|
Execution of Strafford - The
Danger of arming Irishmen - Strafford's Opinions thereon, and Sir
Benjamin Rudyard's - Lord Castlehaven on the Grievances which resulted
in Rebellion - Intolerant Attitude of the Puritans - The Irish under
Arms on the Continent - Some of the Irish Leaders - Rory O'Moore - Sir
Phelim O'Neill - Owen Roe O'Neill.
The trial and death of
Strafford belong rather to English than to Irish history, but so
commanding a personality cannot be permitted to disappear from these
pages without any reference to the fate that awaited the Lord-Lieutenant
of Ireland on his arrival in London. The Long Parliament was opened on
the 3rd of November, 1640, and one of its first acts was the impeachment
of Strafford. Many of the charges against him related to his Irish
administration, but the most serious of them, in the eyes of the
Puritans, were his attempts to establish the arbitrary power of the
Crown and his enrolment of an army of Irish Papists, which he was
accused of intending to bring over to support the King against his
subjects in England. A deputation from the Irish Parliament, which had
so recently lauded him, arrived with a remonstrance of grievances
against him; and he was convicted of offences amounting in the aggregate
to constructive treason. The King made a faint attempt in the House of
Lords to save his faithful servant, but the Bill of Attainder was passed
on the 8th of May, 1641; on the loth, Charles signed the Bill by
commission, and on the 1 2th, Strafford was beheaded on Tower Hill.
It must be admitted that
Strafford's rule in Ireland, though vigorous and able, was far from
just; and while Ulster benefited thereby to the extent of the
establishment of one of her most staple industries, the linen trade, it
was accompanied, in the southern districts especially, by wholesale
spoliation, galling oppression, terrorism, religious proscription, and
even national degradation. The sowing of such dragons' teeth as these
must of necessity produce a plentiful crop of armed men, and such proved
to be the case.
Of the armed Irishman
Strafford himself had a wholesome dread. Even in the early days of his
viceroyalty he wrote on this subject a warning letter to the King when
Charles contemplated raising an army in Ireland. It had been the safer
for your Majesty to have given liberty for the raising five times as
many here in England; because these could not have been debauched in
their faith, where those were not free of suspicion, especially being
put under command of O'Neill and O'Donnell, the sons of two infamous and
arch-traitors, and so likely not only to be trained up in the discipline
of war, but in the art of rebellion also. Secondly, as your Majesty's
Deputy I must tell him, if the state of this kingdom were the same as in
Queen Elizabeth's time, I should more apprehend the travel and
disturbance which two hundred of these men might give us here, being
natives, and experienced in their own faculty as soldiers, being sent to
mutiny and discipline their own countrymen against the Crown, than of as
many more Spaniards, as they sent in those days to Kinsale for relief of
the rebels.
That this was no passing
phase in Strafford's mind, but a deeply rooted conviction, is proved by
his writing, many years later, under the stress of the threatened
Scottish invasion of Ulster, giving expression to his fears of dire
possibilities likely to arise from this arming and drilling the Irish.
What sudden outrage, he said, referring to Antrim's proposal, may be
apprehended from so great a number of the native Irish, children of
habituated rebels, brought together without pay or victual, armed with
our own weapons, ourselves left naked the whilst? What scandal of His
Majesty's service it might be in a time thus conditioned to employ a
general and a whole army in a manner Roman Catholics? What affright or
pretence this might give for the Scottish, who are at least four score
thousand in those parts, to arm also, under colour of their own defence?
It is not safe, he said, to train the Irish up more than needs must in
the military way, which . . . might arm their old affections to do us
more mischief, and put new and dangerous thoughts into them after they
are returned home. ...
Sir Benjamin Rudyard
expressed the same opinion. It was never fit, he said, to suffer the
Irish to be promiscuously made soldiers abroad, because it may make them
abler to trouble the State when they come home. Their intelligence and
practice with the princes whom they shall serve may prove dangerous to
that Kingdom of Ireland.
Events, to use a bold if
somewhat mixed metaphor employed by Mr. Tim Healy, M.P., were now
crystallizing, destined in the near future to return with a boomerang
influence. The four provinces of Ireland were seething with discontent.
The royalist Earl of Castlehaven, who was not prejudiced in favour of
the native Irish, and wrote as an eyewitness, enumerates in his Memoirs
the chief causes of the spirit of unrest which pervaded the country.
First, he wrote, they are generally looked upon as a conquered nation,
seldom or never treated like natural or free-born subjects; secondly,
that six whole counties in Ulster were escheated to the Crown, and
little or nothing restored to the natives, but a great part bestowed by
King James on his countrymen; thirdly, that in Strafford's time the
Crown laid claim also to the counties of Roscommon, Mayo, Galway, and
Cork, with some parts of Tipperary, Limerick, Wicklow, and others;
fourthly, that great severities were used against the Roman Catholics in
England, and that both Houses (of the Irish Parliament) solicited by
several petitions out of Ireland to have those of that kingdom treated
with the like rigor, which, Castlehaven adds, to a people so fond of
their religion as the Irish, was no small inducement to make them, while
there was an opportunity offered, to stand upon their guard; fifthly,
that they saw how the Scots, by pretending grievances, and taking up
arms to get them redressed, had not only gained divers privileges and
immunities, but got £300,000 for their visit (to England), besides £850
a day for several months together; and lastly, that they saw a storm
draw on, and such misunderstandings daily arise between the King and
Parliament as portended no less than a sudden rupture between them, and
therefore they believed that the King thus engaged, partly at home and
partly with the Scotch, could not be able to suppress them so far off,
but would grant them anything they could in reason demand, at least more
than otherwise they could expect.
Lord Castlehaven was not
alone in holding the views thus expressed. A large number of writers on
the subject expressed opinions almost identical to those given above;
among them James Howell, who says that the Irish had sundry grievances
and grounds of complaint, both touching their estates and consciences,
which they pretend to be far greater than those of the Scotch. For they
fell to think that if the Scotch were suffered to introduce a new
religion, it was reason they should not be punished in the exercise of
their old, which they glory never to have altered.
Great hostility
undoubtedly was shown to the Roman Catholics at this time. Petitions
which tended to nothing less than the destruction of their religion, and
of the lives and estates of recusants, were privately circulated among
the Protestants, and were countenanced by the very men who had the
government of Ireland then in their hands the Lords Justices, Sir
William Parsons and Sir John Borlase, displaying extraordinary
fanaticism, the former declaring, at a public entertainment in Dublin,
that in twelve months no more Catholics should be seen in Ireland. In
addition, it was reported with much confidence that the Scottish army
had threatened never to lay down their arms until the Catholic religion
had been suppressed, and uniformity of worship established in the three
kingdoms. Sir John Clotworthy publicly declared that the conversion of
the Papists in Ireland was only to be effected with the Bible in one
hand and the sword in the other, while Pym avowed that the policy of his
party was not to leave a priest alive in the land.
Such threats as these
were calculated to make men think, and as the Irish are as susceptible
to heat as iron, an ardent desire for liberty of speech and freedom of
conscience sprang up and burned fiercely under the current of opposition
which was directed against both. As we ourselves looked for, and have
benefited by, timely aid sent to the Mother Country in her need by that
Greater Britain beyond the seas, so Ireland, at that time, naturally
sought, in her extremity, assistance from her exiled sons scattered over
the face of Europe, many of whom in Spain, France, Germany, Poland, and
the Low Countries had acquired great military eminence, and were able
and willing of themselves to place both men and money at her disposal.
As early as 1611 Sir
George Carew had foretold that the dispossessed natives of Ulster would
some day rebel, that there would be a war of religion, and that the
Protestant settlers would be surprised. Unlike many others, no lying
tongue had been put into the mouth of this prophet, though thirty years
elapsed before his prophecy was fulfilled.
The army collected at
Carrickfergus by Strafford, before his fateful journey to England, was,
by the King's command, disarmed and disbanded, and by a very
short-sighted policy a licence was granted to certain officers from
Spain to trans- port 8000 foot for the service of any prince or state at
amity with us. These officers, who, though from Spain, were Irish, were
Colonels John Barry, Garret Barry, John Bermingham, John Butler, Hugh
Byrne, James Dillon, Richard Plunket, George Porter, and Theobald Taaffe;
and they naturally seized the opportunity thus afforded them to
communicate with the Irish on the Continent, offering them their own
services and those of Charles's disbanded Irish forces to regain their
lost inheritance.
The Irish chiefs were
soon busy intriguing in Rome, Madrid, Paris, and other Continental
capitals, clamouring for an invasion of Ireland, to restore Catholicity
and expel the English planters from the forfeited lands. Philip III of
Spain encouraged these aspirations. He had had an Irish legion under the
command of Henry O'Neill, son of the fugitive Earl of Tyrone, and John,
a brother of Henry's, was Colonel of an Irish regiment in the service of
the Arch- duke in the Low Countries. From a list of Irishmen Abroad,
compiled by that great Franciscan, Father Luke Wadding, we learn that
amongst other sons of Erin in exile were Don Richardo Burke, a man much
experienced in martial affairs, and a good inginiere. He served many
years under the Spaniards in Naples and the West Indies, and was the
governor of Leghorn for the Duke of Florence. There was also Phellomy
O'Neill, nephew unto old Tyrone, liveth in great respect (in Milan), and
is a captaine of a troop of horse; and James Rothe, an alfaros, or
standard-bearer in the Spanish army, and his brother, Captain John Rothe,
a pensioner in Naples, who carried Tyrone out of Ireland. In the Low
Countries, under the Archduke: Young O'Donnel, sonne of the late
traitorous earl of Tirconnel. Others are: Owen O'Neill (Owen Roe),
sergeant-major (equivalent to the present lieutenant-colonel) of the
Irish regiment. Captain Art O'Neill, Captain Cormack O'Neill, Captain
Donel O'Donel, Captain Preston.
The compiler of this very
curious document proceeds to state: There are diverse other captaines
and officers of the Irish under the Archduchess (Isabella), some of
whose companies are cast, and they made pensioners. Of these serving
under the Archduchess there are about 100 able to command companies, and
20 fitt to be colonels. Many of them are descended of gentlemen's
families and some of noblemen. These Irish soldiers and pensioners doe
stay their resolutions until they see whether England makes peace or war
with Spain. If peace, they have practised already with other soveraine
princes, from whom they have received hopes of assistance: if war doe
ensue they are confident of greater ayde. They have been long providing
of arms for any attempt against Ireland, and had in readiness five or
six thousand arms laid up in Antwerp for that purpose, bought out of
deduction of their monthly pay, as will be proved, and it is thought
they have now doubled that proportion by these means.
Early in 1641 the
smouldering fires of discontent began to blaze into rebellion. The first
movement is traced to Rory O' Moore, a member of the ancient family of
the chiefs of Leix. He married a daughter of Sir Patrick Barnwell; and
Colonel Richard Plunket, one of the nine to whom the King had given a
licence to transport troops, was married to his first cousin. With
O'Moore we find associated Lord Maguire, who, overwhelmed in debt,
retained but a small portion of his ancient patrimony in Fermanagh; his
brother, Roger Maguire; Sir Phelim O'Neill of Kinnard, fourth in descent
from John of Kinnard, or Caledon, youngest brother of Con Bacagh
O'Neill, first Earl of Tyrone; Turlogh O'Neill, his brother; Sir Con
Magennis; Philip MacHugh O'Reilly; Colonel Hugh Oge MacMahon; Collo
MacBrian MacMahon and Ever MacMahon, Vicar-general of Clogher.
The meeting of Parliament
gave O'Moore an opportunity to speak to Lord Maguire, an extravagant
young man of twenty-five, who, having married a Fleming, had influence
in the Pale as well as in Ulster, and whose embarrassments disposed him
to desperate courses. He began, said Maguire afterwards, to lay down the
case that I was in, overwhelmed in debt, the smallness of my estate, and
the greatness of the estate my ancestors had, and how I should be sure
to get it again or at least a good part thereof; and, moreover, how the
welfare and maintaining of the Catholic religion, which, he said, the
Parliament now in England will suppress, doth depend on it.
O'Moore, who possessed a
handsome person and fascinating manners, and who was well known to be
both brave and honourable, brought the Ulster men together in Dublin and
visited the northern province himself. He had already, he said,
ascertained that the principal Irish gentry of Leinster and Connaught
were favourable to the design of taking up arms; and urged that they
never would have a better opportunity of bettering their condition and
recovering at least a portion of their ancient estates than during the
present Scottish troubles.
In July, 1640, a cipher
code had been established between Sir Phelim O'Neill, in Ulster, and
Owen Roe O'Neill, in Flanders. Owen Roe was visited by Hugh MacPhelim,
afterwards one of the leaders in Ireland. Sir Phelim O'Neill was one of
those Irish gentlemen who by royal favour had been permitted to retain
some portion of their ancient patrimonies. At this time he was in
possession of thirty-eight town lands in the Barony of Dungannon, county
Tyrone, containing 23,000 acres, then estimated to be worth ,1600 a
year, equal to some ,10,000 of our money. Sir Phelim might, therefore,
have been content, so far as property was concerned. But, setting aside
patriotism, religion, and ambition, it is most probable that he
distrusted the Government and the King, and feared the doom pronounced
in Dublin Castle against all of his race and creed.
About May, 1641, Nial
O'Neill arrived in Ireland from Spain, bearing a message from John
O'Neill to the effect that he had obtained from Cardinal Richelieu a
promise of arms, ammunition, and money for Ireland when required, and
bidding his friends in Ulster to hold themselves in readiness. The
confederates replied that they would be prepared to rise a few days
before or after 3ist of October, as the opportunity offered. Scarcely
had the messenger departed when tidings came that Colonel John O'Neill,
titular Earl of Tyrone, had been killed in Catalonia, and Owen Roe
O'Neill was immediately communicated with and adopted as leader, with
Sir Phelim as chief of the sept until Owen Roe arrived.
Such were the first
beginnings of the Rebellion of 1641. |
