« PreviousContinue »
ver they were, to the astonishment of all honest men; who now perceived, what powerful instruments their enemies made use of, to accomplish their wicked purposes.
сн А Р.
Ormond's reasons for his opposition to the Irish considered.
THE Duke of Ormond assigned two reasons, in excuse for his ungenerous conduct in this particular. First he said,' “ if he had not opposed the motion for including the Irish in the general pardon, others undoubtedly would ; who, by exaggerating their former misconduct, would have excited rather the parliament's indignation against, than commiseration for their
But this reason has no manner of force. For although the English had heard nothing of the insur**rection in Ireland, but what gave them horror, and possessed them with the worst opinion of the whole Irish nation, yet his grace could have easily set them right, as to that matter : ? for, “ besides," as Mr. Carte confesses, “ his being a witness of every man's behaviour during the troubles, he was well acquainted with all the circumstances of their case; he knew what early attempts the most considerable of their nobility and gentry made to return to their duty; the difficulties they had to struggle with in that work; the perseverance with which they pursued their design, till they had accomplished it ; and the zeal with which, in the late king's distress, they had embraced the peace of 1648." All this, I say, his grace could have easily made known to their lordships, in case of the supposed exaggeration of their misconduct, and would have been bound in honour and justice to do so; whereas, by his opposition to the motion for including them in the
· Walsh's Letter to the Bishop of Ferns, p. 24.
2 Carte's Orm. vol. ji.
general pardon, he gave occasion to their lordships to confider them, as the most criminal of all his majesty's subjects in that respect, and as meriting peculiar and exemplary punishment.
His second reason was still weaker than the first, and is refuted by his own experience. He pretended, " that he did not think, that the protestant peers, or commons of Ireland, or even the very catholic Irish, would be concluded by, or content with an act of the English parliament,” viz. An act granting their pardon, and thereby putting them in a capacity to be restored to their estates ! His grace could not, seriously, have meant, that either the protestant peers or commons, or the catholic Irish, would have deemed an act of the English parliament insufficient for the purpose of their restitution ; because it was notorious 4 that he himself was restored to his lands in Ireland, by an act of the English parliament; and particularly, that ones Blackwell was dispossessed of his grace's large estate at Killcash, in virtue of it.” 1
3 Walsh, ubi fupra.
4 Cart. Orm. vol. ii. f. 398. s Id. ib. vol. ii. f. 392.
2“ The parliament of England had restored the Marquis of Ormond to his estate ; in confequence of which feveral adventurers readily resigned their poffeffion; but for the due execution of the act in all parts of Ireland, the king's letters were necessary.” Cart. Orm. vol. ii. f. 218.
« There was an act of parliament passed (in England) with the consent of all parties, that he (Ormond) should be presently restored to all his estate (in Ireland), which was done with the more ease, because the greatest part of it (for his wife's land had been before assigned to her in Cromwell's time, or rather in his son Harry's) lay within that province (Munster), which Cromwell out of his husbandry, had reserved for himself, exempt from all title or pretence of adventurer, or soldier. What other part of his estate either the one or the other was poffefsed of, they very willingly yielded it up to the marquis, in hope of having recompençe made them in other lands." Clarend. Life, vol. ii. p. 197.
The Earl of Orrery abuses the king's confidence, with
respect to the settlement of Ireland. His
IS majesty's declaration before-mentioned, for the settlement of Ireland, (which comprehended every foot of land in the kingdom) ordained, that about five hundred Irish gentlemen therein named, who had faithfully served him abroad, should be restored to their estates; but not until land of equal value was found, to
• In order to enhance the merits, and consequently the rewards, of those said to be in the English interest, the first act of settlement sets forth in the preamble," that the Irish rebels were conquered by his majesty's protestant subjects, in his absence." These Irish rebels, when they were conquered, fought under the command of the Marquis of Ormond, his majesty's lord lieutenant of Ireland, and afterwards under the command of the Lord Marquis of Clanrickard, his majesty's lord deputy of that kingdom. And those protestant subjects who conquered them, were Cromwell, Ireton, Axtel, Hewetson, Jones, Broghill, Coote, &c. who, indeed, vigorously pursued these Irish rebels, because they constantly denied the authority of the pretended commonwealth, and unalterably adhered to the interests of Charles Stewart (as these his majesty's protestant subjects were, in that time of conqueft, always wont to call him); it was in consequence of this act, which establishes it as a fundamental law, that the Irish rebels were conquered by the English protestant subjects, that commissioners were appointed by his majesty to decide the claims of the Irish, in pursuance thereof." Sale and settlement of Ireland.
• The claim of the adventurers was founded on an English act of parliament 17° Caroli, by which all those who had lent money towards carrying on the war against the Irish, should upon their being subdued have a certain portion of their forfeited estates conveyed to them. By the same act it was provided, that the money so lent should not be applied to any other use but that of the Irish war. Yet, “ scarce was there one hundred thousand pounds thus raised, when the fame parliament, contrary to its own-act and engagement, caused it to be laid out for the setting
reprize the Cromwellian adventurers and soldiers, who then had possession of them. It also ordained, that such of the Irish as had never infringed the articles of the
peace, concluded between the Marquis of Ormond and them in 1648, should be restored upon the same conditions. But the king had already disposed of fo great a part of the kingdom in gifts to the English and Irish favourites (some of whom had been accessaries in his father's murder), that the order for reprisals was absolutely impracticable;' on which account the adventurers and soldiers still continued their usurped pofa session ;' “ although many of them, in respect of their notorious and opprobrious actions against the crown, throughout their whole employment, and of their expressing even after his majesty's return, how little they. were satisfied with the revolution, were universally. odious, both in England and Ireland.”
forth their army under the command of the Earl of Effex, then ready for its march, against the king at Nottingham.' Borl. Hift. of the Irish Rebel. f. 121.
The soldiers, who were to be reprized with lands of equal value, had constantly fought for the usurpers against
the king ; and were thus to be rewarded for that service. They were, (says Mr. Carte) for the most part, anabaptists, independents, and levellers.” Orm. vol. ii.
Although the king himself had confessed in his declaration, which was to be the foundation of these acts of settlement, “ that the estates and poffefsions, which the adventurers and soldiers did then enjoy, if they were examined by the strict letter of the law, would prove very defective, and invalid, being no ways pursuant to those acts of parliament upon which they are pretended to be founded.” See that Declaration,
c“ If (says Ormond on this occasion) the adventurers and soldiers must be satisfied to the extent of what they suppose intended for them by the declaration; and if all that aecepted and constantly adhered to the peace (of 1648) must be restored, as the fame declaration seems also to intend, there must be new discoveries made of a new Ireland; for the old will never serve to satisfy these engagements.” Cart. Orm. vol. ij. f. 340.
The Earl of Clarendon, who was thoroughly acquainted with the conduct and intrigues of this settlement, informs us," that his majesty was led into this mistake by a very positive assurance from Lord Orrery, who was believed to understand the state of that kingdom very exactly, that there was land enough to satisfy all the soldiers and adventurers; and that there would be a very great proportion left for accommodating the Irish very liberally." But his lordship, at the fame time, made use of every sinister means, for his own private advantage, to reduce that proportion to nothing.
For, « believing he could never be well enough at court; except he had courtiers of all forts obliged to him, who would therefore speak well of him in all places and companies, he recommended to many of them divers suits for such lands, as by forfeiture, or otherwife, should come to his majesty ; although he knew that his majesty had resolved (and that by his lordship’s own advice) to retain those lands in his own power, to the end that, when the settlement should be made, he might be able to gratify those of the Irish nation, who had any thing of merit towards him, or had been least faulty. His lordship often, even fent certificates to these courtiers under his own hand, of the value those suits might be to them, if obtained ; and of the little importance the granting them would be to his majefty, which having been shewed to the king, disposed him to those concessions, which otherwise he would not so easily have made."
: G H A P.
2 Clarend. Life.
3 Id. ib.
4 Id. ib.
& “ This earl (says K. James in his Memoirs) was famous for changing parties so often, and for making a speech to Cromwell to take the title of king ; his tongue was well hung, he had some good parts, and he was reckoned focunning a man that no body would trust him, or believe what he faid." Macphers, Orig. Pap. vol. i. p. 43.