feelings of his sovereign, in the most tender and vulnerable part: for he had openly espoused the cause of Prince Arthur of Bretagne, whose pretensions to the crown, he deemed just and of whose murder he spoke in terms of unqualified indignation. The temporizing and vindictive De Lacy had informed the king of his rival's indiscreet expressions, and thus provoked him to revenge. But De Courcy openly defied his enemy and prepared for war. In a sanguinary battle fought at Down, in the year 1203, he defeated the army of his rival and compelled him to retreat with disgrace.* Not satisfied with the victory which he had thus gained, he was anxious to bring the contest to a sudden and conclusive issue, and therefore challenged his antagonist to single combat. But De Lacy, aware of his desperate valour and irresistible strength, declined the conflict, as inconsistent with the commission which he had received from the king, who had denounced De Courcy as a traitor and a rebel. Under sanction of this commission, he offered a reward to any person who should seize upon his antagonist and surrender him, alive or dead. But no man was found bold enough to undertake so hazardous an enterprise. De Lacy, therefore, made private offers of a large pecuniary recompense to the earl's servants, if they would betray their lord. De Courcy, in whom was combined a chivalrous spirit of enterprise, with an ardent and even superstitious devotion, was accustomed to perform periodical penance, ob salutem animæ. On Good-Friday, the warrior was in the act of walking barefooted around the churchyard of Down, when the traitors, taking advantage of his defenceless state, rushed suddenly upon their unarmed and unsuspecting master. His two nephews, the sons of Armoric St. Laurence, sprang forward to defend their uncle. De Courcy himself made a most desperate resistance, and, in the height of the contest, seized upon a wooden cross, which lay in the church yard, and wielding this singular weapon with gigantic force, slew thirteen of his assailants. The survivors, however, overpowered the warrior, killed his nephews and brought him a prisoner to De Lacy, who transmitted him to England. The base betrayers of the earl now claimed the stipulated wages of their perfidy; but De Lacy, who loved the treason yet hated the traitors, gave orders that they should proceed to England, with the following curious passport, which they were prohibited from opening till after they should have landed : "I Hugh De Lacy, Lord-Justice of Ireland, &c. &c. &c. "KNOW ye that these men, whose names are underwritten, sometime served SIR JOHN DE COURCY, late Earl of ULSTER, but now in durance in the tower of London, and for a sum of money betrayed their own master into my hands. Them I deem no better than Judas the traytor. How hardly soever I deem of Courcy, I hold them to be a thousand times more damnable traytors. Wherefore, let no subject in the king's dominions, give them any entertainment, but spit in their faces and suffer them to rogue and wander about as Jews." De Lacy provided a boat and victuals for these wretches, but would not grant them any seaman or pilot. Tossed about at the mercy of the winds and waves, they were driven into Cork, where having been first paid the hire of their villany, they were hanged by order of the lord-justice.* On the second of May, 1205, Hugh De Lacy was appointed Earl of Ulster, in lieu of the imprisoned and disgraced De Courcy. Armagh, of course, constituted a part of the territory assigned to this new favourite of the British king; but it appears to have derived no benefit from the change. In the year 1206, the city was • Cox vol, 1, p. 46, 47. Camden ut supra, p. 153. Appendix, No. XVII pillaged by Hugh de Lacy the younger, who continued his depredations during ten successive days.* It is probable that the citizens had formed some alliance with Aodh O Nial prince of Tirconnel, who had given all the resistance in his power, to the progress of the British arms, under De Courcy. Be this at may, Armagh was again pillaged by the troops of De Lacy, on the vigil of Saint Brigid, in the year 1208.+ • Ann. Inisf. Arch Mon. Hib. p. 26. +Ibids CHAPTER VIII. From the imprisonment of De Courcy till the death of Prince Edward Bruce. AN event which took place in the year 1209, may be worth recording here. Shortly before that period, a pestilential disease, which raged through Ireland, had wasted Dublin. It was, therefore, deemed necessary to introduce a colony of English settlers from Bristol to repeople the city. On the Monday in Easter-week, the new inhabitants had proceeded, in a sportive manner, to Cullen's wood,* to amuse themselves with rural pastimes, during the holydays. But the mountain septs of the O Beirnes and O Tuathils, (O Tooles) who viewed the daily influx of foreigners into their native country, with no friendly eye, lay in ambush for the unarmed Bristolians. At a convenient moment, they suddenly sprang from their lurking place on the unsuspecting Britons, of whom they slew three hundred, besides a multitude of women and children, who had accompanied their friends to partake in their harmless recreations. The town was soon repeopled by the citizens of Bristol, by whom the day on which their countrymen had been massacred, was denominated Black-Monday, an appellation which it has retained, even till this present hour. During several centuries, the anniversary of this extraordinary event was solemnized by the mayor, sheriffs, and citizens of Dublin, in a very singular and curious manner. Tents were pitched upon the spot where the Bristolians had been slain. A joyous feast ensued, and, in the midst of the banquet, the imaginary enemy was publickly defied by mimic heralds, and warned, at his peril, to forbear from disturbing their revelry. To this magnanimous challenge, thundered forth against the invisible So called from the noble Irish family of the Cullens to which it formerly belonged.-Mac Geog, vol. 2, p. 54, O Tooles and O Beirnes, Echo alone replied. In process of time, the singing boys of the cathedral were deputed to utter this defiance, ore rotundo, as if even they were fully competent to defend the city against so despi cable a foe.* It is traditionally said that the Bristo-Dublinians, abhorring the O Tuathils and the O Beirnes, drove many individuals of those septs, innocent as well as guilty, from their native mountains. Some of the O Tuathils settled near Lisnadill, in the neighbourhood of Armagh, where their posterity, I believe, resides at this hour. Others of the sept settled in Connaught and in different parts of Ulster. The term Such was the origin of Black-Monday. Bloody-Tuesday seems to have originated with the Irish, who deem that day peculiarly fatal and unfortunate, Limerick was twice won, Wexford surrendered, Waterford besieged and Dublin sacked upon a Tuesday.+ This appellation was also, (I believe) for other causes, adopt. ed by the English. A. D. 1210, King John landed with a great and wellappointed army at Waterford. In Dublin he received the submission of twenty Irish chieftains, amongst whom was Aodh O Nial prince of Tirone, who had so long opposed De Courcy in Ulster. Yet O Nial, having reconsidered this subject, refused to give hostages to the English monarch and treated the messengers sent to demand them with contempt.§ At this period, Eng lish colonies were interspersed over the whole face of the country, through the more numerous aboriginal inhabitants of the land. The laws were variable and uncertain; even the tenants of the crown knew not the nature of their own tenures, and the genuine Irish adhered Hanmer. Leland vol. 1, p. ut supra p. 42, 1, p. 187. Holling. 186. $ Ibid. Ware's Ann. ut supra. Cox vol. 1, p. 14 + Ware's Ann; Ann. Waverl. p. 172, Ann. Inisfal, Mss. Leland vol. |