matter, though it were new unto them; but now I am discredited among them, for they have far less quantities assigned to them in those counties than in the other three. In which the Commissioners . . . were in my opinion, greatly overseen, or went not well . . . for to thrust the servitors with all the natives of a whole country which paid the King near £2,000 rent yearly, into little more than half a barony (as in Tyrone) was a great oversight, if not out of the meaning. If I speak somewhat feelingly in this particular, it is your Lordship to whom I must and will appeal when I conceive I suffer wrong, in which I humbly beseech your Lordship to excuse me for I have some reason to doubt the affection of some of those Commissioners towards me, though I never deserved ill at their hands, and I humbly pray that your Lordship may not be guided by any direction of theirs, for they know not Ireland as well as I do, especially Ulster ; nor do they wish better to the good and prosperity thereof, nor to the advancement of the King's profit and service.

I

[Sir Oliver St. John to Salisbury (9 Oct., 1607). Cal. S.P. Ireland, p. 304.] Presents two things to his Lordship's consideration. . . .

One, the present fortifying of some of the chief towns most subject to any foreign attempt, and aptest to declare themselves against the King. The most important of these are the towns of Galway, Limerick, Cork and Waterford, the securing of which places, if any intention of toleration at home or any foreign invasion be near at hand, will be great countenance to his Majesty's affairs.

The other consideration is, the disposition of the northern lords' lands in Ulster, when they shall be brought to his Majesty's Crown. Advises that no part be given away to any Irish or English, but by worthy and careful commissioners let to the natives of the country at high and dear rates. The reason of his opinion is grounded upon the natural disposition of the poor Irish, who esteem more their landlord whom they know, than their King whom they seldom hear of; and when they shall be inured to know that they hold their lands immediately of the King, they will neglect their wonted tyrants, whom naturally they love not, and only turn their affections and loyalties to the King under whom they will serve, and know how happy it is for them to live. Would only wish that in such places as shall be chosen for the planting of garrisons and seats for English commanders, or for the placing of corporations for the more civil government of those parts, there

Oliver St. John, Viscount Grandison, served with distinction in Flanders and France. He accompanied Mountjoy to Ireland in 1601 and took part in the Irish wars. In 1608 he was made a Commissioner for the plantation in Ulster, and in 1616 was appointed Lord Deputy.

should be allotted some good quantity of land, to be annexed perpetually to those forts and corporations, for the better countenancing of those that shall be examples of justice and civility among those barbarous people. By this course, the poor people's hearts, will be made the King's, and his revenues exceedingly increased; for the Irish people, so they be freed from cuttings and cess, willingly yield large rents; and those wild parts will be the more likely to be brought to a true and permanent subjection.

(5) Sir John Davies upholds the Rights of the Crown. [A Letter from Sir John Davies to the Earl of Salisbury (8 Nov., 1610). Davies, Historical Tracts (1786), pp. 281-91.]

In the perambulation which we made this summer over the escheated counties in Ulster, we performed four principal points of our commission. First, the land assigned to the natives, we distributed among the natives, in different quantities and proportions, according to their different qualities and deserts. Next, we made the like distribution of the lands allotted to the servitors. Thirdly, we published by proclamation in each county, what lands were granted to British undertakers, and what to servitors, and what to natives to the end that the natives should remove from the precincts allotted to the Britons . . . and settle and settle upon the lands assigned to natives and servitors. . . . Lastly, to the British undertakers, who are for the most part come over, we gave seizin and possession of their several portions; and assigned them timber for their several buildings.

...

We began at the Cavan. The inhabitants of this country do border upon the English Pale, where they have many acquaintances and alliances, by means whereof they have learnt to talk of a freehold, and of estates of inheritance, which the poor natives of Fermanagh and Tyrconnel could not speak of; although these men had no other, nor better estate than they; that is, only a scambling and transitory possession, at the pleasure of the chief of every sept. When the proclamation was published touching their removal . . . a lawyer of the Pale, retained by them, did endeavour to maintain that they had estates of inheritance in their possessions, which their chief lords could not forfeit and therefore in their name, desired two things; first, that they might be admitted to traverse the offices which had been found of those lands; secondly, that they might have the benefit of a proclamation made about five years since, whereby the persons, lands and goods of all his Majesty's subjects were taken into his royal protection. To this the King's Attorney, being commanded by the Lord Deputy,

1 Davies became Solicitor-General for Ireland in 1603 and Attorney-General in 1606. His Discovery and the more important of his letters to Cecil are printed by H. Morley in his Ireland under Elizabeth and James I.

made answer: that he was glad that this occasion was offered, of declaring and setting forth his Majesty's just title, as well for his Majesty's honour (who, being the most just prince living, would not dispossess the meanest of his subjects wrongfully, to gain many such Kingdoms) as for the satisfaction of the natives themselves; . . . for his Majesty's right, it shall appear, said he, that his Majesty may and ought to dispose of those lands, in such manner as he hath done and is about to do, in law, in conscience, and in honour. In law, whether the case be to be ruled by our law of England, which is in force; or by their own Brehon law, which is abolished and adjudged no law, but a lewd custom.

It is our rule in our law, that the King is lord paramount of all the land in the Kingdom, and that all his subjects hold their possessions of him, mediate or immediate. It is another rule of our law, that where the tenant's estate doth fail and determine, the lord of whom the land is holden may enter, and dispose thereof at his pleasure. Then those lands in the county of Cavan, which was O'Reilly's country, are all holden of the King; and because the Captainship or Chiefry of O'Reilly is abolished by Act of Parliament ... and also because two of the chief lords elected by the country hath been lately slain in rebellion (which is an attainder in law) these lands are holden immediately of his Majesty. If then the King's Majesty be immediate chief lord of these lands, let us see what estates the tenants or possessors have, by the rules of the Common Law of England. Either they have an estate of inheritance, or a lesser estate; a lesser estate they do not claim; or if they did, they ought to show the creation thereof, which they cannot do. If they have an estate of inheritance, their lands ought to descend to a certain heir; but neither their chiefries nor their tenancies did ever descend to a certain heir; therefore they have no estate of inheritance. Their chiefries were ever carried in a course of tanistry, to the eldest and strongest of the sept, who held the same during life, if he were not ejected by a stronger. This estate of the chieftain or tanist hath been lately adjudged no estate in law, but only a transitory and scambling possession. Their inferior tenancies did run in another course, like the old gavelkind in Wales, where the bastards had their portions, as well as the legitimate; which portion they held not in perpetuity, but the chief of the sept did once in two or three years shuffle and change their possessions by new partitions and divisions; which made their estates so uncertain, as that, by opinion of all the judges in this Kingdom, this pretended custom of gavelkind is adjudged and declared void in law. I

. . . If these men had no estates in law . . . it followeth

The custom of "tanistry' features of Irish land tenure.

and "gavelkind" were the two most characteristic See p. 59 nn. 2, 4.

that if his Majesty, who is the undoubted lord paramount, do seize and dispose these lands, they can make no title against his Majesty or his patentees.

Then have they no estates by the rules of the Common Law, for the Brehon law, if it were a law in force, and not an unreasonable custom, is abolished; yet, even by that Irish custom, his Majesty, having the supreme chiefry, may dispose the profits of all the lands at his pleasure, and consequently the land itself; .. for he that was O'Reilly, or chieftain of the country, had power to cut upon all the inhabitants, high or low, as pleased him; which argues they held their lands of the chief lord in villeinage. . . . Thus then it appears, that as well by the Irish custom, as the law of England, his Majesty may, at his pleasure, seize those lands and dispose thereof.

The only scruple which remains consists in this point :-Whether the King may, in conscience, or honour, remove the ancient tenants, and bring in strangers among them. Truly his Majesty may not only take this course lawfully, but is bound in conscience so to do. For being the undoubted rightful King of this Realm ... his Majesty is bound in conscience to use all lawful and just courses to reduce his people from barbarism to civility; the neglect whereof, heretofore, hath been laid as an imputation upon the Crown of England. Now civility cannot possibly be planted among them, but by this mixed plantation of civil men, which likewise could not be without removal and transplantation of some of the natives, and settling of their possessions in a course of common law; for if themselves were suffered to possess the whole country, as their septs have done for many hundreds of years past, they would never (to the end of the world) build houses, make townships, or villages, or manure, or improve the land as it ought to be; therefore it stands neither with Christian policy nor conscience, to suffer so good and fruitful a country to lie waste like a wilderness, when his Majesty may lawfully dispose it to such persons as will make a civil plantation thereupon.

Again, his Majesty may take this course in conscience, because it tendeth to the good of the inhabitants many ways; for half their land doth now lie waste, by reason whereof that which is habited is not improved to half the value; but when the undertakers are planted among them (there being place and scope enough both for them, and for the natives), and that all the land shall be fully stocked and manured, 500 acres will be of better value than 5,000 are now. Besides, where before their estates were altogether uncertain and transitory, so as their heirs did never inherit, they shall now have certain estates of inheritance, the portion allotted unto them, which they, and their children after them, shall enjoy with security.

Lastly, this transplantation of the natives is made by his Majesty rather like a father than like a lord or monarch. The Romans transplanted whole nations out of Germany into France; the Spaniards lately removed all the Moors out of Granada into Barbary, without providing them any new seats there . . . but these natives of Cavan have competent portions of land assigned unto them, many of them in the same barony where they dwelt before, and such as are removed are planted in the same county, so as his Majesty doth in this imitate the skilful husbandman who doth remove his fruit trees, not with a purpose to extirpate and destroy them, but that they may bring better and sweeter fruit after the transplantation.

Those and other arguments were used by the Attorney to prove that his Majesty might justly dispose of those lands both in law, in conscience and in honour; wherewith the natives seemed not unsatisfied in reason, though they remained in their passions discontented, being much grieved to leave their possessions to strangers, which they had so long after their manner enjoyed ; howbeit my Lord Deputy did so mix threats with entreaty as they promised to give way to the undertakers, if the sheriff by warrant of the Commissioners did put them in possession: which they have performed like obedient and loyal subjects.

The eyes of all the natives in Ulster were turned upon this county therefore when they saw the difficulty of the business overcome here, their minds were the better prepared to submit themselves to the course presented by his Majesty for the plantation; and the service was afterwards performed in the rest of the counties with less contradictions. I

(6) The Scheme of Plantation. ["Orders and Conditions to be observed by the Undertakers upon the Distribution and Plantation of the escheated lands in Ulster (Jan., 1609). Pr. in W. Harris's Hibernica (ed. 1747), pp. 63-7.]

Whereas the greatest part of 6 counties, in the Province of Ulster, within the Realm of Ireland, namely, Armagh, Tyrone, Coleraine, Donegal, Fermanagh and Cavan, being escheated, and

1 The earlier policy of the Government, as displayed, for instance, in the "Composition of Connacht," was to protect the poor "earth-workers" against the great Irish lords, by recognising them as "freeholders." Once the power of the chiefs was broken, the English lawyers declared the mass of the tribesmen to be mere " tenants-at-will," for if "freeholders," their freeholds could not be destroyed through the treason of their chiefs. The Irish themselves quarrelled over this question of status. O'Cahan of Londonderry, claimed that the Earl of Tyrone had no interest in his country, beyond a chief rent of 21 cows and the usual Irish "cuttings" and "spendings." The Earl, on the other hand, declared that O'Cahan had no absolute claim to his lands, but held, he and his ancestors, as tenants on sufferance, as followers and servants of O'Neill. See W. F. Butler, "The Policy of Surrender and Regrant," Journ. Roy. Soc. Antiqs. Irel. (1913), xliii, and A. Clèrigh, "The Tribal Occupier and Sir John Davies," Hist. of Ireland, ch. 15.