Page images

the town, &c, &c, besides being put in possession of the lands and privileges enjoyed by lord Clanricarde as president of that province, with permission to appoint a deputy in his absence. He was also made governor of the county, town and citadel of Gal way; and in 1661 was created earl of Mountrath, and afterwards one of the lord-justices of Ireland, in conjunction with Sir Maurice Eustace, lord-chancellor, and the earl of Orrery. He was also appointed receiver-general of the composition money in Connaught and Thomond, and was governor of the Queen's county. In the latter end of this year he was attacked with smallpox, of which he died, and was buried in Christ's church, Dublin. He married twice, first a daughter of Sir Francis Ruish, by whom he left one son, who succeeded to his title, and next, Jane, daughter of Sir Robert Hannay, by whom he had several children, who succeeded to his various estates in the counties of Kilkenny, Carlow, Kerry, Roscommon and Limerick.

Same*, 33ufee of ©rmonte.

BoRN A. D. 1607 DIED A. D. 1688.

Thomas, the tenth earl of Ormonde, who was among the most illustrious warriors and statesmen of the sixteenth century, was yet living in the next at an extreme old age, at his house on Carrick-onSuir, where he died in his 88th year, in 1614. As he had no male heir his estates were limited to Sir Walter Butler of Kilcash, his nephew, and grandson to the ninth earl. Sir Walter's eldest son Thomas, by courtesy lord Thurles was drowned 15th December, 1619, near the Skerries, in his passage from England, twelve years before his father's death. By his lady, Elizabeth, daughter of Sir John Pointz of Acton, in the county of Gloucester, he left seven children, of whom James the eldest is the subject of the following memoir.

This distinguished statesman is said by Carte to have been born at Clerkenwell in London in 1610, but Arcndall shows from the unquestionable evidence of an inquisition taken at Clonmell, April, 1622, before the king's commissioners and twelve gentlemen of the county of Tipperary, that his birth took place in 1607. The words of the inquisition are "Predictus Thomas vicecomes Thurles, 15th die Decembris, anno dom., 1619, obiit et quidam Jacobus Butler, communiter vocatus dominus vicecomes Thurles, fuit filius et haeres prsefati Thomae Butler, et quod praefatus Jacobus Butler, tempore mortis praedicti Thomas fuit aetatis duodecim annorum, et non amplius." * Carte refers to the difference of date thus maintained, but mentions that he never obtained a sight of the inquisition, and therefore considers it insufficient ground for rejecting the duke's own statement, which makes it 1610.

At the period of his birth his father was under the displeasure of Sir Walter Butler for having married contrary to his wish. And when he went with his lady into Ireland, they lived for some time in the

• Quoted by Archdall.

county of Cork at the house of Mr Anthony Southwell; but their first born, James, was left with his nurse, who was a carpenter's wife at Hatfield.

In 1613 they sent for him, and bis first voyage at this early age, and at a time when travelling was more tedious and liable to casualties than is now easily appreciated, made an indelible impression on his memory. He was often afterwards heard in the last years of his life, to allude to his recollection of being carried over the bridge at Bristol, and of the varied new sights which attracted his childish notice.

His grandfather's resentment had by this time passed, and the old earl his great-granduncle was desirous to see a descendant who was to be the future representative of his honours. And the duke often mentioned bis recollection of this ancestor, then a blind old man, having a long beard and wearing his George about his neck whether he "sat up in his chair or lay down in his bed." He remained while in Ireland with his grandfather at Carrick-on-Suir, until 1620 the year after his father's death; he was then removed by his mother to England, and received by courtesy, the title of viscount Thurles. He was then, according to his own statement, nine years of age, and was placed at school with a Roman catholic named Conyers, at Finchley near Barnet.* This arrangement was not long allowed to continue. King James who considered that the principles of the rising generation would constitute a most important element in the plans on which his mind was then intent, the furtherance of the reformation and the improvement of Ireland, had made some rather arbitrary stretches to secure this important point. By some manoeuvre of Sir W. Parsons the wardship of lord Thurles became vested in the crown upon his father's death, although he inherited no lands the tenure of which involved this consequence.

The king equally apprehensive of the family and kindred, as well as the schoolmaster, all Roman catholics, removed the young nobleman from Finchley and gave him in charge to Abbot, archbishop of Canterbury, by whom bis education, as well as that of other youths committed to his charge, was much neglected. Carte who mentions these particulars, observes that his writings afterwards were such as to show that their great excellence both as Jo matter and method, were rather due to the force of his clear and vigorous understanding than to early cultivation. In the archbishop's family he was but indifferently attended to in other respects. Abbot received no compensation from the king, and must have indeed felt the charge to be rather onerous. Lord Thurles was allowed but £40 a-year for himself and his attendants. His own small estate was under sequestration, and as the. reader may happen to recollect, the bulk of the family estates bad passed from them by an unjust decision of king James.

Thomas the 10th earl of Ormonde, having no issue male, had settled the chief part of his estates upon his nephew, Walter Butler, with remainders over to the male heirs of Walter, and in the succession of inheritance, to the male representatives of each branch of the family, from the first earl of Carrick. He moreover, specially, reserved cer

* Carte.

tain manors and £6000 for his daughter. On his death the title came to Sir Walter, who also thought by the settlement here mentioned to take possession of the estates. But king James had given the daughter of his uncle in marriage to Sir Richard Preston, one of the grooms of his chamber, whom he created earl of Desmond. Preston preferred a claim to these estates in right of his wife, who was heir general; a long and vexatious suit followed, during which the king interfered at every step to overrule the judges: the case was however too plain, for even the compliance of that day, and the judges decided contrary to the desire of the king, who then decided the question himself by a stretch of arbitrary power, for his favourite. The earl attempted to resist this grievous wrong, for which the king seized on all his estate and committed him to the Fleet, where for eight years he was reduced to the most shameful extremes of want. This occurred when lord Thurles had attained his nineteenth year; he then went to live with his grandfather, at a house which he took in Drury Lane, upon his liberation from the Fleet prison.*

The young lord Thurles had been brought up a protestant, while the earl was, as his ancestors had been, a Roman catholic He did not however show any concern in the religion of his grandson, who it is said, at this interval of his life entered very much into all the most approved gaieties of his age, and passed but little time in the earl's company. He manifested a very strong preference for the theatre, which seldom wanted his presence, and was on terms of intimacy with all the actors. He was no less assiduous in pushing his way at court; and we are inclined to think, began already to be governed by that superior sagacity, prudence and discretion which so prominently colour the whole conduct of his life. His active spirit must have manifested itself early to his nearest acquaintance, by many small incidents not recorded; and we doubt not but he already began to be marked by the observant, as one likely to take a prominent place in the foremost wave of the age's progress. It was perhaps with some such perception that the duke of Buckingham when about to embark for the relief of Rochelle, refused to allow lord Thurles to accompany him, on the pretence (for with the unprincipled Villiers, it must have been such) that he had not the permission of earl Walter his grandfather. The earl was then in Ireland, whither he had returned to look after his property, and had not been consulted by his grandson, with whose actions he had not been in the habit of interfering. The young lord would have pressed his wishes, and remained for the purpose at Portsmouth, where the expedition was on the point of sailing; but the assassination of the duke put an end to this expectation and he posted back to London.

It was about six months after this incident that he first met the lady Elizabeth Preston, his kinswoman, and the heiress of those large estates which by the settlements of her grandfather should have descended to himself. Her mother was at the time not long deceased, and her father had like his own been drowned near the Skerries, in his passage from Dublin to Holyhead. The king had given her guardianship to the earl of Holland, then groom of the stole, and a favourite at court.

• Curte.

She had reached her fourteenth year, and is said to have at that early age been well informed in the history of the lawsuit, which had been so disastrous to the house of Ormonde, and was yet, likely to be attended with further mischief to both parties, as it was yet kept alive. It was also perhaps strongly felt, that the injustice by which her right commenced was not likely to outlast the favour and the obstinate self-assertion of the king. These impressions appear to have had their full weight on the minds of both parties, and no less on those of the more prudent part of their kindred. Among others, the lord Mountgarret is mentioned,* as having entered strongly into the interests of his kinsman, and as he had constant opportunities of visiting the young lady, he was sedulous in his endeavours to interest her in favour of lord Thurles. She was designed by the king for some favourite whom it was his desire to enrich, but she soon manifested a lively preference for her young relation, whose very handsome person, spirited manner, and engaging conversation, had with the representations of others engrossed her entire affection. This could not be long concealed at court, and soon reached the royal ear. One day when lord Thurles went to court he was called by the king, who warned him "not to meddle with his ward." Lord Thurles answered that "he never saw her any where but at court, where all paid her respect; and he having the honour to be her kinsman, thought he might do the same as well as others; but if his majesty would forbid him his court he would refrain from it." The king was embarrassed and replied, "no, I do not command that."+ The object of lord Thurles' most anxious wishes was thus apparently brought near by affection and choice, while the prejudices and projects of the king seemed yet to interpose a wider barrier; but some of the main obstacles had recently been removed and others had to be combated by exertion. The duke of Buckingham's assassination had cleared a formidable opponent from the path. Buckingham had a sister married to William Fielding, earl of Denbigh, for whose youngest son he had obtained the promise of the young lady in marriage; and her father was not only thus pledged, but in order the better to secure his own claims to the estates of the earl of Ormonde, he had prevailed on the king to grant him the wardship of lord Thurles, by which means he had acquired as much power over him as over his daughter. The death of both these parties opened a way for the negotiation of the matter; and to this lordThurles determined to resort. There were some slighter impediments, but the only one worth naming was the influence of the earl of Holland, who obtained the lady's wardship from the king on her father's death. As however lord Holland had no object but the then common one of the pecuniary advantage accruing from such an office, lord Thurles took the obvious and direct course of an offer of £15,000, which was more than m the ordinary course the guardian could hope to make by the other proposed marriage. Accordingly he agreed: and the suit being thus advanced through this legitimate authority the king soon consented: he had a strong regard for the memory of Buckingham, and felt desirous to fulfil his known wishes in favour of his nephew; yet he could not but have recognised the hard

* Carte. j Ibid.

ship and injustice attendant on the whole proceeding, from beginning to end; so that when applied to through the formal channel he had no reluctance to wave claims, which could only be maintained by the importunity of court favour. He issued letters patent dated, 8th September, 1629, declaring that "for the final end of all controversies between Walter earl of Ormonde, and Elizabeth, daughter of Richard earl of Desmond, he had given his consent, that there shall be a marriage between James viscount Thurles and the said Elizabeth, and, grants her marriage and the wardship of her lands to the said Walter earl of Ormonde, &c, &c."

This marriage was solemnized in London, Christmas, 1629, and four days after lord Thurles went with his lady to Acton in Gloucestershire, the seat of his uncle Sir Robert Pointz, where for the following year he remained, chiefly occupying himself in study. His education had been neglected while he resided with the archbishop, and after he left his tutelage, he had entered into the dissipation of the court with too much zest to admit of much profitable cultivation. But in the calm and tranquil seclusion of domestic life his good taste and good sense recognised the disadvantage, and his active spirit prompted the correction. The chaplain of his uncle was his able and willing assistant, and gave him such instruction as was thought requisite at that period.

At the end of 1630 he went to reside with his grandfather in Carrick, where he chiefly resided till 1632 when the earl died; and lord Thurles thus succeeded to the estates and honours of his illustrious race. Of the most active disposition, he had at once on coming to Ireland determined to enter into the service of the crown, and purchased a troop of horse in the king's army in Ireland; and soon after made a journey to England, to solicit in some matter of confiscations due to the king. We only mention the circumstance here for the sake of a few slight incidents, which Carte relates, and which help to throw some light on his personal qualities and character. "Having travelled over part of the country and visited his lady's relations, he rode from Edinburgh to Ware in three days, and could easily have been in London that night, had he not thought it convenient to stay there; but so little sensible was he of any fatigue, that, finding books in the room, instead of going to rest, he fell to reading, and about the dead of the night lighted on the 'Counter Scuffle' which he had not seen before, it put him into such a fit of laughter, that the landlord and his wife started out of their sleep amazed, and scarce able to imagine what the matter could be."* His journey home, in about a year and a-half after, is no less descriptive of the travelling of his age. He left London on Saturday morning in September, having two horses upon the road; he proceeded to Acton within eight miles of Bristol, where he received a message from the captain of the "Ninth Whelp," in which he was to sail, that the wind was fair for Ireland, and the vessel would sail by eight next morning. "His lordship took care to be on board by that hour, and first making a hearty meal, went to his rest and slept eleven hours at a stretch. The ship set sail by nine with so favourable a gale, that by nine next morning they ran up to Waterford, and his lordship meet

• Carte.

« PreviousContinue »