pension of eighty merks; and infer that his death must have occurred about the same time.

Walter, Ninth Lord Louth.

DIED A. D. 1428.

THIS baron was a conspicuous actor in the period in which we are now engaged. His actions might supply us with many curious and interesting details, had we not resolved to pass through the history of this century with the least possible detail, and to confine ourselves to a few leading events, which we must refer to the lives of the several persons who bore the chief part in them.

This eminent nobleman was popularly called Walter More, which Lodge interprets, "the Great."* We rather suspect, however, that the Irish idea of greatness was confined to stature; at least such is certainly the ordinary application of the term "More." He was ninth in succession from the illustrious warrior, Sir John Birmingham, who gained the battle of Athenry, and defeated Bruce. He was appointed sheriff for life of Connaught. He commanded, with Sir Thomas de Burgo, the force which gained a victory in 1397, over M'Conn, and slew nine hundred of his men. He died 1428, and was buried at Athenry.

James, Fourth Earl of Ormonde.

DIED A. D. 1451.

As we approach the decline of English power in Ireland, the variety of names diminishes; and the only persons whose character, station, or personal remembrance entitles them to notice, at least to any distinct notice, will be found chiefly to fall under one of the two great races of Geraldine and Butler. Of these even, little is personally known that would be worthy of a distinct memoir, were it not that it is only by these memoirs that we are enabled to connect the history of the century now past, with that of a later period.

The history of James, fourth earl of Ormonde, has indeed a close and prominent connexion with that of his age. He was a man of considerable learning and ability, and was distinguished by an unusual share of royal favour. He was ward to Thomas, duke of Lancaster; by which fact it is ascertained, that he was yet a minor when appointed to the government of Ireland as lord deputy. In this capacity he held a parliament in Dublin, in which the statutes of Dublin and Kilkenny were confirmed.

In 1412, he accompanied the duke of Clarence into France, and rose into great favour with king Henry V., who began his reign in the same year. He seems to have remained in the English court until 1419, when king Henry sent him over as lord lieutenant of Ireland. Imme

Lodge, iii. 41.

diately on landing, he held a parliament at Waterford, which granted the king two subsidies and seventy marks to himself. The pale was at the time kept in a state of terror by the septs of the O'Keillys, M'Mahons, and M Murroughs. Ormonde marched against these and scattered their forces; in consideration of which services he received the sum of five hundred marks more, from the same parliament.*

The country had been for some time plunged into great distractions, not only from the increasing turbulence and encroachment of the surrounding septs; but there had been also serious discontents raised among the English of the pale, by a measure of the English court which may have been necessary, but was effected with inconsiderate violence. The poverty of the Irish, with the troubled state of the country, had the effect of driving numbers into England in search of a peaceable subsistence. This thronged resort brought with it many evils, particularly that of numerous troops of idle persons, who, failing to obtain bread by fair means, sought to live by begging and theft. It therefore became necessary to suppress the evil by some public measure. The parliament of England enacted a law by which this intercourse was forbidden, and all Irish adventurers were ordered to return home. The execution of this law was indiscriminate and insulting; students, and the children of the most respectable Irish families, although exempted by special provisions of the statute, were insolently driven from the inns of court. The same execrable policy was extended to Ireland; the administration became fenced round by illiberal prepossessions against every one of Irish birth, and the pernicious distinctions engrafted in the reign of Edward III., were ripened to the full maturity of their deleterious influence in that of his grandson. A petition was resolved upon, by a parliament held in Dublin, in the fourth year of king Henry V., who had just returned from the battle of Agincourt. The Irish chancellor refused to authenticate this petition by the great seal; and by this cruel and impolitic refusal it need not be explained how the most dangerous and violent discontents were excited. It is probable that in this juncture the high influence of Ormonde was used with the king, and that the monarch was thus made sensible of the injustice of the harsh policy of the Irish government. It is also not unlikely that the service of fifteen hundred brave men of the pale, under the command of the warlike prior of Kilmainham, Thomas Butler, had weight with a military monarch. Ormonde was then sent over with full powers, to inquire into, and redress all complaints. His conduct was, under these circumstances, liberal and gracious, and was met with a thankful spirit by the Irish parliament. Their liberal grants we have already stated. Their petition was revived, sealed, and transmitted. We are not enabled to ascertain what notice it received; but we extract Leland's summary of its contents as the briefest abstract we can offer of the state of the country at this time:

"The petition, which is still extant, contains a pathetic representation of the distresses of his subjects in Ireland, harassed on one hand

* Lodge, from MS. annals in Trin. Col., Dublin.

† Leland, ii. 12, from Rob. Turr. Berm.

by the perpetual incursions of the Irish enemy, and on the other by the injustice and extortion of the king's ministers. The king's personal appearance in Ireland is most earnestly entreated, to save his people from destruction. As the Irish, who had done homage to king Richard, had long since taken arms against the English; notwithstanding their recognisances payable in the apostolic chamber, they beseech his highness to lay their conduct before the pope, and to prevail on the holy father to publish a crusade against them. The insolent opposition of Merbury to their former petition, is represented as a heinous offence, for which they desire that he may be cited to answer before the king. Stanely and Furnival, by name, are accused of the most iniquitous practices, for which they pray redress and satisfaction; and while honourable mention is made of the conduct of Crawly, archbishop of Dublin, as well as of their present governor-who they request may receive the royal thanks for his generous declarations to parliament— all the governors and officers sent from England, are represented as corrupt, rapacious, and oppressive; secreting and misapplying the revenue intrusted to them; defrauding the subject, and levying coyn and livery without mercy. The unreasonable exclusion of their students from the inns of court, the insufficiency and extortion of the officers of the exchequer, the number of absentees, and other matters of grievance are fully stated. They pray that those who hold of the king in capite, may not be exposed to the hardship of repairing to England in order to do homage, but that the chief governor be commissioned to receive it; that their commerce may be defended, their coin regulated, their churches supplied with faithful pastors, without such delays as they had experienced from selfish and designing governors. But above all things they urgently entreat that trusty commissioners be appointed to inspect the conduct of the king's officers sent into Ireland; plainly declaring that such a scene of various iniquities would be thus discovered, as were utterly abhorrent to the equity of the throne, and utterly intolerable to the subject."

The administration of Ormonde, was productive' of much, though not permanent benefit to Ireland. His vigour and activity repressed the growing encroachment of the surrounding septs, and for a while deferred the total decline into which the pale was rapidly sinking. The general incapacity, ignorance, and interested conduct of the governors the neglect of England and the degeneracy of the English settlers, who were become Irish in manner, custom, and affinity-contributed, with the increasing power of the native chiefs, to hasten the approaches of the melancholy period of national affliction and degradation, long approaching and now at hand. From such a state there were occasional and transitory revivals, which were just sufficient to indicate what was wanting to the restoration of the colony. The artful and ambitious earl of Desmond, who in his need had found a friend in the earl of Ormonde, contributed much, by his encroaching spirit, and the haughty isolation by which he kept up an independent state, to increase the difficulties of the time. A spirit of hostility grew up between these two powerful nobles, which was productive of much evil to their country, and of much trouble to Ormonde. The earl of Desmond, availing himself of the weakness of government, resisted his

efforts for the public good; or when occasion offered, endeavoured to bring him into discredit by intrigue, and seems to have been his constant opponent through the opposite changes of favour and disfavour. And from this appears to have arisen the chief vicissitudes of his personal history.

Lodge mentions that he was knighted in the fourth year of Henry VI., together with the king, by the regent, John duke of Bedford. And he adds, that this occurrence took place "before he attained his full age”—an affirmation which cannot be reconciled with the other circumstances here mentioned, with their dates from the same writer, even though we should take some liberty with these dates, to reconcile them. According to these, his first commission as lord deputy occurs in 1407, at which time, though still in his minority, he must at least have arrived at man's estate. Henry VI. was born in 1421 or 1422, when, on the lowest allowance, Ormonde must have been twentyfour years of age; that is allowing that he was lord deputy at ten. Adding nearly five years, we have the fourth year of Henry's reign, when Ormonde must have been, by the same allowance, twenty-eight. This error is rendered still more inextricable by the assertion, "after which, returning into Ireland, he accompanied the deputy Scrope, in his invasion of Macmurrough's territory." Now, this latter circumstance is placed, by Cox and Leland, in the year 1407, when he may have certainly assisted; but eighteen years before the period assigned. We should have set down this entanglement as a typographical error, substituting VI. for IV., as Scrope was deputy, and marched against M Murchard, in 1407, the seventh or eighth year of Henry IV., when all the particulars were likely to have occurred. But this conjecture is baffled by the addition that he received the honour from the duke of Bedford, "the king's uncle and regent,"* who was appointed regent during the minority of Henry VI. All this is still further involved in difficulty by the complaint of Ormonde's enemies in 1445, “that he was old and feeble;" for if he is then assumed to have been sixty-five, he would have been of full age in 1407.

We are inclined to presume that the truth must be, that he was knighted by king Henry IV., previous to his coming over as lord deputy. The incident is of slight importance; we have dwelt upon it as a good illustration of the difficulty of being accurate, and of the perplexity often attendant on investigations, the importance of which cannot be considered equal to the time and labour lost in their prose

cution.

At the death of Henry V., Ormonde was lord lieutenant of Ireland. He was continued but for a short time after the accession of Henry VI. The minority of this monarch, then but nine months old, led the English government, among other precautions against the danger of the existing claims of the house of York, to remove the heir of that family out of view, by sending him to Ireland. In pursuance of this policy, Edmund, earl of Marche, was sent, in 1422, as lord lieutenant; but his government was quickly terminated by his death. He died of the plague,† in his own castle of Trim, and was succeeded by lord * Lodge.

† Cox. Ware notices this as the fourth pestilence in Ireland.-Annals.

.

Talbot, in 1425. But in the following year, he was superseded by Ormonde, who, in his turn made way for Sir John de Gray, who was succeeded by lord Dudley, Sir Thomas Stanley, Sir Christopher Plunkett, and others, with their deputies in rapid succession; during which, his own name occurs in its turn, at short intervals, until 1443, when he comes again more prominently on the scene.

At this time he was sent over with the privilege of absenting himself "for many years, without incurring the penalty of the statute of 3 Rich. II."* against absentees. It was at this time that he entered into strict alliance with the earl of Desmond, and contributed to raise him to a height of power, wealth, and influence, which were afterwards, with a fatal efficiency, directed against himself. Desmond, it appears, won his favour by joining him against the Talbots, then fast rising into authority. The vast grants and privileges thus conceded to Desmond, may be seen in our notice of that nobleman.

The vigour of Ormonde's administration, and his uniform adherence to the princes who, during this period, sat upon the throne, had raised many enemies against him. With this, he seems to have exercised his privileges with high and decisive energy, and perhaps too frequently to have allowed his measures to be governed by feuds and private friendships. This lax policy is, however, in some degree to be justified by the notions and practice of his age. By degrees a combination was formed against him, and representations, which we should not undertake to reject, were made to the English court, complaining of his being incompetent from age-of his partial appointments-his indulgence to the nobles whose parliamentary attendance he dispensed with for money-and lastly, for the wrongful imprisonment of subjects, for the sake of their ransom.† On these grounds they petitioned for his removal. This complaint of a powerful party, led on by the perfidious Desmond, who had been exalted above the condition of a subject by his friendship, gave serious alarm to the earl of Ormonde. He called a meeting of the nobility and gentry at Drogheda, to whom he made an appeal which was answered by a strong testimony to the uprightness and efficiency of his administration. We do not enter into its details for the same reason that we have passed lightly over the details of the complaint. They may both be regarded as the natural language of party spirit in all times; mostly having on each side strong grounds in truth, well mixed with misrepresentations often undesigned, often the contrary. The most satisfactory test of the truth of either charge or defence, must be drawn from the state of public affairs; so far as they may be assumed liable to be affected by the conduct of the public functionary. In the absence of this criterion, the rank and respectability of the parties, affords the best general ground of conjecture. Adopting such a criterion, we should incline towards a favourable judgment of this eminent nobleman.

The representations of his enemies had elicited, from the English court, an order for his attendance to answer for his alleged misconduct. His bold and frank appeal, with the declaration of a large body of the most reputable of the Irish nobles and ecclesiastics, caused