CHAPTER XXV.

Creation of the Earls of Thomond and Clanrickarde--How the King procured

Money--Prayers in English--Opposition of Dr. Dowdall--Accession of Queen

Mary--Joy of the Irish--The Catholic Service restored

Publicly--Accession of Queen Elizabeth--Shane O'Neill obtains his

Dominions--Parliament assembled--Unfair Dealing--Martyrs in the Reign of

Elizabeth--The Protestant Archbishop advises Persecution--Cruelties

enacted by English Officers--Shane O'Neill--The Deputy tries to get him

Poisoned or Assassinated, with the Queen's Concurrence--His Visit to

England--He refuses to Dress in the English Fashion.

[A.D. 1540-1567.]

Every official was now required to take the oath of supremacy, and the

consequences of refusal were too well known to be estimated lightly. It

has been asserted by several historians, that no Irish clergyman

suffered death during this reign; but this statement is quite incorrect.

A careful examination of the State Papers and of the private records of

the religious orders, prove the contrary. In the spring of the year

1540, Lord Leonard Grey was recalled, and Sir William Brereton was

appointed Chief Justice. Grey was soon after committed to the Tower, on

a charge of high treason, and was executed in the following year. The

usual feuds between the Irish chieftains and the settlers were continued

during this period, as well as the usual feuds between the chiefs of

each party. Sir Anthony St. Leger, who was appointed Deputy at the close

of the year 1540, tried to reconcile the Ormondes and the Desmonds, and

describes the latter as "undoubtedly a very wise and discreet

gentleman"--a character which must be taken with some qualifications.

On the 1st of July, 1543, Murrough O'Brien was created Earl of Thomond

and Baron of Inchiquin; and De Burgo, known by the soubriquet of

Ulich-na-gceann ("of the heads"), from the number of persons whom he

decapitated in his wars, was created Earl of Clanrickarde and Baron of

Dunkellin. These titles were conferred by the King, with great pomp, at

Greenwich; but the Irish chieftains paid for the honour, if honour it

could be called where honour was forfeited, by acknowledging the royal

supremacy.

The Four Masters record the following events under the year 1545:--A

dispute between the Earl of Ormonde and the Lord Justice. Both repaired

to the King of England to decide the quarrel, and both swore that only

one of them should return to Ireland. "And so it fell out; for the Earl

died in England, and the Lord Justice returned to Ireland." Sir Richard

Cox asserts that the Earl and thirty-five of his servants were poisoned,

at a feast at Ely House, Holborn, and that he and sixteen of them died;

but he does not mention any cause for this tragedy. It was probably

accidental, as the Earl was a favourer of the reformed religion, and not

likely to meet with treachery in England. The Irish annalists do not

even allude to the catastrophe; the Four Masters merely observe, that

"he would have been lamented, were it not that he had greatly injured

the Church by advice of the heretics."[402]

Great dearth prevailed this year, so that sixpence of the old money was

given for a cake of bread in Connaught, or six white pence in Meath.

In 1546 they mention a rising of the Geraldines, "which did

indescribable damages;" and two invasions of the Lord Justice in Offaly,

who plundered and spoiled, burning churches and monasteries, crops and

corn. They also mention the introduction of a new copper coin into

Ireland, which the men of Ireland were obliged to use as silver.

The immense sums which Henry had accumulated by the plunder of religious

houses, appear to have melted away, like snow-wreaths sunshine, long

before the conclusion of his reign. His French and Scotch wars

undoubtedly exhausted large supplies; his mistresses made large demands

for their pleasures and their needy friends; yet there should have been

enough, and to spare, for all these claims. When the monasteries were

destroyed, the English clergy trembled for their own existence. The King

could easily have dispensed with their services, and deprived them of

their revenues. They were quite aware of their precarious tenure of

office, and willingly agreed, in 1543, to give Henry ten per cent, on

their incomes for three years, after the deduction of the tenths already

vested in the crown. Their incomes were thus ascertained, and a loan was

demanded, which, when granted, was made a gift by the ever-servile

Parliament.

In 1545 a benevolence was demanded, though benevolences had been

declared illegal by Act of Parliament. This method of raising money had

been attempted at an early period of his reign; but the proposal met

with such spirited opposition from the people, that even royalty was

compelled to yield. A few years later, when the fatal result of

opposition to the monarch's will and pleasure had become apparent, he

had only to ask and obtain. Yet neither percentage, nor tenths, nor

sacrilegious spoils, sufficed to meet his expenses; and, as a last

expedient, the coin was debased, and irreparable injury inflicted on the

country.

On the 28th of January, 1547, Edward VI. was crowned King of England.

The Council of Regency appointed by Henry was set aside, and Seymour,

Duke of Somerset, appointed himself Protector. St. Leger was continued

in the office of Lord Deputy in Ireland; but Sir Edward Bellingham was

sent over as Captain-General, with a considerable force, to quell the

ever-recurring disturbances. His energetic character bore down all

opposition, as much by the sheer strength of a strong will as by force

of arms. In 1549 the Earl of Desmond refused to attend a Council in

Dublin, on the plea that he wished to keep Christmas in his own castle.

Bellingham, who had now replaced St. Leger as Lord Deputy, set out at

once, with a small party of horse, for the residence of the refractory

noble, seized him as he sat by his own fireside, and carried him off in

triumph to Dublin.

In 1548 O'Connor and O'More were expelled from Offaly and Leix, and

their territory usurped by an Englishman, named Francis Bryan. Cahir Roe

O'Connor, one of the sept, was executed in Dublin, and a number of the

tribe were sent to assist in the Scotch wars. The political cabals in

England consequent on the youth of the King, who nominally governed the

country, occasioned frequent changes in the Irish administration.

In 1551 the Lord Deputy Crofts succeeded Sir Thomas Cusack, and led an

army into Ulster against the Scotch settlers, who had long been regarded

with a jealous eye by the English Government; but he was defeated both

at this time and on a subsequent occasion. No Parliament was convened

during this short reign, and the affairs of the country were

administered by the Privy Council. Dr. Browne and Dr. Staples were

leading members. The Chancellor, Read, and the Treasurer, Brabazon, were

both English. The Irish members were Aylmer, Luttrell, Bath, Howth, and

Cusack, who had all recently conformed, at least exteriorly, to the new

religion.

The most important native chieftain of the age was Shane O'Neill. His

father, Con, surnamed Baccagh ("the lame"), had procured the title of

Baron of Dungannon, and the entail of the earldom of Tyrone, from Henry

VII., for his illegitimate son, Ferdoragh. He now wished to alter this

arrangement; but the ungrateful youth made such charges against the old

man, that he was seized and imprisoned by the Deputy. After his death

Shane contended bravely for his rights. The French appear to have made

some attempt about this period to obtain allies in Ireland, but the

peace which ensued between that country and England soon terminated such

intrigues.

All efforts to establish the new religion during this reign was equally

unsuccessful. On Easter Sunday, A.D. 1551, the liturgy was read for the

first time in the English tongue, in Christ Church Cathedral. As a

reward for his energy in introducing the reform in general, and the

liturgy in particular, Edward VI. annexed the primacy of all Ireland to

the see of Dublin by Act of Parliament. There was one insuperable

obstacle, however, in the way of using the English tongue, which was

simply that the people did not understand it. Even the descendants of

the Anglo-Norman were more familiar with the Celtic dialect, and some

attempt was made at this time to procure a Latin translation of the

Protestant communion service.[403]

Dr. Dowdall had been appointed, in 1543, to the primatial see of Armagh,

by Henry VIII., who naturally hoped he would prove a ready instrument in

his service; but, to the surprise of the court, he put himself at the

head of the orthodox party, and was one of the most faithful opposers of

the introduction of the Protestant form of prayer. In 1552 he was

obliged to seek refuge on the Continent. On the death of Dr. Wauchop,

petitions were sent to Rome, requesting his appointment to the see of

Armagh. He was proposed in Consistory on the 1st of March, 1553.

Mary succeeded to the crown in 1553. A Protestant writer explains the

difference between the religious persecutions of her reign, and those

which occurred during the reign of Henry VIII., with admirable

discrimination and impartiality: "The religious persecutions which

prevailed in this reign, proceeded altogether from a different cause

from that which stands as an everlasting blot on the memory of Henry

VIII. In Henry's instance, people were tortured and murdered in the name

of religion, but the real cause was their opposition to the will of an

arbitrary tyrant; whereas those who suffered under Mary, were martyred

because the Queen conscientiously believed in those principles to which

she clung with such pertinacity."[404] One of the principal of these

victims was Archbishop Cranmer, who had already caused several persons

to suffer in the flames for differing from his opinions, and thus almost

merited his fate. It is a curious fact that several Protestants came to

Ireland during this reign, and settled in Dublin; they were subsequently

the founders of respectable mercantile families.

Although the English people had adopted the reformed religion

nationally, there were still a few persons whom neither favour nor

indifference could induce to renounce the ancient faith; and this brief

respite from persecution tended to confirm and strengthen those who

wavered. In Ireland, always Catholic, the joy was unbounded. Archbishop

Dowdall immediately prepared to hold a provincial synod at Drogheda,

where enactments were made for depriving the conforming prelates and

priests. Happily their number was so few that there was but little

difficulty in making the necessary arrangements. The only prelates that

were removed were Browne, of Dublin; Staples, of Meath; Lancaster, of

Kildare; and Travers, of Leighlin. Goodacre died a few months after his

intrusion into the see of Armagh; Bale, of Ossory, fled beyond the seas;

Casey, of Limerick, followed his example. All were English except the

latter, and all, except Staples, were professing Protestants at the time

of their appointment to their respective sees. Bale, who owed the

Kilkenny people a grudge, for the indignant and rather warm reception

with which they treated him on his intrusion into the see, gives a

graphic account of the joy with which the news of Edward's death was

received. The people "flung up their caps to the battlements of the

great temple;" set the bells ringing; brought out incense and holy

water, and formed once more a Catholic procession, chanting the _Sancta

Maria, ora pro nobis_, as of old. In fact, "on the accession of Mary to

the throne, so little had been done in the interest of the Reformation,

that there was little or nothing to undo. She issued a licence for the

celebration of Mass in Ireland, where no other service was or had been

celebrated worth mentioning, and where no other supreme head had been

ever in earnest acknowledged but the Pope."[405]

But the Irish obtained no temporal advantages during this reign--an

illustration of the truth of what I have before remarked, that the

nation has suffered almost as much from political as from religious

causes. The work of extermination still went on. The boundaries of the

Pale were increased thereby. Leix was designated the Queen's county, and

the fort of Campa obtained the name of Maryborough, in compliment to the

Queen. Offaly was named the King's county, and the fortress of Daingèan,

Philipstown, in compliment to her Spanish consort.

In the year 1553 Gerald and Edward, the sons of the late Earl of

Kildare, returned from exile, and were restored to the family honours

and possessions. The Four Masters say that "there was great rejoicing

because of their arrival, for it was thought that not one of the

descendants of the Earls of Kildare or of the O'Connors Faly would ever

again come to Ireland." They also mention that Margaret, a daughter of

O'Connor Faly, went to England, "relying on the number of her friends

and relatives there, and her knowledge of the English language, to

request Queen Mary to restore her father to her." Her petition was

granted, but he was soon after seized again by the English officials,

and cast into prison.

Shane O'Neill made an unsuccessful attempt to recover his paternal

dominions, in 1557. The following year his father died in

captivity,[406] Dublin, and he procured the murder of Ferdoragh, so that

he was able to obtain his wishes without opposition. Elizabeth had now

ascended the English throne (A.D. 1558), and, as usual, those in power,

who wished to retain office, made their religion suit the views of the

new ruler. The Earl of Sussex still continued Viceroy, and merely

reversed his previous acts. Sir Henry Sidney also made his worldly

interests and his religious views coincide. A Parliament was held in

Dublin, in 1560, on the 12th of January. It was composed of seventy-six

members, the representatives of ten counties, the remainder being

citizens and burgesses of those towns in which the royal authority was

predominant. "It is little wonder," observes Leland, "that, in despite

of clamour and opposition, in a session of a few weeks, the whole

ecclesiastical system of Queen Mary was entirely reversed." Every

subject connected with this assembly and its enactments, demands the

most careful consideration, as it has been asserted by some

writers--who, however, have failed to give the proofs of their

assertion--that the Irish Church and nation conformed at this time to

the Protestant religion. This certainly was not the opinion of the

Government officials, who were appointed by royal authority to enforce

the Act, and who would have been only too happy could they have reported

success to their mistress.

A recent writer, whose love of justice has led him to take a position in

regard to Irish ecclesiastical history which has evoked unpleasant

remarks from those who are less honest, writes thus: "There was not even

the show of free action in the ordering of that Parliament, nor the

least pretence that liberty of choice was to be given to it. The

instructions given to Sussex, on the 10th of May 1559, for making

Ireland Protestant by Act of Parliament, were peremptory, and left no

room for the least deliberation. Sussex had also other instructions

(says Cox) to him and the Council, to set up the worship of God as it is

in England, and make such statutes next Parliament as were lately made

in England, _mutatis mutandis_. [Hist. Angl. Part I. p.313.] It is plain

that her Majesty's command is not sufficient warrant for a national

change of faith, and that a convocation of bishops only is not the

proper or legal representative assembly of the Church. It is also plain

that the acts of an unwilling Parliament, and that Parliament one which

does not deserve the name of a Parliament, cannot be justly considered

as the acts of either the Irish Church or the Irish people."[407]

The official list of the members summoned to this Parliament, has been

recently published by the Irish Archæological Society. More than

two-thirds of the upper house were persons of whose devotion to the

Catholic faith there has been no question; there were but few members in

the lower house. No county in Ulster was allowed a representative, and

only one of its borough towns, Carrickfergus, was permitted to elect a

member. Munster furnished twenty members. No county members were allowed

in Connaught, and it had only two boroughs, Galway and Athenry, from

which it could send a voice to represent its wishes. The remaining fifty

members were chosen from a part of Leinster. In fact, the Parliament was

constituted on the plan before-mentioned. Those who were considered

likely to agree with the Government, were allowed to vote; those of

whose dissent there could be no doubt, were not allowed a voice in the

affairs of the nation.

It might be supposed that, with the exception of a few members of the

upper house, such a Parliament would at once comply with the Queen's

wishes; but the majority made no secret of their intention to oppose the

change of religion, and the penal code which should be enacted to

enforce it. The Deputy was in an unpleasant Position. Elizabeth would

not easily brook the slightest opposition to her wishes. The Deputy did

not feel prepared to encounter her anger, and he determined to avoid the

difficulty, by having recourse to a most unworthy stratagem. First, he

prorogued the house from the 11th of January to the 1st of February,

1560; and then took advantage of the first day of meeting, when but few

members were present, to get the Act passed; secondly, he solemnly swore

that the law should never be carried into execution, and by this false

oath procured the compliance of those who still hesitated. I shall give

authority for these statements.

The letter of Elizabeth, with her positive instructions to have the law

passed, was dated October 18, 1559, and may be seen _in extenso_ in the

_Liber Munerum Hibernia_, vol. i. p.113. There are several authorities

for the dishonest course pursued by the Lord Deputy. The author of

_Cambrensis Eversus_ says: "The Deputy is said to have used force, and

the Speaker treachery. I heard that it had been previously announced in

the house that Parliament would not sit on that very day on which the

laws against religion were enacted; but, in the meantime, a private

summons was sent to those who were well known to be favourable to the

old creed."[408] Father George Dillon, who died in 1650, a martyr to his

charity in assisting the plague-stricken people of Waterford, gives the

following account of the transaction: "James Stanihurst, Lord of

Corduff, who was Speaker of the lower house, by sending private summons

to some, without any intimation to the more respectable Irish who had a

right to attend, succeeded in carrying that law by surprise. As soon as

the matter was discovered, in the next full meeting of Parliament, there

was a general protest against the fraud, injustice, and _deliberate

treachery_ of the proceeding; but the Lord Justice, having solemnly

sworn that the law would never be carried into execution, the

remonstrants were caught in the dexterous snare, and consented that the

enactment should remain on the statute-book."[409] Dr. Rothe

corroborates these statements, and records the misfortunes which

followed the Speaker's family from that date.[410] Dr. Moran[411] has

very acutely observed, that the day appointed for the opening of

Parliament was the festival of St. Brigid, which was always kept with

special solemnity in Ireland; therefore, the orthodox members would

probably have absented themselves, unless informed of some business

which absolutely required their attendance.

The Loftus MS., in Marsh's Library, and Sir James Ware, both mention the

positive opposition of the Parliament to pass this law, and the mission

of the Earl of Sussex to consult her Majesty as to what should be done

with the refractory members. If he then proposed the treachery which he

subsequently carried out, there is no reason to suppose her Majesty

would have been squeamish about it, as we find she was quite willing to

allow even more questionable methods to be employed on other occasions.

The Loftus MS. mentions a convocation of bishops which assembled this

year, "by the Queen's command, for establishing the Protestant

religion." The convocation was, if possible, a greater failure than the

Parliament. If the bishops had obeyed the royal command, there would

have been some record of their proceedings; but until the last few

years, when the _ipse dixit_ of certain writers was put forward as an

argument--for proof it cannot be called--that the Irish Catholic bishops

had conformed to the Protestant religion, so wild a theory was not even

hazarded. It would be impossible here to go into details and proofs of

the nonconformity of each bishop. The work has been already undertaken,

with admirable success, by an Anglican clergyman.[412] I shall, however,

give some of the impediments offered to the progress of the Reformation

in the time of Queen Elizabeth, and of the cruel persecutions which were

inflicted on those who dared to wish for liberty to worship God

according to their conscience.

Notwithstanding the solemn promise of the Lord Deputy, the penal

statutes against Catholics were carried out. In 1563 the Earl of Essex

issued a proclamation, by which all priests, secular and regular, were

forbidden to officiate, or even to reside in Dublin. Fines and penalties

were strictly enforced for absence from the Protestant service; before

long, torture and death were inflicted. Priests and religious were, as

might be expected, the first victims. They were hunted into mountains

and caves; and the parish churches and few monastic chapels which had

escaped the rapacity of Henry VIII., were sacrificed to the sacrilegious

emissaries of Elizabeth. Curry gives some account of those who suffered

for the faith in this reign. He says: "Among many other Roman Catholic

bishops and priests, there were put to death for the exercise of their

function in Ireland, Globy O'Boyle, Abbot of Boyle, and Owen O'Mulkeran,

Abbot of the Monastery of the Holy Trinity, hanged and quartered by Lord

Grey, in 1580. John Stephens suffered the same punishment from Lord

Burroughs, for saying Mass, in 1597; Thady O'Boyle was slain in his own

monastery at Donegal; six friars were slain at Moynihigan; John

O'Calyhor and Bryan O'Freeor were killed at their monastery in Ulster,

with Felimy O'Hara, a lay brother. Eneus Penny was massacred at the

altar of his own parish church, Killagh. Fourteen other priests died in

Dublin Castle, either from hard usage, or the violence of torture."

Dr. Adam Loftus, the Protestant Archbishop of Armagh, was one of the

most violent persecutors of the Catholics. In his first report to the

Queen, dated May 17th, 1565, he describes the nobility of the Pale as

all devoted to the ancient creed; and he recommends that they should be

fined "in a good round sum," which should be paid to her Majesty's use,

and "sharply dealt withal."[413] An original method of conversion,

certainly! But it did not succeed. On the 22nd of September, 1590, after

twenty-five years had been spent in the fruitless attempt to convert the

Irish, he writes to Lord Burleigh, detailing the causes of the general

decay of the Protestant religion in Ireland, and suggesting "how the

same may be remedied." He advises that the ecclesiastical commission

should be put in force, "for the people are poor, and fear to be fined."

He requests that he and such commissioners as are "well affected in

religion, may be permitted to imprison and fine all such as are

obstinate and disobedient;" and he has no doubt, that "within a short

time they will be reduced to good conformity." He concludes: "And _this

course of reformation_, the sooner it is begun the better it will

prosper; and the longer it is deferred, the more dangerous it will be."

When remember that such words were written, and such deeds were enacted,

by the head of the Protestant Church in Ireland, and sanctioned by the

head of the Protestant Church in England, they may surely be content to

allow modern controversialists the benefit of their pleasant dream that

Catholic bishops conformed. If they had conformed to such doctrines and

such practice, it can scarcely be seen what advantage the Anglican

Establishment could gain from their parentage.

Seven years later, when the same prelate found that the more the Church

was persecuted the more she increased, he wrote to advise pacification:

"The rebels are increased, and grown insolent. I see no other cure for

this cursed country but pacification, [he could not help continuing]

until, hereafter, when the fury is passed, her Majesty may, with more

convenience, correct the heads of those traitors."[414] The prelate was

ably seconded by the Lord Deputy. Even Sir John Perrot, who has the name

of being one of the most humane of these Governors, could not refrain

from acts of cruelty where Catholics were concerned. On one occasion he

killed fifty persons, and brought their heads home in triumph to

Kilmallock, where he arranged them as a trophy round the cross in the

public square. In 1582 he advised her Majesty "that friars, monks,

Jesuits, priests, nuns, and such like vermin, who openly uphold the

Papacy, should be executed by martial law."[415] The English officers

seem to have rivalled each other in acts of cruelty. One is said to have

tied his victim to a maypole, and then punched out his eyes with his

thumbs.[416] Others amused themselves with flinging up infants into the

air, and catching them on the points of their swords.[417] Francis

Crosby, the deputy of Leix, used to hang men, women, and children on an

immense tree which grew before his door, without any crime being imputed

to them except their faith, and then to watch with delight how the

unhappy infants hung by the long hair of their martyred mothers.[418]

Father Dominic à Rosario, the author of _The Geraldines_, scarcely

exceeded truth when he wrote these memorable words: "This far famed

English Queen has grown drunk on the blood of Christ's martyrs; and,

like a tigress, she has hunted down our Irish Catholics, exceeding in

ferocity and wanton cruelty the emperors of pagan Rome." We shall

conclude this painful subject for the present with an extract from

O'Sullivan Beare: "All alarm from the Irish chieftains being ceased, the

persecution was renewed with all its horrors. A royal order was

promulgated, that all should renounce the Catholic faith, yield up the

priests, receive from the heretical minister the morality and tenets of

the Gospel. Threats, penalties and force were to be employed to enforce

compliance. Every effort of the Queen and her emissaries was directed to

despoil the Irish Catholics of their property, and exterminate them.

More than once did they attempt this, for they knew that not otherwise

could the Catholic religion be suppressed in our island, _unless by the

extermination of those in whose hearts it was implanted_; nor could

their heretical teachings be propagated, while the natives were alive to

detest and execrate them."[419]

In 1561 Sussex returned from England with reinforcements for his army,

and marched to Armagh, where he established himself in the Cathedral.

From thence he sent out a large body of troops to plunder in Tyrone, but

they were intercepted by the redoubtable Shane O'Neill, and suffered so

serious a defeat as to alarm the inhabitants of the Pale, and even the

English nation. Fresh supplies of men and arms were hastily despatched

from England, and the Earls of Desmond, Ormonde, Kildare, Thomond, and

Clanrickarde assembled round the Viceregal standard to assist in

suppressing the formidable foe. And well might they fear the

lion-hearted chieftain! A few years later, Sidney describes him as the

only strong man in Ireland. The Queen was warned, that unless he were

speedily put down, she would lose Ireland, as her sister had lost

Calais. He had gained all Ulster by his sword, and ruled therein with a

far stronger hand, and on a far firmer foundation, than ever any English

monarch had obtained in any part of Ireland. Ulster was his _terra

clausa_; and he would be a bold, or, perhaps I should rather say, a rash

man, who dare intrude in these dominions. He could muster seven thousand

men in the field; and though he seldom hazarded a general engagement, he

"slew in conflicts 3,500 soldiers and 300 Scots of Sidney's army."[420]

The English chronicler, Hooker, who lived in times when the blaze and

smoke of houses and haggards, set on fire by Shane, could be seen even

from Dublin Castle, declares that it was feared he intended to make a

conquest over the whole land.

Even his letters are signed, if not written, in royal style.[421] He

dates one _Ex finibus de Tirconail_, when about to wage war with the

neighbouring sept of O'Donnell; he dates another, _Ex silvis meis_,

when, in pursuance of his Celtic mode of warfare, he hastened into his

woods to avoid an engagement with the English soldiers; he signs himself

_Misi O'Neill_--Me, the O'Neill. As this man was too clever to be

captured, and too brave to be conquered, a plan was arranged, with the

full concurrence of the Queen, by which he might be got rid of by poison

or assassination. Had such an assertion been made by the Irish

annalists, it would have been scouted as a calumny on the character of

"good Queen Bess;" but the evidence of her complicity is preserved in

the records of the State Paper Office. I shall show presently that

attempts at assassination were a common arrangement for the disposal of

refractory Irish chieftains during this reign.

The proposal for this diabolical treachery, and the arrangements made

for carrying it out, were related by Sussex to the Queen. He writes

thus: "In fine, I brake with him to kill Shane, and bound myself by my

oath to see him have a hundred marks of land to him and to his heirs for

reward. He seemed desirous to serve your Highness, and to have the land,

but fearful to do it, doubting his own escape after. I told him the ways

he might do it, and how to escape after with safety; which he offered

and promised to do." The Earl adds a piece of information, which, no

doubt, he communicated to the intended murderer, and which, probably,

decided him on making the attempt: "I assure your Highness he may do it

without danger if he will; and if he will not do what he may in your

service, there will be done to him what others may."[422]

Her Majesty, however, had a character to support; and whatever she may

have privately wished and commanded, she was obliged to disavow

complicity publicly. In two despatches from court she expresses her

"displeasure at John Smith's horrible attempt to poison Shane O'Neill in

his wine." In the following spring John Smith was committed to prison,

and "closely examined by Lord Chancellor Cusake." What became of John is

not recorded, but it is recorded that "Lord Chancellor Cusake persuaded

O'Neill to forget the poisoning." His clan, however, were not so easily

persuaded, and strongly objected to his meeting the Viceroy in person,

or affording him an opportunity which he might not live to forget. About

this time O'Neill despatched a document to the Viceroy for his

consideration, containing a list of "other evill practices devised to

other of the Irish nation within ix or tenn yeares past." The first item

mentions that Donill O'Breyne and Morghe O'Breyne, his son, "required

the benefit of her Majesty's laws, by which they required to be tried,

and thereof was denied;"[423] and that when they came to Limerick under

the protection of the Lord Deputy, they were proclaimed traitors, and

their lands and possessions taken from them. Several other violations of

protection are then enumerated, and several treacherous murders are

recorded, particularly the murder of Art Boy Cavanagh, at Captain

Hearn's house, after he had dined with him, and of Randall Boye's two

sons, who were murdered, one after supper, and the other in the tower,

by Brereton, "who escaped without punishment."

In October, 1562, Shane was invited to England, and was received by

Elizabeth with marked courtesy. His appearance at court is thus

described by Camden, A.D. 1562: "From Ireland came Shane O'Neill, who

had promised to come the year before, with a guard of axe-bearing

galloglasses, their heads bare, their long curling hair flowing on their

shoulders, their linen garments dyed with saffron, with long open

sleeves, with short tunics, and furry cloaks, whom the English wondered

at as much as they do now at the Chinese or American aborigines."

Shane's visit to London was considered of such importance, that we find

a memorandum in the State Paper Office, by "Secretary Sir W. Cecil,

March, 1562," of the means to be used with Shane O'Neill, in which the

first item is, that "he be procured to change his garments, and go like

an Englishman."[424] But this was precisely what O'Neill had no idea of

doing. Sussex appears to have been O'Neill's declared and open enemy.

There is more than one letter extant from the northern chief to the

Deputy. In one of these he says: "I wonder very much for what purpose

your Lordship strives to destroy me." In another, he declares that his

delay in visiting the Queen had been caused by the "amount of

obstruction which Sussex had thrown in his way, by sending a force of

occupation into his territory without cause; for as long as there shall

be one son of a Saxon in my territory against my will, from that time

forth I will not send you either settlement or message, but will send my

complaint through some other medium to the Queen." In writing to the

Baron of Slane, he says that "nothing will please him [the Deputy] but

to plant himself in my lands and my native territory, as I am told every

day that he desires to be styled Earl of Ulster."

The Lord Chancellor Cusack appears, on the contrary, to have constantly

befriended him. On 12th January, 1568, he writes of O'Neill's

"dutifulness and most commendable dealing with the Scots;" and soon

after three English members of the Dublin Government complain that

Cusack[425] had entrapped them into signing a letter to the unruly

chieftain. There is one dark blot upon the escutcheon of this remarkable

man. He had married the daughter of O'Donnell, Lord of one of the

Hebrides. After a time he and his father-in-law quarrelled, and Shane

contrived to capture O'Donnell and his second wife. He kept this lady

for several years as his mistress; and his own wife is said to have died

of shame and horror at his conduct, and at his cruel treatment of her

father. English writers have naturally tried to blacken his character as

deeply as possible, and have represented him as a drunkard and a

profligate; but there appears no foundation for the former accusation.

The foundation for the latter is simply what we have mentioned, which,

however evil in itself, would scarcely appear so very startling to a

court over which Henry VIII. had so long presided.

After many attempts at assassination, _Shane-an-Diomais_ [John the

Ambitious] fell a victim to English treachery. Sir William Piers, the

Governor of Carrickfergus, invited some Scotch soldiers over to Ireland,

and then persuaded them to quarrel with him, and kill him. They

accomplished their purpose, by raising a disturbance at a feast, when

they rushed on the northern chieftain, and despatched him with their

swords. His head was sent to Dublin, and his old enemies took the poor

revenge of impaling it on the Castle walls.

The Earl of Sussex was recalled from Ireland in 1564, and Sir Henry

Sidney was appointed Viceroy. The Earls of Ormonde and Desmond had again

quarrelled, and, in 1562, both Earls were summoned to court by the

Queen. Elizabeth was related to the Butlers through her mother's family,

and used to boast of the loyalty of the house of Ormonde. The Geraldines

adhered to the ancient faith, and suffered for it. A battle was fought

at Affane, near Cappoquin, between the two parties, in which Desmond was

wounded and made prisoner. The man who bore him from the field asked,

tauntingly: "Where is now the proud Earl of Desmond?" He replied, with

equal pride and wit: "Where he should be; upon the necks of the

Butlers!"

[Illustration: GOLD EAR-RING, TORQUE PATTERN, FROM THE COLLECTION OF THE

R.I.A., FOUND AT CASTLEREA, CO. ROSCOMMON.]

[Illustration: KILCOLMAN CASTLE.]

FOOTNOTES:

[402] _Heretics_.--Annals, vol. v. p. 1493.

[403] _Service_.--Shirley's _Original Letters_, p. 47. Dr. Browne gives

an account of his signal failures in attempting to introduce the

Protestant form of prayer in his letters to Cromwell. He says one

prebendary of St. Patrick's "thought scorn to read them." He adds: "They

be in a manner all the same point with me. There are twenty-eight of

them, and yet scarce one that favoureth God's Word."--_State Papers_,

vol. iii. p. 6.

[404] _Pertinacity_.--_The Victoria History of England_, p. 256.

[405] _Pope_.--_Lib. Mun. Hib_. part i. p. 37.

[406] _Captivity_.--Lord Chancellor Cusack addressed a very curious

"Book on the State of Ireland" to the Duke of Northumberland, in 1552,

in which he mentions the fearful condition of the northern counties. He

states that "the cause why the Earl was detained [in Dublin Castle] was

for the wasting and destroying of his county." This Sir Thomas Cusack,

who took a prominent part in public affairs during the reign of Queen

Elizabeth, was a son of Thomas Cusack, of Cassington, in Meath, an

ancient Norman-Irish family, who were hereditary seneschals and sheriffs

of that county.--_Ulster Arch. Jour_. vol. iii p. 51.

[407] _People.--The Irish Reformation_, by the Rev. W. Maziere Brady,

D.D., fifth edition, pp. 32, 33.

[408] _Creed_.--_Cambrensis Eversus_, vol. iii. p. 19.

[409] _Book_.--_Orationes et Motiva_, p. 87.

[410] _Date_.--_Analecta_, p. 387.

[411] _Dr. Moran_.--_Archbishops of Dublin_, p. 68. Further information

may be obtained also in Curry's _Historical Review_.

[412] _Clergyman_.--The Rev. W. Maziere Brady, D.D. Mr. Froude remarks,

in his _History of England_, vol. x. p. 480: "There is no evidence that

any of the bishops in Ireland who were in office at Queen Mary's death,

with the exception of Curwin, either accepted the Reformed Prayer-Book,

or abjured the authority of the Pope." He adds, in a foot-note: "I

cannot express my astonishment at a proposition maintained by Bishop

Mant and others, that whole hierarchy of Ireland went over to the

Reformation with the Government. In a survey of the country supplied to

Cecil in 1571, after death and deprivation had enabled the Government to

fill several sees, the Archbishops Armagh, Tuam, and Cashel, with almost

every one of the Bishops of the respective provinces, are described as

_Catholici et Confederati_. The Archbishop of Dublin, with the Bishops

of Kildare, Ossory, and Ferns, are alone returned as 'Protestantes'"

[413] _Withal_.--Shirley, _Original Letters_, p. 194.

[414] _Traitors_.--Letter of October 18, 1597.--State Paper Office.

[415] _Law_.--Letter to the Queen, in _Government of Ireland under Sir

John Parrot_, p.4.

[416] _Thumbs_.--Despatch of Castlerosse, in State Paper Office, London.

[417] _Swords_.--O'Sullivan Beare, _Hist. Cath_. p. 238.

[418] _Mothers_.--_Ibid_. p. 99.

[419] _Them.--Hist. Cath_. p.133.

[420] _Army_.--See Dr. Stuart's _History of Armagh_, p. 261.

[421] _Style_.--In one of the communications from Sussex to O'Neill, he

complains of the chieftain's letters as being "_nimis superbe

scriptæ_."--State Papers for 1561.

[422] _May_.--Moore's _History of Ireland_, vol. iv. p.33.

[423] _Denied_.--This document has been printed in the _Ulster Arch.

Jour_. vol. ii, p.221, but the editor does not mention where the

original was procured.

[424] _Englishman_.--Moore, vol. iv. p. 37, has "like a gentleman," but

the above is the correct reading. In 1584 Sir J. Perrot tried to get the

Irish chieftains to attend Parliament clothed in the English fashion,

and even offered them robes and cloaks of velvet and satin. The

chieftains objected; the Lord Deputy insisted. At last one of them, with

exquisite humour, suggested that if he were obliged to wear English

robes, a Protestant minister should accompany him attired in Irish

garments, so that the mirth and amazement of the People should be fairly

divided between them.--_Sir J. Perrot's Life_, p.198.

[425] _Cusack_.--One reason, perhaps, was that the Chancellor always

treated O'Neill with the respect due from one gentleman to another.

Flemyng mentions, in a letter to Cecil, November 29, 1563, that O'Neill

told him, when about to take the oaths of his people to an agreement

with the Queen, that "Cusack did not give them their oath so, _but let

me give them their oath_."

An Illustrated History of Ireland from AD 400 to 1800 · 第 25 / 37 章