Page images
PDF
EPUB

mise to annihilate the Pope's authority, and every thing that supports it.*

So far was the English government, at that time, from assuming any right of actual sovereignty over the Irish princes, that the legality of the appointment of Tanists (or elective successors) was tacitly acknowledged by the Parliament of 1543, which enacts that the fines of petty larceny shall be paid to the tanist of the country.

It had, however, long been the policy of the Irish government to take every opportunity of diminishing the power of the Irish chieftains, and Henry was of too arbitrary a temper to brook the independence of these petty sovereigns. As yet, however, the English force had not been sufficiently strong to aim openly at their subjection; and therefore those artifices, which power stoops to use when it cannot compel, were adopted.

Henry, or his agents in Ireland, saw the advantage that would accrue from getting the Irish Princes to appeal to his decisions;

1

*The words are-"Usurpatoris primaciem et authoritatem Romani Episcopi anihilabunt, omnesque suos fautores, adjutores precipitabunt et abolebunt."

and had an excellent excuse in their numerous and violent dissensions,, which seemed, to point out the necessity of an arbitrator. The Irish chieftains were aware of the snare, and said, It is true we want arbitrators, but if you please, we will name them ourselves :" accordingly, we find regular arbitrators appointed, mostly bishops, but particular stress laid that the Earl of Desmond should be one; who, being in the equivocal station of a revolted English subject, possessed of all the princely prerogatives of an Irish chieftain, would be particularly on his guard against the encroachments of the English power, and the invasion of these Irish prerogatives, on which his own consequence had been entirely founded.

On these terms the Irish chieftains submitted without any scruple respecting religion. "But they soon resumed their arms" it is true, though not on account of religion, but because all these terins were violated or trampled on by the English government. If we can shew this to have been the case, is it not sufficient? why multiply causes unnecessarily? why be at the

[ocr errors]

pains to conjure up the Pope, where he would not naturally make his appearance?

On the contrary, Theobald de Boys was sent to Ireland as ambassador, to make a league with the Irish chieftains, and met with no success: a small Irish ariny attended the King at Calais; every thing remained tranquil; until when? until Sir Anthony St. Leger, (as a Protestant historian expresses it) finding the kingdom quiet, determined to keep it so.

Of those whom he suspected, he imprisoned some, and obliged others to give hostages; but these measures were calculated to produce only partial disaffection: .he proceeded to another measure which was certain to excite every Irish chieftain in opposition to the English Government.

Let us hear the account of this transaction from the mouth of Sir Richard Cox, the apologist for every bad action performed by a Lord Deputy.

"Sir Anthony St. Leger made it his business to break the dependencies of the Irish, and to that end upon all references to him, he took care that the weaker party might depend on the government for

protection; and that he should not rely upon, or be under the subjection of any other; and particularly on the 14th of July, he made an award between O'Neil and O'Donnel, whereby O'Donnel was freed from depending on O'Neil.

We shall not enquire whether this was good policy or not; its immediate effect must have been, to alarm and irritate the principal Irish chieftains. These, it is true, acknowledged Henry as liege Lord: but, by the same rule, they were liege Lords themselves in their own kingdoms, and had each their dependent princes, over whom their power was much greater than that of the King of England over them. They drew their revenues principally from the chieftains dependent on them, and therefore they could not see, without great jealousy, a system adopted by the English government which aimed directly at the diminution of their power, and the impoverishment of their treasures.

This system was perfidious as well as unjust, because it had been expressiy provided in the indentures of submission, that, not the English government, but

that certain bishops and the Earl of Desmond were to be the arbitrators of differences arising between the Irish chieftains. True, it is said, that the Lord Deputy made the award on a reference to him; but it is plain, that the reference was made only by the one party; by the weaker who knew he should be supported, not by the stronger who knew he should be crushed.

We repeat again, that we are not considering the policy of the measure; it is sufficient for our argument that it would appear most unjust and vexatious to the most powerful of the Irish chieftains; and, therefore, that the rebellion which followed was attributable to this circumstance, and not to religion; for, we read immediately after, that, "now the spirit of rebellion had again seized the Irish, and O'Neil, (the victim of the Lord Deputy's policy) O'Donnel, O'Doherty, and O'Callock, made overtures to the French King.

This appears to be a clear and satisfactory reason for the disturbances in Ireland at the end of Henry the Eighth's reign, we are at least informed of no other; nor should we hesitate to adopt it, because it

« PreviousContinue »