On August 16, four days after the decree of excommunication was passed at Jamestown, an event happened in Scotland which was alone sufficient to destroy all Ormonde’s plans. It is less famous and was less important than the Glamorgan treaty, but it shows that Charles was his father’s son, and he even contrived to better the instruction. At Dunfermline on August 16, he was induced to sign a declaration in which he professed himself ‘deeply humbled and afflicted in spirit before God’ for his father’s sin in opposing the Covenant, ‘and for the idolatry of his mother, the toleration whereof in the King’s house, as it was matter of great stumbling to all the Protestant churches, so could it not but be a high provocation against Him who is a jealous God, visiting the sins of the father upon the children.’ He further declared his conscientious conviction of the ‘exceeding great sinfulness and unlawfulness of that treaty and peace made with the bloody Irish rebels, who treacherously shed the blood of so many of his faithful and loyal subjects in Ireland.’ For the future he would prefer affliction to sin, and employ no one who had not taken the Covenant; and he ‘recalled all commissions given to any such persons.’ The baseness of this declaration can hardly be matched in our history, but George IV. tried to emulate it when he authorised Mr. Fox to inform the House of Commons that he was not married to Mrs. Fitzherbert. Clarendon can only say that Charles was ‘absolutely forced to consent’ and other apologists take the same line, but Carte, with all his royalism, was not deceived by sophistry of this kind. He makes every allowance for Charles’s youth and difficulties, but with the scathing reflection that ‘if a man once gets over his natural magnanimity he is afterwards fit for anything; and having done one mean thing, is capable of doing ten thousand.’[190]
Charles had confirmed the peace.
His apology.
Effect of Charles’s declaration in Ireland.
The Commissioners of Trust support Ormonde.
The articles of the peace had been brought by Lord Byron to the Hague early in March 1649, and Charles had written twice to confirm them, declaring himself ‘extremely well satisfied.’ These letters were found by Carte among Ormonde’s papers, as well as the latter’s acknowledgment, so that their delivery is not doubtful. Charles did not deny the facts, and he sought for the means of neutralising them as much as possible. The emissary chosen was Dr. John King, Dean of Tuam, who had taken refuge in Scotland, and we have his own account of the interview where he received his instructions. ‘The Scots,’ said Charles, ‘have dealt very ill with me, very ill. I understand you are willing to go into Ireland. My Lord of Ormonde is a person that I depend upon more than anyone living. I much fear that I have been forced to do some things which may much prejudice him. You have heard how a declaration was extorted from me, and how I should have been dealt withal, if I had not signed it. Yet what concerns Ireland is no ways binding, for I can do nothing in the affairs of that kingdom without the advice of my council there; nor hath that kingdom any dependence upon this, so that what I have done is nothing.’ It is only fair to say that after Dunbar had been fought he took the opportunity of another trusty messenger to express his gratitude, begging Ormonde not to run any unavoidable personal risk, but to leave Ireland whenever he pleased. He had already advised him that Scotland was not safe, and that he should seek France or Holland. It took Dr. King about two months to get to Ormonde, and he at once undertook ‘through much hazard’ to take the answer back to Scotland. The Dunfermline declaration was already known in Ireland through other channels, and Ormonde at first thought the report was a fabrication circulated by the Scots politicians for their own purposes, but the Dean of Tuam brought a printed copy with him, and there was no longer room for doubt. This was on October 13, and Ormonde at once summoned the Commissioners of Trust to meet him at Ennis on the 23rd, and by their advice convened an assembly to sit at Loughrea on November 15. To the Commissioners he explained in writing that the Dunfermline declaration had been ‘by some undue means obtained from his Majesty’ upon one-sided assertions of the peace being unlawful and without hearing the other parties. For himself he was determined by every means in his power to maintain the validity of the peace as binding the King and all his subjects until the authorised representatives of the Irish nation should have ‘free and safe access unto his Majesty,’ provided always that the Jamestown declaration forbidding obedience to him as Lord Lieutenant should be revoked, that the bishops should acknowledge that they had invaded his Majesty’s prerogative, and that he and the necessary forces under his command should be freely admitted into all garrisons. The Commissioners of Trust accepted the excuses made for Charles, whose declaration they had read with ‘inexpressible grief,’ and for themselves agreed to the Lord Lieutenant’s provisoes. In order to prepare matters for the ‘assembly of the nation,’ they asked and obtained leave to go to Galway, and to confer with the standing committee of bishops there.[191]
A conference at Galway.
The bishops will not have a Protestant governor.
The excommunication maintained.
Six bishops met the Commissioners accordingly, among them being Darcy of Dromore, French of Ferns, who was Ormonde’s bitter enemy, and Lynch of Clonfert, who had protested even against the short delay interposed between the decree of excommunication and its publication. Bellings and his colleagues suggested that the peace and the maintenance of the royal authority were the only means of preserving union, and to this end they asked that the excommunication and declaration should be withdrawn with a promise not to renew them. It was understood by both parties that Clanricarde was Ormonde’s only possible successor, but the bishops could and did argue irresistibly that Charles had withdrawn his own authority ‘and thrown away the nation from his protection as rebels.’ With less wisdom they declared in the baldest way that it was a scandal to have a Protestant governor over Catholics, and that in the abortive agreement between the Pope and Henrietta Maria this had been provided against. They positively refused to annul the excommunication or to promise not to renew it, and they reiterated the complaints of bad administration already so often made against Ormonde. In conclusion they agreed that Clanricarde should govern with the consent of all parties and with ‘the King’s authority from the Lord Lieutenant which he conceives is in him’ until a free and lawful assembly should otherwise order. If such a body decided to treat with the enemy the Church would acquiesce, though she would be the heaviest loser, but they conjured the Catholics of Ireland to imitate the Maccabees, whose fears were greater for the Temple than for their nearest and dearest kinsfolk. The result of this preliminary conference was not very hopeful, but the compromise was accepted by Darcy, who two months before had been authorised to demand that Ormonde should put the viceregal authority into commission, the commissioners being all Roman Catholics nominated by the bishops. This he had of course refused to do, and Clanricarde was the only alternative.[192]