilkenny and the king's deputies. The main stipulations of this truce were that both parties should maintain the positions they then occupied, and that the Catholics should have greater facilities of access to the king than heretofore, for which they, in return, voted him a subsidy of i^20,000.^ This armistice, which according to the original arrange- ment was intended to last a year, but was afterwards pro- longed over another six months, was received in Ireland with very mingled feelings. The Catholics of the English colony greeted it with every manifestation of joy ; the native Irish, on the other hand, who, at this time, were completely under the influence of the papal agent, Scarampi, an Oratorian priest, and were animated with the one desire to crush English rule in Ireland, looked upon the truce as a fatal barrier to their aims. But even among the Irish Protestants there existed a wide difference of opinion with respect to it. While the en- tire royalist party gladly accepted it, hoping that it would enable their monarch to procure fresh succours, the Puritans and the parliamentary party repudiated it, and General Mun- roe in Ulster, and the commander of the troops in Munster, ' See Warner, loc. di., p. 285. 68 History of h^eland. both declared that they did not consider themselves bound by a truce which Parliament had characterised as unchristian. The king, therefore, did not reap as much benefit from the suspension of hostilities as he had expected. It furnished him, however, with the opportunity of aiding the royal cause in England and Scotland, by enabling him to send to the assistance of the forces there a portion of the troops now no longer required in Ireland. But in Scotland the new arrivals disappointed the expecta- tions they had aroused, one of the Irish divisions being, with- out difficulty, in January, 1644, utterly routed by General Fairfax. In order to prevent any further despatch of Irish troops to Great Britain, the English Parliament, on October 24th, 1644, issued the blood-curdling decree that no quarter should be given to any Irish, or to any Papist born in Ireland, who might be found, in any part of Great Britain, in arms against the Parliament.^ This order was carried out with frightful exactness, great numbers of Irish soldiers having been massacred in cold blood. The king, however, did not feel satisfied with a mere sus- pension of arms, and he, accordingly, desired the Marquis of Ormond, who, since the 24th of January, 1644, had filled the office of lord-lieutenant, to spare no efforts to procure a lasting peace. But the Council of Kilkenny, at the instance of the papal legate, demanded, as one of the first conditions of such a peace, that the Catholic Church should be placed on an equality with the English Church, and such a concession being repugnant to Ormond's staunch and conscientious Pro- testantism, the king was compelled to employ another in- dividual as his agent in these transactions ; this was Herbert, Earl of Glamorgan, whom, as his plenipotentiar}^, he invested with large powers. He arrived in Dublin on August i, 1645, and in conjunction with the Irish commissioners, was success- ful in settling the preliminaries of a treaty, the articles of which provided that the Irish should have secured to them ^ See Plowden, loc. cit.^ i. p. 147 ; an idea of the amount of cruelty which followed the promulgation of this decree may be gained from Lecky's " History of England," ii. p. 156 et seq. The Period of the Great Irish Rebellion. 69 the full and free exercise of their religion, and the undisturbed possession of all the churches which they owned at the beginning of the revolution, on condition that they furnished the king with an army of 10,000 men.^ Apprehensive, how- ever, that by placing the Catholic Church on an equal footing with the Anglican Church, he would forfeit the sympathies of his Protestant subjects, Charles did not, for the present, venture to make known in England the terms of this com- pact. But a copy of the treaty was accidentally discovered in the portmanteau of the Archbishop of Tuam, who lost his life during the Irish rebellion, upon which the Parliament immediately caused the document to be published. This disclosure aroused a violent storm of indignation against the monarch, who, on his part, did not even possess the courage or the manliness to acknowledge his participation in the trans- action : on the contrary, he declared, upon his word as a Chris- tian and a king, that he had never empowered Glamorgan to agree to this or any other similar treaty. But his repudiation of the agreement was in vain, and equally futile was the action of Ormond, who, under the pretext that Charles had never given his consent to such a contract, caused the Earl of Glamorgan, as negotiator, to be arrested on a charge of high treason. The English Protestants were firmly convinced of the king's share in the business, while the Irish Catholics felt themselves repelled and insulted by his cowardly refusal to admit it. This was but one of the many instances which occurred during the life of this sovereign, in which, by his intrigues and duplicity, he injured, instead of furthered, his own interests. A few weeks after the secret agreement between Glamor- gan and the Council of Kilkenny had been concluded, there ^ Glamorgan's Treaty is to be found, among other places, in Guizot, loc. ctt., tom. vi. p. 484 et seq. ; also in Plowden, ii. p. \\\ et seq. With the object of exculpating King Charles, Hume has endeavoured, in his "History of England," vol. vii. pp. 416, 417, to show that the commis- sions produced by Glamorgan, which certainly were without seal, were not genuine. But the despatches of the papal ambassador, Rinuccini, which expressly refer to the existence of the royal commission granted to Glamorgan, must demolish all doubts as to their authenticity. For the discovery of the treaty, see Warner, loc. cit., p. 354. JO History of Ireland. landed in Ireland the new papal nuncio, Monsignor Rinuc- cini, Archbishop of Fermo,' an individual who was destined to exercise an influence on the fortunes of the country, at once important and baleful. When, on the 15th September, 1644, Cardinal Panfili was elected to the papal chair, under the title of Innocent X., the Irish confederates despatched to Rome a special envoy to convey their congratulations. At the reception of this messenger, the new pope intimated that it was his intention that the accredited nuncio to Ireland should henceforth be a man of higher rank and possessing fuller powers than had hitherto been the case. Innocent X., having strong leanings towards Spain," at first purposed to confide the mission to a subject of this kingdom ; but fearing that such a step would offend France, he relinquished his original design, and appointed the Archbishop of Fermo, who was a Tuscan, to be papal ambassador to Ireland. Immediately on being informed of the pope's purpose to send this man as nuncio to Ireland, the king entrusted a written communication ^ to his agent, Glamorgan, purporting to be letters of credence, which he was commissioned to deliver to the ambassador on his arrival. In this communica- tion, the king expressed the hope that this, the first letter which, as sovereign of England, he had addressed to a minister of the pope, would not be the last ; and he trusted that at some future time he might be afforded the opportunity of openly manifesting his good-will. The reason for the extreme complaisance which Charles I. exhibited towards the Roman ambassador was that he hoped through the agency of the papal see to obtain a permanent peace with the Irish Catholics. But it was no mean price which the papacy demanded from ' The most valuable source of information for the activities of Rinuccini is supplied by his own despatches, originally published in Italian, " Nun- ziatura in Irlanda di Msgr. Batt. Rinuccini negli anni 1645-1649, publi- cata da Aiazzi, 1844," an English translation of which appeared in Dublin in 1873, under the title of " The Embassy in Ireland of Msgr. Rinuccini." These despatches form the basis of Ranke's account in his " Englische Geschichte," iv. pp. 23-27, as well as of the article, above referred to, in the Edinburgh Retncw^ 1880. - Comp. Ranke's " Englische Geschichte," iv. p, 24. 3 See Aiazzi's " Nunziatura in Irlanda," p. 82. The Period of the Great Irish Rebellion. 71 him in return for its support. We are acquainted with the secret instructions deHvered to the nuncio,^ and according to these, Charles was not only required to abolish the oath of supremacy, annul the penal laws against the Catholics, and grant to them free access to all offices and responsible posi- tions, but a final and indispensable condition was, that the whole of the Irish fortresses should be surrendered to the Catholics, because, — and here we see how well known, even in Rome, were the fickleness and inconstancy of Charles I., — without such a guarantee, no weight could be attached to the promises of his majesty. The course of action to be pursued by Rinuccini was accurately laid down in the instructions which were delivered to him. In the first place, he was directed to go in quest of Queen Maria Henrietta, the wife of Charles I., who at that time was in France, and to convince her that the only means by which the sinking cause of the royalists could be served was an alliance with the Catholics ; he must further endeavour to influence Ormond ; but above all, the new- ambassador was instructed to rely more upon the aboriginal Irish Catholics than upon the English Catholics, who, just at that juncture, were maintaining very intimate relations with France, and, consequently, did not stand high in the estima- tion of the Spaniard-loving pope. But he was advised to make the native Irish serviceable in the promotion of his own ends, and, before all things, to withdraw them from French influence. In view of the acknowledged Spanish predilections of Innocent X., it was not remarkable that, in France, the nuncio was accorded but a cool reception. The English queen, at that time residing at the French Court, declined at first to receive him, while he declared that he had been completely duped by Mazarin. The more striking, therefore, on this account was the cordiality with which he was welcomed by the Irish Catholics, when, towards the end of October, 1645, he arrived in the Bay of Kenmare. At Kilkenny the presi- dent, Mountgarret, formally introduced him to the council ^ See Aiazzi's " Nunziatura in Irlanda," p. 41. 72 Histojy of Ireland. in solemn session ; and here, in the course of an address,^ he vigorously protested against the insinuations which were already in the air, that he desired to alienate the affections of the Irish subjects of his majesty ; on the contrary, he declared that, were the Irish Catholics but allowed the free exercise of their religion, they would offer to the king every demonstration of loyalty and respect. It was just at the time when the nuncio was preparing to leave France and proceed on his journey to Ireland, that the treaty between Glamorgan and the Irish was brought to completion. Rinuccini, therefore, deemed it to be his first duty to make this newly restored peace still more conducive to the furtherance of Catholic interests. He especially desired to see accomplished the restoration of monastic property which had been impropriated at the time of the Reformation ; and there was also a widespread demand that the higher offices of the state, including the lord-lieutenancy, should be filled by Catholics only. But in consequence of the violent tempest of wrath evoked in England by the premature publi- cation of Glamorgan's treaty, in which the concessions granted were of a far less sweeping character than those demanded by the nuncio, Rinuccini resolved, for the present, to hold his more comprehensive schemes in abeyance, and, indeed, to assume a greater degree of reserve in all his actions. This was rendered all the more necessary by the fact that, since the failure of the efforts made by the ultra-Catholic party under Glamorgan to effect a peace, Ormond's influence was again in the ascendant. He, too, although constant in his warnings against too great participation in making conces- sions to the Catholics, was unwearied in his endeavours, on behalf of his sovereign, to bring about a lasting peace between the Irish and the royalist party. And his efforts were not in vain, for on the 28th March, 1646, an agreement was concluded between the royalists and the Council of Kilkenny. The terms of this treaty provided that all questions of religion should remain in suspense until the decisive judgment of the ' See " Analecta Sacra," p. 200. For his reception in Ireland, comp. " The Catholic Rule," p. 458. The Period of the Great Irish Rebellion. "]}, king could be procured. Verbally, however, the Catholics were promised the repeal of all penal statutes and the abolition of the oath of supremacy, for which they engaged to furnish 10,000 men for the king's service. It was originally intended that the compact should be kept secret, but, the king having meanwhile been compelled to flee for refuge to the Scots, in whose camp he found himself a prisoner, Ormond judged it best to publish the treaty, which he did on July 29th, 1646.^ The Protestant royalists, as well as the Catholics of the Pale, were well satisfied with the peace ; but not so the nuncio, or the native Irish element, which he held completely under his sway. This party was just now the less disposed to measures of moderation in consequence of the brilliant victory recently gained by their leader, Owen Roe O'Neill, over the Scotch troops under General Munroe, which took place at Benburb, 5th June, 1646. When, therefore, the announcement of peace was made at Kilkenny, it called forth many hostile manifestations, and in Limerick the feeling of dissatisfaction was so strong that it occasioned an insurrection, while at Waterford a synod was held, August I2th, 1646, under the presidency of Rinuccini, which declared all those who accepted Ormond's peace to be guilty of perjury and to have incurred the penalty of excommunication.^ In his diplomatic despatches, Rinuccini laid particular stress on the' statement that the influence and importance of the clergy had been largely augmented in consequence of the repudiation of the peace by the assembly at Waterford. The nuncio, now, in fact, assumed the leadership of the native Irish faction, and induced the two insurgent generals, O'Neill and Preston, to make an attack on Dublin. This assault, however, proving unsuccessful, owing to the prompt and vigorous action of Ormond, as well as to the want of unan- imity between the two military commanders, Preston, who as an Englishman enjoyed but little of Rinuccini's favour, was accused of treachery, and the nuncio was strongly disposed ' See Warner, loc. cit.^ p. 368. 2 For an account of the Synod of Waterford, consult Brennan's "Ecclesiastical History of Ireland" (1854), p. 459. 74 History of Ireland. to order his arrest. Equally absolute was the influence he exercised over the assembly which was held at Kilkenny early in the year 1647. The members of the council who had taken any share in the negotiations with Ormond, with reference to the treaty of peace, he caused to be imprisoned. A new council was elected, consisting of four priests and eight laymen, all partisans of Rinuccini, over which he himself presided. He appointed Glamorgan to be general in Munster, and entertained the design of creating him lord-lieutenant, but only on condition that he took an oath of loyalty and obedience to the papal see and its nuncio, thereby completely ignoring Glamorgan's obligations to his sovereign.^ Indeed, it gradually became evident that the nuncio had grown altogether indifferent to the royalist cause. He declined any longer to countenance the oath of allegiance to the king, which it had been stipulated should be taken by the Catholic clergy, and regretted that he had previously used language which could be construed as being favourable to such a course. Among the clergy, a theory began to be formulated — and assuredly not without the assistance of the nuncio, — that by its apostacy from the Catholic faith the English Crown had forfeited all its claims upon Ireland, and that, therefore, the island reverted to its original feudal lord, the pope. In accordance with this theory, Rinuccini was anxious to transfer it, without delay, to the possession of the Roman see ; but, as it was possible that Rome might entertain scruples regarding the policy of a direct inter\'ention in the matter, the nuncio conceived a project, according to which a brother of the Grand Duke of Tuscany should go over to Ireland, and there establish his rule under the supreme sovereignty of the pope.^ ^ For the proceedings of this assembly, see especially Moran's " Spici- legium Ossoriense" (Dublin, 1878, 2nd series), p. 28 ; compare Ranke's " Englische Geschichte," iv. p. 25 ; also " The Catholic Rule," p. 463. 2 In a recent criticism of this work by Dr. Bellesheim {Liitcrarischet Handiveiser, 1886, No. 407, p. 272), these attempts have been dis- puted. Dr. Bellesheim supports his case by an appeal to the " Discursus Apologeticus Rinuccinis " (Moran, " Spicilegium Ossoriense," Dublin, 1884, iii. p. 55), where the nuncio observes, "Cum nemo usquam a meo in Hiberniam adventu debitse Maiestati su£e fidelitatis iuriumque eius The Period of the Great Irish Rebellion. 75 Who can tell whether or not these deeply-laid schemes might have been carried out to a successful issue, had not Ormond stepped in, and by his action determined the course of events. He saw through the policy of the nuncio, and clearly recognised that the success of his schemes meant, for Ireland, the utter subversion of British dominion and the extirpation of the Protestant religion. When he perceived, therefore, that he was menaced anew by O'Neill's troops, and that Dublin would be unable to hold out against the attack, it revolted his feelings to allow the Irish capital to fall into the hands of the Celts, who were so completely under the domination and influence of the nuncio. In spite of his antipathy to Puritan republicanism, as an Englishman and a Protestant, he preferred to surrender the city to the parlia- mentary forces. He, therefore, treated with the envoy of the parliamentary army, and on the 28th July, 1647, he resigned the Irish metropolis to Colonel Jones, and immediately hastened to London to vindicate his conduct in the course which he had taken. This event had a profound significance. Not only did the surrender of a place so important as Dublin furnish the par- liamentary troops with a base for further operations, but this occurrence brought about a material change in the position of the nuncio himself. The more moderate Catholics, and especially those who were of English extraction, attributed the capitulation of Dublin to the singular and anti-national policy of the nuncio, in consequence of which, the feeling of antagonism against Rinuccini increased from day to day, more regalium (salvo tamen quocunque religionis interesse) iuxta divinum illud qujE sunt Ceesaris Caesari, quae sunt Dei, Deo, maiorem me ipso conservatorem ac propugnatorem . . . se demonstravit.'' But in a letter of the 2nd March, 1647, to Cardinal Panfilio, he expressly writes that he regretted " di non astenermi da quelle frasi — dicendo per essempio che besognava sollevare, acutare il Re, mostrarsi buoni suddite . . . veggo malto bene, che doveva lasciar di sollo scrivere" (see Aiazzi, " Nunziatura," p. 205). In my judgment, decidedly more weight may be attached to a familiar letter of this nature than to a document which was prepared expressly for publication. Comp. also Aiazzi, p. 266, where reference is made to the transference of Ireland to a Catholic prince ; and Ranke's " Englische Geschichte," iv. pp. 25, 26. ' See Warner, loc cit., p. 408. 76 History of Ireland. particularly when, shortly afterward, August 6th, 1647, the Irish troops were defeated at Trim by the parliamentary army under Colonel Jones. This change of mood among the Irish first began to manifest itself in the general assembly at Kil- kenny, which held its session in the middle of November. Here the moderate element preponderated so largely that Rinuccini, as may be imagined, was not greatly pleased with its proceedings, but on the contrary, violently complained of its intrigues and dissensions. And that he had good reason for his dissatisfaction is shown by the fact that the assembly reconstructed the council, which had only shortly before been elected, choosing the new members mostly from among the Catholics of the Pale, while the friends of the nuncio were left in a minority. This new council resumed its relations wath the royalists which had been so unceremoniously interrupted, and succeeded in effecting a truce with Lord Inchiquin, the commander of the troops in Munster, who had formerly been a parliamentarian, but was now an adherent of the royalist cause ; and it also invited Ormond to return to Ireland.^ Rinuccini naturally offered vigorous, though at the same time, unavailing opposition to these acts, for the general assembly of the confederates which met in 1648, was, in like manner, mainly composed of the peace party. This assembly, consequently, approved of the armistice concluded with Lord Inchiquin, and presented a vote of thanks to the council for its exertions in connection with these negotiations. Rinuccini, on the other hand, issued a proclamation in which he excommunicated all those who accepted the truce, while all those towns and districts which declared in favour of the assembly he placed under interdict.^ But even this threatening measure failed to produce the desired result, and the nuncio found that he could no longer rely even upon the clergy.^ Peter Walsh, the Fran- ciscan monk, fulminated against the interdict in his sermons ; ' See "The Catholic Rule," p. 465 ; Warner, loc. cit., p. 415 ; also Ranke, iv. p. 26. 2 See " Nunziatura in Irlanda," p. 434 et seq. ^ For the disaffection among the Catholic clergy, comp. Gilbert in "A Contemporary History of Affairs in Ireland," p. 274 ; and for Rinuccini's relations to the Jesuits, see " Nunziatura," p. 337 et seq. TJie Period of the Great Irish Rebellion. 77 the Archbishop of Tuam and the Bishop of Ossory openly defied the nuncio ; the Jesuit provincial refused him obedience, while prominent peers appealed to the pope and entered their protest against the excommunication pronounced by his legate. Rinuccini thus began to feel the ground giving way beneath his feet, and Ormond having on the last day of September, 1648, landed in Cork, and been met by the chiefs of Connaught and Munster with offers of support, he eventually decided that it would be the wisest course for him to take his departure from Ireland. Accordingly, in March, 1649, he set sail for France, on the way to the scene of his former archiepiscopal labours. On arriving at Orleans, he addressed a communica- tion to the head of the Jesuit order, in which he sorely com- plained of the Irish provincial, and accused him of having materially contributed towards bringing about the surrender of Ireland into the hands of the Protestant Church.^ Thus ended that remarkable episode in Irish history, during which it seemed as if Ireland were about to sever her connection with England, and become united to a Catholic and continental power. That a complete rupture was avoided must chiefly be attributed to the energetic action of Ormond, whose royalist principles and diplomatic skill were put to a severe test after his return to Ireland in the year 1648. In- tensely anxious, as he was, to render assistance to the hardly pressed sovereign of Ireland, he knew that this was only pos- sible on the attainment of perfect unanimity between the Protestant royalists and the Irish Catholics. But, to this end, it was necessary that concessions should be made by both parties. On the one hand, the Catholics would have to with- draw their demand for the establishment of their religion, which was the object aimed at by the nuncio ; and on the other hand, the Protestants would be obliged to extend re- ligious toleration to the Catholics. To this latter course Ormond's views strongly disposed him, and he was willing to promise them the repeal of the penal statutes and the abolition of the oath of supremacy. With regard to eccle- siastical property, he assured them that they should not be ^ The letter is printed in the Edinburgh Review (1880), p. 469. 78 History of Ireland. disturbed, and that no further action should be taken until the decisions of his majesty could be ascertained. The Catholics, at first, considered the concessions to be insufficient, but sub- sequently, " induced by the present condition of his majesty," they determined to accept Ormond's proposals. On the i6th January, 1649, the general assembly of the Irish confederates announced their acceptance of these terms, and on the follow- ing day the treaty of peace was solemnly published by the lord-lieutenant.^ "'But the king himself was not destined to reap any advan- tage from the support which accrued to the royalist cause by this treaty. In January of 1649, he ended his life on the block. In Ireland, his youthful son was proclaimed with great enthusiasm as Charles II., and it seemed as if, in consequence of the atrocious deed committed by the Commonwealth, the sentiment of loyalty among the Irish people had received a new impulse. With the exception of Dublin, which was in the hands of the parliamentary troops under Colonel Jones, and a considerable part of Ulster, Ormond had succeeded in bringing the entire island under control. As regarded Dublin he hoped that this, too, would soon become his ; and as he was of opinion that the possession of this stronghold " would advance the royalist cause in all the three kingdoms," he sum- moned the commander of the town to surrender, a demand with which Colonel Jones very emphatically refused to comply thus leaving the question to be settled by force of arms.- Ormond was more successful in his negotiations with Owen Roe O'Neill, who still held the greater portion of Ulster. At the outset, it is true, matters appeared to be but little more promising in this quarter, for the leader of the old Irish party, who was engaged in continual hostilities with Monk, the general of the parliamentary troops, was so fanatical in his opposition to the Protestant royalist, Ormond, that he pre- ferred to make terms with the Commonwealth. He therefore despatched a messenger to London to lay his proposals before a committee of the Council of State. On condition of receiving 1 See Warner, loc cif., pp. 440-448. " Comp. Ranke's "Englische Geschichte," bd. iv. p. 28. The Period of the Great Irish Rebellion. 79 a free pardon, undisturbed possession of their estates, and freedom for the exercise of their religion, the Ulster chief and his followers offered to go over to the republic.^ The Council of State, however, declined to accede to these conditions, and the result was, that seeing himself thwarted in this direction, and his advances repelled, O'Neill, notwithstanding his per- sonal antipathy, made overtures to Ormond, and finally deter- mined to accept the terms of his offered peace. From this time, Ormond's sway was established over almost the entire country, and when Prince Rupert, with his flotilla, cast anchor before Kinsale, the royal flag was floating in the breeze. The English Parliament, however, lost no time in adopting counter measures. Convinced that only danger could accrue to the parliamentary cause from a coalition which had sprung into existence on Irish soil, the Parliament determined to make this the first object of its attack. How great was the importance it attached to this campaign may be inferred from its choice of the commander-in-chief The supreme command of all the forces was intrusted to Oliver Cromwell, the most able and distinguished military leader of the revolutionary period. He was, at the same time, created Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, while vast sums of money, which had been ob- tained by the sale of ecclesiastical property and Crown domains, were placed at his disposal.^ ^ M. Brosch ("Oliver Cromwell und die puritanische Revolution," p. 338) speaks only of a report that O'Neill was disposed to negotiate with Cromwell, his authority for which is a despatch of Morisini, the Venetian envoy ; but the memoirs of General Ludlow, which are contained in Guizot's " Memoires relatifs a la revolution d'Angleterre (1827, vi.- viii.), tom. vii. p. lo ^Z Jey., directly state that those negotiations actually took place ; and on this subject Ludlow is a reliable witness, inasmuch as, according to his own account, he was a member of the committee which was deputed to conduct transactions with the Irish agents. 2 The most important source of information respecting Cromwell's sojourn in Ireland is furnished by his own letters, " Oliver Cromwell's Letters and Speeches, with Elucidations," by Thomas Carlyle (Lond., 1871), vol. ii. ; in addition to these may be named the biography con- tained in Forster's "Historical and Biographical Essays" (vol. i., 1858) ; "The Civil Wars and Oliver Cromwell," by Pauly ; "The New Plutarch" (1874), vol. i. pp. 81-208 ; and Brosch in " Oliver Cromwell und die puritanische Revolution " (1886). Concerning the methods which were employed to procure the necessary pecuniary supplies for prosecuting the war in Ireland, see Ludlow's "Memoirs," vol. ii. p. 17. 8o History of Ireland. The coalition which it was intended to demolish bore an essentially royalist character, and as the majority of the troops consisted of Catholics, an attempt was made to use religious fanaticism and the English hatred of popery as an additional weapon against the enemy. Cromwell entered upon the contest as the hero and champion of religion, and on the loth July, 1649, immediately before his departure from England, in order to stamp the campaign with the character of a crusade, he caused the collective banners of the army to be consecrated by the clergy. In the very moment when he was about to embark at Milford Haven, he received the favourable intelligence that, on the 2nd August, 1649, while advancing against Dublin, Ormond had been totally defeated at Rathmines by the parliamentary troops under Colonel Jones.i On August 15 the new lord-lieutenant entered Dublin, and after a brief stay in the capital, he directed his move- pients towards Drogheda, a strongly fortified town, in which, under the command of General Ashton, a soldier of large experience, Ormond had shut up 3,000 of his choicest troops — a grave strategetic blunder, in this wild and uncivilized land, thus to risk his all upon one venture. After offer- ing a determined resistance, the town was captured on September 11, and the eye turns with a shudder from the bloody scenes which were enacted on that occasion. When the last and most important of the fortifications had fallen into the hands of the enemy, Cromwell issued the inhuman command to slaughter the entire garrison, consisting of 2,000 men, and he himself declared that not thirty men escaped with their lives. The tower of St. Peter's Church, which was being defended by a numerous body of fugitives, he caused to be set on fire ; while of those troops which garrisoned the remaining towers and steeples of the town, and voluntarily surrendered, the officers were put to the sword, every tenth man was shot, and the rest were banished to the Barbadoes. Possibly Cromwell felt the necessity for offering some justifi- ' See Carte's "Ormond Papers," ii. pp. 407-411 ; also Cromwell's letter of the 13th August, 1649, '" Carlyle's " Cromwell's Letters," vol. ii. p. 134. The Period of the Gi'eat Irish Rebellion. 8 r cation for these deeds of horror when he wrote to Lenthall, speaker of the House of Commons, in these terms : " I am persuaded that this is a righteous judgment of God upon these barbarous wretches, who have imbrued their hands in so much innocent blood, and that it will tend to prevent the effusion of blood for the future. Which are the satisfactory grounds to such actions, which otherwise cannot but work remorse and regret." ^ A month after this a similar massacre took place at Wexford. When this town capitulated, although Cromwell had distinctly promised the inhabitants that their lives should be spared, 2,000 human beings were slain by the British soldiers. In this wholesale carnage he again perceives but " the just judgment of God," and " wishes now that an honest people would come and plant there." - Nor were these terrible scenes without their effect. Several towns of importance, as Cork, Ross on the Barrow, and Youghal, declared for the conqueror. But another result of Cromwell's successes, and one of immeasurably more moment, was the disruption of the coalition of royalists. Catholics, and the native Irish, which, at the cost of so much labour and trouble, had been effected by Ormond. The Protestant contingent, who were of English descent, had, indeed, never cherished any sentiments of good fellowship towards their brothers in arms among the Irish Catholics, and the brilliant military achievements of Cromwell, in addition to their own inherent aversion to popery which their English leaders contrived to turn to good account, materially contri- buted towards completely estranging them from their Catholic comrades ; the consequence being that the soldiers of English extraction went over to Cromwell's side in large masses. On the other hand, owing to the distracted and unsettled state of their fellow-combatants, the Irish lost heart and confidence : they began to think that, in alliance with Calvinists and under Calvinistic leaders, the victory would never more be theirs. They, therefore, severed the connection between themselves and their former confederates, and again caused ' Comp. Carlyle's " Cromwell's Letters," vol. ii. p. 152. ^ Ibid., vol. ii. p. 170, 82 History of h'eland. the religious question to occupy the most prominent place in the contest. The manifesto which was issued from the Abbey of Clon- macnoise by twenty Catholic bishops on December 4th, 1649, and addressed to all Catholics, played an important and influential part in changing the character of the struggle, which, from being a conflict between royalism and republi- canism, now became a kind of religious war. This manifesto had its origin in a request made by the commander of Ross for religious liberty, to which Cromwell made answer, that, " if under religious liberty, freedom to celebrate the mass were understood, then such a thing could never be permitted where the Parliament of England held sway ! " ^ The mani- festo, ^ therefore, called upon all faithful Catholics to unite themselves in a league against England, it being now notorious that the Parliament had ordered the extermination of their religion, and doomed its followers, partly to slaughter, and partly to transportation to the Tobacco Islands. Cromwell considered it to be his duty to take notice of this action on the part of the bishops, and accordingly, in January, 1650, while he was in winter-quarters at Youghal, he issued " A Declaration for the undeceiving of deluded and seduced people, which may be satisfactory to all that do not wilfully shut their eyes against the light." In this declaration he endeavours to defend himself with regard to the accusations that had been made against him, and especially to show that no quiet, peaceable citizens had been slain, but only such as had been seized with weapons in their hands ; and that only those persons had been transported to Barbadoes who, as rebels against England, might justly have been put to death. An explanation which could scarcely have appeared conclusive to an Irishman. He then seizes the opportunity to take the prelates and the clergy severely to task. Every prerogative claimed by the clergy appears to him to be arrogance and presumption on their part. In a fulmination against the bishops on the question of this assumed superiority, he ex- claims, " And it is for filthy lucre's sake that you keep it up, ' Carlyle's "Cromwell's Letters," vol. ii. p. 175. - Ibid.,\o\. \\.'^.20^ei seq. The Period of the Great Irish Rebellion. 83 that by making the people believe they are not so holy as yourselves, they might for their penny purchase some sanctity from you, and that you might bridle, saddle, and ride them at your pleasure " ; " but arbitrary power," he thunders in another place, " is a thing men begin to be weary of, in kings and churchmen ; their juggle between them mutually to up- hold civil and ecclesiastical tyranny begins to be transparent." Then he grows enthusiastic for religious freedom, and gives utterance to the following sentence, " For my part, I have already declared that concerning liberty of conscience, I meddle not with any man's conscience."^ Remarkable words, especially when taken in connection with his hostility to the mass, as evidenced in his reply to the commander of Ross ; or when they are compared with his declaration contained in this very proclamation, that wherever he has authority the celebration of the mass shall never be tolerated ! But it was just a revelation of the contradiction and inconsistency with which both Cromwell and the entire body of Independency were, at that time, penetrated. In theory, enthusiasts for every form of religious liberty, and willing also to accord it to every sect of Protestantism, immediately a Catholic claimed the same freedom for himself, liberty of conscience was a thing unknown to them. Shortly after the publication of this declaration, Cromwell left his winter quarters, and on January 29th, 1650, ad- vanced on the fortress of Kilkenny, which, towards the end of March, capitulated. Clonmel, which was gallantly defended by Hugh O'Neill and 2,000 of his clansmen, offered far more determined resistance. Repeated assaults were repulsed, in which Cromwell lost near upon 1,000 of his ablest troops; and finally, having exhausted his ammunition, O'Neill was per- mitted to withdraw, leaving his assailants to take possession of the deserted town. The brave chief, and the greater por- tion of his followers, subsequently forsook their island home, and took service in the army of Spain.^ ' Carlyle's " Cromwell's Letters," vol. ii. pp. 207-225. ' For the siege of Clonmel, the letter of an eyewitness, to be found in Carlyle, loc. cit., vol. ii. pp. 256, 257, is valuable ; also Ludlow, loc. cit.^ ii. p. 28, although, as Warner has shown, the latter contains certain inac- curacies. 84 History of Irelarid. Cromwell was making arrangements to besiege Waterford when letters from the Parliament recalled him to England, and appointed him to take the conduct of the war with Scot- land. He, therefore, entrusted the command of the forces in Ireland to his son-in-law, Ireton, and towards the end of May, 1650, set sail for England, Very positive results, it must be admitted, had accrued from this campaign. As Carlyle says, " Cromwell broke the brain of the Irish War," and a final triumph of the rebels was a contingency now impossible to contemplate. There was, however, still work to be accomplished. Beside numberless small fastnesses, which still repelled the attacks of the repub- lican troops, Limerick, Waterford, and Galway, the most strongly fortified positions in the land, were yet in the hands of the Irish ; while new hosts in defence of Ireland's cause were being collected in Connaught under Lord Clanricarde, and in Ulster under MacMahon, the warlike Bishop of Clogher, who, after the death of Owen Roe O'Neill — caused, it was suspected, by poison — had undertaken the command of the troops in the north. Ireton, however, continued the war precisely on the lines laid down by his predecessor. The important strongholds of Waterford and Carlow were captured, and in Ulster the Bishop of Clogher was defeated and taken prisoner by the British forces, and shortly afterward brought to the block. Meanwhile, Lord Ormond, who during so many years had played a leading part in the conduct of Irish affairs, also left Ireland. After the dissolution of the royalist coalition, his position in the country became untenable. The Protestant contingent of his army, intoxicated by the victories of Crom- well, forsook his banner ; while to his Catholic troops, owing to his being a strong High Churchman by conviction, he was an object of positive hatred ; and, finally, some of the Irish towns refused to admit his garrisons, declaring that they preferred to govern themselves as free communities. Another agreement, it is true, was arrived at between him and the Irish nationalists, but it was of such a nature that it completely delivered him over to the power of this party. The Period of the Greit Irish Rebellion. 85 The towns stipulated, indeed, to receive his troops, but only the Catholic portion of them, the Protestants among them, both officers and men, having to be discharged, — the conse- quence of which was that, on receiving their dismissal, they went over to the enemy in a body. Ormond was even com- pelled to grant seats and votes in the council to certain bishops who were engaged in continual intrigues against him, and desired his removal from the country. Notwithstanding the difficulties of his position, he faithfully remained at his post until the end of the year 1650, when he received the intelligence that Charles II. had acceded to the demands of the Scotch Puritans. This news, doubly calamitous to the staunch episcopalian Ormond, induced him to put into exe- cution a plan which he had long meditated. On the 9th December, 1650, after resigning the functions of his office to Lord Clanricarde, a Catholic of weight and influence, as well as of moderate views, despairing of himself and of his country, he said farewell to that unhappy land. Shortly after his departure, it appeared as if the wild and quixotic policy which had sought to transfer Ireland to the power of a Catholic and continental monarch — although in the hands of Rinuccini it had resulted in such utter failure — were about to be revived. The Bishop of Ferns, a political adven- turer, having induced the Duke of Lorraine to advance mone}' to supply the sinews of war, proposed, in return for this ser- vice, to confer on him and his heirs the protectorate of Ireland. This proposal, however, was promptly rejected by Clanricarde, as being insulting and disloyal to the king.^ In the meantime, the condition of the Irish, particularly after the important stronghold of Limerick had, in 165 1, fallen into the hands of the enemy, was becoming increasingly hopeless. ' The fortunes of Ormond until his departure from the island are re- lated very minutely by Carte in his " Life of Ormond," and also by Warner. Information relating to the intrigues of the Bishop of Ferns, and the action of the Duke of Lorraine, is chiefly to be obtained from the Memoirs of Clanricarde (see " Ulik Bourke, Marquis of Clanricarde, Lord Deputy of Ireland : Memoirs, Letters, and Papers relating to the Treaty between the Duke of Lorraine and the Irish Commissioners, 1650-1653." 1722). Comp. also Warner, pp. 525-52S. 86 History of Irela^id. The English Government appointed civil commissioners,'' whose duty it was to levy a tax on the subdued districts for the purpose of defraying the expenses of the war, as well as to administer justice and restore order in the reconquered provinces. And indeed a better state of things was sorely needed, for the condition of this unfortunate country was truly deplorable. As a means of reducing the Irish to submission, the English troops had killed all their cattle, while the soldiers, furnished with sickles and scythes, had mown down the yet green corn ; ^ and the consequences of this barbarous method of warfare were now visible in the frightful famine which pre- vailed throughout the land. To prevent the complete destruc- tion of live stock in the country, the civil commissioners saw themselves compelled to issue a proclamation forbidding the slaughter of lambs or calves, except by special permission. The cultivation of the soil had almost entirely ceased, and to procure bread sufficient for their own requirements, the sol- diers were obliged to till the ground and sow the seed.^ But among the native Irish population the famine was so terrible that, as eyewitnesses relate, in order to sustain life, many of them were reduced to the fearful necessity of eating human corpses. On the heels of this calamity followed the pestilence, which claimed its victims in every part of the country, among the number being Ireton, Cromwell's son-in-law, and com- mander-in-chief of the parliamentary army. After Ireton's death the command of the forces was assumed by Ludlow, who, in May, 1652, captured Galway, the most important position in Connaught. He then advanced against Ross, whose commander, Lord Muskerry, was already prepared to surrender on being allowed the free exercise of religion. To this demand Ludlow replied that the power he served was not wont to force its religion on any person whatever, upon which Lord Muskerry laid down his arms,^ although surely no one acquainted with the views of Cromwell could possibly attach any significance to a declaration of this character. 1 See Ludlow, loc. ciL, vol. ii. p. 69 et seq. ^ See Prendergast's " Cromwellian Settlement" (1865), p. 14. 3 Ibid., p. 16. ■* Comp. Ludlow, loc. cif., ii. p. 156. The Period of the Great Irish Rebellion. ^'] This was the last act in the struggle as an organised contest. On the 27th September, 1652, the English Parliament declared the war to be at an end. Ireland now lost its separate and distinct existence as a nation, and became an integral part of the United Kingdom ; and, during the existence of the Commonwealth, sent its representatives to the Parliament at Westminster as often as the mighty Protector thought fit to convoke such an assembly. This terrible struggle, which during its progress had pre- sented as many varied aspects as the kaleidoscope, had lasted eleven years. Primarily, a spontaneous national rising against the English in consequence of the stringent measures adopted by the Puritan Parliament against the Catholics, it soon as- sumed the character of a war in defence of religion. The ap- pearance of the nuncio, who designed the complete severance of Ireland from England, and its annexation to a Catholic continental state, marked a fresh epoch in the contest. This strange and eccentric policy, however, had the effect of caus- ing the moderate Catholics to join Ormond's army, thus form- ing a coalition which represented an alliance of all the royalist elements in opposition to the forces of the Commonwealth Cromwell's military successes, in conjunction with the fact that he was pleased to adopt the role of the champion of Pro- testantism, constituted the wedge which split up this coalition, and occasioned the Protestant contingent to forsake their allies, and enter the parliamentary ranks ; from which time to its close the war bore the character of a national and religious con- test between the English Protestants and the Irish Catholics. But long after the actual war was at an end, bands of the unvanquished Irish maintained themselves in the swamps and forests of the west. The treatment to which these rem.nants of the enemy were subjected by the soldiery sent out against them was characterised by relentless severity ; and Ludlow himself relates in his memoirs, that he once fired the mouth of a cave in which one of these companies of freebooters was hidden, and that, with a few exceptions, the entire band was suffocated.^ But in spite of these cruel measures, they held ' Ludlow, loc. at., ii. p. 163. 88 History of Ireland. out a considerable time. Outlaws from all human society, these "Tories," as they were called in Ireland, led a robbers' life, similar to that of the brigands of Italy, — at one time hunted like wild beasts, at another the terror and dread of the resident landowners. It is, however, a difficult task adequately to describe the terrible condition of this unhappy land at the close of the war.^ Towns, villages, country seats, all lay in ruins, and it was even possible to hunt wolves in the outskirits of the capital.- The tillage of the fields was utterly neglected, and the price of rye had risen from twelve shillings to fifty shillings a bushel.-^ The entire island, which was once one of the richest grazing coun- tries in Europe, was so impoverished in stock that cattle had to be imported from Wales,* and so great was the dearth of capital, that though the customary rate of interest was six per cent., no money could be obtained in Ireland under twelve per cent.^ In 1654 the entire revenue of the country only amounted to about ^^"200,000, while the maintenance of the army alone cost ^500,000.^ During the eleven years of the war, out of a population of 1,466,000 souls, 616,000 perished either by sword, pestilence, or famine ; while of those who survived, but few remained in Ireland. At the time of the various capitulations, the troops were allowed the option of leaving their native land and taking service in some other country not engaged in hos- tilities with the Commonwealth. Thousands of the younger and more vigorous men took advantage of this offer, and in May, 1652, 7,ooo, and in September of the same year, 3,000 ' For description of the condition of the country at the close of the war, and for an account of the succeeding colonization, consult Prender- gast's " Cromwellian Settlement" (Lond., 1865), the material for which has been derived, in a great measure, from numerous contemporary pamph- lets, but more particularly from the unpublished " Order Books of the Commissioners of the Parliament of the Commonwealth of England." - See Prendergast, loc. cit., p. 144. ^ Comp. Lecky's " History of England," vol. ii. p. 172. ^ Ibid. ^ See Sir Josiah Child's " Discourse on Trade " (French trans.), p. 75 t'/ scq. ; comp. also Petty's " Political Anatomy of Ireland," p. 74 ; and Roscher in "Die Grimdlagen der Nationalokonomie " (Stuttg., 1871), P- 398. * See Prendergast, loc. ciL, p. 16. The Period of the Great Irish Rebellion. 89 men were shipped to Spain. Lord Muskerry despatched 5,000 to the King of Poland, and 3,500 took service under the Prince of Conde : altogether, it is estimated, no less than 34,000 Irishmen took military service in foreign lands.^ Transportation to the West Indies also tended greatly to depopulate the country. We have already mentioned (p. 80) that after the capture of Drogheda and Wexford, numbers of soldiers were shipped to Barbadoes. But the close of the war did not put an end to these transportations. English agents, mostly Bristol merchants, entered into negotiations with the Government for the surrender of Irish men, women, and girls for transport to the sugar plantations. The Government agreed to the proposals of these men, and assigned to them, in the first place, the prisoners of war, as well as all the Irish found in the workhouses and jails ; but, in addition to these, it ordered that all persons who had no visible means of support might also be transported thither. Accordingly, the English agents, like so many slave-drivers, carried away numberless widows, young girls, and boys, who were perfectly innocent of every crime, to those infamous islands, there to fall victims to the murderous climate or to the evil passions of the planters.^ It was natural, therefore, that the English should make an attempt to re-colonize the land thus desolated by pestilence and war, voluntary emigration and penal transportation ; the more so, that such a colonization would tend to increase the influence and importance of the English element in the coun- try. The greater the number of English settlers, the less dangerous could the Irish be ; but before it would be possible to plant a large number of English colonists, a still larger number of the Irish must first be deprived of their land. Re- garded from this point of view, the Act ^ which was passed on the 1 2th August, 1652, some time before the war was actually at an end, and which was published with a flourish of trumpets throughout the length and breadth of Ireland, gains ' See Prendergast, loc. ciL, p. 21 et seq. " Ibid., pp. 237-240. ^ This Act is to be found in "Acts and Ordinances during the Ursur- pation from 1640 to 1656," by Henry Scobell ; comp. also Prendergast, p. 27. 90 History of Ireland. some significance and becomes capable of explanation. By this Act all ecclesiastical and Crown property was confiscated ; all those persons who had taken any share in the rebellion before the loth November, 1642, in addition to about a hun- dred others, whose names were announced, were sentenced to death and to the loss of their property ; all those landowners who had ever borne arms against the Parliament, were con- demned to the loss of their own property, but were entitled to receive landed property in Connaught to one-third of the value of their own forfeited possessions ; those persons who had not taken up arms against the Parliament, yet had never manifested any good-will towards it, were condemned to lose one-third of their goods, and in place of the two-thirds which remained to them, were to receive lands in Connaught of a corresponding value ; the lower classes, persons who at the utmost could show property to the amount of £\o, received free pardon on condition of migrating to the province of Con- naught. Only such labourers as were necessary to the English for the cultivation of the soil were allowed to remain in the other provinces. We clearly see from this last provision that the ground for this act of confiscation was not the part which the Irish had taken in the rebellion, but the rapacity of the English, and their desire for Irish lands; for, whereas the lower classes, who in time of war are usually the persons who allow themselves the greatest license, received free pardon, the better situated classes, who would assuredly be the last to be guilty of any excess, by the elastic constitution of this Act forfeited almost the whole of their property. The precise method to be pursued in this new colonization was7 however, to be decided by a further Act of Parliament, which was passed on the 27th September, 1653.^ This Act decreed that before the ist May, 1654, at the latest, all the Irish population of Ulster, Leinster, and Munster, should leave these provinces and cross the Shannon into Connaught. Whoever, after that date, should be found on this side of the ' See Scobell's " Acts and Ordinances," chap. xii. ; and Prendergast, P- 23- The Period of the Great Irish Rebellion. 9 1 stream should be liable to the penalty of death. The only persons exempted from the operation of this Act were such Irish women as had married English Protestants, and who desired to embrace the faith of their husbands ; boys under fourteen, and girls under twelve years of age, who might be in the service of Protestants ; those labourers who were neces- sary for the management of estates held by Englishmen ; and finally, those persons who during the eleven years of war had given some manifest token of their good-will towards the Parliament. Let us see how the property thus acquired was disposed of. All ecclesiastical property, in addition to the counties of Kildare, Dublin, Carlow, and Cork, the Government reserved for its own use, to be applied to the payment of public debts, and to rewarding prominent adherents of the parliamentary cause. The counties of Limerick and Tipperary, in Mun- ster ; Meath, West Meath, King's County, and Queen's County, in Leinster ; Antrim and Down, in Ulster, were devoted to satisfying the claims of adventurers who had ad- vanced money to the Parliament to the amount of ^^"360,000 ; while to Cromwell's soldiers were assigned the remaining counties in Ulster, Leinster, and Munster, with the exception of County Clare, which with the province of Connaught fell to the share of the Irish. The reason that just this province was allotted to the Irish was that, consisting as it did for the most part of moor and rock, it was not regarded as desirable territory by the English. Moreover, it was encircled by the Shannon and the sea ; con- sequently, the entire Irish nation could literally be held in captivity in this province; and, as if to render the imprisonment still more real, a belt of land four miles in width, extending along the banks of the Shannon and the sea-coast, was taken from the Irish and peopled with soldiers.^ According to the original decree, the migration of the Irish into this province, thus surrounded by a military cordon, was to have taken place by the ist May, 1654 ; but the Government agreed to grant a respite until the ist May, 1655, at which date the three ^ See Prendergast, p. 187. 92 History of Ireland. provinces of Ulster, Leinster, and Munster must be cleared of every Irish landowner. After the expiration of this term, forays were made into these provinces by English officials, and any Irish who, contrary to law, were discovered on this side of the Shannon, were either put to death or transported to the Barbadoes.^ On the other hand, a dreary life awaited those who had settled in Connaught. In this sterile, war- wasted province they were doomed to life-long poverty, exposed to the suspicious and contemptuous sui'veillance of the English, and in consequence of the proscription of their faith, they were not even permitted to satisfy the needs of their religious nature. For, an edict of the 6th January, 1653, revived an obsolete and forgotten law of the reign of Queen Elizabeth, which enacted that any Irish priest found in Ireland after the space of twenty days should be liable to be hanged, beheaded, and quartered.- It also decreed that those persons who, after this date, harboured a priest should be subject to the penalty of death and the confiscation of their goods. Accordingly, a price was set on the head of every priest, and those who extended succour or shelter to any member of this class, did it at the risk of their lives and property. The districts vacated by the Irish were soon in the occupa- tion of English officers and soldiers, merchants and artisans ; and it cannot be denied that, in the hands of its new owners, the land gradually began to recover from the desolation caused by the war.^ Even a writer so hostile to the Common- wealth as Clarendon, says : " And which is more wonderful, all this was done and settled within little more than two years, to that degree of perfection, that there were many buildings raised for beauty as well as use, orderly and regular planta- tions of trees, and fences and enclosures raised throughout the kingdom, purchases made by one from the other at very valuable rates, and jointures made upon marriage, and all other conveyances and settlements executed as in a kingdom ' For the dispensations and respites granted, see Prendergast, p. 34 ; and for the penalties decreed, ibid., pp. 53, 64, 142. 2 See Brennan's " Ecclesiastical History of Ireland," and Prendergast, p. 157. 3 See Clarendon's "Autobiography " (1761), vol. li. p. 118. The Period of the Great Irish Rebellion. 93 at peace within itself, and where no doubt could be made of the validity of titles." These results were mainly attributable to the remarkable energy and the not inconsiderable capital which the various classes of colonists had imported into the country ; but, notwithstanding the impetus thus given to the economic prosperity of the country, the social condition of Ireland during the last years of the Commonwealth was sad enough. In place of any detailed statement, we shall cite an incident which took place in the year 1657, in the Parliament of the United Kingdom at Westminster. At that time it was intended to impose a fresh tax on Ireland, and during the discussion of the subject in the House of Commons, Major Morgan, the member for County Wicklow, rose and protested against it. The country was still in ruins, ^ he said, and apart from the cost of rebuilding churches, market-houses and law-courts, the inhabitants had laid a heavy burden on themselves, in the shape of rewards which they had to pay for the destruction of wild animals. " We have," he continued, " three burdensome beasts to destroy that lay heavy burden upon us. The first beast is the wolf, on whom we lay £i^ a head, and ;^io if a bitch ; the second beast is a priest, on whose head we lay £\o, if he is eminent, more; the third beast is a Tory, on whose head, if he is a public Tory, we lay ;^20, and 40^-. if he is a private Tory." What a terrible social condition is here indicated ! ' For Morgan's speech in Parliament in 1657, see Prendergast, p. 150. CHAPTER V. IRELAND FROM THE ACCESSION OF CHARLES II. TO THE TREATY OF LIMERICK (1691) : THE PERIOD OF THE RESTORATION. Cromwell's iron hand had pressed cruelly on the unhappy Irish nation, and it was, therefore, not surprising that after the death of this ruler and the short administration of his son, hope revived in every Irish heart when, on the 25th May, 1660, Charles II. landed at Dover, in order to ascend the throne of his ancestors. The people of Ireland expected that their lives would be brightened by the advent of the new sovereign ; that he would restore to them their property ; and they were encouraged in the indulgence of such a hope by the fact that in 1650, Charles, himself an exile, had given them a written promise to the effect that all the Irish who had ever sworn allegiance to his father should be reinstated in their possessions.^ In furtherance of this object, agents appointed by the Irish entered into active communication with the king. They made a proposal that, after the issuing of a general amnesty, their fellow-countrymen should again be placed in possession of their estates, but that, for a certain number of years, a third part of the revenues derived from the estates should be devoted to the compensation of those soldiers and adventurers, as far as their claims could.be established, who had been planted there under Cromwell's administration.^ The greater portion of the soldiers, indeed, had received real estate in lieu of arrears of pay, and the same was the case with the majority of the merchants and traders who, in place of the large sums ' See Carte's " Life of Ormond," ii. p. 129. ^ Ibid., ii. p. 214. 94 The Period of the Restoration. 95 of money which they had advanced to Parliament, were endowed with Irish landed property. These were claims which the king was manifestly bound to respect. But the sums offered by the Irish were far from being sufficient to satisfy the demands of any one of these interests ; beside which, an agreement of this nature would have been an affront to public opinion in England, which was by no means disposed to surrender the dearly bought ascendency of Protestantism in Ireland. By this arrangement, too, the king would have forfeited the quit-rents which he at present received from the settlers. These combined reasons, therefore, decided the fickle monarch to disregard the promise he had formerly made to the Irish, and on the recommendation of Lord Broghill and Sir Arthur Mervyn, instead of reinstating the Irish in their possessions, and satisfying the claims of Cromwell's settlers, a decision of a wholly different character was announced by the publication of the royal declaration of November 1660, which formed the basis of the Act of Settlement.^ This Act provided that all those Irish settlers on whom lands had been bestowed prior to the 7th May, 1659, as well as all old soldiers who had received land instead of pay, were to remain in possession of such ; all " innocent Papists " were, naturally, to have their estates restored to them, but were to re- sign the land which they had received in Connaught. No one, however, was reckoned as belonging to this class who, before the truce of the i6th September, 1643, had been in any way implicated in the rebellion, or who, before Ormond's peace of 1649, had joined the party of the papal nuncio. All those persons who might primarily have taken part in the rebellion, but had subsequently submitted to the king and remained loyal to him, were not entitled to the restitution of their property, but were allowed to remain in possession of the lands granted to them in Connaught by the Commonwealth ; while those of their number who had afterwards served the • The Act of Settlement is to be found in the Irish Statutes, 14 and 15 Charles II., c. 2. Comp. also Leland's " History of Ireland," iii. p, 414 ; Carte, loc. cit.^ ii. pp. 216-222 ; and Lecky's " History of England," ii. p. 175- 96 History of Ireland. king during his residence in foreign lands, and had received no grant of land in Connaught, were permitted to claim their former estates, but only on condition of making adequate compensation to the present proprietors. There were, accordingly, many of the Irish who were de- barred from any share in the restitution of property ; but, as Lord Ormond justly observed, it would have been necessary to discover a new Ireland in order to meet even all the recognised claims.^ Seeing, therefore, that it was impossible to satisfy both parties at the same time, the only question that remained to be settled was as to which of them must be sacrificed. In this contest the Irish were undoubtedly at a disadvantage ; they were poor, and without powerful friends, while the English settlers were in possession of the richest territory, and, consequently, enjoyed both power and influ- ence. Thus, the Irish Parliament which met in 1601 consisted almost wholly of Englishmen, the Irish being virtually un- represented. The most influential of the king's counsellors, Clarendon and Ormond, the latter now advanced to the rank of duke, and since 1661 reinvested with the lord-lieutenancy of the Irish kingdom, were more closely allied to the colonists, both by religion and descent, than they were to the native Catholic population ; and while the English settlers who sat in the Irish Parliament contrived to gain the favour of the powerful viceroy by voting him a gift of ;^30,ooo, the Irish were impolitic enough to convert into an enemy the man who wielded such potent influence. Moreover, in their dealings with the king, they likewise displayed much indiscretion, demanding as " an act of justice that which the king, at the utmost, granted as a favour and an act of grace." Conse- quently, the sovereign speedily lost all sympathy for the Irish, and in a short time declared that he " was in favour of an English interest being established in Ireland." ^ This plainly revealed to the Irish that they, and not the English, were to be the victims. Meanwhile, the proceedings in connection with the appli- ' See Carte, loc. cit., ii. p. 240. - Ibid. loc. cit., ii. p. 236 ; comp. ibid., pp. 241, 242. The Period of the Restoration. 97 cation of the Act made but slow progress.^ A commission was appointed for the purpose of inquiring into the claims of 4,000 " innocent Papists " who desired the restitution of their property. During the first three months 185 cases came on for hearing, and in only 19 of them was it possible to prove any actual offence against the parties. It now became evident that should a corresponding result be obtained in the examinations which were to follow, the available means for the compensation of all the Irish claims would be utterly inadequate ; and the Irish Protestants, accordingly, began to be apprehensive that ultimately their estates would be at- tacked. The temper of the Irish people at that time was ominous and portentous. The Irish House of Commons was loud in its complaints, and the speaker, Sir A. Mervyn, characterised ^ the times through which they were passing as a critical epoch, in which the established religion was in danger of being undermined by the predominance acquired by popish interests. Officers of the Cromwellian army began to meditate a fresh insurrection in defence of their possessions. Even in England protests were raised against every species of concession made to the Irish. Thus, the Government was continually being confronted by fresh complications ; and finally, after long and arduous de- liberation, it arrived at an arrangement which did not, indeed, untie the knot, but cut it: this was the passing, in 1665, of an Act of Explanation,^ which provided that the soldiers and adventurers should relinquish one-third of their possessions, and that the Irish should retain two-thirds of the land which they held in September, 1663. The demands of all those persons whose claims had not yet been adjudicated upon were rejected, with the exception of about twenty Catholic families, who were reinstated in their possessions by special favour. The final result was that, whereas in 1641 two- thirds of the entire land of Ireland was in the hands of Irish Catholics, after the execution of the Act of Settlement, two- ^ See Leland's "History of Ireland," iii. p. 431. ^ Comp. Leland, loc. cit.^ iii. p. 433. ^ This Act is contained in Irish Statutes, 17 and 18 Charles II. c. 2. Comp. Carte, ii. p. 304 ; Leland, iii. p. 440. H 98 . Histoiy of Ireland. thirds of the entire land was in the occupation of English Protestants/ and that close upon 3,000 Irish proprietors had been irrevocably and for ever driven from their patrimonial estates. The mother-country resolutely supported the interests of those of her sons who had emigrated to Ireland, and her in- terpositions in their behalf materially tended to uphold the claims of the Cromwellian colonists to their possessions. But there was a limit beyond which the solidarity of interests did not extend. As soon as England's fears were aroused that the colony could injure her commercially or economically, the bond of a common descent and a common faith was immedi- ately forgotten by the mother-country. A characteristic fact is, that at the very time in which the ruling classes in England were so warmly espousing the cause of the Cromwellian settlers to the property they had acquired, a violent contest arose between England and her proteges with reference to a matter of mercantile policy, which eventually resulted in the sacrifice of the economic interests of the weaker country. England began, in the first place, to be jealous of Irish commerce. The geographical situation of the island, and its excellent harbours, had placed Ireland in a position peculiarly favourable for carrying on a trade with the American colonies ; but this very circumstance awakened the envy of the English shippers, who were so importunate in their complaints to Parliament, that their case was at length made a subject of investigation. The result was, that although Cromwell, in pursuance of a generous and enlightened policy, had, in his Navigation Act, placed England and Ireland on exactly the same footing,^ Ireland was completely ignored in the new Act of 1663, and henceforth only English ships were per- mitted to convey goods to the British colonies.^ This law, which was again confirmed in 1670, not only struck a severe blow at Ireland's colonial traffic, but also occasioned a decline both in the ship-building trade, and in the art of navigation ' Comp. Lecky, loc. cit.^ ii. p. 181. 2 See Arthur Young's "Tour in Ireland" (Ger. trans., Lpzg., 1780), ii. p. 276. ^ See Irish Statutes, 15 Charles II., c. 7. The Period of the Restoration. 99 itself; so that it was no exaggeration when Swift, in 1727, declared that, notwithstanding her magnificent timber, Ireland was not one ship richer than she was fifty years before, and he might justly affirm that " the conveniency of ports and harbours which nature so liberally bestowed on this kingdom, is of no more use to Ireland than a beautiful prospect is to a man shut up in a dungeon." ^ Ireland was destined, however, to be still further injured by English legislation. The copious rainfall and the abundance of moisture for which this island is remarkable are not, it is true, favourable to the cultivation of corn ; nevertheless, it is owing to these that the land is covered with that wondrously green carpet which has given to it the name of the Emerald Isle. It was, therefore, very natural that the Irish landowners early turned their attention to cattle-grazing, from which they also realized considerable profits. Just at this particular time, it happened that the English landowners were experiencing a falling off in their rents, which was really attributable to various causes, but principally to the war with Holland. They, however, imagined that this reduction of their incomes could only be due to the importation of Irish cattle, which over- stocked the English markets, and thus kept down the price of English cattle ; and, as in the Parliament as then constituted the control of the legislature was in the hands of the landed gentry, they succeeded, in 1663, in passing an Act which prohibited the importation into England of Irish fat cattle after the ist July of each year. These measures speedily appearing insufficient, another bill was introduced, in 1665, which absolutely forbade the importation into England of Irish cattle, whether fat or otherwise, alive or slaughtered. Some of the more enlightened members of the House, it must be admitted, resisted this proposal. Sir Heneage Finch, especially, pointed out that this bill would be the source of endless misery to Ireland, while at the same time it would be of no service to the English themselves. It might, it was true, be the means of suppressing the inconvenient competition of ^ Compare Swift's "Short View of Ireland," in "Works" (ed. Roscoe), vol. ii. p. 80. lOO History of Ireland. the Irish graziers, but inasmuch as Irish cattle were, for the most part, paid for in Enghsh manufactures, Enghsh com- merce would necessarily suffer in the same proportion in which the purchasing power of the Irish decreased. More- over, when, in consequence of the supply of cheap Irish meat being cut off, an advance should take place in the price of meat, English firms would be compelled to pay their work- people higher wages, and thus the cost of English manu- factures would render them too dear for exportation. But what availed these considerations with an assembly represent- ing only class interests, as was the case with the Parliament of England at that day ? The bill became law, and was im- mediately followed by many of the results which had been predicted. Numerous Irish farmers and landowners were reduced to poverty, and the trade of Ireland, three-fourths of which had been carried on with England, sustained very sensible injury.^ The Duke of Ormond, it is true, honestly endeavoured to heal the wounds which had been inflicted on his native land by the foolish policy of the mother-country. He obtained a proclamation from the king, conferring upon the Irish liberty to trade with foreign nations, hoping thus, in some measure, to render nugatory the unwise prohibition against traffic with the colonies. He also paid especial attention to developing the industrial resources of the country, as a means of supplying the im- poverished land with fresh sources of wealth. He interested himself chiefly in promoting the manufacture of linen, and sent suitable persons to Holland in order to study the im- provements which had been introduced in that country in the production of linen fabrics. In conjunction with Sir William Temple, he was instrumental in bringing 5CX) families from Brabant to Ireland, while a number of French families from Rochelle also planted themselves there, and in consequence 1 Comp. Irish Statutes, i8 Charles II., c. 2 ; also 32 Charles II., c. 2. The occasion and the consequences of the prohibition of the export of cattle are fully dealt with by Carte, loc. at., ii. pp. 317-337 ; Leland, loc. cit, iii. p. 442 ; in addition to which consult Clarendon's " Autobio- graphy," vol. iv. pp. 204-233. The Period of the Restoration. loi of receiving this stimulus from without, the Irish Hnen manu- facture considerably gained in importance. Still more valuable, perhaps, were his efforts to encourage the woollen manufacture. He erected a factory in Clonmel for the weaving of woollen cloths, and invited 500 Walloons to take up their residence in Ireland in order to work it ; and, subsequently, a second factory in Carrick also owed its exist- ence to him. This fresh branch of industry rendered very timely aid to the sadly hampered agriculturalists of Ireland ; for the Irish pastures being admirably adapted to sheep- grazing, the landowners, who were forbidden to export their cattle, now devoted themselves to the production of wool for the supply of the woollen factories.^ But in addition to economic questions, the ecclesiastical disorders of the reign of Charles II. also demand some notice. On the accession of this sovereign the Anglican Church was restored to its former position in Ireland as well as in England ; the bishops were recalled to their deserted dioceses, and tithes were again levied as in the olden days. Strenuous efforts were made to keep dissenters well in check ; Catholics were prohibited from removing out of one province into another, without permission of the authorities ; while they were, at the same time, forbidden to hold public meetings, and were thus reduced to a condition in which it was impossible for them to bring their sufferings and grievances before the Crown. With the object of demonstrating the loyalty of the Catholics and protecting them from further oppressive measures, Peter Walsh, a Franciscan monk, originated a proposal to present an address to the king ; he, accordingly, drew up a remon- strance,^ wherein a protest was entered against the belief widely prevalent in England, that toleration of Catholicism was in- compatible with safety to the state. This document further set forth that Catholics everywhere regard the king as supreme ' For evidence of Ormond's fostering care for the industries of Ireland, see Carte, ii. p. 340 et scq. ; also Leland, loc ciL, iii. pp. 448, 449. ^ With reference to the presentation of the remonstrance, and the disputes arising from it, see especially Peter Walsh's "History of the Irish Remonstrance," First Treatise ; Comp. also Leland, loc. ctL, iii. p. 459 ^/ seq. I02 History of Ireland. ruler in all things temporal ; and that neither the pope nor any other spiritual authority has the right or power to re- lease any subject of a non-Catholic monarch from his oath of allegiance to that sovereign. The remonstrance especially branded as godless and unchristian the doctrine that any Catholic subject whatever has the right to kill, or in any other wise, injure a sovereign professing a different faith. This remonstrance was delivered, in due course, to Ormond, who drew attention to the fact that it was unsigned ; whereupon an appeal was made throughout the country for signatures. But although numerous members of the nobility, and many distinguished Catholic commoners willingly appended their names to this document, the majority of the bishops, and many of the inferior clergy, declined to sign it ; and the papal nuncio at Brussells declared that some of the principles enunciated in the remonstrance were such as had formerly been con- demned by the apostolic see. From this time the Catholics of Ireland were split up into two sections : one of which endorsed the principles contained in the remonstrance, and hence were called remonstrants ; while their opponents ac- quired the name of anti-remonstrants. On several occasions violent disputes occurred between the two parties with reference to certain ecclesiastical appointments, and at the National Synod held in Dublin, 1666, the excitement ran so high that a furious quarrel ensued. As long as Ormond was at the helm of affairs, the loyal remonstrants were regarded by the Government with favour ; but when, after much intriguing, the ministry known as the Cabal, which in 1667 had ejected the Chancellor Clarendon, also succeeded a year later in displacing the chancellor's friend the Duke of Ormond, a complete revolution took place in this respect. At the same time that the new English ministry, which numbered among its members two declared Catholics, was lending its countenance to the Romanising tendencies of the Court of England, it happened that in Ireland a number of Irish Catholics ^ — and those, strange to say, like Colonel ' See Carte, loc. cit., ii. p. 414 £•/ seq. The Period of the Restoration, 103 Talbot and his brother Peter, Archbishop of Dubhn, belonging to the party of anti-remonstrants — likewise stood high in the favour of the new lord-lieutenant, Lord Berkeley of Stratton, who was appointed to the vice-regal office in the year 1670. They contrived, by an unscrupulous persecution of their opponents, to turn the influence thus enjoyed by them to good account, with the result that the greater number of the loyal clergy among the remonstrants were deprived of their livings. Simultaneously, the Catholic Archbishop of Dublin, relying upon the favour of the Court, and casting off the reserve which, in view of the exclusively Protestant character of the Government, the Catholics had for some time past imposed upon themselves, publicly assumed the rank and pomp of a prince of the Church. The favour extended to Talbot and his party by the lord- lieutenant encouraged them to take a further step. They sent a deputation to the king, with instructions to lay before him all the grievances of the Catholics ; and this deputation actually succeeded in obtaining the appointment of a commis- sion, authorised to institute inquiries as to the means by which all property then in the possession of Protestants in Ireland had been acquired, and to discover how far those methods were in accordance wath the royal declaration of 1660. This attack on the Act of Settlement was the cause of widespread agitation and apprehension in the Protestant circles of both England and Ireland, in which circles the toleration accorded to the Catholics was already regarded with but scant approval. The English Parliament was be- sieged with petitions from the colonists of Cromwell's time, praying for protection for their allotments. Lamentations over the growth of popery were heard on every hand, and, ultimately, there remained no course open to the ministry ex- cept to recall Lord Berkeley, and replace him by the Earl of Essex. At the same time the English Parliament presented an address ^ to the king, which, beyond all other things, ' For the downfall of Berkeley and the address of the English Parlia- ment, see particularly Carte, loc. cit., ii. p. 429 ; and Leland, loc. cit., iii. p. 466. I04 History of Ireland. demanded the maintenance of the Settlements Act ; but in addition to this, it also contained a petition for the dissolution of all monasteries, the banishment of Catholic priests, and the deposition of Colonel Talbot. The feeling of hostility to Catholicism, which so widely prevailed in England, thus received clear and definite expression. The king's reply was to the effect that it was his purpose to maintain the Act of Settlement ; and by holding out this promise, and making certain small concessions, he succeeded in calming the excited public mind, and by this means pre- vented the adoption of harsher measures against the Catholics. Lord Essex, however, felt himself but ill at ease as lord- lieutenant of a country which, as he expressed it, was torn and rent by every faction ; he, therefore, welcomed the oppor- tunity which presented itself, in 1677, of relinquishing his office. And now there appeared once more at the head of the Irish administration a man whose name has so frequently recurred in these pages. For the third time the post of lord- lieutenant was occupied by the Duke of Ormond, a position which his moderation, his knowledge of affairs, and his length- ened experience eminently qualified him to fill. Ormond had not long been in office when religious disorders broke out afresh in the land. The false rumour of an intended popish plot which, in the year 1678, was circulated in England by Oates and Tong, stirred up, as is well known, religious fanaticism in that country to an intense degree. Similar reports were also disseminated in the sister island ; but here they were supplemented by the intelligence that certain in- dividuals had been hired by the pope to murder the viceroy, and that the Archbishop of Dublin himself was privy to the plot. Rumours of this nature only too soon gained credence among the fanatical multitudes ; and although by no means convinced of the existence of a conspiracy, Ormond felt him- self compelled, on political grounds, to take some action. He therefore ordered the arrest of the Archbishop of Dublin^ who at that time was dangerously ill ; temporarily closed all the Catholic places of worship, and ordered all soldiers, both officers and men, to return into garrison. The English The Period of the Restoration. 105 Government was, however, not satisfied with these pro- ceedings, and commanded the lord-Heutenant to arrest Lord Mountgarret, an old man of eighty, in addition to his son and Colonel Talbot.^ There were two principal reasons which, at that time, induced many an English statesman, although personally disbelieving the myth about a popish conspiracy, to join his voice to that of the multitude in the cry of " No Popery." Some of the politicians of the day believed that, by the sup- pression of their religion, the Irish would be goaded to insur- rection, and that thus an opportunity would be afforded to the English to completely exterminate the hostile race, and appropriate their lands. Others, as Lord Shaftesbury, im- agined that by inflaming and exciting religious fanaticism, they would be able to compass the downfall of the Duke of Ormond, who had invariably counselled a policy of modera- tion towards the Catholics ; and impelled by such motives, they did not scruple to employ these base means for the accomplishment of their ends. True, these personal opponents of Ormond's failed for some time to attain their object, but, none the less, was the lord- lieutenant powerless to prevent an innocent man from falling a victim to the religious fanaticism thus aroused. Oliver Plunket, the Catholic Archbishop of Armagh, was taken to England, and there accused of having conspired with France against England, and of having endeavoured, by means of the contributions of the clergy, secretly to enlist an army of 6,000 Irishmen. Without a shadow of proof he was condemned to death, and executed at Tyburn on the ist July, 1681." Finally, after the lapse of several years, the enemies of Ormond succeeded, by their unremitting aspersions, in damag- ing his reputation with the king. On the 6th October, 1684, Ormond received a royal letter, in which the monarch an- nounced to him his intention of recalling him, and conferring 1 Comp. Carte, loc. at, ii. p. 477 et seq. ; Leland, iii. p. 473. * For this subject the " Life of Archbishop Plunket," by the Rev. Dr. Moran, Bishop of Ossory, is especially valuable. Comp. also Leland, iii. p. 480 ; Carte ii., App. p. 109. io6 History of Ireland. the lord-lieutenancy on Lord Rochester. But on the 6th February, 1685, before Ormond had retired from his post, the king died, and was succeeded by his brother James, whose ascension of the throne was productive of fresh complications for Ireland. It is a matter of notoriety how this sovereign, having, prior to his accession, openly embraced Catholicism, set before him, as the one task of his life, the establishment of the Catholic religion throughout the whole of his dominions ; and how, in the prosecution of this design, he exhibited not a trace of statesmanlike foresight or consideration. In carrying out his plans he naturally felt himself drawn towards the Irish, who for the most part were his co-religionists, and he was, accord- ingly, particularly concerned to transfer the most important offices of State in Ireland to the Catholics. Shortly after James ascended the throne, Ormond was commanded to leave Ireland and proceed to London, there to devote himself to the duties of his office in the household, as lord steward. The functions of the lord-lieutenancy were now divided, the civil department being entrusted to Lord Henry Clarendon, an English Protestant, while the command of the army was confided to Colonel Richard Talbot, a Catholic, whom Ormond, as we have seen, at one time caused to be arrested, but who had recently been raised to the rank of Earl of Tyrconnel.^ The earl was a man of low character and coarse manners ; but the circumstance of his being a Catholic was, in the king's eyes, a sufficient qualification for this lofty post. Once in- vested with authority, he made it his chief aim to crush the English Protestant colony in Ireland, and to restore the country to the aboriginal race. This intention was visible in all the acts of his administration, and Lord Clarendon was too feeble to offer any effectual resistance to his schemes. Thus, in carrying out the royal command to disarm the ' For information respecting Tyrconnel, see Macaulay's clever sketch of him, which is, nevertheless, too evidently written with undue bias, in his " History of England since the Accession of James II." (Lond., 1849), vol. ii. pp. 48-51. The Pej'iod of the Restoration. 107 population, Tyrconnel contrived, while utterly despoiling the Protestant gentry of every weapon, to leave the Catholic peasants and farmers in possession of their arms. In the army he discharged a large number of Protestant officers, and filled their places with Catholics ; and he also proceeded on the same principles in enlisting private soldiers.^ He then caused the charters of incorporation possessed by the various towns to be called in, and these were so altered that two- thirds of the municipal offices were conferred upon Catholics.- The king gave his assent to all these measures, and declared that he regarded the majority of the colonists as his enemies, for which reason he considered it to be all the more necessary that the civil and military administration should be in the hands of his friends.^ Lord Clarendon had meanwhile been a compliant observer of these acts, but notwithstanding his docility and obsequious- ness, the king ultimately grew weary of him. He was, accordingly, removed from his post, and the functions which he had hitherto discharged were transferred to the Earl of Tyrconnel. The anxiety of Tyrconnel to procure for his co-religionists the most influential offices in the state was now redoubled, and he also endeavoured to find ways and means of restoring to them their lost estates. He hated the Act of Settlement, which had ejected the Irish from their possessions, with all his soul, and he designated it " a foul thing, a roguish thing, and a damned thing."^ The abrogation of this Act, however, could not be lightly accomplished. In the first place, it would be necessary to have the consent of the Irish Parliament, and this body was, at present, mainly composed of Cromwell's settlers, or their descendants ; but as the parlia- mentary representatives were chiefly elected by the municipal corporations, and as the laws regulating the constitution of ' See Macaulay, loc. cit. (vol. ii. pp. 142, 144), who here takes as his authority the correspondence between Rochester and Clarendon. " See Leland, loc. cit.., iii. p. 503. ^ See the letter of James to Clarendon, of the 6th April, 1686. (Comp. Macaulay, loc. cit.., vol. ii. p. 142.) As illustrating the king's views, the despatch of Barillon, the French ambassador to Louis XIV., is valuable. (Macaulay, ii. pp. 431, 432.) •• See Macaulay, ii. p. 146. To8 History of I Iceland. these bodies had recently been altered in favour of the Catholics, there was a reasonable hope that, in course of time, a legislative assembly would be elected more favourable to the abolition of the Settlement Act than the one now in existence. But before the measures adopted by Tyrconnel had had time to become operative, the Revolution, which broke out in the year 1688, swept James from the throne. His successor, William III., tried in the beginning to attach the lord-lieu- tenant to his side, and entered into communication with him. But even had Tyrconnel ever seriously entertained the idea of an alliance with William, the temper of the Irish Catholic party at that time was such that he would not have ventured to proceed farther with his negotiations. Indeed, when the Irish first heard rumours of Tyrconnel's relations with William, they threatened to set fire to his palace, and burn him with it.^ These considerations alone would have sufficed to render Tyrconnel faithful in his allegiance to King James. He, therefore, despatched an envoy to St. Germains, where the fugitive king was then holding his court, who was com- missioned to inform James that Ireland was expecting him. In response to this invitation, James II. undertook an expe- dition to Ireland, accompanied by the French ambassador, D'Avaux, and by some troops, under the command of the German General Rosen, and on the 12th March, 1689, arrived in Kinsale Harbour. On the 24th March he made an entry into Dublin, amid the rejoicings of the Catholic population, after which he summoned a parliament to meet in the capital on the 7th May, 1689. In the meantime, he resolved to march northward, and, in the first place, advanced upon Londonderry, which had declared against him. Although the inhabitants of this town had neither soldiers, ammunition, nor provisions, they, nevertheless, came to the heroic determi- nation to defend themselves. Having chosen a clergyman named Walker as their leader, under his direction they sustained a siege of close upon four months' duration with so 1 Comp. the despatch of D'Avaux to Louis XIV. of the 4th April, 1689, which is to be found in Ranke's "Enghsche Geschichte," vi. p. 291. The Period of the Restoration. 109 much fortitude and endurance, that the siege of Londonderry is accounted one of the most memorable incidents in the annals of British warfare. At the expiration of four months succour arrived, and the enemy was forced to retire.^ The storming of Londonderry having proved a failure, James returned to Dublin, where, on the appointed day, he opened Parliament in person.^ Owing to the fact that great numbers of Protestants, and these mostly of the wealthier classes, had left Ireland on the news of James's landing, and repaired to England, the Protestant element was but very feebly represented in both Houses of Parliament. The entire Protestant representation in the Upper House consisted of four spiritual and five temporal peers, while in the Lower House, out of 250 members, only six were Protestants, the great majority of the representatives being sons of those persons who had been deprived of their estates under Crom- well's administration. It was to be foreseen, therefore, that the policy of a parlia- ment thus composed would be neither a calm nor a prudent one, but that it would be marked by acts of revenge and deeds of retaliation ; and, in truth, the greater number of its measures ^ were framed with the double object of utterly destroying the influence of the English colony and the ascendency of Protestant interests in Ireland, and of invest- ing the native Irish with supreme control throughout the country. The first step which was taken by this Parliament was to constitute the Irish Parliament the highest legislative authority in the land by the repeal of the ancient statute of 1495, called Poyning's Act, which established the dependence of the Irish Parliament on the Government of England. The next measure passed by this assembly was an Act of ' The siege is described by Walker himself in "A True Account of the Siege of Londonderry " (Lond., 1689). - For the history of this Parliament, by far the most valuable work is " The Present State of the Protestants in Ireland," by King ; comp. also Leland, loc. cif., iii. p. 536 et seq. ; among more recent writers, Lecky (ii. p. 182 et seq.), and Macaulay (vol. iii., p. 202 et seq.), whose brilliant account is, however, not free from partiality. ^ A list of the Acts of this Parliament is to be found in Plowden's " Historical Review," vol. i. App. 1 1 o History of Ireland. Toleration, which conceded religious freedom to every con- fession, and thus abolished the precedence hitherto claimed by the Anglican Church, — a measure, the tendency of which could certainly only be approved, but which, it is to be re- gretted, remained only a dead letter, as shortly afterward, in direct contravention of this Act, a violent persecution of the Protestants commenced in every province. The next business was the regulation of ecclesiastical tithes. It was not surprising that the Irish Catholic felt it to be a heavy burden upon him that, although his own priests were entirely supported by the freewill offerings of their parish- ioners, he should be compelled to pay tithes to the teachers of an alien faith. This anomaly was removed by Parliament, and it was decreed that the Catholics should henceforth pay tithes exclusively to their own priests. One hardship was, however, associated with this law for the Anglican clergy, who, having entered upon their duties relying upon the permanence and security of Irish institutions, were entitled, by its provisions, to no compensation for the reduction which this Act occasioned in their incomes. This measure was followed by a revision of titles. It has already been men- tioned that Tyrconnel and the entire Irish Nationalist party were inspired by a profound hatred of the Act of Settlement ; consequently, they now seized the opportunity to abrogate it. The Irish who had been driven from their estates by Crom- well were now to be reinstated in their possessions, from which the Cromwellian colonists were, in their turn, to be ejected without receiving either one farthing as compensation, or even being refunded for outlay on buildings and improve- ments ; the thirty years undisturbed possession which they had enjoyed being considered an ample and all-sufficient equivalent. Only those persons were entitled to compensa- tion who had come into possession of their estates by purchase or inheritance, the requisite funds for which compensation were to be derived from the confiscated property of the adhe- rents of William 1 11.^ The effect of this Act was that the ' Macaulay (vol. iii. p. 211) lays much stress upon the great injustice which was involved in depriving the innocent purchasers of Irish land The Period of the Resto7'ation. 1 1 r sacred rights of property were once more assailed, and even James must have had a presentiment that the enforcement of this law would involve an utter subversion of the existing order of things, for, on the advice of some of his friends in England, who justly regarded this measure as a declaration of war by the Irish National party against the English colony, he himself exhorted the Parliament to moderation. At first he hoped the bill would be thrown out by the Lords, and again he considered the advisability of dissolving Parliament. Such a step, however, in view of the prevailing temper of the country, would have completely extinguished the king's in- fluence in Ireland. Already, in the course of their delibera- tions on this measure, the Nationalists had declared that should the king refuse to grant them their rights, they would not consider themselves bound to serve him in war. James therefore yielded, and allowed the bill to become law.^ The last law passed during this session was one relating to high treason, a measure which has justly been termed the most cruel Act passed by this Parliament. According to the provisions of this enactment, all those Irish subjects who had gone to England and taken refuge with William III., and who, before a certain approximate date, should not have sworn allegiance to their just and lawful sovereign, James II., should be declared guilty of high treason, condemned to death and to the confiscation of their goods. James did not withhold his sanction, even, from this, notwithstanding the fact that one of its clauses restricted the king's prerogative to pardon. A list was, accordingly, drawn up, containing the names of the proclaimed persons to the number of about 2,000, in which were included half the entire body of Irish peers. This catalogue, to which personal enmity or a private grudge may have added the name of many an innocent man, was made the basis of proceedings which were conducted without any careful investigation, and which frequently had only common rumour to justify them. Not being able to obtain of theic possessions, but he makes not the sHghtest reference to this compensation. In contrast hereto, comp. Lecky, ii. p. 185 et seq. '^ See the despatch of D'Avaux to Louis XIV., of the 3rd June, 1689, in Ranke's " Enghsche Geschichte," vi. p. 298. 1 1 2 History of Ireland. possession of the persons of their adversanes,^ this law was only of moment in so far as it authorized the seizure of the estates of the fugitives, which, it was hoped, would furnish ample means for carrying on the war, as well as for the compensation of those landowners who had come into posses- sion of Irish estates by purchase. — But the days of Irish domination were soon told. At the end of July, 1689, James prorogued his Parliament, and in August of the same year. General Schomberg, with 10,000 men, landed in Ireland for the purpose of reconquering that country for his master, William 1 11.^ The first year, it is true, was barren of any definite results, for the loose discipline of the army, and its insufficient equipment, compelled the British commander to fortify himself in Dundalk, and refrain from all operations involving risk. Instead of seizing this opportunity to attack the British troops, which, in addition to their disorganization, were also considerably decimated by the pestilence, James, too, decided to get into winter quarters, and likewise forbore to attempt any great feat of arms. The following spring both parties received important rein- forcements. James obtained an auxiliary force of 7,000 troops from France, under Lauzun,^ upon which William also per- ceived the necessity of strengthening his army. On the 14th June, 1690, William himself landed in the island with 30,000 well disciplined troops, and in the course of a few weeks Ireland's fate was decided by the brilliant, but, owing to the loss of Schomberg, dearly bought victory at the battle of the Boyne. James proved himself a coward in battle, and, like a poltroon, when the contest was over, he abandoned both his ' The assertion of Macaulay (vol. iii. p. 219), who, in this case, has mainly relied upon the by no means unbiassed representations of King, to the effect that the lists of the proscribed were mercilessly kept secret, has been conclusively proved by Lecky to be incorrect (Lecky, vol. ii. pp. 191, 192). - Details of the war are to be found in Macaulay, loc. cit.^ chaps, xiv., XV., xvi. ^ The despatches of this French general, which are of great value for the consideration of the campaign of 1690, are to be found in Ranke's " Englische Geschichte" (bd. ix. pp. 1-24), which work also contains some extracts from the diary of a Jacobite, having special reference to these operations in Ireland. The Period of the Restoration. 113 followers and their cause. In wild haste he fled to Waterford, and immediately afterward set sail for France. While the conqueror was making his triumphal entry into Dublin, the Irish resolved to retire beyond the Shannon, and there continue the war. And, although the French auxiliaries soon left the country, the Irish succeeded for a considerable time in maintaining the struggle with the British troops, who, after William's departure, were commanded successively by Marlborough and General Ginkel. Athlone fell in June, 1691, and shortly after this, Ginkel defeated the Irish at Aghrim, a victory which was speedily followed by the capture of Galway, and on the 14th August, 1691, the English troops laid siege to Limerick, the last buttress of the Irish cause. After enduring a siege of six weeks, and seeing no prospect of relief arriving, the besieged decided to capitulate, hoping that, by a voluntary surrender, they would at least be enabled to secure for themselves religious freedom. The conditions of the capitulation were drawn up on the 2nd October, and signed on the 3rd October, 1691. The articles of the Treaty of Limerick ^ fall under two divisions, political and military : and under the first division it was provided that the Catholics of Ireland should enjoy the free exercise of their religion, as they had enjoyed it in the reign of Charles II. The articles under the second head provided that all the inhabitants of Limerick," and all the officers and men forming the garrison of that town, or of any other fortified place, should, on con- dition of taking the oath of allegiance to King William and Queen Mary — which was the only oath to be demanded of them, — be protected in all their estates, rights, privileges and immunities which they held in the reign of Charles II. No legal proceedings should be taken against any person included in the capitulation, on account of any deed committed in the course of the war, nor should the nobility and gentry be de- prived of the right to carry arms. " And their majesties," the document proceeds, " as soon as their affairs will permit them to summon a Parliament, will endeavour to procure the said ' A literal transcript of the treaty is to be met with in Leland, loc. ciL, vol. iii. App. p. 619 et seq. ; also in Plowden's " Historical Review." I 114 History of Ireland. Roman Catholics such further security as may preserve them from any disturbance on account of their reHgion." These articles were signed by the Lords Justices of Ireland and General Ginkel, and subsequently ratified by their majesties. The division of the treaty containing the military provisions granted to the officers and privates of the garrison permission to leave the country, with all their goods and chattels ; and in case they desired to settle in France, Baron Ginkel undertook to provide them with the necessary transport ships. Some thousands took advantage of this offer to enter the French service, in order to render assistance to the arms of Louis XIV. against England and other Protestant powers. A stream of emigrants poured into France, whereby the Irish fatherland was robbed of its most vigorous military strength, and its national energy permanently weakened. The brief interlude of Celtic independence was thus brought to an end by the Treaty of Limerick. The decrees of the Irish Parliament were annulled, and all things reverted to the conditions existing in the time of Charles II. Nor was the customary sequel to every Irish rebellion wanting in this instance : all those who had taken part in the movement were sentenced to the forfeiture of their goods. Owing to the operation of the Treaty of Limerick being confined to the counties Limerick, Cork, Mayo, Sligo, Clare, and Kerry, a vast number of the adherents of James II. lost their property. With the exception of five or six Catholic families who, by a special act of royal favour, were reinstated in their posses- sions, it was only the inhabitants of these counties — compara- tively few in number — who were entitled, under the treaty, to claim the restitution of the property they had enjoyed in the reign of Charles II. Accordingly, after the provisions of the Treaty of Limerick had been executed, only one-eleventh part of the land of Ireland, which was capable of cultivation, re- mained in the hands of the Irish,^ and ever since this period an enormous majority of the Celtic population have been doomed to an existence of drudgery and misery, either as small farmers, ^ Comp. Beaumont's "L'Irelande sociale, politique, et religieuse" (Par., 2ed., 1881), vol. i. p. 91, The Pernod of the Restoration. 1 1 5 labourers, or beggars. Infinitely sad is the picture presented thirty years after this last confiscation by Jonathan Swift, a writer intimately acquainted with Irish life. " It is a melan- choly object to those who walk through this great town, or travel in the country, when they see the streets, the roads, and cabin doors crowded with beggars of the female sex, fol- lowed by five or six children, all in rags, and importuning every passenger for an alms, children who are growing up without training and without instruction, and who, because they have no means of subsistence, will ultimately develop into thieves." ^ ^ See Swift : "A Modest Proposal for Preventing the Children of Poor People from being a Burden to their Parents and Country" (1729), in "Works " (Roscoe), ii. pp. 99-102. CHAPTER VI. THE RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION OF THE IRISH IN THE PERIOD BETWEEN THE TREATY OF LIMERICK (1691), AND THE ACCESSION OF GEORGE IIL (1760). As we have already mentioned, the first article of the Treaty of Limerick stipulated that the Catholics of Ireland should enjoy such liberties and privileges as they had enjoyed in the reign of Charles II. It is true that the sanction of Parliament was necessary for the ratification of this compact, but the Irish naturally supposed that the assent of this august as- sembly could not be withheld from a treaty solemnly con- cluded by the Government at a time when Parliament was not sitting. In this supposition they probably reckoned on the influence of William, who was animated by a spirit of genuine toleration, and had, before his expedition to England, intimated to the German emperor that it was his intention to exert himself to the utmost to effect the repeal of those penal laws against the Catholics which had been in existence since the reign of Elizabeth. He had, moreover, before the battle of Aghrim, offered the Irish Catholics, on condition of their voluntary surrender, the free exercise of their religion, the half of the churches in the kingdom, and the half of their ancient possessions.^ They might, therefore, naturally have ' For the transcictions between William IIL and the emperor, see Ranke's " Englische Geschichte," bd. vi. p. 208. From a letter of Charles Wogan, a nephew of Tyrconnel, to Swift (see Swift's " Works," ed. Roscoe, vol. ii. pp. 667-678), it appears that the king had offered the Irish "the free exercise of their religion, half the churches of the kingdom, half the employments, civil and militaiy, too, if they pleased ; and even the moiety of their ancient properties," I make a literal extract of this por- tion of the letter because one of the critics of the present work (Kreuz- zeitung, 29th August, 1886), has questioned the statement that William III. at one time contemplated the adoption of more righteous measures to- wards Catholicism. Religious PerseciLtion behvcen 1691 and 1760. 117 expected that William would take means to insure the ratifi- cation of the treaty by Parliament. But the Irish were doomed to a bitter disappointment in this respect, for all William's wishes and plans were frustrated by the obstinate resistance of the parliamentary majority. The English Par- liament was, at that time, almost wholly composed of zealous High Churchmen, who were little disposed to manifest any complaisance towards the Irish Catholics. When, therefore, in December, 1691, the Treaty of Limerick was laid before the House, the conditions upon which alone the English Par- liament would consent to sanction it, were that no person should be allowed to sit in either of the two Houses consti- tuting the Irish Parliament who had not previously taken the oath of supremacy, and signed a declaration condemning the sacrifice of the mass, transubstantiation, the worship of images and prayers to the saints, as practised in the Romish Church.^ The acceptance of these conditions effectually excluded from the Irish Parliament all those persons who had sat in that assembly during the reign of Charles II. The first infringement, therefore, of the Treaty of Limerick proceeded from England ; and since that day Limerick has been popularly known as " the town of the broken treaty." ^ This example of intolerance afforded by the English Parlia- ment was speedily followed by the kindred body in Ireland. Since it was now impossible for a Catholic to obtain a seat in either branch of the legislature, the Irish Parliament strictly confined itself to representing and promoting the interests of the Protestant colonists. Inspired by a deep hatred of the Celtic race, it inaugurated a system of legislation, the osten- sible object of which was to prevent the growth of popery, but which, to use the words of Burke, was " manifestly the effect of national hatred and scorn towards a conquered people whom the victors delighted to trample upon, and were not afraid to provoke." ^ ^ This clause is to be found in Statutes, 3 William and Mary, c. 2 ; respecting these proceedings, comp. Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 123. ^ See " Historisch-politische Blatter," bd. 48, pp. 394-396. ^ See letter to Sir H. Langrishe (" Works," 1808), vi. p. y^,-]. 1 1 8 History of h^eland. The first of the laws imposing disabihties ^ upon CathoHcs was passed in the reign of WilHam III., and this monarch, who, as regards internal politics, was completely helpless, must often have been compelled, at the risk of forfeiting the sup- port of the governing classes, to give his assent to laws against which his inmost soul revolted. The reign of Queen Anne is especially rich in these cruel decrees, but the same course of persecution continued to be pursued long after the accession of the House of Hanover. Every Jacobite insurrection in other parts of the realm, every plot devised against the Government, was followed by new penalties for the Irish Catholics ; and during a period of ten years. Acts of this nature were the only signs of vitality which the Irish Parlia- ment exhibited. These statutes are of an extremely varied character : thus, one portion of them aimed at gradually depriving the Irish Catholics of all civil rights. As we have above seen, an Act of the Er^glish Parliament had already debarred them from the legislative assemblies. But this was not enough. They were further excluded from all public offices, either in the state or the municipalities, from the bar, the universities, the army, the navy ;^ and finally, by a law of 1727, they were deprived of the elective franchise. It is characteristic of the spirit of the times that, when this last measure was proposed in the Irish Parliament by Bishop Boulter, not a voice was raised against it.^ A Catholic was not permitted to have swords or firearms in his house, and, according to an Act of George II., any person found contravening this decree was liable to a fine of iJ"20 for the first offence ; for the second, to imprisonment and whipping.* Even the possession of a horse ' Burke's opinion of the penal laws, all of which are recorded in the Irish Statute Book, may be learnt from his " Tract on the Popeiy Laws " (" Works," vol. ix. pp. 323-396). The following may also be consulted : Curry, "The State of the Irish Catholics"; Beaumont, loc. cit., i. pp, 101-118 ; Lecky, loc. cit., i. pp. 278-303. 2 See Irish Statutes, 9 William III., c. 13 ; 2 Anne, c. 6, § 16 ; i George II., c. 20. ^ Ibid., I George II., c. 9, § 7. Comp. Mountmorres' " History of the Irish Parliament," i. p. 163. •* Irish Statutes, 10 William III., c. 8 ; 13 George II., c. 6. Religious Perseaitiou between 1691 a7id 1760. 1 19 valued at more than ;^5 was forbidden to him, and any Pro- testant was entitled to stop the carriage of an Irish Catholic, and on offering this sum, to take possession of his most elegant carriage horse.^ The design of another class of enactments was to render it impossible, or extremely difficult, for an Irish Catholic to become a successful man of business. Thus, an Act of Queen Anne, in the year 1703, ordered that, with the exception of sailors, fishermen, and day-labourers, whose yearly rental did not exceed ^os., no Papist should be allowed to settle in the towns of Limerick and Galway.^ In short, all Catholics who endeavoured to establish a business in Ireland were subjected to extraordinary and harassing taxation, known as quarterage.^ Their houses could be appropriated by the militia,* and, as if they were suspected of being the authors of every outrage, the Catholics were bound to make good any damage occasioned by robbers, or hostile privateers.^ Another vexatious enactment was passed in 1709, forbidding the employment of more than two apprentices ^ in any business except the linen manufacture. But the most cruel and severe measures were those adopted with reference to property. No Papist was allowed to buy land from a Protestant, to inherit, or to receive it as a present from him. He was even forbidden to hold the lease cf a farm for his life, and the longest term for which a lease was valid was thirty-one years.^ Various writers, well acquainted with the condition of the country, bear testimony to the fact that under these comparatively short leases, the farmer rarely felt disposed to undertake any extensive drainage or other improvements in the land, and that, consequently, the effect of this law was, that the land suffered, and the cultivation of the soil was neglected.^ The nett profits of such farms were 1 7 William III., c. 4. - Irish Statutes, 2 Anne, c. 6, § 23. ^ Comp. Burke's "Tracts on the Popery Laws," p. 337. ■* Irish Statutes, 2 George I., c, 9. * Ibid., 6 George I., c. 3, § 4. ® See 8 Anne, c. 3. ' See 2 Anne, c. 6, § 6. ^ See Burke's " Tracts on the Popery Laws " ("Works," vol. ix.), p. 387 ; also Arthur Young's "Tour in Ireland " (trans. 1780), vol. i. p. 47. 1 20 History of Ireland. restricted by law to one-third of the rent, and if, as the result of the farmer's industry, or the improvements introduced by him, his profits exceeded that proportion, and he failed to make an immediate announcement of the same in order that a corresponding increase could be made to his rent, his farm passed into the possession of the first Protestant who de- nounced him to the authorities.^ The door was thus opened to a highly demoralising system of espionage, and it is a fact that several of the Irish law courts were almost exclusively occupied in investigating cases of this character. In 1739 the Catholics addressed a petition to the king with reference to this subject, in which they explained how they were " daily oppressed by the number of idle and wicked vagrants of this nation, by informing against their little leases and tenements, if the law gets any hold thereof." ^ Their complaints, how- ever, failed to effect any change. The Catholic landowner was also deprived of the right to bequeath his property. According to the law of 1703, his estate was equally divided among all his children ;^ but should the eldest son abjure Catholicism and join the Anglican Church, he was then entitled to inherit the entire estate. From that moment the father lost the right of disposition over his property, and was merely allowed the administration of it for his life.* This was an utterly immoral enactment " by which," as was justly pointed out in a petition presented to the king by the Catholic gentry in 1777, "a father, con- trary to the order of nature, is put under the power of the son ; and one which had broken the hearts of many desen,'ing parents, and entailed poverty and despair on some of the most ancient and opulent families of this kingdom."^ Not only did this last clause sow discord and dissension among the various members of a family, but the equal division of the property which it demanded dissipated the estate, and ^ 2 Anne, c. 6, § 6. 2 Lecky, vol. ii. p. 284 ; derived from the English Record Office. ^ See 2 Anne, c. 6, § lo. ■* Comp. 8 Anne, c. 3. * Contained in Curry's " State of the Irish Catholics," ii. pp. 287-293 ; the greater portion of it also in " Lecky," iv. p. 465. Religious Persenition behueen 1691 and 1760. 121 thus led to a gradual impoverishment of the Catholic land- owners." ^ The efforts of the Irish legislature were also directed to- wards rendering mixed marriages impossible. An Act of the year 1697- had already decreed that no Protestant woman possessed of ii^500, in either money or land, should marry a Catholic, on pain of forfeiting the whole of her property, which devolved to the nearest Protestant heir ; and that any priest who should perform the ceremony of marriage between two persons, without first informing himself respecting their faith, should be liable to a fine of ;^20. A further law, in 1725,^ enacted that every priest who celebrated a marriage between a Catholic and a Protestant should be liable to the penalty of death ; and finally, in 1745,* a law declared all such marriages to be null and void. Other enactments had special reference to the training and instruction of the Catholics. No Catholic was suffered to accept the guardianship of a child : on the other hand, in accordance with the Act of 1703, every Catholic orphan child was provided by the Chancellor with a Protestant guardian, whose duty it was to see that the child was brought up in the Protestant faith.^ It has already been stated that Catholics were excluded from the university ; but it was, morover, for- bidden to Catholics to open a school, or to teach in one ; and a reward of ;^io was offered to the discoverer of a popish schoolmaster.^ In order to prevent the wealthier classes of the Catholic population from sending their children to be educated on the Continent, every father found guilty of this act was threatened with the confiscation of all his property.^ The Irish Catholics were therefore compelled, either to allow their children to grow up in utter ignorance, or to send them to the ' See Burke's "Tracts on the Popery Laws," vol. ix. pp. 323-326. A pamphlet published in the year 1755 asserts that, in consequence of this legislation, landed property had depreciated 10 per cent. 2 Irish Statutes, 9 William III., c. 3. ^ 12 George I., c. 3. ■* 19 George II., c. 13. * 2 Anne, c. 6, § 4. 6 8 Anne, c. 3, §§ 31,32. 7 Irish Statutes, 2 Anne, c. 6. 12 2 History of Ii-eland. Charter Schools, institutions founded by Primate Boulter in the year 1733, mainly for the purpose of making proselytes.^ This dignitary of the English Church regarded it as his especial mission " to bring over by all Christian means, the great mass of Irish Papists into the Church of England," - and he conceived that the most effectual means of doing this would be the establishment of the Charter Schools, which, according to the published programme, were founded " to rescue the souls of thousands of poor children from the dangers of popish superstition and idolatry, and their bodies from the miseries of idleness and beggary." Nor is it to be denied that those institutions were remarkably well calculated to insure conversions. The children of poor parents were here gratuitously boarded, lodged, clothed, and educated ; the boys were apprenticed to some trade and the girls placed in situa- tions, and even a small dowry apportioned to the latter ; but this was all associated with the sole and inviolable condition that the children should be educated in the Protestant faith. And so much exasperation did this single stipulation create, that Irish parents seldom willingly sent their children to these schools. In times of famine these richly endowed establish- ments were better attended, but immediately the distress was over, the schools were again deserted ; and, as a proof of the aversion with which the population of Ireland regarded this violence done to their consciences, it has been stated that, even " during the present century, the Irish peasant seldom passed the school without a curse, or a heart-felt sigh of anguish."^ Attempts were also made to restrict, as far as possible, the celebration of the Roman Catholic worship. In 171 5, at the time of the Jacobite insurrection in Scotland, the Duke of Shrewsbury, who was then lord-lieutenant, ordered all the ' For the significance of the Charter Schools, the letters of Archbishop Boulter are especially important ("Letters written by Hugh Boulter, Lord Primate of Ireland, 1724-1738." Oxford, vol. i., 1769 ; vol. ii., 1770). See also Wakefield's "Account of Ireland," ii. pp. 410-414 ; and Lecky, loc. cit., ii. p. 200 et seq. ■ Conip. Boulter's letter of May 7, 1730, to the Duke of Newcastle, vol. ii. p. II. 3 See Wakefield, /oc. cit. Religious Persecution between 1691 and I'jGo. 123 Catholic chapels in Ireland to be closed ;^ but it was not only during periods of great excitement that such measures were adopted ; numerous regulations were passed in seasons of profound tranquility which were especially designed to sup- press the services of the Catholic Church. Thus, the Catholics were only permitted to have such chapels as had neither steeples nor bells ; " pilgrimages were forbidden under severe penalties/ and even the observance of a religious festival, not sanctioned by the state, was visited with a heavy fine.* Any person who was instrumental in converting a member of the Anglican Church to Catholicism was punished with the con- fiscation of his property. On the other hand, those Catholic priests who went over to the English Church received an annual allowance of iJ^20, which was subsequently raised to ^^"30.^ Indeed, one of the objects chiefly aimed at was to restrict the increase of the Catholic priesthood as much as possible, and as a means of keeping an effectual check on their numbers, the law of 1703*" ordered that every Catholic priest, on pain of banishment, should enrol his name in a certain prescribed register ; that only such priests as were thus registered, should be entitled to celebrate mass, and those only in their own parishes. And although the Treaty of Limerick expressly stipulated that no other oath than the oath of allegiance should be demanded of the Catholics, yet, in the year 1709, every Catholic priest was required to take the oath of abjuration, which declared that neither James III. nor any other Catholic had any right whatever to the Crown of England and Ireland.^ Scant and niggardly as was the toleration accorded to the priesthood, not even this measure of indulgence was granted to the higher dignitaries of the Catholic Church. All bishops, deans, and heads of ' Comp. Lord Mahon's "History of England from the Peace of Utrecht to the Peace of Versailles " (Lond., 1853), vol. i. p. 64. - See Beaumont, loc. cit., i. p. 104. ^ Irish Statutes, 2 Anne, c. 6, §§ 26, 27. ■• See 7 William III., c. 14. * See 2 Anne, c. 7, § 2. The sum was raised to ^30 by 8 Anne, c. 3, § 18. '' 2 Anne, c. 7. '' 8 Anne, c. 3, § 22. 12 4 History of Ireland. religious orders were commanded, in 1698, in accordance with an enactment of the reign of William III., to leave the country on pain of incurring the penalty of high treason.^ Even the harbouring or entertaining of one of these dignitaries was an act to which penalties were attached ; a law of 1709 offered a reward of ^^50^ to any one who would reveal the retreat of a bishop or a dean ; and as the sum of ^20 w^as likewise offered for the discovery of an unregistered priest, these premiums actually called into existence a new vocation, many men now making it their business to hunt out the priests from their hiding places, and denounce them to the authorities. Such were the measures constituting the penal code which the ruling party in Ireland ingeniously devised against the majority of the population of the country. But if the real aim and intention of these laws was to hinder the further growth of popery,-^ then the efforts put forth were not attended with success. In spite of these cruel laws, only thirty-seven persons joined the Anglican Church between 1703 and 1709 ; during the following ten years the number of converts rose to 1 50 ; and altogether, — an accurate record having been kept of every recovered sheep — from 1703 to 1773,4,088 people went over to the Established Church.* Many of these conversions were, however, only feigned ; at least. Archbishop Boulter complains in 1727,^ that many persons, in order to procure admission to the bar, brought a certificate testifying that they had partaken of the sacrament according to the rites of the Protestant Church, but that when they had attained their ends they brought up their children as Catholics, and, indeed, never troubled themselves about the English Church again. ' 9 William III., c. i. " 8 Anne, c. 3. ' The law of 1703 is entitled, "An Act to Prevent the Giowth of Popery." ■* This number is the result of calculations to be found in the " Memoirs of the Life of H. Grattan, by his son," vol. i. p. 266. * See his letter to Lord Carteret of the 26th July, 1727. Hence, he was in favour of a bill providing that converts should not be admitted to the bar until five years had elapsed from the time of their change of faith (Boulter's " Letters," i. p. 1S7 ; ibid., p. 226.) Religious Persecution between 1691 and 1760. 125 But even these pretended conversions do not appear to have been very numerous ; and it is certain that the great bulk of the Irish people remained true to Catholicism, even in the period of its bitterest persecution. When Wesley visited Ireland in 1747, he found that in some parts of the country there were ten, fifteen, or as many as twenty Catholics to one Protestant.^ Nor were the results more satisfactory with regard to the numbers of the priesthood. If the compulsory registration of the priests was designed to reduce their numbers, here, too, the desired end was far from being attained ; in support of which statement we again cite Archbishop Boulter, who, in letters bearing date 1728, lays particular stress upon the fact that there were about three thousand Catholic priests in Ireland, as against six to eight hundred clergy of the Established Church.- And, although these figures appear somewhat exaggerated, the report of the Committee of the House of Lords, which, at the instance of this prelate, was appointed to inquire into the condition of popery in the country, states that there existed in Ireland at that time 1,445 priests, with 892 mass-houses, and 54 private chapels; and that the number of monasteries amounted to 51, with 254 monks.^ But, as all the authorities of the last century unite in agree- ing, these laws were, in fact, not devised for the purpose of diminishing the numbers of the Catholics ; their one aim and object was to rob the Catholics of Ireland of all influence and importance. Burke, the statesman, himself an Irishman by birth, and a Protestant, a man intimately acquainted with Irish history, as well as an eminently intelligent observer of the circumstances of Ireland, affirms that the penal laws were not dictated by any considerations of religion, but were merely the offspring of the spirit of domination.* In like ' Wesley's " Works," vol. xv. p. 209 ; comp. also Lord Mahon's " History of England," i. p. 248. ^ See Boulter's " Letters," i. pp. 210, 223. ^ Comp. Lecky, vol. ii. p. 277. '' See "A Letter to a Peer of Ireland on the Penal Laws" (1782), in Burke's " Works " (ed. 1808), vol. vi. p. 295. 126 HistoTy of Ireland, manner, Lord Townshend/ an Irish statesman, whose name will frequently recur in these pages, expressly states that the Irish legislature desired, by means of these laws, to annihilate the influence of the Papists. Young,^ the celebrated political economist, also observes that these enactments were not directed against religion, which only thrives in proportion as it is persecuted, but against the property and commercial industry of all those who professed this religion. And this object was fully realized, for, under the burden of oppressive legislation, the Catholic population speedily lost all signifi- cance. The result of the enforced division of the estates, and the consequent dispersion of the property was, that, as Lord Townshend in one place remarks,^ there was scarcely a single Catholic family left in Ireland which derived any influence or position from its landed possessions. As the Catholics were almost completely debarred from obtaining a superior educa- tion, it was impossible that any leader should arise in their midst. The Papists, accordingly, degenerated into an uncul- tured mass, without guide or head ; they were reviled in the streets and derided on the stage ;^ while, according to the testimony of Lord Chesterfield, the Catholic farmer was more grossly treated by his Protestant landlord than the negro slave by his master.^ And in what mean estimation they were held by the Protestant ruling class may best be illus- trated by the judgment passed upon them by Swift as early as the year 1708.^ "The popish people," he writes, " people without leader, without discipline or natural courage, are little better than hewers of wood and drawers of water, ^ In a private letter from Townshend to Rochford, April 10, 1772, obtained by Lecky from the English Record Office, and to be found in his " History of England," vol iv. p. 460. 2 See Young's "Tour in Ireland" (Ger. trans.), ii. p. 74. ^ See Lecky, vol. iv. p. 460. •* For instance, in the comedy of " The Non-juror," which was produced in Dublin in the year 1718 (comp. Beaumont's " L'lrlande, sociale, politique, et religieuse," i. p. 131). * See Lewis " On the Irish Disturbances," p. 53 ; and Arthur Young's "Tour in Ireland" (Ger. trans., ii. "p. to et seq.) ; comp. also Lecky, ii. pp. 291, 292. * See Swift, " A Letter Concerning the Sacramental Tests " (Roscoe), vol. ii. p. 233. Religious Pci'seaition between 1691 and 1760. 127 utterly incapable of inflicting any injury, even if they de- sired it;" At that time secret bands of robbers, who went by the name of Tories and Rapparees, favoured by the unexampled poverty of the country, organised and carried on a kind of guerilla warfare against the dominant party. Rumours were also frequent of acts of incendiarism committed by these bands ; of cattle-maiming,^ especially between the years 171 1 and 171 3 ; of the abduction of wealthy Protestant maidens ;^ but the thought of an open resort to arms was never, at this period, for a moment entertained by the Irish. When, in 171 5, the Jacobite insurrection broke out in Scotland, Ireland remained perfectly tranquil, and a portion of the Irish army was employed in quelling the revolt of the Highlanders. Four years later, when an invasion of the Stuarts was threatened, the Duke of Bolton, then lord-lieutenant, again sent troops to England, and when in 1722, it was apprehended that the Pretender's standard was once more about to be raised, six Irish regiments were despatched to England, in reference to which incident the following interesting communication passed between King, the Protestant Archbishop of Dublin, and his brother of Canterbury : " We are sending off," he writes, " six regiments to assist you. One would think, considering the number of Papists we have here ; that our gentry are, for the most part, in England; and all our money goes there; that we should rather expect help from you in any distress, than send you forces to protect you. Yet this is the third time we have done so since his majesty's accession to the throne, and withal preserved the kingdom from any insurrection or rebellion, which is more than can be said for England or Scotland." ^ Swift was, therefore, justified in declaring in the year 1725,^ that in Ireland the cause of the Pretender was dead. Notwithstanding all this, the penal code still remained in * Comp. Lecky, ii. p. 352. ^ See Arthur Young's "Tour in Ireland" (Ger. trans.), ii. pp. 184, 185. ^ The letter of Archbishop King to the Archbishop of Canterbury of May, 1772, is in Lecky, loc. cit. (vol. i. p. 282, note), and has been copied, for the most part, from a manuscript in the British Museum. ^ In the "Drapier's Letters" (Letter 7, Roscoe), vol. ii. pp. 1-54. I 28 History of Ireland. force, and not one of its provisions was repealed. Here and there, indeed, a voice was raised advocating the relaxation of these statutes.^ Viscount Molesworth declared himself in favour of removing the restrictions relating to the education of Catholics. Canon Synge, in one of his sermons, recom- mended the observance of religious toleration towards Papists ; the Anglican Bishop Berkeley, in a work on political economy, pointed out the preposterousness of preventing Catholics from acquiring landed property. But all these men were as those who cry in the wilderness, their voices never penetrated to the ears of the English Government ; and among all Great Britain's statesmen, from 1691 until about 1740, Lord Stan- hope was the only one who ever conceived the design of mitigating the rigours of the religious enactments against the Papists.- There still exists a draft containing a list of condi- tions upon which he was minded to introduce a measure for relaxing the penal code, but the Ministry of Stanhope was of too short duration to admit of this scheme being brought to maturity, and his successor, Robert Walpole, during his long tenure of office, effected no alteration in the existing condi- tion of things. It was not until after the downfall of Walpole that a change took place in the views of English statesmen, and in this respect the viceroyalty of Lord Chesterfield is especially worthy of notice.^ This statesman undertook the adminis- tration of Ireland just at the critical moment when the romantic Charles Stuart had landed in the Highlands, with the intention of taking possession of the throne of Great Britain for his family. A man of tolerant nature and wide culture, his feelings revolted against a policy which aimed at strengthening Protestant interests in the country by means of ' See Lecky, loc. cit , ii. p. 305 et seq. 2 Printed in Lord Mahon's " History of England, from the Peace of Utrecht to the Peace of Versailles," vol. ii. p. 77, App. ; comp. ibid.^ vol. i. p. 326. •* The truest estimate of Lord Chesterfield's administration is to be derived from his own letters, which are to be found in his " Miscellaneous Works" (Lond., 1777, vol. iii.). Consult also the biography, by INIaty (" Memoirs of the Life of Lord Chesterfield "), which is preti.xed to vol. i., especially pp. 152-172. Religions Pei'seaitlon between 1691 and 1760. 129 a persecution of the Catholics ; and, although in the official address with which he opened Parliament on the 8th October, 1745,^ he was compelled to refer to the good effects of the popish laws, he, nevertheless, went to Ireland with the secret determination " to proscribe not a single individual among the Catholics, but to win them all over by good treatment." - He repeatedly expressed the opinion that " for Ireland poverty was a far greater evil than popery." '^ In one of his letters he urges that the laws be made as mild as possible, and that then they be strictly enforced. He specially recommends * that Catholics be allowed to purchase land, inasmuch as pro- prietorship always constitutes the strongest bond of attachment to the throne, and he also maintains that the Catholics should not be required to take any other oath than the simple oath of allegiance, as no faithful Catholic could honestly take the oath of abjuration.^ At that period, enlightened and tolerant views such as these were sorely needed. The English circles which Chester- field had just left, and which looked upon Jacobitism and popery as inseparable, demanded that, in accordance with the course already pursued in England, the lord-lieutenant should close all the Catholic mass-houses and chapels in Ireland, a request which he steadfastly disregarded, and un- hesitatingly continued to allow the Irish the free exercise of their religion, according to their necessities. On the contrary, he called to his aid a Catholic of high standing and position, reminded him of the influence he wielded over his fellow religionists, and powerfully appealed to him to use this in- fluence for the maintenance of order and tranquility.*^ This decided action of the viceroy, united with his accustomed ^ To be seen in the " Miscellaneous \\'orks," vol. i. p. 268. - Comp. Chesterfield's letter, preserved in the archives of Dublin Castle, and printed in Mahon's "History of England," iii. p. 328. 3 See letter of Thomas Prior of the 14th June, 1746 ("Miscellaneous Works," vol. ii. p. 541). ^ Comp. the letter to Chevenix, Bishop of Waterford, of the 22nd November, 1757 (" Miscellaneous Works," ii. p. 495). ^ Letter to the same of the 29th January, 1755 ("Miscellaneous Works," ii. p. 482). Comp. also Maty, loc. cit., pp. 160, 161. '' ?ilaty, loc. cit., p. 156. K 130 History of Ireland. and acknowledged tolerance, was productive of the best results. The Irish priests, by both written and oral exhor- tations, warned their flocks against taking part in any ill- advised insurrection, and enjoined upon them to be faithful to their country ; and the people responded to these admonitions of their spiritual guides by a perfect compliance with their wishes. As Lord Chesterfield, with just pride, was subse- quently able to affirm, not a hand was raised throughout the entire land in favour of the rebellion, and in the Irish House ■of Lords, Stone, the Protestant archbishop, was forced to acknowledge that, on the papers being examined which were found on the Pretender's secretary when he was taken prisoner, not the slightest trace had been discovered of any Irishman having been concerned in, or in any way having furthered, the Pretender's cause.^ Although Chesterfield was recalled from his post in 1746, the succeeding administration was unable, in face of the loyal bearing of the Catholic population, to adhere to the letter of the illiberal penal code. A growing sentiment of religious toleration was also at work, and, consequently, there began to be initiated a different ecclesiastical policy. The old penal statutes were not, indeed, repealed, but they were no longer rigidly enforced. The strict oversight of the priests was relaxed ; the penalties imposed on the possession of arms were not exacted ; and no obstacles were placed in the way of wealthy Catholics sending their children to be educated on the Continent.^ One result of this changed policy was that, in course of time, a number of writers sprang up among the Catholics of the country, who raised their voices in favour of the abolition of the penal statutes. One of these was the Capuchin friar O'Leary, whose brilliant literary talent is still held in high estimation by his fellow-countrymen ; '^ another was Dr. Curr}', a physician, who especially endeavoured to refute the mis- "^ See Curry's "State of the Irish CathoHcs," ii. p. 261. " Comp. Arthur Young's "Tour in Ireland" (Ger. trans.), i- P- I44- ^ Comp. Lecky on " Flood " (" Leaders of Public Opinion in Ireland,"' translated by Jalowicz, 1879), P- ^27. Religious Persecution betiveen 1691 and 1760. 131 representations which were so widely dissenainated among the populace respecting the rebellion of 1641 ; and to these may be added the antiquary O'Connor. The last two, in conjunc- tion with a merchant named Wyse, founded, in 1757, the society known as the Catholic Association,^ whose aim was to vindicate and maintain the interests of Catholicism. In the same year, at Dublin Castle, the Catholic gentry of Ireland presented to the Duke of Bedford, who was at that time lord- lieutenant, an address praying for the repeal of the penal statutes, while, in order to show that the Catholics were worthy of more beneficent treatment, the association pub- lished a declaration,- in which it repudiated, in the most emphatic manner, the doctrine that any ecclesiastical authority has the right to depose temporal rulers, and at the same time solemnly affirmed that the Catholics had no thought of engaging in any proceedings hostile to the institutions of the state. Two years later the Catholics were offered the opportunity of giving practical proof of their loyalty. When, in 1759, at the time of the seven years' war. General Thurot, a French officer, arrived with several ships in Ireland and landed at Carrickfergus, not a single Irishman rose in his favour, and the invasion consequently came to an ignominious end. But no acknowledgment was made to the Catholics of their peaceful and law-abiding attitude, in the repeal or relaxation of the penal enactments ; and during a further period of twenty years, this question still remained in exactl}' the same stage of stagnation. ' Plowden's " Historical Review," i. p. 332 ; also Appendix (No. Ixii. p. 264), where a copy of Wyse's programme may be seen. - Parnell's " History of the Penal Laws," pp. 78-82 ; also Lecky's " History of England," vol. iv., p. 469. CHAPTER VII. THE PERIOD OF IRELAND'S ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL RESTRICTIONS, FROM THE REIGN OF WILLIAM III. TO THAT OF GEORGE III. We have already shown (pp. 99, 100) how, in the reign of Charles II., the commercial and agricultural classes of Eng- land, animated by motives of selfishness, inaugurated a series of enactments which debarred Ireland from all colonial trade and prohibited the export of Irish cattle and other agricultural products to England. If it was possible to enact such laws in the reign of a monarch comparatively friendly to the Irish, it is not surprising that, during the ten years which followed the Revolution of 1688 and the fresh rebellion in Ireland, the English Government suffered no legislative changes to be effected favourable to the interests of the sister isle. The Irish were, therefore, still forbidden to export cattle or other agricultural produce to England, and the prohibition against traffic with the colonies was, by a special decree^ of William III., in the year 1696, amplified and rendered more stringent. It was thereby further enacted that no person, on pain of forfeiting both ship and cargo, should convey merchandise to Ireland from any of the American colonies, without ha^•ing first landed in England, and having there paid the customary dues. A decree of this nature was an effectual bar to any direct commercial intercourse between Ireland and the Ameri- can colonies. But the Irish were marked out for still more oppressive economical restrictions. We have already seen that, in the reign of Charles II., mainly owing to the exertions ' Insli Statutes, 7 and 8 William 11 L, c. 22 ; comp. also Buckle's " His- tory of Civilization in England" (trans. Arnold Ruge), vol. ii. p. 304. Economic and Political Restrictions. 133 of the viceroy, Lord Ormond, the woollen manufacture had attained considerable importance, and that when the Irish agriculturists saw themselves debarred from exporting their cattle to England, they directed their attention to the cultiva- tion of sheep, for which the luxuriant pasture-land in which the country abounded was eminently suitable. Such an in- crease in the production of wool in Ireland was indirectly of inestimable advantage to the woollen-cloth manufacture. This branch of industry grew more flourishing from year to year, and Irish woollen goods were exported in large quantities to Germany and other northern states.^ This lively export trade, however, speedily aroused the jealousy of the English manu- facturers, who contrived to gain the interest and sympathy of both the English Houses of Parliament.^ On the 9th June, 1698, the House of Lords presented an address to the king, setting forth the dangers likely to accrue to English manufac- tures from the growing prosperity of the Irish woollen industry. On the 30th June a similar address from the House of Com- mons requested the king to check the export of Irish wool, and to discourage the Irish woollen manufacturers ; to which, on the 2nd July, King William returned an answer signifying his assent to the proposal of the petitioners. On the 27th September of the same year, accordingly, the representatives of the lord-lieutenant invited the Irish Parliament to abstain from any further encouragement of the woollen industry in Ireland, on the ground that this was the staple trade of Eng- land, and that England already supplied all the foreign markets with wool. They, at the same time, suggested that Ireland should rather direct its energies towards fostering and improv- ing the linen and flax manufactures, to which course England would be prepared to lend its countenance and protection. ' See Swift, '"The Pr&sent State of Ireland' in a Letter from a Gentle- man in Dublin to his Friend, 'Sir R. Walpole,' in London, where is briefly stated the Cause of all our Woes." " Works" (Roscoe), vol. ii. p. 102. ^ A full account of the measures adopted for the suppression of the Irish woollen indiistiy is to be met with in Hutchinson's " Commercial Restraints of Ireland" (1779); also in Arthur Young's "Tour in Ireland" (Ger. trans.), ii. pp. 227-231, where a copy of portions of the addresses presented by the English legislature may also be seen. 134 History of Ireland. And the Irish ParHament, unused to independent action, and expecting in return for its compliance some real and material support for the linen trade, itself forged the weapon which was to give the death-blow to its own flourishing manufacture. This was effected by the passing of a law by the Irish Parlia- ment, which came into force on the 25th March, 1699, and which imposed on all exports of Irish cloth and woollen stuffs a duty of 20 per cent, on their value — a duty which was almost equivalent to a prohibition. And finally, in 1699, the English Parliament also passed an Act ^ forbidding the export of Irish woollen manufactures to any countries except England and Wales. At the time when this question was under discussion in the English Parliament, Molyneux, the learned friend of Locke, had just issued a treatise called "The Case of Ireland," in which he endeavoured to show the ruinous tendency of the measures proposed by the English Parliament, and he, at the same time, expressed the opinion that the English legislature possessed no authority over Ireland. This opposition, ema- nating from Ireland itself, was immediately suppressed by the English Parliament, which on the 25th June, 1698, caused the book to be burned by the common hangman, as a scandalous libel. The author only escaped the vengeance of his enemies by his untimely death.- The effects of this suppression of the woollen manufacture — Ireland's most important branch of industry — were not slow in making their appearance. The brisk trade carried on with the countries of the north immediately ceased, and as, in con- sequence of the poverty of the country and the large number of absentee landlords, the great bulk of the manufactured goods had hitherto found their way to the export market, now, that an embargo was laid upon all trade with foreign countries, many of the factories had to be closed. After the lapse of twentj'-two years from the passing of the Act, not a single loom was to be found in many villages and districts which had formerly been entirely supported by the woollen ' See 10 and 11 William III., c. 10. - Comp. Macaulay's "History of England," vol. v. pp. 54-60; also Lecky, vol. ii. p. 415. Economic and Political Restrictions. 135 manufacture ; and it is a significant fact, in any case, that in the years 1700 and 1701, 20,000 to 30,000 operatives were dependent on the charity of the pubHc.^ Although the Irish Parhament had given its assent to the enactment which had thus taken the bread out of the hands of a vast proportion of the nation, and had rendered smugghng the most profitable business in the country, the motive by which it was actuated was, as we have already suggested, the expectation that decided tokens of favour would be shown to the linen industry in compensation for the violence done to the woollen manufacture. But herein the Irish were sadly disappointed. The English continued to carry on their own linen manufactories, and were by no means disposed to patro- nize Irish productions. On the contrary, the Irish were excluded from the bounties which were granted to the English on the export of all linen goods to foreign lands. Moreover^ an Act of the reign of George II. placed a high duty on Irish sailcloth and prohibited the importation of striped Irish linen to the colonies.^ The Irish Parliament soon discovered, but, unfortunately,, too late, that it had made a gross mistake. The ever-increasing poverty of the country revealed the fact that it had destroyed the only flourishing field of labour which existed in the land. Artificial remedies were employed with the hope of reviving this suffering branch of industry. With this object, and as a means of relieving the poor, the Irish House of Commons passed resolutions urging the Irish people to confine them- selves exclusively to the use of articles of native manufacture for their clothing, and the furniture of their houses.'^ But the ruined trade was not to be recovered by resolutions of this nature. All those who were honestly concerned for the wel- fare of Ireland began to desire an union with England, trusting ' See Hutchinson's "Commercial Restraints of Ireland," p. 209 ; for the effects of this enactment, comp. also Swift, " The Present State of Ireland'' (Roscoej, vol. ii. p. 102. ^ Comp. Arthur Young, loc. cif., ii. p. 233 ; and for fuller details Hutchin- son, /oc. cit., pp. 130-150. ^ Hutchinson, /oc. cit.., p. 210. 136 History of h^eland. that, in this way, the country might be enabled to regain its lost commercial freedom. In the year 1707, therefore, on the occasion of the Scottish Union, the Irish House of Commons presented an address to Queen Anne, in which it expressed the wish that the Crown might be invested with greater strength and lustre by means of a yet more comprehensive union. ^ But although these desires of the sister isle were sup- ported by many enlightened Englishmen — among others, by Defoe- — the English Government paid no heed to them. The English trading classes still resented every attempt to ease the burdens which pressed so heavily on Irish commerce, and even political economists like Davenant'^ deemed the prohibi- tion of the woollen manufacture to be perfectly justifiable. Urged by the growing commercial distress which was be- coming greater year by year, and by the continual!}- increasing poverty of the country, Jonathan Swift, in the year 1720, pub- lished a pamphlet entitled " A Proposal for the Universal Use of Irish Manufactures,"^ which he scattered broadcast among the masses. In this brochure he quotes the fable of Arachne in the following words: "The goddess had heard of one, Arachne, a young virgin, very famous for spinning and weaving ; they both met upon a trial of skill ; and Pallas, finding herself almost equalled in her own art, stung with rage and envy, knocked her rival down and turned her into a spider, enjoin- ing her to spin and weave for ever out of her own bowels and in a very narrow compass. I confess, that from a boy I always pitied poor Arachne, and could never heartily love the goddess on account of so cruel and unjust a sentence ; which, however, is fully executed upon us by England, with further additions of rigour and severity, for the greatest part of our vitals is extracted without allowing us the liberty of spinning and weaving them." He then calls upon Ireland to unite and revenge itself upon cruel England, urging the Irish to restrict themselves entirely to articles of home manufacture ' Comp. Lecky, ii. p. 416. " In his " History of the Scotch Union." ■'' .See Davenant, " Works," ii. p. 237 ct seq. ^ See Swift, " Works " (Roscoe), ii. pp. 62, 63. Econouiic and Political Restrictions. 137 for their clothing and domestic purposes, and thus exclude from Ireland all English goods, those persons who refuse to do this to be visited with universal contempt. The temerity with which the evils of the commercial policy then being pursued were exposed, aroused throughout Ireland feelings of wonder and amazement, and among the ruling classes this pamphlet was received with a storm of indigna- tion. The work being an anonymous publication, the lords- justices were commissioned to proceed against the printers. In a letter to the poet Pope,^ Swift dwells at considerable length upon this trial, in which Chief Justice Whitshed, who presided, exhibited a large amount of party spirit. Nine times the jury returned a verdict of " not guilty," and nine times did the judge send them back to reconsider their de- cision, publicly declaring tKat the case before them was one in which, by means of a dangerous and seditious Jacobite publication, it was sought to sow discord between England and Ireland. But although the jury were completely ex- hausted by a sitting which lasted eleven hours, it was impos- sible to extort from them a verdict of " guilty." The whole country was exasperated by the conduct of Whitshed, and the temper of the people was such, that the Duke of Grafton, the new lord-lieutenant, considered it advisable to interpose, and he, accordingly, stopped the prosecution. No change was, however, effected in the laws, and nearly half a century passed before any endeavour was made to strike off the oppressive fetters with which Irish commerce was bound. As regards their commercial polity, therefore, the inhabitants of Ireland were entirely dependent on the will of England. But in respect to their civil rights, they were also far behind their fellow-subjects in Great Britain, inasmuch as a number oi important laws affecting the liberties of the people had not been extended to Ireland. Thus, the Act of William III., which rendered the judges appointed by the king irremovable, and the Habeas Corpus Act, that great palladium of civil liberty, were both inoperative in Ireland. ' This letter of January 10, 1721, is to be seen in Swift's " Works," ii. p. 62. 138 History of Ireland. It is true that the country possessed a Parh'ament of its own, but the estimation in which it was held in the land may be gathered from the writings of Swift, in which, under the title of the " Legion Club," \ he holds this lofty assembly up to ridicule, as being — " Not a bow-shot from the college, Half the globe in sense and knowledge." And, in truth, when we look more narrowly into its com- position, and consider its actions, we can easily understand the great humorist directing his sarcasm against a body to whom the interests of its own country were of the very last moment. The House of Lords in Ireland, as in England, was com- posed of great landowners and bishops. The former were, perhaps, in a position to know what would have conduced to the welfare and advantage of the country, but the greater number of these temporal peers were absentees, and the result was that the fate of all questions was left to be decided by the bishops, who held the majority in their own hands ; but who, being nominated by the Crown, and for the most part transferred from England, were, consequently, unacquainted with the circumstances of the country.- And what, let us ask, was the constitution of the House of Commons? Since 1691 the Catholics had been deprived of the right to sit in Parliament, and since 1727 of the elective suffrage ; accordingly, five-eighths of the entire population of Ireland were absolutely unrepresented in that assembl)'. Moreover, since 1704, by the extension to Ireland of the Test Act, which required all candidates for parliamentary honours to take the communion according to the rites of the Anglican Church, dissenters were also excluded from the House of Commons.-^ Members of the Anglican Church, therefore, were the only class who were at all represented in the Commons, and these, ' Swift's " Works," vol. i. p. 730 (ed. Roscoe). - Comp. the letter of Archbishop King to the English primate in the year 1714, in Mant's "History of the Irish Church," ii. p. 285. ■' Comp. Lecky, loc. cit., ii. p. 404 ct scq. Economic and Political Restrictions. 139 indeed, but imperfectly ; for, all the defects of the popular representativs s)-stem, as it then existed, were to be met with in Ireland in an exaggerated form. The elections to the Lower House of both England and Ireland were conducted on precisely the same principles. Members of Parliament sat for counties, towns, and boroughs ; but these last, belong- ing, as they did, to just that class of elective bodies which, less than any other, contributes to form an essentially repre- sentative assembly, played a far more important part in Ire- land than they did in England.^ While in England the ancient royal prerogative, which enabled the sovereign to create nomination boroughs, had, since the reign of Charles II., fallen into desuetude, in Ireland it was still exercised. James I. created forty, the remaining Stuarts thirty-six, and William III. eleven such constituencies ; and the consequence was that of 300 members, 216 were elected by these boroughs. In all the boroughs, as well as in many of the counties, the influence of the large landowners decided the elections. We learn, for instance, from a private report which the Irish Government caused to be prepared for Pitt, that, at that time, Lord Shannon held the unlimited control of sixteen, the Ponsonby family of fourteen, and the Duke of Leinster of seven seats. In the towns, too, where, comparatively, the greatest number of persons entitled to vote were to be found, the suffrage was not vested in individuals, but in corporations. A real representation of the Irish population was thus out of the question ; consequently, if the Government desired its proposals to be accepted, it was, before all things, necessary to gain the support of the powerful landowners, who, owing to the great influence they wielded, were called in the jargon of the day, " Parliamentary Undertakers." In order to secure the favour of these undertakers, the new peers were mostly chosen from their ranks ; titles, offices, and pensions were lavished upon them ; and even direct bribery was by no means unknown. In 1769, the lord-lieutenant of the day boasted at ^ Accurate information respecting the composition of this Parliament is to be found in Mountmorres' "History of the Irish Parhament"; comp. also " Life of Grattan," iii. p. 1 16. 140 Histoiy of Ireland. a public table that he could buy himself a majority whenever he wished. 1 " The Parliaments of that age," to quote the opinion of Lord Chesterfield, in 1760, "displayed a total disregard for the public well-being, a shameless amount of self-seeking, and a general corruption of morals and man- ners." ^ Some remedy for this universal corruption might, perhaps, have been found in shortening the duration of the parlia- ments, which would have afforded the constituencies more frequent opportunities of calling their parliamentar}- repre- sentatives to account. What, it will be asked, was the period for which an Irish Parliament was elected? While in Eng- land the duration of Parliament was formerly three, and sub- sequently seven years, the Irish House of Commons was elected on the accession of each new sovereign, and not dissolved until another monarch ascended the throne : thus, the Parliament of George II. sat thirty-three years, and it was not, as we shall see, until 1768, in the reign of George III., that a change took place in this respect. The parliamentary sessions, too, of that day were held at extremely irregular periods. Since the reign of Charles II., the Crown in Ireland had been entitled to a tolerably large hereditary income,^ derived from the rents of the confiscated lands, the hearth-tax, excise duties on spirits, and custom dues : in ordinary times, therefore, it was but rarely necessary to summon the Parliament. It was not until the reign of Queen Anne, when the hereditary Crown revenue proved insufficient, in consequence of the increased expenditure rendered neces- sary by the augmentation of the army, and the advance of pensions, that the sovereign was compelled to convoke Parlia- ment more frequently ; thus investing this assembly with a greater importance than it had hitherto possessed. ' See Horace Walpole's '' Memorable Events in the Reigns of George II. and George III." (Ger. trans., 1847), vol. iii. p. 457. " See Chesterfield's letter addressed to Chevenix on the 29th April, 1760, in his " Miscellaneous Works," vol. ii. p. 507. ^ For the hereditary royal revenue, consult the "Indenture, containing a Grant of all His Majesty's Revenue of Ireland, for the year 1676," printed in Mountmorres' " History of the Irish Parliament," ii. pp. 245-409. Economic and Political Restrictions. 141 The Irish Parhament was, however, still completely de- pendent upon England. Poyning's Act (p. 8) was still in force, and, although in the year 1556, in the reign of Queen Mary, this law had been somewhat modified, and it was now possible for the Irish to convene Parliament before submitting all its proposed measures to the English Privy Council, it was, nevertheless, not competent to them to amend a bill returned by the Crown, but they were yet, as heretofore, under the necessity of either accepting or rejecting it entirely.^ Ireland was, therefore, in a much less favourable position than Scot- land, which before the Union possessed an absolutely inde- pendent Parliament. Another disadvantage under which Ireland lay was that the English House of Lords, and not the Irish Upper House, con- stituted the highest court of appeal for the land. When, in 1719, the Irish House of Lords claimed for itself appellate judicial functions, the English Parliament peremptorily refused this demand, and passed an express resolution, declaring that "the kingdom of Ireland hath been, is, and of right ought to be subordinate unto and dependent on the Imperial Crown of Great Britain ; " and that the king, in conjunction with the English Parliament, always had, and ought to have, the power " to enact binding laws for the people and the Kingdom of Ireland." - Ireland's dependence upon England was clearly impressed upon the entire system of administration pursued in that country. The lord-lieutenant, the highest functionary in the land, was rarely an Irishman by birth, but was almost invari- ably chosen from the. highest ranks of the English nobility. Frequently cherishing a strong aversion to the rude and un- civilised country over which he ruled, and but slightly ac- quainted with its circumstances, the viceroy customarily passed but a short portion of his time in Ireland ; after a residence ot a few months, he generally transferred the reins of Govern- ment to his ministers, the lords-justices, and returned to * Comp. Mountmorres, loc. cif., i. p. 59. - These documents are to l^e found in Plowden, " Historical Review," i., App. pp. 244-249. 142 History of Ireland. England, there to enjoy, at his leisure, the ample revenues attached to his office. The country thus suffered a twofold injury : for, not only was all united action in the conduct of affairs rendered impossible, but no benefit or advantage was reaped by the inhabitants of this indigent land from the very considerable salary of the highest state official. This lofty post became an absolute sinecure, and it was not without reason that at the commencement of the eighteenth century, the Duke of Shrewsbury, at that time lord-lieutenant, said of the ofifice, " there was just occupation enough to prevent a man going to sleep, but not sufficient to keep him awake." ^ The absenteeism of the viceroys had became so habitual, that Lord Chesterfield's residence in the country during the whole term of his lord-lieutenancy was a matter of general remark ; and Chesterfield himself was not a little proud of the interest he had shown in Irish affairs, and was particularly fond of declaring, that he would rather be called the " Irish Lord- Lieutenant than the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland." ^ Moreover,not only was the viceroy commonly an Englishman, but all the highest positions, in both Church and State, were, as a rule, filled by Englishmen. In the fourth of the Drapier letters,^ Swift furnishes us with a list of important and highly paid offices, all of which were in the hands of English noble- men, and were administered on the absentee principle. During the first half of the last century, the post of chancellor of the kingdom of Ireland was uninterruptedly filled by Englishmen ; the same was the case with the primacy ; and as the Irish primates were always numbered among the lords-justices, there was, consequently, a preponderance of English interests in this body. The richest livings in the Church were rarely given to the clergy of Irish birth, but, for the most part, they were conferred upon Englishmen, usually the creatures of the viceroy, who were popularly known by the name of " king- fishers." It it only necessary to glance at the letters written ' This saying is taken from the " Marchmont Papers," i. p. 91, and is repeated by Lord Mahon in his " History of England," vol. iii. p. 327. - See a letter to Prior, in the year 1746 v" Miscellaneous Works," ii. p. 546). ^ See Swift, " Works '' (Roscoe), vol. ii. p. 19. Economic and Political Restrictions. 143 to England by Archbishop Boulter during his primacy, 1724- 1738/ to see how this illustrious representative of English interests scented out, with the sagacity of an animal of prey, all the rich Irish livings which were likely to become vacant, and how, after the event, he strained every nerve to secure the preferment of English friends and favourites. Not with- out justice, therefore, did Swift affirm, in 1727, that "those who have the misfortune to be born in Ireland have the least title to any considerable employment." - The salaries attached to the posts thus conferred upon Englishmen by the Crown were usually very considerable, and out of all harmony with the revenues of this poor and half-civilized country. The Irish viceroy of to-day derives a large, almost a princely income from his office, but when we hear that at the beginning of the eighteenth century, Lord Wharton, while occupying the post of lord-lieutenant, ac- cumulated, within a period of two years, a fortune of ^45,000, it must be admitted that in comparison with the enormous incomes derived by these functionaries in the last century, the present salary of ^18,000 is insignificant.'^ Other officials were correspondingly well paid. Swift tells us, for example, that the salary attached to the post of under-treasurer was ;^9,ooo, to that of clerk of the Pells ;^2,500, and that of first remem- brancer i!"2,ooo.*^ Full, therefore, of the bitterest truth is like- wise this assertion of the great Irish humorist, that " Ireland is like a great hospital, in which all the household officers grow rich, while the poor, for whose sake it was built, are almost starving." " The Irish Parliament being unable to place any but the very flimsiest restrictions on the Crown in the bestowal of ' Comp. Boulter's " Letters," i. pp. 22, 31, 138 ct passim. - See " The Short View of Ireland," in " Works "' (Roscoe), ii. p. 80. * According to Gneist in " Das heutige Verfassungs-und Verwaltungs- recht Englands" (1857, vol. i. p. 389), the salary of the Irish viceroy is stated to be Th. 120,000 = ^18,000. Concerning the accumulated savings •of Lord Wharton during a period of two years, see Gordon's " History of Ireland," ii. p. 198 ; also Beaumont, " L'Irlande sociale, politique, et reli- ^ieuse," i. p. 175. •* See" Works," ii. p. 19. '" See "The Short View of Ireland," in " Works " (Roscoe), ii. p. 80. 144 History of Ireland. places and pensions, the result was that Ireland's resources were very largely employed in endowing members of the royal family, or court favourites. This practice began to be adopted in the reign of Charles 11.,^ who granted an Irish pension to his natural son, the Duke of St. Albans, and en- riched his favourite, the Duke of Ormond, with confiscated landed property to the value of ^70,000. The mistress of James II. received an Irish pension, of ;^5,ooo a year ; and in the reign of William III., his Dutch favourites, the Dukes of Portland and Albemarle, and the Earl of Athlone received such large presents of the forfeited lands of Ireland, that even in the English Parliament these grants excited remark, and were the occasion of some disagreeable explanations.- Under the Hanoverian kings, the same system with regard to the expenditure of the Irish revenue was maintained. In the reign of George I., pensions were granted out of Irish state funds to the Duchess of Kendal and the Countess of Darling- ton, mistresses of the king; in the reign of George II., to another royal favourite, the Countess von Wallmoden ; to the widowed sister of the king, the Queen of Prussia, and to a number of Hanoverian favourites. This squandering of Irish revenues, partly on foreigners, partly on unworthy individuals,, — " infamous pensions to infamous men," as Grattan desig- nated them in a speech made in 1779,'^ — naturally produced widespread dissatisfaction, the more so that these large sums were not spent in Ireland itself, but principally in England, and, consequentl}', the Irish tradesman and artisan were pre- cluded from all share in the benefits to be derived from their expenditure. In the year 1729, therefore, just as the country was emerging from a severe visitation of famine, the Irish Parliament aroused itself, and took the bold step of imposing a special tax of four shillings in the pound upon all salaries and pensions paid to persons who did not reside six months of the year in Ireland.* But as a clause was inserted in the ' For the favourites who were provided with pensions out of Irish funds,, see Lecky. loc. cit., ii. p. 228. - See Macaula,y, vol. v. p. 264 ct scq. ^ See " Speeches of Henry Grattan,"' i. p. 23. ^ Irish Statutes, 3 George II., c. 2. Economic and Political Restrictions. 145 bill providing that the king should have the right to exempt the recipients of certain pensions from the payment of the tax, the effects of this financial measure could scarcely be detected. The great majority of the pensions continued to be spent out of the country, and owing to the fact that Parlia- ment possessed no restraining influence, the Irish pension-list increased annually. When, in 1755, the Duke of Devonshire entered upon the office of viceroy, it amounted to ;^38,ooo ; when the Duke of Bedford succeeded him, two years later, it was ^5^51,583; and in 1761, when Halifax undertook the administration of Ireland, it amounted to £6A^,\2y} This augmentation of the pension-list had taken place not- withstanding the resolution passed unanimously by the Irish House of Commons in 1757, that " the expenditure of so large a portion of the revenue of the state in pensions was impru- dent, and detrimental to the interests of the Irish nation." We thus see that, during the seventy years following the Treaty of Limerick, the complete dependence of Ireland upon England was manifest in every department of both the legislature and the administration. ^ These figures are quoted from the statement of Lecky, iv. p. 365. The Duke of Bedford himself puts the pension-list at a somewhat lower figure (" Bedford Correspondence," ii. p. 273). CHAPTER VIII. THE PERIOD OF THE STRUGGLES OF THE ANGLO-IRISH COLONY FOR INDEPENDENCE. — FROM THE REIGN OF WILLIAM in. TO THAT OF GEORGE IH. The Protestant settlers who had taken possession of the con- fiscated lands of Ireland under Cromwell and William III. were compelled, in order to maintain their position in face of the superior numbers of the Catholic Irish natives, as well as by regard to their own interests, to cultivate intimate relations with the mother-country. And, in the contest with the Irish Catholics, as represented by the penal code, we find that, as a matter of fact, the English colony and the English Govern- ment were closely united. But the selfishness of the mother- country, displayed, as we have seen, in her commercial policy, 'did not spare the colony when the interests of England were concerned, kindred in race though it was ; and the commercial restrictions placed upon Ireland pressed just as heavily on the English settlers as they did on the native Irish themselves. In course of time, therefore, a certain estrangement sprang up between the English colony and the mother-country, which was aggravated by the over-bearing legislative and adminis- trative measures adopted towards Ireland by the English Government. As Burke has observed,^ the English settlers in Ireland began, in course of time, to recollect that they had a country, a fatherland ; they raised their voices against the British Government, at first timidly and singly, and then boldly and with a certain unanimity, in defence of what were distinctly Irish interests. As early as the year 1692, one year after the ^ See Burke's letter to Sir H. Langrishe in " Works" (Lond., 1S08}, vol. vi. p. 338. 146 Struggles of the Anglo-Irish for Independence. 147 Treaty of Limerick, a degree of hostility was manifested in the Parliament which was convoked by the viceroy, Lord Sydney, between the views of the English colony and those of the English Government. At that time the Irish Parlia- ment was endeavouring to enlarge the sphere of its authority, and, to this end, claimed that every money bill should ema- nate from the Irish House of Commons.^ The opposition on this occasion, it is true, was without result ; the lord-lieutenant immediately prorogued Parliament, and laid the question before English and Irish judges, who concurred in declaring the claim of the Irish House of Commons to be vmtenable. And, as in this case, so all the attempts which were made during many succeeding years to obtain for the Irish kingdom a greater measure of independence were resolutely opposed and defeated. When Molyneux, as we have seen (p. 134), in his pamphlet, " The Case of Ireland," affirmed the principle that England had no right whatever to forbid the exportation of Irish wool, the English Parliament caused the publication to be burned by the common hangman as an infamous and seditious libel. A fresh constitutional conflict arose in 17 19 out of the Annesley case, a trial concerning the possession of an estate, in which the defeated party appealed to the Irish House of Lords as the final Court of Appeal, with the result that the sentence of the first court was revoked. This decision of the Irish Lords was, however, not recognised by the English House of Lords, which upheld the judgment of the court of the first instance ; and when the sheriff of the county, not regarding the commands of the English Upper House as possessing the force of law, refused to carry out the sentence, the English House of Lords visited him with severe penalties. The House of Commons in England likewise took the matter under its consideration, and the British Parliament, being determined to maintain its authority over the colony in Ireland, passed the resolution already cited (p. 141), which ^ The House declared that " it was the undoubted right of the Com- mons of Ireland in Parliament assembled to prepare the ways and means of raising money, etc." See Plowden's " Historical Review." 148 History of Ireland. asserted Ireland's legislative dependence upon England ; ^ and at the same time, it also established the English House of Lords as the final Court of Appeal for Ireland. The conflict which broke out three years later was, however destined to stir the nation still more profoundly, and the fact that Britain's greatest humorist was prominently engaged in the struggle, lent to it an especial significance. The immedi- ate occasion of this contest was the granting of a patent for the issue of a new coinage. Ireland possessed no mint of her own ; consequently, when it was necessary to put fresh money into circulation, a special patent had to be granted ; and in 1722, through the influence of the Duchess of Kendal, the favourite of George I., the right was conferred upon an English ironmaster, named Wood, to coin copper money to the amount of iJ" 108,000.^ This transaction alone aroused con- siderable animosity among the populace, which several attend- ant circumstances sen-ed greatly to increase. In the first place, it was urged that the amount of copper money to be issued was out of all proportion to the entire coin currency of Ireland, which was estimated at only ;^400,000 ; ^ it was objected, too, that the first instalments of the new coinage were not uniform ; and although the assertion, which was very generally made, that the receiver of these coins would suffer loss to the extent of 1 50 per cent, was, as Walpole proved in a letter to Lord Townshend, grossly exaggerated, it was undoubtedly true that the coinage was inferior in value to the corresponding currency in England.^ The main objection,, however, which the Irish nation entertained to this project was that the English Government had again utterly ignored the Irish Parliament and the Irish Privy Council in the matter ; and, without even consulting these bodies, had con- ferred this lucrative patent on an Englishman. Both Houses of the Irish Parliament, therefore, presented ' Comp. note 2, p. 141. " See especially Coxe's " Memoirs of the Life and Administration of Sir R. Walpole" (Lond., 1816), vol. ii. p. 167 et seq., in which the most important documents are also given. ^ See Boulter's " Letters,'' i. p. 10. * Lord Mahon's " History of England," ii. p. 62. Struggles of the Anglo-Irish for Independence. 149 an address to his majesty praying for the withdrawal of a patent so ruinous to the country. The king returned a gracious reply, and promised that, in case of any abuses having been committed, they should receive the strictest investigation. The master of the mint, who, at that time happened to be the celebrated Sir Isaac Newton, was, accord- ingly, commissioned to test Wood's money, and he reported that the coins he had examined were, with respect to both weight and value, strictly in accordance with the requirements of the patent. The Government, at the same time, reduced the sum of money to be coined to iJ'40,000.^ But all these attempts to appease the indignation of the Irish were in vain. The rumour was diligently circulated that Wood had issued only a certain number of sterling coins, and that it was these which had been submitted to the test at the Royal Mint. The excitement of the people, accordingly, grew in intensity, and the publication of several lampoons,^ holding up to ridicule Wood's avarice and his relations to the Duchess of Kendal, naturally served to add fuel to the flame. At length this movement received the support of Swift, who, as we have seen, on the question of the prohibitory law in regard to the export of woollen manufactures, had already upheld the interests of Ireland in opposition to the English Government. In the year 1724 he published, under the signature of M. B. Drapier, Dublin, those important letters^ which may be classed among the most famous literary pro- ductions of polemical politics. In the first of these letters, he describes the dangers which would accrue to his fellow-subjects through the acceptance of Wood's coinage, and calls upon them to be unanimous in their rejection of this money. The second letter, treats virtually of the same subject, and points out the main significance of the case. "If the famous Mr. Hampden," he here says, " rather chose to go to prison than pay a few shillings to Charles I. without authority of Parlia- ^ Swift, " Drapier's Letters" (Roscoe), vol. ii. p. 5. 2 Examples of these are to be seen in Lord Mahon, loc. cit.^ ii. p. 63 ; also in Coxe, loc. cit., vol. ii. p. 178. ^ See " Works " (Roscoe), ii. pp. 1-54. 150 History of Ireland. ment, I will rather choose to be hanged than have all my substance taxed at seventeen shillings in the pound, at the arbitrary will and pleasure of the venerable Mr. Wood." In the third letter, starting with the question of the coinage, he proceeds to discourse on the general state of affairs in Ireland, and especially complains of the small measure of consideration which is usually paid to the Irish Parliament. " Put the case, that the two Houses of Lords and Commons of England," he writes, " and the Privy Council there should address His Majesty, to recall a patent from whence they apprehended the most ruinous consequences to the whole kingdom, and to make it stronger, if possible, that the whole nation, almost to a man, should thereupon discover the most dismal apprehen- sions, would his majesty debate half an hour what he had to do ? Would any minister dare advise him against recalling such a patent ? And is there the smallest difference between the two cases ? Were not," he continues, " the people of Ireland born as free as those of England ? How have they forfeited their freedom ? Is not their Parliament as fair a representative of the people as that of England ? And hath not their Privy Council as great, or a greater share in the administration of public affairs ? Are they not subjects of the same king ? Does not the same sun shine over them and have they not the same God for their protector ? Am I a free man in England, and do I become a slave in six hours by crossing the channel ? " The same complaints with respect to the inconsiderate treatment which the Irish nation received from the English Government are heard in the fourth letter, which is addressed to the whole people of Ireland. He here affirms that the loyalty of the Irish people is beyond all question ; " for which," he continues, " we have been rewarded with the privilege of being governed by laws to which we do not consent, a ruined trade, a House of Peers without jurisdic- tion, almost an incapacity for all employments, and the dread of Wood's halfpence. "It is true," he proceeds, " that those who come over hither to us from England, and some weak people among ourselves, whenever in discourse we make mention of liberty and property, shake their heads, and tell us Struggles of the Anglo-Irish for Independence. 151 that Ireland is a dependent kingdom, as if they would seem by this phrase to intend that the people of Ireland are in some state of slavery or dependence different from those of Eng- land. But that is not true. It is written in no law. I, M. B. Drapier, desire to be excepted ; for I declare, next under God, I depend only on the king, my sovereign, and the laws of my own country." Then he concludes with pathos : " The remedy is wholly in your hands, and, therefore, I have digressed a little in order to refresh and continue that spirit so seasonably raised amongst you, and to let you see that by the laws of God, of nature, of nations, and of your own country, you are, and ought to be, as free a people as your brethren in Eng- land." In the seventh letter, which is addressed to both Houses of Parliament, he waxes still bolder. " For my own part, who am but one man of obscure condition, I do solemnly declare in the presence of Almighty God, that I will suffer the most ignominious and torturing death rather than submit to receive this accursed coin, or any other that shall be liable to these objections, until they shall be forced upon me by a law of my own country ; and if that shall ever happen, I will transport myself into some foreign land, and eat the bread of poverty among a free people." These letters, which, as Burke justly remarks, exhibit the Dean of St. Patrick's in the most advantageous light, and do honour at once to his understanding and his heart, exercised a powerful influence. It seemed as if all political and religious differences in Ireland had suddenly disappeared The Irish Whigs, the Jacobites, and the Papists were alike enthusiastic in their praise of the Drapier letters, and unanim- ous in their rejection of Wood's halfpence. Some of the most prominent of the Irish statesmen, as Viscount Middle- ton,^ the chancellor, were strong opponents of the patent; while others, as Primate Boulter, were full of apprehension - lest the excitement aroused by Wood's halfpence should ^ For information about him consult Coxe's " Life of Sir R. Walpole," vol. ii. p. 172. 2 Comp. his letter of the 19th January, 1725, to the Duke of Newcastle, in Boulter's " Letters," i. pp. 8-13. 152 History of Ireland. be detrimental to English interests, and tend to strengthen Irish desires for independence. The Duke of Grafton, whom Walpole once facetiously described as " a fine weather pilot, who, as soon as the first sign of a storm appeared, was at his wit's end," ^ was, at that time, lord-lieutenant, but he was too weak to make himself master of the situation ; he was there- fore recalled, and succeeded by Cartaret, secretary of state, a statesman of large experience and resource. Walpole, him- self one of those accommodating, conciliatory natures, who seek to avoid all violent collision of political opinions, wrote to the Duke of Newcastle,^ on the ist September, 1724, that he was alarmed at the degree of excitement which prevailed, and he was afraid that it would scarcely be prudent to refuse the demands of the Irish with any show of force : at the same time, he considered that the immediate presence of the lord- lieutenant w^as urgently needed to appease the passions of the people. Accordingly Cartaret landed in Ireland in October, 1724, and forthwith offered a reward of ;^300 for the detection of the author of the Drapier's letters ; as, however, no traitor could be found in the land, proceedings were taken against the printers, but although Chief Justice Whitshed spared no efforts to intimidate the jury, they resolutely declined to return a verdict of guilty. The storm of agitation still continued to rise, and ultimately the English Government was compelled to yield. In the speech from the throne,^ Cartaret withdrew the patent in the king's name, and Wood was subsequently com- pensated for his loss. Here, for the first time, Irish interests had triumphed over English policy, a victory, the moral effects of which were considerable. Dating from this period, there arose in the Irish Parliament a party — originally, it is true, very small, but a gradually growing party — of opposition to the great mass of politicians who were always ready to subordinate their own wishes to those of the Castle. It would, however, be a great ^ In a letter to Townshend on the 26th October, 1723 (see Lord Mahon, loc, cit., vol. ii. p. 61). 2 See Coxe, loc. cit., ii. p. 315 ct scq. 3 Ibid.., ii. p. 188 d'/ scq. Str7iggles of the Anglo-Irish for Independence. 153 mistake to suppose that this opposition was animated by lofty- views or by real patriotism. By no means. The leaders of this party were, for the most part, large landed proprietors, with considerable influence in the boroughs, who, when they resisted the arbitrary action of the English ministers, had really only their own personal interests in view. Nevertheless, they resided in the country, were acquainted with the condition of its affairs ; and, as in many cases their own aims harmonized with the wishes of the people, their opposition to the ruling system was frequently of advantage to the nation. Small and unimportant as this party was at its commencement, it none the less succeeded on one occasion, in the year 1731, in defeating the Government. A fund had been formed about this time towards the liqui- dation of the national debt, and it was now desired by the Government to place this fund in the hands of the Crown for a term of twenty-one years. The opposition was, however, resolved that it should be granted from session to session, and on the question being put to the vote, it was discovered that both parties had recorded the same number of votes. Sud- denly, however, the sergeant-at-arms announced that another honourable member had just arrived, in riding costume and mud-bespattered boots, and that he desired to take part in the division. This member was Colonel Tottenham, who now, in his horseman's guise, having ridden sixty miles, joined the assembled House, which, according to the custom of the time, was in evening dress, and gave his vote against the Government, thus placing the victory in the hands of the opposition. This, it is true, was but a single success, for the Government, as a rule, was enabled to carry all its measures.^ It was not until 1740 that the opposition became more influential, its first accession of strength being obtained when Dr. Boyle, for many years speaker of the House, impelled by jealousy of Dr. Stone, the recently appointed primate • For this incident, see Plowden's " Historical Review," also Barring- ton's " Personal Sketches of his Own Times" (1827), vol. i. p. 193, in which it is stated that " Tottenham in his boots " was subsequently employed as a party toast. 154 History of Ireland. and lord-justice, placed himself at the head of the new party. About this time, too, the press began to show itself hostile to the Government. Charles Lucas,^ a Dublin apothecary, who in 1 74 1 attacked the Government on account of its infraction of the chartered rights of corporations, subsequently became, through the medium oi Freeman's Journal, which he founded, a vigorous opponent of the existing system of administration. The main objects aimed at by this man, and pursued by him in the press with an unfailing energy, were the abolition of scandalous pensions, and the shortening of the duration of parliaments. His resolute action became so inconvenient to the Government, that it was determined to prosecute him, the result of the proceedings being that Parliament, in 1749, proclaimed him an enemy to his country, and a Dublin grand jury ordered his speeches to be burned as libels. This prosecution,^ however, invested him, in the eyes of the masses, with greater importance than he was entitled to ; and when, in 1760, after an exile of eleven years, he was at length permitted to return to Ireland, his popularity was so great that the city of Dublin immediately elected him as its par- liamentary representative. The question of the liquidation of the national debt once more became the occasion of violent conflict between the Castle party and the landed interest opposition, under the leadership of Boyle. A bill in connection with this matter, which was sent from England in 1753, was rejected by a majority of five.^ This victory caused great jubilation among the opposition, who caused the division list to be printed in red and black type, and scattered throughout the land. Over the list of names constituting the majority stood the significant words, " Vindices libertatis " ; over that of the minority, " Hie niger est hnnc tu Romaiie caveto." In Govern- ' Consult Plowden, loc. a'f., i. p. 304 ; also Lecky's "Henry Flood" ("Leaders of Public Opinion in Ireland," Ger. trans., p. 68). - The folly of this act was recognised by Chesterfield, as is evidenced by a letter of his, dated the 26th October, 1749 ("Miscellaneous Works," vol. ii. p. 554). 3 See " Memoirs of the Life and Times of the Right Hon. Henr>' Grattan, by his Son," vol. i. (1839) ; App., p. 425 ct scq., where the division list is given. Struggles of the Anglo-Irish for Independence. 155 ment circles, on the other hand, this defeat produced extreme irritation ; and in order to render the recurrence of such an event impossible in the future, the Government resorted to arbitrary measures, and Speaker Boyle, as well as the other officers of the Crown who had voted with the majority, were dismissed from their posts. Moreover, notwithstanding the rejection of the bill, which proposed to appropriate a portion of the surplus revenue to the liquidation of the national debt, the measure was ultimately carried by a royal ordinance. This rigorous conduct of the Government had the effect of augmenting the ranks of the opposition. Lord Kildare, the son of the Duke of Leinster, addressed a memorial ^ to the king, complaining of the action of his ministers, in con- sequence of which the Duke of Dorset, who for some time had been lord-lieutenant, was, in 1755, recalled, and the Marquis of Hartington, afterward the Duke of Devonshire, was appointed to succeed him. The new viceroy made friendly advances to the party of the gentry, and from that time the influence of Primate Stone began to wane. Boyle and the other Crown servants were reinstated in their offices, and Boyle was subsequently created a peer under the title of the Earl of Shannon. Although the elevation of Boyle to the peerage deprived the opposition of its leader, it, nevertheless, continued the conflict with the Castle party, and in the year 1757 carried energetic resolutions against the granting of scandalous pensions, and, more particularly, against conferring such on foreigners. Its action, however, remained only what might be termed a kind of legislative monologue, for the Govern- ment paid not the slightest regard to the declarations of the legislative body. On the contrary, a few months after the passing of these resolutions, it settled high pensions out of the Irish revenues on the Princess of Hesse-Cassel and on Prince Ferdinand of Brunswick.- The recklessness and total absence of consideration thus exhibited by the Government served ^ The memorial is printed in Plowden, loc. cit., i. App. p. 255. 2 See "Bedford's Correspondence," ii. pp. 270-275, 335-338, 354; also Lecky's '• History of England," vol. ii. p. 435. • 156 History of Ireland. but to increase the dissatisfaction already existing in the •country. It was now that the masses of the people first began to be interested in the proceedings of Parliament, and to give practical demonstration of their interest. On the 3rd Decem- ber, 1759, at the time when Parliament was entertaining the question of the legislative union of England and Ireland, a formidable riot took place in Dublin. The mob broke into the Houses of Parliament, placed an old woman in the lord ■chancellor's seat in the House of Lords, insulted many mem- bers of Parliament, and from others exacted an oath that they would never assent to the proposed measure.^ What a change had been effected during the last fifty years ! In the year 1707, it had been possible for the Irish House of Com- mons, in an address to the throne, to pray for a union with England without evoking the faintest opposition in the land : now, the merest suggestion of such a step is sufficient to provoke a dangerous popular tumult — conclusive evidence that dissatisfaction with English rule was steadily on the increase, and that the teachings of Swift and Lucas on the subject of the legislative independence of Ireland had found acceptance among the masses. The prime instigators of this movement were, moreover, the Protestants ; the Catholics, meanwhile, protesting their loyalty by an address to the Crown, and being in no way implicated in the disturbance. The ancient party distinctions, accordingly, began to dis- appear, the change which had taken place in this respect being well characterised by Lord Bowes, the Irish lord chan- cellor, shortly after the death of George II. "Formerly," he said, " Protestant or Papist were the key words ; they are now Court or Gentry, referring still to constitutional grievances." - 1 See " Memoirs of H. Grattan," i. p. 72. ^ This opinion is contained in a letter from Lord Bowes to Dodington, of the 2nd February, 1761, which maybe found in Adolphus, "History of England, from the Accession to the Decease of George III." (1840), vol. i. pp. 592-594- CHAPTER IX. FROM THE ACCESSION OF GEORGE III. (1760), TO THE ADMINISTRATION OF LORD TOWNSHEND (1767). — THE PERIOD OF AGRARIAN DISTURBANCES. Whereas the period from 1691 to 1760 was so barren of striking events that we have been able to treat it very briefly, an era commenced with the death of George II. and the accession of his grandson, George III., which, as regards the history of Ireland was, in many respects of eminent import- ance. Immediately after the accession of the new monarch, writs were issued, in accordance with ancient custom, for the election of a new House of Commons ; an event which sup- plied fresh stimulus to the widely diffused craving for inde- pendence and the ever-growing discontent, to give expression to which, to use the words of a contemporary, had become " the turn and fashion of the upper sort of the people, and is caught from them downwards." ^ Thirty-three years had elapsed since the nation had last been called upon to exercise its electoral privileges, and the new election was, on this account, invested with more than the usual interest. In this long interval an active press had come into existence, within the range of whose comment all the questions of the day were drawn. The event was, consequently, attended with great excitement, and meetings were held on every hand. As the lords-justices reported to England shortly before the elec- tions : " People of all ranks, here, as well as in other places, are more curious and inquisitive into business than they were formerly"; and, to the regret of those in power, the practice ' The words of Rigby, a high officer of state in Ireland, which may be found in the "Bedford Correspondence," ii. p. 29. Comp. Lecky, iv. p. 352. 158 History of Ireland. was introduced of requiring candidates for Parliament to pledge themselves by definite promises.^ But in presence of the limitations which were imposed on the exercise of the suffrage, and of the overwhelming influence of the borough-mongers, not even the liveliest interest dis- played in the contest by the populace was able to prevent the " parliamentary undertakers " again acquiring predomin- ance in the new House of Commons. The large landowning interest- was represented in a prominent degree among the recently elected members ; and lawyers also played a con- spicuous part in the new Parliament, taking their places, for the most part, on the opposition benches, among the patriots, as they were called, where, owing to their dialectical and rhetorical superiority, they obtained an importance and a significance to which, by their numbers, they were not entitled. Prominent among these was Anthony Malone, a powerful speaker, and a skilful exponent of constitutional law, who, at that time, filled the office of chancellor to the treasury. Another member of the bar in that Parliament was Henry Flood, the foremost rhetorician of the age.'^ Before the new Parliament could assemble, a fresh consti- tutional dispute broke out between England and Ireland. We have already seen how, in 1692, the Irish House of Commons, under Lord Sydney, had made an energetic, al- though, it is true, an unsuccessful, demand, that money bills should be allowed to proceed from the House of Commons itself, and not from the Irish Privy Council (p. 147). If at that time, and in that stage of public feeling, a demand of this nature had been advanced, it might be supposed that now, when a much more vigorous desire for independence pervaded the country, a repetition on the part of the Government of the action which evoked it, would encounter still more violent * See the representation made by the lords-justices in Lecky, \\\ PP- 352, 353- - In a letter to Dodington (Adolphus, loc. cif., i. 592), Lord Bowes says that the parliamentary representatives in Ireland probably owned more property, in proportion to their number, than those in Great Britain. 3 For Flood, consult Lecky's " Leaders of Public Opinion in Ireland " (trans, by Jalowicz), pp. 62-100. The Period of Agrarian Disttcrbances, i 760-1 767. 1 59 opposition from the people. In view of this consideration, therefore, and on the representations of Malone, chancellor of the Irish treasury, the Irish Privy Council intimated to the authorities in England that, in its judgment, to send in a money bill as the ostensible ground for summoning the new Parliament would, under existing circumstances, be inoppor- tune. England, however, declined to create a precedent by deviating from established usage, and refused to allow the innovation suggested by the Privy Council. Meanwhile, the strength of the opposition had been decidedly over-estimated, and when the bill was brought in, its opponents in Parliament were unable to defeat it. The Government gained an easy victory, and subsequently revenged itself on Malone for the resistance which, at his instigation, the Irish Privy Council had offered to its decrees, by dismissing him from the post of chancellor to the treasury.^ The first session of the new Parliament passed away with- out any further conflicts. The recently appointed viceroy, Lord Halifax, who entered upon office on the 6th October, 1 76 1, was remarkably popular with the Parliament, which granted him a considerable vote of credit for military expen- diture,- and also raised the salary attached to the lord-lieu- tenancy. The Catholics likewise demonstrated their loyalty by presenting in February, 1762, through Lord Trimleston, an address; in which they offered the services of their people to the Crown, and prayed that they might be permitted to enter the army ; should there, however, exist any objection to the granting of this concession, they further declared their readi- ness to place themselves at the disposition of the king, as Elector of Hanover.^ A motion relating to this subject was brought before the Irish House of Commons, but it was very decisively rejected by the majority,'^ and the British Govern- • For an account of this conflict, refer to Adolphus, loc. cit., i. p. i6i et scq. ; also to the App. i. pp. 589-592, where letters of Lord Bowes bearing on this question may be seen. - Comp. Adolphus, loc. cit.., i. p. 163. ^ See Plowden's " Historical Review," i. p. 348. Comp. also Lecky's " History of England," iv. p. 364. * SeeHardy's "Memoirsof J.Caulfield, Earlof Charlemont" (i8io),'p.66 i6o History of Ireland. meat likewise hesitated to repeal the law excluding Catholics from the army. A scheme was, it is true, entertained of enrolling seven regiments of Irish Catholics for service in Portugal, but this project was ultimately abandoned.^ The tranquility enjoyed by the country under the adminis- tration of its popular viceroy was, however, disturbed by a series of agrarian risings, which originated in the southern counties, and were provoked by the destitution of the rural population. The numerous absentee landlords of the country were, very naturally, disinclined to burden themselves with the task of drawing rents from a large number of small farmers. In order, therefore, to secure a tolerably safe in- come, they let their lands for long terms to middlemen, who, at great advantage to themselves, sublet them for shorter terms to cotters ; and it sometimes happened, when the de- mand for land was great, that the middleman would even re-let his own lease to an under agent. It is evident that a system which permitted several intermediaries to stand be- tween the landlord and the actual tiller of the soil, must, in the end, lead to the imposition of heavy burdens on the real husbandman. Not only was his rent unduly raised, but by the introduction of these numerous agents, the leases were being continually curtailed, and, indeed, many of the tenant farmers, if their rents were not punctually paid, were forthwith ejected. In cases of misfortune or bad harvests, no forbear- ance was shown them by the middlemen, who, for the most part, were rough and uncultivated persons. On the contrary, if the tenant happened to be without ready money, the middle- men usually paid themselves with the produce of the farm, at a price ruinous to the farmer, and thus contributed still further to impoverish him. It was not exaggeration, therefore, when Arthur Young designated the middlemen " the pest of Irish society." This system of subletting the land was, in fact, one of the main causes of the unhappy social condition of the country.^ 1 Horace Walpole's " Memorable Events in the Reigns of George IL and George 111." (Ger. trans.), pt. ii. p. 62. - The middlemen are fully discussed in Arthur Young's " Tour in Ire- land," ii. p. 23 et scq. The Period of Agrarian Distttrbances, 1 760- 1767. 161 There were other circumstances, however, which enhanced the poverty and destitution of the land. During the course of the eighteenth century an important change was gradually introduced with regard to the cultivation of the soil. A great diminutipn took place in the production of corn and potatoes,^ and the land was largely converted into pasturage for grazing purposes.^ One of the results of the foolish law which enacted that the profits of any farm tenanted by a Catholic should not exceed one-third of the rent, and which also compelled the Catholic farmer to give notice of any increased produc- tiveness of his farm, in order to insure the raising of his rent (p. 120), was to be seen in the fact that, as competent contem- porary observers bear witness," many Irish farmers, instead of continuing the more profitable cultivation of the soil, now re- stricted themselves to grazing, the nett profits of which were not so readily estimated. Another reason for the change was that, by a decree of the House of Commons in 1735, pasture lands had been exempted from the payment of tithes. Thus,, all things considered, it was decidedly more advantageous for the Irish farmer to turn grazier, a course which was, conse- quently, very widely adopted. Moreover, in the year 1758,. the prohibition against the exportation of cattle to England was removed, and for the space of five years Irish cattle were admitted into England. This circumstance, although it did not, as was feared, result in deluging the country with Irish cattle,^ nevertheless, added in some measure to the import- ance of the cattle-rearing trade in Ireland, in consequence of which the graziers presently found that the existing amount of pasture land was inadequate to their needs. They, there- fore, hit upon the plan of enclosing the commons, which had hitherto formed the general pasture ground of the ^ Swift complains of the enormous increase of pasturage (see " Short View of Ireland," Roscoe, vol. ii. p. 80). - This is shown by Lord Taaffe in his " Observations on the Affairs of Ireland, from the Settlement of 1691 to the Present Timej" (Dubl., 1766). Comp. Lecky, loc. cit., ii. p. 245. * Adam Smith pointed out in the fourth book of his " Wealth of Nations" (trans, by Lowenthal, 1882, vol. i. p. 470), that this result by no means followed the removal of the prohibition relating to the export of cattle. M 1 62 History of Ireland. village populations, and which were, accordingly, tacitly acknowledged to be the property of the community. Many of the small farmers also received notice to quit their hold- ings ; and thus the social condition of the smaller tenants was aggravated in many respects. They lost the right of free pasture, numbers of them were driven from the soil, while to others were allotted wretched strips of land on which to grow a few potatoes, in consideration of which the liolders were forced to work for their landlords for the miser- able pittance of fivepence per day.^ Was it surprising, therefore, that a class of people thus con- demned to beggary, sunk in misery, and at the point of starva- tion, should, in their despair, eventually combine and declare war against the classes who were more favourably situated ? The enclosure of the commons, which was carried out with much harshness, seems to have formed the immediate occasion of those agrarian outrages ~ which were he'ard of for the first time in December of the year 1761. Large numbers of men banded themselves together in the county of Limerick, and went about the country tearing down the fences with which the commons had been recently enclosed, and hence were called " Levellers " ; subsequently, however, from the white shirts which they wore over their garments, and the white cockades in their hats, they were better known by the name of " Whiteboys."^ The movement grew from day to day, and in February of the year 1762 there existed fi\^ or six of these companies, each numbering some hundreds of men. Threatening letters were sent by them in all directions, and ^ This is the rate of wage paid to agricultural labourers about the year 1770, as given 1)y Arthur Young in his "Tour in Ireland" (Ger. trans.), vol. i. p. 587. Dobbs, in his " Essay on Trade" (1731), reckons it at four- pence a day (pt. ii. p. 47). 2 Comp. especially Curry's "Civil Wars in Ireland," ii. p. 271 ; also an extract from a letter of the lord-lieutenant, dated the Sth April, 1762, in Lecky's " English History," iv. p. 320, obtained by him from the Record Office. ^ For an account of the agrarian disturbances of this period, consult Arthur Young's "Tour in Ireland" (Ger. trans.), i. p. 95 et seq.; also Watkinson's "Philosophical Survey of the South of Ireland" (Ger. trans., 1779), p. 235 et seq.; and more especially Lewis, "On the Irish Disturbances." The Period of Agrarian Disturbances^ 1 760-1 767. 163 every one they met was forced to swear allegiance to their mysterious head, Queen Sieve, or Sieve Oultagh. The dis- turbance quickly spread through the counties of Tipperary, Cork, Waterford, and, indeed, through the whole of Munster ; and while in some districts the animosity of the bands was directed against the enclosure of the commons, in others it took the form of antagonism to tithes. It is not to be denied that the system of tithes,^ as developed in Ireland, was obviously unreasonable, and could only lead to terrible injustice. As we have already shown (p. iio), the tithes were not a payment made to the clergy in return for their spiritual ministrations, but they were a compulsory tax upon the indigent Catholic population for the benefit of the Anglican clergy, with whom they had no dealings whatever, and who, in the majority of cases, did not live among the people whose tithes they received, nor even reside in the country itself A still greater element of injustice was intro- duced when, in 1735," the House of Commons, in pursuance of a one-sided policy, dictated by class interests, passed a decree exempting pasture lands from the payment of tithes. The result of this Act was that, while the wealthy graziers, who paid rentals for their land varying from ;^3,ooo to ^10,000, enjoyed perfect immunity from all tithes, the poor cotter, whose only possession was a potato patch, was forced to pay a tax amounting to a tenth part of its produce. If, at least, a little humanity and forbearance had been shown in the collection of these tithes, the burden might have pressed less heavily than it did ; but the higher Anglican clergy resided chiefly in England, so that they, too, were accustomed to let their tithes to an agent, and in his dealings with the people, this tithe-farmer was as terrible a v^ampire as the middleman. With stern and unrelenting severity he gathered ^ For a correct estimate of the tithe system, the speeches of Grattan on the 13th March, 17S7, and the 14th February, 1788, are particularly valuable (see speeches of H. Grattan, 1822, vol. ii. pp. 8, 16, 25-71). Comp. also Lecky, loc. ciL, iv. p. 321 et seq.\ as wallas the interesting observa- tions on this subject by Frederick von Raumer in " England in the Year 1840," vol. i. pp. 27-39. ' See Grattan's ".Speeches," ii. p, 9. 164 History of Ireland. in the last farthing, and woe to the cottager who was unable to satisfy his demands ! The poor people bound themselves by a written agreement to pay an exorbitant interest, and, as Grattan once said in a speech which was inspired by noble indignation, they literally made themselves tributary to the tithe-farmers ; " they carried his corn, his hay, and his turf for nothing, and they gave him their labour, their cars and their horses for nothing."^ It cannot, therefore, be wondered at, that at that time the peasantry were strongly incensed against the iniquitous tithe system, or that the bands of Whiteboys vented their rage mainly upon the collectors of these taxes. They, accordingly, issued proclamations, in which they called upon the people either to pay no tithes at all, or only such a composition as should be approved by the Whiteboys. The following is a notice issued by one of these bands : " No tithes, or beware of the consequences ! If you pay tithes, you may order your coffin ! Whether you leave the country or remain here, death certainly awaits you ! " Underneath this notice was the figure of a coffin and the signature, " Captain Rock." These proclamations not only protested against tithes and the enclosure of commons ; they also declared war against excessive rents and low wages. Another manifesto runs : " No countenance can any longer be afforded to the payment of rents, the amount of which is double what it ought to be. Those persons who pay no heed to this notice will be treated with the utmost severity." On another occasion, the command goes forth' that no day-labourer shall work for less than ten shillings per week, and those who accept lower wages are strongly denounced. These notices all bore fictitious sig- natures ; some " Captain Rock," others " Terry's Mother," or " Terry's Alt ; " but most frequently they were signed " Cap- tain Right."- The penalties threatened, and likewise exacted, by the Whiteboys were various. One common punishment inflicted upon those who failed to comply with the orders of these ^ " Speeches," ii. p. 45. " Respecting the proclamations, see Lewis, loc. cii., p. 221. The Period of Agrarian Disturbances, i 760-1 767, 165 bands, or otherwise incurred their hatred, was the destruction of their property, their houses and barns being set on fire, or their cattle maimed. Very frequently, too, the Whiteboys would drag people from their beds, ride off with them some distance on horseback, cut off one of their ears, and finally bury them up to their chins in a hole filled with thorns. Murder, however, seems to have been but rarely committed by them.^ This system of intimidation was effectual.- For a con- siderable period no tithes were paid ; no landowner ventured to distrain for rent, nor could any one be induced to give evidence against a Whiteboy ; and when, on a certain occa- sion, a member of one of these bands had been condemned to be whipped, no amount of money could procure a man to carry out the sentence — a condition of things which only tended to increase the recklessness of these desperate bodies. Among other exploits, they marched through the country in open day, and released their confederates from prison, com- pelled the inhabitants of the town of Lismore^ to illuminate the houses in their honour, and actually levied a tax on the farmers for the support of their cause. In view of the recognised antipathy cherished by the British against the Celts, it was natural that, by many persons in England, religious and political motives should have been ascribed to these agrarian outrages.* It was rumoured that among the hosts of the Whiteboys, French officers and a quantity of French money had been discovered ; and as the attempted invasion of Thurot (p. 131) was of recent occurrence, the entire Whiteboy movement was, in many quarters, re- garded as a popish insurrection, planned by the French at the time of this invasion. That Catholics should have formed the main body of the Whiteboy bands was not surprising in a country in which Catholics composed five-sixths of the ^ Lewis, /(Cii.-. (;77.,p.226; Young's "Tour in Ireland" (Germ. trans.), i. p. 17. - Comp. Lecky, iv. p. 331, note. ^ See Horace Walpole, loc. cit. (Ger. trans.), ii. p. 69. ^ That the Whiteboys had relations with the Continent is maintained by both Walpole {loc. cit., ii. p. 69) and Musgrave, in his " Rebellions in Ireland" (App. p. i). 1 66 History of Ireland. entire population, and also reckoned among their number all the poorer classes of the community. There is abundant and conclusive proof that these disturbances were altogether owing to the miserable social condition of the people, and that they were in no way attributable to religious or political motives. Thus, the tithe-farmers, irrespective of their creed — Catholic and Protestant alike — were especially singled out for ill-treat- ment. Catholic priests, too, were frequently made to suffer ; and in the county of Kilkenny it was the Catholics of the town of Ballyragget who first combined and successfully opposed the Whiteboys.i The Commission appointed by the Govern- ment to inquire into the cause of these outrages also declared in its official report that " the authors of these disturbances have consisted indiscriminately of different persuasions";- and the viceroy, Lord Halifax, in a letter to Egremont,^ the secre- tary of state, reports that, notwithstanding the most careful investigations, it had been impossible to discover the slightest trace of any sort of connection with foreign lands. Arthur Young/ the well-known writer on political economy, who, shortly after these outrages, took a journey through the country, and sifted the question thoroughly, likewise expressly states that the origin of the disturbances was utterly removed from all political or religious causes, and that all views to the con- trary were based on the evidence of infamous slanderers. At the beginning of this movement the Government, for a time, remained a passive onlooker, and it was this inactivity which enabled the Whiteboys to inspire the population with so much dread, and to create such an amount of terrorism in the land. After a while Parliament graduall}' awoke to a sense of its duty, and, in the year 1765, passed an Act '" which threatened with the penalty of death all men who, in bands of ^ See Young's " Tour in Ireland '' (Ger. trans.), i. p. 98. - Lewis, loc. cit., p. 13. •* Tlie greater portion of which may be seen in Lecky, derived by him from the Record Office (Lecky, loc. cit., iv. p. 336). ■* Arthur Young, loc. cit.., i. p. 95. The existence of any alliance between the Whiteboys and the Continent is also very energetically disputed by Watkinson in his " Philosophical Survey," p. 237, and by Hardy in his "Life of Charlemont," p. 8S. * See Irish Statutes, 5 George III., c. 8 The Period of Agrarian Disturbances^ i 760-1 767. 167 five or more, should roam about the country by night, attack- ing persons or destroying property ; or who should release criminals, or extort illegal oaths from their fellow-subjects. Should guilty persons not be discovered, the grand juries of the counties were empowered to exact an indemnification from the districts in which the outrages had been perpetrated. This enactment, which, in a manner, placed the country in a state of siege, was originally designed to extend only over two years, but its effects were so beneficial that the period of its operation was prolonged ; and by this means the organiza- tion of the Whiteboys was eventually broken up. It is true that, on the occasion of bad harvests, or other economical calamities, such bands reappeared from time to time. Thus^ fresh hosts of Whiteboys made their appearance at the period of the American war of independence, for whose dispersion it was necessary to enact a still more stringent measure. Closely resembling them in their character, were also "Captain Right's" bands in 1785 ; and the " Peep of Day Boys," who disturbed the land in 1795 ; while the "Moonlighters," who threw Ire- land into a violent state of excitement in 1881, were, in their aims and organization, not essentially different from the Whiteboys. Although the disturbances caused by the Whiteboys were mainly confined to Munster and a portion of Leinster, a similar but less formidable agrarian movement was, at the same time, taking place among the Protestant population of Ulster. Here, too, the occasion of the agitation was to be found in the relentless exaction of tithes, to which a fresh grievance had been added by an order compelling the in- habitants to furnish labour for the repaving and laying out of roads. Just at that time, the grand juries had determined to con- struct a number of roads which, it was maintained, would less serve the interests of the community at large than those of the great landowners whom the grand juries principally represented. The cotters, exasperated by this fresh addition to their burdens, gave vent to their wrath in agrarian out- rages, and during the summer of 1763, they formed them- 1 68 History of Ireland. selves into bands, four to five hundred strong, the members of which wore oak-twigs in their hats, and, hence, were called " Oakboys." These bands compelled every clergyman who came in their way to take an oath binding himself neither to promote the construction of any new highways, nor to collect tithes from his parishioners beyond a certain specified sum. Although they created much disturbance and confusion in the country, they refrained from more serious excesses, and by enacting a more equitable Highway Act, the Government gradually succeeded in restoring tranquility.^ The insurrection of the " Steelboys," - or " Hearts of Steel," which, though it did not occur until 1772, will be most fittingly treated in connection with the other agrarian dis- turbances, bore a far more dangerous character than the last. This rising, which took place in the counties of Down and Antrim, one in which Protestants, and even dissenters, were chiefly engaged, was occasioned by the ruthless conduct of a single large landowner. The Marquis of Donegal, a wealthy absentee landlord, suddenly raised the rents on his extensive property, and in preference to renewing the leases to his former tenants, he transferred the whole of them to two rich merchants. As, however, it was the intention of these men not to sublet the lands, but to use them for grazing purposes, it became necessary to eject a large number of small tenants from their holdings ; and it was from this class that these nightly bands of marauders were largely recruited, whose excesses were much more formidable than those of the Oakboys. They maimed cattle, invaded prisons, and spread such terror throughout the land that, in the northern counties, juries were afraid to cOnvict such of the Steelboys as were brought to trial ; in consequence of which the Government was compelled, with the assent of Parliament, to order a change of venue, and the proceedings were, accordingly, removed to the capital. It was also decided to despatch ' Comp. especially Hardy's " Life of Charlemont," p. 94 ; and Watkin- son, loc. cit.^ p. 246. " For the Steelboys, see Arthur Young ijoc. cit.^ pp. 139, 166, 198), who, nevertheless, defends Lord Donegal. Comp. also Wesley's "Journal," June, 1773 ; Lecky, iv. p. 349 ; Plowden's " Historical Review," i. p. 412. The Period of Agrarian Disturbances, 1 760-1 767. 169 large bodies of troops to the north, and these, in course of time, succeeded in restoring order. Many persons implicated in the insurrection were captured and executed ; and owing to the fact that Ulster was relieved of vast masses of those who composed its discontented popular element, by means of the enormous emigration ^ which shortly afterward took place, the tranquility of this province henceforth remained undisturbed. In order to present the agrarian disturbances of Ireland in their proper sequence and relation, we have somewhat antici- pated the time ; and we now return to consider the internal history of the country. In the Parliament of 1763, which was summoned after Lord Halifax had been succeeded in the viceroyalty by the Duke of Northumberland, the old cancer-spot in the adminis- tration of Ireland — the increase of scandalous pensions — gave rise to many violent debates. It was not only that the fright- ful amount of the pension-list, which, since 1761, had risen from ^^64,127 to ;^70,752,~ was regarded as an intolerable evil, but revelations had been made of considerable jobbery in connection with some of the items. It was, for instance, discovered that, at the close of the war between England and France, the minister, Bute, had conferred an annual pension of ;!^ 1,000 out of the Irish revenues upon Count de Virri, the Sardinian ambassador, under a false name ; a discovery which produced immense excitement in the House.^ It was with difficulty that the Government succeeded in frustrating the intentions of Parliament to present a memorial on the subject to the king ; and in order to allay the storm of indignation which had been aroused, the Duke of Northumberland saw himself compelled to give an assurance to the House that, for a certain number of years, the king should grant no pensions chargeable on the Irish revenue. There were also other constitutional abuses which Parlia- ment endeavoured to remedy. In 1763 a futile attempt was ' See Arthur Young, loc. cit., i. p. 158. - See Lecky, loc. at., iv. pp. 365, 366. 2 Comp. Horace Walpole's "Memoirs" (Ger. trans.), ii. pp. 132, 180. 1 70 History of Ireland. made to procure an enactment rendering the judges irremov- able.^ The shortening of the duration of parHaments was hkewise, on several occasions, the subject of discussion in the House of Commons. At the time of the elections a great number of candidates had given to their constituencies distinct promises on the matter, and accordingly, in 1761, Lucas, who, in Freeman's Journal, had formerly strongly advocated shorter terms, brought in a bill for a seven years' parliament." This measure was passed in Ireland, but was rejected by the English Privy Council ; a result with which many of the "par- liamentary undertakers " were well satisfied. In their hearts they were opposed to a proposal which threatened to diminish their influence, but, in face of the popularity of the measure, they were undesirous of appearing as its open opponents, and were, therefore, greatly delighted when the English Privy Council, by its avowed antagonism, relieved them from the unpleasant obligation of voting against the bill. The same comedy was repeated on two occasions : in the year 1763, when the motion of Lucas was again introduced, and supported in a brilliant speech by Flood ; and once more, in 1765, when the bill was carried in the Irish Parliament, but thrown out by the English Privy Council. On both occasions the "parliamentary undertakers," in order to curry favour with the people, voted for the bill, knowing perfectly well what would be its fate when it arrived in England. Equivocal as was the conduct of many of the members of Parliament, the attitude of the lord-lieutenant on this question was not less so.^ Halifax and Northumberland were, in reality, both hostile to the bill, but as a means of rendering themselves popular, they assumed an outward complaisance towards the measure. The fact that neither the highest ' See " Life of H. Grattan, by his Son," i. p. 65. - For details concerning the efforts made to pass the Septennial Bill, see Adolphus, loc. cit., i. p. 331 ; Lecky, loc. cit., iv. pp. 367-369. Comp. also the letters of Chesterfield to Chevenix ("Miscellaneous Works," ii. 515-530), in which the former lord-lieutenant meets us as the oppo- nent of any measure to shorten the duration of parliaments. * See Lecky {loc. cit.^ iv. pp. 369, 370), who here, for the first time, avails himself of the confidential correspondence which took place between the viceroys and the English secretary of state. The Period of Agrarian Dishirbaiices, i 760-1 767. i 7 1 functionaries of the Crown nor the most influential of the landed proprietors ventured to appear as open adversaries of the proposal, proves how great was its popularity in the coun- try. A still stronger proof, however, of the large hold this measure had on the sympathies of the people was afforded in May, 1766, when the sheriff and upwards of six hundred of the most prominent merchants and tradesmen of Dublin presented an address to their parliamentary representatives, in which they bitterly complained that the bill for the shorten- ing of parliaments had again been rejected in England, and, at the same time, urged upon them not to vote a money bill for longer than six months, until the English Privy Council should give its assent to a measure legalising shorter parlia- ments.^ In face of such an irritated public feeling, it must have been difficult for any statesman to undertake the responsibility of advising the further postponement of this bill, the more so as the condition of things hitherto existing had conduced less to the advantage of the Crown than to that of the large land- owners. George III. was exceedingly dissatisfied with the influence wielded by the " parliamentary undertakers," and owing to the fact that the idea of a personal government, both in England and Ireland, was always uppermost in his mind, a disposition more favourable to seven years' parlia- ments gradually began to make itself felt in Court circles. The administration formed by the great Chatham, in the year 1766, \\'as decidedly inclined to take this question into con- sideration ; and when the new viceroy. Lord Townshend, entered upoti office in October, 1767, his instructions autho- rised him to state that the English ministry now purposed to fulfil the long-cherished wish of the Irish constituencies. ^ See Adolphus, loc\ a't., i. p. 331. CHAPTER X. FROM THE COMMENCEMENT OF LORD TOWNSHEND'S ADMINISTRATION (1767) TO THE ORGANIZATION OF THE IRISH VOLUNTEERS (1778). The viceroyalty of Lord Townshend was fraught with im- portant results to Ireland in many respects, but, perhaps, in none more so than in this, that now, for the first time, it began to be recognised in England, that the Irish administration could not be efficiently carried on by an absentee lord- lieutenant ; and, consequently, the viceroy was henceforth required to reside continuously in the country.^ When the Duke of Northumberland quitted office, in 1765, there was a very prevalent desire in Government circles that the new lord-lieutenant should take up his abode in Ireland, as it was imagined that the influence of the resident landowners, from which body the lords-justices were chosen, might, by that means, be diminished ; but the realization of this wish was delayed for some time by the fact that no one was willing to incur the increased expenditure involved in a permanent official residence in the country ; and it was not until the post was conferred upon Lord Townshend, who received the appointment through the interest of his brother, Charles Townshend, secretary of state, that an Irish governor could be induced to set up an establishment in Ireland.^ The new viceroy landed in the country on the 14th October 1767 ; and the circumstance that he had determined to settle among the people he had come to govern, at once rendered him a favourite with them ; while his affable manners, his 1 See Adolphus, i. p. 331 ; loc. cit., iv. p. 371. - A striking sketch of this man is to be found in Lecky, loc. cit., vol. iv. pp. 372, 373. Lord Toiviishciid. The Vohuiteer Movement. 173 social gifts, and above all, the beneficent reforms of which he gave notice, only tended to increase his popularity. He announced that unless some extraordinary occasion should arise, no more pensions were to be granted from the Irish funds, and that England would henceforth place no obstacle in the way of shortening the duration of parliaments ; he also publicly declared that a measure establishing the irremov- ability of the judges would receive the approval of the king.^ The Irish House of Commons, accordingly, introduced a bill intended to regulate the appointment and tenure of the judges in exact accordance with English usage. The bill passed through the Irish Parliament without any considerable diffi- culty, but in England it was altered to such an extent,- that when it was returned to Ireland the Irish House of Commons determined to reject it. The British Government thus dis- credited its own representative, a proceeding which must assuredly have conduced to weaken his authority in the land. When, however, the subject of shorter parliaments was earnestly dealt with, he was enabled to dispel the distrust of the people, and to regain his popularity. Not long after the arrival of Lord Townshend in Ireland, the Parliament carried this bill a second time, and presented it to the lord-lieutenant in a body. The English cabinet, in which Lord Camden especially defended Irish interests, resolved, on this occasion, to yield" and introduced but one alteration, which changed the duration of the parliaments from seven to eight years.^ This change was no manojuvre^ intended to effect the rejection of the bill, but was merely designed to obviate the inconveni- ence arising from the elections occurring simultaneously in England and Ireland. Moreover, as the Irish Parliament was usually only summoned once in two years, it was considered ' Comp. Hardy's " Life of Charlemont," p. 126. - Particulars respecting the modifications introduced may be learnt from Lecky (vol. iv. pp. 374, 375), who here cites an interesting but hitherto unpublished letter of Shelburne, the secretary of state. ^ For the Octennial Bill consult Horace Walpole, loc. cit. (Ger. trans.), iii. p. 87 ; Hardy's " Life of Charlemont," p. 191 et seq. ; Plowden's " His- torical Review " i. p. 38S; Adolphus, loc. cit., i. p. 333, and Lecky, iv. p. 381. '' This is the construction placed upon it by Plowden, loc. cit., i. p. 388. I 74 History of Ireland. to be more fitting, that instead of seven years the Irish ParHaments should extend over a period of eight years. It was also decreed that this law should come into operation at once, instead of at the expiration of seven years, as was proposed in the original draft, — an alteration which some asserted was intended to punish the " undertakers " for their previous dubious attitude.^ The bill containing these modifications was returned from England in February, 1768, and so immaterial appeared the changes that had been introduced, in comparison with the advantages obtained, that not a voice was raised against it in Parliament ; on the contrary, the three readings of the bill were taken in one day, and the House moved an address of thanks to the Crown, which was couched in the very warmest terms. The population of Dublin also made a most enthusi- astic demonstration in honour of the lord-lieutenant, and when on his way to the House of Parliament" to announce the king's assent to the bill, the crowd took the horses from his carriage, and dragged him in triumph through the streets.^ Having thus granted to the electors of Ireland their dearest wish, the Government was encouraged to hope that it might now be enabled to realize, in its turn, a desire which lay very near to its heart, — the increase of .the army. After the Peace of Paris, the leading statesmen of England had arrived at the conviction that an increase in the standing army of Great Britain was indispensably necessary for the protection of its wide dominions. They, therefore, desired that the Irish con- tingent, which, since the reign of William III., had numbered 12,000 men, should be raised to 15,000, and a message to this effect was accordingly sent to the Irish Parliament. In reply to this demand, the Irish National party advanced the opinion that if England, with all its wealth, only maintained a stand- ing army of 17,000 men, the support of an army of 12,000 men was a burden amply sufficient for poor Ireland to bear. But notwithstanding the action of this party, the Government would have succeeded in carrying its measure for the augmen- ' Such is the assertion of Horace Walpole, loc. cit., iii. p. 87. ^ Comp. also Watkinson's " Philosophical Survey '' (Ger. trans.), p. 47. Lord Townshend. The Volunteer Movement. 175 tation of the army had it been supported by the influential landowners, more especially by the Earl of Shannon and Speaker Ponsonby. Not that these men were opposed to the Government proposal ; on the contrary, they entered into negotiations with the lord-lieutenant, and declared their readi- ness to assist in carrying the bill through Parliament, on condition that certain lucrative posts were conferred upon themselves and various members of their families. As, how- ever, Shelburne, the English secretary of state, was too honourable to agree to a bargain of this nature, these "under- takers" immediately assumed a hostile attitude towards the bill, and by using their parliamentary influence, prevented the proposed increase of the army being accomplished.^ In May, 1768, shortly after the defeat of the Government, Parliament was dissolved, and from this time all Lord Towns- hend's energies were directed towards crushing the influence of the " undertakers" at the coming elections. As "the con- stant plan of these men of power," he says, in speaking of Lord Shannon and Ponsonby, "is to possess the government of this country, and to lower the authority of English govern- ment," this aristocratic party, " which wishes to convert the lord-lieutenant into a mere pageant of state,"^ must be utterly shattered. In order to accomplish this, he considered that it would be necessary, in the first place, to win over to the side of the Government, by means of promotions, offices, pensions, and orders, all those men who possessed large electoral influ- ence. But, although in accordance with this view, he conferred titles and dignities on various members who had- supported him during the past session, he, nevertheless, failed to reap the fruits of his efforts in the elections of 1768. In the new Parliament the influence of Ponsonby and Shannon remained undiminished. The elections were completed in the summer of 1768, but ' The most important source of information with regard to the army augmentation scheme is tlie correspondence between Shelburne and Townshend, a considerable portion of which is contained in Fitzmaurice's " Life of Shelburne." - See Townshend's letter to Shelburne, of the 31st May, 176S (Lecky, loc. cit., iv. p. 385). 176 History of Ireland. the new Parliament did not meet until October, 1769, and during the first week of the session, the same question which in 1760 gave rise to a constitutional conflict between the Crown and the popular representatives, was again the cause of a similar collision. As was the case in the years 1692 and 1760, the Irish Privy Council again sent in a money bill as the ground for the summoning of a fresh Parliament. If, in opposition to the Privy Council, the House of Commons had in former years, claimed as its exclusive privilege that money bills should originate with itself and not with the Privy Council ; it was infinitely more necessary now, when, in America, the question of the right to impose duties was pro- ducing so much violent contention, to reassert and maintain this prerogative. Accordingly, the House of Commons re- jected the money bill by ninety-four to seventy-one ; the opposition having been strengthened by the large landowners, who, inspired by personal rancour against Townshend, allied themselves with the patriot party. Simultaneously, a resolu- tion was carried, which alleged, as the motive of this action, that the bill had not originated in the House of Commons. This was regarded by the English Government as an unconsti- tutional act, and, as in the case of Lord Sydney, in 1692, the lord-lieutenant was required to enter a protest against the proceeding. As, however. Lord Townshend was, above all things, anxious to see his budget agreed to, he went to work very warily, and exercised great caution and moderation. By primarily observing a complete reticence, he contrived to carry his budget for two years, and obtained ample votes of credit : he also passed the army increase bill, with an amend- ment providing that of the 15,235 men to which the forces had been augmented, 12,000 should be available for Ireland alone. When the lord-lieutenant had thus attained his ends, he proceeded to aim the blow against the Parliament which he had long been secretly contemplating. On the 26th Decem- ber, 1769, he repaired to the House of Lords, where, after summoning the members of the Lower House, he entered a solemn protest against the above resolution of the House of Lord Toivnshend to the Volunteer IMovenient. 177 Commons, as being contrary to the provisions of Poyning's Act, and therefore unconstitutional, whereupon he conckided the function by proroguing ParHament. The protest of the lord-Heutenant was duly entered in the journals of the House of Lords, but the House of Commons forbade its clerk to make any record whatever of the Government protest.^ The action of Townshend aroused great dissatisfaction throughout the country; and while in the English Parliament his conduct was sharply criticised by Boyle Walsingham,- in Ireland, owing to the fact that both Houses of Parliament were prorogued, the opposition was mainly confined to the press. Freemaiis Joiirnal formed the centre of the press op- position, and it was here those political letters appeared under the signature " Pertinax and Posthumus," which proceeded from the pen of a young and nameless lawyer, subsequently known as the celebrated Henry Grattan, and in which the author, after the manner of the Junius Letters, submits the conduct of the lord-lieutenant to keen and trenchant criticism. In these columns Flood also published similar letters, of which, however, he afterward desired to deny the authorship.'^ Ultimately a series of satires appeared, among which was an ironical history of the administration, entitled " Barataria," by Sir H. Langrishe, in which, under fictitious names, most of the prominent politicians of the day are caricatured, Towns- hend being represented under the title of Lord-Lieutenant Sancho Panza.'^ The position of the viceroy was now a critical one. Having, by his protest, as well as by the prorogation of Parliament, offended both the aristocratic landowners and the patriot > For the parliamentary conflict of the year 1769, consult "Memoirs of the Life of Grattan, by his Son," vol. i. p. 98, where Townshend's speech of the 26th December, 1769, is printed ; also Adolphus, loc. ciL, i. p. 379. - See Adolphus, loc. cit., i. p. 3S0. ^ See Lecky, "Leaders of Public Opinion in Ireland" (Ger. trans.), p. 73. For Flood's share in the publications, see Grattan's letter to Broome of the 22nd February, 1770 (" Memoirs of Life of Grattan," i. pp. 157, 205). * The " Barataria " of Sir H. Langrishe, with the key, is printed in " Memoirs of the Life of Grattan," i. p. 435, App. N I yS History of Ireland. party under the leadership of Flood, he hesitated to follow up the prorogation by a dissolution, fearing lest in the new Parliament a hostile element might prevail whose first act would be, in pursuance of a suggestion contained in one of Grattan's letters,^ to present an address to the king praying for the recall of his viceroy Townshend. He, therefore, decided that the most practical course would be to make terms with the present House of Commons ; nevertheless, he delayed to summon Parliament from one three months to another, until the consequence was that during a period of fourteen months the Irish legislature held no session. Mean- while, however, he was using every effort to procure himself a majority. In order to discourage further opposition, he deprived his most violent opponents during the last session, Lord Shannon and Ponsonby, of their offices ; struck the name of the Duke of Leinster, one of the most influential of the landowners, off the list of the Privy Council ; and, in fact, completely reconstituted that body.^ On the other hand, adherents of the Government were extravagantly rewarded. Several men of influence were won over by promotions, while various members of Parliament who had promised their sup- port to the Government received lucrative posts or pensions. On the whole, it is estimated that a sum of about ;:^5oo,ooo^ was spent in bribery and corruption at a time when, owing to the agrarian disturbances in the north, and to a diminution in the exports, the revenue of the country had very considerably declined. By means of this extensive corruption, Townshend attained his object; and when, in February, 1771, Parliament reassem- bled, the lord-lieutenant's majority was secure. Townshend's speech at the opening of Parliament literally overflowed with references to the public welfare and the happiness of the people ; and it was decided to reply to it by an address, the framing of which gave rise to prolonged debates in both 1 See Grattan's letter of tlie 30th March, i77o("Lifeof Grattan,'"i.p. 162). ■2 Comp. Lecky's " History of England," iv. p. 395. ■'' This amount is given by Plowden, loc. cit., ii. p. 251 ; comp. also Adolphus, loc. cit., i. p. 3S0. Lord Toiunshend to the Volunteer Movement. 1 79 Houses. Those paragraphs in the address in which ParHa- ment expressed its thanks to the king for having been pleased to continue the lord-Heutenant in his lofty position called forth numerous manifestations of dissent ; but notwithstand- ng this opposition, which in the Upper House was led by Lord Charlemont, and in the Lower House by Flood, the majority voted in favour of the original draft. Nevertheless, sixteen members of the House of Lords solemnly protested against the address, while Ponsonby resigned his position as speaker of the House of Commons, rather than be accessory to its presentation.^ Townshend's majority could, however, only be maintained by means of the same corruption which had procured it. The expenditure of money was unremitting ; fresh promotions and new pensions were promised on every hand ; and the lord- lieutenant regarded the appointment to every vacant post in church and state only in the light of a possible addition to his parliamentary influence." With this end in view, he de- termined to increase the number of the commissioners form- ing the Board of Accounts, intending to confer these highly remunerative posts on members of Parliament, who would thus be converted into supporters.^ The House of Commons, however, on the motion of Flood, declared itself opposed to such an increase; but notwithstanding this decided expression of opinion on the part of the legislature, Townshend created five of these lucrative offices. This action aroused a passion- ate storm of resentment, the issue of which was that a vote of censure against that person who had advised the king to take such a step was moved in Parliament, and after excited de- bates was carried by the casting vote of the speaker.* This opposition appeared to deprive the lord-lieutenant of ^ For the session of 1771, consult Hardy's " Life of Charlemont," p. 150 ; also Adolphus, loc. cii., ii. pp. 1 1-16, who on such points is particularly painstaking. "•^ With respect to the extensive employment of church patronage, see Lecky, loc. ciL, iv. p. 397. ^ See Horace Walpole's " Last Journal," i. p. 17. * For the proceedings in Parliament, consult especially Grattan's letter to Day, of the 27th Februaiy, 1772, in " Memoirs of the Life of Grattan," i, p. 257. i8o History of Ireland. his reason. He held up the members of the opposition to ridicule at a public table, and satirised them in verses which he scattered broadcast through the land.^ Almost all his letters to the English Government contained demands for fresh pensions and promotions ; consequently, during his administration the pension list swelled with amazing rapidity. In his private life, too, he gradually cast off all restraint, and at last it seemed as if it were his aim and intention, by his public conduct and his unbridled license,, utterly to eradicate every trace of his former popularity. When the consequences of this mis-government began to be manifest, — when the annual deficit continued to grow larger, and the Government script was no longer negotiable, — the English ministry felt itself called upon to take action, and on the 9th October, 1772, Lord Townshend was recalled, and Lord Harcourt, who had previously been ambassador at the French Court, was appointed to succeed him. The difficulties which Lord Harcourt encountered on enter- ing office were not owing to individuals ; for the leaders of both the aristocratic party and the popular party accorded him a friendly reception, and his levees were attended alike by Flood, Shannon, and Ponsonby. His difficulties lay rather in the frightful condition of the finances, which had been produced by the social circumstances of the country, and aggravated by the irrational administration of Townshend. The state of affairs was such that in April, 1773, the viceroy wrote to the English prime minister, Lord North : " Our dis- tresses have increased to such a degree that almost an entire stop is put to all payments whatsoever, except for the suste- nance of the army, and at times it has been found difficult to find money even for this purpose. I have every reason to think that the arrears upon the establishment by Christmas next will not fall short of ;i^300,ooo." " In order to meet this calamitous state of things, it was, in the first place, necessary to discover fresh sources of revenue. ' See Horace Walpole's " Memoirs " (Ger. trans.), part iii. p. 457. For the general condition of the state, comp. Adolphus, ii. p. 16. - See Lecky's "History of England," vol. iv. p. 403. Lord Toivnshend to Ike Volunteer Moveviejit. 1 8 1 Of all the plans which were now suggested with this object, none was so popular with the Irish as the proposal for an absentee tax ; a suggestion which also had the approval of Adam Smith and Prior.' Nor was it surprising that a country which regularly saw a third portion of its rents flow off into a neighbouring kingdom, should, at last, conceive the idea of drawing an advantage even from the money thus diverted into other lands. Harcourt, therefore, determined to recommend this tax to the English Cabinet ; and the English Tory Government appeared to be not unfavourable to the scheme. " If the Irish Parliament," wrote Lord North, "should send over to England such a plan as should appear to be well calculated to give effectual relief to Ireland in her present dis- tress, their opinion would be that it ought to be carried into execution, although a tax upon absentees should be a part of it."~ While, therefore, the Government and the Tory party were not hostile to the proposed tax, the Whigs were com- pletely divided on the question. The illustrious Lord Chat- ham did not consider himself called upon to interfere with the Irish Commons in the exercise of their exclusive right to raise taxes in any way which appeared to them most advantageous. He also regarded it as a very rational Irish policy to urge, that the rents which the landowners derived from that kingdom should be consumed at home, among their own tenants, rather than in England and in foreign countries.^ Very different were the views held upon this subject by Lord Rockingham, whose property was in Ireland, and who, there- fore, had a personal interest in the question. He, and four other noblemen having extensive Irish possessions, addressed a remonstrance'* to Lord North, in which they represented themselves as unfavourable to the proposed tax. Although, as they here state, their property was situated in Ireland, they had, nevertheless, chosen to reside in England, to which coun- ' Prior in his " List of the Irish Absentees," and Adam Smith in the "Wealth of Nations," bk. v., chap. ii. - See Lord North's letter to the Duke of Devonshire, in Plowden's " Historical Review," i. p. 424. ^ Chatham's " Correspondence," iv. pp. 296-30S. •* The protest is printed in Albemarle's " Life of Rockingham," ii. p. 227. 1 8 2 History of Lr eland. try they were attached by ties of birth, and also, in a measure, by those of pubHc duties, and they had not hitherto known that in doing this they had been guilty of a punishable offence, the penalty for which was the payment of a considerable tax. Surely, as subjects of his majesty, they had the right to choose their own place of abode ; and it could be no matter for re- proach, that they had elected to take up their residence in the most important section of the realm. This tax might be detrimental to England, but it was a mistake to suppose that Ireland would reap any benefit from it ; for the necessary consequence of such a measure would be the depreciation of Irish rents, inasmuch as the imposition of this tax would sub- ject Irish landed property to " restrictions unknown in any other part of the British dominions, and, indeed, of the civil- ized world." This expostulation was from the pen of Edmund Burke, one of England's most distinguished politicians, who, although an Irishman by birth, separated himself on this sub- ject from his fellow-countrymen, and had already, in a spirited letter to Charles Bingham, severely condemned a measure which threatened the liberty of the subject, as regarded the right to take up his residence in any part of the kingdom he might think fit.^ Just at this time Chatham was lying on a sick bed, and was thus debarred from obtaining support for his opinion in favour of the absentee tax. Burke and the Rockingham party, meanwhile, succeeded in organizing a formidable agitation against the bill, and soon induced all the landowners who were interested in the question, of whom there was a goodly number, to espouse their views. The English Government, consequently, began to regard the situation as critical, and accordingly, Rochford, secretary of state, ultimately wrote to the lord-lieutenant, informing him that serious difficulties had presented themselves in connection with the bill."- On ' Printed in Burke's "Works " (1812), ix. p. 134-147. Yox Burke's com- plicity in it, see Prior's " Memoirs of the Life and Times of the Honourable Edmund Burke" (Lond., 1839), pp. 147-150 ; also Macknight's "History of the Life and Times of Edmund Burke " (1858, Lond.), vol. ii. pp. 34-37- ^ For the transactions between Harcourt and Rochford, see Lecky,/^t. «'/., vol. iv. pp. 410, 411, Lord Tozunshcud to the Volunteer JMoveiucnt. i8 o receiving this intimation, Harcourt came to the conclusion, that as the proposed tax would be prejudicial to the property of some of England's foremost men, and appeared to endanger the security of the English administration, it must, therefore, be abandoned. For the present, however, the Irish Court did not venture to display any open hostility to the measure, but rather chose to preserve the same kind of doubtful and am- biguous attitude which had formerly been adopted with regard to the Septennial Act. When Flood introduced a bill in the Irish Parliament, ^ proposing to levy a tax of two shillings in the pound on the net incomes of those landowners who, dur- ing six months of the year, did not reside in Ireland, the im- mediate supporters of the measure were left quite in the dark as to the sentiments of the Government. In the meantime, however, the letter of the five peers representing the decline of rents as the inevitable consequence of the passing of such a law was being privately disseminated among the public ; while, at the same time, the report was put into circulation that this tax was but the precursor of a general land-tax ; and by this means there was being secretly created a widespread disposi- tion unfavourable to the bill. When, therefore, in November, 1773, the bill was brought up for discussion in the House of Commons, it was found that public opinion had undergone a complete change. Although Flood advocated the measure with remarkable energy, it was received with violent opposi- tion, and after Blaquiere, the Irish secretary, in an extremely diplomatic speech, had hinted that the Government would not be displeased by the rejection of the bill, it was thrown out by 122 votes to 102. Thus was frustrated the scheme which was designed to heal, by means of a measure of financial policy, the moral canker of absenteeism which was eating away Ireland's life. On this question, therefore, England carried her point ; and a further feeble attempt made by Parliament, in 1774, to ' Hardy relates in his "Life of Charkmont " (p. 170J, that Flood brought in this bill. For further particulars respecting the proceedings in Parliament, see ibid. ; also "Memoirs of H. Grattan," i. p. 264 ; and Lccky, iv. pp. 412,413. 1S4 History of Ireland. mitigate the severities of the penal code, by granting to Catho- Hcs the right to place their money out on mortgage, was like- wise defeated by England.^ Nevertheless, the same year witnessed Ireland's success in obtaining some slight mercan- tile concessions from the English Government. Thus, the fisheries of Newfoundland, from which the Irish had hitherto been excluded, were now thrown open to the fishermen of Ireland ; the ancient prohibition with respect to the export of woollen manufactures was modified, to th'e extent that Ire- land was permitted to export such woollen goods as were necessary for the clothing of Irish troops stationed in foreign lands ; the importation of rape seed into Great Britain was also allowed ; and in order to assist the suffering linen indus- try in the north, the English Government granted a small bounty on the importation of flax into Ireland.- But of what value to the Irish were these paltry concessions so long as the woollen export and the colonial trade still remained under an interdict? While the English Government was thus persistently step- ping in to defeat every endeavour by which it was sought to advance the liberties or promote the economical development of Ireland, in America, after a long contest between the colony and the mother-country, the die had, at last, been cast. The restrictions which had been imposed on American commerce, and the taxation which, without their consent, the mother- country had levied on the colonists, had aroused their resent- ment and, finally, forced them to take up arms. Who among the Irish patriots could fail to be struck with the resemblance between the circumstances of America and those of Ireland ? The same injury which, by custom-house restraints and prohibitory laws, England had been inflicting on the trade and manufactures of the American colonies, she was now inflicting upon Ireland, — except perhaps to a greater degree ; and the right which the Imperial Parliament at Westminster claimed to legislate for America, it also claimed with regard to Ireland ; and if, in its dealings with the Americans, the ^ See " Memoirs of H. C.rattan," i. p. 265. - See Macpherson's "Annals of Commerce," iii. p. 576. Loj'd ToiuusJiaid to the Vohmtcer Movcnuiit. 185 English Government adhered so pertinaciously to its right to impose duties, who could guarantee that the Parliament in London should not, one day, lay claim to the same right over the Irish? It is manifest, therefore, that their interests were identical. Moreover, in former years of distress in Ireland, and more especially after the insurrection of the Steelboys in more recent times, vast numbers of the Irish had emigrated to America, in consequence of which the relations between the American colonists and Ireland were many and close. Hence a large proportion of the people of Ireland looked upon the cause of the Americans as their own, and some of them were disposed to regard the events which were happen- ing in the colonies as an incentive to action on their own part. In the year 1771, Benjamin Franklin, who at that time was visiting Dublin, where he came into contact with most of the parliamentary leaders of the day, wrote, that he had found among the most prominent men in Ireland a considerable inclination to become the friends of America ; and that he had encouraged this feeling wherever he had met with it, because, by mutually prosecuting their common interests, they would be enabled to obtain from England more equitable treatment for Ireland, as well as for the colonies.^ Accord- ingly, in view of the favourable disposition existing in Ireland towards the colonists, the American Congress, in 1775, issued an address to the Irish nation.- This address, in the first place, dwelt upon the identity of interests shared by the two nations in their relations to a Government from whose coun- sellors the old spirit of wisdom had departed. The Congress then expressed its regret that, in consequence of the war, it was under the necessity of relinquishing its commercial inter- course with Ireland, from whose Parliament America had suffered no injustice, and whose people were friends to the rights of humanity. In conclusion, the address pointed out, in emphatic terms, that the fruitful plains of America offered to the Irish a safe asylum from poverty and oppression. But though the cause of the colonists was warmly espoused ' Franklin's "Works," vii. pp. 557, 558. - Comp. Adolphus, ii. pp. 255, 236. 1 86 History of Ireland. by the Irish populace, the American party was but feebly represented in Parliament itself ; for Harcourt had contrived, by his amiable disposition, and a skilful employment of his personal interest, to completely disarm the old opposition ; and even Flood, who for many years had been a leader of the patriot party, was induced, in the autumn of 1775, after long negotiations, to accept the lucrative post of vice-treasurer, a step for which he was sorely blamed by his friends, and particularly by Lord Charlemont.^ When, therefore, on the lOth October, 1775, Parliament was opened by the lord-lieu- tenant, with a speech in which reference was made to the rebellious conduct of the Americans, and the assistance of Ireland invoked for the suppression of the revolt, the House unanimously agreed to reply to the speech by an address, in which Parliament expressed its indignation at the rebellion in America, and, at the same time, protested its own inviolable attachment to the Government of his majesty. The opposi- tion limited themselves to recommending conciliatory mea- sures, and to amendments intended to weaken the force of the offensive expressions used with reference to the Americans ; but their motions were rejected, and although Burgh uttered the prophecy that Ireland would not be subdued until America should be upon her knees before England, the address was carried by close upon two-thirds of the entire votes.- This triumph for the Government was shortly afterward followed by another. On the 25th November, 1775, Lord Harcourt requested Parliament to sanction the withdrawal, for service in America,'^ of 4,000 men belonging to the troops which the law had provided should be retained in Ireland for the protection of the country. The small group composing the patriotic party, with Burgh and Yelverton at their head, desirous to prevent Ireland becoming involved in the /\merican war, objected to the motion ; but Flood himself supported the 1 See " Life of Charlemont," p. 182. - For the debate on the address in the year 1775, comp. " Memoirs of H. Grattan," i. p. 267 et seq. ; also Adolphus (ed. iSio), vol. ii. p. 290. ^ On this question, see especially " jMemoirs of H. Grattan," i. p. 208, 271 ; also Adolphus, ii. p. 290. Lord Towiishcnd to the Vohuiteer Movement. 187 Government proposal in a speech in which he described the troops as "armed negotiators," — an expression afterward bitterly stigmatized by Grattan/ — and ultimately the Govern- ment succeeded in obtaining the assent of Parliament to the proposed step. Great irritation was produced by this result, especially in the north of Ireland, where sympathy with the Americans was most prevalent ; and the exasperation at length became so intense, that Harcourt did not hesitate to characterize the Presbyterians of the north as utter rebels.- In other respects, too, the policy of the Government offered abundant ground for attack : the constantly increasing national debt ; the grant- ing of fresh pensions, in spite of all engagements to the contrary ; the rejection of the militia bill, which the country urgently demanded ; the fact that the bill relating to the tenure of office by the judges had once more been thrown out in England ; ^ and that money bills had again been pro- posed by the Irish Privy Council, — were all grievances which the opposition utilized to the utmost. The temper of the country was thus becoming, month by month, increasingly omnious ; and it was, therefore, a hazardous step on the part of the Government, when in March, 1776, it dissolved Parlia- ment before the expiration of its legal term. And undoubtedly the new elections were the occasion of eftdless" trouble to the Court party. Again, as during Towns- hend's administration, pensions, places, and other forms of reward were considered to be the only methods by which the requisite number of adherents could be obtained for the Government. The Irish secretary, accordingly, forwarded to the English minister, Robinson, an accurate list of all the pensions, amounting to £\ 1,000 a year, which were absolutely necessary to secure the elections ; adding, that only in case these were granted would the Government have a decided ' In the speech of the 28th October, 1783 (Grattan's "Speeches," i. p. 1 76 ei seq.). ■ See his letter to Rochford on the i6th August, 1775 (Lecky, loc. See " Life of Grattan," iv. p. 36. 258 InJliLcnce of the French Revolution upon Ireland. 259 to "The Popular Commission of Public Welfare," at Bordeaux, to which a reply was also forwarded by that town.^ Another characteristic manifestation of the intense political excitement existing in the north of Ireland was the founding, in Belfast, of an association called the " United Irishmen," whose statutes were first published in October, 1791. It was intended to be a fraternity composed of Irishmen of every confession, banded together for the sole object of promoting parliamentary reform, and the le gal reco gnition of the Roman Catholic religion ; and its members were required to pledge themselves by oath to use their best endeavours to bring about the accomplishment of these ends.- The programme, therefore, was a moderate one, and the society rapidly spread to all the towns in the kingdom ; but the fact that ultra- Radicals, of the type of Napper Tandy and others, began to occupy prominent positions in its councils, soon forced it into the republican ranks. It was inevitable that the widespread dissemination of the doctrines of the French Revolution should have a marked effect upon the Catholic population of the country. At a time when the principles of liberty and equality were being enunciated on every hand, the Catholic citizens of Ireland were, in an especial manner, acutely reminded of the fact that they were still debarred from the exercise of all electoral privi- leges and rights; that they were still oppressed by number- less burdens and restrictions ; and the present time naturally appeared to them more than ever favourable for making an attempt to obtain the removal of these disabilities. Accord- ingly, in February, 1791, they organized a Committee in Dublin, whose business it was to undertake the agitation necessary for the attainment of these objects.^ Various circumstances were propitious to the aims of the ^ Plowden, loc. cif., ii. pp. 331, 332, where the reply is also given. The history of Ireland from this period until the Union is treated in a succinct but lucid dissertation by Herve, under the title, " Les Origines de la crise Irlandaise," in the Revue dcs Deux Mondes, 1880, pp. i^j-\j^. ' The statutes and the oath are printed in Plowden, vol. ii. pt. 2, App. p. 171. ^ See Plowden, ii. p. 325. 26o History of Ireland. Irish Catholics. It was an event decidedly in their favour that precisely at this time a bill was carried by the English legislature — and that, too, without encountering any material opposition — by which the Catholics were admitted to muni- cipal offices, to the bar, and to the lower government posts. What had been granted to the English Catholics could not reasonably be denied to the Catholics of Ireland. Thesupport which accrued to th^qiJVom their old friend in England, Edmuixi Burke, was also very considerable.^ He was still as ardent a defender of the cause of the Catholics as he had formerly been when, by his pen and in his speeches, he had first advocated Catholic emancipation. Burke's sup- port at that time was the more significant from the fact that he had just published his celebrated book, the " French Revo- lution," an event which had been the means of completely sev'ering his connection with the Whig party. Henceforth, he wa s the f avourite of the court and the aristocracy^; ^^nZTcon- se quently, greater^ weight was now attached to his advocacy of the Catholic cause than had hitherto been the case. But his efforts were not confined to a mere vindication of the claims of the Catholics among the ruling classes of England ; he also sent his only son, Richard, to Dublin, in order that in the capacity of secretary to the Committee, he might be able to render assistance to the Catholics in all the steps they should see fit to take for the accomplishment of their emancipation. And, indeed, it seemed as if the influence and support of this eminent politician actually hastened the current of events in regard to this question. When, in September, 1791, the Catholic Committee sent one of its members as a deputation to London, for the purpose of endeavouring to secure Pitt's influence in furtherance of Catholic liberation, the grateful assurance was given to him that a bill, which should admit Catholics to the bar, render them eligible for the office of sheriff, and for other county appointments, would meet with no opposition from the Government, which, moreover, was pre- 1 Burke's share in the emancipation of the Irish Catholics is described by H. von Sybel, in an essay entitled, " Burke und Irland," which is to be found among his " Kleinere historischen Schriften," 1863, p. 474. Influence of the French Revolution upon Ireland. 261 pared to take into consideration the advisability of conferring upon Catholics the elective franchise. Just at this critical moment, however, a division appeared among the Catholics which threatened danger to their cause. The circumstance that several members of the Committee had entered into relations with the leaders of the United Irishmen now occasioned certain Catholic noblemen, to the number of about sixty, headed by Lord Kenmare, to cease their connec- tion with the Committee, and also to present an address to the lord-lieutenant,^ on the 27th December, in which they re- pudiated all association with the seditious elements compos- ing the Committee, and declared that they looked solely and entirely to the political wisdom of the Castle for the ameliora- tion of their condition. The Committee was highly incensed by this arbitrary action, and accordingly ordered the name of Lord Kenmare to be struck off its rolls. Thus, at the very moment when it was imperative that union should be main- tained, the Catholics were divided into two parties — an aristo- cratic and a democratic party. Unpropitious as was this want of harmony for the ultimate success of the emancipation scheme, the year 1792, neverthe- less, opened with cheerful prospects for the Catholic cause. On the 3rd January, Sir Hercules Langrishe, a Member of Parliament who, although by no means belonging to the opposition, always honestly strove to promote the welfare of his fellow-countrymen, received the celebrated letter from Burke, " On the Subject of the Roman Catholics in Ireland," ^ in which Burke severely criticised former penal legislation, and characterized it as being at variance with the laws of nature and of nations, and opposed both to the constitution and the interests of Ireland ; and in which he, at the same time, manfully broke a lance in defence of Catholic emancipa- tion. This letter, in the form of a pamphlet, was widely circu- lated throughout England and Ireland, and was the means of gaining many new friends for the cause of Catholic libcFation. ' Printed in Plowden, ii. pt. 2, App. p. 171, (Comp. also ibid.^ ii, pt. 2, p. 323.) - The letter is contained in "Works," vol. vi. (ed. 180S), pp. 299-376. 262 History of Irelatid. On the 25th January, 1792, Langrishe asked leave to lay before Parliament a bill which aimed at affording further relief to the Catholics. The bill provided that the pro- hibition against mixed marriages be removed; that Catho- lics be allowed to practise at the bar ; it also sought to repeal that unwise and harassing decree which prohibited Catholics from employing more than two apprentices in their business ; and, finally, the bill provided that Catholics should have the right to erect schools, without being com- pelled, as heretofore, to obtain the sanction of the Anglican bishops. Timid as were these attempts at reform, and trifling as was the relief sought by this bill, the High Church party, never- theless, declined to take any share in granting even these insignificant concessions. They urged that by permitting mixed marriages, proselytism and domestic dissension would be increased ; they described the Catholic Committee as an association dangerous to the state, which desired to intimidate Parliament and dictate laws to the legislature ; and, in short, they strenuously opposed the bill.^ In the course of these proceedings in Parliament a petition was presented, purport- ing to be an exposition of the wishes of the Catholics, which had been drawn up and signed under the direction of Richard Burke, who entered the House himself with the intention of representing the petitioners and advocating their cause. This appearance of a non-member in the House was, however, regarded as a breach of privilege, and it was only with dififi- culty that Burke escaped arrest at the hands of the sergeant- at-arms. This petition was declared to be unconstitutional, inasmuch as it was presented by a private person, and was not an expression of opinion by the Catholics; and, accordingly, it was withdrawn.^ Langrishe's bill, on the other hand, in spite of the vehement opposition of the ultra-Protestant party, was ^ For the proceedings in Parliament refer to the " Reports of the Debates in both Houses of Parliament, 1792 " ; comp. also Grattan's " Speeches," ii. pp. 326-376. '■' Con'sult " Harrington's Personal Sketches of His Own Times," vol. i. (1827), pp. 340-342. Influence of the French Revolution upon Ireland. 263 eventually carried in both Houses, and became the law of the land.i Meanwhile, numerous petitions were addressed to the House of Commons, praying for the bestowal of further privileges on the Catholics. One petition, signed by 600 Protestants of Belfast, demanded that the Catholics should be placed on a perfect equality with the Protestants ; a fact which clearly indicated the spread of the principles inculcated by the United Irishmen. The demands contained in the petition which emanated from the Catholic Committee,^ and which was pre- sented on the 1 8th February, 1792, were of a far more moderate character. All that was here required was the abolition of the penal statutes, and the restitution of the elective franchise, which, up to the year 1727, the Catholics had possessed ; but, notwithstanding the modesty of the con- cessions demanded, they were received with no favour by the majority in Parliament. It was feared that by conceding these claims, Protestant supremacy in Ireland would be en- dangered, and accordingly, although Grattan warmly supported the Catholics in their demands, the petitions were rejected on the 20th February, by a large majority. A question of such magnitude was, however, not to be finally settled by a decision of this nature. As, both in Parlia- ment and in the press, the old charges against the Catholics had recently been revived, and it was being again asserted that the Catholics were bound to yield absolute obedience to the pope in temporal matters ; and also, that the pope had authority to release subjects from the oath of allegiance to the sovereign, the Dublin Committee issued a proclamation ^ on the 17th March, 1792, which declared the unshaken loyalty of the Catholic population, and vigorously repelled the suggestion that they prosecuted any aims ulterior to the establishment of perfect religious equality. At the same time, it was deter- mined to petition the king to grant the elective franchise to ' See Irish Statutes, 32 George III., c. 21. 2 See " Life of Grattan," iv. pp. 56-64 ; Grattan's " Speeches," ii. pp. 376-383- ^ Printed in Plowden, loc. cif., ii. pt. 2, App. pp. 1 79-1 81 ; comp. also " Life of Grattan," iv. pp. 67, 68. 264 History of Ireland. the Catholics ; to which end it was also decided to enlarge the Committee by the addition of delegates chosen by the various counties. This energetic action on the part of the Catholics aroused keen excitement in the camp of the ultra-Protestants, in whose eyes the augmented Committee appeared to be a kind of Jacobin club. One of the Catholic leaders, named Keogh, having taken the occasion at a meeting of the Catholic Com- mittee, to thank the United Irishmen^ for the support they had rendered to the Catholic cause by means of a pamphlet which they had recently published, severely condemning the system of penal laws, the Anglican party made much capital out of this expression of indebtedness. High functionaries of the Crovv^n, as Fitzgibbon and Beresford, fomented the agitation against the Catholics, and it was mainly at their instigation that numerous corporations, and the grand juries of several counties, passed resolutions in which they sharply censured the conduct of the Catholics, and announced their determina- tion to maintain the supremacy of Protestantism, and to defend the threatened constitution in Church and state. The treat- ment to which the Catholic population was subjected, at this time, was highly criminal. During the proceedings in con- nection with the petitions, they had expressly been desired to make their wishes known ; and now that the Catholic Committee, in the name of the Catholic population, was endeavouring to formulate these demands, it was stigmatized by the ultra-ecclesiastical Tories as a revolutionary club ; a course of action which was undeniably calculated to cause even the most loyal sentiments to waver. While the Catholic Committee was thus agitating peace- fully, and by loyal means, for the attainment of Catholic emancipation, the United Irishmen had utterly renounced the principles of the constitution, and embraced the doctrines of the French Republic. On the 14th July they celebrated, in Belfast, the anniversary of the taking of the Bastile in a ' According to Plowden (vol. ii. p. 380), it was during the sitting of the Committee on the 23rd March, 1792. The pamphlet, which bore the title, " Digest of the Popery Laws," was written by Simon Butler. Influence of the French RevohUion tipon Ireland. 265 manner which unmistakably indicated the principles of their association. Among the decorations of the festal hall there was no English flag,^ the only countries represented being Ireland, France, and Poland ; while among the mottoes on the walls was the characteristic one : " Our Gallican brethren were born again on the 14th July, 1789; we are still in an embryonic condition." Remembering the part which the Irish volunteers had played in the political achievements of 1782, and influenced, in some degree, by the importance which at that time was attached to the National Guard in France, Napper Tandy and Hamilton Rowan, the leaders of the United Irishmen, desired to possess a similar institution in Ireland. A National Guard was, accordingly, organized in Dublin, and the spirit which pervaded this body may be inferred from the fact that on the buttons of their green uniform the harp, which constitutes the arms of Ireland, was surmounted by a Jacobin cap, instead of the usual crown. When General Dumouriez had defeated the allied troops at Jemappes, these National Guards also attempted to celebrate the victory of the French and the triumph of universal liberty, by a festival of brotherhood ; but the Government, having received timely warning, pro- hibited it.2 The United Irishmen were thus gaining followers in the towns." Meanwhile, agrarian bands had again become active in the open country in the north, and were greatly disturb- ing the inhabitants of Ulster. The excitement existing in this province among the Anglican party had spread to the Protestant peasantry, who became infected with the prevailing fanaticism, and formed themselves into bands called " The Peep of Day Boys," who made it their chief business to eject the Catholics from their farms ; while, on the other hand, from among the Catholic farmers, bands, calling themselves "Defenders," arose, who forced themselves into the houses ' See Thomas Moore, " The Life and Death of Lord Edward Fitz- gerald," vol. i. p, 204 ; a particularly valuable work for the history of the revolutionary movement in Ireland. 2 Thomas Moore, loc. cit.^ i. p. 211. 266 Histoi'y of Ireland. of Protestants, and robbed them of their weapons.^ The peasantry of Ulster were, consequently, divided into two hos- tile camps, and bloody conflicts were frequent between them. Several Protestants having on one of these occasions lost their lives, even this calamity, by the malicious manner in which it was represented, was turned to party uses, and was employed to create a sentiment unfavourable to the granting of further concessions. A list of the victims was forwarded to the Government in England, accompanied by the emphatic statement that these unhappy persons bad been slain by the Catholics. But Pitt and the majority of the English ministers were not so shortsighted as Chancellor Fitzgibbon, and the other officials at the head of the Irish administration. If only for the sake of the tranquility of the country, they deemed it advisable to make some further concessions to the Catholics. When, therefore, the Catholic Committee in its augmented character met on the 3rd December, 1792, notwithstanding the vehement opposition with which it had been assailed, and drew up a petition for presentation to the king, containing a declaration of the grievances and demands of the Catholics, there was no refusal to accept the petition, as their opponents had hoped. On the contrary, the five delegates deputed to present it were kindly received by the king on the 3rd January, 1793, and as the result of an interview with the minister, Dundas, they returned to Ireland impressed with the firm conviction that no opposi- tion would be offered to the complete emancipation of the Catholics.^ And that they were destined to receive something more than mere words was very speedily manifest. In the speech from the throne with which the lord-lieutenant opened Parlia- ment on the loth January, 1793, for the first time in such an official document, a special reference was made to the Catho- lics of the country, in a paragraph which ran as follows : ^ For the " Peep of Day Boys " and the " Defenders," consult Plowden, ii. pp. 385, 386 ; also " Life of Grattan," iv. pp. 130, 174. 2 " Life of Grattan," iv. pp. 76-80. Influence of the French Revolution upon Ireland. 267 *' The condition of his Catholic subjects demands the serious attention of His Majesty ; and His Majesty confides the con- sideration of this matter to the wisdom and HberaUty of his Padiament." ^ This passage naturally aroused the indigna- tion of Fitzgibbon, who had recently been elevated to the peerage under the title of Lord Clare, as well as that of the other leaders of the High Church party, revealing, as it did, the fact that the principles which they professed had suddenly been disavowed at head quarters ; nevertheless, the address in reply to the speech, which was supported by Grattan and Wellesley, and expressed the readiness of the House to pro- ceed with the work of Catholic emancipation, obtained the assent of the majority. Accordingly, on the 4th February, 1793, Hobart, the Irish secretary, gave notice of a bill intended to afford further relief to the Catholics. In the first place, it provided that all the existing restrictions relating to public worship and educa- tional institutions be removed ; that Catholics be admitted to certain military and civil posts ; and it further provided that the right to vote at parliamentary and municipal elections, as well as to carry arms, be conceded to the Catholics. When the bill came in for discussion in the House of Commons, its principal opponent was Dr. Duigenan, a recent convert from Catholicism, whose entire programme was comprised in the words, •" A Protestant king, a Protestant Parliament, a Pro- testant hierarchy, Protestant electors, and Protestant officials in every branch of the administration." Truly, a remarkable doctrine in a country in which there were only half a million Protestants to three million Catholics ! In the House of Lords, the opposition was led by Lord Clare, who prophesied that the final consequences of such a disastrous enactment would be the complete separation of Ireland from England- These pessimistic predictions did not, however, avail to crush the bill. After the rejection of an amendment moved by Knox, which sought to confer upon Catholics the right to sit in Parliament, the bill, as introduced by Hobart, was carried 1 Comp. Plowden, ii. p. 399 ; " Life of Grattan," iv. p. 84. 268 History of Irelana. in both Houses, and was eventually placed upon the statute- book.i While Catholic emancipation had thus been advanced one step, parliamentary reform, which was the second burning question of the hour, was being strenuously resisted by both the Government and the two branches of the Irish legislature. A motion brought in by Ponsonby, on the 14th January, 1793, for the reform of Parliament, shared the fate of Grattan's earlier attempts in this direction.^ In another department, however, there is one gain to be recorded as the fruit of this period. The pension list, which had gradually attained enor- mous proportions, was reduced to i^8o,ooo ; and the king was provided with a fixed civil list.^ The more the United Irishmen coquetted with France, and appeared disposed to direct their course into republican channels, the greater was the repugnance with which the subject of parliamentary reform was regarded. It was not long after the commencement of the war which broke out between England and France on the 3rd February, 1793, that a French agent arrived in Ireland and entered into communi- cation with the leaders of the United Irishmen;* and although no tangible results were achieved, the event gave rise to the belief among certain enthusiastic Irish spirits, that with the assistance of France, Ireland might be enabled to attain com- plete independence. The Government itself had no cogni- sance of these relations with the Continent ; nevertheless, many circumstances — as the celebration of French victories, the action of those volunteer battalions which were under the influence of the United Irishmen, and similar significant indications — plainly revealed what might be apprehended from associations of this nature. In order, therefore, to be armed against these alliances, the Government demanded excep- ' Information concerning the proceedings in connection with Hobart's bill will be found in Plowden, ii. p. 406 ei seq. ; " Life of Grattan," iv. pp. 87-94; and especially in the " Reports of the Debates in both Houses of Parliament" (1793). - 2 See " Life of Grattan," iv. pp. 1 19-124. ' Ibid.^ iv, p. 140. •• Thomas Moore, " Life of Fitzgerald," i. p. 256. Injluence of the French Revolution ttpon Ireland. 269 tional legislation, and, accordingly, laid before Parliament two bills relating to this subject. The bill which prohibited the importation of weapons and gunpowder into Ireland, and rendered the possession of these articles dependent on a special license, was intended to disarm the volunteer battalions of the United Irishmen ; while, at the same time, it was aimed at the agrarian bands in the north.* The Convention Bill,^ which forbade the holding of meetings for the purpose of drawing up petitions to the king or the Parliament, and which prohibited the election of delegates to attend such meetings, had likewise a twofold tendency. In the first place it was directed against the reform schemes of the United Irishmen, but, on the other hand, it also struck a blow at the loyal efforts of the Catholic Committee. Both bills met with but slight opposition in Parliament. The only person who resisted the Gunpowder Bill was the youthful Lord Edward Fitzgerald, son of the Duke of Leinster, who had imbibed republican ideas in Paris from his intercourse with Thomas Payne and other members of the French National Convention.^ The Convention Bill was a virtual abolition of the right to hold meetings and prevent petitions ; but it encountered only feeble opposition, and was finally carried in the House of Commons, on the 13th July, 1793, by one hundred and twenty-five votes to twenty-seven. So powerful was the hold which the fear of Radicalism had taken on the minds of even the most prudent politicians, that they unhesitatingly gave their assent to an enactment which was characterised by Grattan as an utterly unconstitutional measure, and as the boldest step towards the introduction of martial law. Under such auspices, highly unfavourable to the prospects of any scheme of healthy reform, the parliamentary session of 1794 was opened by the lord-lieutenant on the 21st January. During the course of the debate on the address,* Grattan ' For the Gunpowder Bill, see Moore, loc. at., i. pp. 219, 220 ; also "Life of Grattan," iv. p. 136. - Comp. Thomas Moore, he. cit., i. p. 220 ; " Life of Grattan," iv. p. 138. ^ Thomas Moore, loc. cit., i. p. 170 et seq, ^ " Life of Grattan," iv. p. 145. 2 /O History of Ireland. delivered a speech which was severely censured i by the Radicals of the Fitzgerald type, but which was characterised by a strain of the loftiest patriotism. While recognising no other external policy for Ireland than to stand or fall with England, as regarded the internal politics of the country, he demanded, most urgently and energetically, the perfecting of the constitution and the removal of the crying abuses con- nected with parliamentary elections. On the 4th March, therefore, in answer to this demand, W. Ponsonby again brought in a reform bill,- which was intended to entirely remodel the boroughs — the seat of parliamentary corruption, — and to reduce the number of members. But much as a moderate measure of reform was needed, and effectual as such a measure would have been in wresting the most dangerous weapon out of the hands of the United Irishmen, whose chief demand was for a radical reform of parliamentary institutions, the prevailing sentiment among members of the House, who were completely dominated by a horror of Radicalism, left no doubt as to the ultimate fate of the bill. A motion that the bill be read that day six months was made by Sir H. Lang- rishe, who, although by no means averse to a reasonable rate of progress, considered that it would be dangerous to confer fresh rights and privileges upon the people in such troublous times ; and exemplified his statement that the present time was ill chosen for the introduction of such reforms by point- ing to the condition of France. This allusion was seized hold of by Grattan, who replied to the previous speaker in an elo- quent speech, in the course of which he said : " But, says the right honourable baronet, ' France ! take warning by France ! ' If France is to be a lesson, take the whole of that lesson ; if her frantic Convention is to be a monitress against the views of a republic, let the causes which produced that Convention, be an admonition against the abuses of monarchy. France would reform nothing until abuses accumulated, and Govern- ment was swept away in the deluge ; until an armed force redressed the state." The best means to hinder the entrance ' Thomas Moore, loc. cif., i. p. 234. - See " Life of Grattan," iv. pp. 147-15 1 ; Plowden, ii. pp. 452-454. Injiiieiice of the French Revolution upon Ireland. 271 of republican ideas was, therefore — and this thought was the essence of his speech, — to effect prudent and reasonable re- forms. But his words might as well have been addressed to the winds. The motion of Langrishe was carried, and Pon- sonby's bill was accordingly lost. Herewith, the hopes of all moderate reformers were extinguished, while the prospects of the United Irishmen, speculating on the pessimistic position of affairs, waxed brighter. Now, however, the Government began to exercise strict surveillance over the United Irishmen. Those volunteer battalions which were under the immediate influence of the society were deprived of their cannon ; houses were searched for arms ;^ the meetings of the association were dissolved, while one of its leaders, Hamilton Rowan, was prosecuted on the charge of having published a libellous pamphlet, and although he was defended by Curran in a brillant address, which is extolled as a model of judicial eloquence, he was condemned to two years' imprisonment, and a fine of ^^^500.^ The severity of this sentence only tended to inflame still more the minds of his associates, and to increase their antagonism to the Government; while the prohibition with regard to their open gatherings con- verted them into a secret society with extensive ramifications, and thus rendered them all the more dangerous to the state. At this juncture, the governing classes in France considered that the suitable moment had arrived for spreading their net afresh, with a view to drawing the Irish into an alliance with the French Republic. The " Committee of Public Safety " selected, as their agent in these transactions, a man named Jackson, who had formerly been a clergyman of the Anglican Church, and had lived a considerable time in France. This man was sent to Ireland with instructions to come to an understanding with the Irish, and to induce them, if possible, to shake off the British yoke. He arrived in Ireland in April, 1794, where he succeeded in gaining access to Hamilton ' " Life of Grattan," iv. p. 137. 2 For the trial of Hamilton Rowan, see Plowden's " Historical Review," ii. p. 448, where the incriminating document is also printed ; comp. also " Barrington's Personal Sketches of His Own Times," ii. p. 119 et seg. 272 History of Ireland. Rowan in prison, and in establishing relations with him and other members of the association of United Irishmen ; but, betrayed by a false friend, he fell into the hands of the Eng- lish Government. At his trial, which lasted until the following year, he was unable to clear himself from the accusations brought against him, and he only escaped the penalty of his crimes by committing suicide. At the moment in which sentence of death was being passed upon him, he swallowed poison, and died in the presence of his judges.^ The revelations which were made during his trial also com- promised another individual, whom we shall meet with re- peatedly in these pages. This was an advocate, named Wolfe Tone, who had succeeded Richard Burke as secretary to the Catholic Committee, in 1793, when, in consequence of his dis- satisfaction with the condition of affairs, he resigned the post. In this position, Wolfe Tone zealously endeavoured to bring about a close union between the Catholics and the United Irish- men. A document which was produced during Jackson's trial, and which had been drawn up by Wolfe Tone, aroused the suspicions of the Government against him, and he only suc- ceeded in saving himself from arrest by fleeing to America, whither, after having undergone some months of his sentence, Hamilton Rowan followed him.^ The circumstance that Wolfe Tone, the secretary of the Catholic Committee, was suspected of being implicated in the conspiracy with the Continent was a great triumph for the High Church Tories of the country. For if, they thought, an individual who held a conspicuous position in the ranks of the Catholic Committee could be proved guilty of a crime of that nature, the burden of the same might be laid to the charge of the entire Catholic confession ; and this, in their opinion, would effectually preclude the possibility of any further attempts at reform. • Barrington, loc. cif., ii. pp. 120, 121 ; Stanhope's " Life of Pitt," vol. ii. p. 311. The description of the trial given by the younger Grattan (" Life of Grattan," iv. p. 164), is marred by exaggeration. " For Wolfe Tone consult his own diary, "Memoirs of Theobald Wolfe Tone, written by himself, and edited by his son, W, Th. Wolfe Tone " (1826, 2 vols.j ; also " Life of Grattan," iv. p. 166. hiflitence of the French Revolution upon Ireland. 273 The English prime minister, Pitt, did not, however, pursue the fanatical and illiberal policy of these exclusive, ultra- churchmen, who desired to avenge the crime of one individual on a community of three and a half million persons ; on the contrary, just at that time he was more than ever disposed to adopt a policy of concession. As one result of the French Revolution, a number of English Whigs, under the leadership of the Duke of Portland and Burke, had attached themselves to Pitt, and considerably strengthened his position in England. In a similar manner, Pitt now wished to win over the Whig element of Ireland ; and in pursuance of this object, he sought to come to terms with Grattan.^ But in order to render this possible, it was inevitable that, in the first place, some conces- sions would have to be made with respect to certain personages. It would be necessary to recall Westmoreland, the unpopular lord-lieutenant, who was, at the same time, a strong Tory ; and in his place Pitt purposed to appoint Lord Fitzwilliam, a Whig nobleman of illustrious talents, who had hitherto been president of the Privy Council, and was well known as a friend of Catholic emancipation. The office of chief secretary he proposed to confer on the younger Burke, an individual whose past career must necessarily have aroused the hopes of the Catholics that an entirely new political system was about to be inaugurated. This gifted young man, however, died on the 4th August, 1794, and it was then decided to offer the post to Lord Milton.2 On the 23rd August, 1794, immediately after his appoint- ment had been- resolved upon. Lord Fitzwilliam wrote to Grattan,^ and while assuring him that, in his administration of Ireland, the viceroyalty of the Duke of Portland in 1782 should serve him as a model, he solicited the support of Grat- tan and his friends. In consequence of this communication, Grattan shortly afterward went to London, where, on the 14th October, at a dinner given by the Duke of Portland, he met Pitt, Grenville, and other prominent members of the Cabinet. ^ See Lord Stanhope, loc. cit., ii. p. 2S1. 2 Ibid., loc. cit., ii. p. 281. 3 Printed in the " Life of Grattan," iv. p. 173. T 2 74 History of Irela7td. The following day he received from the prime minister a gracious invitation to visit him, in order that they might con- sult with each other on Irish affairs.^ This conference did not, however, result in a mutual under- standing. Grattan desired a complete change of system, and accordingly, not only demanded the recall of Westmoreland, but also the dismissal of Fitzgibbon, whom he regarded as the most dangerous opponent of reform. But Pitt, who had to contend with the weakness inherent in a ministry formed by the union of many dissimilar elements, and who, at the same time, did not wish to break with his old Tory friends, was not prepared to go such lengths as these. In no case would he agree to the dismissal of the Lord Chancellor, and even Westmoreland's recall must be effected in a manner which should convey no suggestion of offence." Moreover, on the subject of Catholic emancipation, the most momentous question of the day, Pitt seemed inclined to temporise, in order not to alienate his Tory colleagues. It is true he had given Grattan the assurance,^ that although the Government were not disposed to initiate legislation with re- gard to this subject, yet, that if pressure were brought to bear on them, they would, nevertheless, grant Catholic emancipation. But he appears in this case only to have expressed his own personal views, not those of the Cabinet, having on several occasions emphatically declared that, in coming to a final decision on this question, he should allow the ministry per- fect freedom. In consequence of such differences, matters remained some time in suspense, and appearances seemed to indicate that rather than agree to a perfect change of system, and the dis- missal of other high officials, the Government would prefer to annul the appointment of Lord Fitzwilliam. Not until the ' See " Life of Grattan," iv. pp. 174, 175, where Pitt's letter is also given. - With regard to the question of personal considerations, the corres- pondence between Pitt and Windham is especially important, the material part of which is to be found in Stanhope's " Life of Pitt," ii. pp. 287-290. 3 See "Life of Grattan," iv. p. 177, where the younger Grattan charge; the minister with intrigue and duplicity ; Pitt is defended by Stanhope, loc. cit., vol. ii. p. 286. Influence of the French Revolution upon Ireland. 275 Whig section had announced its wilh'ngness to be satisfied with the change in the lord-lieutenancy was Westmoreland recalled, when he received an appointment in the household as Master of the Horse. On the loth December, Lord Fitz- william took the oath, and assumed the position of Viceroy of Ireland. The new lord-lieutenant arrived in Ireland on the 4th January, 1795, and was received by the entire population with unrestrained and undissembled joy. Congratulations poured in upon him from every part of the country, plainly showing that nothing less than an abandonment of the old system was expected from the new representative of the Crown. The lord-lieutenant appeared to be completely intoxicated by this expression of feeling ; and the warmth of his recep- tion seemed, indeed, to rob him of that discretion which, in the difficult circumstances in which he was placed, was so indispensably necessary to him. Liberal in his views and sentiments himself, he was, nevertheless, obliged, in his official capacity, to act with members of the council and officers of the Crown whose opinions were diametrically opposed to his own, and who were at the same time fully determined to offer the most strenuous resistance to those reforms which it was his purpose to carry out, and which the nation expected from him. In such circumstances he ought, in the first place, to have waited until his adversaries had offered any factious opposition to his schemes, and then he might have been able to convince the English prime minister of the impossibility of co-operating with elements so diverse in their character. In that case, inasmuch as Pitt at heart agreed with him, he would assuredly have succeeded in effecting the purification of the official ranks. But instead of quietly awaiting the misdeeds of his opponents, he committed the gravest error himself, and straightway threw down the gauntlet to the Tories by removing from their posts two of the highest Tory officers of the Crown — Beresford, first commissioner of the revenue, and Cooke, secretary of war. As Pitt had expressly stipulated that, except in case of 276 History of Ireland. official insubordination,^ no other Irish Crown ser\-ant should be dismissed on the accession of Fitzvvilliam, this act was in direct contravention of the agreement. Moreover, the pro- ceeding was marked by a really indecent haste. The new viceroy entered upon office on the 4th January, and on January 7th Beresford was informed that his removal was contem- plated.- Beresford and Cooke immediately communicated with their influential friends in England ; and in complaining of the treatment to which they had been subjected, they contrived to make such a forcible presentment of their grievances, that dissatisfaction with the new viceroy forthwith began to manifest itself in the Cabinet.^ On the emancipation question, too. Lord Fitzwilliam ex- hibited but little piTidence. While several of the Tory ministers were irreconcilably opposed to the demands for perfect religious equality, and even the attitude of Pitt himself was one of apparent indecision, he being determined to await the action of the House of Commons, Fitzwilliam, on the other hand, accepted petitions in favour of Catholic emancipation immediately after his arrival in Ireland ; and although Pitt had expressly counselled him to impose upon himself a certain amount of reserve in his public acts, he nevertheless replied to them in a sense decidedly favourable to the peti- tioners.^ The result was that petitions from all parts of the country poured in upon Parliament, praying for the establish- ment of perfect equality between the religious confessions ; and in a few days the number of signatures amounted to 500,000.'' The excitement with regard to this question had become so intense, that Grattan, the old and tried champion of the Catholic cause in Parliament, conceived it to be his duty to delay no longer. Accordingly, on the 12th February, 1795, he applied for leave to bring in a bill intended to effect ' Stanhope, loc at., ii. p. 293. ^ Comp. the interesting letter of Fitzgibbon to Beresford in the " Beres- ford Correspondence," ii. p. 88 ; also Stanhope, ii. p. 300. ^ See Stanhope, loc. at., ii. p. 301. •» " Life of Grattan," iv. p. 183. ^ See the letter from Dr. Hussey in "Burke's Correspondence," vol. iv. p. 277. Iiifliiaice of the French Revolution upon Irelaiid. 277 the complete emancipation of the CathoHcs ; and against this request only three voices were raised.^ In spite of this im- mense majority, " the small but powerful party " of the ultra- Tories, knew how to spin their web in the most skilful manner. Two days after the measure was introduced. Lord Clare wrote to London that he would shortly forward the bill accompanied by the necessary comments, but that he hoped the sovereign would never permit a bill of this nature to become law.^ This attempt to defeat the measure was, however, wholly unnecessary. George III., a staunch Protestant, and at the same time a man of extremely narrow views, was troubled with qualms of conscience, and was of opinion that a com- plete emancipation of the Catholics would be inconsistent with his coronation oath. On the 6th February, therefore, he caused a detailed statement to be sent to the prime minister, in which he set forth that the action of Lord Fitz- william could only be regarded as a direct violation of that system of administration which had been pursued in Ireland since the expulsion of James II., and that, in his judgment, it would be a more sagacious course to make a change in the administration than to continue a policy which was cal- culated sooner or later to ruin one, if not both, of the kingdoms.^ The monarch's views were very cordially supported by the Tory hiembers of the Cabinet, who, indeed, regarded the large admixture of the Whig element in the ministry with but little satisfaction, and now took occasion of the indiscreet con- duct of Fitzwilliam, to reproach Pitt with having weakened the Cabinet. Pitt was not able to resist this combined assault on the part of his sovereign, his Tory colleagues, and the ultra-Conservative official clique in Dublin ; and the consequence was that Fitzwilliam was sacrificed. On the 21st February, 1795, Pitt wrote to him a letter in which he courteously, but firmly, pointed out the mistakes of his administration, the result of ' " Life of Grattan," iv. p. 187. - " Beiesford Correspondence," ii. p. "]}) ; Stanhope, loc. ctL, ii. p. 304. ® Printed in Stanhope, vol. ii., App., pp. 23-25. 2/8 History of Ireland. which was that on February 25th, the lord-lieutenant asked to be relieved of his viceregal duties. On the 19th March, it was resolved at a Cabinet Council that his recall was a step absolutely necessary for the welfare of the kingdom ; and a month later the lord-lieutenant said farewell to the country to which, but a short time before, he had been so enthusias- tically welcomed. On the day of his departure, the entire capital appeared to be in mourning ; places of business were closed ; and the carriage which bore him to the landing-stage was dragged through the streets by some of the most pro- minent citizens of Dublin.^ After his arrival in London, he received numerous addresses of thanks, while petitions were presented to the king lamenting the departure of the viceroy and complaining of the attitude of the Government. Thus ended the first Liberal Irish administration which was friendly to the Catholics, having lasted scarcely three months, notwith- standing the promising auspices under which it commenced. Immediately after his return to England, Fitzwilliam felt himself called upon to justify the policy he had pursued in Ireland, and, accordingly, he published two letters, addressed to Lord Carlisle,^ from which it appears that the viceroy had supposed himself to be in perfect accord with the prime minister and the other members of the ministry, in his ideas on the question of Catholic emancipation, and that he would never have accepted office had he believed that the rest of the Cabinet did not share his views. If these letters suffice to clear him from the charge of insubordination, it cannot be denied that his conduct was, at least, precipitate and impolitic. Meanwhile, his cause had been taken up in the English Parliament by his friends among the Whig party. The recall of Fitzwilliam was made the occasion of an attack on the ' An account of Lord Fitzwilliam's departure is to be found in Plowden, ii. p. 511. 2 Printed in Plowden, ii. p. 473. On the other hand, Westmoreland expressly declared in Parliament that he had been assured by Pitt that Fitzwilliam had received no authority from the Cabinet for his subsequent action with regard to the question of Catholic emancipation (Plowden, ii. 471). Tiifliience of the French Revohition upon Ireland. 279 Government in the House of Lords by the Duke of Norfolk, and by Fox and Jekyll in the House of Commons. A demand was made that the correspondence between Fitzwilliam and the ministry should be laid before the House, in order that members might be enabled to learn the real grounds for the recall of the late viceroy. This demand was, however, per- emptorily refused by Pitt and Grenville,i as being inconsist- ent with the welfare of the state, and incompatible with the royal prerogative. Lord Fitzwilliam was succeeded in the lord-lieutenancy by Lord Camden, the son of the celebrated democratic lawyer of that name. It was understood that the Government of the country should be conducted on the old lines, he having received express injunctions from his sovereign to reinstate in their posts those officials who had been dismissed ; and, before all things, to support the Protestant religion and pro- mote English interests.- To the Irish, the appointment signified a determination on the part of the Government to return to the old system ; con- sequently, when the new viceroy arrived in Dublin on the 31st March, his appearance was the signal for violent manifes- tations of displeasure among the population. While the new lord-lieutenant was taking the oath at the Castle, a riot broke out in the streets, in the course of which the carriage of the chancellor was attacked, and an angry mob surrounded the custom house for the purpose of seizing the obnoxious Beres- ford ; and it was not until the assistance of the military had been obtained that order could be restored."' Shortly after Camden's accession to office, Grattan's eman- cipation bill was brought on for the second reading, and the voting on this occasion is eminently characteristic of the state of parliamentary life at that period. Whereas on the 12th February — during the time, that is, when Lord Fitzwilliam ' For these transactions consult Stanhope's " Life of Pitt," ii. pp. 309, 310 ; also Plowden, ii. p. 529. - Comp. the letter of George III. to Pitt, bearing date the loth March, 1795 (Stanhope, loc. at., vol. ii., App., p. 27). ^ Comp. " Life of Grattan," iv. p. 226. 28o History of Ireland. was at the helm of affairs, and advocated the removal ol Catholic disabilities — only three voices were raised against the introduction of the bill ; on its second reading, on May 4th, 1795, when another current of opinion had set in in Government circles consequent upon the appointment of Lord Camden, the same bill was rejected in the same Parliament by 155 votes to 84,^ a clear evidence of the strength of the influence exerted by the Government on the members of the House of Commons. The administration of Camden was marked by only one measure favourable to the Catholics, which was the founding of the Catholic seminary at Maynooth. During the time of the persecution of the Catholics, their clergy were educated on the Continent ; great numbers of Catholic priests having been trained in France, especially at the colleges of St. Omer and Douay. But in the storms of the French Revolution these institutions had been swept away, and in view of this fact, Archbishop Troy, in the name of the entire Catholic prelacy, presented a petition to Westmoreland in 1794, in which he dwelt upon the urgent necessity which existed in the country for clerical seminaries, and prayed for permission to erect an academical institution in Ireland for the education of the priesthood. Pitt considered that the necessity had been established, and it was, therefore, determined, in 1795, to found the Catholic college at Maynooth, and to contribute an annual grant of ^9,000 towards its maintenance. This was the first, and for a long time, the only support which any institution in connection with the Catholic Church in Ireland received from the state.^ Apart from this slight concession, all the joyous anticipa- tions which had so recently been awakened with respect to Catholic emancipation were shattered ; and the boundless exultation which had marked the opening year was followed by a disappointment proportionately great. Consequently, many persons, who had hitherto cherished the hope that they would be able to obtain parliamentary reform by loyal and ^ Plovvden, ii. pp. 516-519. - Stanhope, loc. at., ii. p. 311. Influence of the French Revolution 7ipon Ireland. 281 constitutional means, seeing themselves thus deceived in their expectations, now turned their eyes towards the Radical league of the United Irishmen which, as we already know, had, since the Convention Act of 1794, undergone a considerable change in its organization. The entire confederacy was broken up into numberless small branches, each of which consisted of only twelve persons, of whom one was chosen by his fellow members to act as secretary. Five secretaries constituted a lower baronial committee ; ten lower baronial committees elected one member of the upper baronial committee. Above these stood the provincial committee, and above this again the executive committee, in whose hands was vested the sole direction of the society's affairs ; while the individual members of the association were known only to the persons composing their own group.^ The oath demanded by the league had also been altered. Instead of each member being required, as formerly, to pledge himself to use his efforts to obtain an impartial representation of the Irish nation in Parliament, the words " in Parliament " were omitted in the new formula, and the object now aimed at was " a perfect, equal, and propor- tional representation of the whole people of Ireland." " It will be seen, therefore, that the question of parliamentary reform had now been expunged from the programme of this society, and that, henceforth, its watchword was pure democracy. Meanwhile, in the north, where fanaticism and political excitement were rampant, the agrarian bands continued to increase in strength, and notwithstanding the exceptional legislation which was employed against them, they com- mitted more formidable excesses than ever. There were again frequent collisions between the Catholic Defenders and the Protestant Peep of Day Boys, or Orangemen, as they had recently begun to call themselves, after William of Orange, the restorer of Irish Protestantism ; and on one of these occasions, in County Armagh, the Catholics, although in a majority, were overpowered, and forty-three of their number killed. Shortly after this skirmish, which was known as the > Thomas Moore's " Life of Fitzgerald," i. p. 270. - The new formula is printed in Plowden, ii. p. 536. 282 History of Ireland, battle of Diamond, and was celebrated as a great Protestant victory, the ultra-Tories, under the influence of the fanatical speeches of Dr. Duigenan, formed themselves into Orange lodges, whose avowed object was the maintenance of Pro- testant ascendency in Ireland, which, as it was asserted, was now being menaced. The name of William III. served as a party shibboleth for these unions, the members of which were likewise bound by a secret oath ; and the anniversary of the battle of the Boyne was observed by them as a general holi- day, upon which toasts were drunk to the immortal memory of King William, to the clergy of the Anglican Church, and in remembrance of the glorious battle of Diamond.^ The formation of these Orange lodges tended to stimulate the excitement of the Protestant peasantry, and spur them on to still wilder acts of fanaticism ; so that before the end of the year 1795, the terrorism created by the Orangemen had reached an extraordinary height. They searched the houses of the Catholic peasants, and where arms were found they plundered the dwellings and drove the owners from hearth and home ; in some cases, — and here we quote the report of a Protestant eyewitness, Lord Gosford,^ the governor of County Armagh, — no proof was required that the peasant or farmer had committed any outrage, or even that he belonged to the Defenders ; the fact that he professed the Catholic faith was sufficient ground, in the eyes of these " lawless bandits," for robbing him of his property. Many of the Catholic land- owners and farmers accordingly preferred to migrate from County Armagh, where their lives were no longer safe, into the quieter province of Connaught. Among those who re- mained, however, the desire was aroused to meet violence with violence, which resulted in the adoption of retaliatory measures, and in many cases the Catholic Defenders revenged themselves for the outrages to which they had been subjected ^ See Barrington's " Personal Sketches," vol. i. pp. 243-247. For the battle of Diamond, and the disturbances which followed, there is a work by Musgrave, entitled " Memoirs of the Different Rebellions in Ireland," which is, however, not an impartial account, but, on the contrary, is strongly tinged with Orange sentiment. - Printed in the " Life of Grattan," iv. p. 233. Infltieiice of the French Revolution upon Ireland. 28.3 by the murder of their antagonists ; and, indeed, to such lengths was this desire for vengeance carried, that at last it seemed as if, in Ulster, the age of brute force had returned. With the object of restoring tranquility in this province, Wolfe, the attorney-general, immediately after the opening of Parliament in January, 1796, gave notice of two bills, one of which aimed at securing from possible prosecution any servant of the state who, in his attempts to quell the disturbances, might have overstepped the limits of the law ; while the other, the " Insurrection Bill," was intended to invest officials with fuller powers for the suppression of outrage. Accordingly, on the 20th February, Wolfe laid before the House four resolutions which, it was designed, should form the basis of the Insurrection Act. In introducing his bill, the attorney- general drew the attention of the House to the outrages com- mitted by the Defenders, at the same time not so much as hinting at the abominations perpetrated in Armagh by the Orangemen ; and when Grattan, indignant that the guilt of the tumults should be so unequally divided, proposed an amendment in which allusion was made to the conduct of the Orangemen, his motion was unceremoniously rejected. The Liberal Opposition strenuously resisted the passing of a law which was designated by Ponsonby " the grave of the constitution " ; young Fitzgerald, with justice, protested that the sufferings of the people must first of all be alleviated ; then they would return of themselves to their duty and alle- giance; and until this was done all laws and all resolutions would be ineffectual. But these representations availed nothing, and the Insurrection Bill was passed by an over- whelming majority. This Act conferred upon the officials the right to declare a county to be in a state of insurrection, in which case they were empowered to intrude into any house to search for arms, and to imprison every person found abroad between sunset and sunrise.^ The result of this severe measure was to make English rule in Ireland increasingly hateful, and to drive fresh recruits into ' Conip. " Life of Grattan," iv. pp. 241-243 ; Thomas Moore's " Life of Fitzgerald," i. pp. 276, 277 ; Plowden, loc. cif., ii. pp. 543-546. 2S4 History of Iceland. the ranks of the United Irishmen. The moderate elements of this secret society were continually being superseded by more Radical constituents, and ere long, those members were in the ascendant who were planning to throw Ireland into the arms of France as a means of achieving her complete separation from England. These men believed, — and herein they cherished no illusion, — that English dominion in Ireland could only be shattered by a French invasion, and, accordingly, they strained every nerve in order to bring about such a consummation. With this end in view, Wolfe Tone, of whom mention has already been made (p. 272), went over from America to France, and there entered into negotiations with several prominent personages in that country, more particularly with the cele- brated Carnot, the highly gifted organizer of the French army, at that time a member of the Directory ; and with Clarke, the minister of war, who was himself of Irish descent. Wolfe Tone invited these men to come to the assistance of his fatherland, promising them in the event of an invasion, not only the help of the Catholics, who were embittered by the injustice to which they were subjected, but also the support of the Dissenters in the north, whose republican sympathies were well known.^ In order to strengthen the relations established with the French Government, another leader of the United Irishmen was despatched to France in May, 1796, in the person of Lord Edward Fitzgerald. This nobleman, sprung from the most illustrious family in Ireland, had distinguished himself in the English army by his bravery at the time of the war with America. More recently, in the course of extensive travels, he had been in Paris at the beginning of the French Revolution, where he became imbued with a burning enthu- siasm for the doctrines of liberty. Here, too, he married Pamela, the charming adopted daughter of Madame de Genlis, who was governess in the family of the Duke of Orleans ; indeed, she was regarded by Thomas Moore, the biographer of the youthful nobleman, as the natural daughter of Madame de ^ For Tone's relations with Carnot and Clarke, consult especially his diary ; also Stanhope, loc. ciL, vol. ii. pp. 384, 385. Influence of the French Revolution upon Ireland. 285 Genlis and the Duke. By this alliance he became intimately associated with the circle over which the " Egalite " presided. These relations with the leaders of the Revolution, in addition to an eccentric toast which he proposed at a fraternal banquet in Paris, resulted in his being expelled from the English army. Shortly after this he returned to Ireland and, as member for the county of Kildare, took his seat in the House of Com- mons on the benches of the ultra-Radicals ; where we have already seen him, successively, as a strenuous opponent of the Gunpowder Bill, of the Convention Act, and of the Insurrec- tion Bill. After the recall of Fitzwilliam, and especially after the passing of the Insurrection Act, he lost all faith in the possibility of reform ; and being of an ardent and extravagant nature, he surrendered himself to the idea of revolution, and accordingly joined the league of the United Irishmen, at whose councils the valiant son of a duke, side by side with a band of Cataline conspirators, must truly have presented a strange spectacle.^ It is not surprising that the rank, the talents, and the mili- tary skill of this man soon acquired for him a prominent position in the deliberations of the association. Thus, he was entrusted with a mission to France for the purpose of negotiating an alliance, in which he was accompanied by another Radical member of Parliament, Arthur O'Connor, who, however, had not yet joined the United Irishmen. In order to avoid exciting the suspicions of the English Govern- ment, the friends first directed their steps towards Hamburg, where they entered into communication with Reinhard, the French resident minister ; after which they proceeded to Basle, and called upon the French ambassador there ; but just as they were preparing to enter French territory, Fitzgerald, whose aristocratic connections, as well as his relations to the Orleans family, had aroused the mistrust of the French Directory, was forbidden to cross the frontier, and hence O'Connor was compelled to continue his journey alone. He ultimately succeeded in procuring an interview with General ' Comp. Thomas Moore's " Life of Fitzgerald," /ai-j/w. 2 86 History of Ireland. Hoche, who was regarded as the prospective commander of the French invading army, but he obtained no definite promises. ^ Meanwhile, the Irish ParHament had again assembled on the 13th October, 1796, on which occasion Lord Camden made special reference, in the speech from the throne, to the fact that the traitorous organizations of secret societies continued to exist, in spite of all the means which the Government had employed for their suppression. As the cruelties practised by the Orangemen in the north were again completely ignored by the lord-lieutenant, Grattan considered that the obligation rested upon him to point out the real condition of the country ; and as, moreover, the speech from the throne contained no mention of emancipation, or any measure of reform, this distinguished orator felt it incumbent upon him to remind the Government of its duty. He accordingly moved an amend- ment to the address, "to represent to His Majesty that the most effectual method for strengthening the country and promoting unanimity, was to take such measures, and enact such laws as would ensure to all His Majesty's subjects the blessings and privileges of the constitution, without any distinction of reli- gion." Grattan criticised the entire system of administration with keenness and severity, and in the course of his speech addressed the following characteristic words to the Govern- ment : " Quick — very quick — you have not a moment to lose ; you have given your fellow-subjects a share of your taxes, your defeats, and depopulation ; kindly, very kindly, — give them now a share of your blessings, whatever your ministers have left you. Let us make no more sacrifices of our hberties ; let us now sacrifice our prejudices ; they will ascend in incense, the best use you can make of them." But this impassioned appeal to the majority was in vain, and a proof of the extent to which the opposition had dwindled was furnished by the 1 For the mission of Fitzgerald and O'Connor, see Thomas Moore, loc. cit., i. p. 278 ; also the important letter from Castlereagh, of the 17th Aug., 1798, in the " Castlereagh Correspondence" (" Memoirs and Corres- pondence of Viscount Castlereagh, edited by his Brother," Lond., 1848) i. p. 309- Influence of the French Revohctioji upon Ireland. 287 fact that the House of Commons rejected Grattan's amend- ment by 149 votes to 12} On the day following this debate, notwithstanding Grattan's eloquent warning, Parliament took a further step, and sacri- ficed another of the liberties which had been so hardly won. Wolfe, the attorney-general, moved the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act ; and the motion was carried against a minority of seven.^ It was not without reason that Grattan, shortly after this, exclaimed to the attorney-general : " I know not where you are leading me — from one strong bill to an- other — until I see a gulf before me, at whose abyss I recoil." ^ It was as if he already foresaw that a system which rigidly set its face against even the most insignificant reforms, and which met every expression of discontent with violent and bloody measures, must ultimately and inevitably drive the nation to revolution. The great mass of the people, it is true, whose endurance was being so sorely tried, maintained, for a time, a thoroughly loyal attitude, and that, too, at a period when English rule in Ireland was being directly menaced by France. As the result of O'Connor's mission, the French had hastened their pre- parations for an invasion of Ireland, and by the beginning of December, 1796, there lay at anchor in Brest harbour, under the command of Hoche, seven corvettes, thirteen frigates, and seventeen ships of the line. This fleet carried 1 5,000 men, who were to be employed in effecting a landing in Ireland ; and in prospect of a general rising of the Irish, it was also furnished with considerable stores of arms and munition.'* It had on board several Irish fugitives, among others Wolfe Tone, who had left America, and now occupied some post in the French army. The squadron set sail for Ireland on the 15th December, but before it had proceeded far, a terrible storm arose which des- troyed some of the vessels and scattered the rest. Only a ' For the speech from the throne, and the debate on the address, see Plovvden, ii. p. 577 et seq. ; also " Life of Grattan," iv. pp. 247-257. - " Life of Grattan," ii. p. 236. ^ Ibid., p. 257. * See '* Memoirs of Theobald Wolfe Tone, written by Himself, edited by his Son, W. T. Wolfe Tone " (1826, 2 vols.), vol. ii. p. 145. 2 88 History of Ireland. portion of the fleet was enabled to cast anchor in Bantry Bay, the point originally fixed upon ; while Hoche himself was driven with his frigate on to another part of the coast. Thus, at one spot on the Irish shores, there was an army without a leader, and at another a leader without an army. Wolfe Tone, still inspired with the old hatred of the British Government, desired the landing to be accomplished at all costs, and en- deavoured to induce General Grouchy, the officer in command in Hoche's absence, to carry out his wishes ; but, as the forces were considerably weakened, and the expected support on the part of the population of the country failed to appear, Grouchy deemed it advisable to relinquish the idea of landing, and to return to France. Wolfe Tone's disappointment when this determination was announced to him may easily be conceived. •' I do not wonder," he wrote in his diary at that time, " that Xerxes caused the sea to be flogged ; for I was just then in the humour to commit a similar and an equally rational action." ^ Although any alliance between the Irish and the French might have been fraught with danger to British rule, not a rebellious hand was raised at that time in the south of Ireland ; and Lord Camden himself was compelled to express his approval of the excellent conduct of the Catholic population. In a letter addressed to the Duke of Portland,^ he especially alludes to the manner in which they had suc- coured the army ; how they had voluntarily lodged the sol- diers on the march ; helped them to put impassable roads into repair ; and how, in short, they rendered assistance to them in every way possible. Grattan and Ponsonby were, therefore, in addressing Parliament in January, 1797, fully justified in ad- ducing the exemplary attitude of the Catholics on this occa- sion as an argument in favour of rendering all the privileges of the constitution accessible to them.^ ' The most important source of information for Hoche's expedition is Wolfe Tone's diary, loc. eit. ; in addition to which consult Stanhope's "Life of Pitt," iii. p. 5 et seq. ; also Sybel's " Geschichte der Revolutions- zeit " (1882), bd. iv. p. 362. 2 Printed in the " Life of Grattan," iv. p. 265. ^ Ibid., iv. p. 267. Injluence of the French RevobUiofi upon Ireland. 289 At the commencement of the year 1797, the only part of the country which was in a disturbed state was the north. Here, nightly warfare of an agrarian character still continued to be carried on between Orangemen and the Defenders. Moreover, it was in the regions of the north, as is well known, that the United Irishmen had gained the greatest number of their adherents, who, in this district alone, num- bered 99,000 members.^ The monetary position of the league was, however, far from being proportionate to the number of its members, and its stores of ammunition still less so ; while the watchfulness of the Government effectually prevented the introduction of arms from foreign countries. The Government was, indeed, not slow to make ample use of all the despotic powers which the legislature had conferred upon it during the past two years. Houses were searched for arms, and so many arrests took place, that the prisons were not large enough to accommodate all the suspected persons, and it became necessary to convert barracks and guard-houses into houses of detention.^ Very harsh proceedings were also taken against the press; and in February, 1797, the military broke into the offices of the Morning Star, a paper published in Belfast ; destroyed the printing press and the type, and threw the printers into prison.^ But still more stringent measures followed. At the instance of Pelha'm, the Irish chief secretary, General Lake, the com- mander of the forces in Ulster, issued a proclamation on the 13th March, which ordered a general disarmament and placed the population under strict martial law.* The legality of this measure was called in question, in the Irish Parliament, by Grattan and other members of the Opposition ; ^ and the issu- ing of the proclamation was declared by them to be an act repugnant to the spirit of a free people, and one which at the ^ See " Life of Grattan," iv. p. 279, where the author takes as his au- thority Dr. MacNevin's "Pieces of Irish History." ^ See "Life of Grattan," iv. p. 269 ; Ross, " Correspondence of Charles, First Marquis of Cornwallis," vol. ii. (Lond., 1859), p. 341. ^ See Plowden's " Historical Review," ii. p. 624. * Printed in Plowden, loc. at., ii. 2 App., pp. 262-273. * " Life of Grattan," iv. p. 273. U 290 History of Irelaiid. utmost could only prove helpful to the designs of the French. The majority in Parliament did not, it is true, deny the illega- lity of the act, but they defended it on the ground that the disturbed state of the country rendered such a step necessary, and so intense had party fanaticism become, that Beresford, one of the leaders of the Orange party, declared in plain lan- guage, that he wished their opponents would resort to open re- bellion, in order that they might, at least, be met face to face. The attempts made by Grattan and Curran to induce Par- liament to declare the proclamation illegal, and thus to compel its withdrawal, naturally did not succeed ; on the contrary, another proclamation of the lord-lieutenant,^ on May 17, ex-, tended the operation of the first decree to the whole kingdom, and at the same time granted an amnesty only to such mem- bers of secret societies as should, on a given day, be prepared to take the oath of allegiance. The only effect of the latter proclamation was to make the feeling of the country increasingly hostile to England. Many persons began to be anxious for the immediate arrival of the French, to enable them to revenge themselves on the English Government for establishing the reign of martial law ; indeed, some of the inhabitants of the north urgently wi.shed to attempt an insurrection without the assistance of France.- About this time the French Government sent a communi- cation to the United Irishmen containing the assurance that France had not abandoned the cause of Ireland, and begging that another agent might be sent to them. The United Irish- men had just, after the pattern of the French Republic, elected a Directory of their own, which consisted of five members, Lord Edward Fitzgerald, Dr. MacNevin, Arthur O'Connor, Oliver Bond, and Thomas Emmet ; and this body, accordingly, appointed a certain Mr. Lewines to be the agent of the league in its transactions with France.^ He was instructed to nego- ' Printed in Plowden, ii. p. 2, App., p. 265 et seq. - Comp. the memorial of the imprisoned members of the Directory which is published in the " Castlereagh Correspondence," vol. i. pp. 353- 372, and particularly p. 368. ^ See Thomas Moore's '' Life of Fitzgerald," i. p. 297 ; and the above- mentioned " Memorial of the State Prisoners," in the " Castlereagh Cor- respondence," vol. i. p. 369. Influence of the French Revolution icpon Ireland. 291 tiate a loan with either France or Spain — and, before all things, to solicit the French Government to send over a supply of arms, of which the Irish were in the greatest need. At the same time, they also endeavoured to obtain an auxiliary force of 10,000 men ; but in these negotiations they were extremely guarded as to making any concessions to France, being very determined to maintain their national independence, and to lend no countenance to the idea of incorporation with the French Republic. Lewines's mission resulted, however, in nothing but fine speeches ; and as the awakening suspicions of the British Government lent urgency to the matter, a fresh mission was entrusted to Dr. MacNevin, one of the members of the Direc- tory.^ He left Dublin on the 27th June, 1797, and proceeded, in the first place, to Hamburg, where he had a conference with the French ambassador, Reinhard, and left with him a memorial to be presented to the French Directory. He then directed his steps towards Paris, and personally delivered a second memorial to the ruling powers there. In this com- munication - he discussed the possibility of an invasion of Ireland, and by exaggerating to an extraordinary degree the resources of the United Irishmen, he endeavoured to place the chances of such an expedition in as favourable a light as possible. But MacNevin, too, failed to obtain any binding agreerrient, and the only issue of this mission was a repetition of the general promises which had been made to his predecessor- In order to induce the French Government to come to a definite engagement, MacNevin had pointed out,'^ in one of the memorials, that even in those districts where the United Irishmen did not preponderate, the Catholic population would, nevertheless, range themselves on the side of the French. He represented that the great body of the farmers and small ' For this mission consult again the "Memorial of the State Prisoners"; also the correspondence of Reinhard with De la Croi.x in the " Castle- reagh Correspondence," vol. i. pp. 272-294. * One of the documents is printed in the " Castlereagh Correspon- dence," i. pp. 295-301. ^ Ibid., p. 298. 292 History of Ireland. tenants had been driven by the despotism of the British Government, and the hardships they had to endure at the hands of their landlords, to make common cause with the French. The Catholic priests, he likewise alleged, were no longer alarmed by the slanders which had been circulated with regard to the irreligiousness of the French ; but they now acknowledged that it was from that people the Irish were destined to receive the gift of freedom ; and thus, in many quarters, the priests had been of considerable service in advo- cating, more or less zealously, an alliance with France. There may, it is true, have been much exaggeration in this representa- tion ; none the less, it is a fact, that whereas, at the end of the year 1796, the Catholic population of Ireland maintained a per- fectly loyal attitude, which compelled even the recognition of the authorities, it now began to be remarked that the Catholics and the United Irishmen were gradually tending towards amalgamation. The dignitaries of the Catholic Church, in- deed, continued to exhort their flocks, both by pastorals and by preaching, to conform to the law ; to warn them against entering into any league with the atheistical French nation ; and to point out to them, that only by means of a strictly loyal bearing could the Catholics ever hope to remove the prejudices entertained against them by the other confessions.^ But the patience of the people was by degrees becoming exhausted ; and they had arrived at the belief that no worse evils were to be feared from the French than those they had to endure from the British Government ; and so it came to pass, that the Catholic population joined issue with the United Irishmen ; and that, for fear of the vindictive measures of the secret societies, the humbler class of priests, in many cases^ followed their example. Thus, the alliance which years before Wolfe Tone had striven in vain to obtain, was ultimately accomplished under wholly different circumstances. Meanwhile, the course of events on the Continent was one which, to the discontented factions in Ireland, was full of promise. The Dutch Republic, in concert with France, was ' Comp. the letter of Archbishop Troy in the " Castlereagh Corre- spondence," i. p. 209. Injinence of the French Revolution 7ipon Ireland. 293 at that time planning an invasion of England. Hence, to- wards the end of June, in the year 1797, Wolfe Tone and Lewines were called to the Hague, where Hoche, the French general, imparted to them the " good news " that Daendels, . the Dutch general, and Admiral de Winter, were prepared with 15,000 men, and 16 frigates, now lying at Texel, to in- vade Ireland. But unexpected obstacles again presented themselves. The first delay was occasioned by the desire of the French that General Hoche should again command the expedition, while the Dutch, on the other hand, wished to reserve that honour to themselves. After these difficulties had at length been removed, the fleet was becalmed for some weeks, at the end of which time it was found necessary to re- plenish the provision stores which, during the enforced inaction, had been consumed ; and this, to the great annoyance of Wolfe Tone, who was again on board the invading fleet,^ necessarily occasioned a further delay. In the meantime, the English war ships, under the command of Duncan, were on the alert ; and on the nth October, 1797, they attacked the Dutch at Camperdown, and gained a brilliant victory. This event put an end to all danger of a Dutch invasion, and once more the hopes of the United Irishmen were doomed to disappointment.^ The summer during which the Dutch and the French were preparing to invade Ireland, also witnessed the preparations which were made by the country for the election of a new Parliament. Henry Grattan, the leader of the Liberal Oppo- sition, came to the determination to retire from public life, and he accordingly issued an address to the citizens of Dublin, in which he conveyed to them his resolution.^ He pointed out that when the land is oppressed; when the press is annihilated ; when public meetings, the only aim of which is the exercise of the right of petition, are dissolved, or threatened by the military, then an election has lost all its significance. He ^ " Memoirs of Wolfe Tone," ii. p. 232. 2 Ibid. ; also Stanhope's " Life of Pitt," iii. p. 66, and Sybel's " Geschichte der Revolutionszeit," v. p. 14. ^ See " Life of Grattan," iv. p. 301. 294 History of Ireland. therefore considered that the best course for him to pursue was to renounce his seat in Parh'ament. He also resigned, at the same time, the officer's commission which he held in the yeomanry. His example was followed by several members of his party who formed the body of parliamentary reformers,but Ponsonby, and some others, resolved to persevere and still maintain the struggle. At a time, however, when the Liberal Opposition was utterly disheartened, when the great mass of the people expected nothing from parliamentary representation, and everything from revolution and an alliance with foreign powers, the result of the elections could easily be foreseen. The new Parliament consisted of a small group of liberal- minded politicians, against an ovenvhelming majority of members unanimously agreed to grant no further concessions to the Catholics. The latter were completely under the sway of the Chancellor, Lord Clare, in whose hands even the vice- roy, Lord Camden, was a willing instrument. Consequently, the entire Administration was pervaded by his narrow and intolerant spirit. Pelham, the chief secretary was, it is true, a man of more moderate views, but he was prevented by illness from discharging the duties of his office, and his deputy, Robert Stewart, Viscount Castlereagh, who had recently been appointed keeper of the privy seal, was unable, on account of his youth, to create a counterbalancing influence in opposi- tion to the chancellor. Lord Clare invariably counselled a policy of extreme severity. Above all things, he was determined that the action taken against the Radical press should be energetic and unsparing. The editor of a democratic paper called TJie Press, in which the illustrious poet Thomas Moore earned his political spurs, was indicted on a charge of libel, and sentenced to the pillory and two years' imprisonment. The same rigour was manifested by the judges against all political crimes, — one man being condemned to death and hanged, for having administered to several persons treasonable oaths.^ In the north, the troops under the command of Lord 1 Slanhope, loc. cit., iii.p. 104. hifluence of the French Revohition upon Ireland. 295 Carhampton behaved like monsters of cruelty : they set fire to the houses of persons who were suspected of not having delivered up their arms, and threw every particle of their furniture into the flames ; certain Irishmen, some of whcm were charged with having been concerned in an agrarian crime, and others with having sheltered guilty persons, were put to torture by being hung up in a tree and left sus- pended until they promised to confess. The result of such license was that when Lord Carhampton resigned the com- mand, in November, 1797, the soldiers had become so com- pletely demoralized, that his successor, Sir Ralph Abercromby, openly declared that " they were formidable to everybody but the enemy." ^ In November, Lord Moira introduced the subject of the excesses committed by the troops to the notice of the British Parliament ; and on the 19th February, 1798, the same noble- man took the opportunity to enlighten the Irish House of Lords as to the conduct of the soldiery, and to ask the Government if it hoped to restore peace to Ireland by burn- ing down dwelling houses, and by flogging and hanging suspected persons. Instead of these acts of barbarity, he suggested the adoption of a policy of conciliation. Were this course followed, the mightiest forces which France could send against, the British Isles would have no terrors, for in fourteen days there would not be a man of them left, except as prisoners. This policy of reconciliation must, however, be adopted speedily ; for every day that it was delayed but in- creased the difficulties in the way of restoring tranquility to the country. He then moved that an address be presented to the lord-lieutenant, recommending conciliatory measures as the best means of removing the discontent which reigned in the land. This proposal was vigorously opposed by Lord Clare. The motion of the noble lord was inexplicable to him, except as regarded in the light of his prolonged absence from Ireland, and his consequent ignorance of the state of the country. ^ Concerning the cruelties practised by the soldiery, see " Life of Grattan," iv. p. 327. 296 History of Ireland. The Government had for years pursued a poh'cy of concih'a- tion in the island ; from the commercial concessions of Lord North and the establishment of legislative equality, in 1782, until the granting of the elective franchise to the Catholics in the year 1793, and what had been the result ? The formation of revolutionary societies, the system of nocturnal robbery and plunder, the league of the United Irishmen, and the desire for complete separation from England. At such a critical time as this, further experiments could not be made, and the first step towards establishing peace in Ireland would have to be the utter suppression of the rebellion. In conclusion, he was certain that no policy of conciliation would satisfy the league of the United Irishmen, who were completely under the spell of the French Republic.^ The statement made by Lord Clare was indisputable ; but he forgot that had the Government persisted in the course of wise and prudent reforms upon which it at one time entered, this action would have prevented the formation of such a Radical union in the first instance ; and, moreover, that the responsi- bility for the abandonment by the Government of its policy of concession rested mainly on himself Apart from these proceedings, which closed with the re- jection of Lord Moira's motion, the transactions of Parliament presented nothing of special interest. The attention of the people was not directed towards the rhetorical feats of the Dublin legislature ; the eyes of the nation were now fixed on the mortal combat which had just commenced between the United Irishmen and the Government. ^ For the proceedings in the Irish Parliament in connection with the speech of Lord Moira in the Irish House of Lords, see " Life of Grattan," iv. p. 329 et seq. ; Plowden, ii. p. 654 ; Stanhope, loc. cit.^ iii. p. 109 et seq. CHAPTER XIV. IRELAND FROM I798 UNTIL 180O. — THE REBELLION, AND THE UNION WITH ENGLAND. It was impossible for the transactions of a secret society such as that of the United Irishmen, whose numbers had recently so enormously increased, that towards the end of the year 1797 it comprised nearly half a million members, to escape, for any lengthened period, the vigilance of the Govern- ment. If, therefore, the league wished to avoid the discovery of its plans, it was imperatively necessary that it should take prompt action, either with or without the assistance of a foreign power We have seen how the hopes which the conspirators had placed on the expedition of Daendels were shattered. In like manner, the renewed prospect of foreign aid which was again, shortly afterward, held out to them was also destined to prove illusory. The day after the proclamation of the Peace of Campo Formio, in October, 1797, the French General, Bonaparte, was commissioned by the Directory to organize an army for service in England, a command, the news of which was naturally received by the Irish emigrants in France, and especially by the sanguine Wolfe Tone, with boundless jubila- tion. With characteristic energy, Bonaparte lost no time in carrying out the instructions which had been given to him. He prosecuted the equipment of the fleet with great ardour, and diligently inspected the harbours of the Channel with the object of discovering the most suitable point at which to effect a landing. But he speedily arrived at the conclusion that the maritime supremacy of England could not be easily crushed ; and, accordingly, reported to the Directory, on the 23rd Feb- ruary, 1798, that it would not be possible to attempt a descent 298 History of Ireland. upon England until the following year ; that even then it would probably be impracticable owing to complications on the Continent ; and that the favourable opportunity for such an undertaking was possibly gone for ever.^ The scheme of an invasion of England, or of Ireland, was therefore aban- doned, and the army destined for England was subsequently despatched to Egypt. During the time in which Bonaparte was making his pre- parations for war, the United Irishmen were also forming themselves into a military organization, in order that when the right moment should present itself, they might be prepared to take action. The members of the league were arranged into regiments ; a staff was elected, and a plan of insurrection was drawn up by Fitzgerald.^ Consequently, when Bonaparte's scheme was relinquished, there existed in the society a strong determination to take the matter into its own hands : in the first place, however, it was deemed advisable, once more, to ask the French Government what possible aid might be ex- pected from that quarter. A letter on this subject which had been sent to the French Directory having failed to reach its destination, Arthur O'Connor, one of the members of the Irish Directory, resolved again to undertake personal negotiations with the French Government. Accompanied by a Catholic priest, named O'Coigley, and two other members of the league, he left London, intending to take ship for the Continent at Margate ; but after being watched for some time by British detectives, he and his com- panions were arrested,^ on February 28th, 1798 ; and on O'Connor being searched, despatches in cipher were found in his dressing-case which were capable of proving highly in- ' For an account of the French preparations for the invasion of Ireland, see " Secret Information respecting Hostile Preparations in French Ports in February and March, 1798," in the "Castlereagh Corre- spondence," i. pp. 165 ct seq. For Napoleon's report, see Sybel's " Geschichte der Revolutionszeit," v. p. 102. ■^ See Thomas Moore's " Life of Fitzgerald," ii. p. 11 ; comp. also the " Memoir of the State Prisoners" in the "Castlereagh Correspondence," vol. i. p. 363. ^ See Plowden, i. p. 659 ; Thomas Moore, loc. cif., ii. p. 9 ; " Castle- reagh Correspondence," i. p. 211. The Rebellion and the Union. 299 criminatory. He was accordingly taken back to London, and tried at Maidstone assizes on March 21st. But notwithstand- ing many suspicious circumstances, the jury could not be con- vinced of his guilt, and hence he and two of his companions were acquitted. O'Coigley was, however, sentenced to death, on a charge of high treason, and in June of the same year was hanged. But O'Connor was not long permitted to enjoy his liberty : the Government soon found an opportunity of pre- ferring a fresh accusation of high treason against him, upon which he was again arrested, and confined in Newgate. Shortly after O'Connor's imprisonment, the Government was enabled to strike another and a fatal blow at the con- spiracy. Thomas Reynolds, a silk merchant in Dublin, and a member of the league of United Irishmen, was tempted by the prospect of a considerable reward to turn traitor. Having enjoyed the complete confidence of his associates in the league, he had not only been chosen colonel of a regiment in the county of Kildare, but he had also been elected a dele- gate of the Provincial Committee of Leinster, and in that capacity was present at a meeting of that body on the 19th February, 1798. It having been arranged that the next meet- ing should be held at the house of Oliver Bond, one of the members of the Directory, Reynolds gave notice of this arrangement to the Government. As the result of this in- formation, Bond's house was surrounded by a body of dis- guised military police, to the number of twelve, who ultimately succeeded in arresting thirteen delegates of the Leinster Committee, among whom was Oliver Bond himself At the same time a number of important papers were seized, which disclosed the entire scheme of- the projected invasion, and the names of the leaders of the conspiracy.^ Consequently, numerous warrants of arrest were issued, and Emmet and Dr. MacNevin fell into the hands of the Government on the same day. Only one of the five members constituting the secret Directory was enabled to effect his escape, and this was Lord ' See Thomas Moore's "Life of Fitzgerald," ii. pp. 14-17 ; Plowden, vol. ii. p. 673. 300 History of Ireland. Fitzgerald, who succeeded in hiding himself in a house situ- ated in a suburb of Dublin. The Government would have rejoiced had he fled to the Continent, in order that it might have been spared the necessity of bringing to the scaffold a scion of Ireland's noblest and most ancient house; and Lord Clare intimated as much to his family. " For God's sake," he said, " let the young man get out of the country ; all the harbours shall be free to him, and no obstacle shall be placed in his way." ^ But Fitzgerald was loath to be separated from his young wife, and disdained to take refuge in flight. After considerable delay, the Government ultimately offered the sum of a thousand guineas for his apprehension. The offer of this reward incited the agents of the Government to re- newed activity in their search, and very shortly they succeeded in discovering the hiding-place of the young nobleman. On the 19th May the town-major, with three officers and eight men, surrounded the house in which Fitzgerald was concealed, and surprised him while in bed. He, nevertheless, offered desperate resistance, and killed one of the officers ; but at last, bleeding from several wounds, he was overpowered and carried off to prison. Some days afterward he succumbed to his wounds, and thus escaped the vengeance of the law.^ Immediately after the successful stroke of March 12th, the United Irishmen took steps to repair, in some measure, the breaches that had been made in their organization. They elected a fresh Directory, but the new members of this body, not having the practical knowledge and experience of their predecessors, soon fell a prey to spies, and were betrayed. One of these, Captain Armstrong, contrived to insinuate himself into the good graces of several members of the executive committee, and having learned their secrets, he repaired on the loth May, 1798, to Lord Castlereagh, the ' Moore, ii. p. 58. Lord Castlereagh also personally intimated to the mother of Lord Edward the willingness of the Government to connive at her son's escape (Thomas Moore, ii. p. 22). ■^ In addition to the work of Thomas Moore, comp. also the account of the younger Ryan, whose father, Captain Ryan, was fatally wounded on the occasion of the capture of Fitzgerald (" Castlereagh Correspon- dence," i. pp. 458 et seq.). The Rebellion and the Union. 301 deputy Irish secretary, and reported to him the names of the conspirators and the details of their plans.^ According to these plans, it had been arranged that the standard of revolt should be raised on the 23rd May, and that the commence- ment of the rebellion should be signalised by simultaneous assaults upon Dublin Castle, the camp at Loughlinstown, and the park of artillery at Chapel-izod. Meanwhile the Government, kept informed by its agents of all that was passing in the camp of the conspirators, adopted the most vigorous counter measures. The commander of the corps of royal engineers drew up an elaborate plan for the defence of the City of Dublin. Special attention was paid to the condition of the commissariat. The stores of munition were carefully replenished, while orders were issued for a strict watch to be kept on the coast. Having thus taken all necessary precautions, the Government was prepared quietly to await the outbreak of the insurrection.^ Moreover, on the 3rd April, Sir Ralph Abercromby, at the instance of the lord-lieutenant, had published a proclamation in the north similar to the one issued in 1797 (p. 289), which ordered the surrender of all arms and weapons within ten days, and threatened all those persons who neglected to comply with this command that soldiers should be billeted upon them.^ In issuing this proclamation, Abercromby had yielded to the solicitations of the lord-lieutenant with great repugnance, and immediately afterward he asked to be relieved of his post. In his place the Government appointed General Lake, from whom, judging from his antecedents (in I797)j rio such scruples or objections were to be feared. The proceedings of this man in the north were characterised by remarkable astuteness ; and in a short time he was enabled to deliver up to the authorities 40,000 guns and 70,000 pikes. But who shall say how many deeds of harshness and cruelty were perpetrated before this result was attained ? As in the ^ See Plowden, ii. p. 680. * Comp. the documents in the " Castlereagh Correspondence," i. pp. 180, 189-197, ^ Printed in Plowden, ii. p. 676. 302 History of h'eland. previous year, strangulation, flogging, and similar tortures were the favourite methods employed to induce the " crop- pies " — a name given to the followers of the United Irishmen on account of their closely cropped heads — to surrender their concealed weapons.^ But although the conspirators were thus in a great measure deprived of their arms, and although they had lost all their original leaders, being now, in fact, in consequence of the further arrests which followed Armstrong's revelations, vir- tually without any leadership at all, — on May 23rd, the rebellion, nevertheless, broke out according to previous arrange- ment, in the provinces of Ulster, Munster, and Leinster,- Connaught alone remaining tranquil. The ammunition re- positories already referred to in Dublin and the neighbourhood, upon the possession of which the insurgents had mainly built their hopes, were so strongly defended that the project of taking them by assault was entirely out of the question ; and thus the energies of the conspirators were paralysed even in the capital itself In the open country of Leinster they com- menced operations by attacking the mail-coaches, after which they united, and advanced on the small town of Naas, situated about fourteen miles from Dublin. Their want of military skill, however, now became manifest, for, notwithstanding the superiority of their numbers, the insurgents were defeated, and the same result attended a second encounter in the neighbourhood of Dublin ; hence they were compelled to renounce all hope of ever conquering the capital. The risings in Ulster and Munster were not more successful. The rebels made an ineffectual attempt to take Antrim, after which they contented themselves, for the most part, with agrarian outrages. In all three provinces, while the majority of the body of insurgents consisted of Catholics, the greater number of their leaders were Protestants ; and Lord Castle- ' Stanhope, loc. ciL, iii. p. 116 ; also the " Report of the Secret Com- mittee of the House of Commons in Ireland," August, 1798, App. p. 39. - For an account of the rebellion, in addition to Plowden, may be mentioned Musgrave's work, " Memoirs of the Different Rebellions in Ireland," upon which, however, on account of its strongly marked bias, Cornwallis, the lord-lieutenant, passed a very unfavourable Judgment. The Rebellion and the Union. 303 reagh, therefore, not inaptly designated the insurrection as " a Jacobinical conspiracy pursuing its objects chiefly with popish instruments." ^ By far the most serious rising was that which took place towards the end of May, in County Wexford. The population of this district, which was composed mostly of Catholics, remained for some time perfectly tranquil ; but, exasperated by the atrocities perpetrated by the soldiery, and filled with a religious and national antagonism to the English, they eventually took part in the rebellion, under the leadership of Father Murphy, a priest who wielded an enormous influence over the masses. The rebels, to the number of 4,000, occupied a hill in the neighbourhood of the town of Wexford, and here they defeated a body of militia, a success which naturally increased their thirst for victory. A perfect religious frenzy now took possession of the insurgents. Respecting this phase of the rebellion. Lord Castlereagh wrote : " The priests lead the rebels to battle. On their march they kneel down and pray, and show the most desperate resolution in their attack. They put such Protestants as are reported to be Orangemen to death, saving others upon condition of their embracing the Catholic faith." ^ Inspired by this religious fanaticism, they advanced on Ferns, set fire to the palace, the residence of the " heretic " bishop, captured the town of Enniscorthy, and finally Wexford, the county town. Here they opened the prison doors and released many prisoners, among others Harvey, a Protestant landowner, who from this time made common cause with the rebels. Frightful cruelties were practised on Protestant prisoners, and all the efforts of their leaders to restrain the ferocity of the insurgents were for the most part unavailing. The great mass of the rebels acknowledged no leader, and one of the chiefs of the rebellion himself declared that they possessed but little authority over their followers. " The mob was furious, and anxious to slay every Protestant in Ireland ; and the only means by which ' " Castlereagh Correspondence," i. p. 2ig. 2 See the letter to Wickham of the i2th June, 1798, in the "Castle- reagh Correspondence," i. pp. 219, 220. 304 History of Ireland. the people could be prevented from setting fire to the houses was to remind them that they were destroying their own property." ^ After the capture of Wexford, the rebels formed a com- mittee of their own, under the presidency of the rescued Harvey, which formed, as it were, the heart of the rebellion. They received reinforcements from all quarters, and encamped, to the number of 15,000 men, on an eminence which comman- ded the whole of the surrounding country, called Vinegar Hill, they there awaited the attack of the Government troops. The situation appeared to Pitt to be so grave, that he resorted to the most vigorous measures for the suppression of the rebellion. In the first place, he induced the sovereign to consent that British troops should be sent to the aid of the Irish army.^ It was also determined that the functions of lord-lieutenant and commander-in-chief, which had hitherto been vested in two individuals, should be combined in one person, and this responsible and influential post it was decided to confer on the Marquis of Cornwallis, who, notwithstanding the disaster with which he had met at Yorktown, in the Ameri- can war, was still regarded as one of the ablest officers in the English army. He had been importuned to undertake this arduous and difficult task at the time of Abercromby's resig- nation ; but it was not until after very lengthened negotiations, that he announced his readiness to accept the appointment. ^ When, however, the new viceroy landed in Ireland, on the 20th June, there remained but little for him to do. On the day of his arrival. General Moore gained a considerable ad- vantage over one of the insurgent hosts ; and on the following day General Lake achieved a decisive victory over the rebels intrenched on Vinegar Hill, which resulted in the recapture of Wexford, and the dissolution of the rebel army.^ The ^ " Cornwallis Correspondence," ii. p. 370. 2 Concerning the reinforcement of the army by British troops, consult the "Castlereagh Correspondence," i. p. 221 ; also Stanhope's "Life of Pitt," iii. p. 146. 3 See the letter of the 31st March, 1798, in Ross, " Cornwallis Corre- spondence," ii. p. 334. ^ Comp. Plowden, ii. p. 754. The Rebellion and the Union. 305 rebellion, it is true, was not thereby ended ; bands of insur- gents still held out in the hilly districts of County Wexford, but the crisis of the insurrection was past. Great numbers of the rebels who fell into the hands of the soldiers were immediately hanged, and, in truth, the outrages which had been committed by the Wexford insurgents were now hideously avenged. Bloodthirsty cruelty celebrated its wildest orgies at that time, and the conduct of the Govern- ment troops was such as would have reflected little credit on any civilized nation. Hence the new viceroy was thoroughly dissatisfied with the behaviour of his soldiers ; and he openly declared that they had certainly cleared the country of rebels, but that the deeds of robbery and murder which had formerly been committed by the insurgents were now perpetrated by themselves.^ Cornwallis himself was disposed to exercise clemency to- wards the great mass of the rebels, who had partly been misled and deluded, and partly been driven by despair and the fear of punishment to take a share in the revolt ; and he, therefore, authorised his officers to allow such of them as were willing to lay down their arms and take the oath of allegiance to depart to their homes. But this statesmanlike policy of mercy and forbearance, which discriminated between the ring- leaders and their victims, and which, while punishing the one class sev'erely was prepared to deal leniently with the other, failed to meet with the approval of his collegues in the Admini- stration. The only person who supported the lord-lieutenant in his purposes of mercy was his secretary. Lord Castlereagh, who had now definitely succeeded to the post hitherto held by Pelham, and who was also of opinion that it would be in the highest degree impolitic to drive to desperation a deceived and misguided people, whose only sin was that they had allowed themselves to be made the instruments of others. The ruling classes of the country, however, who belonged, in a great measure, to the Orang-e party, and especially the majority in Parliament, were averse to all acts of clemency, ' "Cornwallis Correspondence," ii. p. 369. 3o6 History of Ireland. and recommended the adoption of the most cruel measures. ''The words 'papist' and 'priest,'" wrote Cornwallis, with reference to this fanatical action of the party, "are continually in their mouths, and by their unreasonable policy they would drive four-fifths of the state into irretrievable rebellion." ^ In another part of his correspondence he says : " Even at my table, where you will suppose I do all I can to prevent it, the conversation always turns on hanging, shooting, burning, and so forth; and if a priest has been put to death, the greatest joy is expressed by the whole company." - . But the viceroy did not allow himself to be shaken in his purpose by the prevailing tone of the circle in which he moved. Accordingly, on the 17th July, in the House of Commons, and on the 19th, in the House of Lords, he introduced a bill which, with certain exceptions, proposed to proclaim a general am- nesty to the rebels. In addition to thirty-one persons men- tioned by name, the exceptions included all the members of the executive committee, all the higher officers in the rebel army, and all such persons as had been concerned in any act of murder. Although this bill accorded ill with the cruel sentiments by which the parliamentary majority were anima- ted, they were eventually induced to give their assent to its proposals.^ It yet remained to arraign the numerous authors and leaders of the rebellion who were confined in the state prisons of the country. Several sentences had been delivered and executed, when suddenly, sixty-four prisoners of state approached the Government with an extraordinary proposition. They an- nounced their willingness to supply every information respect- ing the secret society of the United Irishmen, and the origin of the rebellion, on condition that their lives should be spared, and that they should be permitted to go into perpetual banish- ment. By the advice of the highest law officers of the Crown, this offer was at first rejected ; but on its being repeated, and ^ Comp. the letter to Ross of the 8th July, 1798,111 the " Cornwallis Correspondence," ii. p. 358. - Ibid.^ ii. p. 369. ^ Ibid., ii. p. 360. The Rebellion and the Union. 307 the lord chancellor having meanwhile declared in its favour, the lord-lieutenant decided to accept it. Oliver Bond was never examined. Immediately after it had been agreed to receive the statement of the prisoners, he died suddenly in prison. The three remaining members of the Directory, O'Connor, MacNevin, and Emmet, were subjected to an examination in the presence of the viceroy and the lord chancellor, in the course of which they furnished full details respecting the secret association ; and also laid before the Government a special memorial, in which they revealed the secret springs of the conspiracy, and more particularly its relations to the French Government. It was chiefly with the view of ascertaining the precise extent of these relations that the lord-lieutenant had agreed to accede to the prisoners' prayer for pardon. After the examination, the former mem- bers of the Directory were still confined some time in Fort George, after which they were allowed to depart to France.^ In the course of the examinations which took place at that time, one man deposed, on the testimony of an eye-witness, that on a certain day in April, 1797, Grattan had taken the oath as a member of the league of United Irishmen. Not- withstanding the fact that the witness cited by the informer, who was likewise a prisoner of state, emphatically denied the statement, and although Grattan himself most conclusively proved an alibi, this false accusation was so diligently propa- gated in the circles of his political opponents, that even the lord-lieutenant, who was usually so cautious in arriving at conclusions, allowed himself to be affected by it ; and under the influence of his suspicions he, on the 6th October, struck Grattan's name from the list of the privy council.^ Scarcely had tranquility been, in some measure, restored to the country, when Ireland was threatened by a new French ^ For this event, the letter of the lord-lieutenant to the minister, Port- land, of the 26th July, 1798 ; and also that of Cooke to Wickham, of the 24th July, 1798, are of especial importance (" Cornwallis Correspon- dence," ii. pp. 370, 375). " See " Life of Grattan," iv. p. 406 et seq. ; also the letter of Cornwallis, dated the 6th October, 1798, in the "Cornwallis Correspondence," ii. p. 415- joS History of Irelajid. invasion. While the rebelHon was in progress, the French had been preparing to go to the help of the Irish ; but, owing to the distraction which reigned in every department of the administration during the period of the French Directory, as well as to the terribly exhausted condition of the treasury, their equipment was not completed until it was too late. When, at last, they determined to attempt an invasion of Ireland, the rebellion had already been suppressed, and the forces at their command were too inconsiderable to afford any chance of success in case of independent action. Never- theless, General Humbert set sail from La Rochelle with i,ioo men, three frigates, and a few transport ships, and on the 22nd August landed in Killala Bay. On receipt of this intelligence, General Lake was sent against him with some regiments of Irish militia; but these troops, ill-dis- ciplined at the best, and having still further degenerated during the civil war, in which they had chiefly signalised themselves by robbery and plunder, were, in spite of their superior numbers, defeated at Castlebar, thus justifying the harsh judgment passed upon them by the lord-lieutenant. In order to wipe out the stain of this defeat, Pitt meditated sending fresh troops from England, but these reinforcements were not required. After the overthrow of his lieutenant- general, Cornwallis himself advanced against the enemy with a considerable body of infantry, and after a short campaign compelled him to lay down his arms at Ballyna- muck, on September 8th.^ It had been the intention of the French Government to land troops on other parts of the island, as well as at Killala, but want of funds prevented the carrying out of this project. One French ship, however, the Anacreon, with the Irish emi- grant, Napper Tandy, on board, did appear on the coast of Donegal. But on reaching his native shores, Napper Tandy, who regarded Irish affairs from an optimist's point of view, and had boasted that the whole district would flock to his standard, experienced a sore disappointment. Not a hand ' Plowden, ii. p. 789 et scq. ; Stanhope's " Life of Pitt," iii. p. 154, TJie Rebellion and the Union. 309 was raised in his favour, and when he learnt the fate of General Humbert's army, he concluded that the most prudent course for him would be to withdraw from the shores of Ire- land, which he accordingly did, and set sail for Norway.^ During the same year the French again undertook an ex- pedition against Ireland, for which, on this occasion, they were better equipped. A fleet consisting of the Hoche^ a ship of seventy-four cannon, and eight frigates, carrying an army of 3,000 men, was collected in Brest harbour under the command of Admiral Bompart ; and after successfully running the blockade, arrived on the nth October, 1798, in the Bay of Killala, where, on the following day, after a severe engage- ment with the English under Commodore Sir John Borlase Warren, the French admiral's ship was compelled to strike the tri-colour, and the HocJie and six other French ships were taken. This was the last occasion upon which a foreign power attempted to effect a landing in Ireland.^ One of the prisoners captured by Warren was discovered to be Wolfe Tone, who had taken part in the campaign in French uniform, and under an assumed name. He was, how- ever, recognised, and being specially excluded from the amnesty, he was taken to Dublin and tried by court-martial. Although he pleaded that, as a naturalised Frenchman in the service of the French Republic, he was entitled to be treated merely as a prisoner of war, he was, nevertheless, condemned to death ; but he anticipated his public execution by cutting his throat in prison, from the effects of which he died, November I9tlv'^ Thus an end had been put to invasion, the rebellion had been quelled, and the hostile society of United Irishmen annihilated. But the minister who directed the destinies of both Ireland and England did not, on that account, consider that his task was done. On the contrary, he felt an obliga- ' For this subject, see the deposition of the naval officer, Captain Roper, in the " Castlereagh Correspondence," i. p. 400 ; Stanhope's "Life of Pitt," iii. p. 156. - See Plowden ; also the " Castlereagh Correspondence," ii. p. 7. ^ "Castlereagh Correspondence," ii. p. 7j also the "Cornwallis Cor- respondence," ii. p. 432. 3IO History of Ireland. tion laid upon him now, more than ever, to give his attention to Irish affairs. But if order and security were again to be restored in the land, Pitt was convinced that the old system must be abandoned. Were the Irish Parliament in College Green, with its venal representation and its intolerant Orange sentiments, to be allowed to exercise its functions as hereto- fore, faithful to its old traditions, it would be equivalent to declaring perpetual warfare between the Anglican minority and the Catholic majority. On the other hand, Pitt feared that if the Catholics were admitted into Parliament, they would soon become the dominant party ; the result of which might be the enactment of laws antagonistic to the principles of English policy, and inimical to the Protestant character of the kingdom. In his opinion the only way out of the dilemma was to be found in the legislative union of the two countries, and the consequent blending of their Parliaments. This once achieved, not only would the direction of affairs no longer, as hitherto, be in the hands of a perverted Orange aristocracy, governed by the interests of class, to the detriment of the common weal ; but Catholic emancipation could also be carried without prejudice to the Protestant character of the United Kingdom. In the year 1785, when the subject of Ireland's relations to England was under consideration ; and again in 1789, when on the question of the regency the Irish Parliament pursued a course directly at variance with the action of the mother- country, the union of the two Parliaments presented itself to Pitt's mind as a desirable object ; and in this view he was now strengthened and confirmed by the present situation of affairs. There was little opposition to be expected from England ; on that matter the minister was in no doubt. Several eminent writers on economic questions, as Arthur Young, Adam Smith, and Tucker, had already created a public opinion in favour of a scheme of union ; while the objections which the centres of industry might be expected to urge against such a proposal could undoubtedly be overcome with ease. The condition of things in Ireland was, however, very different. When Corn- wallis accepted officCj he received instructions to elicit the The Rebellion and the Union. 311 views of the most prominent men in the country with regard to the expediency of a union, and after he had been a month in Ireland, he intimated to the Government that the moment was generally deemed to be extremely ill-chosen for the dis- cussion of this question.^ The most influential men in the country were, in fact, almost without exception, prejudiced against the union ; and the Orange party were utterly opposed to such a step, for the reason that, in an Imperial Parliament, the wide influence which they now wielded would naturally be swamped. The Liberal Opposition, who, it is true, were de- jected and discouraged by the recent course of events, and were now of little account in the legislative bodies, but who, none the less, had a considerable number of followers in the country, opposed the union because it would involve the abandonment of all those privileges which had been won in 1782, and which were mainly the conquests of that party. The City of Dublin was unfavourable to the 'scheme of union because, in the surrender by the countiy of a national Parlia- ment, the greatest amount of loss would fall upon her ; and^ in short, Pitt met with opposition to his project on every hand. The Catholics alone, who in consequence of their numbers were, as parliamentary voters, entitled to consideration, were not unfavourably disposed to the union ; but the matter of primary importance with them was the emancipation ques- tion, — the union being in their eyes an object of but secondary moment. It is not to be denied that they would have pre- ferred Catholic emancipation without the union, to emancipa- tion with the union ; inasmuch as, in the latter case, they would have had to be content with an inferior position, whereas in the former they would gradually have acquired a prepondera- ting influence. As they were, however, convinced that the English Government would never surrender Protestant ascend- ancy, they had, by degrees, accustomed themselves to the thought of union accompanied by emancipation ; the more so, as they believed that this measure would enable them to • See the letter of Cornwallis of the 20th July, 179S ("CornwalHs Cor- respondence," ii. p. 364). 3 1 2 History of Ireland. secure the removal of some of the worst abuses in connection with the tithe system, as well as, perhaps, an endowment of the Catholic clergy by the state. Strong in this assumption, the Catholic bishops grew especially warm in their adv^ocacy of the union, while several Catholic priests eagerly drew up petitions in its favour.^ But indeed it was no easy matter to arrive at a decision on this question. Even in the Irish Government circles, the most diverse opinion?, prevailed with regard to the subject. Sir John Parnell, the chancellor of the treasury, was a strenu- ous opponent of the union scheme ; neither could Fitzgerald, the prime sergeant, nor Forster, the speaker of the House of Commons, be won over to the project." The majority of the Crown officials, were, it is true, in favour of the union ; but as to the manner of its accomplishment, there was a great lack of unanimity. Thus, Lord Chancellor Clare was quite of opinion that union only could save the " accursed country," as he was accustomed to designate his native land ; but he desired before all things that it should be effected, "unen- cumbered with the doctrines of emancipation ; " and he was therefore bitterly opposed to the admission of Catholics to the Imperial Parliament.^ The viceroy, Lord Cornwallis, was of quite another mind. As, during the early days of his administration, he had given evidence of being animated by a wide tolerance and liberal views ; so, on this matter, he ex- hibited the same characteristics. It was his hope to be able to bring about a union not with a party, but with the entire ' For the attitude of the Catholics, Castlereagh's letter to Portland of the 28th January, 1798, is of primary importance (" Castlereagh Correspond- ence," ii. pp. 139-141) ; see also the communications of the bishops {ibid., ii. pp. 344-349) ; and the letter from Cornwallis to Ross of the 8th February, 1798 (" Cornwallis Correspondence," iii. p. 8), the latter of which contains an exposition of the views of the influential Catholics, Lords Kenmareand Fingal, as also of those of Archbishop Troy. 2 Cornwallis refers at some length to Speaker Forster in a letter to Ross of the 8th November, 1799 ("Cornwallis Correspondence," ii. p. 429) ; comp. also Stanhope's " Life of Pitt," iii. p. 160. ^ The opinion of Clare on this subject may be ascertained from a letter which he wrote to Castlereagh from London, on the 16th October, 1798 (" Castlereagh Correspondence," i. p. 393), as well as from the " Corn- wallis Correspondence," ii. pp. 414, 415. The Rebellion and the U]i{on. 313 Irish nation, and he was impelled by the conviction that there could be no peace, and no tranquility in Ireland, until the Catholics were placed on a perfect equality with the members of the Anglican Church ; ^ a conviction which also actuated, and was shared by, his young secretary. Lord Castlereagh. An equal diversity of opinion prevailed in the English ministry respecting the methods to be employed. One portion of the Cabinet — Burke's old party — were anxious for imme- diate emancipation, and hence their support of the question of union ; while the Tory members were implacable foes to any measure designed to place Catholics and Protestants on an equality. In view, then, of these dissensions in the Cabinet ; in view also of the opposition which Pitt knew he would have to encounter in carrying through his union scheme, both from the Orange party and from the Tory party in the British Parliament, were he to combine the question of emancipation with that of union ; and taking into consider- ation the repugnance with which, judging from the events of the year 1795, his sovereign might be presumed to regard the proposal to grant perfect equality to the Catholics, — the prime minister came to the conclusion that it would be im- prudent to associate the two measures. An agent of the Irish lord-lieutenant sought to demonstrate to him that there were various urgent reasons for the immediate granting of Catholic emancipation ; but Pitt was unwilling to be convinced of the feasibility of such a measure at so critical a moment.^ When, therefore. Lord Clare arrived in London, in November, 1798, he speedily learnt that Pitt had resolved to proceed with the union scheme alone. The question of Catholic emancipation he left to be solved by the Imperial Parliament. When the modus proccdendi had once been agreed on by the ministry, the details of the measure were speedily settled; and on November 12th, the principles of the bill, as prepared by the British Cabinet, were forwarded to the lord-lieutenant.'^ • See his letter to Pitt in the " Cornwallis Correspondence," ii. p. 416. - Stanhope's "Life of Pitt," iii. p. 160. ' See the letter from Portland to Cornwallis of the 12th November, 1798 ("Cornwallis Correspondence," ii. p. 434). 3 1 4 History of Ireland, During the two following months an energetic agitation was carried on in Ireland. The opinions of persons of distinction, and particularly of those who possessed large influence in the boroughs, were canvassed, and their support of the bill gained by the offer of a peerage or the promise of promotion.^ Some of the Crown officers, as Parnell, the chancellor of the exchequer, and James Fitzgerald, the prime sergeant, who had assumed a hostile attitude towards the question of union, were dismissed from their posts ; the former being succeeded by the shrewd Isaac Corry/ The press was powerfully manipu- lated ; and a prominent Irish official, named Cooke, of whom mention has already been made, published a pamphlet, in which all the grounds for the union w^ere presented in the most ingenious manner ; ^ this called forth a perfect flood of refutatory literature, some of which was from the pens of well-known members of Parliament, as Barrington and Bushe. At length, in January of the year 1799, this question, which had so long agitated the public mind, was introduced in both Parliaments almost simultaneously. On the 22nd January, a royal message to the British Parliament gave expression, in the first place, to a desire for the union of both states, assign- ing as the chief reason for such a step, that the foreign policy of the country rendered it desirable that a closer connection should be established between the two kingdoms than had hitherto existed.^ Accordingly, after a preliminary debate on January 23rd, Pitt laid before the English House of Commons, on the 31st of the same month, eight resolutions which it was proposed should form the basis of the Union Bill, and which he supported in a well-digested and statesmanlike speech, pervaded throughout by a noble enthusiasm. The speaker commenced by pointing out that the foreign ^ See the lord-lieutenant's letter to Portland of the 27th November, 1798, in the " Cornwallis Correspondence," ii. p. 448. 2 For the removal of Parnell, consult the " Cornwallis Correspondence,"' iii. p. 38 ; also Stanhope, loc. ciL, iii. p. 168. ^ For Cooke's pamphlet, see " Plowden," ii. p. 815. ^ Printed in " The Speeches of the Right Hon. William Pitt in the House of Commons," vol. iii. (1808), p. 15. The Rebellion and the Union. 315 relations of the country imperatively demanded that an end be put to the existing condition of things, and that a perfect union of the two kingdoms be effected. " Suppose, for in- stance," he said, " that the present war, which the Parliament of Great Britain considers to be just and necessary, had been voted by the Irish Parliament to be unjust, unnecessary, extravagant, and hostile to the principles of humanity and freedom. Would that Parliament have been bound by this country? If not, what security have we, at a moment the most important to our common interest and common salva- tion, that the two kingdoms should have but one friend and one foe ? " He then referred to the religious question, and showed that while Ireland remained a separate kingdom, per- fect equality could never be granted to the Catholics without shaking the constitution of Ireland to its centre, and endanger- ing the safety of the state ; but that in a united Imperial Parliament, the question of Catholic emancipation could be solved with infinitely less risk than it could ever possibly be by separate legislative assemblies. The tithe difficulty, too, which, as a matter of fact, often presented itself at the present day as a serious evil, could easily be removed by an Imperial Parliament, without necessitating an open rupture with the existing ecclesiastical system. Everything seemed to point to England as the friend and protector of Ireland, in all the dangers which threatened her peace and security. Ireland spoke the same language, had the same customs and laws as Great Britain ; and under these circumstances, the union was a natural one, and ought not to be stigmatised as an attempt to bind a foreign yoke on the neighbouring island ; it was rather the voluntary union of two lands which, for their common advantage, were combining to form one kingdom. In this connection, he quoted the following lines of Virgil, — " Non ego Teucris Italos pareie iubebo, Nee nova regna peto ; paribus se legibus ambce Invictse gentes a^tenia in fcedera mittant."^ He was warmly supported by Dundas, and also by Canning, ' See Pitt's " Speeches," vol. iii. pp. 28-70 ; the extracts quoted are to be found pp. 42-62. o 1 6 History of Ireland. who, although a young man, was already beginning to occupy an important position. Owing to his dissatisfaction with the course of domestic poHtics, Fox held aloof from these trans- actions of the House of Commons ; consequently, the opposi- tion was mainly led by Sheridan, who moved an amendment which was rejected by a considerable majority. In the House of Lords, Pitt's bill was equally well received. Lord Moira and Lord Lansdowne, it is true, spoke against the Union, but eventually the bill was carried without any marked dissent. The course of events in Ireland, however, bore quite another character. In the speech from the throne, the lord- lieutenant also referred to the union scheme as representing the desire of the Crown ; consequently, the parliamentary conflict commenced with the debate on the address. Never- theless, in the House of Lords, the wishes of the Government met with ready approval, and an address was carried on January 22nd, which emphatically declared the acquiescence of the Irish Lords in the will of the Government. Very different was the result in the House of Commons. On the 2 1 St January, Castlereagh had estimated the number of votes for the Government to be 160 against 100 of the Opposition. But this proved to be a decided miscalculation. When, on January 22nd, an address was moved, signifying the assent of the House to the speech from the throne, an amendment issuing from the ranks of the Opposition, was brought forward by G. Ponsonby, which strongly " maintained the undoubted birthright of the people of Ireland, to have a resident and independent legislature " of their own. After a discussion lasting twenty-one hours — a case certainly unique in the history of Irish parliamentary debate — the amendment was rejected by a majority of one, a result which was greeted with tumultuous applause from the benches of the Opposition. This narrow escape of the Government was shortly followed by an actual defeat. On January 24th, after a second pro- longed debate, the paragraph recommending the establishment of the Union was struck out of the address by 109 votes against 104. The victory won by the Opposition was cele- The Rebellion and the Union. 317 brated in Dublin by a brilliant illumination, on which occasion the houses of those parliamentary representatives who had supported the Union were mobbed by the populace.^ Although the debate on the address had clearly proved that Pitt's views were shared by only a minority of the Irish House of Commons, the prime minister did not relinquish the hope that a Union Bill would, nevertheless, be laid before both Houses of Parliament during the present session. But the viceroy, who was better acquainted with the temper of the Opposition, speedily undeceived him, and assured him of the impracticability of reviving the question before the following- session of Parliament. Cornwallis also attempted, once more, to make his voice heard in favour of the Catholics, expecting more satisfactory results from a union which should be built upon broader foundations ; ^ but the Government gave him little encouragement ; and the Duke of Portland expressly wrote that what was called " Catholic emancipation " could only be secured " by means of the Union, and through the medium of an united Parliament." ^ In order to avoid, during the coming session, a repetition of the ill-success which had marked the last it Vv'as necessary for the Government to put in motion all the machinery at its command, the more so that the anti-union party was untiring in its 'endeavours to procure votes against the Government. Numberless meetings in opposition to the proposed scheme of Union were held in all parts of the country, and were attended by immense multitudes — a fact which was presented to members of Parliament as a hint that the confidence of the ^ For the proceedings of the Irish Parhament, see Plowden, ii. pp. 824-875 ; for the transactions on the 22nd and 23rd January, 1799, comp. also the letter of the lord-lieutenant to Portland, dated the 23rd January, 1799 ("Cornwallis Correspondence," iii. p. 40^/ seq.). The prospects which the Government believed itself entitled to entertain are expounded in a letter from Castlereagh to Portland, in the " Castlereagh Corre- spondence," ii. p. 126. - Pitt's plans are disclosed in a letter of the 26th Januar)', 1799, to be found in the " Cornwallis Correspondence," iii. p. 56 ; the reply of Cornwallis, ibid., p. 58. The proposal of Cornwallis to build up a " Union on a more enlarged principle " was made by him on the 29th January, 1799 (" Cornwallis Correspondence," iii. p. 55). ^ The " Castlereagh Correspondence," ii. p. 145. o 1 S History of Ireland. people would be given to those representatives who voted against the Union. It is certain that the result of a dissolution of Parliament and an appeal to the country would, at this time, have been disastrous to the Government ; but no such step was medi- tated. On the contrary, the Duke of Portland declared that so much consideration for the electorate would be unjustifiable and, indeed, unconstitutional.^ And, in fact, it was far easier for the British Government to attain the end it had in view by means of the Parliament as then constituted, than it would have been with a fresh representation enjoying the confidence of the nation. The most certain method of inducing the parliamentary majority to approve the plans of the Government was pro- pounded by Lord Castlereagh in a memorial which he addressed to the minister Portland on the ist February, 1799. In this memorial the writer, who, notwithstanding his youth, betrays remarkably realistic views of men and things, as well as an extraordinary insight into Irish affairs, lays bare in the coolest possible manner the secret springs by which the various opposing elements in the country were moved, and at the same time makes a calculation as to the price which it will be necessary to pay in order to gain over these same elements, and thus bring the existence of the Irish Parliament to a happy termination. As one effect of the Union, as contem- plated by the proposals of the Government, would be the abolition of a considerable number of boroughs, it was sug- gested in this memorial to compensate the borough owners for the loss of influence which they would inevitably suffer from the passing of a measure of this nature, such disen- franchised seats to be paid for at the rate of £j,ooo each, which in the aggregate would amount to ^756,000 ; while it was proposed to render the hostile influence of the counties innocuous by the payment of ;^224,ooo. The members of the legal profession, who regarded a parliamentary career as a means of advancement and emolument, and who were, con- ' See Portland's letter to Castlereagh of the 29th January, 1799, in "Castlereagh Correspondence," ii. p. (46. TJie Rebellion and the Union. 319 sequently, almost unanimous in their opposition to the Union, were to be appeased by the sum of iJ"200,ooo. Those persons who had expended money on the purchase of seats in Par- liament were to be indemnified to the amount of ;{^75,ooo; and finally, it was proposed to pay to the City of Dublin the sum of ^200,000, with the object of inducing her to look with favour upon the Union. Altogether, Castlereagh demanded for his project a million and a half sterling ; and he declared that without this amount of money the desired end could never be attained.^ Nor was this memorial destined to remain a purely specu- lative disquisition. On the contrary, the Government deter- mined to carry out Lord Castlereagh's proposal to the letter ; and the sum total of the money actually paid as com- pensation in the realization of this scheme, eventually amounted to ^1,260,000, several "fatted borough-mongers," who had formerly been objects of dread on account of the immense influence they were able to exercise on a parlia- mentary election, receiving sums varying from ^^"40,000 to ;^ 5 0,000.- This was, however, not the only means employed to capture votes. Irish commoners, whose aspirations tended more in the direction of rank and dignities than of gold, were won over by the offer of a peerage. Irish peers were rewarded for their support of the Government by being advanced to the more esteemed rank of an English peer. Thus, in connection with the Union, twenty-two new peers were created, and seventeen were invested with higher titles.^ This shameless bribery, partly open, partly secret, caused the noble-minded viceroy to blush. " The political jobbery of this country," he wrote to his friend Major-General Ross, on the 20th May, 1799, "gets the better of me. It has alwa}-s been the wish of my life to avoid such dirty transactions ; and now I am involved in them, and am, therefore, more ' "Castlereagh Correspondence," ii. pp. 149-153. " " Cornwallis Correspondence," iii. pp. 323, 324. ^ The names of the respective peers may be seen in the "Cornwallis Correspondence," iii. pp. 318, 319. 320 His lory of Iceland. wretched than I ever was before. I trust I shall live to get out of this most cursed of all situations, and most repugnant to my feelings. How I long to kick those whom my public duty obliges me to court !" ^ On the 8th June, he again writes to the same friend : " My occupation is now of the most unpleasant nature — negotiating and jobbing with the most corrupt people under heaven. I despise and hate my- self every hour for engaging in such dirty work, and am supported only by the reflection that without an union the British Empire must be dissolved." " With the Catholics, too, the Government was prodigal of promises. It was thought that in their case, also, monetary considerations would prove a powerful factor in gaining the adhesion of the bishops to the Union. Accordingly, it was decided to make a proposal to endow both the Catholic and the Presbyterian clergy ; and the proceedings were initiated by Lord Castlereagh, who entered into negotiations with several of the Catholic bishops, more particularly with Dr. Troy, Archbishop of Dublin.^ Seeing, however, that no mere expenditure of money could purchase the support of the Catholics for the Government policy on the question of emancipation, the heads of the Irish Administration went a step farther, and allowed it to be generally understood, that in case the union were effected, the subject of Catholic emancipation should immediately come to the front. But, as it was feared that this mode of procedure would act prejudicially with regard to several influential mem- bers of the Orange party who had hitherto been in favour of the union project, it was decided to take precautionary mea- sures, and accordingly, on the 12th February, the lord-lieu- tenant received instructions from the Duke of Portland to ascertain, in strict confidence,^ what position these persons ' See "Cornwallis Correspondence," iii. p. 100. 2 Ibid.^ p. 102. ^ Comp. "Castlereagh Correspondence," ii. pp. 171-173. It would appear, however, from a letter to Pitt of the 24th January, 1799 (Stan- hope's " Life of Pitt," iii. App., p. xviii.), that the king was strongly averse to any such support being given to the Cathohc Church. See " CornwalHs Correspondence," iii. p. 63. The Rebellion and the Union. 321 would be likely to assume towards a subsequent measure of Catholic emancipation. It would appear that the viceroy succeeded in overcoming the scruples of these individuals, for in August we find him journeying in the south of Ireland, stirring up the Catholics, and endeavouring to create among them a public opinion favourable to the Union. Then, in the autumn of 1779, he despatched his secretary. Lord Castlereagh, to London, in order to furnish the ministry with a report of the actual condition of affairs. His presentment of the case was to the effect that the Union could never be achieved if the Catholics resisted it ; and that the opposition of the Catholics would be extremely violent should they have reason to sus- pect that the ministry continued to regard the question of emancipation with disfavour, and should the hopes which they had lately been cherishing on this subject prove to be delusive. Hereupon a Cabinet Council was held to deliberate on the situation, at which, in spite of some doubt which still existed in the minds of certain of the ministers, as to the ad- visability of admitting Catholics to the highest offices of the state, — and although they did not hide from themselves the fact that the antipathy which prevailed in court circles on this ques- tion would have to be encountered and overcome, — the minis- ters present unanimously declared in favour of granting Catho- lic emancipation. Castlereagh, therefore, received instructions to inform the lord-lieutenant that he might confidently con- tinue his efforts to procure the support of the Catholics, but that to give a direct promise on the subject was not considered desirable ; nevertheless, should special circumstances render it necessary for the viceroy to make a declaration, he was at liberty to state the grounds upon which he believed such a measure would receive the assent of the Cabinet.^ Thus protected in the rear, the Irish Administration lost no opportunity of soliciting the suffrages of the Catholics for the scheme of union ; and their efforts were attended with eminent ' These negotiations are minutely recapitulated by Castlereagh in a highly important letter to Pitt, which was, however, not written until a year after the transactions had taken place. (See letter of the ist January. 1801, in the " Cornwallis Correspondence," iii. p. 326.) Y 2,2 2 Histoi'y of Ireland. success. Large numbers of adherents were gained, especially in the purely Catholic districts of the south, where the people now steadfastly believed that the Union would speedily be fol- lowed by Catholic emancipation. In the north, too, when, in October, the lord-lieutenant took a journey through Ulster, he received numerous addresses in favour of the Union, of which one, in Dundalk, was presented by a Catholic priest.^ When at length the preparations were all completed — when the Catholics had been won over by the prospect of emancipa- tion ; the borough owners by the promise of monetary com- pensation ; those persons who were ambitious and aspiring by the hopes of a peerage, — the time appeared to be ripe, and everything seemed ready for striking the final and long premeditated blow. It was, therefore, decided to summon the Irish Parliament for the 15th January, 1800. A number of fresh elections having taken place immediately prior to the assembling of Parliament, Henry Grattan took advantage of the occasion, at considerable pecuniary cost to himself, to obtain a seat for the borough of Wicklow, - in order that he might have the opportunity of defending the constitution of 1782, the one great work of his life. As the speech from the throne contained no reference whatever to the question of the Union, Sir Lawrence Parsons, a zealous opponent of the measure, could not refrain from giving utterance to his joy at this fact, and moved an amendment to the address, expressive of a desire for the continuance of an independent, resident Parliament for Ireland. This motion was the signal for a violent encounter between the hostile parties in the House, during which Lord Castle- reagh and Corry maintained the conflict on one side, and Ponsonby, Plunket, and Bushe on the other. At last, close upon midnight, Grattan also rose for the purpose of opposing the Union. He had just risen from a sick bed, to which he had been long confined, and was still pale and feeble, but every minute that he spoke seemed to give him fresh strength ; and ' See the letter of Cornwallis to Portland, dated the 22nd October, 1799 ("Cornwallis Correspondence," iii. p. 138). 2 " Cornwallis Correspondence," iii. p. 161, note. T/ie Rebellion and the Union. ■;^i-i^ he now employed all the powers at his command, and all the stirring eloquence of which he was master, in the endeavour to save the Parliament of his country. After having repelled the attacks which had been made on the existing system, he turned directly towards the ministers, and warned them not to destroy the stately fabric which it had taken centuries to erect. These structures, which it takes generations to rear, might, like works of marble, be demolished in a few moments. Then he referred to the engagements which had been made on every hand, how commercial advantages had been promised to the trading classes ; state endowments to the Catholic clergy; and emancipation and the abolition of tithes to the Catholic masses ; " but," he continued, " that which the English minister proposes to buy is what cannot be sold, — liberty ! For it he has nothing to give ; everything of value wlrich you possess, you obtained under a free constitution ; part with it, and you must be not only a slave, but an idiot." ^ But great as was the effect pro- duced by his burning words, they were not able to convince those who had been influenced by pecuniary reasons, and con- sequently Parsons's amendment in favour of retaining an Irish Parliament was rejected by 138 votes to 96. This division proved to the Government that it had the majority of the House of Commons on its side, a situation which it 'hastened to turn to the greatest advantage. Accord- ingly, on the 5th February, Lord Castlereagh, after having first attempted to find an explanation for the fact, that a measure which, in the previous year, had aroused so much violent animosity, had now been so much more favourably received, laid before the House of Commons the outlines of the Act of Union.2 According to this draft, the conditions upon which the union was to be effected, were the following: Ireland should henceforth send 100 members to the Imperial Parliament, of which sixty-four were to be elected by the counties, and thirty- six by the boroughs and towns and the Universit}' of Dublin. * Grattan's " Speeches," iii. pp. 352-373 ; for this quotation, see p. 372. - Stanhope's " Life of Pitt," iii. p. 223 et seq. ; also Plowden ; on this subject Adolphus is somewhat inaccurate (vol. vii. p. 362). 324 History of Ire/and. A large number of boroughs were to be disfranchised. The proportion of Irish representatives to those of Great Britain was to be in the ratio of one to five and a half, the grounds for which proportion were disclosed by Castlereagh. The population of Great Britain amounted to over ten millions ; that of Ireland to four millions ; whereas the total of British taxation bore to that of Ireland the relation of seven and a half to one. The sum of the two proportions yielded a mean of five and a half to one, and it was this ratio which had been adopted as the basis of the distribution of seats in the House of Commons. It was proposed that Ireland should be represented in the House of Lords by four spiritual and twenty-eight temporal peers. The right to sit in the House of Lords was to be en- joyed by the bishops in turn, the change to be made each session ; and the temporal peers were to be elected for life. All those Irish peers who should not be elected to sit in the House of Lords, should be eligible for election to the House of Commons, but should meanwhile be excluded from all the rights and privileges of the House of Peers. The royal pre- rogative to create peers should not be abolished as regards Ireland ; but until such time as the number of Irish peers be reduced to one hundred, it should be so far limited that it should only be competent to the sovereign to create one new peerage for every three that might become extinct ; after which he would be entitled to fill up every vacancy as it occurred. The stipulations respecting trade provided, that with regard to commercial treaties, bounties, and duties, the two nations should stand on an equal footing ; that all taxes which had hitherto been imposed upon goods exported from England to Ireland should be abolished, with certain exceptions to be specially named, — thus covertly introducing a fresh policy of commercial restrictions, — upon which countervailing duties should be laid as a means of equalising the burden of taxation. For a period of twenty years Ireland should contribute two- seventeenths and Great Britain fifteen-seventeenths of the gross expenditure of the United Kingdom, at the expiration The Rebellion and ike Union. O-D of which time a fresh arrangement should be made by the united Parliament of Great Britain and Ireland. The English and Irish Churches were to be assimilated, under the title of the " United Episcopal Church of England and Ireland," and the same doctrines, services, discipline, and ecclesiastical probity should be established in the united Church as were appointed to be held and observed in the Church of England. Such were the most important points in the Union scheme proposed by Lord Castlereagh. No sooner had he finished his speech than the opposing hosts crashed down upon each other. Ponsonby characterised the ministerial policy in the sharpest terms. In a powerful speech, Grattan once more exhorted the House to remember that it was not now a question of any special measure, of any single reform, but that it was a question of existence, that the entire political life of the nation was at stake.^ But neither his remonstrances nor his entreaties were of any avail. After a long debate, in a House unexampled for its attendance in the annals of the Irish Parliament," Lord Castlereagh's scheme was accepted by 15S votes to 1 15. At each sitting the same conflict was renewed, and feeling ran so high that after a violent altercation between Grattan and Corry, on February 17th, the two opponents withdrew to another scene of action, and there exchanged shots.^ All efforts were, however, in vain ; for the House of Commons proceeded to pass one resolution after another conformably to the wishes of the Government. The struggles in the Irish House of Lords were less violent, and were more quickly terminated. The Government mea- sure was introduced by Lord Clare in a significant speech on the loth February ; and after a somewhat prolonged debate the proposals of the Government were accepted by "jG votes to 26. When the resolutions had been passed by both Houses of ' Grattan's " Speeches," iii. pp. 380-394. ' See " Cornwallis Correspondence," iii. p. 181. •* Stanhope's '' Life of Pitt," iii. p. 226. 326 History of Irdand. the Irish Parliament, they were sent to the sovereign, accom- panied by an address ; and on the 2nd April, the king caused them to be laid before the British Parliament, with a request to bring the work, so happily begun, to a speedy completion. Accordingly, both the House of Lords and the House of Commons took the measure under deliberation on the same day, the 21st April. In the House of Lords only three votes were given against the Government, but in the House of Commons there was less unanimity. The Opposition, led by Sheridan and Grey, endeavoured to preserve the independence of Ireland, by demanding the dissolution of the Irish Parlia- ment and an appeal to the country ; the further discussion of the question to be postponed until the issue be ascertained. This motion was, however, only able to secure 30 votes against 206.^ After these resolutions had thus been carried by the Parlia- ments of both countries, they were embodied in a formal bill, and again submitted to the deliberations of Parliament. In view of the former proceedings in the Irish House of Commons, the Opposition, from the outset, regarded all further resistance as futile, and resigned themselves to the hope that some future generation might be successful in obtaining the dissolution of the Union. This confidence was expressed by Grattan in the last speech which he made on this subject. " The constitution may for a time be lost ; the character of the country cannot be lost. The ministers of the Crown will, or may, perhaps, at length find that it is not so easy to put down for ever an ancient and respectable nation, by abilities however great, and by power and by corruption however irresistible ; liberty may repair her golden beams and with redoubled heat animate the country. Yet I do not," he said in conclusion, " give up the country. I see her in a swoon, but she is not dead ; though in her tomb she lies helpless and motionless, still there is on her lips a spirit of life, and on her cheek a glow of beauty. . . . While a plank of the vessel sticks together, I will not leave her. Let the courtier present his flimsy sail, and carry ' For this consult " Speeches of William Pitt," iii. p. 179 ei seq. The Rebellion and the Union. 327 the light bark of his faith with every new breath of wind ; I will remain anchored here with fidelity to the fortunes of my country, faithful to her freedom, faithful to her fall."^ An Opposition, whose leader assumed an attitude of so much resignation, was no longer to be feared. The bill quickly passed through its various stages, and on the ist August, the Act of Union, which was to come into force on the ist January, 1801, received the royal assent."- On the following day both Houses of Parliament assembled for the last time, and after, an address from the lord-lieutenant they were permanently dissolved. Thus ended the independent Irish Parliament, a body which has rightly obtained, for the most part, but an unfavour- able judgment at the tribunal of history. Npver the re- presentative of the entire nation, but only of an exclusive class, it had, as a rule, sought merely the advantage of a clique, and had only on the very rarest occasions ever upheld the interests of the people ; having almost invariably opposed every extension of the franchise and all measures of reform, of whatever nature. But although it had thus pre- served a persistent hostility to the wishes of the people, it did not scruple to sell itself to the Castle for rank and dignities, pensions and gold. The Parliament had lived by bribery, and by bribery it came to an end. Although, therefore, we can- not but regard with the warmest sympathy such noble and high-minded men as Grattan and Plunket, who saw in their Parliament the symbol of their country's independence, and for that reason struggled with all their might to preserve it ; nevertheless, in the interests of the people, the destruction of such a -corrupt body was not to be regretted ; and however much we may detest the means by which he obtained his ends, Pitt's policy must, therefore, as to its scope and aim, be characterised as a wise one. True, England's minister would have acted still more wisely ' Speech on the 26th April, 1800, in Grattan's " Speeches," iv. pp. 7-21 ; for this particular passage, see pp. 20, 21. - See 40 George III., c. 67. The Act is also printed in Grattan's " Speeches," iv. p. 39 et seq. ; also in Plowden. 328 History of Ireland. ^ had he caused the Union to be immediately followed by Catho- lic emancipation. Although no express and definite promise had been given, the Catholics of Ireland had every reason to expect that the ministry would now grant them this measure. Pitt himself, as well as his colleague Canning, had frequently, in speeches, referred to Catholic emancipation as being immi- nent. By holding out the prospect of this concession, the lord- lieutenant had appealed to the Catholics for their support on the question of the Union ; and on these terms the Catholic population had willingly given their countenance to the Govern- ment scheme. Pitt, in fact, felt himself to be under an obliga- tion in this matter ; but when, on the 30th September, 1800, he called a Cabinet Council to consider the question, he met with unexpected opposition. This emanated from the highest legal functionary in the land. Lord Chancellor Loughborough, who strenuously protested against granting equality of rights to the Catholics, and made especial allusion to the pronounced antipathy of his sovereign to any step of that nature. Not long after this, Pitt was furnished wath a direct proof of the aversion with which George III. regarded all such concessions. At a levee on the 28th January, 1801, the king declared to Windham, secretary of state, that he should consider every man who voted for a measure of this kind as personally hos- tile to himself ; and on the same occasion he remarked to his minister, Dundas, " I count any man my personal enemy who proposes any such measure. I have never heard anything more Jacobinical." ^ Notwithstanding his sovereign's emphatic ex- pression of opinion on this subject, Pitt, nevertheless, resolved, on the advice of Canning, to remain firm in his purpose, and as the king was also inflexible, rather than withdraw from his position, he resigned office. This resolute attitude was, however, not long maintained. Out of consideration for the lamentable state of the king's health, Pitt shortly afterward declared that during the king's lifetime he would allow the Catholic question to rest ; and ' Sec Lord Malmesbury's " Correspondence," iv. p. 12 ; comp. also May's "Constitutional History" (Ger. ed., 1862), vol. i. p. 67. The Rebellion and tJis Union. 329 when, on the downfall of " Addington's anti-Cathoh'c ministry," he again entered upon office, he gave a renewal of this assur- ance. Generous as it may be for a minister to subordinate his views and opinions to those of his venerable monarch, in order to save him mental anguish and conscientious scruples, for the well-being of the state this determination was, neverthe- less, greatly to be deplored. Had Pitt remained steadfast, and made Catholic emancipation the condition of his re-accept- ance of office, the king would have been compelled to yield ; inasmuch as he would have been unable, in the embarrassed condition of affairs, to find another prime minister equal to the occasion. In that case, emancipation would have been carried without delay, and the majority of the Irish people, who were already one with England on the question of union, would by this measure have been completely won over to the Government. Pitt's renunciation of his determination to carry Catholic emancipation placed the Government in an extremely un- favourable position in Ireland. The Catholics, whose hopes and expectations were centred in Pitt, began to think they had been deluded and deceived. They declared that they had been lured by the prospect of emancipation to give their support to the Union, and that now, after they had helped the Government to realise its wishes, this ardently desired blessing was being withheld from them. Hence, a feeling of intense bitterness against England took possession of the Catholics, who 'but recently had so loyally supported the Government ; and the violent agitation of the following years only contributed to intensify the hatred between the two coun- tries. And when, in the year 1829, in order to avert civil war, England at last granted Catholic emancipation, the alienation between England and Ireland had so largely increased that even this concession failed to satisfy the Irish nation. Thus, England at that period played the part of the legendary Roman king, who at first refused to purchase the sacred books for a small price, but who was afterward com- pelled to offer a considerably higher sum for only a portion of them. In like manner, England might, in the year 1800, 330 History of Ireland. have procured peace and tranquilit}' for Ireland by the com- parati^•ely inconsiderable concession of Catholic emancipation ; but the favourable opportunity was allowed to pass away ; and now, all concessions and all offers appear to be insuffi- cient to purchase that priceless blessing. THE KND. INDEX A. Abercromby, Ralph, general, and commander-in-chief of the Irish troops (1798), 295-301. Abingdon, Lord, peer of England (1782), 231. _ _ _ Absenteeism, its injurious effects, 5. Absenteeism of Irish peers in the i8th century, 138. Absentee Tax, introduced in the reign of Richard 11., 5 ; attempt in 1773 to re-introduce it, 181- 183. Addington, British minister (i8oi_), 329. Adrian IV., pope in the 12th cen- tury, I. Aghrim, battle of, 113. Aguila, Don Juan del, Spanish general in 1601, 33. Albans, Duke of St., natural son of Charles II., 144. Albemarle, Duke of, favourite of WiUiam III., 144. Allen, Archbishop of Dublin in the reign of Henry VIII., 10. America, resemblance between the North American and the Irish situations, 184, 185 ; address of the American Congress to the Irish, 185 ; the Irish Parliament declares against America, 186 ; Irish troops despatched to America, 186; the export of cattle to America forbidden (1776), 188. Anne, Queen (1701-1714), iiS, 119, 136. Annesley, trial (1719), 147. Anti-remonstrants, an Irish party in the reign of Charles II., loi. Antrim, county, in Ireland, as- signed to the " Undertakers " in the time of Cromwell, 91 ; dis- turbances in 1772, 168. Antrim, town of, unsuccessful as- sault upon, 302. Ardes, English colony in Ulster, -3- Armagh, Irish county, resettled in the reign of James I., 41 ; agra- rian outrages in 1797, 281. Armstrong, Captain, 300. Ashton, governor of Drogheda (1649), 80. Athlone, capture of, reign of Wil- liam III., 113. Athlone, Earl of, favourite of Wil- liam III., 144. B. Bacon, Francis, chancellor in the reign of James I., 41. Bagenal, member of the Irish House of Commons in the year 1782, 227. Bagnal, English general in the time of Elizabeth, 30. Bale, Bishop of Ossory, 16, 17, Ballynamuck, battle of, 308. Ballyragget, resistance of, to the Whiteboys, 166. Bantry Bay, arrival ,of a remnant of Hoche's expedition in, 2S8. Barbadoes, deportation to, in the time of Cromwell, 80, 82, 89. Bedell, English bishop in the reign of Charles I., 62. Bedford, Duke of, Irish viceroy in the reign of George II., 131, 145. Bellahoe, battle of, in 1539, 13. Beresford, Irish first commissioner of the revenue, in the reign of George III., 264, 275, 276, 290. Index. Berkeley of Stratton, Lord, Irish viceroy under Charles II., 102. Berkeley, Anglican bishop in the 1 8th century, 128. Blackvvater, battle of, in 1598, 30. Blaquiere, Irish secretary in the year 1773, 183. Bolton, Duke of, Irish viceroy (1719), 127. Bompart, French admiral during the revolutionary period, 309. Bonaparte, afterward Napoleon I., 297. Bond, Oliver, member of the Irish Directory, 290, 299, 307. Borlase, Sir John, lord-justice at the outbreak of the Irish re- bellion, 57. Boroughs, creation of forty new, by James I., 43 ; total number of, 139; borough owners com- pensated at the Union, 318, 319 ; abolition of numerous boroughs by the Act of Union, 324. Boultei-, Archbishop, and Primate of Ireland (1724-1738), 118, 122, 124, 125, 142, 151. Boyle, Irish speaker in the reign of George II., afterward created Earl of Shannon, 153, 155. Boyle Walsingham, member of the English Parliament in the last century, 177. Boyne, battle of, 1 12 ; a toast of the Orangemen, 282. Brehon law, ancient Celtic law, 6, 42. Bristol, Earl of, and Bishop of Derry, 237, 243. Browne, Archbishop of Dublin in the 1 6th century, 12, 15-17. Buckingham, Marquis of, Irish viceroy (1788, 1789), 251, 253- 255. Buckinghamshire, Earl of, viceroy of Ireland (i 776-1 780), 188, 197, 199,211. Burgh de, chieftains of Connaught, 29. Burgh, Hussey, member of the Irish Parliament, and some time prime sergeant, 186, 202, 204, 218. Burke, Edmund, his views with regard to the Discoverers, 46 ; the penal code, 125 ; the Irish Ab- sentee Tax, 181, 182; defends the Catholic Bill of 1778, 195, 196 ; advocates the liberation of Irish commerce, 191 ; labours for the further emancipation of the Catholics, 216; and for the legis- lative independence of Ireland, 226 ; breaks with the Whigs, and again advocates the cause of the Catholics, 259 ; writes the letter to Sir H. Langrishe, 261. Burke, Richard, son of the fore- going, secretary of the Irish Catholic Committee, 260, 262, 272, 7-]l. Bute, Lord, favourite and minister of George III., 169. Byrne, Irish landowner at the time of James I., 46, C. Camden, Lord, lord chancellor in Chatham's cabinet (1766), 173. Camden, Lord, son of the preced- ing, Irish viceroy (i 795-1 798), 279, 280, 286, 288, 290. Camperdown, battle of, 293. Canning, minister of George III., 316, 328. Captain Right and Captain Rock, names used by a secret agrarian society, 164, 248. Carew, George, lord president of Munster in Elizabeth's reign, -^fi. Carew, George, Irish viceroy in the ■ reign of James I., 36. Carlisle, Lord, Irish viceroy (1780- 1782), 211, 213, 219, 220, 278. Carlow, capture of, 84. Carnot, member of the French Directory, 284. Carteret, English secretary of state, Irish lord-lieutenant in the year 1724, 152. Cashel, Synod of, in 11 72, 3. Castlebar, battle of, in 179S, 308. Castle Chamber, Irish court of justice, 37, 38. Castlemartin, Truce of, 67. Index. TiCil Castlereagh, Robert Stewart, Earl of, enters the Irish Parhament in 1791,257; becomes keeper of the privy seal, 294 ; receives infor- mation respecting the conspiracy of the United Irishmen, 300 ; his views on the Irish rebellion of 1798, 303 ; becomes Irish secre- tary, 305; his views on the Union, 313 ; his memorandum, 318, 319 ; his mission in connec- tion with the emancipation ques- tion, 321 ; his part in the debate on the address of 1800, 322 ; in- troduces the Union Bill, 323. Catholic Committee, founded 1791, for the furtherance of Catholic emancipation, 259-262, 266. Cattle, exportation of, into England forbidden (1665), 99 ; this prohi- bition removed (1758), 161. Celts, the, position of, in the 13th and 14th centuries, 4-6 ; the first confiscation of Celtic lands in the reign of Mary, 18, 19 ; their resistance to the Refor- mation, 20 ; suppression of their ancient rights of inheritance under James I., 37 ; restrictions on the intercourse between Celts and the English removed in the reign of James I., 45 ; greed , of the English for Celtic lands, 45, 46 ; insurrection of the Celts in Ulster, 1641, 59- 62 ; attitude of the Catholic Celts on the accession of Charles II., 94 ; preponderance of the Celtic element in the Parliament of 1689, 109 et seq. Chandos, Duke of, 240. Chapel-izod, park of artillery at, 301. Charlemont, James Caulfield, Earl of, Irish peer, opposes the ad- dress in 1 77 1, 179 ; his views on the Catholic laws, 194 ; his activity in the volunteer move- ment, 198, 212, 217 ; his position with respect to the question of legislative independence, 221, 222 ; receives the order of St. Patrick, and becomes a member of the privy council, 233, 237 ; president of the volunteers at the Rotunda Convention of 1783, 237 ; deputed to present the address to the Prince of Wales in 1789, 253 ; his attitude towards the French Revolution, 258. Charles I. (1625-1649) grants the " graces," 47 ; dismisses Lord- lieutenant Falkland, 48 ; appoints Wentworth viceroy, 49 ; enjoys unlimited control over the Irish Church, 50 ; creates Wentworth Earl of Strafford, 52 ; his absolute rule in Ireland in Wentworth's time, 54 ; recalls Strafford, 54 ; surrenders him to the Parliament, 54, 56 ; appoints lord-justices for Ireland, 57 ; his attitude with regard to the rebellion of 1641, 66-68 ; he concludes a truce with the Irish, and despatches Irish troops to Scotland, 68 ; ne- gotiations with the Irish through Glamorgan, 68, 69 ; he repudiates his agent Glamorgan, 69 ; his letter to Rinuccini, 70;- he obtains a fresh truce, 72 ; he flees to the Scotch, 'j-;^ ; he is given up by Rinuccini, 74 ; Ormond attempts to find succours for his sovereign, ']'] ; fate of the king, 78. Charles II. (1660-1685), son of the preceding monarch, proclaimed king in Ireland (1649), 78 ; puts himself in the hands of the Scotch Puritans (1650), 85 ; promises the Irish the restitution of their pro- perty, 94 ; ascends the throne (1660), 94 ; grants the Declaration of Nov., 1660, 95 ; desires to es- tablish English interests in Ire- land, 96 ; his position with regard to the anti-remonstrants, 103 ; calms the excitement of the Eng- lish party in Ireland, 104 ; pur- poses to recall Ormond, dies, 105, 106. Charles Edward Stuart, Pretender, 128. Charles V., emperor of Germany and king of Spain, 10. o4 hid ex. Charter schools, founded in 1733, 122. Chatham, William Pitt, Earl o*", English minister, 171. Chesterfield, Earl of, Irish viceroy in the year 1746, 126, 128-130, 140, 142. Chichester, Sir Arthur, Irish vice- roy 1 605-16 16 ; social reforms,. 36; his position with regard to the ecclesiastical question, ^tl \ ^^is attitude towards the chieftain of Ulster, 38, 39 ; his plan for the colonization of Ulster, 39, 40 ; alteration of his plan in London, 41 ; his recall, 46. Christian, Bishop of Lismore in the 1 2th century, 3. Clanricarde, Ulik Bourke, Marquis of, president of Connaught, and afterwards lord deputy in the 17th century, 64, 84, 85. Clare, Lord. See Fitzgibbon. Clarendon, Edward Hyde, Earl of, minister of Charles II., and his- torian of the Irish rebellion, 61 ; his judgment upon Cromwell's settlement of the land, 92 ; as minister rejects the claims of the Irish, 96 ; his removal from office, 102. Clarendon, Henry Hyde, Lord, Irish viceroy under James II., 106, 107. Clarke, French minister of war in the time of the Revolution, 284. Clement VII., pope in the i6th century, 10. Clogy, biographer of Bishop Bedell, 62. Clonmacnoise, Abbey of, 16 ; Mani- festo of, 82. Clonmel, defence of, 83 ; erection of a woollen factory at, loi. Coleraine, destruction of, 43. Common Prayer, Book of, 14, 15, 35, 38. Connaught, province of, divided into counties in 1584,28; regu- lation of land tenure by the Composition of Connaught, 29; dissatisfaction of the chieftains therewith, 29; fresh insurrection, 30 ; appointment of a commission for the registration of titles in Connaught (1616), 46; the titles declared invalid, 47 ; fresh regur lation of titles granted by the " graces," 47 ; under Wentworth the validity of titles again dis- puted, 51 ; the province at length involved in the rebellion in the time of Charles I., 64 ; allotted to the Irish in 1652, 91 ; an attempt to effect a change is made in the reign of Charles II., 94-97 ; during the rebellion of 1798 is quiet, 302. Conolly, a member of the Irish Parliament in the reign of George III., 202, 253. Conventions Bill (1793), 269. Conway, General, member of the English House of Commons, 220. Cooke, Irish secretary of war under Lord Fitzwilliam (1795), 275, 276, 314. Cork, Richard, Earl of, Irish lord- justice under Charles I., 49. Cornwallis, Charles, Marquis, Bri- tish general, and viceroy of Ire- land in 1 798, 304 ; his dissatis- faction with the Government troops, 305 ; his treatment of the rebels in 1798,305,306 ; receives the disclosures of the State prisoners, 307 ; strikes Grattan's name from the privy council list, 307 ; his views on the questions of the Union and of Catholic emancipation, 310-313 ; wins over the Catholics to the Union, 321, 322; dissolves the Irish Parliament (1800), 327. Corry, Isaac, president of the Irish treasury in 1799 and 1800, 314. 322, 325- Crofts, Sir James, Irish lord-de- puty under Edward \"I., 16. Cromer, Archbishop of Armagh in the reign of Henry VIII., 12. Cromwell, Oliver, British protector, lord-lieutenant of Ireland (1649). 79 ; his campaign in Ireland, 79-84 ; his Navigation Act, 98. Culmore, fort of, 40. Index. 335 Curran, lawyer and member of tlie Irish Parliament under George III., 253, 271, 290. Curry, Irish Catholic writer in the 1 8th century, 130, 196. Curwin, Hugh, Archbishop of Dub lin, 17. D. Daendels, Dutch general (i 797), 293. Daly, member of the Irish Parlia- ment in the last century, 189. Darlington, Countess of, mistress of George I., 144. D'Avaux, ambassador of Louis XIV., 108. Davenant, English political econo- mist at the beginning of the last century, 136. Davies, attorney-general under James I., 41-45- Defenders, name given to agrarian bands formed by the Catholic farmers of Ulster, 265, 2S2. Defoe, Daniel, 136. Derry, capital of County Derry destruction of, by fire, 43. Devereux, Walter, Earl of Essev, 24. Devonshire, Duke of, Marquis of Hartington, Irish viceroy (1755), I45.-I55- Diamond, battle of (1795), 281, 282. Discoverers, business ot, 45. Dissenters, excluded from the Irish Parliament since 1704, 138 ; an attempt in 1773 to remove this disability fails, 195 ; but succeeds in 1780, 206. Dobbs, Irish writer, 199. Donegal, Marquis of, Irish landed proprietor in Ulster, 168 Douay, Irish Catholic seminary, 24, 280. Dowdal, Archbishop of Armah in the 16th century, 15-17. Down, capital of County Down, cathedral burnt down, 13. Drogheda, town in Leinster, 65, 80. Dublin, Irish capital, i^, 75, 78, 80, 171, 199, 200, 203, 242, 243, 259, 301,302,311,317, 319. Duigenan, Professor, Irish member of Parliament at the close of the last century, 267, 282. Dundas, English minister of George III., 226, 328. Dungannon, convention of the volunteers at, 217; meeting at, 234- Eden, Sir William, Irish secretary of Lord-lieutenant Carlisle, 21 1, 220. Edward II., king of England (1307- 1327), 4- Edward III., king of England (1327-1377), 6._ Edward IV., king of England (1461-1483), 6. Edward VI., king of England (1547-1553). 14-16. Elizabeth, queen of England (1558- 1603), her attitude with regarcl to the Reformation, 19 ; summons the Irish Parliament (1560), 19; receives the homage of Shane O'Neill, 22; enmity between her , and the pope, 24 ; recalls the viceroy, Perrot, and causes him to be beheaded, yi ; commits the conduct of the war against Shane O'Neill to the Earl of Essex, 31 ; disapproves of his policy and brings him to trial, 31 ; finally approves of his negotiations with the Irish, 34 ; her end, 34. Ely, Viscount, Irish lord-justice (1629), 49. Embargo (1776), 18S, 189. Emmet, Thomas, member of the Irish Directory (1797 1798), 290, 299, 307. Enniscorthy, capture of, by the rebels (1798), 303. Eric, a money compensation for all offences, being the only penalty known to the Celtic race, 6. Essex, Robert Devereux, Earl of, favourite of Queen Elizabeth, 31. Essex, Earl of, Irish viceroy in the reign of Charles II., 103, 104. 1 '< f\ Index. F. Fairfax, Lord, British general in the time of Cromwell, 68. Falkland, Lord, Irish viceroy in the reign of Charles L, 47, 48. Ferdinand, Prince of Brunswick, 155- Ferns, attack upon, by the rebels (1798), 303. Finch, Sir Heneage, member of the Irish Parliament under Charles n.,99- Fitzgerald, family of, 7. Fitzgerald, Gerald, Earl of Kildare, lord-lieutenant of Ireland in the reign of Henry VIII., 9-1 1. Fitzgerald, Thomas, son of the pre- ceding, deputy lord-lieutenant, 9-1 1. Fitzgerald, Lord Edward, member of the Irish Parliament, and later member of the Irish Directory, 269, 284, 285, 290, 298, 300. Fitzgerald, Lord James, prime sergeant, and opponent of the Union, 312, 314. Fitzgibbon, afterward Lord Clare, attorney-general, later Irish lord- chancellor, 243, 253, 254; op- ponent of Catholic emancipation, 264, 267 ; actively opposed to Lord P^itzwilliam (1795), 277 ; the foremost man in Camden's ad- ministration, 294 ; defends the policy of the Government in the Irish House of Lords (1797), 295, 296 ; his attitude with regard to the Union and Catholic eman- cipation, 312, 313, 325. Fitzherbert, Irish secretary (1789), 253- Fitzmaurice, James, chieftain of Munster in the reign of Eliza- beth, 25, 26. Fitzwalter, Lord, afterward Earl of Sussex, Irish viceroy in the reigns of Mary and Elizabeth, 17-19. Fitzwilliams, Sir William, Irish viceroy in the reign of Elizabeth, 30- Fitzwilliam, Earl, Irish lord-lieu- tenant in 1795, 273-278. Flood, Henry, lawyer and member of the Irish Parliament in the reign of George III. ; his entrance into the House of Commons, 158; supports the demand for the shortening of Parliaments, 170 ; is known as a writer on political subjects, 177 ; introduces a bill for Absentee Tax (1773), 183 ; becomes vice-treasurer 186 ; defends the measures of the Government, 186, 189 ; advocates free trade (1779), 202 ; is de- prived of his office, and demands the repeal of the Perpetual Mutiny Act and Poyning's Law, 214, 215 ; his position with regard to the volunteers, 217 ; to the question of simple repeal, 230, 231 ; his breach with Grat- tan, 235, 236 ; introduces a Re- form Bill in 1783, 238, 239 ; enters the English Parliament, 240 ; re- introduces his Reform Bill in 1784, 240, 241 ; takes part in the National Congress, 243. Florida Blanca, Spanish minister in the last century, 200. Forster, Speaker of the Irish House of Commons and an opponent of the Union, 312. Fo.x, Charles James, English minister and member of Parlia- ment in the reign of George III., 220, 221, 225, 233, 240, 246, 247, 279,316. Franklin, Benjamin, 185. France, Ireland's relations with, in the reign of Edward VL, 15 ; position of, with regard to the national Irish and the English Catholics of Ireland in the reign of Charles L, 71 ; her invasion of Ireland (1757), 131 ; treaty between France and America (1778), 189; negotiations with Spain respecting" an invasion of Ireland, 200 ; influence of the French Revolution upon Ireland, 258 ; declaration of war with England (1793), and the despatch of an agent to Ireland, 268 ; a second agent is sent (1794), 271, Index. 137 272 ; further ne2fotiations be- tween France and Ireland, 284 ; attempted invasion of Ireland (1796'), 287, 28S ; fresh, negotia- tions (1797), 291 ; schemes of in- vasion in the time of Bonaparte, 297 ; further French expeditions (1798), 307,308- G. Gal way, jury of County, 52. Gal way, town of, capture, 86 ; Papists not permitted to reside in, 119. Gardiner, member of the Irish Parliament in the reign of George III., 194, 215, 229. Genlis, Madame de, governess in thefamily of the Duke of Orleans, 284. George I. (1714-1727), 118, 144, 148. George II. (1727-1760), ij8, 135, 140, 144. George III. (1760-1820), his dis- satisfaction with the aristocratic landowners of Ireland, 171 ; un- favourable to Dissenters, 195 ; opposed the legislative indepen- dence of Ireland, 207 ; founds an Irish Order, 232 ; mental de- rangement (17S8, 1789), 251, 254 ; receives the Catholic deputation (1793), 266; is provided with a Civil List, 268 ; opposition to Catholic emancipation, 277, 279, 328. George, Prince of Wales, afterward George IV., 252, 253. Ginkel, British general in the reign of William III., 113, 114. Glamorgan, Herbert, Earl of, negotiator between Charles I. and the Irish, 68, 69, 74. Glenmalure, battle of, 26. Goodacre, Archbishop of Armagh, in the i6th century, 16. Gordon riots in Scotland, 215. Gosford, Lord, governor of Armagh, 282. Graces, The, granted by Charles I., 47. Grafton, Duke of, Irish viceroy under George I., 137, 152. Grattan, Henry, lawyer and mem- ber of the Irish Parliament ; attacks Lord-lieutenant Towns- hend, 177 ; opposes the embargo, 189 ; advocates the abolition of penal enactments against the Catholics, 194 ; Free Trade, 202 ; declares himself opposed to the imposition of fresh taxes (i779^' 204 ; brings in his " Declaration of Rights," 207 ; his opposition to the Perpetual Mutiny Act, 211 ; his defence of the Catholic Bill (1781), 216 ; his part in the Dungannon Convention, 217 ; struggles to obtain legislative in- dependence, 218,221-224 ; move? an address to the king (May 27th, 1782), 226 ; receives a national gratuity, 227 ; his position on the question of Simple Repeal, 230, 231 ; appointed member of the privy council, 233 ; his breach with Flood, 235, 236 ; his attitude on the subject of Parliamentary reform, 241 ; on the abolition ot restrictions on commerce, 247 ; his views on the Riot Bill, 249 ; endeavours to procure a revision of the tithe-system, 249-251 ; his attitude on the regency question, 252-253 ; attacks the policy of the government, 256 ; is re- elected (1790), 256 ; moves for the liberation of trade with the East Indies, 257 ; his position with regard to the French Revolution. 258 ; recommends the reform of Parliament, 26S, 270 ; his patrio- tic speech in the course of the debate on the address, in the year 1794, 270; his negotiations with Pitt, 273, 274 ; introduces the Emancipation Bill(i795), 276 ; his proposals rejected, 279, 280 ; he opposes the Insurrection Act, 283 ; also the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, 286 ; and the order for a general disarm- ament, 289 ; retires from Par- liament, 293 ; his name struck i8 Index. off the list of privy councillors, 307 ; re-elected for Parliament (1800), 322 ; his part in the de- bates on the question of the Union, 322, 323, 326, 327. Gray, Lord, Irish lord-lieutenant under Henry VIII., 11, 13. Grey, leader of the English Whigs in England in the reign of George III., 326. Grouchy, French general at the time of the revolution, 288. Gunpowder Bill, passed in the year 1 793, 269. H. Habeas Corpus Act, 137, 215, 287. Halifax, Lord, Irish viceroy (1761- 1763), 145, 159, 166, 169. Harcourt, Lord, Irish viceroy (1772-1776), 180, 186, 187, 188. Harvey, leader of the rebels in 179S, 303- Henry II. (1154-11S9), 2. Henry VII. (1485-1509), 7. Henry VIII. (1509-1547), 9, 11, 12, I3> 14- Hereditary Revenue of the Crown in Ireland, 140. Heron, Irish secretary under Lord liuckinghamshire, 198, 210. Hillsborough, English minister of George III., 213, 215, 219. Hobart, Irish secretary in the year 1793, 267. Hoche, French general at the time of the revolution, 287, 28S, 293. Humbert, French general at the time of the revolution, 308. Hutchinson, Irish secretary (1782), I Inchiquin, Lord, governor of Munster in the time of Charles I. and Cromwell, 76. Indemnity Act (1796), 283. Innocent X., Pope, elected (1644). 70, 71. Insurrection Act (1796), 283. Irvine, Colonel, president of the Dungannon Convention (1781), 217. J. Jackson, French agent in Ireland, 271. James I. (1603-1625), regarded as an adherent of the Catholic Church, 35 ; receives the Irish chieftains in London, 36 ; his attitude towards the Catholics, 37, 39 ; regulates the colonisation of Ulster, 41, 42 ; confers upon the City of London Company the privileges of a corporation, 43 ; summons an Irish Parliament (1613), 43 ; receives a deputation from the Irish Catholics, 44 ; ap- points a commission for the re- gistration of titles in Connaught, 46 ; receives proposals from the gentry of Connaught, 47 ; his death, 47. James II. (1685-1688), character of his reign, 106 ; his expulsion from England, 108 ; lands in Ireland (1689), 108 ; summons a Parliament to meet in Dublin 1689, sanctions the High Treason Act, and the alteration of the Act of Settlement, 109-111 ; is defeated at the battle of the Boyne, 112; flees to France, 112; bestows an Irish pension upon his mistress, 144. Jekyll, member of the English House of Commons (1795), -19- John, King (i 199-1216), 3. John XXII., pope in the 14th cen- tury, 4. Jones, Colonel, of the Parliamen- tary troops in Dublin, 75, 78, 80. Kendal, Duchess of, favourite of George I., 144, 148, 149. Kenmare, Lord, Catholic peer of Ireland, 216, 261. Keogh, leader of the Iiish Catholics at the time of the French Re- volution, 264. Kildare, Lord, brother of the Duke of Leinster, 155, Index, 339 Kilkenny, statute of (1367), 6 ; Synod of (1642), 65 ; General As- sembly at (1642), 65 ; reception of Rinuccini at, 71 ; General Assembly at (1647, 1648), 76 ; capitulation of, in the time of Cromwell, 83. Killala, bay of, 308, 309. King, Archbishop of Dublin at the close of the 1 7th and the begin- ning of the iSth centuries, 127. Kingfishers, name given to English clergyman holding Irish bene- fices, 142. King's County, 19. Knox, member of the Irish Parlia- ment (1793), 267. Lake, British general in the last century, 289, 301 ; is victorious at Vinegar Hill, 304. Lansdowne, Lord, British peer, 316. Langrishe, Sir Henry, member of the Irish Parliament in the last century ; writer of the Barataria, 177 ; letter addressed to him by Burke, 261 ; introduces a Cath- olic bill, 262 ; opponent of Par- liamentary reform (1794), 270. Laud, Anglican archbishop in the reign of Charles I., 54. Legion Club, name of derision for the Irish Parliament, 138. Leinster, Irish province; conferred upon Richard Strongbow, 2 ; the landlords of, join the rebellion of 1641, 63 ; the Irish driven from, 90, 91 ; volunteer move- ment in (1782), 218; rebellion in (i798)> 302. Leinster, first Duke of, contem- porary with George II. and (jeorge III., 155, 179. Leinster, second Duke of, son of the former, 198, 202, 253, 254. Levellers, name given to agrarian bands, 162. Lewines, agent of the French gov- ernment, 290, 291, 293. Ley, lord chief justice, in the reign of James I., 41. Limerick, county of, 91, 114, 198. Limerick, town of, "]■}>■: 85 ; capitu- lation of, 113 ; no Papist allowed to reside in, 119; treaty of, con- cluded (1691), 113, 114; altered, 117. Loftus, Archbishop of Armagh, afterwards of Dublin, in the reign of Elizabeth, 20, 30. London, Company of City of, 43, 51- Londonderry, 43, 108. Lords, English House of, the high- est court of appeal for the Irish, 141, 147, 207-226. Lords justices, deputy lord-lieu- tenants, 57, 114, 142, 153, 154, 172. Lord-lieutenant, freciuent changes in the office of, 4 ; how the duties of the office were discharged, 141, 142. Loughborough, Lord, English lord chancellor in the reign of George III., 226,328. Lucas, Charles, political writer and member of the Irish Parliament in the last century, 154, 170. Ludlow, general in the time of Cromwell, 86, 87. M. MacDermot, Prince of Leinster in the 1 2th century, 2. MacGuire, instigator of the i^e- bellion (1641), 59. MacMahon, Bishop of Clogher, leader of the Irish troops in the time of Cromwell, 84. MacNevin, member of the Irish Direciory, 290, 291, 299, 307. Malone, afterward Lord Bowes, lawyer and chancellor to the Treasury, 156, 158, 159. Mary I., queen of England (1553- 1558), 17, 18. Maria Henrietta, queen of Charles I., 71. 340 Index. Mary II., queen of England, and consort of William III., 113. Mary Stuart, queen of Scotland, 23- Maryborough, 19. Maynootb, Catholic seminary, 280. Mazarin, French minister of Louis XIV., 71. Meath, diocese o*", 21. Mellifont, abbey of, 34. Mendoza, ambassador of Philip II. of Spain, 25. Mervyn, Sir A., member of the Irish Parliament in the 17th century, 95, 97. Middlemen, 160. Middleton, Alan Broderick, Vis- count, Irish chancellor (1724), 151. Milton, Lord, Irish secretary (1795), Moira, Lord, member of the En- glish, as well as the Irish, House of Lords, 295, 316. Molesworth, Viscount, 128. Molyneux, Irish writer, 134, 147. Monk, British general, 78. Monroe, Scotch general, 65, 73. Montluc, Jean de. Bishop of Va- lence, French agent at the time of Edward VI., 15, Moore, general at the time of the rebellion of 1798, 304. Moore, Thomas, biographer of Lord Edward Fitzgerald, 284, 294. Morgan, member of the Irish Par- liament in Cromwell's time, 93. Mountgarret, Lord, president of the Council of Kilkenny, 71. Mountjoy, Charles Blount, Lord, English commander in the war against Tyrone, afterward gov- ernor of Ireland, 32-34, 36. Mountnorris, Lord, contemporary of Strafford, 50. Munster, province of, insurrection of 1572 in, 24; fresh risings in (1579-1583), 25-27; revolt in (1598), 31 ; joined in the rebellion of 1641, 64 ; agrarian bands in (1761), 163; again in 1786, 24S ; the tithe system oppressive in, 250 ; attitude of, after the at- tempted invasion of Hoche, 288 ; the rebellion of 1798, 302. Muskerry, Lord, leader of the Irish in Cromwell's time, 86, 89. Murphy, Catholic priest, 303. Mutiny Act, 209, 210, 214, 217, 223, 225, 226, 229. N. Naas, engagement at (1798), 302. Napper Tandy, Irish demagogue, 243, 259. 265, 308. National Congress (1784), 243. Navigation Act, alteration of (1663), 98. Newcastle, Duke of, minister of George II., 152, Newenham, Lord, member of the Irish Parliament, 243. Newfoundland fisheries, 1S4. Newry, Ladies' Fencibles, 212. Nicholas, chaplain of Henry II., 3. Nomination boroughs, 139. Norris, Lord, leader of the British forces against Tyrone, 30. North, Lord, prime minister in the reign of George III.; his opinion of the Absentee Tax, 180; his attitude on the question of Irish commerce, 191, 192 ; re- moves some of the restrictions upon colonial trade (1779), 205, 206 ; fall of his ministry (^1782), 220 ; formation of the coalition ministry of Fox and North, 233 ; its fall, 240. Nortliington, Lord, Irish viceroy ( 1 783-1 784), 233, 240. Northumberland, Duke of, Irish viceroy (1763- 1 765), 169, 170, 172. Nugent, Lord, member of the English Parliament, 190. O. Dates, Titus, denouncer of the pre- tended Popish plot in the reign of Charles II., 104. Index. 541 Oakboys in Ulster, 167, 168. O'Brien, Murrougli, chieftain of Ulster in the reign of Henry VIII., 13. O'Coigley, Catholic priest, and Irish agent, 298. O'Conolly, Owen, informer against the conspirators of 1641, 60. O'Connor, Roderic, king of Con- naught in the reign of Henry II., 2, O'Connor, chieftain of Leinster under Edward VI., 14. O'Connor, founder of the Catholic Association, 131. O'Connor, Arthur, member of the Irish Parliament, and member of the Irish Directory, 285, 290, 298, 307. O' Desmond, Gerald, Earl and chieftain of Munster in the reign of Elizabeth, 26, 27. O'Desmond, John, cousin of the preceding, 26, 27. O'Dogherty, Lord of Innishowen, in the time of James I., 40, 45. O'Donnell, afterward Earl of Tyrconnel, chieftain of Ulster, 3°! oZ- O'Donnell, Roderic, brother of the former, created Earl of Tyrconnel by James I , 36, 39, 45. Octennial Act (1798), 173, 174. O'Leary, monk and writer in the iSth century, 130, 200, 201. Omer, St., Catholic seminary for the education of the Catholic clergy, 280. O'Moore, chieftain of Leinster in the reign of Edward VI., 14. O'Moore, Roger, one of the origin- ators of the rebellion (1641), 59. O'Neill, chieftain of Ulster in the reign of Henry VIII., 12, 13, 16. O'Neill, Shane, chieftain of Ulster in the reigns of Edward VI., Mary, and Elizabeth, 16, 17, 22, 23- O'Neill, Matthew, brother of the last. 22. O'Neill, Hugh, son of the preceding. Earl of Tyrone, 30-34, 36, 38, 39, 45- O'Neill, Phelim, one of the insti- gators of the rebellion of 1641, *59, 65. O'Neill, Owen Roe, relative of the last, commander of the rebels in Ulster from the year 1642, 65, 73, 75, 78, 84. O'Neill, Hugh, leader of the Irish troops against Cromwell, 83. Orange lodges founded (1795), 282. Orangemen, 281. Ormond, Earl of, leader of the army against Tyrone under Elizabeth, 30- Ormond, James Butler, Earl, after- wards Marquis, and from 166 1 Duke of ; for many years viceroy of Ireland ; his victory over the rebels, 65 ; attempts to negotiate a truce with the rebels, 67 ; arrests Glamorgan, 69 ; concludes a peace with the Irish, 72 ; the peace not recognised by the ultramontane and national Irish parties, ^^^ ; repulses an attack upon Dublin, T"}, ; surrenders Dublin to the Parliamentary troops and returns to England, 75 ; recalled in 1648, TJ ; con- cludes another treaty between the king and the Irish, 78 ; O'Neill submits to him, 79 ; his defeat at Rathmines, 80 ; the coalition which he hac^ effected is dissolved, 81 ; he leaves Ire- land(i65o), 84,85 ; again becomes lord-lieutenant, 1661 ; favours the demands of the English colonists, 96 ; interests himself in the economic development of the country, 100 ; his position with regard to the Remonstrants, 102 ; in 1668 is again driven from office, 102 ; returns in 1677 as viceroy, 104 ; religious disturb- ances during his administration, IC4, 105 ; loses the favour of his sovereign, 105 ; is recalled by James II., 106. O'Rorick Brien, chieftain of Con- naught in the time of Elizabeth, 30. ■^ ,1 '> Index. P. Pale, the districts in the east of Ireland first colonised by the English, 3, 5, 63. Parish School Act, passed 1537, 12. Parliament, English ; grants no toleration to the Catholic religion in Ireland (1641), 63 ; confers i\ million acres of Irish land upon English capitalists (1642), 64; orders that no quarter be given to any Irish found fighting in Great Britain (1644), 68 ; resolves upon the colonisation of Ireland (1652), 89 ; furnishes detailed in- structions as to the method of colonisation to be pursued, 90 ; alters the Treaty of Limerick (1691), 117 ; forbids the export of Irish wool (1698), 133 ; enters into negotiations respecting the libera- tion of Irish commerce (1778), 190 ; proceedings in connection with the Irish question (1779), 205, 206 ; proceedings on the same subject (1782), 220, 221 ; assents to the legislative inde- pendence of Ireland, 225 ; re- nounces supreme legislative authority in Ireland, 232 ; pro- ceedings relative to placing English and Irish commerce on an equality (1785), 245,246; on the question of the regency, 252 ; admits Catholics in England to the lower offices of State, 260 ; proceedings relative to the re- moval of Lord Fitzwilliam (1795), 279 ; in connection with tlie excesses of the troops in Ireland (1797), 295 ; proceedings on the subject of the Union (1799, 1800), 314,315,325- Parliament, Irish, earliest mention of, 7 ; method of summoning, according to Poyning's law, 8 ; the Parliament of 1536, 11 ; that of 1541, 13 ; that of 1556, 17 ; that of 1560, under Lord Fitz- walter, 19 ; of 1585, under Perrot, 28 ; the Parliament of James I. (161 3), 43, 45 ; the Parliament under Lord Strafford (1634}, 50 ; the session of 1640, 54 ; allies itself with the enemies of Straf- ford, 55 ; prorogued by the lord justices, 63 ; Irish Parliament under Charles II., 97; the Par- liament of 1689, 109 ; transactions of this Parliament, 109-111 ; the Parliament of 1692 comes into conflict with the Government, 147 ; the Parliament of 1698 places high duties on the export of Irish cloth, 134 ; suggests the use of native manufactured goods only, and advocates, in 1707, Union with England, 135 ; cha- racter of the Irish Parliament in the i8th century, 138-141 ; in 1757 passes resolutions condemn- ing high pensions, 145 ; rise of an opposition party in the reign of George II., 152 ; first victory of this party, I73r, 153; further contests under George II., 154, 155 ; contest in connection with the questions of pensions and seven years Parliaments, in the reign of George III, 169, 170; eight years Parliaments intro- duced (1768), 173 ; an attempt to crush the power of the aristocratic element in Parliament fails, 175 ; constitutional conflict (1769), 176 ; prorogation of Parliament and its corruption by Townshend, 177, 179 ; the Parliament of 1773 declares against the Absentee Tax, 183 ; against the Americans (1775), 186; dissolution (1776), 187 ; Parliament sanctions the em- bargo ('1777), 188; effects the first breach in the Penal Code (1778), 192-196 ; demands free com- merce (1797), 201 ; refuses to agree to fresh taxation, 204 ; proceed- ings of the year 1780, 207-210 ; session of 1781,213-216 ; Grattan advocates the views of the vvil- unteers (17S2), 218 ; furthertrans- actions (17S2), 219-221, 224; address of thanks passed by the Irish Parliament the 27th May, 1782, 226 ; Parliament perfects Index. o^o the Constitution, 229 ; amelio- rates the condition of the CathoHcs, 229 ; the question of Simple Repeal arises, 230, 231 ; a vote of thanks to the volunteers passed (1783), 235 ; dispute in Parliament between Grattan and Flood (1783), 235, 236; trans- actions in connection with Flood's Reform Bill (1783 and 1784), 238, 241 ; proceedings relative to the commercial equality of Ireland and England, 245, 247 ; to the pension-list (1786), 248 ; proceed- ings in connection with the Riot Bill (1787), 249 ; Grattan's pro- posals on the tithe question(i787, 1788), 249-251 ; its action on the subject of the regency (1789), 252, 253 ; transactions of the year 1790, 256 ; the elections of 1790, 256, 257 ; session of 1791, 257 ; Catholic Bill brought in and passed (1792), 261, 262 ; proceed- ings in reference to the Catholic question (1793), 267 ; Parliamen- tary reform, 268 ; the Gunpowder Bill and the Conventions Bill, . 269 ; the Parliament of 1 794 and the Emancipation Bill, 276, 279 ; its action in connection with the Indemnity Bill and the Insurrec- tions Bill (1796), 283 ; it suspends the Habeas Corpus Act (1797), 2S7 ; passes an Amnesty Bill after the rebellion of 1798, 306 ; proceedings in connection with the Union Bill (1799), 316 ; cor- ruption of Parliament, 317-319 ; further proceedings relative to the Union (1800), 322-326 ; end of the Irish Parliament, 327. Parliamentary Undertakers, 139, 170, 175. Parnell, Sir John, chancellor of the treasury, opponent of the Union, 312, 314. Parsons, Sir William, Irish lord . justice in the reign of Charles I., 57, 58, 64, 67. Parsons, Sir L., member of the Irish House of Commons (iSoo), 322. Paul III., Pope (1534-1550), 12. Peep of Day Boys, agrarian bands at the end of last century, 265, 281. Pelham, Irish secretary under Lord Camden, 288, 294. Penal laws, introduction and cha- racter o*", 1 18-126; isolated de- mands for their relaxation, 128; certain of them after a time no longer enforced, 130; gradual abolition of (1778, 1782, 1792, 1793), 195, 229, 261, 262, 267. Pensions, Irish, 143-145 ; attacks upon the pension system (1757, 1763, 1786), 155, 169, 248 ; reduc- tion of thepension list (1793), 268. Perrot, Irish lord-lieutenant in the reign of Elizabeth, 27-29. Pery, member of the Irish Parlia- ment, 169. Philip II., King of Spain, consort of Mary I., 25, 27. Philipstown, 19. Pitt, William, younger son of the Earl of Chatham, minister of George III. ; his attitude on the question of Irish commerce, 244- 24S ; his views upon the tithe system, 249 ; on the regency question, 252 ; on granting equal rights to the Catholics, 260, 266 ; makes advances to the Whigs, and desires a change in the ad- ministration, 273 ; negotiates with Grattan, 273, 274 ; his opinion on Catholic emancipation, 274 ; his action with regard to Lord Fitz- william (1795), 277 I advocates the erection of a Catholic seminary atl\laynooth,28o; takes measures for the suppression of the re- bellion, 304 ; his action in con- nection with the Union, 310, 314 ; his attempt to carry Catholic emancipation fails, 327 ; his re- signation of office, 328 ; he re- sumes office, 329. Pius v., pope (1565-1572), 24, 25. Plunket, Catholic Archbishop of Armagh in the time of Charles II., 105. 344 Index. Plunket, member of the Irish House of Commons, opponent of the Union, 322. Portland, Bentinck, Duke of, fa- vourite of Wilham III , 144. Portland, Uuke of, Irish viceroy (1782), afterward English minis- ter, 224, 232, 273,317. Portugal, purposed enlistment of Irish troops for, 160 ; threatened fiscal war with, 212. Ponsonby, family of, 139. Ponsonby, J., Speaker of the Irish House of Commons until 1769, 176, 178, 222. Ponsonby, G., son of the preceding, Irish member of Parliament, 316. Ponsonby, W., brother of the last, member of the Irish Parliament, 268, 270, 294, 322, 325. Poyning, Sir Edward, Irish viceroy in the reign of Henry VII., 8. Poyning's Act passed, 8 ; modified (1556), 141 ; failureof the attempt to abolish it, 28 ; temporarily re- pealed, 109 ; this decision re- scinded, 114; its repeal again moved (1780), 206, 209 ; likewise in 1 781, 1782, 214, 223 ; its aboli- tion accomplished, 229. Preston, Irish leader of the troops at the time of the rebellion, 73. Prior, writer in the i8th century, 181. Puritans, the, their attitude towards Catholicism under James I. and Charles I., 44, 58. Pym, member of the English Par- liament in the reign of Charles I., 54, 58. Q- Quarterage, 119. Oueen's County, 19, 91. R. Raleigh, Walter, contemporary with Elizabeth, 27. Rapparees, Irish robbers in the iSth century, 127. Ratlimines, battle of, 80. Reform Bill, brought in by Flood (1783), 238 ; re-introduced (1784), 240 ; Ponsonby's Reform Bills (1793, I794\ 268, 270. Regency, question of (1788, 1789), 252-254. Recusant Act, 37. Remonstrance of the Irish Catho- lics in the reign of Charles I., 64. Remonstrants, name of an Irish party in the reign of Charles II., lOI. Reynolds, informer against the Irish conspiracy of 1798, 299. Richard II. (1377-1399), 7. Rinuccini, Archbishop of Fermo, Papal nuncfo to Ireland in the reign of Charles I., 69-77. Riot Bill (1787), 249. Robinson, English minister in the reign of George III., 187. Rochester, Lord, proposed by Charles II. as Irish viceroy, loG. Rockingham, Marquis of, member of the English Parliament and prime minister (1782), 181, 205, Rosen, general in the reign of James II., 108. Ross on the Barrow, victory of (1642), 65 ; surrender to Crom- well, 81. Ross in Connaught, 86. Rowan, Hamilton, leader of the democratic party, afterward the head of the United Irishmen, 255, 265, 271, 272. Rupert, Prince, 79. Rutland, Duke of, lord-lieutenant of Ireland (1784-17S7), 240, 244, 246, 24S, 251. S. Saint Leger, viceroy in the reigns of Henry VIII. and Edward VI., 13-16. Saratoga, capitulation of, 189. Scarampi, Oratorian brother. Papal nuncio in Ireland in the reign of Charles I., 67. Schomberg, general of William III., 112. Scott, Irish attorney-general in the reign of George III., 203, 208. Sebastian, King of Portugal, 26. Index. 345 Settlement, Act of, in the reign of Charles II., 95 ; an act to ex- plain it (1665), 97 ; temporarily abolished by James II., 1 10. Shannon, family of, 139. Shannon, first Earl of, see Boyle. Shannon, second Earl of, son of the former, 175, 178, 254. Shannon, the river, the Irish ban- ished beyond, 90, 91. Shaftesbury, British statesman in the reign of Charles II., 105. Shelburne, member of the British Parliament, 205, 224. Sheridan, member of the English Parliament, 316, 326. Shrewsbury, Duke of, Irish viceroy at the beginning of the i8th century, 122, 123, 142. Sidney, Lord, Irish viceroy (1692), .^47- Simnel Lambert, Pretender in the reign of Henry VII., 7. Simple Repeal, a contested ques- tion (1782), 230, 231. Sieve, or Sieve Oultagh, mythical head of the Whiteboys, 163. Smerwick, harbour of, 27. Smith, Adam, political economist of the last century, 181, 190,244,310. Smith, Thorn., founder of a British colony in Ulster, 24. Somerset, Duke of, lord protector in the reign of Edward VI., 15. Spain : renders assistance to the rebellion in Munster (1579), 26, 27 ; enters into relations with the Earl of Tyrone, and sends an army to Ireland, 31-33 ; holds communications with France respecting an invasion of Ireland (1779), 200 ; the Irish propose to solicit a loan from Spain (1797), 291. Spenser, the poet, contemporary with Elizabeth and James I., 27. Stanhope, Earl, English minister in the reign of George I., 128. Steelboys, agrarian bands in Ulster (1772), 168, 169. Stone, Dr., Archbishop of Dublin and Irish lord justice in the 18th century, 130, 153, 155. Strafford, Earl of, see Wentworth. Strongbovv, Richard, Earl, vassal of Henry II., 2. Stuckley, Thomas, Irish refugee in the time of Elizabeth, 25, 26. Sudley, Lord, member of the Irish Parliament, 234. Swan, town-major, 300. Swift, Jonathan, Dean of St. Pat- rick's, on Irish pauperism, 115; the restrictions upon colonial trade, 99 ; the insignificance of Jacobitism in Ireland, 127 ; pam- phlet, "A modest proposal," etc. (1720), 136; prosecution on ac- count of it, 137 ; his opinion of the Irish Parliament, 138 ; on the bestowment of Irish offices upon Englishmen, 143 ; on the high salaries of Irish officials, 143 ; attacks Wood's patent, and pub- lishes the Drapier Letters (1724), 148-151 ; trial in connection with them, 152. Synge, Canon of Dublin, 128. Talbot, Richard, Colonel, created Earl of Tyrconnel by James II., Irish viceroy, 103, 105, 106, 108, no. Talbot, Peter, brother of the pre- ceding, Archbishop of Dublin, 103. Tanistry, name for the mode of succession which prevailed a- mong the Celts, 6. Tara Hill, assembly at, 64. Temple, Historian of the Rebellion of 1641, 61. Temple, Sir William, statesman in the reign of Charles II., 100. Temple, Earl, Irish viceroy (1782, 1783), 232, 233. Terry's Mother, signature to the Whiteboy proclamations, 164. Test Act, passed in Ireland (1704), 138; effijrt to repeal it (1778), 195 ; its abolition (1780), 206. Thurot, French general in the i8th century, 131. 346 Index. Tithes, hardships in connection with the system of, no, 163; temporary re^^ulation of, in the reign of James II., no; the abuses of the tithe system the cause of the Whiteboy distur- bances, 160; Pitt's views on the question, 249 ; Grattan's pro- posals for their better adjustment, 249-251. Toleration, Act of, in the reign of James II., no Tone, Wolfe, lawyer, secretary of the Catholic Committee, leader of the United Irishmen, 272, 284, 287, 293, 297, 309. Tong, informer against the Papists in the reign of Charles II., 104. Tories, namefor Irish robber-bands, 88, 127. Tottenham, Colonel, member of the Irish Parliament (1731), 153. Townshend, Lord, secretary of state in the reign of George I., 148. Townshend, Charles, secretary^ of state in the reign of George III., 172. Townshend, brother of the latter, Irish viceroy, 1767-1772 ; his earliest acts, 172 ; attains the shortening of Parliaments, 173 ; failure of his plan for increasing the army, 174 ; he endeavours to crush the influence of the "Under- takers," 175 ; his action in con- nection with the conflict of 1769, 176; by bribing and undue in- fluence succeeds in obtaining- a majority, 178; creates new places in opposition to the wishes of the Parliament, 179; general disap- proval of his conduct, and his recall, 180. Trim, town of, negotiations at, 64 ; battle of, 76. Trimleston, Lord, presents an ad- dress (1762), 159. Troy, Dr., Catholic Bishop of Os- sory, afterward Archbishop of Dublin, 243, 280, 320. Tucker, political economist and writer, 310. Tyrconnel, see O'Donnell and Tal- bot. Tyrone, Earl of, sec Hugh O'Neill. U. Ulster, province of: insurrection of Shane O'Neill, 22 ; divided into counties, 28 ; insurrections of O'Donnell and Hugh O'Neill, 30-34 ; holding of the first assizes, 36; O'Dogherty's rising, 40; col- onisation of Ulster, 40-42 ; the colonisation sanctioned by the government, 45 ; rebellion of Phelim O'Neill (1641), 59 ; spread of the rebellion, its character, 60, 61 ; agrarian disturbances by the Oakboys (1763), 167, 168 ; by the Steelboys (1772), 168 ; sympathy of the province with America (1775), 1 87; the French Revolution has many friends in Ulster, 258, 259; agrarian disturbances ( 1 793), 265, 28 1 ; insurrection ( 1 798), 302, Union between England and Ire- land desired by the Irish Parlia- ment (1707), 135 ; the discussion of this subject in 1759 occasions a riot, 156; Pitt meditates a L^nion, 248, 254 ; Union Bill of 1799, 309-316 ; agitation in con- nection with the Union, 318-321 ; proceedings in 1800, 321-327. United Irishmen, founding of the society (1791), 259; celebration of the storming of the Bastile, and the formation of volunteer battalions, 264, 265 ; government measures against the league, 269, 270 ; growing influence of, after the year 1797, and change in their organization, 281 ; their ef- forts to bring about a French invasion, 283-285 ; they elect a Directory (1797), 290; win over the Catholic population. 291, 292 ; they give themselves a military organization, 298 ; arrest of the Directoiy, 299 ; election of a second one, 300 ; they put their plans into execution, 302. Index. 347 Upper Ossory, Earl of, member of the English Parliament, 205. Urban VIII., Pope (1623-1643), 66. Usher, James, Anglican Archbishop of Dublin in the reigns of James I. and Charles I., 48. V. Vergennes, French minister in the reign of Louis XVI., 200. Vinegar Hill, battle of, 304. Virri, Count, Sardinian ambassador to England, 169. Walker, clergyman, chief defender of Londonderry during the siege, 108. Walpole, Robert, English minister in the reign of George I. and George II., 148, 152. Walsh, Bishop of Ossory, 21. Walsh, Peter, Franciscan monk in the 17th century, 76, loi. Warbeck, Perkin, Pretender in the reign of Henry VII., 7. Warren, Sir Borlase, British com- modore, 309. Waterford, town of, 36, 73, 163, 201. Wellesley, Arthur, afterward Duke of Wellington, member of the Irish Parliament, 257, 267. Wentworth, Thomas, lord-lieu- tenant of Ireland in the reign of Charles I., 49 ; character of his policy, 50; his proceedings against the gentry of Connaught, 51, 52 ; brighter aspects of his administration, 53 ; created Earl of Strafford, 52 ; the Irish Par- liament completely at his will, 54; his recall, trial, and fate, 54, 55- Wesley, founder of Methodism, 125. Westmoreland, Earl of, Irish vice- roy (1790-1794), 256, 273, 275. Weymouth, English secretary of state under (jeorge III., 200. Wexford, county of, rebellion in, 303- Wexford, town of, capitulation of, 36; massacre at, 81 ; capture of by the rebels (1798), 303 ; recap- ture by the troops, 304. Wharton, Irish lord-lieutenant at the beginning of the i8th cen- tury, 143. Whig Club, Irish, founded 1789, 255. \\ hiteboys, agrarian bands in Mun- ster (1761-1767), 162 ; their pro- clamations, 164 ; punishment in- flicted and terrorism caused by them, 165 ; political motives false- ly attributed to them, 165, 166 ; attitude of the government with regard to these disturbances, 166, 167 ; fresh bands of (1784). 242. Whitshed, Irish lord chief justice in the reign of George I , 137, 152. William III., 1 688-1 701, accession of, 108 ; adherents of, in Ireland, proscribed by James II., 11 1; sends Schomberg to Ireland, 112; lands in Ireland himself, and gains the battle of the Boyne, 112; leaves Ireland and ratifies the Treaty of Limerick, 113; his toleration towards the Catholics, 116; is compelled to sanction penal legislation against them, 118; prohibits trade between Ireland and the colonies, 132 ; suppresses the Irish woollen trade, 133 ; creates new boroughs, 139 ; gives his favourites Irish lands, 144. Windham, British secretary of state in the reign of George III., Wingfield, English general in the reign of James I., 40. Winter, de, admiral of the Dutch Republic, 293. Wolfe, Irish attorney-general, 283, 287.. Wood, ironmaster, receives a patent for the coining of Irish money, in the reign of Geoige I., 148- 152. Wyse, founder of the Catholic As- sociation, 131. 148 Index. Y. Yelverton, riiember of the Irish Parliament, opposes the sending of Irish troops against America (1775), 1 86; defends the volunteers, 203 ; moves for the alooHtion of Poyning's law (1780), 209 ; again in 17S1, 214; recommends the formation of an Irish fleet, 213; moves that legal force be given to such British Acts as deal with Irish landed property and Irish commerce, 219; conflict with Flood on the Reform Bill, 238, 239- Yorktown, capitulation of, 214, 304. Youghal, town of, 81, 82. Young, Arthur, political economist, 126, 160, 310. > Cutler & Tanner, The Sehvood Printing Works, Frome, and Londoa. Date Due ^"'^■l5'3 ? .^ ..^ ^ ,r„,.^ ^ 1 KOU (*'.?? ^0UI3'37 PPR-C ' !972 MAY 2^ UhC 4 1989 /^R 22 1992 'J ■■ ■ (|) 4^624 BOSTON COLLEGE LIBRARY UNIVERSITY HEIGHTS CHESTNUT HILL, MASS. Mf Books may be kept for two weeks and may be renewed for the same period, unless re- served. . Two cents a day is charged for each book kept overtime. If you cannot Snd what you want, ask the Librarian who will be glad to help you. The borrower is responsible for books drawn on his card and for all fines accruing on the same. o