6 tofore Lord of Ireland, the ancestor of our but the Irish, which were not in the King's Lord the now King, was in Ireland, the law of peace, are called enemies. Statute Kilkenny, c. England in Ireland thence to the present day,1, 10 and 11; 2 Henry the Fourth, c. 24: 10 of right had and ought to have, and accordingHenry the Sixth, c. 1, 18; 18 Henry the Sixth, "to that law ought to be judged and to inherit. c. 4, 5; Edward the Fourth, c. 6; 10 Henry 'And so pleaded the charter of denization granted the Seventh, c. 17. All these statutes speak of 'to the Oostmen recited before; all which appear- English rebels and Irish enemies; as if the Irish 'eth at large in the said record: wherein we may 'had never been in the condition of subjects, but 'note, that the killing of an Irishman was not pun-always out of the protection of the law, and ished by our law, as manslaughter, which is were indeed in worse case than aliens of any felony and capital, (for our law did neither pro- foreign realm that was in amity with the crown 'tect his life nor avenge his deeth,) but by a fine,of England. For by divers heavy penal laws, 'or pecuniary punishment, which is called ane- 'the English were forbidden to marry, to foster, 'ricke, according to the Brehon, or Irish law.' 'to make gossips with the Irish, or to have any The following record speaks still more distinct-trade or commerce in their markets or fairs; ly the perfect right claimed and enjoyed by the English in Ireland, of slaughtering with impunity the mere Irish.' It records a case tried at Limerick, before the same Lord Chief Justice Wogan, in the fourth year of Edward the Second, and is as follows: 'nay, there was a law made no longer since than 'the twenty-eighth year of Henry the Eighth, 'that the English should not marry with any person of Irish blood, though he had gotten a 'charter of denization; unless he had done both 'homage and fealty to the King in the Chancery, and were also bound by recognizance with sure *William Fitz Roger being arraigned for 'the death of Roger de Cantelon, by him feloni-ties, to continue a loyal subject. Whereby it is 'ously slain, comes and says that he could not 'commit felony by means of such killing; because "the aforesaid Roger was an Irishman, and not of 'free blood. And he further says that the said Roger was of the surname of O'Hederiscal, and not of the surname of Cantelon; and of this he puts himself on the country, and so forth. And the jury upon their oath say, that the aforesaid Roger was an Irishman of the 6 manifest, that such as had the government of Ireland under the crown of England, did intend to make a perpetual separation and enmity be'tween the English and the Irish, pretending, no doubt, that the English should in the end root out the Irish; which the English not being able 'to do, caused a perpetual war between the 'nations, which continued four hundred and odd years, and would have lasted to the world's end, 6 'surname of O'Hederiscal, and for an Irishmanif in the end of Queen Elizabeth's reign the Irish was reputed all his life; AND THEREFORE the 'said William, as far as regards the aforesaid 'felony, is acquitted. But inasmuch as the afore"said Roger O'Hederiscal was an Irishman of our 'Lord the King, the aforesaid William was re'committed to jail, until he shall find pledges to pay five marks to our Lord the King, for the value of the aforesaid Irishman.' One more quotation from Sir John Davies, will place in the clearest light the spirit in which the English party governed Ireland, and the results of such misgovernment. It will also serve to show that there is nothing new under the sun; as the pretence of the modern faction that they are able to root out the Irish, is but the repetition of the factious cry of former days. The only difference is this: that in the olden day it might have been realized; at the present, it is utterly impossible it should be successful. The following quotation is from p. 85 of Da vies's Tracts : ་ 'In all the Parliament Rolls which are extant, 'from the fortieth year of Edward the Third, 'when the statutes of Kilkenny were enacted, till 'the reign of King Henry the Eighth, we find the degenerate and disobedient English called rebels; The original record is in these words: 'Willielmus filius Rogeri rectatus de morte Rogeri de Cantelon felonice per ipsum interfecti, venit et dicit, quod feloniam per interfectionem prædictam committere non potuit, quia dicit quod prædict. Rogerus fuit purus Hibernicus et non de libere sanguine etc.; et ulterius dicit quod prædict. Rogerus fuit de cognomine de Ohederiscal et non de cogno'mine de Cantelon, et de hoc ponit se super patriam, etc. Et jurati dicunt super sacram. suum quod prædictus Rogerus Hibernicus fuit et de cognomine de Ohederiscal et pro Hiber'nico habebatur tota vita sua. IDEO prædict. Willielmus quoad feloniam prædict. quietus. Sed quia prædictus Rogerus Ohederiscal fuit Hibernicus Domini Regis, prædict. Willielmus recommittatur gaolæ, quosque plegios invenerit de quinque marcis solvendis Domino Regi pro solutione prædicti Hibernici.' 4 had not been broken and conquered by the sword, and since the beginning of his Majesty's reign, 'been protected and governed by the law.' The compliment included in the last phrase to the then reigning monarch, James I, was naturally enough to be expected from Sir John Davies, who was his Attorney-General; but it will soon appear that the law was scarcely less destructive than the sword, and that the Irish had very little cause to rejoice at the transition. It is not, however, to be taken for granted that it was the sword alone which had been used against the Irish during the preceding reigns. The vexations of law were superadded to the cruelty of open violence; and the statutes passed by the Parliament of the English Pale afforded specimens of the senseless, and indeed ludicrous, malignity of the English party against the Irish. I think itright to add the following specimen : 6 6 6 10th Henry the Sixth. This was an act entitled, An Act, that no person, liege or alien, shall take merchandize or things to be sold, to 'faire, market, or other place, amongst the Irish enemies, &c, whereby it was enacted, That no merchant, nor other person, liege or alien, should use, in time of peace nor warre, to any manner of faire, market, or other place amongst the Irish 'enemies, with merchandise or things to be sold, nor send them to them, if it were not to acquite any prisoner of them that were the King's liege men; and if any liege man did the contrary, he 'should be holden and adjudged a felon, and that 'it should be lawful for every liege man to arrest ' and take such merchants and persons, with their 'merchandise and things, and to send them to the next gaole, there to remain until they should be delivered as law requireth, and the King to have 6 6 one halfe of the said goods, and he or they that 'should take them the other halfe,'-as by the 'said act more at length appeareth.' It is quite impossible in the annals of English history to meet such another specimen of legislation as that which made an English merchant a felon, for no other crime than that of selling his goods at the best profit he could get. There was, however, another statute passed, in the same 20th year of Henry VI, which shows that there was to be no peace nor truce with the Irish; but that they were in time of truce, or even of peace, to be slaughtered as enemies. It was an act intituled ‘An Act,that every liege man shall take the Irish conversant as espialls amongst the English, and make of them as of the King's enemies; where'by it was enacted, 'That it should be lawfull for every liege man, to take all manner of Irish ene'mies, which in time of peace and truce should come and converse amongst the English lieges, 'to spie their secresies, force, wayes, and subtil. 'ties, and to make of them as of the King's ene'mies.'' It will be observed that these Acts of Parlia ment were passed in the year 1432, that is, 260 years after the invasion of Ireland by Henry II. It appears that the latter of these acts was not considered sufficiently sanguinary, for the same English party passed another law in the year 1465, the fifth year of Edward IV, intituled- 'An' Act, that it shall be lawfull to kill any that 'is found robbing by day or night, or going or coming to rob or steal, having no faithfull man of good name or fame in their company in Eng'lish apparel;' Whereby it was enacted, 'That it shall be lawfull to all manner of men 'that find any theeves robbing by day or by night, 'or going or coming to rob or steal, in, or out, going, or coming, having no faithfull man of good name in their company in English apparel, upon any of the liege people of the King, that it shall 'be lawfull to take and kill those, and to cut off 'their heads, without any impeachment of our Sovereign Lord the King, his heirs, officers, 'or ministers, or of any others.' 6 6 6 'having half a plow-land in the said barony, onepenny, and every other man having one house and goods to the value of fourty shillings, onepenny, and of every other cottier having house and smoak, one half-penny.' After such statutes as these, it is matter of little surprise that so late as the 28th year of the reign of Henry VIII.—that is, in the year 1537-an act was passed, intituled, 'An Act against marrying, or fostering with, or to, Irishmen.' By this act, it was prohibited under the severest penalties, to marry an Irishman, but the Legislature was not so ungallant as to prohibit marriage with Irish women. That would have been inflicting the severest possible punishment upon themselves; and considering the natural antipathy that the English in those days entertained against everything Irish, it furnishes the strongest proof that the Irish women at that time afforded the same models of beauty and goodness for which they are celebrated at the present day. Even in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, the spirit of hatred and contempt of the Irish animated the Legislature. So late as the year 1569, an act was passed, (in the 11th year of her reign,) intituled, An Act prohibiting any Irish lord or captaine of this realme, to foster to any of the 'lords of the same realme;' whereby it was enacted 6 6 'That no lord nor captaine of the Irish of Ire'land, should from henceforth foster to any earl, 'viscount, baron, or lord of the same realm; and 'that what Irish lord or captaine soever, that from 'henceforth should receive or take to foster the 'child mulier, or BASTARD of any of the said earls, viscounts, barons, or lords, the same should be deemed and adjudged high-treason in the taker, ' and also felony in the giver, according to the taxation and discretion of the lord-deputie, governour or governours, and councell of this realm 'for the time being.' Such were the laws made by the Parliament of the English settlers in Ireland, in the spirit of contempt and hatred of the Irish people. Yet the extent of territory which belonged to the English, was, during all this time, extremely limited. How ignorant is the present generation of the fact, that for centuries England claimed the actual dominion of only twelve of our counties; and, even in these, the English laws were only in force, in the parts actually occupied by men of English descent. Upon this point the authority of Davies is distinct and decisive,-Hist. Tract. p. 93. True it is, that King John made twelve shires in Leinster and Munster, namely Dublin, Kil'dare, Meth, Uriel, Catherlogh, Kilkenny, Wex'ford, Waterford, Cork, Limerick, Kerry, and Tip'perary. Yet these counties stretched no farther 'than the lands of the English colonies extended. 'In them only were the English laws published 'and put in execution; and in them only Thus, in truth, the only fact necessary to be ascertained, to entitle an Englishman to cut off the head of another man, was, that such other should be an Irishman. For if the Irishman was not robbing or coming from robbing, who could say but that he might be going to rob; in, or out,' as the statute has it. And the Englishman -the cutter off of the head, was made sole judge of where the Irishman was going, and of what he intended to do. The followers of Mahomet, with regard to their treatment of their Grecian subjects, were angels of mercy when compared with the English in Ireland. Care was also taken, that no part of the effect of the law should be lost, by the mistaken humanity of any individual English-did the itinerant judges make their circuits man; for an additional stimulant was given by and visitations of justice, and not in the counthe following section of the act: tries possessed by the Irish, which contained two-thirds of the kingdom at least: and there'fore King Edward the First, before the court 'of Parliament was established in Ireland, did 'transmit the statutes of England in this form." 'And that it shall be lawful by authority of the 'said Parliament to the said bringer of the said 'head, and his ayders to the same, for to distrain ' and levy by their own hands, of every man hav'ing one plow-land in the barony where the said thief was so taken, two pence, and of every man Davies then sets forth the writ for the promulga tion of the statutes in Ireland: it is in Latin of course, and it is stated to be for the common utility of our people; but that promulgation is confined to the several places belonging to us in our land of Ireland.' Davies then proceeds thus:— By which writ, and by all the pipe-rolls of 'that time, it is manifest that the laws of Eng and never gave their soldier any other pay. But when the English had learned it, they used it 'with more insolence, and made it more intolera. 'ble; for this oppression was not temporary, nor limited either to place or time; but because there was every where a continual war, either offen 'land were published and put in execution only'sive or defensive, and every lord of a country, in the counties which were then made and lim'ited, and not in the Irish countries, which were 'neglected and left wild.' It appears, however, that although there were twelve counties thns nominally under English dominion, yet, before the reign of Henry the Eighth, they had shrunk into four: at least, that in not more than four were the English laws obeyed and executed. For Davies in speaking of the Acts called Poyning's Laws, after alleging that they were intended for all Ireland, is forced to confess that they were executed only within a very limited portion of that country. His words, at p. 177, are; And that the execution of all these laws had no greater latitude than the Pale, is manifest by 'the statute of 13th Henry the Eighth, c. 3, which 'recites, 'that at that time the King's laws were 'obeyed and executed in the four shires only;' and 'yet the Earl of Surrey was then Lieutenant of Ireland, a governor much feared of the King's 'enemies, and exceedingly honoured and beloved ' of the King's subjects. And the instructions 'given by the State of Ireland to John Allen, Master of the Rolls, employed in England near ' about the same time do declare as much; where'in, among other things, he is required to adver'tise the King that his land of Ireland was so 'much decayed, that the King's laws were not obeyed twenty miles in compass. Whereupon grew that by-word used by the Irish, viz., That they dwelt by west the law, which dwelt be. 'yond the river of the Barrow ;' which is within 'thirty miles of Dublin. The same is testified by Baron Finglas, in his discourse of the decay of Ireland, which he wrote about the twentieth 'year of King Henry the Eighth." ་ It will not be a matter of astonishment that the English dominion had shrunk into the narrow limits of four counties, to any person acquainted with the hideous system of daily recurring misrule and tyranny which was constantly practised towards the Irish, as well as towards the weaker portion of the English settlers, by the more powerful of the English lords and proprietors. These proprietors adopted and exaggerated the most oppressive portions of the English feudal system, and they added to that every injustice committed by the more powerful upon the weak amongst the natives. The following passage from Davies (p. 131) will show what must have been the effects of such accumulated oppressions; especially as they were practised with little intermis. sion for more than four centuries: 6 and every marcher, made war and peace at his pleasure, it became universal and perpetual; and 'indeed was the most heavy oppression that ever was used in any Christian or heathen kingdom. And therefore, vox oppressorum, this crying sin 'did draw down as great, or greater plagues upon Ireland, than the oppression of the Israelites did draw upon the land of Egypt. For the plagues of Egypt, though they were grievous, were but 'of a short continuance; but the plagues of Ireland lasted FOUR HUNDRED YEARS TOGETHER" The natural consequences followed; they may as well, and cannot be better described, than in the words of Davies: "This extortion of Coin and Livery produced 'two notorious effects: first, it made the land waste; next, it made the people idle; for when the husbandman had labored all the year, the 'soldier in one night consumed the fruits of all his labor, longique perit labor irritus anni. Had 'he reason then to manure the land for the next Or rather, might he not complain as the year? shepherd in Virgil : "Impius hæc tam culta novalia miles habebit ? Barbarus has segetes? En quo discordia cives Perduxit miseros? En queis consevimus agros?' And hereupon of necessity came depopulation, 'banishment, and extirpation of the better sort of subjects; and such as remained became idle and lookers on, expecting the event of those miseries and evil times: so as their extreme extortion and 'oppression hath been the true cause of the idle'ness of this Irish nation; and that rather the vulgar sort had chosen to be beggars in foreign countries, than to manure their fruitful land at 'home.' (pp. 132, 133.) The same result is produced by the oppression of the present day. The Irish for four centuries suffered the miseries of "Coin and Livery," as they now suffer from tithes and absentee rents.— They are still driven, not as beggars, but as laborers, to foreign lands, and to cultivate every soil but their own. Irish had no protection. An Irishman could not The most wicked and mischievous custom of It might be supposed by some, that the Irish were unwilling to receive the English laws, or to be received into the condition of subjects. The Attorney-General, Davies, however, tells us the B "Bonagh" was the Irish term for billeting of soldiers contrary. At p. 87, he puts the question thus:— they were not strong enough to violate it with 'But perhaps the Irish in former times did wil-safety. fully refuse to be subject to the laws of Eng'land, and would not be partakers of the benefit thereof, though the crown of England did desire 'it; and therefore they were reputed aliens out 'laws, and enemies. ASSUREDLY THE CONTRARY " DOTH APPEAR.' And in page 101, he expressly declares,"That for the space of two hundred years at 'least, after the first arrival of Henry the Second 'in Ireland, the Irish would have gladly embra'ced the laws of England, and did earnestly de'sire the benefit and protection thereof; which, being denied them, did of necessity cause a con'tinual bordering war between the English and 'Irish.' It does, indeed, appear, that the reason why that wise monarch, King Edward III., did not extend the benefit of English protection and English law to the Irish people, was, that the great Lords of Ireland, the Wicklaws, the Stanleys, and the Rodens of the day, certified to the King,— 'That the Irish might not be naturalized, without being of damage or prejudice to them, the 'said Lords, or to the Crown.' This appears by a writ, directed by that monarch⚫ to the Lord Justice of Ireland, commanding him to consult and take the opinion of the great Lords of Ireland, with the return thereon, amongst the rolls in the Tower of London, quoted at length by Davies, at p. 88. I will refer, for the present, only to one passage more in the Tracts of that Attorney-General, in further illustration of the text of my first chapter. It is to be found at page 90: ་ It would be equally shocking and tedious to recite all the well-attested acts of cruelty and per. fidy which were perpetrated on the Irish people by the order or connivance of the English Government. There is in the College of Dublin, a State Paper of considerable importance. It is a memorial presented by a Captain Thomas Lee, drawn up with great care and with very singular ability; written about the year 1594, and ad. dressed to Queen Elizabeth, giving her a detailed account of the real state of Ireland. It was a confidential document, for the personal informa. tion of the Queen. I shall have occasion to extract many passages of it. In the meantime, I will give, from other authors, two or three instances only, of the horrible cruelty exercised towards the Irish by the English Governors. My first quotation is from Leland's History of Ireland, Book IV. He tells us, chap. 2, that when in the year 1579 the garrison of Smerwick in Kerry surrendered upon mercy to Lord Deputy Gray, he ordered upwards of seven hundred of them to be put to the sword or hanged. That mercy for which they sued, was rigidly denied them; Wingfield was commissioned to disarm them; and when this service was performed, an English company was sent into the fort, and the garrison was butchered in cold blood; nor is it without pain that we find a service so hor. rid, so detestable, committed to Sir Walter Raleigh.' It also appears that for this, and such other exploits, Sir Walter Raleigh had 40,000 acres of land bestowed upon him in the county of Cork, which he afterwards sold to Richard, first Earl of Cork. The next instance is almost contemporaneous. It introduces another historic name. Shortly before the same year, 1579, "This, then, I note as a great defect in the 'civil policy of this kingdom; in that for the space of three hundred and fifty years at least 'after the conquest first attempted, the English 'laws were not communicated to the Irish, nor 'Walter Earl of Essex, on the conclusion of a 'the benefit and protection thereof allowed unto 'peace, invited Brian O'Nial of Claneboy, with them, though they earnestly desired and sought a great number of his relations, to an entertain'the same for as long as they were out of the 'ment, where they lived together in great har'protection of the law, so as every Englishman 'mony, making good cheer for three days and might oppress, spoil, and kill them without con- 'nights; when, on a sudden, O'Nial was surprised trol, how was it possible they should be other 'with an arrest, together with his brother and his 'than outlaws and enemies to the Crown of Eng-wife, by the Earl's orders. His friends were 'land? If the King would not admit them to 'the condition of subjects, how could they learn to acknowledge and obey him as their sovereign? When they might not converse or commerce with any civil man, nor enter into any 'town or city without peril of their lives; whither 'should they fly, but into the woods and moun'tains, and there live in a wild and barbarous 'manner?' (p. 90.) The passages which I have already quoted,|| show that the Irish sought for, but could not obtain, any species of legal protection. It would be too tedious to enter into a detail of all the horrors inflicted upon them by the lawless power and treachery of the English settlers. Nothing could be more common than scenes of permeditated slaughter-massacres perpetrated under the guise of friendly intercourse, into which the natives permitted themselves to be betrayed. No faith was kept with the Irish; no treaty nor agreement was observed any longer than it was the interest of the English settlers to observe it,-or whilst put to the sword before his face, nor were the women and children spared. He was, himself, 'with his brother and wife, sent to Dublin, WHERE THEY WERE CUT IN QUARTERS. This in creased the disaffection, and produced the detes'tation of all the Irish; for this chieftain of Clane. 'boy was the senior of his family, and as he had 'been universally esteemed, so he was now as universally regreted.'— MS. Trinity College, Dublin. The next instance I shall mention, occurred in the year 1577. It is thus introduced by Morris. son, the historian, (folio edition, p. 3) :— 'After the 19th year of Queen Elizabeth, vide'licit anno 1577, the Lords of Connaught and O'Rooke,' says Morrisson, made a composition for their lands with Sir Nicholas Malby, Governor of that province; wherein they were con'tent to yield the Queen so large a rent and such services, both of labourers to work upon occa'sion of fortifying, and of horse and foot to serve upon occasion of war, that their minds seemed 'not yet to be alienated from their wonted awe ' and reverence to the Crown of England. Yet, "in the same year a horrible MASSACRE was committed by the English at Mulloghmaston on some hundreds of the most peaceable of the Irish gentry, invited thither on the public faith and under 'the protection of Government.' The manner of this massacre appears to have been this (the spot is now part of the King's County): 'The English published a proclamation, inviting all the well-affected Irish to an interview on the Rathmore, at Mulloghmaston, engaging at the same time for their security, and that no evil was 'intended. In consequence of this engagement, 'the well-affected came to Rathmore aforesaid; ' and soon after they were assembled, they found 'themselves surrounded by three or four lines of English horse and foot completely accoutred, by 'whom they were ungenerously attacked and cut 'to pieces; and not a single man escaped.' Perhaps the instances of cruelty to individuals and to private families are more heart-rending than the wholesale massacres to which I have referred. The following quotation is from Morrisson's History of Ireland, folio 10: Another instance I select from a multitude of similar cases mentioned by Lee in his memorial. 'The Irish who have once offended," says Lee in his memorial to Elizabeth, 'live they never so honestly afterwards, if they grow into wealth, are sure to be cut off by one indirect way or 'other.' 6 6 6 6 6 6 Of this he gives the following melancholy instance: In one of her Majesty's civil shires, there 'lived an Irishman peaceably and quietly as a good subject, many years together, whereby he grew into great wealth; which his landlord thirsting after, and desirous to remove him from his land, entered into practice with the sheriff of the shire to dispatch this simple man, and divide 'his goods between them. Whereupon they sent one of his own servants for him, and he coming with him, they presently took the man and hang'ed him; and, keeping the master prisoner, they went immediately to his dwelling and shared his substance, which was of great value, between 'them, turning his wife and many children to begging. After they had kept him (the master) 'fast for a season with the sheriff, they carried 'him to the castle of Dublin, where he lay bye 'the space of two or three terms; and he, having no matter objected against him whereupon to be 'tried by law, they, by their credit and countenance, being both English gentlemen, and he 'who was the landlord the chiefest man in the shire, informed the Lord Deputy so hardly of him, as that, without indictment or trial, they 'executed him, to the great scandal of her Majes 6 Yet this, and the like exemplary justice,' adds 'he, 'is ministered to your Majesty's poor sub'jects there.' Individual instances of this kind, make oppression more familiar to the human mind, and leave a stronger impression on the recollection, from their individuality. They also illustrate the working of the system. They, in fact, bring it home more pointedly and distinctly to the eye of reason and common sense. But we must not lose sight of the more general description of crimes perpetrated by the Government, and with the sanction of the persons who from time to time acted as the Sovereign's deputies at the head of that Government. 'About the year 1590 died M'Mahon, chieftain 'of Monaghan, who, in his lifetime, had surren'dered his country into her Majesty's hands, and 'received a re-grant thereof under the broad seal ' of England, to him and to his heirs male; and ' in default of such, to his brother Hugh Roe M'-'ty's state, and the impeachment of her laws. 'Mahon, with other remainders. And this man dying without issue male, his said brother came up to the state, that he might be settled in his inheritance, hoping that he might be counte'nanced and cherished as her Majesty's patentee. But he found, as the Irish say, he could not be 'admitted until he promised six hundred cows; 'for such, and no other, were the Irish bribes. 'He was afterwards imprisoned for failing in part ' of his payment; and in a few days enlarged, 'with promise that the Lord Deputy himself 'would go and settle him in his county of Monaghan; whither his lordship took his journey shortly after, with M'Mahon in his company.'At their first arrival the gentleman was clapt ' into bolts; and in two days after he was indicted, arraigned, and executed at his own door; all 'done, as the Irish said, by such officers as the 'Lord Deputy carried with him for that purpose 'from Dublin. The treason for which he was condemned, was, because two years before, he, pretending a rent due unto him out of Fearney, levied forces and made a distress for the same, which, by the English law, adds my au'thor, may perhaps be treason; but in that coun 6 Here is a passage of this description from the same memorial: 6 'There have also been divers others pardoned by your Majesty, who have been held very dangerous men, and after their pardon have lived very dutifully and done your Majesty great ser 'vice; yet upon small suggestions to the Lord Deputy that they should be spoilers of your Ma'jesty's subjects, notwithstanding their pardon, there have been bonds demanded of them for their |