« PreviousContinue »
ble that this account of the effects of the famine is highly exaggerated. If the people were reduced to the necessity of using human flesh for food, it is not likely that they would have increased the disgust which they must naturally have felt for such diet by using the skulls of their deceased countrymen for boilers."
(But Mr. Stuart seems here to forget that people driven into the desolate fens and woods to save their lives from the ravages of war could not well carry about with them pots or saucepans or other kitchen utensils on such pil
grimages.) F. Mory
p. 301. A.D. 1602. “ Ravaged by his [i.e. Lord Mountson's ac joy's) troops, the country was totally inadequate to supcount of the port its wretched inhabitants. Multitudes of the Irish, 1602.
hunted from hill to hill, perished by famine, and lay horrid spectacles, unburied in the fields and in the open highways. The following quotation from Fynes Moryson, who was himself an actor in this tremendous scene of misery and blood, will convey to the imagination of our readers a lively and affecting image of the almost unexampled calamity with which this unhappy country was then afflicted.
Now,' says that writer, because I have often made mention of our destroying the rebels' corn and using all means to famish them, let me by two or three examples shew the miserable estate to which
the rebels were thereby brought. Case of chil- •Sir Arthur Chichester, Sir Richard Moryson dren feed- (his brother) and the other commanders of the forces ing on their mother's re
sent against Brian Mac Art aforesaid, in their remains.
turn homeward, saw a most horrible spectacle of three children (the eldest not above ten years old,) all eating and gnawing with their teeth the entrails of their dead mother ; on whose flesh they had fed twenty days past, and having eaten all
used also as human food
from the feet upward, to the bare bones, roasting it
eating of her entrails,' &c. “ And again, after narrating that the peasants were Another driven to eat horseflesh, kites, &c. he adds, Cap- case of cani
tain Trevor and many honest gentlemen lying this crisis. in the Newry, can witness that some old women of those parts used to make a fire in the fields, and divers little children, driving out the cattle in the cold mornings, and coming thither to warm them,
were by them surprised, killed and eaten.' The children's skulls and bones, he adds, were found, and some women were convicted and executed for the crime.f • Again he states (p. 289) that it was a common Horseflesh practice to thrust long needles into the horses of our English troops, and they dying thereupon, to be
by the staryready to tear out one another's throats for a share ing people. of them; and no spectacle was more frequent in the ditches of towns and especially in wasted countries than to see multitudes of these poor people dead with their mouths all coloured green by eating nettles, docks, and all things they could rend up above ground. Again Moryson states that from O'Kane's coun- Desolation try northward of Tyrone, we have left none to of the coungive us opposition, nor of late have seen, any but tryin dead carcases, merely starved for want of meat.' I
Derry, Ty“ And again he says that O'Hagan protested unto rone, &c.
us that between Tullaghoge and Toome, there
• Fynes Moryson, vol. 2, pp. 282, 283.
* ib. p. 172.
than the O'Neils which makes me commiserate them,
and hope better of them hereafter. Spenser's Moryson cannot” (says Mr. Stuart) “ be suspected parallelace of exaggeration in the portraiture of human misery which count of the effects of he has thus depicted in such lively colours. Spenser, the Des the English poet, &c, . . . writes thus . . . 'Ere one mond war. year and half.
-(then follows the passage already given in the body of this work, p. 802 sup., and ending with “ void of man and beast.")
Again, (as Mr. Stuart mentions at p. 373,) in the great rebellion of 1642, the king's troops in the course of their marching through Ulster found the Irish once more in the same terrible condition, and “ reduced by famine to the dreadful necessity of eating their own dead.”
JUDGMENT OF THE UNIVERSITIES OF SALAMANCA AND VALLADOLID
ON THE LAWFULNESS OP H. O'NEILL'S WAR AGAINST QUEEN ELI-
The very striking and instructive record above named is here presented to the reader at full length, as taken, along with the observations comprised in the notices which precede and follow, from O'Sullevan's History, tom. 3, Queen Eli
A.D. 1603. O'Sullevan, to prove
the unlawfulness of loyalty to
• ib. p. 200.
, lib. 8, cap. 7, fol. 202–204. It may be seen the also in Foulis, pp. 491-494.
"CHAP. VII.-Whether the Irish were justified in under
taking this war ?
“ From the historical statement now set before the reader, with scrupulous regard to truth, it clearly follows, that the war against the Queen of England, and the Irish belonging to the royal faction, was undertaken upon just and lawful grounds ;—an opinion which some of our Anglo-Irish priests have refrained from asserting or pressing on the attention of their Anglo-Irish and Irish followers. In opposition to whose views, I think it better on the present occasion to produce here the judgment of those most famous academies of Salamanca and Valladolid, than to commence any argument about a matter so plain and perspicuous. That judgment, which was issued after some delay, in compliance with the request of the belligerant Catholics of Ireland, runs as follows:
• Sentence of the Doctors of the Universities of Salamanca
and Valladolid concerning the present War in Ireland, and their Explanation of the Letter of our most holy Lord Pope Clement the Eighth respecting the same War. The most illustrious prince Hugh O'Neill wages war the Spanish
Judgment of with the Queen of England, and the English people, for the universities defence of the Catholic religion, that is, that the in favour of Irish people may be allowed freely to profess the Catho- the rebellion lic religion, a freedom which the Queen of England is O'Neill.
endeavouring to wrest from them by violence and arms.
Connected with this war there are two questions now Two ques- raised. The one is, Whether it be lawful for Irish Ca
tholics to support the said Prince Hugh in this war by posed.
arms or by any other means whatsoever? The other, Whether the same Catholics may, without mortal sin, fight against the aforesaid prince, or favour the English in this war by arms, or in any other manner? especially considering that if they refuse the English this kind of assistance, they expose themselves to manifest peril of life, or of losing their worldly substance. And besides, as a permission has been given to these Catholics of Ireland, by the supreme Pontiff, allowing them to obey the said
Queen of England, and acknowledge her for a lawful Queen by paying taxes to her, they seem in a position to render her that service, which properly belongs to subjects, namely by fighting with those that have rebelled against the queen's authority, and who appear to be asserting a usurped claim to a territory subject to her
dominion. A first prin- In order to give a satisfactory answer to both quesciple stated; tions, it must be laid down as certain, that the Roman viz., that seceders
Pontiff has the power, when other means prove insuffifrom the cient for meeting such a serious evil, to compel and co
erce by force of arms, deserters from the faith, and such faith may be as attack the Catholic religion. It is also to be taken
for a settled truth, that the Queen of England is one who makes attacks on the Catholic religion, and will not allow the Irish to celebrate publicly the worship of the Catholic faith, and that it was for the said cause the aforesaid prince, and before him the others who are mentioned in the letter apostolic of CLEMENT THE EIGHTH have been led to engage in the war against her. These observations being thus premised, the First Question is easily answered.
*For it is beyond doubt that any Catholics may give
coerced with arms.