Retreat of Sarsfield.
Deserted by all but his own troop, MacCarthy made a desperate attack on the infantry who guarded the captured guns, but he soon fell covered with wounds. He was taken to Enniskillen, where he was very well treated, as Avaux testifies, and King James sent a doctor and a surgeon with wine and other luxuries. There were over 300 prisoners, most of whom were afterwards employed by Kirke to clean and repair the rescued but almost ruined city of Londonderry. The unfortunate runaways were mercilessly killed among the reeds and bushes. The pursuit lasted all night, and no quarter was given until the morning. The victors excused this bloody work as a natural revenge for Lord Galmoy’s perfidy. Avaux reported that a regiment of dragoons and three battalions of infantry had almost entirely disappeared. When MacCarthy was taken, a letter from Sarsfield was found in his pocket saying that he was encamped at Bundrowes and ready to attack Enniskillen on the west if MacCarthy and Berwick would attack it on the east. The French ambassador thought it much more likely that the garrison would crush the three armies in succession; and, in fact, Wolseley lost no time in marching towards Bundrowes, but Sarsfield, as soon as he heard of the rout at Newtown Butler, broke up his camp and retreated to Sligo. Berwick, who was threatening Donegal, also retired at the news, and effected an exchange of prisoners. Those who returned to Enniskillen had seen Hamilton’s ruined army march away from Londonderry. They had no wish to meet another victorious garrison, and Wolseley’s scouts saw their rearguard pass through Castle Caulfield, so that pursuit was impossible. One regiment of cavalry, two of dragoons, and three of infantry were formed from the defenders of Enniskillen. Of these Cunningham’s became the Inniskilling Dragoons, famous at Waterloo and on many other fields, and Tiffen’s grew into the Inniskilling Fusiliers. The fame of these troops was great in their own day, and when a London regiment made a loyal address to Queen Mary shortly before the Boyne, Tories and Jacobites called them Inniskillings in derision, while good Whigs hoped that they would be found such.[236]
Kirke at Londonderry.
Walker in England.
Tangier was a bad school, and Kirke showed during the Monmouth insurrection that he had learned its lessons only too well. Very little credit was due to him personally, but he treated Londonderry like a conquered city. The late garrison was made into regiments, and the claims of some who had done much were ignored. But Michelburn, who had served under him in Africa, was continued as Governor, and Walker, who hastened to get rid of his military character, was sent to London with the news and an address from the defenders to King William. While he was on his way, William’s letter of thanks and congratulation arrived addressed to the Governors, for only the bare facts of the relief had then reached London. Kirke filled up the blanks with the names of ‘George Walker and John Michelburn, Esquires.’ Walker travelled by way of Scotland, receiving the freedom of Glasgow and Edinburgh. Sir Robert Cotton, the great antiquary’s son, drove out as far as Barnet to meet him, and crowds followed him in the streets. He was presented to the King, who gave him 5000l., which was paid next day, adding that that was only a small part of what he owed him. On receiving the thanks of the House of Commons he made little of his own services. At William’s request Cambridge agreed to make him a Doctor of Divinity, but he did not go there to receive the degree. At Oxford, which he visited on his return journey in company with Archbishop Vesey, the same distinction was conferred on him in convocation as the defender of Londonderry, ‘and by that fact, as we hope, the preserver and avenger of all Ireland.’ In London, says Luttrell, he was caressed by all sorts of people, and entertained at dinner, and has the character of a very modest person.’ Tillotson said his modesty was equal to his merit, and that everyone was pleased at hearing that he was to be made a bishop. He spent about six months in England, exerting himself to obtain rewards and recognition for those who had suffered by the siege, not forgetting the services of the seven dissenting ministers.[237]
Burnet on the siege.
Walker’s True Account.
Mackenzie’s Narrative.
After giving a slight sketch of the events at Londonderry, Burnet originally wrote that ‘there was a minister in the place, Dr. Walker, who acted a very noble part in the government and defence of the town; he was but a man of ordinary parts, but they were suited to this work, for he did wonders in this siege.’ In the published history this was left out, and Macaulay was at a loss to explain the omission. Swift and Routh both blame the Bishop for not mentioning Walker. The explanation is not, however, far to seek. Burnet, writing in the summer of 1691, agreed with his friend Tillotson, and with society generally, in giving a lion’s share of credit to Walker, but he pretended to no exact knowledge of Irish affairs, and when the time came to publish his work he remembered that the late governor had detractors who were chiefly Scotch Presbyterians, remaining dissenters in Ulster, but established in the Bishop’s own country. He therefore prudently decided not to mention any individual hero, but to praise the resolution of the defenders generally. In other respects the revised narrative gained in accuracy what it lost in picturesqueness. Walker wrote an account of the siege, and published it by request soon after his arrival in London. It was done in a hurry, and to meet a pressing want—that the demand was great is shown by the three extant editions bearing date 1689, and by the translations into Dutch and German. Walker was soon attacked for claiming too great a share in the siege, for giving less praise than was due to Murray and others, and, above all, for not naming the seven dissenting ministers whose good service he had acknowledged. He then published a Vindication, saying that he did not know the names which he was accused of suppressing, and supplying the omission after inquiry. Some months later, when Walker had returned to Ireland, the Rev. John Mackenzie, who had been through the siege, published a more detailed pamphlet, declaring, among other things, that Walker was never governor, and giving nearly all the glory to the Presbyterians. Candid readers will not agree, but Mackenzie added largely to the facts recorded and is historically very valuable. His narrative is, however, dull reading compared to Walker’s account and the public had had enough of the subject. There were several minor publications connected with this quarrel. We can only regret with the very prosaic poet who wrote the Londeriad that the union between Protestants which danger produced should have passed away with it.[238]