according to Story’s account, General Lord Kilmallock, General Lord
Galway, Brigadier-General Connel (O’Connell), Brigadier-General W.
Mansfield Barker, Brigadier-General Henry M. J. O’Neill, Colonel Charles
Moore, his lieutenant-colonel and major; Colonel David Bourke, Colonel
Ulick Bourke, Colonel Connor McGuire, Colonel James Talbot, Colonel
Arthur, Colonel Mahony, Colonel Morgan, Major Purcell, Major O’Donnell,
Major Sir John Everard, with several others of superior rank, “besides,
at least, five hundred captains and subordinate officers.” This latter
statement has been challenged by Irish historians, who claim that
non-commissioned officers were included in the list. Story omitted from
the number of superior officers slain the name of Colonel Felix O’Neill,
Judge-Advocate-General of the Irish army, whose body was found on the
field. Of the less than five hundred Irish prisoners taken, twenty-six
were general or field officers, including General Lord Duleek, General
Lord Slane, General Lord Bophin, General Lord Kilmaine, General
Dorrington, General John Hambleton (Hamilton), Brigadier-General Tuite,
Colonel Walter Bourke, Colonel Gordon O’Neill, Colonel Butler, Colonel
O’Connell (ancestor of Daniel O’Connell), Colonel Edmund Madden,
Lieutenant-Colonel John Chappel, Lieutenant-Colonel John Butler,
Lieutenant-Colonel Baggot, Lieutenant-Colonel John Border,
Lieutenant-Colonel McGinness, Lieutenant-Colonel Rossiter,
Lieutenant-Colonel McGuire, Major Patrick Lawless, Major Kelly, Major
Grace, Major William Bourke, Major Edmund Butler, Major Edmund Broghill,
Major John Hewson, “with 30 captains, 25 lieutenants, 23 ensigns, 5
cornets, 4 quartermasters, and an adjutant.”
Chaplain Story, to whom, with all his faults, we are much indebted for
the details of this momentous battle—one of the few “decisive battles”
of the world—says: “We [the English and their allies] lost 73 officers,
who were killed in this action, with 111 wounded, as appears by the
inserted lists [_vide_ his History of the “Wars in Ireland”] of both
horse and foot, given in two days after by the general’s command, and
sent to the king.” The lists referred to acknowledged, also, 600
soldiers killed and 906 wounded. The allied losses were, no doubt,
underestimated for political effect in England, which had been taught
that one Englishman could kill any number of Irishmen without much fear
of a fatal result to himself. And this superstition was useful, we
believe, to the morale of the British soldiers of the period, whose
stomachs failed them so notably when they were “up against” the defences
of Limerick, as will be seen hereafter. Captain Taylor, a Williamite
writer, who was present at the battle and published a graphic account of
it, says that the loss of the allies (British, Dutch, Danes, Germans,
and Huguenots) was little less than that of the Irish, most of the
latter having fallen in the retreat after the death of General St. Ruth.
Of the Anglo-Dutch troopers, there were killed by the Irish cavalry at
the pass of Urachree, in the early part of the fight, 202, and wounded
125, thus showing the superior strength, reach of arm, and dexterity of
the Irish horsemen. In hand-to-hand conflicts, whether mounted or on
foot, the Irish soldiery, in whatever service, ever excelled, with sword
or battle-axe, pike or bayonet. Clontibret and the Yellow Ford, Benburb
and Fontenoy, Almanza and Albuera, Inkerman and Antietam bear witness to
the truth of this assertion. As a charging warrior, the Irishman has
never been surpassed, and, no matter how bloodily repulsed, an Irish
regiment or an Irish army is ever willing to try again. There may be
soldiers as brave as they, but none are braver, even when they fight in
causes with which they have no natural sympathy. It may be set down as a
military axiom that the Irish soldier is, by force of untoward
circumstances, frequently a mercenary, but rarely, or never, a coward.
The principal officers who fell on the English side, at Aughrim, were
Major-General Holztapfel, who commanded Lord Portland’s horse at
Urachree; Colonel Herbert, killed in the main attack on the Irish
centre; Colonel Mongatts, who died among the Irish ditches while trying
to rally his routed command; Major Devonish, Major Cornwall, Major Cox,
and Major Colt. Many other officers of note died of their wounds at the
field hospital established on the neighboring heights of Garbally—now
converted into one of the most delightful demesnes in Europe; and some
who survived the field hospital died in the military hospitals of
Athlone and Dublin. Those who fell in the battle were buried on the
field, with the usual military honors.
Captain Parker, who fought in the English army in this battle, and who
has left a narrative, frequently quoted by O’Callaghan, Haverty, Boyle,
and other historians, says: “Our loss was about 3,000 men in killed and
wounded,” and, as he was in the thick of the fight and came out
unwounded, he had full opportunity, after the battle closed, to verify
his figures. He certainly could have no object in exaggerating the
English loss, for the tendency of all officers is to underrate the
casualties in their army. And Captain Parker says, further: “Had it not
been that St. Ruth fell, it were hard to say how matters would have
ended, for, to do him justice, notwithstanding his oversight at Athlone,
he was certainly a gallant, brave man, and a good officer, as appeared
by the disposition he made of his army this day.... His centre and right
wing [after his fall] still held their ground, and had he lived to order
Sarsfield down to sustain his left wing, it would have given a turn to
affairs on that side”—“or,” O’Callaghan says in comment, “in other
words, have given the victory to the Irish.”
Lord Macaulay—anti-Irish as all his writings prove him to have been—says
in his “History of England”: “Those [the Irish] works were defended with
a resolution such as extorted some words of ungracious eulogy even from
men who entertained the strongest prejudices against the Celtic race.”
He then quotes Baurnett, Story, and, finally, the London “Gazette,” of
July, 1691, which said: “The Irish were never known to fight with more
resolution.”
In his interesting, but partial, “Life of William III,” published in the
beginning of the seventeenth century, Mr. Harris, a fierce
anti-Jacobite, says: “It must, in justice, be confessed that the Irish
fought this sharp battle with great resolution, which demonstrates that
the many defeats before this sustained by them can not be imputed to a
national cowardice with which some, without reason, impeached them; but
to a defect in military discipline and the use of arms, or to a want of
skill and experience in their commanders. And now, had not St. Ruth been
taken off, it would have been hard to say what the consequence of this
day would have been.”
Now we will give a few comments of the Irish historians upon this
Hastings of their country: O’Halloran, who was born about the time the
battle was fought, and who, as a native of Limerick, must have been, at
least, as familiar with soldiers who fought in the Williamite wars as we
are with the Union and Confederate veterans, in Vol. I, page 106, of his
“History of Ireland,” replying to some slurs cast by the Frenchman,
Voltaire, on the Irish people, says: “He should have recollected that,
at the battle of Aughrim, 15,000 Irish, ill paid and worse clothed,
fought with 25,000 men highly appointed and the flower of all Europe,
composed of English, Dutch, Flemings, and Danes, vieing with each other.
That, after a most bloody fight of some hours, these began to shrink on
all sides, and would have received a most complete overthrow but for the
treachery of the commander of the Irish horse, and the death of their
general [St. Ruth] killed by a random shot.”
On pages 532-533 of the same work, the historian says: “Sir John
Dalrymple tells us that [at Aughrim] the priests ran up and down amongst
the ranks, swearing some on the sacrament, encouraging others, and
promising eternity to all who should gallantly acquit themselves to
their country that day. Does he mean this by way of apology for the
intrepidity of the Irish, or to lessen the applause they were so well
entitled to on that day? Have they required more persuasions to fight
the battles of foreign princes than the native troops, or are they the
only soldiers who require spiritual comfort on the day of trial? I never
thought piety was a reproach to soldiers, and it was, perhaps, the
enthusiasm of Oliver’s troops that made them so victorious. This battle
was, certainly, a bloody and decisive one. The stake was great, the
Irish knew the value of it, and, though very inferior to their enemies
in numbers and appointments, and chagrined by repeated losses, yet it
must be owned they fought it well. Accidents which human wisdom could
not foresee, more than the superior courage of their flushed enemies,
snatched from them that victory, which already began to declare in their
favor. Their bones yet (1744) lie scattered over the plains of Aughrim,
but let that justice be done to their memories which a brave and
generous enemy never refuses.”
Abbé McGeoghegan, who wrote about 1745, and was chaplain of the
Franco-Irish Brigade, says in his “History of Ireland,” page 603: “The
battle began at one o’clock, with equal fury on both sides, and lasted
till night. James’s infantry performed prodigies of valor, driving the
enemy three times back to their cannon.”
Rev. Thomas Leland, an Irish Protestant divine, who published a history
of Ireland about 1763, after describing the catastrophe which befell St.
Ruth, says: “His [St. R.’s] cavalry halted, and, as they had no orders,
returned to their former station. The Irish beheld this retreat with
dismay; they were confounded and disordered. Sarsfield, upon whom the
command devolved, had been neglected by the proud Frenchman ever since
their altercation at Athlone. As the order of battle had not been
imparted to him, he could not support the dispositions of the late
general. The English, in the meantime, pressed forward, drove the enemy
to their camp, pursued the advantage until the Irish, after an
engagement supported with the fairest prospect of success, while they
had a general to direct their valor, fled precipitately.”
The Right Rev. Dr. Fitzgerald, Episcopalian bishop, in his “History of
Limerick,” published some sixty years ago, says: “It [Aughrim] was the
bravest battle ever fought on Irish soil.” The bishop, evidently, had
not read the lives of Art MacMurrough, Hugh O’Neill, Hugh O’Donnell, and
Owen Roe O’Neill, when he penned the words.
“Such,” writes O’Callaghan, at the conclusion of his account of it, in
the “Green Book,” page 230, “was the battle of Aughrim, or Kilconnell,
as the French called it, from the old abbey to the left of the Irish
position; a battle unsuccessful, indeed, on the side of the Irish, but a
Chæronea, or a Waterloo, fought with heroism and lost without dishonor.”
A. M. Sullivan, in his fascinating “Story of Ireland” (American edition,
page 458), says, or rather, quotes from a Williamite authority: “The
Irish infantry were so hotly engaged that they were not aware either of
the death of St. Ruth or of the flight of the cavalry, until they
themselves were almost surrounded. A panic and confused flight were the
result. The cavalry of the right wing, who were the first in action that
day, were the last to quit the ground.... St. Ruth fell about sunset
[8.10], and about 9, after three hours’ [nearer four hours’] hard
fighting, the last of the Irish army [who were not killed, wounded, or
captured] had left the field.”
John Boyle, in his “Battlefields of Ireland,” quotes Taylor, an English
military author who fought at Aughrim, as saying: “Those [the Irish
dead] were nearly all killed after the death of St. Ruth, for, up to
that, the Irish had lost scarcely a man;” and, says he, further, “large
numbers were murdered, after surrender and promise of quarter, by order
of General Ginkel, and among those, so murdered, in cold blood, were
Colonel O’Moore and that most loyal gentleman and chivalrous soldier,
Lord Galway.” This same able writer, in concluding his graphic story of
the famous battle, remarks, with indignant eloquence: “It is painful to
speculate on the cause that left the Irish army without direction after
the death of St. Ruth. Many have endeavored to explain it, but all—as
well those who doubt Sarsfield’s presence on the field as those who
maintain the contrary—are lost in conjecture, and none who participated
in the battle, and survived it, has placed the matter beyond
speculation. So leaving that point as time has left it, what appears
most strange in the connection is the absence of all command at such a
conjuncture. The disposition of the Irish troops, though dexterous, was
simple. The day was all but won. The foiling of Talmash (Mackay) would
have been the completion of victory. A force sufficient was on his
front; a reserve more than ample to overwhelm him was on its way to the
ground—nay, drawn up and even ready for the word. The few British troops
that held a lodgment in the hedges, at the base of the hill, were
completely at the mercy of those above them. It required no omniscient
eye to see this, nor a voice from the clouds to impel them forward, and,
surely, no military etiquette weighed a feather in opposition to the
fate of a nation. Any officer of note could have directed the movement,
and many of experience and approved courage witnessed the crisis. Yet,
in this emergency, all the hard-won laurels of the day were tarnished,
and land and liberty were lost by default! Nor can the rashness of St.
Ruth, his reticence as to his plans, his misunderstanding with
Sarsfield, nor the absence of the latter, justify the want of intrepid
action among those present. This stands unexplained and inexplicable,
nor will the flippant appeal to Providence, whose ways are too
frequently offered as an excuse for human misconduct, answer here. The
want of ammunition at such a moment was, no doubt, of some import, but
the concurrence of events too plainly indicates that Aughrim was won by
the skill of St. Ruth and the gallantry of his troops, and that it was
lost through want of decision in his general officers, at a moment the
most critical in the nation’s history.”
De Ginkel’s army remained in the neighborhood of the field of battle
long enough to give it an opportunity of burying all of the Irish dead,
were it so disposed. The country-people remained away, in terror of
their lives and poor belongings—particularly cattle—until decomposition
had so far advanced as to make the task of sepulture particularly
revolting. And thus it came to pass that nearly all the Irish slain were
left above ground, “exposed to the birds of the air and the beasts of
the field; many dogs frequenting the place afterward, and growing so
fierce by feeding upon man’s flesh that it became dangerous for any
single man to pass that way. And,” continues Story in his narrative so
frequently quoted, “there is a true and remarkable story of a greyhound
[meaning the large, rapacious, and ferocious, Irish Wolf Dog that
existed in those days, although extinct since the last century]
belonging to an Irish officer: the gentleman was killed and stripped in
the battle, whose body the dog remained by night and day, and tho’ he
fed on other corps [es] with the rest of the dogs, yet he would not
allow them, or anything else, to touch that of his master. When all the
corps [es] were consumed, the other dogs departed, but he used to go in
the night to the adjacent villages for food, and presently to return
again to the place where his master’s bones were only then left; and
thus he continued till January following, when one of Colonel Foulk’s
soldiers, being quartered nigh hand, and going that way by chance, the
dog, fearing he came to disturb his master’s bones, flew upon the
soldier, who, being surprised at the suddenness of the thing, unslung
his piece, then upon his back, and killed the poor dog.”
Ireland’s national poet, Thomas Moore, in the beautiful words, set to
that weirdly mournful air: “The Lamentation of Aughrim,” thus pours out
in deathless melody the heart of his unfortunate country:
“Forget not the field where they perished,—
The truest; the last of the brave—
All gone and the bright hopes we cherished
Gone with them and sunk in the grave.
“Oh, could we from death but recover
Those hearts as they bounded before,
In the face of high heaven to fight over
That combat for freedom once more.
“Could the chain for a moment be riven
Which Tyranny flung round us then—
No, ’tis not in man, nor in heaven,
To let Tyranny bind it again!
“But ’tis past; and tho’ blazoned in story
The name of our victor may be;
Accurst is the march of that glory
Which treads on the hearts of the free!
“Far dearer the grave, or the prison,
Illumed by one patriot name,
Than the trophies of all who have risen
On liberty’s ruin to fame!”
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BOOK VI
TREATING OF THE PERIOD FROM THE SECOND SIEGE OF LIMERICK, IN 1691, TO
THE DISSOLUTION OF THE EXILED FRANCO-IRISH BRIGADE A CENTURY LATER
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER I
Second Siege of Limerick—Terrific Bombardment—The English, Aided by
Treachery, Cross the Shannon—Massacre of Thomond Bridge
THE decisive battle having been lost by Ireland, what followed in this
campaign became almost inevitable. Louis XIV and his ministers were
criminally culpable in encouraging the Irish people to resistance when
they did not mean to give them effective aid. Ireland had proved, in
breach and field, that she needed no foreign troops to do her fighting,
but she badly needed arms, ammunition, quartermaster’s supplies, and a
money-chest. Perhaps the egotism of the French monarch and his advisers
led them to underrate the importance of Ireland as a factor in the
affairs of Europe, and the slanders of the perfidious Lauzun and his
lieutenants had poisoned the mind of the ruler of France in regard to
Irish valor. James, in his panic flight, had also carried with him to
the French court a most unfavorable impression, and some Irish
writers—among them Mr. Boyle—aver that Louis bitterly reproached the
fallen king for his ignominious abandonment of Ireland after the affair
of the Boyne. James, however, managed to conciliate his haughty cousin,
and the latter made him still more promises of effective assistance.
De Ginkel, whose immediate objective, as before the great battle, was
Galway, broke up his camp at Aughrim and marched to Loughrea, on July
16. He reached Athenry the following day, and Oranmore on the 18th. At
this point he learned that Lord Dillon was Governor of Galway town, and
that the French general, D’Usson, commanded the garrison. Baal Dearg
O’Donnell, with what remained of his irregular force, hovered about the
city, but failed to throw himself into it. It has been stated, on
seemingly good authority, that the Irish officials within the town
distrusted him, as, indeed, was not unreasonable, seeing that Chaplain
Story tells us that “his [O’Donnell’s] design was to keep amongst the
mountains till he could make terms for himself, upon which account he
writ [wrote] the general, De Ginkel, before our army removed from
Galway.” He followed up this treason in a practical manner, and, some
months later on, as the Chaplain circumstantially informs us, the
adventurer entered the service of William in the Continental wars, and
also received a pension of £500 per annum, for life, from the English
treasury. The same consideration was subsequently given to Brigadier
Henry Luttrell, on whom popular Irish tradition has fixed the odium of
having “sold the pass at Aughrim.” It is certain that twenty-six years
afterward, A.D. 1717, this treacherous “general of the Irish horse” was
shot to death in a sedan chair, while being carried through the streets
of Dublin. No doubt remains among the Irish people that the deed was
done in reprisal for Luttrell’s villanous conduct in the campaign of
1691, and some have gone so far as to charge him with having been the
officer who ordered the Irish cavalry off the field immediately after
the death of St. Ruth on Kilcommodan Hill.
Galway, before which De Ginkel appeared on the 19th, after a respectable
show of resistance, surrendered with the honors of war, and sundry
liberal civil provisions, on the 22d. On the 26th it was evacuated by
the Irish garrison, which marched to Limerick. This capitulation
virtually ended Irish resistance in Connaught, except for the town of
Sligo, which was stubbornly held by the gallant Sir Teague O’Regan, the
hero of Charlemont, against a strong detachment of the English army,
under Lord Granard, until the following September 16, when he, too,
having done all that a brave commander might, yielded his post with
honor, and was allowed to join the main Irish army in Limerick town. The
adventurer, O’Donnell, assisted the English against Sligo. De Ginkel,
after garrisoning Galway, moved toward Limerick by way of Athenry,
Loughrea, Eyrecourt, Banagher Bridge, Birr, Nenagh, and Caherconlish,
meeting but feeble resistance on his route. He halted at the
last-mentioned place to refresh and reinforce his army, and to provide
himself with a stronger siege train. This he finally brought up to the
number of sixty “great guns,” none of them less than a twelve-pounder,
and about a score of mortars for the throwing of large shells. About
this time, he issued several proclamations, and continued to do so
throughout the subsequent operations, with the design of seducing the
Irish officers and soldiers from their allegiance to a desperate cause.
In this effort he was by no means successful, but several clever Irish
spies passed themselves off as deserters, and gave him plenty of
misinformation regarding the condition of affairs at Limerick. While in
this camp at Caherconlish, the Dutch general’s attention was called to
the cupidity of the sutlers and other camp-followers, who appear to have
been as greedy and conscienceless as their successor of our own times.
The gossipy Chaplain informs us, in this connection, that General Ginkel
“sent out an order that all ale from Dublin and Wicklow should be sold
at 6 pence [12 cents] per quart; all other ale, coming above forty
miles, at 5 pence, and all under forty miles at 4 pence; white bread to
be sold at 3 pence per pound; brown bread at 2 pence; claret at 2
shillings and 6 pence, and Rhenish at 3 shillings [per quart]; brandy at
12 shillings [$2.88] per gallon, etc.; and that no person should presume
to exceed these rates on the penalty of forfeiting all his goods, and
suffering a month’s imprisonment. But they promptly found out a trick
for this,” continues Mr. Story in disgust, “and called _all_ drink that
came to the camp Dublin or Wicklow ale!” This “touch of nature” shows
how little mankind has changed in principle and practice after a lapse
of more than six generations.
De Ginkel appeared in front of Limerick on August 25, and the city was
immediately invested on the south, east, and north. The Clare side,
connected by Thomond Bridge with Englishtown, or King’s Island, still
remained unattacked, as no English force had passed the river. The Irish
horse and dragoons were all quartered on that side, while the infantry
garrisoned the threatened portions of the city.
Notwithstanding the imposing array of Ginkel’s superb army and powerful
siege equipment as they approached the walls of their city, neither the
people nor the garrison of Limerick seem to have been much concerned by
the spectacle. The walls were much stronger than they had been in the
previous siege, and the soldiers were seasoned to hardship and peril.
D’Usson, the French lieutenant-general, was in chief command, with his
fellow-countryman, general, the Chevalier De Tessé, second, and
Sarsfield, it appears from the order of signature in the subsequent
treaty, was third in rank, with the Scotch general, Wauchop, fourth. The
Duke of Tyrconnel had died of apoplexy—Story hints at poison
administered in wine—after dining heartily with the French generals and
other officers on August 14. The misfortunes of his country, in the
opinion of many writers, had more to do with hastening the end than any
other cause. His remains lie under a nameless flagstone in the aisle of
St. Mauchin’s church in Limerick, but we are informed not even Irish
tradition, usually so minute, can point out the exact place of
sepulture. The powerful English batteries, raking the town on three
sides, poured in torrents of bombs and red-hot cannon balls, day and
night, and the place caught fire at several points. Most of the women
and children had to be removed to the cavalry camp on the Clare bank,
and the casualties among the defenders were numerous. The Irish replied
spiritedly, but they were very deficient in weight of metal, and, also,
because of the comparative shortness of supply, had to be sparing of
their ammunition, whereas the English were always sure of a fresh supply
both from the interior and their men-of-war on the adjacent coasts. The
Chaplain, under date of September 8, 1691, relates how the “new
batteries were all ready—one to the left with ten field-pieces to shoot
red-hot ball; another to the right of 25 guns, all 24 and 18-pounders;
and in the centre were placed 8 mortars, from 18¾ to 10½ inches in
diameter; these stood all together on the northeast of the town, nigh
the island; then there were 8 guns of 12-pound ball each, planted at
Mackay’s fort, and some also toward the river on the southwest, where
the Danes were posted. These fell to work all the time and put the Irish
into such a fright [more partisan venom] that a great many of them
wished themselves at another place, having never heard such a noise
before, nor I hope never shall in that kingdom.”
Three days later the reverend chronicler tells us that “the breach was
widened at least forty paces, and, floats being prepared, there were
great debates amongst the chief officers whether it should be attempted
by storm.... Though indeed we could not do the enemy a greater pleasure,
nor ourselves a greater prejudice, in all probability, than in seeking
to carry the town by a breach, before those within [the Irish, to wit]
were more humbled, either by sword or sickness.” No finer tribute than
this, coming from such a source, could be paid to Irish constancy and
courage, after such treasons and disasters as marked the capture of
Athlone and the loss of Aughrim.
Thoroughly convinced that he could not hope to carry Limerick by direct
assault, De Ginkel now resolved to test the never-failing weapon of
treachery and surprise on this stubborn foe. He had information that
there was a strong peace-at-any-price party within the town, and that,
could he but land a strong force on the Clare bank of the Shannon, the
city would speedily capitulate. He, therefore, determined to construct,
in all secrecy, a pontoon bridge across the river above St. Thomas
Island, near a place called Annaghbeg, where Brigadier Robert Clifford
commanded a strong body of Irish dragoons and infantry, quite
sufficient, if only properly directed, to foil any hostile movement. On
the night of the 15th of September, the bridge was laid—the most
favorable point having been revealed by some fishermen, who, the
historian O’Callaghan relates, were bribed to betray their country. It
is much more probable, however, that they were forced to turn traitors
under threat of death. However, on the morning of the 16th the bridge
was completed and a formidable English force of horse and foot, under
Generals Talmash and Scravenmore, succeeded in crossing. Apparently
taken by surprise—although distinctly charged with treason by numerous
Irish historians—General Clifford, at this important juncture, displayed
neither zeal, courage, nor capacity. He brought his men up in a state of
unreadiness and in detachments, instead of in a solid formation, and, of
course, was easily put to rout. To show the criminal carelessness, to
say no worse, of this commander, his cavalry horses were “out at grass”
two miles from his camp, when the English attack was made! Such
“generalship” would have demoralized an army of Spartans, and the Irish
rank and file can hardly be blamed if, on this occasion, they did not
manifest their customary intrepidity. Europe never beheld in the field a
braver body of men than King James’s Irish army, and the world never
furnished a more incompetent staff of general officers, whether French
or Irish, than that which commanded and, finally, wrecked it. We wish to
except St. Ruth and Sarsfield and Boisseleau, who were able and gallant
soldiers, thoroughly devoted to the cause in which they had embarked. De
Ginkel’s bold movement resulted in the partial turning of Thomond
Bridge—the key to King’s Island—and the capture of St. Thomas Island,
another important Irish post above the city. He, therefore, felt
justified in issuing, that same day, a proclamation inviting the
garrison of Limerick to surrender on honorable conditions, but the
Irish, although now under a veritable rain of fire and iron from every
point of the compass, paid no heed to it, whereat the phlegmatic, but
skilful, Dutch strategist greatly marveled.
But, although the river had been successfully passed, Ginkel was so
discouraged by the firm countenance of the Irish garrison that he called
a Council of War on the 17th, when it was, at first, decided to cross
the whole English army into Clare, destroy the Irish resources of food
and forage in that county, and then convert the siege into a blockade
that might last indefinitely. Reflection, however, changed this
decision. Winter was approaching, and the wet Irish winter meant
wholesale death to the soft and pampered English and their foreign
allies. Ginkel, then, resolved to again try his favorite manœuvre—a
turning movement. Accordingly, on September 22, at the head of the
greater portion of the allied army, he crossed the pontoon bridge and,
commanding in person, made a sudden and tremendous attack on the small
fort which commanded Thomond Bridge, and was garrisoned by about 800
Irish soldiers. The English cannon soon covered this fort with red-hot
projectiles. Everything inflammable in the soldiers’ quarters caught
fire, and the desperate garrison made a sortie with the object of
crossing into King’s Island by Thomond Bridge. The connection was by
means of a draw. A little over a hundred of the Irish had crossed in
safety, when the French major in command at the drawbridge, fearing, it
is said, that the English might enter the town with the fugitives,
caused it suddenly to be raised. The men behind were not able to see
what had happened, and the foremost ranks that stood on the western
abutment were forced over the gulf and nearly all perished in the river.
The others put up white handkerchiefs in token of surrender, but the
savage victors showed no mercy. Story, who saw the whole sickening
butchery, paints the scene in ghastly fashion thus: “Before the killing
was over, they [the Irish] were laid in heaps upon the bridge, higher
than the ledges of it.” Out of 800 men, only the five score and odd that
gained the drawbridge in time, and the few strong ones who swam the
river, escaped. It, on a smaller scale, resembled the disaster at
Leipsic, in 1813, when the French Major of Engineers, Montfort, caused
the bridge over the Elster to be blown up, while yet the corps of
MacDonald and Poniatowski, which formed Napoleon’s rearguard, were on
the hostile bank of the river. Thus, through the stupidity, or panic, of
a subordinate officer, the emperor lost the Polish marshal, who was one
of his best generals, and 20,000 of his choicest troops. A fool or
coward commanding at a bridge over which an army is compelled to
retreat, is more deadly to his friends than all the bullets and sabres
of the enemy.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER II
Capitulation of Limerick—Terms of the Famous “Violated Treaty”—Cork
Harbor Tragedy
THE Irish cavalry, which would seem to have been inefficiently commanded
by General Sheldon during the late operations, and now completely
outnumbered, fell back to Six-Mile-Bridge in Clare, dejected and almost
hopeless. The men had lost faith in their commanders, and that meant a
speedy end of effective resistance. When it became known in Limerick
that the enemy had been successful beyond the river, the peace party
began again to clamor loudly for a capitulation. A party eager for
surrender within a beleaguered city is the very best ally a besieging
force can have. In this case, their treason or pusillanimity proved the
destruction of their country. De Ginkel had positive information that a
great French fleet, under a renowned admiral, Count Chateau-Renaud, was
fitting out at Brest for the relief of Limerick. Therefore he was ready
to promise almost anything in order to gain the timely surrender of the
place, for he knew that if the French once landed in force, all the
fruits of his recent victories would be irretrievably spoiled. The
buoyant Irish would rally again more numerously than ever, better
drilled, equipped, and thoroughly inured to war. His good opinion of
their fighting qualities was unequivocally shown in his eagerness to
enlist them as soldiers under the banner of King William. He felt
morally certain that Sarsfield and the other chief Irish officers were
entirely ignorant of the preparations going on in France. They imagined
themselves absolutely deserted by that power. Irish tradition credits
General Sarsfield with a disposition to hold out to the last, while it
is believed, on the same rather unreliable authority, that the French
generals, D’Usson and De Tessé, favored an honorable and immediate
surrender. It is certain that most of the Anglo-Irish officers were
tired of the war and desired to have an end of it on any reasonable
terms. Ginkel was still over the river in Clare, when, on the evening of
September 23, the Irish drums, from several points in the town, beat a
parley. The siege had lasted almost a month, and the English officers
were delighted at the near prospect of peace. They received Sarsfield,
Wauchop, and their escort, under a flag of truce, with military
courtesy, and directed them where to find the general-in-chief. The
Irish officers crossed the Shannon in a rowboat, and found Ginkel in his
camp by Thomond Bridge. He received them favorably, and a temporary
cessation of hostilities was agreed upon. Next morning, it was decided
to extend it three days. Then it was determined that the Irish officers
and commands separated from the Limerick garrison should be communicated
with, and that all, if terms were agreed upon, would surrender
simultaneously. Meanwhile the English and Irish officers exchanged
courtesies and frequently dined together, although the French generals
held aloof, for some reason that has never been satisfactorily
explained.
But now the ultra peace party having, in a measure, the upper hand,
sought to commit the Irish army to a dishonorable and ungrateful
policy—the abandonment of France, which, with all its faults, was
Ireland’s sole ally. Hostages were exchanged by the two armies, those
for England being Lord Cutts, Sir David Collier, Colonel Tiffin, and
Colonel Piper; and for Ireland Lords Westmeath, Iveagh (whose entire
regiment afterward passed over to William), Trimelstown, and Louth.
Following the arrival of the latter in the English camp came the peace
party’s proposals, which stipulated for the freedom of Catholic worship
and the maintenance of civil rights, and then basely proposed that “the
Irish army be kept on foot, paid, et cetera, the same as the rest of
their majesties’ forces, in case they were willing to serve their
majesties against France or any other enemy.”
The Irish army, nobly chivalrous and patriotic, with the usual base
exceptions to be found in every considerable body of men, was not
willing “to serve their majesties” as intimated, as will be seen further
along. Ginkel, who was thoroughly coached by the “royal commissioners”
from Dublin, who were rarely absent from his camp, rejected the
Palesmen’s propositions, chiefly because of the Catholic claims put
forward in them. There is no evidence whatever that Sarsfield
countenanced the policy attempted to be carried out by this contemptible
faction.
On the 28th all the parties in Limerick town came to an agreement in
regard to what they would propose to and accept from De Ginkel. The
latter, who was quite a diplomatic as well as military “bluffer,” began
openly to prepare his batteries for a renewal of the bombardment—the
three days’ cessation having nearly come to an end. But, on the day
stated, there came to him, from out of Limerick, Generals Sarsfield
(Lord Lucan), Wauchop, the Catholic Primate, Baron Purcell, the
Archbishop of Cashel, Sir Garret Dillon, Sir Theobald (“Toby”) Butler,
and Colonel Brown, “the three last counselors-at-law, with several other
officers and commissioners.” Baron De Ginkel summoned all of his chief
generals to meet them, and “after a long debate, articles were agreed
on, not only for the town of Limerick, but for all the other forts and
castles in the kingdom, then in the enemies’ possession.” In compliance
with the wish of the Irish delegation, De Ginkel agreed to summon the
Lords Justices from Dublin to ratify the treaty. These functionaries,
authoritatively representing King William and Queen Mary, soon arrived
at the camp and signed the instrument in due form. The French generals,
although they did not accompany the Irish commissioners on their visit
to Ginkel, signed the terms of capitulation with the rest, the names
appearing in the following order: D’Usson, Le Chevalier de Tessé, Latour
Monfort, Mark Talbot, Lucan (Sarsfield), Jo Wauchop, Galmoy, M. Purcell.
For England there signed Lords Justices Charles Porter and Thomas
Conyngsby, Baron De Ginkel, and Generals Scravenmore, Mackay, and
Talmash.
The Treaty of Limerick was thus consummated on October 3, 1691, with all
the required forms and ceremonies, so that no loophole of informality
was left for either party to this international compact. In the treaty
there were 29 military and 13 civil articles. As they were quite
lengthy, we will confine ourselves to a general summary, thus:
All the adherents of King James in Ireland were given permission to go
beyond the seas to any country they might choose to live in, except
England and Scotland. Volunteers and rapparees were included in this
provision, as well as the officers and soldiers of the Irish regular
army. These voluntary exiles were allowed to depart from Ireland in
“whole bodies, companies, or parties;” and it was provided that, if
plundered by the way, the English Government would grant compensation
for such losses as they might sustain. It was agreed that fifty ships of
200 tons burden each should be provided for their transportation, and
twenty of the same tonnage in addition, if it should be found necessary,
and that “said ships should be furnished with forage for horses and all
necessary provisions to subsist the officers, troopers, dragoons, and
[foot] soldiers, and all other persons [meaning families and followers]
that are shipped to be transported into France.” In addition, two
men-of-war were placed at the disposal of the principal officers for the
voyage, and suitable provision was made for the safe return of all
vessels when their mission of transportation was accomplished. The
thrifty De Ginkel further stipulated that the provisions supplied to the
military exiles should be paid for by their government as soon as the
Irish troops were landed on French soil. Article XXV provided: “That it
shall be lawful for the said garrison [of Limerick] to march out at
once, or at different times, as they can be embarked, with arms,
baggage, drums beating, match lighted at both ends, bullet in mouth,
colors flying, six brass guns, such as the besieged shall choose, two
mortar pieces, and half the ammunition that is now in the magazines of
the said place.” This provision, which, as can be seen, included the
full “honors of war,” was also extended to the other capitulated Irish
garrisons. Another significant provision was that all Irish officers and
soldiers who so desired could join the army of King William, retaining
the rank and pay they enjoyed in the service of King James.
Of the civil articles, the first read as follows: “The Roman Catholics
of this kingdom shall enjoy such privileges in the exercise of their
religion as are consistent with the laws of Ireland, or as they did
enjoy in the reign of King Charles II; and their Majesties, as soon as
their affairs will permit them to summon a Parliament in this kingdom,
will endeavor to procure the said Roman Catholics such further security
in that particular as may preserve them from disturbance upon the
account of their said religion.”
The second article guaranteed protection in the possession of their
estates and the free pursuit of their several professions, trades, and
callings to all who had served King James, the same as under his own
régime, on the taking of the subjoined oath of allegiance prescribed by
statute: “I —— do solemnly promise and swear that I will be faithful and
bear true allegiance to their Majesties, King William and Queen Mary: so
help me God.” A subsequent article provided that “the oath to be
administered to such Roman Catholics as submit to their Majesties’
government shall be the oath aforesaid and no other”—thus doing away, as
the Irish honestly supposed, with the odious penal “Test oaths,” which
were an outrage on Catholic belief and a glaring insult to the Catholics
of the whole world.
The third article extended the benefit of the first and second articles
to Irish merchants “beyond the seas” who had not borne arms since the
proclamation issued by William and Mary in the preceding February, but
they were required to return to Ireland within eight months.
Article IV granted like immunity to Irish officers in foreign lands,
absent in pursuance of their military duties, and naming, specially,
Colonel Simon Luttrell (the loyal brother of the traitor, Henry),
Colonel Rowland White, Colonel Maurice Eustace, of Gormanstown, and
Major Cheviers (Chevers) of Maystown, “commonly called Mount Leinster.”
Article V provided that all persons comprised in the second and third
articles should have general pardon for all “attainders, outlawries,
treasons (?), misprisions of treasons, præmunires, felonies, trespasses,
and other crimes and misdemeanors whatsoever, committed by them, or any
of them since the beginning of the reign of James II; and if any of them
are attainted by Parliament, the Lords Justices and the General will use
their best endeavors to get the same repealed by Parliament, and the
outlawries to be reversed gratis, all but writing-clerk’s fees.”
Article VI provided general immunity to both parties for debts or
disturbances arising out of the late war. This provision applied also to
rates and rents.
Article VII provided that “every nobleman and gentleman comprised in the
second and third articles shall have liberty to ride with a sword and
case of pistols, if they [_sic_] think fit, and keep a gun in their
houses for the defence of the same, or for fowling.”
The eighth article granted leave to the inhabitants, or residents, of
Limerick, and other Irish garrisons, to remove their goods and chattels,
if so disposed, without interference, search, or the payment of duties,
and they were privileged to remain in their lodgings for six weeks.
The tenth article declared that “no person, or persons, who shall at any
time hereafter break these articles, or any of them, shall thereby make
or cause any other person or persons to forfeit or lose the benefit of
the same.”
Article XII read thus: “The Lords Justices and the General do undertake
that their Majesties will ratify these articles within the space of
three months, or sooner, and use their utmost endeavors that the same
shall be ratified and confirmed in the Parliament.”
The thirteenth, and final, article made provision for the protection
from financial loss of Colonel John Browne, commissary-general of the
Irish army, who, during the war, had seized the property of certain
Williamites for the public use, charging the debt, pro rata, on the
Catholic estates secured to their owners under the treaty; and requiring
General (Lord Lucan) to certify the account with Colonel Browne within
21 days.
It will be remembered, in examining the religious provisions of the
Treaty of Limerick, that Catholic worship in the reign of Charles II was
permitted by connivance rather than by law. Many of the worst of the
penal laws, although in abeyance, might be revived at any time by law
officers tyrannically disposed toward the Catholics. The latter were
once again to discover that it is one thing to obtain a favorable treaty
from a formidable enemy, while they have arms in their hands and a still
inviolate fortress at their backs, but quite a different matter to make
the foe live up to the provisions of the treaty when the favorable
conditions for the capitulators have passed away. But of this hereafter.
Not many days subsequent to the surrender of Limerick, Count
Chateau-Renaud, with a powerful French fleet, having on board arms,
cannon, and all kinds of military supplies, together with a veteran
contingent of 3,000 men and 200 officers, cast anchor in Dingle Bay, on
the southern coast, without once coming in contact with the naval might
of England. Were the Irish a dishonorable people, they could have then,
with great advantage, repudiated the treaty, but the national honor was
irrevocably plighted, and, consequently, there was an end of the
struggle. Many honest Irish writers have blamed the precipitancy of
Sarsfield and the other leaders in signing the articles of capitulation,
and not without good cause. Lord Lucan should have court-martialed and
shot the leaders of the peace-at-any-price traitors when they first
showed their hands. Hugh O’Neill, Red Hugh O’Donnell, or Owen Roe
O’Neill would have done so without hesitation, but, then, Sarsfield was
only half a Celt, and had an unfortunate tenderness for his fellows of
the Pale. It is regrettable that none of the French generals has left a
clear statement of the events that led to the premature surrender of the
town; but we know that King Louis, who subsequently honored Sarsfield,
held D’Usson responsible, for Story tells us, on page 280 of his
“Continuation of the History of the Wars in Ireland,” that “the French
king [Louis XIV] was so far from thanking him for it [the capitulation]
that, after some public indignities, he sent him to the Bastile.”
Viewed in the light of after events, the Treaty of Limerick, from the
Irish standpoint, looks like a huge game of confidence, and is an
ineradicable blot on English military and diplomatic honor. The civil
articles were ignored, or trampled under foot, almost immediately. The
military articles were better observed, except that provision which
related to transportation to France, which was grossly violated and led
to the drowning in Cork Harbor of a number of the wives of the Irish
soldiery, who, unable to find room on board, owing to De Ginkel’s
alleged faithlessness, or the perfidy of his lieutenants, clung to the
ropes, when the ships set sail, and were dragged beneath the waves to
their death.
Mitchel, in his able “History of Ireland,” page 3, writing of this
painful incident, defends Sarsfield against an imputation cast upon that
officer by Lord Macaulay, in his brilliant but unreliable “History of
England,” thus: “As to General Sarsfield’s proclamation to the men ‘that
they should be permitted to carry their wives and families to France,’
he made the statement on the faith of the First and several succeeding
articles of the treaty, not yet being aware of any design to violate it.
But this is not all: The historian who could not let the hero go into
his sorrowful exile without seeking to plunge his venomous sting into
his reputation, had before him the ‘Life of King William,’ by Harris,
and also Curry’s ‘Historical Review of the Civil Wars,’ wherein he must
have seen that the Lords Justices and General Ginkel are charged with
endeavoring to defeat the execution of the First Article. For, says
Harris, ‘as great numbers of the officers and soldiers had resolved to
enter into the service of France, and to carry their families with them,
Ginkel would not suffer their wives and children to be shipped off with
the men, not doubting that by detaining the former he would have
prevented many of the latter from going into that service. This, I say,
was confessedly an infringement of the articles.’
“To this we may add,” continues Mitchel, “that no Irish officer or
soldier in France attributed the cruel parting at Cork to any fault of
Sarsfield, but always and only to a breach of the Treaty of Limerick.
And if he had deluded them in the manner represented by the English
historian, they would not have followed him as enthusiastically [as they
afterward did] on the fields of Steinkirk and Landen.”
Mr. Mitchel did Lord Macaulay an unintentional injustice in attributing
the original charge against Sarsfield to him. It originated with
Chaplain Story, and can be found on pages 291-293 of his Continuation,
in these words: “Those [of the Irish] who were now embarking had not
much better usage on this side of the water [he had alluded to the
alleged ill-treatment of the first contingent on its arrival in France],
for a great many of them, having wives and children, they made what
shift they could to desert, rather than leave their families behind to
starve, which my Lord Lucan and Major-General Wauchop perceiving, they
publish a declaration that as many of the Irish as had a mind to’t
should have liberty to transport their families along with themselves.
And, accordingly, a vast rabble of all sorts were brought to the
water-side, when the major-general [Wauchop], pretending to ship the
soldiers in order, according to their lists, they first carried all the
men on board; and many of the women, at the second return of the boats
for the officers, catching hold to be carried on board, were dragged
off, and, through fearfulness, losing their hold, were drowned; but
others who held faster had their fingers cut off, and so perished in
sight of their husbands or relatives, tho’ those of them that did get
over [to France], would make but a sad figure, if they were admitted to
go to the late queen’s court at St. Germain.... Lord Lucan finding he
had ships enough for all the Irish that were likely to go with him, the
number that went before and these shipped at this time, being, according
to the best computation, 12,000 of all sorts [a palpable underestimate],
he signs the following releasement:
“‘Whereas, by the Articles of Limerick, Lieutenant-General
Ginkel, commander-in-chief of the English army, did engage
himself to furnish 10,000 tons of shipping for the transporting
of such of the Irish forces to France as were willing to go
thither; and to facilitate their passage to add 4,000 tons more
in case the French fleet did not come to this kingdom to take
off some of these forces; and whereas the French fleet has been
upon the coast and carried away some of the said forces, and the
lieutenant-general has provided ships for as many of the rest as
are willing to go as aforesaid, I do hereby declare that the
said lieutenant-general is released from any obligation he lay
under from the said articles, to provide vessels for that
purpose, and do quit and renounce all farther claim and
pretension on this account, etc. Witness my hand this 8th day of
December, 1691.
“‘LUCAN.
“‘_Witnesses_:
MARK TALBOT,
F. H. DE LA FOREST, SUSANNEL.’”
From the same authority we learn that “on December 22, my Lord Lucan,
and the rest of the Irish great officers, went on board the transport
ships [bound for France], leaving hostages at Cork for the return of the
said ships.”
It is impossible to reconcile the circumstantial statement of the
Williamite historian, Harris, in regard to Ginkel’s faithlessness, with
the official document, signed by Sarsfield, as Earl of Lucan, which
practically exonerates the Dutch general. Would Sarsfield have signed
such a release if Ginkel had been guilty of the treachery ascribed to
him by Harris? Story’s book was published a year before Lord Lucan fell
in Flanders, and must have been read by that general and the officers
who served with him at Limerick. One thing about the question is
certain—if Sarsfield ever issued the proclamation, in conjunction with
General Wauchop, ascribed to him by the English chaplain, he must have
been grossly deceived by somebody. All writers of his own times, and of
after times, describe Sarsfield as the soul of honor, but some have
asserted that he was rather easy-going in business affairs, and a little
too ready to sign any document placed before him.
We have been unable to find any contemporary confirmation of the
romantic Irish tradition that the Treaty of Limerick was signed on the
historic bowlder, now preserved by pedestal and railing near Thomond
Bridge, on the Clare bank of the Shannon. But tradition is often more
accurate than written history. Therefore, the Irish people having
accepted the story through more than six generations, we accept with
them the legend of “the Treaty Stone.”
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER III
The Irish Troops, as a Majority, Enter the French Service—King James
Receives Them Cordially—His Testimony of Their Devotion and Courage
IMMEDIATELY after the signing of the treaty, it was fixed upon between
De Ginkel and Sarsfield that, on October 6, the Irish infantry would
march out of the King’s Island by Thomond Bridge, into the County Clare,
and there and then make a choice of service with England or France. It
was arranged that those who chose the former service were to turn to the
left at a certain point, where an English flag was planted, while those
who decided for France were to march straight onward to a more distant
point marked by the French standard. They were, in all, about 15,000
men, and, quite naturally, the respective leaders awaited the result
with burning anxiety. They were not left long in doubt. The first body
to march was the Royal Irish regiment of Foot Guards, fourteen hundred
strong, of which Mr. Story remarks wofully, it “seemed to go all entire
[for France] except seven men, which the general was much concerned at,
then my Lord Iveagh’s regiment of Ulster Irish came off entire to our
side.” In all a little over 1,000 officers and men ranged themselves
under the flag of King William, while nearly 13,000 mustered under the
Fleur-de-Lis. A few days afterward, the Irish horse, now much reduced,
made choice in the same fashion, and with about the same proportionate
result. The same privilege was granted the outlying bodies of King
James’s army, and all decided for France in the proportion of about ten
to one. Of the Irish general officers, more or less under the suspicion
of the army since the disasters of Aughrim and Annaghbeg, we find
Generals Luttrell and Clifford, Baron Purcell, “and a great many more of
the Irish nobility and gentry going toward Dublin,” which means that
they made terms with the enemy.
It was well along in the month of December before the Irish soldiers who
had volunteered to go beyond the seas were entirely transported to
France. The foot, for the most part, sailed from Limerick, many of them
in the returning fleet of Chateau-Renaud, and the cavalry from Cork,
where occurred the tragical event we have already related. In
all—including the capitulated troops from every Irish garrison—20,000
men from Ireland landed in the French ports, and these, together with
Mountcashel’s Brigade, which had been in the French service since before
the battle of the Boyne, made up a force of 25,000 veterans, who were
mostly in the pay of King Louis, but all of whom were sworn to support
King James in any effort he might put forth to recover his crown.
As much injustice has been done the memory of King James II by Irish
writers, who have taken too much for granted on traditional “hearsay,”
we deem it only fair to place before the readers of this history the
sentiments of the unfortunate monarch toward his Irish defenders. We
quote from his Memoirs, Vol. II, pp. 465-467: “Thus was Ireland [he
alluded to the fall of Limerick], after an obstinate resistance in three
years’ campaigns, by the power and riches of England, and the revolt of
almost all its [Ireland’s] own Protestant subjects torn from its natural
sovereign, who, tho’ he was divested of the country, was not wholly
deprived of the people, for the greatest part of those who were then in
arms for the defence of his right, not content with the service already
rendered, got leave [as was said] to come and lose their lives, after
having lost their estates, in defence of his title, and brought by that
means such a body of men into France as by their generous comportment in
accepting the pay of the country [much less than British or Irish pay]
instead of that which is usually allowed there [in France] to strangers
and their inimitable valor and service during the whole course of the
war, might justly make their prince pass for an ally, rather than a
pensioner, or burden, to his Most Christian Majesty, whose pay, indeed,
they received, but acted by the king’s, their master’s, commission,
according to the common method of other auxiliary troops. As soon as the
king [James] heard of their arrival [in France] he writ to the commander
[General Sheldon, who went with the first contingent] to assure him how
well he was satisfied with the behavior and conduct of the officers, and
the valor and fidelity of the soldiers, and how sensible he should ever
be of their service, which he would not fail to reward when it should
please God to put him in a capacity of doing it.”
Following is the full text of the letter addressed to the Irish troops
through their general by King James, as given in Story’s Continuation,
page 289:
“JAMES REX.
“Having been informed of the capitulation and surrender of
Limerick, and the other places which remained to us in our
Kingdom of Ireland, and of the necessities which forced the
Lords Justices and general officers of our forces thereunto: we
will not defer to let you know, and the rest of the officers
that came along with you, that we are extremely satisfied with
your and their conduct, and of the valor of the soldiers during
the siege, but most particularly of your and their declaration
and resolution to come and serve where we are. And we assure
you, and order you to assure both officers and soldiers that are
come along with you, that we shall never forget this act of
loyalty, nor fail, when in a capacity to give them, above
others, particular marks of our favor. In the meantime, you are
to inform them that they are to serve under our command, and by
our commissions; and if we find that a considerable number [of
them] is come with the fleet, it will induce us to go personally
to see them, and regiment them: Our brother, the King of France,
hath already given orders to clothe them and furnish them with
all necessaries, and to give them quarters of refreshment. So we
bid you heartily farewell.
“Given at our Court at St. Germain the 27th of November [Dec.
7], 1691.”
In pursuance of his promise, King James made two fatiguing trips from
St. Germain to Bretagne and return, regimented the gallant exiles at
Vannes, Brest, and other points, and in every possible way showed his
marked appreciation of their devotion. He was accompanied by his son,
the Duke of Berwick.
In accepting French pay, the Irish soldiery exposed themselves almost to
penury, and their officers submitted to be reduced in rank, almost
without a murmur. Major-generals became colonels; colonels, captains;
captains, lieutenants, and many of the latter sergeants. This was
absolutely necessary, as there was room for only a certain number in the
French establishment. Many reduced officers served also as volunteers,
without pay of any kind, waiting patiently for death or promotion. The
total amount of property sacrificed by these brave men in the Jacobite
cause was 1,060,792 acres, and this new confiscation placed fully
seven-eighths of the soil of Ireland in the hands of the supporters of
the English interest.
William and Mary formally ratified the Articles of the Treaty of
Limerick within the specified three months, but the English Parliament,
influenced by motives of greed and bigotry, shamefully refused to
acquiesce, and as William and Mary did not endanger their crown by
offering a vigorous opposition, the civil articles of Limerick were,
from that moment, a dead letter. Then redescended on Ireland “the long,
black night of the penal laws,” and we gladly turn from it, for a
period, to follow the brilliant but bloody fortunes of the Irish Brigade
in the service of France.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER IV
Early Exploits of the Irish Brigade in the Service of France—At Landen,
Cremona, and Blenheim—Tribute Paid it by an English Historian
IN the preceding chapter we indicated that we would deal with the
history of the Irish brigades in the French service, from 1692 to 1792,
before touching on the terrible penal period in Ireland. Their services
have won a fame so world-wide that no history of Europe is complete that
omits them from its pages. They were prominently engaged in the reign of
Louis XIV in the War of the League of Augsburg, which was hotly waged by
nearly all Europe against him, from 1688 to the Peace of Ryswick, in
1697; in the War of the Spanish Succession—waged by Louis to support his
grandson, Philip of Anjou, on the Spanish throne—commenced in 1700 and
concluded by the Peace of Utrecht and Treaty of Rastadt in 1713-14, and
under Louis XV in numerous minor wars with Germany, and especially in
the War of the Austrian Succession—France supporting the claim of
Charles VII, of Bavaria, against Maria Theresa, Queen of Hungary,
daughter of the last Hapsburg Emperor of Germany, Charles VI. This war
was begun in 1740. France took sides in 1743, and it was concluded by
the Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle, in 1748. In each of these contests France
and England were on opposite sides—a circumstance favorable to the
bloody development of Irish hatred. After the last of the wars
specified, the Irish Brigade, having no warlike food on which to
flourish, covered with laurels and “worn out with glory,” faded from the
fields of Europe.
In another place we have alluded to the campaign of Savoy, 1690-91, in
which the ill-starred St. Ruth was chief in command. Mountcashel’s,
known as the “Old Brigade,” scaled every Alpine fortress, drove the
vengeful “Vaudois” from their rugged hills, and laid the country under
fire and sword, leaving a reputation for military prowess fresh, at this
day, amid the mountains of Savoy.
In Flanders, in 1692, under Sarsfield and Lord Clare, the “New” Brigade
won great honor at Steinkirk, where Luxemburg routed King William. At
Landen, or Neerwinden, in July, 1693, William held his ground
desperately against the bravest efforts of the French. Luxemburg was in
despair, when the fierce war-cry, “Remember Limerick!” rent the clouds,
and the Royal Irish Foot Guards, led by Colonel John Barrett, shattered
the English centre, broke into Neerwinden, opened a path to victory for
the French Household, and William was hurled into the river Gette, while
the Irish shout of victory shook the plain like a clap of thunder.
Sarsfield, like the brave Barrett, received his death wound, but his
dying gaze beheld the sight he most loved to see—the English flag in
sullen flight.
This same year, in Italy, under Catinat, the “Old” Brigade made its mark
at Marsaglia, where it defeated the Savoyard centre, drew the whole
French army after it, and chased Victor Amadeus almost to the gates of
Turin.
Thenceforth, Lord Mountcashel having died of his wounds, the two
brigades were united as one. The younger Schomberg, son of the hero of
the Boyne, fell before the Irish bayonets at Marsaglia. At the battle of
Montgry, in Spain, fought in 1694, by the French against the Spanish,
the “Brigade,” under Marshal de Noailles, renewed its laurels, and the
Irish charge proved potent in bringing the Spaniards to terms.
This war terminated gloriously for France by the Peace of Ryswick.
The War of the Spanish Succession broke out in 1700. England and Austria
supported the Archduke Charles against Philip of Anjou, the Bourbon
heir. This struggle brought upon the stage the Duke of Marlborough, for
England, and Prince Eugene, of Savoy, for Austria, two of the greatest
generals of modern times. Marshals, the Duke of Berwick, Catinat,
Villeroy, Vendome, Villairs, Boufflers, and Noailles, commanded the
armies of France. In this frightful struggle, the Irish flag always
blazed in the vanguard of victory, in the rearguard of defeat, and the
Irish name became the synonym of valor.
In the winter of 1702, the citadel of Cremona, in northern Italy, was
held for France by Marshal Villeroy, with a strong garrison. The French
gave themselves up to revelry, and the walls were poorly guarded.
Caissioli, an Italian, informed Prince Eugene, the Austrian commander,
of the state of affairs. The traitor agreed to let in a portion of the
enemy by means of a sewer running from outside the walls under his
house. At the same time the French sentinels at the gate of St.
Margaret, badly defended, were to be drawn off, so that Eugene himself,
with a strong body of cuirassiers, might enter and join the other party.
Count Merci was to attack the “Gate of the Po,” defended by an Irish
company, and Prince Vaudemont and Count Freiberg were to support the
attack with the cavalry of their respective commands. The attack was
made at midnight, and the plans were admirably executed. The Austrians
were in possession of the town before the garrison was alarmed. Count
Merci, however, met bad fortune at the “Gate of the Po.” The Irish
guard, chatting over old times by the Shannon, the Barrow, or the Suir,
kept faithful watch. The clatter of hoofs aroused them, as Merci,
attended by several regiments of dragoons, rode up to the gate and
called upon them to surrender. The Irish replied with a sharp volley,
which laid some of the Austrians out in the roadway. The fire aroused
the sleeping Irish regiments of Dillon and Burke, who, in their shirts
only, as they sprang from bivouac, grasped their muskets and hastened to
the rescue. They were met in the square by Eugene’s cuirassiers, who
charged them fiercely. Major O’Mahoney formed his Irish into a square
and let the Austrians have a fusillade. The cuirassiers, urged by Eugene
and Freiberg, dashed madly at the Irish battalions, but, despite the
bravest efforts of this iron cavalry, the Irish actually routed them and
slew their leader, Baron Freiberg. Marshal Villeroy was made prisoner by
Macdonald, an Irishman in the Austrian service, and the French general
second in command shared the same fate. But the Irish still held out,
fighting desperately and losing half their men. This prolonged
resistance alarmed the French, who now, thoroughly aroused, gallantly
seconded their Irish comrades, and, after a terrible carnage of eight
hours’ duration, Prince Eugene, with all that remained of the flower of
the Austrian cavalry, gave up in despair, and was hurled pell-mell
through the gates of St. Margaret, by the victorious garrison. This
exploit of the Irish saved northern Italy to the French monarch—the
Austrians retreated to the Alps. All Europe rang applause. Louis raised
the pay of his Irish troops, and made O’Mahoney a general. He also
decreed that Irishmen, who deserved the honor, should thenceforth be
recognized as French citizens, without undergoing the form of
naturalization.
At the first battle of Blenheim, Bavaria, in 1703, the Irish, under
Marshal Tallard, contributed to that victory. The regiment of Clare,
encountering the Austrian guards, was, for a moment, overpowered, but,
immediately rallying, it counter-charged with such fury that it not
alone recovered its own flag, but gained two colors from the enemy!
The second Blenheim, so disastrous to France, was fought in 1704.
Marlborough commanded the English right, facing Marshal Tallard, and
Eugene commanded the allied left, facing Marshal de Marcin, with whom
was the Irish Brigade. Tallard was dreadfully beaten, and Marcin fared
little better. The French suffered great slaughter, and were badly
worsted. The Brigade, however, would not lose heart. Closing up its
ranks, it made a superb charge on Prince Eugene’s lines, broke through
them—being one of the few corps in the French army that saved their
colors that day—and covered the retreat of France to the Rhine!
The English professor, E. S. Creasy of Cambridge University, writing of
the conduct of the Irish in this great battle, says, on page 318 of his
“Fifteen Decisive Battles of the World”: “The [French] centre was
composed of fourteen battalions of infantry, including the celebrated
Irish Brigade. These were posted in the little hamlet of Oberglau, which
lies somewhat nearer to Lutzingen than to Blenheim.” And, on page 320 of
the same work, the professor continues: “The Prince of Holstein Beck
had, with eleven Hanoverian battalions, passed the Nebel opposite to
Oberglau when he was charged and utterly routed by the Irish Brigade,
which held that village. The Irish drove the Hanoverians back with heavy
slaughter, broke completely through the line of the allies, and nearly
achieved a success as brilliant as that which the same Brigade afterward
gained at Fontenoy. But at Blenheim their ardor in pursuit led them too
far. Marlborough came up in person and dashed in on the exposed flank of
the Brigade with some squadrons of British cavalry. The Irish reeled
back, and, as they strove to regain the heights of Oberglau, their
column was raked through and through by the fire of three battalions of
the allies, which Marlborough had summoned up from the reserve.”
Competent military critics have observed that had the French cavalry
seconded the charge of the Irish infantry, Blenheim would have been a
French victory.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER V
The Irish Brigade in the Campaigns of North Italy and Flanders—Its
Strength at Various Periods—Count Dillon’s Reply to King Louis XV
IN the summer of 1705, the Irish again, at the battle of Cassano, where
they fought under Marshal Vendome, paid their respects to Prince Eugene.
They fought with a bravery that electrified the French and paralyzed the
Austrians. Vendome’s flank was badly annoyed by a hostile battery on the
farther bank of the river Adda. The stream was broad and deep, but two
Irish regiments, under cover of the smoke, swam across it, and, under
the very nose of the great Eugene, captured the Austrian cannon and
turned their fire upon the enemy! This intrepid action decided the day,
and France was once more triumphant, by her Irish arm.
Conspicuous in this brilliant action, as also at Cremona, was the famous
“Regiment of Burke”—the last to yield at Aughrim. Of it the
Scotch-Canadian poet and novelist, William McLennan, has written:
“Would you read your name on honor’s roll?
Look not for royal grant—
It is written in Cassano,
Alcoy and Alicant!
Saragossa, Barcelona,
Wherever dangers lurk,
You will find in the van the blue and the buff
Of the Regiment of Burke!
All Spain and France and Italy
Have echoed to our name—
The burning suns of Africa
Have set our arms aflame!
But to-night we toast the morn that broke and wakened us to fame—
The day we beat Prince Eugene in Cremona!”
Marshal Villeroy, in May, 1706, allowed himself to be cooped up by the
Duke of Marlborough in the village of Ramillies, in Flanders. The French
were utterly overwhelmed, and many thousands of prisoners were taken.
Lord Clare formed the Brigade into a column of attack and broke through
the victorious enemy. The regiment of Clare, in this charge, met the
English regiment of Churchill—now the Third Buffs—full tilt, crushed it
hopelessly, captured its battle-flags, and served a Scotch regiment, in
the Dutch service, which endeavored to support the British, in the same
manner. The Brigade then effected its retreat on Ypres, where, in the
convent of the Benedictine nuns, it hung up the captured colors—“sole
trophies of Ramillies’ fray”—where they have waved, for many a
generation, a fitting memento of the faith and fame of the Irish exiles.
In April, 1707, the Brigade next distinguished itself, at the battle of
Almanza, in Spain, where it fought in the army of Marshal the Duke of
Berwick. The English and Austrians were commanded by Ruvigny—the
Williamite Earl of Galway—who signalized himself at Aughrim. The Brigade
paid him back that day. It charged with a fury never excelled in any
fight. The allies were overthrown, Ruvigny disgraced, and the crown of
Spain was placed on the brow of Philip V.
In defeat, as in victory, the bayonets of the Brigade still opened up
the road to honor. When the French retreated from Oudenarde, in July,
1708, Marlborough felt the Irish steel, as the gallant fellows hung
doggedly behind the retiring French, kept the fierce pursuers at bay,
and enabled Vendome to reorganize his beaten army. The battle of
Malplaquet, fought September, 1709, was the bloodiest of this most
sanguinary war. The French fought with unusual desperation, and the
English ranks, led by Marlborough and seconded by Eugene, were
decimated. It was an unmitigated slaughter. At length Marshal Villairs,
who commanded the French, was wounded and Marshal Boufflers ordered a
retreat. Again the Irish Brigade, which fought with its usual courage
all through that dreadful day, had the honor of forming the French
rearguard, and, although many flags, captured from France, were laid at
the feet of the victor, no Irish color graced the trophies of
Marlborough, who, with the ill-judged battle of Malplaquet, virtually
ended his grand career as a soldier. After that fight the war was feebly
waged—France being completely exhausted—until the Peace of Utrecht and
Treaty of Rastadt, 1713-14, closed the bloody record.
It would be almost impossible to enumerate the sieges and minor actions
in which the Irish Brigade of France participated within the limits of
this history. The facts we have given, and are to give, rest on the
authority of the French war records, and the testimony of English and
other writers, carefully compiled by Matthew O’Conor, in his “Military
History of the Irish People,” and by John C. O’Callaghan in his
invaluable “History of the Irish Brigades”—works which should ensure for
their able and careful authors a literary immortality, and which people
of the Irish race should treasure among their most precious heirlooms.
It would be equally difficult to follow the career of those Irish
soldiers who, at the peace, transferred their swords from France to
Spain, because Louis XV, who succeeded his grandfather while yet a
child, could not employ them all. In Spain, as in France, their swords
were sharpest where the English were their foes, always, it must be
admitted, worthy of their steel.
The subjoined statement of the strength of the Irish forces in the
French service during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries is taken
from the authorities already quoted:
From 1690 to 1692, three regiments of foot; 1692 to 1698, thirteen
regiments of infantry, three independent companies, two companies of
cavalry, and two troops of horse guards; 1698 to 1714, eight regiments
of infantry and one regiment of horse; 1714 to 1744, five regiments of
infantry and one of cavalry; 1744 to 1762, six regiments of infantry and
one of horse; 1762 to 1775, five regiments of infantry; 1775 to 1791—the
period of the dissolution of the Brigade—three regiments of foot.
From the fall of Limerick, in 1691, to the French Revolution, according
to the most reliable estimate, there fell in the field for France, or
otherwise died in her service, 480,000 Irish soldiers. The Brigade was
kept recruited by military emigrants, borne from Ireland—chiefly from
the province of Munster—by French smugglers, under the romantic and
significant title of “Wild Geese”—in poetical allusion to their eastward
flight. By this name the Brigade is best remembered among the Irish
peasantry.
After the death of Louis XIV, the Irish Brigade had comparatively little
wholesale fighting to keep them occupied, until the War of the Austrian
Succession, thirty years later. They made many expeditions to the
smaller states on the Rhenish frontier, with which France was in a
chronic state of war, under the Duke of Berwick. In every combat they
served with honor, and always appeared to best advantage where the hail
of death fell thickest. At times, like most of their countrymen, they
were inclined to wildness, but the first drum-roll or bugle blast found
them ready for the fray. On the march to attack Fort Kehl, in 1733,
Marshal Berwick—who was killed two years afterward at the siege of
Philipsburg—found fault with Dillon’s regiment for some breach of
discipline while en route. He sent the colonel with despatches to Louis
XV, and, among other matters, in a paternal way—for Berwick loved his
Irishmen—called the king’s attention to the indiscreet battalion. The
monarch, on reading the document, turned to the Irish officer, and, in
the hearing of the whole court, petulantly exclaimed: “My Irish troops
cause me more uneasiness than all the rest of my armies!” “Sire,”
immediately rejoined the noble Count Dillon—subsequently killed at
Fontenoy—“all your Majesty’s enemies make precisely the same complaint.”
Louis, pleased with the repartee, smiled, and, like a true Frenchman,
wiped out his previous unkindness by complimenting the courage of the
Brigade.
The great War of the Austrian Succession inaugurated the fateful
campaigns of 1743 and 1745, respectively signalized by the battles of
Dettingen and Fontenoy. The former was a day of dark disaster to France,
and Fontenoy was a mortal blow to British arrogance.
At Dettingen the Earl of Stair commanded the English and Hanoverians,
although George II and his son, Cumberland, were present on the field.
Marshal de Noailles commanded the French, and was badly worsted, after a
desperate engagement. The Irish Brigade, summoned from a long distance,
arrived too late to restore the battle, and met the French army in full
retreat, hotly pursued by the allies. The Brigade, under the orders of
Lord Clare, opened their ranks and allowed the French to retire, and
then, closing steadily up, they uttered their charging cry, and, with
leveled bayonet, checked the fierce pursuers. Thus, once again, the
Irish Brigade formed the French rearguard, as the Fleur-de-Lis retired
from the plains of Germany.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER VI
The Austrian Succession—Campaign of 1745—Magnificent Achievement of the
Irish Brigade at Fontenoy—Prince Louis’s Adieu to the Heroes
THE famous battle of Fontenoy was fought on the soil of Belgium, in the
ancient province of Hainault, within some thirty miles of the memorable
plains of Waterloo, on May 11, new style, 1745. France, as we have
already noted, championed the cause of Charles of Bavaria, who laid
claim to the Austrian throne, while England, Holland, Hanover, and
Austria took the side of Maria Theresa, who eventually, owing to the
unexpected death of Charles, won the fiercely disputed crown.
The French were besieging Tournay with 18,000 men. A corps of 6,000
guarded the bridges over the Scheldt, on the northern bank of which
Marshal Saxe, accompanied by Louis XV and the Dauphin, having with him
45,000 men, including the Irish Brigade, took post, to cover the siege
of Tournay, and prevent the march of the allies, English, Dutch, and
Germans, under the Duke of Cumberland and Prince Waldeck, to its relief.
The duke was a brave soldier, but fierce and cruel as a tiger. History
knows him by the well-won title of “the butcher Cumberland.” His
business was to raise the siege of Tournay and open a road to Paris. He
had under his command 55,000 veteran troops, including the English
Household regiments.
The French lines extended from the village of Rhamecroix, behind De
Barri’s Wood, on the left, to the village of Fontenoy, in the centre,
and from the latter position to the intrenchments of Antoine, on the
right. This line of defence was admirably guarded by “fort and flanking
battery.” The Irish Brigade—composed that day of the infantry regiments
of Clare, Dillon, Bulkeley, Roth, Berwick, and Lally—Fitz-James’s horse
being with the French cavalry in advance—was stationed, in reserve, near
the wood, supported by the brigades of Normandie and De Vassieux.
Prince Waldeck commanded the allied left, in front of Antoine. Brigadier
Ingoldsby commanded the British right, facing the French redoubt at De
Barri’s Wood, while Cumberland, chief in command, was with the allied
centre, confronting Fontenoy.
The battle opened with a furious cannonade, at 5 o’clock in the morning.
After some hours spent in this manner, Ingoldsby attempted to carry the
redoubt, but was ignominiously repulsed, and could not be induced to
renew the attempt. This refusal subsequently led to his dismissal from
the army on a charge of cowardice. Prince Waldeck fared no better at
Antoine, being defeated in two attempts to force the lines. The Duke of
Cumberland, grown impatient because of repeated failures, loaded the
unfortunate commanding officers with imprecations. He took the resolve
of beating the French at any cost by a concentrated attack on their left
centre, through a gap of about 700 yards, which occurred between the
Fontenoy redoubts and the work vainly attacked by Ingoldsby in the edge
of the wood of Barri. For this purpose, he formed his reserves and least
battered active battalions, including the English guards, several
British line regiments, and a large body of picked Hanoverian troops,
into three columns, aggregating 16,000 men, preceded and flanked by
twenty pieces of cannon, all drawn by hand, to avoid the confusion
incident on the killing and wounding of the battery horses. But
subsequent developments compelled the Duke to change the original
formation to one massive, solid oblong wedge, the British on the right
and the Hanoverians on the left. Lord Charles Hay, the boldest soldier
in the allied army, drew his sword and led the attacking column.
Meanwhile, Cumberland renewed the attack all along the line, in order to
cover the advance of his human battering-ram. Thus, the French were
pressed hard at every point, but their batteries and battalions replied
with spirit, and Antoine held out heroically in spite of all the efforts
of Waldeck and his Dutch and Austrian troops against it. These latter
were badly cut up by the fire of a French battery planted beyond the
Scheldt. Up to this period, about the noon hour, everything had gone
favorably for the French.
But the decisive moment had now arrived, and the great Anglo-Hanoverian
column received the command—“Forward, march!” “In front of them, as it
chanced,” says Mitchel, “were four battalions of the French guards, with
two battalions of Swiss on their left and two other French regiments on
their right. The French officers seem to have been greatly surprised
when they saw the English battery taking up position on the summit of
the rising ground. ‘English cannon!’ they cried. ‘Let us go and take
them!’ They mounted the slope with their grenadiers, but were astonished
to find an army on their front. A heavy discharge, both of artillery and
musketry, made them quickly recoil with heavy loss.” On, then, swept the
English column, with free and gallant stride, between Fontenoy and De
Barri’s wood, whose batteries plowed them from flank to flank at every
step. But in the teeth of the artillery, the musketry and the bombshells
which rose, circled and fell among them, killing and wounding scores at
each explosion; charged by the cavalry of the royal household, and
exposed to the iron hail of the French sharpshooters, that
blue-and-scarlet wave of battle rolled proudly against the serried ranks
of France. Falling by the hundred, they finally got beyond the
cross-fire from the redoubts, crossed the slope and penetrated behind
the village of Fontenoy—marching straight on the headquarters of the
king! The column was quickly in the middle of the picked soldiers of
France, tossing them haughtily aside with the ready bayonet, while the
cheers of anticipated victory resounded from their ranks far over the
bloody field. Marshal Saxe, ill, and pale with rage and vexation,
sprang, unarmored, upon his horse, and seemed to think the battle lost,
for he ordered the evacuation of Antoine, in order that the bridges
across the Scheldt might be covered and the king’s escape assured. At
this moment, Count Lally, of the Irish Brigade, rode up to Duke
Richelieu, Saxe’s chief aide, and said to him: “We have still four
field-pieces in reserve—they should batter the head of that column. The
Irish Brigade has not yet been engaged. Order it to fall on the English
flank. Let the whole army second it—let us fall on the English like
foragers!” Richelieu, who, afterward, allowed the suggestion to appear
as if coming from himself, went at once to Saxe and gave him the
substance of Lally’s proposal. The king and Dauphin, who were present,
approved of it. The order to evacuate Antoine was countermanded, and
aides immediately galloped to the rear of the wood of Barri to order up
the Irish Brigade, commanded by Lord Clare, and its supporting
regiments. These brave men, rendered excited and impatient by the noise
of the battle, in which they had not yet been allowed to participate,
received the command with loud demonstrations of joy. Their officers
immediately led them toward the point of danger.
Meanwhile, the English column, marching and firing steadily—that
“infernal, rolling fire,” so characteristic of the British mode of
fighting—kept on its terrible course, and crushed every French
organization that stood in its path. Had the Dutch and Austrians
succeeded in carrying Antoine at this moment, Cumberland must have been
victorious and the French army could not have escaped. Already the
column, still bleeding at every stride, was within sight of the royal
tent. The English officers actually laid their canes along the barrels
of the muskets to make the men fire low. Suddenly, the fire from the
four reserve French cannon opened on the head of the column, and the
foremost files went down. The English guns replied stoutly and the march
was renewed. But now there came an ominous sound from the side of De
Barri’s wood that made Lord Hay, brave and bold as he was, start, pause,
and listen. It swelled above the crash of artillery and the continuous
rattle of musketry. “Nearer, clearer, deadlier than before,” that fierce
hurrah bursts upon the ear of battle! The English have heard that shout
before and remember it to their cost. The crisis of the conflict has
come, and the command, by voice and bugle, “Halt! halt!” rang from front
to rear of the bleeding column. The ranks were dressed hastily, and the
English prepared to meet the advancing enemy with a deadly volley from
their front and long right flank. They looked anxiously in the direction
of the wood and beheld long lines and bristling columns of men in blue
and red—the uniform of the Irish Brigade—coming on at the charging step,
with colors flying and “the generals and colonels on horseback among the
glittering bayonets.” They did not fire a single shot as they came on.
Behind them were masses of men in blue and white. These were the French
supports. Again the British officers laid their canes across the barrels
of the muskets, and, as the Brigade came within close range, a murderous
volley rolled out. Hundreds of the Irish fell, but the survivors,
leaping over the dead, dying, and wounded, never paused for a moment.
They closed the wide gaps in their ranks and advanced at a run until
they came within bayonet thrust or butt-stroke of the front and right of
the English column, which they immediately crushed out of military
shape; while their fierce war-shout, uttered in the Irish
tongue—“Revenge! Remember Limerick and English treachery!” sounded the
death-knell of Cumberland’s heroic soldiers. While the clubbed muskets
of the Brigade beat down the English ranks, that furious war-cry rang
even unto the walls of old Tournay. The French regiments of Normandie
and Vassieux bravely seconded the Irish charge, and they and other
Gallic troops disposed of the Hanoverians. Within ten minutes from the
time when the Brigade came in contact with the English column, no
British soldiers, except the dead, wounded, and captured, remained on
the slope of Fontenoy. Bulkeley’s Irish regiment nearly annihilated the
Coldstream Guards and captured their colors.
This victory saved France from invasion, but it cost the Irish dear.
Count Dillon was slain, Lord Clare disabled, while one-third of the
officers and one-fourth of the men were killed or wounded. King Louis,
next morning, publicly thanked the Irish, made Lally a general, and Lord
Clare was, soon afterward, created a marshal of France. England met
retribution for her cruelty and faithlessness to Ireland, and King
George vehemently cursed the laws which drove the Irish exiles to win
glory and vengeance on that bloody day.
The losses in the battle were nearly equal—the French, Swiss, and Irish
losing altogether 7,139 men killed, wounded, and missing; while the
English, Hanoverians, Dutch, and Austrians acknowledged a total loss of
7,767 men, said by O’Callaghan to be an underestimate. Fontenoy was one
of the greatest of French victories, and led, in the same campaign, to
numerous other successes. Among the latter may be enumerated the triumph
at Melle, the surprise of Ghent, the occupation of Bruges, and the
capture of Oudenarde, Dendermonde, Ostend, Nieuport, and Ath.
Several officers of the Irish Brigade went with Prince Charles Edward
Stuart to Scotland, when he made his gallant but ill-fated attempt to
restore the fallen fortunes of his luckless father, called by the
Jacobites James VIII of Scotland and James III of England and Ireland,
in 1745-46. The Hanoverian interest called James the “Old” and Charles
Edward the “Young” Pretender. The Irish officers formed “Prince
Charles’s” chosen bodyguard when he was a fugitive amid the Highlands
and Western Isles after Culloden. One of the last great field exploits
of the Irish Brigade was its victorious charge at Laffeldt, in Flanders,
in 1747, when, for the second time, it humiliated Cumberland, and, in a
measure, avenged his base massacre of the gallant Scottish Highland
clans, in 1746. The victory of Laffeldt led to the Peace of
Aix-la-Chapelle, which was favorable to France, in 1748. The Brigade
took part in each succeeding war in which France was involved down to
the period of the Revolution. Some of its regiments served also in India
and America. Under Count Dillon, several Irish battalions distinguished
themselves in the dashing, but unsuccessful, attack on the British at
Savannah, Ga., in 1779, when the brave Count Pulaski, who led the
assault, was killed on the ramparts. By that time, however, the volume
of recruits from Ireland had greatly diminished, owing to the gradual
relaxation of the penal code, and a majority of the officers and
soldiers of the Brigade were, although of Irish blood, French by birth.
Some of the officers were French by both birth and blood, and, among
them, in 1791, was the great-grandson of St. Ruth. The Brigade, as
became it, remained faithful to the last to the Bourbon dynasty.
Unfortunately this fidelity led the feeble remnant, under Colonel
O’Connell, to take service in the West Indies, beneath the British flag,
after the Revolution. In extenuation of their fault, it must be
remembered that they were, to a man, monarchists; that the Stuart cause
was hopelessly lost, and that both tradition and education made them the
inevitable enemies of the new order of things in France. Still, an Irish
historian may be pardoned for remarking that it were much better for the
fame of the Brigade of Cremona and Fontenoy if its senile heir-at-law
had refrained from accepting the pay of the country whose tyranny had
driven the original organization into hopeless exile.
But the active career of the bold Brigade terminated in a blaze of
glory. The hand of a prince, destined to be a monarch, inscribed its
proud epitaph when, in 1792, the Comte de Provence, afterward Louis
XVIII, presented to the surviving officers a drapeau d’adieu, or flag of
farewell—a gold harp wreathed with shamrocks and fleur-de-lis, on a
white ground, with the following touching words:
“Gentlemen: We acknowledge the inappreciable services that
France has received from the Irish Brigade in the course of the
last hundred years—services that we shall never forget, though
under an impossibility of requiting them. Receive this standard
as a pledge of our remembrance, a monument of our admiration and
our respect, and, in future, generous Irishmen, this shall be
the motto of your stainless flag—
“‘1692-1792.’
“Semper et Ubique Fidelis!
(“Ever, and everywhere, faithful.”)
Never did military body receive a nobler discharge from service.
And yet, well might the haughty Bourbon prince so express himself. In
defence of his house, there died beneath the golden lilies, in camp and
breach and field, nearly 500,000 of Ireland’s daring manhood. It is no
wonder that with those heroes departed much of her warlike spirit and
springing courage. Her “wild geese,” as she fondly called them, will
never fly again to her bosom across the waves that aided their flight to
exile and to glory. The cannon of all Europe pealed above their gory
graves, on many a stricken field, the soldier’s requiem.
“They fought as they reveled, fast, fiery, and true,
And, tho’ victors, they left on the field not a few;
And they who survived fought and drank as of yore,
But the land of their hearts’ hope they saw nevermore:
For, in far foreign fields, from Dunkirk to Belgrade,
Lie the soldiers and chiefs of the Irish Brigade!”
Its successor in the French army was the Irish Legion, composed in the
main of refugees who had participated in the “rebellion” of 1798 and the
“rising” of 1803. This fine body of soldiers was organized by Napoleon
himself, wore a distinctively Irish uniform of green and gold, and
carried French and Irish colors. To it, also, was intrusted an eagle—the
only foreign force that was so honored by the greatest of generals. The
Legion fought for the Emperor, with splendid fidelity, from 1805 to
1815, participating in most of the great battles of that warlike period.
It was naturally expected that Louis XVIII, on his final restoration to
the throne, would revive the old Irish Brigade, so highly praised by
him, when Comte de Provence, in 1792, but he was under too many
obligations to England, and, in fact, his treaty with that power, after
the second exile of Napoleon, made it obligatory on him not to accept an
Irish military contingent under any consideration. His acquiescence in
this ignoble compact makes more emphatic the venerable adage, “Put not
your trust in Princes.”
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BOOK VII
NARRATING THE MANY PENAL STATUTES AGAINST THE CATHOLICS, AND CARRYING
THE STORY DOWN TO THE ACQUIREMENT OF A FREE COMMERCE BY THE IRISH
PARLIAMENT, UNDER THE LEADERSHIP OF GRATTAN, A.D. 1780
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER I
Anti-Catholic Penal Laws—Their Drastic, Brutal and Absurd
Provisions—Professional Informers, Called “Priest-Hunters”