they gave encouragement to the turbulent. The party here particularized was evidently under the sanction of Mr King, a gentleman of the popular party, in whose house they stored their plunder; they were in strict combination with the people of Clontarf, who had actually formed a part of their strength and joined them with their fishing boats. We mention these facts because the summary statement that Sir C. Coote expelled them from Clontarf, by burning both Mr King's house and the village, must otherwise place the act in a fallacious point of view. Coote acted in this as on every occasion with the sweeping severity of his harsh character; but the unpopularity of his character, and of the lords-justices to whom he was as an arm of defence, seems to have diverted the eye of history from the obvious fact, that in this, as upon many other occasions, he did no more than the emergency of the occasion called for.

It was but a few days after that he was compelled to march to the relief of Swords, which was occupied by 1400 men. They barricaded all the entrances. Coote forced these passages, and routed them with a slaughter of 200 men.

The known violence of Coote, while it made him the instrument of the government in many questionable acts and many acts of decided injustice, also exposed him to much calumny, the certain reward of unpopularity. Among other things, a report was spread, that he had at the council board expressed his opinion for a general massacre of the Roman catholics; this report was alleged as an excuse by the lords of that communion for refusing to trust themselves into the hands of the Irish government.* These noblemen had unquestionably real grounds for their distrust of the lords-justices, and thought it necessary to find some pretext for the prudent refusal. But they could not seriously have entertained a motion so revolting. The pretext, though perhaps too frivolous for the persons who used it, was, nevertheless, highly adapted for the further purpose of working upon the fear and anger of the multitude; who can be ignorant, that however self-interest and vicious passions may warp the hearts and understandings of the upper ranks, there is too much knowledge of right and wrong among them to permit of so open an outrage to humanity, among persons pretending to the dignity of the lords-justices and council. It is very likely that Coote, who was a rude soldier and an irritable man, used language which, used by a person of more sedateness of temper, would have borne a harsh construction; but we see no reason to admit that he either contemplated the crime described, or that any one present could have reasonably so reported his language. The lords-justices in reply to the letter of the lords of the pale, assured them that they never "did hear Sir Charles or any other, utter at the council board or elsewhere, any speeches tending to a purpose or resolution, to execute on those of their profession, or any other, a general massacre; nor was it ever in their thoughts to dishonour his Majesty or the state by so odious, impious, and detestable a

Letter signed Fingal, Gormanstown, Slane, Dunsany, Netherville, Oliver, Louth, Trimleston.

thing. Giving them assurance of their safety if they would repair thither, the 17th of that month."*

With such a reputation for violence and cruelty, it was unfortunate for Sir Charles Coote and for the country, that as military governor of the city, it devolved to him to try the prisoners then under the charge of rebellion in Dublin. He was an unfit instrument, and had neither the prudence nor temper for so delicate an occasion. Το make the matter worse, it remains at best doubtful, whether the occasion demanded the substitution of martial law for the ordinary jurisdiction of the criminal courts. The ground assigned was the great accumulation of prisoners, and the impossibility of obtaining juries from the counties where the crimes were alleged to have been committed. Carte remarks on this, that they had juries from Meath, Wicklow, and Kildare, as well as from Dublin; and according to his statement of their conduct, we think it may be doubted whether the parties tried before them gained much by the preservation of form; for Meath, Wicklow, and Dublin, "within two days afterwards, bills of high treason were found against all the lords and prime gentlemen, as also against three hundred persons of quality and estate in the county of Kildare: among which were the old countess of Kildare, Sir Nicholas White, his son, captain White, who had never joined the rebels—so much expedition was used in this affair." To preserve the escheats of property, which had always a due share of consideration with the government, the persons of property were exempted from martial law, and it was easy to find juries to the extent required. The poor were ordered to be tried by the more expeditious and summary method. But we must here remark, that the injustice is not the real ground of objection to this course. The main part of the prisoners had been taken in arms, and at any time would have been amenable to martial law: but the act was cruel and imprudent, for the wholesale and summary conviction of a multitude of deluded peasants could answer no end. If it was not vindictive, which we cannot believe, it is chiefly to be censured as a shallow mistake: when the cruelty of punishment is more revolting than its justice is apparent, the indignation and sympathy of the multitude takes the place of submission and fear. The instrumentality of one so feared and so unpopular as Coote, cast an added shade of darkness upon this measure. Among the persons thus tried were several Roman catholic priests; and from this the exasperation of the populace was the more to be apprehended. These gentlemen were very generally accused of exciting the people to rebellion: how far such an accusation could be rigidly maintained, we cannot decide, but it is easy to feel the unhappy embarrassment under which such cases would be likely to present themselves to the feelings of a just and humane jury; for in very many such instances, where the priest has been the leader, his entire conduct has been directed to soften the horrors of rebellion, and to save its victims. The history of "ninety-eight" supplies examples enough. But father O'Higgins, the victim of 1641, was a "quiet, inoffensive, and pious man, much respected by those who knew him, who

*Borlase.

+ Carte, I. 278, note

officiated at Naas, and in the neighbourhood. He had distinguished himself in saving the English in those parts from slaughter and plunder, and had relieved several that had been stripped and robbed. The earl of Ormonde found him at Naas, took him under his protection, (he never having been concerned in any act of rebellion, nor guilty of any crime, nor liable to any objection, but the matter of his religion,) and brought him along with him to Dublin."* Some time after, while lord Ormonde was absent from town, the proceedings here described commenced, and the unfortunate O'Higgins was seized, condemned, and executed. This shameful act was near drawing on Coote the punishment which his inconsiderate violence deserved. The earl of Ormonde, who was lieutenant-general of the kingdom, was indignant when he heard of the fate of his protegè, and immediately insisted on the trial of Coote, as an offender against the laws of the land. The lords-justices were unwilling to give up the man on whose military talent and bravery they chiefly rested their trust, and who, they were conscious, was but their instrument in a station of the duties of which he was wholly ignorant. The earl of Ormonde expostulated with them in vain, and even threatened to throw up his office: they apologized, and temporized, and invented lame excuses, until it was plain that they were not to be persuaded by threats or entreaties: and Coote escaped. But the act which was thus made additionally notorious, produced a pernicious effect among the Roman catholic aristocracy and gentry, whose fears it appeared strongly to confirm.t

The next affair of any importance in which Coote is found engaged, occurred on the 3d February, when he accompanied the earl of Ormonde to Kilsalaghan, within seven miles of Dublin, against a strong army of rebels whom they drove from their entrenchments and routed completely: the particulars belong to our memoir of the earl of Ormonde.

In the beginning of March the earl of Ormonde left Dublin, to march against the rebels in the county of Kildare. During his march, detachments were sent out on various services, under the chief officers of his army. On the 10th April, Coote was sent with six troops of horse to the relief of Birr. On the way they came to a causeway which the rebels had broken up and fortified with a trench, which they occupied. The post was formidable, and the passage appeared quite impracticable to persons of ordinary nerve: Coote here nobly maintained his known character for decision and unflinching intrepidity, alighting from his horse, he selected forty of his troopers, with whom he proceeded on foot against the rebels. The smallness of his party threw them in some degree off their guard: they scorned to take the full advantages of their wooded and entrenched position against forty dismounted troops: but these troopers were soldiers, led by an officer of first rate proof

* Carte.

It is here but just to state, that there were other causes likely to produce the same effect. The excesses of the rebels had by this time amounted to a frightful sum. The list of murders through the country was not less than 154,000 between the 23d October, 1642, and March, 1643.-Dr Maxwell's Examination.

and the coolest hardihood, whose presence doubled every man's strength. Without the loss of a single man, Coote and his brave party slew the captain of the rebels, with forty of his men: went on and relieved Birr, Borris, and Knocknamease, and after forty-eight hours' incessant riding and fighting, returned to the camp. "This," writes Cox, 66 was

the prodigious passage through Montrath woods, which is indeed wonderful in many respects." From this adventure, the title of earl of Montrath was conferred afterwards on his son.

He was also soon after distinguished at the battle of Kilrush, between the forces under the earl of Ormonde, and the rebels commanded by the lord Mountgarret. There Coote led the foot, and had no small share in the signal victory of that day. We shall hereafter relate it at length.

Some time after, he joined lord Lisle, to relieve the castle of Geashill, where the lady Letitia Offaley had for some time been besieged by the rebels. This noble lady, a Geraldine, and grand-daughter of the earl of Kildare, though in her 64th year, shut her gates against the rebels, and, with the bravery of her race, prepared to defend her castle. She was summoned to surrender, with a threat from the rebels that, upon her refusal, they would burn the town, and massacre man, woman, and child. To this dastardly menace, the heroic lady replied, that she had always lived among them as a good neighbour and a loyal subject: that she would die innocently as she had lived, and if necessary, would endeavour to defend her town. Being however influenced by the humanity natural to her sex and rank, she remained on the defensive, and the rebels who were still collecting, might in the end have added another illustrious victim to the murders of this fatal year, when happily the party of lord Lisle and Coote came up, and relieved her from her peril.

The next place to be relieved was Philipstown. On this occasion a characteristic story is told of Coote. Having to march for that purpose through a difficult and dangerous country, the general called a council. The difficulties being strongly pressed, Coote, who was not of a temper to admit of difficulties, observed, that "if they made haste, they might easily pass the defiles and causeways before the enemy could get together to oppose them." This was admitted, but the question next proposed was, "how they should get back?" "I protest," answered Coote, "I never thought of that in my life; I always have considered how to do my business, and when that was done, I got home again as well as I could, and hitherto I have not missed of forcing my way."

The advice was taken, and the result thoroughly successful; but the time had come when Coote was himself to be deserted by his usual good fortune. They took Philipstown, and pursued their way to Trim, where a large party of rebels had drawn together. On their approach the rebels retired, and they took possession of the town. Lord Lisle immediately took his departure to Dublin to procure sufficient men to leave a garrison in the town. Night drew on, and all seemed still until midnight, when the rebels, to the number of three thousand. returned to attack the wearied party of troopers, who little expected such

an interruption to their well-earned rest. Coote was too watchful to be caught asleep. On receiving the alarm from his sentinel, he collected seventeen troopers, and rushed out to take possession of the gate. Thus he was enabled to secure a retreat for his party, who quickly came up. They then issued from the gate, and charging the disorderly crowd, at once put them to flight in every direction. But a shot either from the flying crowd, or from the town, or as some historians appear to conjecture, from his own party, killed Sir Charles Coote. This event occurred 7th May, 1642. The next day his body was sent to Dublin, under a strong guard.

In continuing the account of the phases of this first stage of the great rebellion, we pass to introduce, in a notice of a descendant of one of the most famous hero families of the conquest, its aspects in the distant province of Connaught.

MILES BOURKE, VISCOUNT MAYO.

DIED A. D. 1649.

Or the ancestral history of the family of Burke, Bourke, and de Burgo, common variations of the same illustrious name, we have said enough in these pages. The nobleman whom we are here to notice was the representative of the Mac Oughter branch. It is known to the reader, that near the middle of the 14th century, William de Burgo, earl of Ulster, was assassinated by his own people. His countess, with her infant daughter, took refuge in England. The possessions of the earl were left unprotected. In the north they were seized by the O'Neiles; in Connaught by two collateral descendants of the De Burgo To escape a future demand of restitution, these ancient gentlemen embraced the laws and manners of the surrounding septs of Irish, and assumed the names of Mac William Eighter and Mac William Oughter. Of these, the latter, and we suspect the other also, were descendants from the second son of Richard de Burgo, grandfather to the murdered earl.

race.

The viscount of this family, whom we are now to notice, demands this distinction on account of the very peculiar and unfortunate circumstances of his history. He sat as viscount Mayo in the parliament of 1634. When the troubles of 1641 commenced, he was appointed governor of the county of Mayo, conjointly with viscount Dillon. By virtue of the authority with which he was thus intrusted, he raised six companies of foot, and during three months kept the county in a quiet state without any aid from government.

As, however, it was not long before the convulsions in England threw a cloud of uncertainty upon every question at issue between parties; the rebels were soon divided into factions, each of which contended, and was ready to fight for the shade of loyalty or of opinion maintained by itself. It is not easy now to settle with precision, by what strange course of previous politics, or from what reasons of right, real, or supposed, the lord Mayo acted in direct opposition to the