Ireland under the Stuarts and During the Interregnum, Vol. 3 (of 3), 1660-1690

by Richard Bagwell

FOOTNOTES:

[81] As to the character of Robartes, see Clarendon’s Life, Cont., p. 198; ‘vicious under the appearances of virtue,’ Burnet’s Own Times, i. 98; ‘vieux sacripante, &c.,’ Mem. de Grammont, chap. viii. Carte’s Ormonde, ii. 378 sqq., Ormonde to Ossory, February 16, 1668-9, ib. appx. On the other hand, Lord Herbert of Cherbury thought his conversation most pleasing. The instructions to Robartes are in State Papers, Ireland, calendared at July 29, 1669, and drafts of them in the same vol. pp. 740-746. Duchess of Ormonde to George Mathew, February 1668-9, Ormonde Papers, new series, iii. 442. The Presbyterian Patrick Adair, while praising Robartes, does not deny that he was ‘somewhat morose in his temper and carriage,’ True Narrative, chap. xviii.

[82] As to the Tories from 1664 to 1667, see 32nd Report of the Deputy Keeper of Public Records, pp. 92-97; as to Nangle, State Papers, Ireland, July 17, 18, 1666; as to Costello, ib. March 11, 16, 1666-7. There is much about Tories and highwaymen in Orrery’s State Letters, particularly those to Ormonde in March 1666-7. Proclamation, June 3, 1668, State Papers, Ireland. Sir Peter Pett to Williamson, May 23, ib.

[83] Ormonde to Ossory, February 16, 1668-9, in appx. to Carte’s Ormonde, vol. ii. Cal. of State Papers, Ireland, pp. 1-6. There is a good deal about Lady Robartes in Mem. de Grammont, chap. viii., but the scandalous chronicler cannot say much against her. Duchess of Ormonde to George Mathew, March 6, 1668-9, Ormonde Papers, iii. 442.

[84] Lord O’Brien’s letters to Williamson in October 1669, State Papers, Ireland; Armourer to same, October 31, ib.; Lord Herbert of Cherbury to same, October 4, ib.; the King to Robartes, December, n.d.; Robartes to the King, December 7, ib. Marvell’s letter of March 21, 1670. Airy’s edition of Burnet with the notes, i. 482. ‘I am,’ said Locke, ‘more a friend to the clergy and their calling than those amongst them who show their forwardness to leave the word of God to serve other employments. The office of a minister of the Gospel requires the whole man,’ Third Letter for Toleration.

[85] Arlington to Robartes, February 19, 1669-70, State Papers, Ireland; Frowde to Williamson, April 23, May 14, ib.; Leigh to Williamson, June 11, ib.

[86] State Papers, Ireland, February 20 and March 23, 1661, for Fitzharris. Orrery to Arlington, ib. November 8, 1665. Warrant for Colonel Edward Vernon and others, ib. July 1669. Vernon had received Alden’s confidences in 1663, Carte’s Ormonde, ii. 262.

[87] Grey’s Debates, November 25, 1669; Marvell’s Letters, nos. 128 and 129, but the latter is dated November 4 in Grosart’s edition, which cannot be right, probably a mistake for December.

[88] Grey’s Debates, November 25, December 1 and 10, 1669. Articles of impeachment and answers in Orrery’s State Letters, i. 109. Macpherson’s Original Letters, i. 56, wrongly placed under 1670. Marvell’s letter, no. 129, ut sup.

[89] Macray’s Notes of conversations between Clarendon and Charles II. in July 1660, Roxburghe Club. Character in Clarendon’s State Papers, iii., supplement, lxxiv. Burnet’s character is to the same effect, adding ‘corrupt, without shame or decency,’ Own Times, i. 266. ‘The greatest vapourer in the world,’ Pepys’ Diary, December 3, 1665, and very dishonest, ‘guilty of one of the basest things that ever was heard of a man,’ ib. September 27, 1668. Marvell says he gave 10,000l. for his place to the Duchess of Cleveland, letter of August 9, 1671.

[90] Marvell’s letter of March 21, 1670. Berkeley’s instructions are in Cox’s Hibernia Anglicana, Charles II., ii. 9. As to Leighton, see Burnet’s Own Times, i. 137, and Foxcroft’s Supplement, p. 13. In a note to his edition of Burnet, Mr. Airy says he is ‘not aware of a single word extant in his favour.’ North’s Examen, iii. chap. vi. 89—‘being secretary in Ireland he extorted most outrageously and being expostulated with for it, answered, "What a pox, d’ye think I come here to learn your language?"’

[91] Cardinal Moran’s Life of Plunket, particularly chaps. vi. and xvii. Brady’s Episcopal Succession, i. 227. Alderman Matthew Anderton to Perrott (Williamson’s clerk), April 20, 1670, State Papers, Domestic. Patrick Adair’s Narrative, p. 300.

[92] Carte’s Ormonde. Remarks on the Life and Death of Mr. Blood, 1680. Verney Memoirs, iv. 228. Letters to Williamson, ed. Christie, i. 14, ii. 120. Sir Walter Scott made good use of Blood in Peveril of the Peak.

[93] Copy of the petition of November 28, 1670, appointing Talbot agent, Trinity College MSS. 844-849. Carte’s Ormonde, ii. 426 sqq., and Finch’s Report of February 1, 1670-1, ib. appx. 91. State Papers, Domestic, July 2 and August 1, 1671, and also at p. 595 in Cal.

[94] Patrick Adair’s Narrative, pp. 290, 303. Pepys’ Diary, June 8, 1661. For details concerning Lady Clanbrassil (Lady Alice Moore), see Lowry’s Hamilton MSS. Dorset’s verses ‘On an antiquated coquette’ have been thought to refer to her.

[95] Dr. Lancelot Bolton to Conway, May 13, 1671, State Papers, Domestic. Armourer to Williamson, June 6, July 27, ib. Conway to Rawdon, June 20, Rawdon Papers.

[96] King to Lords Justices, May 22, 1661, State Papers, Ireland. King to Lord Lieutenant, February 26, 1671-2, State Papers, Domestic. Proclamation, ib. March 8.

[97] Rawdon to Conway, July 13, 1671, State Papers, Domestic. Leigh to Williamson, July 18, ib. Essex to Arlington, September 14, 1672, Essex Papers.

[98] Letter to Williamson, March 30, 1672, State Papers, Domestic, Phelim O’Neill to Conway, May 23, 1671, ib. The King to Berkeley, April 30, 1672, ib.

[99] Leigh to Williamson, May 19, 1671, State Papers, Domestic.

[CHAPTER XLVI]
GOVERNMENT OF ESSEX, 1672-1677

The Earl of Essex Lord Lieutenant.

The corrupt administration of Berkeley and Leighton could not be called a success, and much to his own surprise the Earl of Essex was named for Lord Lieutenant quite early in 1672. He was made a Privy Councillor along with Halifax in February, and some thought that the latter would go to Ireland. Berkeley’s letter of recall did not reach him till May, and he was forbidden to make any appointment during the remainder of his time, particularly in Dublin, where disorders had lately followed on a change of officers. Some years later the viceroyalty was offered to Halifax, but he said he did not like dining to the sound of the trumpet and with thirty-six dishes of meat. It is not easy to see what caused Essex to be selected, for he could never have been a party to the policy of the treaty of Dover. But his firmness of character was known, and Charles may have thought that by leaving Ireland in strong hands he made it easier to get his own way in England.[100]

State of the corporate towns.

Essex reached Ireland early in August 1672, and was involved at once in the business of the corporations, for the power to make rules under the Act of Explanation expired at Michaelmas. Berkeley’s temporary regulations had been quite abortive, and one of his latest acts had been to recommend Totty as Lord Mayor for another year. The policy of the English Government since the Restoration had been vacillating. In 1661 the King gave orders that the Irish or Roman Catholic inhabitants of towns should be restored to trading privileges, and this was repealed in 1672. The first letter had, however, been followed by another, which expressly declared that it had never been His Majesty’s pleasure to admit the Papists to any share in magistracy or government. In 1670 it was ordered that no one should act as head or member of a corporation without taking the oath of allegiance and such other oaths as were of force in Ireland. Thus the first question that Essex had to decide was whether the oath of supremacy should be enforced or not. He thought that it should be, as otherwise every corporation would be flooded with Roman Catholics. But he would allow the oath to be dispensed with by special favour. He believed that otherwise wealthy Protestant traders would withdraw themselves and their capital from Ireland. This policy was approved of, and Charles ordered the oath of supremacy to be enforced ‘as a general rule,’ and the dispensing power to be exercised by the Lord Lieutenant. This was in harmony with the Declaration of Indulgence which Parliament had not yet had an opportunity of condemning.[101]

New rules made.

Rules were made for Dublin accordingly. To be of any effect the choice of Lord Mayor, Sheriffs, Town Clerk, and Recorder had to be ratified by the Lord Lieutenant. In the case of the Lord Mayor, sheriffs, and treasurers the elective power was confined to the Lord Mayor and not less than eight aldermen. All officers, aldermen, common councillors, and members of guilds had to take the oaths of allegiance and supremacy, the like obligations being imposed upon foreign traders and artisans, who were encouraged to become denizens with the same privileges as natives. Power was reserved to the Lord Lieutenant to dispense with the oath of supremacy at his discretion ‘by writing under his hand.’ Similar rules were made for all the other corporations in Ireland, which thus retained their Protestant character until the viceroyalty of Tyrconnel. By the Act of Explanation, rules made in conformity with it had full statutory force and could not be abrogated without another Act, and no Parliament met in the meantime. The dispensing power was at once exercised, and some Roman Catholics were admitted as common councilmen with the King’s full approval, who nevertheless suspended the operation of the rules by letter until they had been discussed in Council. Anglesey alone opposing, they were approved in due course. The delay caused Essex much trouble and annoyance, for copies of the royal missive were circulated with a view of impairing his authority. The most notable malcontent was the learned and eccentric Dudley Loftus, but the intrigues of Anglesey added fuel to the flame. Loftus, who was a master in chancery, publicly declared that the rules were illegal, which they certainly were not, and was placed under arrest by the Lord Lieutenant. Complaints of the rules and petitions against them continued for some time, but they had the force of law and could not be interfered with. As the validity of the Acts of Settlement seemed to be attacked, there was general consternation among the holders of property, and the King was forced to declare that he had not the slightest intention of interfering with their operation.[102]

Agitators in Dublin.

Essex reported that the population of Dublin had almost doubled since the Restoration, and recommended that a citadel should be built to secure order. Lives having been lost in the bridge riots, there was an undercurrent of discontent which lasted for two or three years, and was sedulously fostered by one Nevill. This man had several aliases, and having been ‘a prompter to plays was afterwards Sir Ellis Leighton’s broker to make his bargains.’ The first thing was to decide as to the legality of the late proceedings. This was tried before the Privy Council, and Essex says he scarcely ever heard a clearer case. By a unanimous vote Sir William Davis was restored to the recordership and the excluded aldermen to their places. Sir John Totty lost his position as clerk of the tholsel, but continued to stir up discontent, in which he was supported by one Philpot, who had been under arrest for contempt of the Council’s decrees, and by three or four other agitators. ‘These have been observed never to be in their shops, but all day long at taverns or coffee-houses, perpetually sending about for several citizens, persuading them to further or promote these seditious designs, which prime movers are men of small estates, and no doubt their aim was to be employed as agents in England, thereby to have got some collection of money from the city, as a little before my coming one Nevill (an unworthy instrument of Sir Ellis Leighton’s) did.’[103]

Phœnix Park granted to the Duchess of Cleveland.

Essex saves the park.

The success of Swift’s attack upon Wood’s halfpence was partly owing to the fact that the Duchess of Kendal was intended to be a gainer. A much worse injury to Ireland was projected by Charles II. when he granted the Phœnix Park to the Duchess of Cleveland, who, if we are to believe Marvell, had already made 10,000l. out of Berkeley as the price of his office. Later on he was ready to bribe her successor if she would get him reappointed. It was arranged that the grant of the park should not take effect in Essex’s time, and Arlington, whose daughter was betrothed to the favourite’s son, seemed to think that his consent was a matter of course. But Essex declared that the honour of his office was in his keeping and that the fact of his own immunity only made him the more determined not to injure his successors. To alienate the Phœnix Park would be to deprive every future viceroy of the only place where he could ride or walk in comfort, for the Castle was a house merely, and a very bad one. The venison was also a consideration. With the recent additions made under Ormonde, which had cost the King 10,000l., the area of the park was over 2000 acres and its value was certainly more than double that sum. All this it was proposed to settle on the Duchess and her natural sons by the King successively in tail male. Shaftesbury was Lord Chancellor, and to him Essex appealed as the proper person to prevent this monstrous job. He reminded him that Charles II. had learned to appreciate a chancellor who repeatedly refused to obey him in making grants which he knew were against his interests. We have not Shaftesbury’s answer, but the scheme was abandoned, though Essex was fain to find other lands of equal value for the rapacious Barbara. Ten years earlier he might have been unable to save the park, but poor Alinda was growing old and her numerous infidelities were well known to Charles. Nell Gwyn was and remained in favour, and Louise de Keroualle was fairly installed as the official mistress.[104]

The provincial presidencies suppressed.

Essex was ordered by his instructions to suppress the presidencies of Munster and Connaught which had been established in 1569. Ireton thought these provincial governments an unnecessary charge to the country, and Ormonde was much of the same opinion. Sir George Rawdon, who had found that Ulster did very well without a special governor, said it was ‘better for a son to have only a father than a grandfather also.’ Lord Berkeley, whose interest in the presidency of Connaught was merely pecuniary, objected to its abolition unless an income was secured to him; this was granted, and Lord Kingston, who was a local magnate and had done the work, was also provided for. Orrery secured royal favour by prompt resignation, and was very liberally treated as to money. He remained in command of the troops in Munster, but was refused leave to have six iron guns mounted at Castlemartyr, and his licence to keep cannon at Charleville was also withdrawn. He was never trusted by Essex, and long cherished the hope of superseding him.[105]

Intolerance of the English Parliament.

The Parliament which passed the Test Act was not likely to let Ireland alone. On March 8 the King cancelled his Declaration of Indulgence one month after he had publicly ‘resolved to stick’ to it. A week later the House of Commons took Irish grievances into consideration. Some Roman Catholics had been made Justices of the Peace and some admitted to corporations, and disorders had taken place. At Clonmel in particular, when the Protestant Mayor and corporation were returning on November 5 from the service commemorating the Gunpowder Plot, they were set upon by the mob, but no great harm was done. Archbishop Peter Talbot had been using his power to oppress loyal Papists, and the country was swarming with priests and friars. Colonel Richard Talbot had a troop of horse, and it was against him that the main debate turned, since he was agent for the recusants and had obtained the commission which was daily threatening the Revolution settlement. Henry Coventry used his influence to calm the House, but on the following day it was unanimously decided to address the King about Ireland.[106]

Address of the Commons.

A week later the address was brought up and agreed to without a division. The Commons demanded that the commission of enquiry into the Acts of Settlement should be revoked, as tending to the overthrow of those Acts and the disturbance of the kingdom. They required that Papists should be disarmed and that none should be suffered to be or to remain Judges, Justices of the Peace, Sheriffs, Coroners, Mayors, Sovereigns, or Portreeves. Titular bishops and abbots, especially Peter Talbot, were to be exiled as well as all regular clergy, ‘Convents, seminaries, and other public Popish schools’ to be suppressed. English Protestant settlers were to be encouraged, and it was specially desired ‘that Colonel Richard Talbot, who has notoriously assumed to himself the title of agent of the Roman Catholics of Ireland, be immediately dismissed out of all command, either civil or military, and forbid an access to Your Majesty’s Court.’ Such was the result of the treaty of Dover and the second Dutch war.[107]

The King’s surrender.

Proclamation against titular bishops.

Proclamation against convents, &c.

In a letter of the previous year Charles had directed that there should be no further prosecution for things done during the Civil War, thus carrying out the principle of the Act of Indemnity. He hesitated about cancelling this wise letter, and took no notice of the demand that Richard Talbot should be forbidden the Court. But on every other point his surrender to the Commons’ address was complete. It was known that Talbot had talked about his intention to tear up the Act of Settlement, but he was allowed to sell his troop and to go abroad. The Rupert commission of enquiry was recalled in July, after a debate in the English Privy Council, and the hopes of the dispossessed Roman Catholics were deferred until the day when Talbot should return in triumph to govern Ireland. In the meantime, Essex was ordered to encourage the English planters and Protestant interest and to ‘suppress the insolency of Irish Papists.’ A proclamation was accordingly issued forbidding them to keep firearms without a licence, but it was not very strictly executed, for the Lord Lieutenant discriminated between arms kept for offence or defence, and he had no intention of depriving gentlemen of their swords. By another proclamation titular bishops and other dignitaries, and all regulars were ordered out of the country, Peter Talbot being mentioned by name. Most of the bishops had to go, but there was a difficulty about the friars, because some of them had been useful, particularly the few remaining of Peter Walsh’s party, whose lives would hardly be safe abroad. On this point Essex wrote direct to Ormonde, whose policy about dividing the Roman clergy he exactly followed. John O’Molony of Killaloe, ‘the most dangerous because the wisest man of their clergy, made a composure of all the differences among the men of their religion,’ and the only chance of profiting by their dissensions was to encourage a few friars ‘who always have their little wrangles with the secular clergy.’ O’Molony, who played an important part later, had private means, and Essex thought him a pensioner of France, whither he now retired. Talbot went to Paris. Oliver Plunket remained in Ireland, but he thought it prudent to hide for a time and suffered considerable hardship, though in his case Essex had certainly no wish to be strict. On the whole the proclamation was very slackly executed, of which there were many complaints, and the King enjoined increased severity. A second and more stringent proclamation was accordingly issued with orders that all ‘convents, seminaries, friaries, nunneries, and Popish schools in Ireland be forthwith utterly suppressed.’ Ordinary secular priests were not included in either proclamation and were not seriously interfered with. The bishops and friars were a great source of expense to the impoverished gentry, and the Lord Lieutenant thought their banishment would not be unpopular, but, he added, should it be resolved to use like measure with all the seculars, it must be remembered that there were several hundred thousand Roman Catholics in Ireland and he would not undertake to keep the peace without at least fifteen or twenty thousand men regularly paid and available for duty.[108]

Ormonde and Essex.

During the time of Berkeley’s viceroyalty and for long afterwards Ormonde was more or less in disgrace and was carefully excluded from consultations concerning Ireland. When Cary Dillon, afterwards Earl of Roscommon, asked for his help, saying he had no friends but God and his Grace, the Duke answered that no two persons had less interest at Court. But he had influence in Parliament, and Essex sent him his proxy early in 1674, hoped to see him soon in Ireland, and acknowledged former friendly offices. In July he arrived at Kilkenny, and the Lord Lieutenant again expressed a wish to see him and to have an opportunity of consulting ‘one of so much experience as your Grace in the business of this country and of whose integrity there is so large testimony, as it may seem a lessening to your Grace even to name it.’ This was almost an invitation to Dublin, but Ormonde’s short visit to the capital was not an unequivocal success. He was the first subject in Ireland, though out of favour at Court, and his popularity was evident. Perhaps Essex thought that he rather overshadowed him, or it may be that his visitor did not care about a private position in a city where he had always been the chief person. But the friendly attitude of the two men was nevertheless steadily maintained, though courtiers tried to excite mutual jealousy. Essex refused to build barracks at Clonmel without the consent of Ormonde, who was chief owner of the place, and thanked him in 1676 and 1677 for efficient parliamentary support. At this time Ormonde was again summoned to the Council and was sometimes consulted, though the King was as cold in his demeanour as ever. Buckingham’s influence was at an end, and Ormonde became Lord Lieutenant again. He was as anxious for his predecessor’s honour as if it had been his own, and reminded him that great pains had been taken to make bad blood between them, but that he had nevertheless been always his sincere friend.[109]

The Tories still troublesome,

especially in Ulster.

During the whole time of Essex’s government there was great trouble with brigandage. Every here and there some leader appeared who had suffered by the Settlement, and a band was soon formed. The Dutch war, the legislation against cattle, and the poverty of the country generally encouraged idleness, for there was no money to pay even those who were willing to work. The gaols were often crowded, but little justice was done, for the chief sufferers were the poor, and their helplessness made them afraid to give evidence. Orrery and most of the extreme English party wished for a strong Protestant militia, but against this Essex set his face. He said the regular army was able to keep order, and no doubt it would have been had it been regularly paid. A good deal of republican feeling lingered among the survivors of the Protectorate, and where the Scots were strong the militiamen would be sure to sympathise with the Presbyterians of Scotland whenever they made a move. Orrery would be over the militia, and would thus be able to advertise his Protestant zeal and to show his importance to the Lord Lieutenant’s detriment. Essex said it would even be better to exercise martial law, an illegal course but one which had always been taken in Ireland when necessity required. He objected to giving a reward for bringing in offenders dead or alive, since it would lead to people wreaking private vengeance in the name of order. The worst outrages were in Ulster, but the mountainous parts of Kerry, Cork, and Waterford were seldom altogether free from predatory outlaws. In the winter of 1673-4 the Tyrone farmers had to seek refuge in the towns, and no one dared keep any money at home. Before the end of January some thirty offenders were taken and hanged, but the horses in Sir George Rawdon’s troop were worn out before the spring by bad quarters and ‘jaunting after tories.’ Before midsummer Essex was fain to issue a proclamation against giving protections to robbers and Tories, advantage having been taken of them to commit murder and burglary with impunity. A month later there was a further proclamation reciting an Act of Henry VI., which authorised all persons to kill any one found housebreaking by day or night, a reward for so doing to be levied off the barony. But in the following winter Armagh was again infested by highway robbers. In the year before the proclamation communications between Cork and Kerry were interrupted, and some parish priests in the latter county declared their willingness to excommunicate all Tories, murderers, thieves, and robbers with their aiders and abettors, and generally to help the authorities provided they were not required to give evidence themselves.[110]

Essex goes to England.

Before Essex had been three years in Ireland there were many schemes for upsetting him and many rumours as to his successor. Orrery, Halifax, Lauderdale, Ormonde, and Conway were all named, but there seems to have been no real intention of recalling him. In the summer of 1675 he went to England for what he meant to be a short visit. The King said he wished to consult him on Irish affairs, and named the Primate and Sir Arthur Forbes as Lords Justices. Essex had asked for such an opportunity of explaining matters as had been twice allowed to Strafford, of clearing up the remaining difficulties under the Act of Settlement, of making arrangements for collecting the revenue, and of discussing measures for an Irish Parliament in contemplation. On reaching London he found that he had enemies at Court, but that they had made no impression on the King. Revenue matters detained him unexpectedly for several months, during which he frequently met Ormonde at the Privy Council, and for a long time after this there was no further misunderstanding between them.[111]

Financial irregularities, Lord Ranelagh.

Hearth-money.

Richard Jones, Viscount Ranelagh, Orrery’s nephew and grandson of the prelate who had married Tyrone to Mabel Bagenal, had been much befriended by Ormonde, who procured his appointment as Chancellor of the Exchequer in 1668. The insight thus obtained into Irish finance no doubt caused him to conceive the idea of getting the whole revenue into his hands. The opportunity was afforded by Lord Aungier the Vice-Treasurer, who produced a paper showing the state of the finances for the five years ending with Christmas 1670. Ranelagh offered to collect all the taxes and to pay all the expenses of government. The revenue at this time amounted to about 200,000l., consisting of quit-rents and other land taxes, and of imposts settled upon the Crown by the late Parliament independent of anything that subsidies might produce. These were the customs and excise leviable according to rates fixed by law, ale-house duties, and the hearth-money granted as compensation for the abolition of knight-service and of the Court of Wards. Two shillings upon every fireplace or stove does not seem a very heavy charge, but it was leviable by distress and involved domiciliary visits, and it was manifestly unfair as between rich and poor. It was abolished in England by William III., but continued long afterwards in Ireland. ‘It still remains,’ wrote Howard in 1776, ‘a most oppressive burden on the occupiers of the wretched hovels in many parts of this kingdom.’ In the hands of farmers it was capable of great abuse. Ranelagh and his partners were given complete control of the finances from Christmas 1670 to Christmas 1675, and the Vice-Treasurer was forbidden to interfere with them. The farmers behaved after their kind. Poor men were often charged twice over, but the establishment expenses were nevertheless badly paid. In the summer of 1676 nine months’ arrears, amounting to 139,000l., were due to the army alone, and an unpaid army, Essex truly said, was like tinder. He could not rest well until he saw these poor creatures righted. He believed that if the Lords Justices had had 10,000l. they might have nipped the rebellion of 1641 in the bud, but the Exchequer was empty and they had no credit. He himself was in much the same position, and there were small mutinies at Drogheda and Kinsale. Everything connected with the army was out of order. There were scarcely 300 barrels of good powder in the country, nor 500 good muskets. ‘There is not one company in the whole army completely armed, their muskets being many of them out of order and of different bores and the pikes half of them broken, all guns and fieldpieces in the several garrisons generally unmounted.’ Ranelagh was himself made Vice-Treasurer in June 1674, so that there was no supervision whatever.[112]

Essex, Ranelagh, and Ormonde.

Though deprived of effective control Essex tried to keep the farmers in order, but they appointed numerous private collectors, and it was almost impossible to say who had a right to demand money. Moreover, the King and the Lord Treasurer did what they could to thwart him, and a letter signed by the one and countersigned by the other blamed him obliquely for ‘encroaching on the office of our said Vice-Treasurer.’ Many allowances were made for Ranelagh and much extra time was given him, but he could not be brought to account. The real reason of the extraordinary favour he enjoyed at Court doubtless was that he gave Charles ready money behind the Lord Lieutenant’s back, and if it be true that one of his daughters became the King’s mistress, as Henry Sidney reports, that might be an additional argument. Both Cleveland and Portsmouth made money out of Ireland. The King cared more about putting cash into his Privy Purse than about the public service. His state policy was influenced by this, as Louis XIV. well knew, and smaller people could play the same game. In March 1677, Ranelagh at last handed in an account up to the end of 1675, but declared that it was not final and that the items were liable to reconsideration. As it was confessedly imperfect, Essex refused to pass it. In the meantime, Ranelagh had fallen foul of Ormonde, attributing his own troubles to the mismanagement of Irish finance in the ten years preceding 1671, during the greater part of which the Duke was Lord Lieutenant. Ormonde had not much difficulty in defending himself, and retorted by showing how oppressive had been the system of collection under Ranelagh. The inferior tax-gatherers did not hesitate to remedy their own deficiencies by squeezing those whom they thought unable to defend themselves. On the Ormonde estate alone 13,000l. were demanded from tenants who were able to show that they owed only 657l., and where less powerful landlords were involved it was easy to imagine that the irregularities would be still worse. The King, after a full enquiry, exonerated Ormonde from all blame, but continued to heap favours on Ranelagh, who received an Earl’s coronet at the end of 1677. In 1681 a very large sum was still due, which Charles freely forgave. At a later date Ranelagh was Paymaster-General for many years, and was expelled from Parliament in 1702 for defalcations amounting to 72,000l.[113]

Scheme to make Monmouth Viceroy.

Charles sups with Ormonde.

Essex returned to Ireland in May 1676, but it did not seem likely that his future stay would be long. The King was inclined to think that he had been viceroy long enough, and there were plenty of candidates for the succession. Ormonde wished to be back in the Government, but in the meantime he supported Essex. He has, wrote Aungier, now Earl of Longford, ‘stuck to your Excellency with the zeal and courage of a true friend.’ Danby, who was not particular in money matters, supported Ranelagh, but the King refused to order Essex to pass an unsatisfactory account. Early in 1677 Ranelagh and Danby, with the help of the Duchess of Portsmouth, devised a scheme for making Monmouth Lord Lieutenant. He was to remain in England while Conway governed Ireland as Deputy with part of the salary and allowances, paying a round sum down and defraying many expenses himself. Ormonde said he would never visit Ireland while Conway governed it, and sought the help of the Duke of York, which was readily given. At the beginning of April Charles, who had not spoken to Ormonde, sent him word that he would come and sup with him. A splendid repast was provided at a cost of 2000l., and before leaving the King announced his intention of making his host Lord Lieutenant. Yonder, he said next day, ‘comes Ormonde; I have done all I can to disoblige that man, and to make him as discontented as others, but he will not be out of humour with me, he will be loyal in spite of my teeth, I must even take him in again, and he is the fittest person to govern Ireland.’ Long before, to judge by their demeanour, Buckingham had remarked that it was hard to say whether the Duke of Ormonde was in disgrace with the King or the King with the Duke of Ormonde. Essex was recalled with many handsome expressions, his successor stipulating that the same complimentary words should be used as in his own case. The letter had been signed, but Charles made the desired addition on the margin in Coventry’s presence. The new appointment was made without consulting Danby, and Essex was told that he might appoint Lords Justices and come away or wait for Ormonde’s arrival, just as he pleased.[114]

Ireland terrorised by outlaws.

With all his diligence Essex had not succeeded in getting rid of the Tories and other disturbers of the peace. Orrery was an alarmist, but he found it hard to get even murder punished. One very bad offender had his bonds cut by an Irish constable, and many local magistrates ‘living in lone houses, fearing their activity might cause revenge, are remiss.’ Lord Massereene reported that the southern part of Londonderry county was full of idle people ‘supporting themselves and their clans by the spoil of others.’ In Connaught Dr. Thomas Otway, Bishop of Killala, was particularly active, and had an equally low opinion of the justices, but approved the conduct of some Scottish iron-workers who cut off the heads of such Tories as they could catch. ‘This chopping of their heads doth much more terrify others from running out than hanging, though that doth pretty well when they come to it, but it is a long time first, they have so many friends not only Irish but English and some of them sitting on the bench ... all our justices are tantum non Presbyterians and I wish they were but tantum nons.’ The Presbyterians, said Otway, were nearly as subtle proselytisers as the Jesuits, and many scandalous papers against episcopacy were in circulation. Even the gentle Margetson reported that there were great meetings for no good, though they were professedly only to ‘hear the word.’ Considering the state of Scotland at the time there was some cause for alarm.[115]

Ormonde returns to the Government.

Irish doctors at Oxford.

Ormonde left London early in August 1677, and paid his first visit to Oxford as Chancellor by the way. He entered the town from the east with at least fourteen coaches and accompanied by the Duchess and several ladies. Anglesey was one of those who travelled with him. It was market day and the High Street was crowded with butchers’ stalls, but the Chancellor halted at St. Mary’s and heard a speech from South, who had long been public orator. From Carfax to Christ Church the street was lined by the undergraduates, more speeches being delivered at various points, and there was a dinner at Magdalen. The next day being Sunday the Lord Lieutenant heard two sermons at St. Mary’s and dined with Bishop Fell at Christ Church. Next day twenty-two degrees were conferred at the Chancellor’s request. Fell had begged him to be merciful, as plenty of unworthy persons might take advantage of such an opportunity, but Ormonde said he would be responsible for his men. They were nearly all more or less connected with Ireland, among them being Lord Longford, Sir Robert Southwell, and Robert Fitzgerald, who played a distinguished part in 1690. Then there was another speech from South, and Ormonde set out at once for Holyhead by the Banbury road. He had to time the journey so that all his coaches could pass by the beach round Penmaenmawr, over which there was no road. At Dublin he was received with great honour. To show his sense of the Duke’s friendly behaviour, Essex had not applied for Lords Justices as he had leave to do, but handed over the sword himself. There was not to be another change as long as Charles II. lived.[116]