ORMONDE'S LAST STRUGGLES, 1650
[Sidenote: Hopeless dissensions among Irish Royalists.]
[Sidenote: Ormonde meets the bishops at Limerick, March.]
[Sidenote: Limerick excludes Ormonde's garrison.]
The Anglo-Irish Catholics had been drawn into the war against their
will in many cases, and in many others only in the hopes of obtaining
religious toleration. They were genuine Royalists, though the interests
of the sovereign did not always seem to be theirs. But the Celts
cared extremely little for the Crown and a great deal for the Church;
even more perhaps for the land which they had lost. Rinuccini's whole
influence went to widen the difference between the two sections. The
dominant faction among the clergy were quite ready to submit to a
foreign protector, and Ormonde's last struggles were with the bishops.
The Clonmacnoise decrees having failed to secure union, he summoned
twenty-four prelates along with the Commissioners of Trust to meet
him at Limerick, whither he went after finally leaving Kilkenny. They
met accordingly on March 8, and five days later presented him with
a paper of advice. They suggested that a Privy Council should be
appointed consisting of 'peers and others, natives of this kingdom, at
once spiritual and temporal,' to sit daily with the Lord Lieutenant
and determine all weighty affairs. The answer to this was easy: that
the appointment of Privy Councillors belonged to the King alone, and
that in the actual condition of affairs the Commissioners of Trust
were quite Council enough. There were vague charges of preferring
Protestants to Catholics, and suggestions made as to the rendering of
accounts and the administration of justice, very suitable for peaceful
times, but not at all applicable to the desperate state of affairs
really existing. Ormonde's immediate object was to place a garrison in
Limerick, and there all was refused to him, Lord Kilmallock, Catholic
though he was, being imprisoned by the citizens for quartering part of
his own troop within the walls by the Marquis's orders. Some of the
bishops made a faint attempt to reconcile the townsmen; but Ormonde
went away to Loughrea on March 18, and the prelates and Commissioners
followed him thither next day. It had been represented to him by some
of them that all would be right if he would only get rid of Inchiquin;
while others told the latter that he, as a chief of the ancient Irish,
was the proper person to command, if only he would separate from
Ormonde. The two lords compared notes, and easily perceived that the
real object in view was to get rid of them both.[179]
[Sidenote: A successor to Owen Roe O'Neill.]
[Sidenote: Bishop Macmahon appointed, April 1.]
By the fourth article of his agreement with Owen Roe O'Neill, Ormonde
was bound to give the command in Ulster to the person nominated by the
nobility and gentry of that province, who assembled for that purpose
at Belturbet in March, under the presidency of Eugene Swiney, who
had been Bishop of Kilmore since 1628. Antrim, who had already been
in communication with Cromwell and was soon to be in alliance with
Ireton, was a candidate, and had many supporters among the officers.
It was thought that Sir George Monro and his Scots might follow him,
though they would dislike an Irish and especially a clerical general.
Hugh O'Neill, who would have been by far the fittest man, was absent
in Munster; and Daniel O'Neill was practically disqualified by being
a Protestant. The other candidates were Sir Phelim O'Neill, who had
never shone as a soldier, Owen Roe's son Henry, General Ferrall, and
Bishop Macmahon of Clogher. The bishop professed no great anxiety for
the post, but there seems little doubt that he left no stone unturned.
These intrigues were successful, and Ormonde signed his commission on
April 1. He was, says the 'British Officer,' 'a great politician, but
no more a soldier fit to be a general than one of Rome's cardinals.'
[Sidenote: Englishmen turned out of the army.]
Before the end of April, Monro surrendered Enniskillen to Coote 'for
500_l._ and other trivial things.' At the beginning of May the Bishop
began his active campaign. Toome, at the foot of Lough Neagh, was
surprised, and, though it was retaken not long after, this prevented
Coote from besieging Charlemont; and the Irish army got between his
garrison at Londonderry and that of Venables at Coleraine. A council
of war was held at Loughgall in Armagh to decide whether the attack
should be on the Belfast district or on Londonderry. According to the
'British Officer,' the latter course was taken owing to the secret
practices of Sir George Rawdon, who wished to keep the war away from
his own country. Macmahon summoned Dungiven, which was defended by
Colonel Beresford with about sixty men, to whom he wrote, 'if you shed
one drop of my soldiers' blood, I will not spare to put man, woman,
and child to the sword.' The place was taken by assault, the soldiers
mounting the ramparts by means of short sticks thrust into the sods,
and all found in arms were killed, except Beresford himself, who was
sent wounded to Charlemont, where he recovered. The women, among whom,
according to the 'British Officer,' were Lady Coote and Mrs. Beresford,
were sent safely to Limavady, which was maintained by the successor of
Sir Thomas Phillips. The Bishop hoped that some Scots would join him on
Royalist grounds; but he got rid of all Englishmen, and a declaration
was published by himself and the Bishop of Down, which was signed by
twenty-nine officers, every one of them with Celtic names.[180]
[Sidenote: Over-confidence of Bishop Macmahon,]
[Sidenote: who divides his forces,]
[Sidenote: and rejects Henry O'Neill's advice.]
[Sidenote: Battle of Scariffhollis, June 21.]
[Sidenote: An old soldier's comments.]
The Bishop of Clogher styled his followers 'the confident, victorious
Catholic army of the North,' but its career of success was not long.
Ballycastle, on the northern shore of Antrim, was taken without
resistance, and garrisoned; but it could be of little use, and the
army, amounting at this time to about 4000 foot and 400 horse, returned
through the mountains. The Foyle was crossed at a little-frequented
passage below Lifford, Coote being encamped higher up with a much
inferior force. A smart skirmish took place in which the Irish had the
best of it, Captains Taylor and Cathcart being killed. If the Bishop
had followed up this success, he might have gained a great victory,
for Coote had to retire by a narrow causeway through bogs. The Scotch
settlers were numerous between Lifford and Londonderry, and agreed to
give some provisions to the Bishop's army; but Coote persuaded them
all to retire into Inishowen with their cattle, so that there was
little left for the enemy to eat. Macmahon occupied Lifford, which
Major Perkins surrendered as soon as he saw Ormonde's commission, and
remained there for a week, when supplies began to run short. He then
imprudently weakened his force by sending a large detachment to take
the remote castle of Doe on Sheephaven, and smaller ones to forage
about the country, so that when he took up a position at Scariffhollis
on the Swilly, some two miles above Letterkenny, he had not with him
more than 3000 foot and 400 horse. In the meantime, Coote was growing
stronger: 1000 foot, under Colonel Fenwick, came to him from Venables
at Belfast, and every available man was drawn out of Enniskillen, so
that he had a large force by the fatal 21st of June. The principal
officers in the Irish army were for adhering to the Fabian tactics of
their late chief, his only son among them. Their arguments were sound
and based on experience; but we may be sure that the speech put into
Henry O'Neill's mouth is very different from that uttered by him. The
report occupies little more than a page, but in it are mentioned by
name Mars, Ulysses, Ajax, Antiochus, Hannibal, Fabius Cunctator, Scipio
Africanus, Scanderbeg, Spinola, and Maurice of Nassau. The Bishop
retorted by actually accusing him of want of courage; and after that
there was nothing left but to fight. They were, says Coote, posted on
a mountain-side, 'inaccessible to either horse or foot,' but descended
on the enemy's appearance into ground 'which was extreme bad,' but yet
possible to traverse. The infantry on both sides were perhaps nearly
equal, but the English had a great superiority in cavalry, so that when
the Irish broke after an hour's hard fighting it was easy to pursue
them in all directions. About 3000 were killed, including a large part
of the officers, and few unmounted men can have escaped. Sir Phelim
O'Neill got away to Charlemont, and the Bishop managed to keep some
200 horse together, with which he fled southwards. All his colours,
arms, ammunition, and baggage fell into the victors' hands. Coote's
casualties of all sorts were under a hundred, and only one officer
was killed outright. Colonel Fenwick, who fell at the first fire,
afterwards died of his wounds. 'Now the reader may observe,' says the
British Officer, 'the sequel of making the Bishop a general that was
nothing experienced in that lesson, nor becoming his coat to send men
to spill Christian blood; and how that for want of conduct and prudency
in martial affairs he lost himself and that army that never got a foil
before he led them.'[181]
[Sidenote: The Bishop is captured.]
[Sidenote: and executed.]
[Sidenote: O'Neill put to death.]
One of the Maguires, who knew all the short cuts, hurried off to
Enniskillen as soon as he saw the result of the fight, and warned Major
John King that the Bishop was coming his way. King got out one hundred
fresh horsemen and fell upon the fugitives, who were in no condition
to resist. Macmahon's leg was broken in the scuffle, and he was taken
prisoner. During his captivity he made a good impression, bewailing his
many shortcomings and foretelling the course of events. King tried to
save his life, but he was hanged after some weeks and his head fixed
upon one of the gates of Londonderry. The responsibility for this must
be shared between Ireton and Coote, but particulars are wanting. 'I do
not know,' says the historian Lynch, 'what the Bishop foretold, but
I am certain that our nation never experienced worse calamities than
she has done since he was taken from our midst.' Ormonde praised him
long afterwards as a truthful man who kept to his agreements. Several
officers of rank were put to death by Coote after the battle, some
of them, if we accept O'Neill's Journal, with circumstances of great
brutality. Henry O'Neill was among them, who reminded Coote that his
father had saved him when he was near having to surrender Londonderry.
To this Sir Charles replied that those services had been paid for at
the time, and that he owed him nothing. The Irish accounts say that
these officers had all been received to quarter and should have been
treated as prisoners of war; and it is remarkable that the English
accounts say nothing about it, though Ludlow notes that there were few
prisoners, 'being for the most part put to the sword.' It is never
possible to ascertain exactly what happened in a battle, but the
probability is that immediate quarter for life given on the field was
not supposed to cover acts of treason or rebellion, and all Coote's
victims would have come within those qualifications of the subsequent
Act of Settlement which barred pardon for life and estate.[182]
[Sidenote: Ormonde is unsupported.]
[Sidenote: Assembly at Loughrea, April 27.]
[Sidenote: Ormonde kept out of Limerick,]
Ormonde has been blamed by many Irish writers for not supporting the
Bishop of Clogher; but he had no army with him and no means of raising
one. Inchiquin's force had disappeared in the manner already described,
and Castlehaven could do little with his small following. Meanwhile,
the Shannon estuary was at the mercy of the Parliamentary fleet.
Kilrush and Tarbert were burned and all country boats destroyed, so
that Clare was cut off from the rest of Munster. The possession of
Limerick was absolutely necessary to keep up the communications between
Connaught and the other provinces, and Limerick was contumacious.
To those who criticised him for keeping the few soldiers he had in
scattered country quarters instead of concentrating them in important
garrisons, the Lord Lieutenant sarcastically answered that the towns
themselves were responsible, 'wherein we cannot yet prevail, nor ever
could, till by the enemies' lying at one end of the town we were, not
without articling and conditioning, permitted to put such men as we
could then get in at the other end.' He summoned a general assembly
to meet at Loughrea on April 27, enclosing a copy of the young King's
letter, which permitted him to leave Ireland if he could not secure
obedience. He had a vessel ready in Galway Bay, but the conciliatory
attitude of the assembly, owing to the presence of a lay element,
induced him to dismiss her and to stay on in Ireland a little longer.
The Archbishop of Tuam and Sir Lucas Dillon went to Limerick with
directions to settle matters between the town and Ormonde, who in
consequence received a rather halting invitation from the mayor, John
Creagh. He came within four miles of Limerick, and agreed to visit the
city on condition that he should be received with the respect due to a
Lord Lieutenant; that he should have military command within the walls,
and that he should be attended by his own guard of fifty horse and one
hundred foot, all Roman Catholics and old soldiers of the Confederacy.
The mayor would have agreed, but Dominick Fanning and a friar named
Wolfe possessed themselves of the keys, collected a number of young
men, who had already distinguished themselves by plundering Ormonde's
papers on board a ship, and admitted Colonel Murtagh O'Brien with an
Irish regiment consisting largely of recruits. Clanricarde, supported
by the Commissioners of Trust, called upon the Bishop of Limerick to
excommunicate Fanning and O'Brien; but, of course, this was not done.
Ormonde offered to remain in Limerick during the coming siege and take
his chance with the rest, provided he was allowed to put in a proper
garrison and strengthen the works as he thought fit; but his efforts
were all in vain, and Galway was equally determined not to admit
Clanricarde.[183]
[Sidenote: and Clanricarde out of Galway.]
[Sidenote: Progress of Ireton.]
[Sidenote: Tecroghan taken, June 25.]
[Sidenote: Castlehaven failed to relieve it.]
While Ormonde persevered in his hopeless task, Ireton was gradually
reducing the few strongholds which held out to the east of the Shannon
after Cromwell's departure. The first to fall was Tecroghan, in the
south-west corner of Meath, which capitulated on June 25, only four
days after the disaster at Scariffhollis. That strong castle belonged
to Sir Luke Fitzgerald, whose daughter married the ill-fated Henry
O'Neill, and had been Ormonde's headquarters when Cromwell came to
Drogheda. Reynolds besieged Tecroghan about the middle of May, the
garrison being commanded by Sir Robert Talbot, a kinsman of Lady
Fitzgerald, under Ormonde's orders. This appointment displaced Major
Luke Maguire, and the everlasting jealousy between the native Irish
and the men of the Pale caused great dissension between the partisans
of the late and present governor. In order to relieve the place,
Clanricarde came to Tyrrell's Pass with 2000 foot and 700 horse, under
Castlehaven's command. Several miles of bog had to be crossed, and a
council of war was disinclined to move; but Castlehaven offered to
march with the foot, leaving the cavalry to distract the enemies'
attention, if possible. The latter part of the advance was along a
narrow causeway with deep ditches on either side, and the rearguard,
under Captain Fox, was ordered to face about and protect the convoy.
'He turned to his men,' says Castlehaven, 'and spake something in
Irish that I did not know, and, marching two or three hundred paces in
such a fashion that I could not tell whether he intended fighting or
running away. At last he did run away, and all his party followed.'
The van marched on into Tecroghan, but without the provisions and
ammunition; and Castlehaven with difficulty got back. Fox was tried by
court-martial and shot. No further attempt could be made to relieve
Tecroghan, which capitulated on honourable terms, the garrison marching
out with the honours of war, and protection was given for the property
of Lady Fitzgerald and some of her friends. By a special article, half
the guns in the castle were to remain with Talbot, provided he took
them within eight weeks. Carte says this was not done, and calls it a
shameful breach of faith; but it is very likely that the pieces were
not claimed within the specified time.[184]
[Sidenote: Surrender of Carlow, July 24.]
Ireton summoned Carlow on July 2, having already thrown a bridge
over the Barrow. Major Bellew, who commanded a garrison of about 200
men, asked for three days' truce, which were granted, to communicate
with the Bishop of Dromore and with Preston at Waterford. Further
negotiations then took place, and it seems evident that the news of
Scariffhollis had greatly damped the ardour of the defenders. Ireton
took the bulk of the army with him to Waterford, leaving Sir Hardress
Waller to take Carlow, which capitulated as soon as a tower near the
bridge had been battered and carried by assault. The terms were as good
as those granted to Tecroghan, and Ireton, says Ludlow, 'caused them
punctually to be executed, as his constant manner was.'[185]
[Sidenote: Surrender of Waterford, Aug. 10.]
[Sidenote: Ireton's military justice.]
[Sidenote: Waterford capitulates,]
[Sidenote: and Duncannon also.]
After the fall of Clonmel and the departure of Cromwell, Waterford
was almost isolated, though Duncannon was still in Irish hands, and
communication by the river could not be altogether prevented. But
Ireton had control of all the county of Waterford and of Carrick, where
was the lowest bridge over the Suir. It was therefore practically
impossible to relieve the city, and a small force encamped at some
distance was probably enough to stop the introduction of cattle or
other provisions by land. When Carlow was once invested, Ireton could
spare a larger force, and he left that place early in July to press the
siege of Waterford, having first sent a summons to offer fair terms.
The garrison were to march out and surrender their arms within four
miles of the town, officers and gentlemen retaining their swords and
pistols. Cannon were not to be removed. Private property of all kinds
was protected, and two months given to carry it away. Civilians were
to be disarmed, but not otherwise interfered with in any way, and the
soldiers might go where they pleased on promising not to serve against
the Parliament in England or Ireland. No obstacle was placed in the
way of taking service under any foreign government. These terms were
rejected, and a further summons was sent after the surrender of Carlow.
Preston or his son, Sir James, then made a sporting offer to admit
Ireton's infantry and let them do what they could inside the town.
There is a good deal of grim humour in the letters exchanged on this
subject, Ireton suggesting that 'old General Preston' must be dead. Of
course, this came to nothing. More importance attaches to the murder
of a man named Murphy, who was going out of Waterford into the country
with 80_l._ in his pocket. A major and a cornet were implicated, and
Ireton had them both shot. At last, after much correspondence, Sir
James Preston and others came out upon safe conduct dated the last of
July. The place of meeting was then called New Cross, just outside the
town on the south-east side and close to the Suir. It was probably the
news of Carlow having fallen that decided Preston to surrender, for
Ireton seems not to have been ready for an assault, though he could
annoy the town with his artillery. The terms were virtually the same
as those offered a month before, and on August 10, says Ireton, 'there
marched out about 700 men, well armed, the townsmen more numerous than
before we believed, and the town better fortified in all parts and
more difficult to be attempted than our forces conceived, there being
many private stores sufficient to have maintained them a long time.'
Duncannon, which it was now evidently useless to defend, capitulated
seven days later.[186]
[Sidenote: Surrender of Charlemont, Aug. 14.]
[Sidenote: A desperate defence.]
[Sidenote: Sir Phelim O'Neill.]
Having taken a fortnight's rest after Scariffhollis, Sir Charles Coote
proceeded to besiege the strong fort at Charlemont, which had been
in Sir Phelim O'Neill's hands since the first outbreak in 1641. As
Sir Phelim had accepted the peace of 1649 it was reckoned as a royal
fortress, and was the last to hold out for the King in Ulster. Venables
joined Coote, and a hot fire was kept up with guns and mortars; but it
was not till near the middle of August that a practicable breach was
made. The garrison made a desperate resistance, assisted by many women,
'who more appeared like fighting Amazons than civilised Christians.'
The storming-party were assailed not only with shot, but with scalding
slops and hot ashes, and were beaten back after two or three hours'
fighting. Venables had a narrow escape, but Coote, who commanded in
chief, remained 'a spectator, smoking of tobacco at distance.' The
total loss of the besiegers was not less than 500 men, but O'Neill's
ammunition was running short, and only thirty men out of 140 were able
to bear arms, all the rest being killed or wounded. He went out himself
to confer with Coote, while Colonel Audley Mervyn, afterwards Speaker
of the House of Commons, and Major King, afterwards Lord Kingston, were
sent in as hostages. The garrison marched out with arms and baggage,
Sir Phelim having leave to go beyond sea, and Coote undertaking to find
him a vessel. Unfortunately for himself, O'Neill remained in Ireland,
while Venables returned to Carrickfergus and Coote to Londonderry. A
Parliamentary garrison was left in the fort which had been so dearly
won.[187]
[Sidenote: Meeting of bishops at Jamestown, Aug. 6.]
[Sidenote: Ormonde rebukes the prelates.]
While the strong places of Leinster, Munster, and Ulster were being
reduced, Ormonde was struggling to maintain the semblance of royal
authority beyond the Shannon. The Loughrea conferences had led to
no good result, and the bishops assembled on their own account at
Jamestown in Leitrim on August 6. They announced their intentions to
Ormonde through the Archbishops of Dublin and Tuam, who reminded him
of what he knew only too well--that there was no army and no money,
and that the enemy were actually drawing large contributions from
Irish Catholics, whose country was in their hands; so that 'we are in
a fair way for losing our sacred religion, the King's authority, and
Ireland.' They invited the Lord Lieutenant to send a representative
to Jamestown, but he answered with perfect truth that this would be
useless after what had already happened. 'Ancient and late experience,'
he said, 'hath made evident what power those of your function have
had to draw the people of this nation to what they thought fit.' Yet
they had been unable or unwilling to give him possession of Limerick,
without which successful military operations east of the Shannon were
quite impossible. But he wished the Jamestown assembly all success,
especially if the object of the prelates was, as they themselves
admitted, to clear their own consciences. He had endeavoured to show
'that the spring of our past losses and approaching ruin arises from
disobedience, and it will not be hard to show that the spring of these
disobediences arises from the forgeries invented, the calumnies spread
against government, and the incitements of the people to rebellion by
very many of the clergy.'[188]
[Sidenote: The bishops order Ormonde out of Ireland.]
[Sidenote: His adherents excommunicated.]
[Sidenote: Another fruitless conference.]
[Sidenote: Ormonde predicts increased confusion.]
The Jamestown congregation met as announced, and after three or four
days' deliberation they despatched Bishop Darcy of Dromore and Charles
Kelly, Dean of Tuam, to Ormonde with full powers to explain their
views. They had observed with 'grief and admiration' that he threw
some of the blame upon them, showed to their own satisfaction that
they were not in fault, and left it to their emissaries to declare
what they believed to be the only possible means of preserving the
country. Ormonde prudently required the plenipotentiaries to put their
message upon paper; and the result was a peremptory notice to him to
quit Ireland forthwith. The writers plainly said that he was of no use
there, but that his great position and experience might avail something
if he was by the King's side. In the meantime, he was to leave the
viceregal authority in the hands of someone 'trusty to the nation, and
such as the affection and confidence of the people will follow.' On
the day before this message was delivered the assembled prelates had
actually excommunicated all who adhered to the Lord Lieutenant, so that
there was little sincerity in sending the Bishop of Dromore and his
colleague at all. The excommunication, with the declaration prefixed,
though dated August 12, was withheld from publication until September
15, so that Ormonde's answer might be first received. The Commissioners
of Trust persuaded him to summon the bishops to another conference at
Loughrea on August 26, and he went there himself; but they only sent
the Bishops of Cork and Clonfert, with no instructions except to demand
an answer to their order for his leaving the kingdom. In giving this,
Ormonde pointed out that he had returned to Ireland from a sense of
duty, that he had been prepared in April last to make room for a Roman
Catholic viceroy, but that many of the prelates themselves had then
begged him to stay; and that he waited now because the King's position
in Scotland was hopeful and orders might come which he would be sorry
should arrive in his absence. 'We plainly observe,' he added, 'that
though the division is great in the nation under our government, yet
it will be greater upon our removal; for which in a free conference we
should have given such pregnant evidence as we hold not fit this way to
declare.' The best chance of prevailing upon Charles to send supplies
was to be able to tell him how obedient and dutiful the people were.
A majority of the Commissioners of Trust, all Roman Catholics, wrote
in much the same strain, urging that disloyalty on the part of the
clergy would reflect upon the nation at large, and could only result in
general ruin.[189]
[Sidenote: Charles II. repudiates the 'bloody Irish rebels,' Aug. 16.]
[Sidenote: The King's mother idolatrous.]
[Sidenote: And Ormonde's peace exceeding sinful.]
[Sidenote: Commissions to Cavaliers revoked.]
[Sidenote: Opinions of Clarendon, Carte, and Walker.]
On August 16, four days after the decree of excommunication was
passed at Jamestown, an event happened in Scotland which was alone
sufficient to destroy all Ormonde's plans. It is less famous and was
less important than the Glamorgan treaty, but it shows that Charles
was his father's son, and he even contrived to better the instruction.
At Dunfermline on August 16, he was induced to sign a declaration in
which he professed himself 'deeply humbled and afflicted in spirit
before God' for his father's sin in opposing the Covenant, 'and for
the idolatry of his mother, the toleration whereof in the King's
house, as it was matter of great stumbling to all the Protestant
churches, so could it not but be a high provocation against Him who is
a jealous God, visiting the sins of the father upon the children.' He
further declared his conscientious conviction of the 'exceeding great
sinfulness and unlawfulness of that treaty and peace made with the
bloody Irish rebels, who treacherously shed the blood of so many of his
faithful and loyal subjects in Ireland.' For the future he would prefer
affliction to sin, and employ no one who had not taken the Covenant;
and he 'recalled all commissions given to any such persons.' The
baseness of this declaration can hardly be matched in our history, but
George IV. tried to emulate it when he authorised Mr. Fox to inform the
House of Commons that he was not married to Mrs. Fitzherbert. Clarendon
can only say that Charles was 'absolutely forced to consent' and other
apologists take the same line, but Carte, with all his royalism, was
not deceived by sophistry of this kind. He makes every allowance for
Charles's youth and difficulties, but with the scathing reflection that
'if a man once gets over his natural magnanimity he is afterwards fit
for anything; and having done one mean thing, is capable of doing ten
thousand.'[190]
[Sidenote: Charles had confirmed the peace.]
[Sidenote: His apology.]
[Sidenote: Effect of Charles's declaration in Ireland.]
[Sidenote: The Commissioners of Trust support Ormonde.]
The articles of the peace had been brought by Lord Byron to the
Hague early in March 1649, and Charles had written twice to confirm
them, declaring himself 'extremely well satisfied.' These letters
were found by Carte among Ormonde's papers, as well as the latter's
acknowledgment, so that their delivery is not doubtful. Charles did
not deny the facts, and he sought for the means of neutralising them
as much as possible. The emissary chosen was Dr. John King, Dean of
Tuam, who had taken refuge in Scotland, and we have his own account of
the interview where he received his instructions. 'The Scots,' said
Charles, 'have dealt very ill with me, very ill. I understand you
are willing to go into Ireland. My Lord of Ormonde is a person that
I depend upon more than anyone living. I much fear that I have been
forced to do some things which may much prejudice him. You have heard
how a declaration was extorted from me, and how I should have been
dealt withal, if I had not signed it. Yet what concerns Ireland is
no ways binding, for I can do nothing in the affairs of that kingdom
without the advice of my council there; nor hath that kingdom any
dependence upon this, so that what I have done is nothing.' It is only
fair to say that after Dunbar had been fought he took the opportunity
of another trusty messenger to express his gratitude, begging Ormonde
not to run any unavoidable personal risk, but to leave Ireland whenever
he pleased. He had already advised him that Scotland was not safe,
and that he should seek France or Holland. It took Dr. King about
two months to get to Ormonde, and he at once undertook 'through
much hazard' to take the answer back to Scotland. The Dunfermline
declaration was already known in Ireland through other channels, and
Ormonde at first thought the report was a fabrication circulated by the
Scots politicians for their own purposes, but the Dean of Tuam brought
a printed copy with him, and there was no longer room for doubt. This
was on October 13, and Ormonde at once summoned the Commissioners of
Trust to meet him at Ennis on the 23rd, and by their advice convened
an assembly to sit at Loughrea on November 15. To the Commissioners
he explained in writing that the Dunfermline declaration had been 'by
some undue means obtained from his Majesty' upon one-sided assertions
of the peace being unlawful and without hearing the other parties. For
himself he was determined by every means in his power to maintain the
validity of the peace as binding the King and all his subjects until
the authorised representatives of the Irish nation should have 'free
and safe access unto his Majesty,' provided always that the Jamestown
declaration forbidding obedience to him as Lord Lieutenant should be
revoked, that the bishops should acknowledge that they had invaded his
Majesty's prerogative, and that he and the necessary forces under his
command should be freely admitted into all garrisons. The Commissioners
of Trust accepted the excuses made for Charles, whose declaration
they had read with 'inexpressible grief,' and for themselves agreed
to the Lord Lieutenant's provisoes. In order to prepare matters for
the 'assembly of the nation,' they asked and obtained leave to go to
Galway, and to confer with the standing committee of bishops there.[191]
[Sidenote: A conference at Galway.]
[Sidenote: The bishops will not have a Protestant governor.]
[Sidenote: The excommunication maintained.]
Six bishops met the Commissioners accordingly, among them being Darcy
of Dromore, French of Ferns, who was Ormonde's bitter enemy, and Lynch
of Clonfert, who had protested even against the short delay interposed
between the decree of excommunication and its publication. Bellings
and his colleagues suggested that the peace and the maintenance of
the royal authority were the only means of preserving union, and to
this end they asked that the excommunication and declaration should be
withdrawn with a promise not to renew them. It was understood by both
parties that Clanricarde was Ormonde's only possible successor, but the
bishops could and did argue irresistibly that Charles had withdrawn
his own authority 'and thrown away the nation from his protection
as rebels.' With less wisdom they declared in the baldest way that
it was a scandal to have a Protestant governor over Catholics, and
that in the abortive agreement between the Pope and Henrietta Maria
this had been provided against. They positively refused to annul the
excommunication or to promise not to renew it, and they reiterated
the complaints of bad administration already so often made against
Ormonde. In conclusion they agreed that Clanricarde should govern
with the consent of all parties and with 'the King's authority from
the Lord Lieutenant which he conceives is in him' until a free and
lawful assembly should otherwise order. If such a body decided to treat
with the enemy the Church would acquiesce, though she would be the
heaviest loser, but they conjured the Catholics of Ireland to imitate
the Maccabees, whose fears were greater for the Temple than for their
nearest and dearest kinsfolk. The result of this preliminary conference
was not very hopeful, but the compromise was accepted by Darcy, who two
months before had been authorised to demand that Ormonde should put the
viceregal authority into commission, the commissioners being all Roman
Catholics nominated by the bishops. This he had of course refused to
do, and Clanricarde was the only alternative.[192]
[Sidenote: Assembly at Loughrea, Nov. 25.]
[Sidenote: A Deputy to be appointed. Clanricarde.]
[Sidenote: Ormonde leaves Ireland.]
The assembly began to meet at Loughrea on November 15, but did
not constitute themselves until the 25th, when Sir Richard Blake
was elected chairman. The lay element from the first asserted
itself, and some bishops, who in purely ecclesiastical manifestoes
considered themselves bound by the majority, showed a certain amount
of independence. On December 7 an agreement was rather unexpectedly
arrived at, and probably this was hastened by the fact that Ormonde
was on shipboard and might leave Ireland without delegating his
authority. First the prelates were induced to say that they had no
intention at Jamestown of usurping the royal authority, and no aim
but the 'preservation of the Catholic religion and people.' The
assembled 'Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Gentry' then declared
their conviction that the royal authority was the best bond of union,
and that no body of men in Ireland had any power to impair it. It is
to be observed, and no doubt Ormonde did observe, that the deposing
power of the Pope is not referred to. They then besought the Lord
Lieutenant to leave his authority in some person faithful to his
Majesty 'and acceptable to the nation,' to whom they promised ready
obedience. And they fully acknowledged that the retiring viceroy had
risked person and property for the royal cause, and that, even when
unsuccessful, he had 'faithful intentions and hearty affections to
advance his Majesty's interests and service.' This manifesto reached
Ormonde at Gleninagh in Clare, where he had put in before taking his
final departure. He wrote to say that he was not fully satisfied, but
that he had sent a commission as Deputy to Clanricarde, and he left it
to him to get further explanations and to accept or reject the charge
according to their tenor. This was his last act in Ireland until after
the Restoration and, having refused Ireton's offer of a pass, he sailed
on December 11 in a very fast vessel of twenty-four tons and four
guns which the Duke of York had provided for him in Jersey. He was
accompanied by Inchiquin, Bellings, Daniel O'Neill, and many officers,
and it was three weeks before they reached land at Perros Guirec in
Brittany. Forty men in a boat of twenty-four tons in the open Atlantic
and in midwinter must have endured very great hardships. Ormonde made
his way to Caen, where his wife and children were, and from thence
to Paris. A second ship with Sir George Lane and others reached
France, and a third with servants and baggage was lost at sea. The
distinguished exiles were from the first in the direst distress.[193]
FOOTNOTES:
[179] Clarendon's _Hist. Ireland_, 97-106; Cox's _Hibernia Anglicana_,
appx. 45.
[180] Ormonde's Commission in Borlase's _Hist. of the Rebellion_,
ed. 1743, p. 311, and in the _Parliamentary Hist._ xix. 297; Sir C.
Coote to Lenthall, July 2, _ib._ appx. 28; British Officer's _Warr
of Ireland_, 115-119; O'Neill's Journal in _Contemp. Hist._ iii.
212; Declaration of the Ulster Party, May 20, _ib._ ii. 418; Bishop
Macmahon to Beresford, May 30, _ib._ ii. 422. In the English official
account, _ib._ iii. 166, the Bishop's army is described as 'all Irish
or Papists, not a Protestant among them, having taken up an opinion
that they should never prosper till they had cleared their army of
all Protestants.' A letter from Nantes, May 26, 1650, in _Spicilegium
Ossoriense_, i. 340, says: 'Decreverunt Catholici nostri nullam dare
auctoritatem ulli Anglo, et specialiter Protestanti, quia experti sunt
eos semper fuisse perfidos in omni occasione, et ita deduxisse nos in
ultimam fere ruinam.'
[181] English official narrative in _Confed. and War_, iii. 166.
Coote's account seems pretty faithful in his letter to Ireton of
July 2, _ut sup._ The British Officer's _Warr of Ireland_ gives some
details. _Aphorismical Discovery_, ii. 86, can hardly be trusted, but
it condemns the idea of an episcopal general as much as the last.
An extract from a Latin narrative by John Lynch, printed from the
Carte Papers in _Confed. and War_, iii. 154, says Coote had double
his opponent's number of infantry and treble of cavalry, and that the
Bishop gave battle 'concilio bellico refragante.' There is a good
account in Ludlow's _Memoirs_, ed. Firth, i. 255, but it is certain
that the Bishop was executed long after the battle.
[182] Lynch's MS. _De Presulibus_ as above; O'Neill's Journal in
_Contemp. Hist._, iii. 212. Both Lynch and the Aphorismical Discovery
mention the Irishman (nefarius aliquis), who carried the news to
Enniskillen, 'per viarum compendia,' and the latter says his name was
Maguire. See Cox's _Hibernia Anglicana_, p. 23, and Borlase's _Hist. of
the Rebellion_, ed. 1743, p. 313.
[183] Charles II. to Ormonde from Jersey, February 2, 1649-50, in
Carte's _Life of Ormonde_, ii. 107. The general assembly to Ormonde
from Loughrea, April 30, 1650, and his answer (same place), May 1, in
app. 46 to Cox's _Hibernia Anglicana_. Ormonde's correspondence with
Limerick, June 12, in Clarendon's Hist. of the Rebellion, _Ireland_,
117-121, and his instruction to Hugh O'Neill and John Walsh, June 29,
in _Confed. and War_, ii. 430. Ormonde's letter of June 14 to the mayor
of Limerick is printed by Cox, ii. 22. Captain W. Penn to Cromwell,
April 5, 1650, _Milton State Papers_, p. 5.
[184] Castlehaven's _Memoirs_, p. 91; Carte's _Life of Ormonde_,
ii. 115; Dillon and others to Ormonde, May 16, in _Contemp. Hist._,
411, and the articles of surrender, _ib._ 489. The account of the
Aphorismical Discovery, who saw treason everywhere, is hardly to be
trusted, but he notes that the cannon were not sent for within three
or four weeks, and for a wonder does not accuse Reynolds of bad faith,
_ib._ ii. 95.
[185] The summons and articles are in Borlase's _Hist. of the
Rebellion_, ed. 1743, appx. 26. Ludlow's _Memoirs_, ed. Firth, i.
255. The Diary of one of Waller's officers printed in _Confed. and
War_, iii. 218, says 'a passage over the Barrow was by one bridge of
bulrushes and another of timber.'
[186] Ireton's account is in _Parliamentary Hist._, xix. 336. Diary of
a parliamentary officer employed in the parleys in _Contemp. Hist._,
iii. 219. Most of the letters are in the diary of Mr. Cliffe, who was
Ireton's secretary, printed in Borlase's _Hist. of the Rebellion_,
ed. 1743, appx. 32-45. Sir James Preston always signs as governor,
and perhaps his father, whose patent as Viscount Tarah is dated
Ennis (where Ormonde was), July 2, 1650, considered himself as still
general-in-chief. He stayed for some time in Waterford after the siege.
A round shot, which from its position may have come from the other side
of the Suir, still sticks in the tower built by Reginald the Dane,
which formed the south-east angle of the walls.
[187] British Officer's _Warr of Ireland_, p. 131. Archbishop of Armagh
and others to Ormonde, August 18, 1650, in _Contemp. Hist._, iii. 173.
[188] The letter of the two archbishops, July 24, and Ormonde's answer,
August 2, are in Clarendon, _Ireland_, 130-132.
[189] The Jamestown congregation to Ormonde, August 10, and the
Bishop of Dromore's statement, August 13, in Clarendon, _Ireland_,
133-137; Ormonde's answer, August 31, in Cox, ii. 32, where the date
is misprinted; eight Commissioners of Trust (none of the names Celtic,
Bellings one) to the Archbishop of Tuam, September 2, in _Contemp.
Hist._, iii. 179. Fourteen bishops and the procurators of several
others signed the Jamestown declaration. Among the other subscribers
were representatives of the Franciscans, Dominicans, and Augustinians.
The Jesuits refused to sign on the ground that they were not allowed to
meddle in politics and affairs of State, _Spicilegium Ossoriense_, i.
359.
[190] The Dunfermline declaration is in the _Parliamentary History_,
xix. 362, and in Walker's _Historical Discourses_, p. 170. Whitelock's
summary leaves out the Irish part. Sir Edward Walker, who was with
Charles at the time, remarks, 'What induced him to do it I cannot say.'
[191] The papers concerning Dean King's mission, August to October
1650, are in Carte's _Original Letters_, i. 391-399; the King's second
letter to Ormonde, September 13, _ib._ ii. 444, and his two letters
confirming the peace, March 9 and 20/30, 1648-9, _ib._ i. 363, 368. The
Ennis negotiations with the Commissioners of Trust are in P. Walsh's
_Hist. of the Remonstrance_, appx. 123-126.
[192] Proposals of six Commissioners of Trust (Bellings being one),
October 29, and the six bishops' answers, November 5, in Walsh's _Hist.
of the Remonstrance_, appx. 127-135.
[193] The Act of the Loughrea assembly, dated December 7, is printed
by Cox, ii. 51. For Ormonde's movements see Carte's _Life_, ii. 136,
and Clarendon, _Ireland_, 175; Ormonde to Sir E. Nicholas from Caen,
January 9, 1650-51, in _Nicholas Papers_, i. 215. Cox says Ireton
was advised to send a pass to Ormonde by a great man still living in
1688--this might seem to point to Ludlow, who, however, was not in
Ireland at the moment.