« PreviousContinue »
of these conjunctures, would have precluded him from some part of that vast emolument, which he expected from these grants, and which he knew, was in the end to be proportioned to the extent, duration, and heinousness of the insurrection.
“ And thus we find his noble friend, the Ear} of Anglesey," acknowledging in print, in 1681, it was then apparent, that his grace and his family, by the forfeiture and punishment of the Irish, were the greatest gainers of the kingdom, and had added to their inheritance vast scopes of land, and a revenue three times greater than what his paternal estate was
2 Let. to the Earl of Castlehaven. Castlehav. Mem. Ist ed.
d When the Duke of Buckingham was endeavouring to supplant Ormond in the king's favour, and made overtures to the Earl of Anglesey to join him for that purpose, the “ earl rejected these overtures with indignation, and gave Ormond notice of the designs formed against him.” Lel. Hift. of Irel. vol. iii. p.453. See Cart. Orm. vol. ii. fol. 482.
• A knowing contemporary writer afferts, “ that the annual rents of Ormond's estate before the war, were but seven thousand pounds sterling (his antient estate being then encumbered with annuities and leases, which otherwise was worth forty thousand pounds sterling per annum), and at present (1674) it is close upon eighty thousand. Now the first part of his new great revenues, is the king's grant of all those lands of his own estate which were leased or mortgaged; the rest were grants of other men's estates, and other gifts of his majesty.” His gifts and grants are thought to amount to 630,000l. Unkind Deserter, p. 161-2. See Queries. ib. Appen. p. 168.
The pamphlet containing these queries, was publifhed in England soon after the restoration, but seems not to have been answered by any of the duke's friends either then or for some
“ If his grace (says a contemporary author in 1676) or any one for him, can answer the said queries, why is he or they so long filent ? they render his integrity suspected, they wound his fame and honour. Certainly, if there were any way to answer them, and prove them false, Father Walth would, long before now, have spoken it loudly to the world.” Unkind Desert. &c. p. 172,
Nor was this silence of the Duke of Ormond and his friends the effect of contempt or disregard of the supposed calumny.
before the rebellion; and that most of his increase was out of their estates who adhered to the peaces of 1646 and 1648, or served under his majesty's ensigns abroad." From whence his lordship justly concluded, that “ his grace could not have been very sincere, in making either of these peaces with the Irish; but that, whatever moved him thereto, whether compassion, natural affection, or any thing else, he was in judgment and conscience against them; and so,” adds he," he has since appeared, and hath advantage by their laying afide.”
It is, therefore, no wonder that his grace's noble brother-in-law, Lord Muskerry, when on his deathbed, declared to himself, “ that the heaviest fear that possessed his soul, then going into eternity, was for his having confided so much in his grace, who had deceived them all, and ruined his poor country and countrymen.
С Н А Р.
3 Unkind Deserter, &c.
The printer of the pamphlet was prosecuted and imprisoned, and two hundred copies seized in his house; and although his poverty and charge of children were very great, yet he would never confess who set him to work; such a confession would have procured him his liberty, but he seemed to flight it, being maintained very well in prison, where he lay for a long time very contentedly, without making any application, or using any means to be bailed or discharged.” Carte's Orm. vol. ii.
« My Lord Duke of Ormond,” says the Earl of Effex, lord lieutenant of Ireland in 1674-5, “has received above 300,000l. in this kingdom, besides all his great places and employments; and I am sure the lofles in his private estate have not been; equal to those I have suffered (in the preceding civil war), and yet he is so happy as no exception is taken to it.” State Lett p. 213-14.
The Duke of Ormond befriends the Irish. In the year 1679, when so much innocent blood was shed in England, by means of the perjuries of Titus Oates, and his flagitious associates, encouraged and patronised by the Earl of Shaftsbury,' peace and quietness of Ireland was a great disappoint
Cart. Orm. vol. ii. fol. 494.
. Such was the people's abhorrence of popery at this time in England, and so light and excusable in their opinion did a person's being a protestant, render any other vice that a person might be guilty of, “ that when Nell Gwin (Charles II.'s mistress) was insulted in her coach at Oxford by the mob, who mistook her for the Duchess of Portsmouth another mistress of that king's, but a papist), she looked out of the window, and said with her usual good humour, Pray good people be civil, I am the protestant w-e. And this laconic speech drew upon her the blessings of the populace, who suffered her to proceed without further molestation." Graing. Biograph. Hift. vol. iv.
P 189. note.
6 “ The notorious Titus Oates (says the Rev. Mr. Grainger) was soon after the accession of (king) James, convicted of perjury, upon the evidence of fixty reputable witnesses, of whom nine were protestants. He was sentenced to pay a fine of two thousand marks, to be stripped of his canonical habit, to be whipt twice in three days by the common hangman, and to stand in the pilory at Westminster-hall gate, and at the Royal Exchange; he was moreover to be pillored five times every year, and to be imprisoned during life. The hangman performed his office with uncommon rigour. The best thing James ever did was punishing Oates for his perjury; and the greatest thing Oates ever did, was supporting himself under the most afflictive part of his punishment with the resolution and constancy of a martyr. A pension of four hundred pounds a year was conferred upon this miscreant by king William. He was, for a clergyman, remarkably illiterate ; it is well known that he was the son of an anabaptist; and he probably died in the communion in which he had been educated.” Biographic. Hist. of Eng. vol. iv. p. 348.
ment to that earl and his party; and they took all porfible methods to provoke and exasperate the people of that kingdom, already too much discontented. For that end, they procured orders from the council of Ireland, to transmit severe bills against the Irish catholics in matter of religion, in hopes to drive them into a new rebellion. It was now proposed to introduce the test act, and all the English penal-laws, into Ireland ; and that a proclamation should be forthwith issued for encouraging all perfons, that could make any further discoveries of the horrid popish plot, to come in and declare the same."
“ Titus Oates (says the same Biographer) was restrained by no principle, human or divine, and like Judas wouid have done any thing for thirty shillings; he was one of the most accomplished villains that we read of in history; he had been chaplain on board the fleet, whence he was dismissed for an unnatural crime, and was known to be guilty of perjury before he set up the trade of witnessing; he was successful in it beyond the most sanguine expectation : he was lodged at Whitehail, and had a pension assigned him of 1200l. a year. The æra of Oates's plot was also the grand æra of whig and tory.” Id. ib. p. 201-2.
Some have concluded from the following passage in D'Avaux, that the Prince of Orange had a considerable share in framing this most iniquitous plot: “I presume to declare,” says that count, “ that I have omitted nothing to discover the combinations that the Prince of Orange has engaged in, with the most abandoned of the English. On the 21st of September, 1679, I fent intelligence that Oates, who has since that time been so notorious; Freeman, of whom I have already spoken; and Du Moulin, a man of intrigue and an execrable villain; arrived together in Holland some years past, and that the Prince of Orange had been in grand conferences with them.” D’Avaux, tom. i. p. 32
See M'Pherson's Hift. of Great Britain, vol. i. p. 343
Certain it is, that after that prince became king of England, he attempted to have reversed Oates's sentence; but the commons refused to gratify him in so impious an act. That villain, however, was pardoned and pensioned by his majesty, as above-mentioned.
On the first report of the popish plot, “ Peter Talbot, Archbishop of Dublin, in a dangerous fit of the stone, was imprisoned in the castle. Orders were issued, that all officers should repair to their respective garrisons; that popish ecclesiaf
The Duke of Ormond, then Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, and luckily at that juncture in England, employed all his interest with the king, to prevent the calling a parliament for these cruel purposes. will venture,” says his grace in a letter to the Earl of Arran on that occasion, " to tell you, without a cypher, that the reason why the calling of a parliament in Ireland sticks, is the severity of two bills transmitted against the papists; the one taking away the votes of peers, whilst they are papists; and the other inflicting death upon a certain sort of popish clergy, if found in Ireland ; the one seeming unjust, and the other cruel, and neither necessary. For my part, I confess, if I had been here when the expelling of the popish lords passed, I should have voted against it in conscience and prudence ; in conscience, because I know no reason why opinion should take away a man's birthright; or why his goods or lands may not be as well, taken away; since money misapplied is, for the most part, a more dangerous thing in disaffected hands, than a word in his mouth. And I think no less of the other bill, for upon ferious and cool thoughts, I am against all fanguinary laws, in matters of religion, purely and properly fo called.” a
> Cart. Orm. yol. ä. fol. 535
tics should depart from the kingdom, popish seminaries and convents should be fuppreft. Informations quickly multiplied, and directions were received from England to seize Richard Talbot ; (afterwards Duke of Tyrconnel), Lord Mountgarret and his fon, and a colonel of the name of Peppard. Lord Mountgarret, represented as a dangerous conspirator, was of the age
of cighty years, bed-ridden, and in a state of dotage ; and, to the further discredit of the evidences, no. Colonel Peppard was known or could be found in Ireland.” Lel. Hist. of Ireland, vol. iii. p. 474.
• Previous to, and concomitant with, Oates's plot, the minds of the people were inflamed by sermons, pamphlets, &c. containing the groffest and most abominable aspersions on the civil principles of Roman catholics. Thomas Barlow, Bishop of Lincoln, eminently distinguished himself on that occafion, in a book of one hundred and thirty-six pages in quarto ; which