Page images
PDF
EPUB

very probably was such at the time, as to give weight to the intercession of a high and influential ecclesiastic; and historians attribute his forgiveness of the Lacies to the abbot's representations. After some demur, he at last suffered them to resume their possessions, exacting from Hugh 4000 marks for Ulster, and from Walter 2500 for Meath. The Lacies proved their gratitude to the abbot by knighting his nephew, and investing him with a lordship in Ireland.

King John's visit to Ireland was upon the present occasion marked by measures of considerable prudence, and, if laws and ordinances were alone enough to ensure civil order and national prosperity, adapted to heal the most prominent disorders of the country. He divided Leinster and Munster, into the provinces of Dublin, Kildare, Meath, Uriel, Caterlogh, Kilkenny, Wexford, Waterford, Cork, Limerick, Tipperary, and Kerry, to which he appointed civil officers, as in the English counties.* He left an abstract of the English laws sealed and signed by himself in the exchequer in Dublin, and ordained that they should thenceforth be observed in Ireland. After this he appointed bishop Gray lord justice, and returned into Englard.

The next mention of any interest we find of the Lacies, occurs in the first year of Henry III. From a writ cited by Cox,† it would appear that Hugh de Lacy, although pardoned by king John, still took care, and doubtless with justifiable prudence, not to put himself within the tyrant's power. "Another writ," says Cox, "under the test of the earl Marshall, was sent to Hugh de Lacy to invite his return; in this writ, (which runs in the name of the king) his majesty condescends to expostulate with Lacy, that he (the king) ought not to be blamed for his father's unkindness to Lacy, and assures him that he shall have restitution and protection, if he would come back; and upon receipt of it, Lacy did very readily comply with the king's desire."

This writ is further explained by another paper, published by Leland, from which the following extract contains the evident confirmation and extension of the same liberal policy:—" And whereas, we have heard that some resentment hath arisen between our lord and father aforesaid, and certain nobles of our realm, and for some time subsisted, whether with cause or without cause, we know not; our pleasure is, that it shall be for ever abolished and forgotten, so as never to remain in our mind; and in order that the effect may cease with the removal of the cause, whatever resentment was conceived, or subsisted against him, we are ready and willing to the utmost of our power to atone for, by yielding to all persons what reason shall suggest, and the good counsel of our subjects direct, abolishing all evil usages, from our realm, and by the restoration of liberties and free customs so as to recall the gracious days of our ancestors, granting to all our subjects what each may fairly and reasonably claim. For this purpose, know ye that a council being lately convened at Bristol, in which were present all the prelates of England, as well bishops and abbots as priors, and many as well earls and barons, they did homage and fealty to us, publicly and generally; and receiving a grant of those liberties and free customs first demanded and approved by them, departed in

* Cox.

† Cox, 56; from Brady's Append. 153.

joy, ready and willing to do our service, each to his particular residence."*

Far from the centre of authority, and endowed with enormous possessions, the Irish barons could not, in the state of constitutional jurisdiction then existing, be easily made amenable to control; they had the licence attendant on an unsettled state, as well as that inherent in the feudal institutions. Law and charter, were as yet but declaratory of the progress of opinion, and of the growth of that civil wisdom which must precede improvement. The Irish barons possessed on a narrow scale the powers of sovereignty, without its constraints. The monarch of a nation acts in the eye of the world, and is influenced by the power, wisdom, and virtue of his nobles; the tyrant noble, exercises his petty despotism over the mindless level of a province, from which the voice of complaint and suffering could only receive influential weight from the fear or the humanity of the chief. The sword of justice (literally its instrument of authority then) could reach but a little way in the confusion of the times; nor was it, in those days of violence and usurpation, easy to find justice uncontaminated by the motives of private ambition and passion. In such a state of things it was that the Lacies were formidable as enemies or to be desired as friends by the sovereign himself. They lived in an endless train of dissensions and intrigues, wars, oppressions, and spoliations, which the law had not force to control, and at which the government found it necessary to connive, unless where circumstances made the opposite policy the more expedient means of conciliating the most efficient servants. On this principle, the barons were more frequently employed to counterbalance each other, than made in any way amenable to the law of justice. Justice slept when deeds of the most fearful tyranny were perpetrated, but was sometimes compelled to awaken by the passions which accumulated in the course of a political intrigue. Of this nature was that execrable conspiracy of which the unfortunate Richard, earl Marshall, was the victim, and in which Hugh de Lacy, who claimed a part of his territories, bore a share. We have already given a full account of this disgraceful transaction.†

It only remains to mention that Hugh de Lacy, and his brother Walter, died about the year 1234; and leaving only daughters, their great possessions went to other families. Hugh's daughter was married to Walter de Burgo, who thus acquired the earldom of Ulster. The two daughters of Walter de Lacy were married to Lord Theobald de Verdon, and to Geoffry Genneville.‡

Richard de Burgo.

DIED A. D. 1243.

AMONGST the greater names by which the annals of this period are illustrated, few are more entitled to our notice than Richard de Burgo. He was the son of Fitz-Adelm, of whom we have already given a

* Leland, 198.

† Page 335.

+ Cox.

sketch, by Isabella, natural daughter to Richard I., and widow of Llewellyn, prince of Wales. He succeeded by the death of his father in 1204, to the greater part of the province of Connaught, the grant of which was confirmed to him by king John, for the yearly rent of 300 marks; and again by Henry III. for a fine of 3000 marks. This grant was afterwards enlarged by a subsequent transaction in the year 1225, when the lord justice Marshall was directed to seize the whole of Connaught, forfeited by O'Conor, and to deliver it up to Richard de Burgo, at the rent of 300 marks for five years, and afterwards of 500 yearly. From this was excepted a tract, amounting to five cantreds, reserved for the maintenance of a garrison in Athlone. These grants appear to have been slowly carried into effect; in the first instance, they were no more than reversions on the death of Cathal O'Conor, who still continued to hold a doubtful and difficult state in his paternal realm. His restless and turbulent spirit soon afforded the pretext, if it did not impose the necessity, of proceeding to more violent extremities; but his death in 1223 made the claim of De Burgo unconditional.

This, nevertheless, did not deter the native chiefs from proceeding in pursuance of custom, to the election of a successor; and Tirlogh O'Conor, brother to Cathal, was invested with the royal name and pretensions. This nomination drew forth the interference of the government, at the time in the hands of De Marisco. But the hostilities of this governor were rather directed against the disaffected Irish prince, than in support of the already too powerful settlement. De Marisco having led a powerful force into Connaught, expelled Tirlogh, and set Aedh a son of Cathal in his place. Aedh, however, availed himself of the power thus acquired, for the purpose of resisting the power by which he was set up; and a contention ensued, in the result of which he met his death in some tumultuary affair between his people and those of De Marisco. Tirlogh re-assumed his claims; but Richard de Burgo had by this time succeeded De Marisco in the government of the country, and was thus armed with the power to right his own cause effectually. He deposed Tirlogh: but instead of directly asserting his claim to a paramount jurisdiction, he thought it more consistent with his ambition to act under the shadow of a nominal kingly authority, and accordingly placed Feidlim O'Conor, another son of Cathal, on the throne. His expectations were, however, disappointed by the spirit and sagacity of his nominee: Feidlim resisted his exactions, and refused to lend himself to his plans of usurpation and encroachment. De Burgo, indignant at this return for a seeming but selfish kindness, and stung by disappointment, avenged himself by the appointment of a rival prince of the same line, and marching to support his nomination, he contrived to make Feidlim his prisoner. Feidlim escaped, and collecting his friends and adherents, he defeated and slew the rival prince.

At this time Hubert de Burgo, uncle to Richard, fell into disgrace. He had for a long period, by the favour of these successive monarchs, been one of the greatest subjects in the kingdom-perhaps in Europe. He was chief justice of England, and had also been created earl of Connaught, and lord justice of Ireland for life. He was now displaced

*

from his offices, and as Richard had been appointed in Ireland by his nomination and as his deputy, he was involved in the consequences of his dismissal, and Maurice Fitz-Gerald appointed lord justice of Ireland.

The power and authority of Richard de Burgo were probably not seriously affected by the change: but the complaints of Feidlim O'Conor, representing his own wrongs and also the dangers to English authority which were likely to arise from the uninterrupted machinations. of so turbulent and powerful a baron, had the effect of alarming the fears of Henry III. In consequence, a letter was written to Maurice Fitz-Gerald, of which the consequences will hereafter be more fully detailed. De Burgo was placed in a state of hostility with the English government; and king Feidlim his enemy, by a commission of the king, appointed to act against him.

Such a state of things under the general system of modern governments, when the relative position of king and subject are guarded by a proportionate difference of powers and means, must have terminated in the speedy ruin of the subject thus circumstanced. On the growing fortunes of De Burgo it had no effect. His uncle too returned into power, and shortly after we find Richard acting under his commission against earl Marshall, as already described.

On the return of his uncle to power, the king had been content to remonstrate with De Burgo, on his alleged disloyalty. He received him into favour, and gently intimated his advice, that for the time to come he should be found careful to observe such orders as he might receive, and in guarding against even the suspicion of disloyalty. De Burgo seems to have been little influenced by this remonstrance. He contrived to gain the lord justice to his side; and easily finding some of those lawful excuses, which never yet have been found wanting for any occasion, they joined in the invasion of king Feidlim. The pretence was the suppression of insurrections; and under this pretence, they contrived to seize on large tracts of territory. Feidlim repeated his complaints, and the king sent an order for his redress to Maurice Fitz-Gerald; but a war with Scotland having commenced, and the king having ordered the attendance of Fitz-Gerald and the Irish chiefs, English and native-grounds for delay arose, and the storm was averted from De Burgo. He thus went on in the improvement of his circumstances, already grown beyond the limits of a subject. In 1232, we find an account of his having built the castle of Galway; and still growing in power and territorial possession, in 1236, he built that of Lough Rea. He now affected the state of a provincial king, and kept a train of barons, knights, and gentlemen, in his service, and about his

person.

In 1242, he went, accompanied by a splendid suite, to meet king Henry in Bourdeaux, but died in France in 1243.†

He was married to Hodierna, daughter to Robert de Gernon, and by her mother grand-daughter to Odo, son of Cathal O'Conor, known by the appellation of Crovderg, king of Connaught. By her he left Walter de Burgo, his successor, and two daughters, of whom

[blocks in formation]

one was married to Theobald Butler, ancestor to the Ormonde family; the other to Henry Netterville, ancestor to Lord Netterville."

Maurice Fitz=Gerald.

BORN A. D. 1195-DIED A.D. 1257.

THIS eminent person was the grandson of the first leader of the same name, of whom we have already presented the reader with a sketch. His father, Gerald, was styled baron Ophaly; and, as he is said to have died in 1205, and Maurice was put in possession of his honours and estates in 1216, it is to be presumed that it was on the occasion of his coming of age. In 1229, on the disgrace of Hubert de Burgo, Maurice was appointed lord justice of Ireland, in the room of Richard de Burgo. The principal public incidents of his administration at this time, were the contests between Feidlim O'Conor and De Burgo, and the hapless and shameful death of earl Marshall. These we have already related.

This last-mentioned event excited great indignation in Ireland, and threw much imputation on his government. Gilbert, the brother and successor of the murdered earl, for a little time incurred the anger of Henry III. He had married the daughter of Alexander, king of Scotland; and, possessing his unfortunate brother's pride and spirit, without his ability, he was quickly led into a course of opposition which ended in his disgrace. He was, however, restored to favour by the mediation of the king's brother. Maurice Fitz-Gerald on this, thought it prudent to seek a reconciliation with him, and passed over to England to obtain the royal influence for his purpose. He there exculpated himself before Henry and his court, by a solemn oath, that he had no part in the death of Richard, earl Marshall; and proposed, for the sake of amity and peace between the families, to found a monastery, with monks to offer up continual masses for the soul of the murdered earl. It was also on this occasion that Feidlim O'Conor came over in person to look for redress at the English court, against his enemy, Richard de Burgo.

The account of sudden commotions in Ireland hastened the return of Maurice; on his approach they subsided into a calm.

In the following year, 1244, king Henry had levied a powerful army to make war on Alexander, king of Scotland; but the cause of quarrel being removed, he was advised to seize the opportunity to reduce the Welch to obedience. On this occasion the king sent to Maurice, to attend him with such aid as he could bring from Ireland. The delay was considerable enough to give the king some discontent, which he seems to have treasured up for a future occasion. Maurice led over his forces, accompanied by Feidlim O'Conor. Passing the island of Anglesey, they landed and laid waste a part of the island; but, while they were moving off with the spoil to their ships, the inhabitants collected and came on them by surprise. They had no force

* Lodge.

« PreviousContinue »