|
Charlemont the Last
Stronghold of the Irish in Ulster - Is besieged by Coote and Venables -
After a Desperate Defence it surrenders - The Dunfermline Declaration of
Charles II - The King's Defence of the Declaration - He repudiates "the
Irish Rebels" - Ormonde excommunicated - He applies to the Commissioners
of Trust - The Roman Catholic Clergy accept Clanrickard as Lord Deputy -
Ormonde leaves Ireland - Negotiations with the Duke of Lorraine -
Agreements signed, but come to naught.
The strong fort of
Charlemont was now all that remained in the hands of the Irish in
Ulster. The fort had been taken in a most treacherous manner on the 23rd
of October, 1641, by Sir Phelim O'Neill, who approached the fortress in
a friendly fashion with a large retinue, for whose presence he
apologized. Being welcomed by the governor, young Lord Caulfeild, and by
his recently widowed mother, Sir Phelim invited himself to dinner. At
the conclusion of a hospitable entertainment Sir Phelim's followers, at
a preconcerted signal from their chief, seized and bound Lord and Lady
Caulfeild, and surprised and disarmed the unsuspecting garrison. Lady
Caulfeild and her children were removed as prisoners to O'Neill's house
at Kinard, and later were " kept at a stone house near Braintree woods",
from which they were rescued by Captain Rawdon during the following
summer, when O'Neill's house was attacked during his absence and burnt
to the ground. Lord Caulfeild was kept a close prisoner at Charlemont
until the I4th of January, 1642, when Sir Phelim ordered him to be
removed to the Castle of Cloughoughter in Cavan. The first halting
-place of the escort was at Sir Phelim's house at Caledon, where it was
proposed to stay the night, and as Lord Caulfeild was entering the gate
he was shot in the back "with a brace of bullets" by Edmund O'Hugh, a
foster-brother of Sir Phelim, under whose directions some dozen of
Caulfeild's English and Scottish followers were also slaughtered. Sir
Phelim O'Neill was said to be in Kilkenny at the time of this murder,
and to have been sorely distressed at it. A contemporary writer states
that "Sir Phelim O'Neale, at his return, caused his foster-brother and
two or three villains more to be hanged who were conspirators in the
death of the Lord Caulfeild", but later evidence seems to show that the
assassin was allowed to escape.
After the defeat of the
Irish under Ever MacMahon, Sir Charles Coote determined to take
Charlemont, and early in July, 1650, having been joined by Venables, he
proceeded to besiege this the last stronghold of the Irish in Ulster.
The defence was desperate, even the women taking part, and in the frenzy
of their efforts acting more " like fighting Amazons than civilized
Christians". While the walls of the beleaguered fort were subjected to a
constant cannonade in the hope of effecting a breach, the assailants
were, whenever they attempted an escalade, greeted, in addition to a
hail of bullets, with an irruption of glowing embers or a cataract of
scalding water. Even when a breach was effected, red-hot ashes and
boiling water proved to be powerful weapons in the hands of infuriated
women, and the storming-party were beaten back after several hours'
severe fighting. Coote, with characteristic sang-froid, contented
himself, as Commander-in-Chief, by directing operations without taking
part in them, and finally, being satisfied with the progress made, sat
placidly in his saddle "smoking of tobacco at distance". Here he was
approached by Sir Phelim O'Neill, who, finding his ammunition running
short, and having only thirty men left fit to continue the fight, deemed
it wiser to come to terms. The
siege had now lasted over
a month, Coote had lost at least 500 men, and he was therefore glad to
comply with any reason- able request. Terms accordingly were arrived at
whereby the dogged defenders of Charlemont were allowed to march out of
the fort with their arms and baggage and Sir Phelim himself permitted to
depart on condition that he left Ireland. Thus on August the i4th, 1650,
Ulster passed completely into the hands of the Parliament.
If anything further were
needed to eradicate all Royalist proclivities in the province that
additional stroke came two days later, when on the i6th the King, at
Dunfermline, signed a declaration pronouncing the Ormonde Peace to be
null and void, stating that he was conscientiously convinced of the "
exceeding great sinfulness and unlawfulness" of it, and of allowing the
Irish the liberty of the Popish religion; for which he did from his
heart desire to be "deeply humbled and affected in spirit before God".
He deplored "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". Finally
he repudiated "the bloody Irish rebels, who treacherously shed the blood
of so many of his faithful and loyal subjects in Ireland".
There is only one
satisfactory solution of the problem presented by Charles's conduct: he
was the son of his father. In addition to his being a striking
illustration of
How heredity enslaves,
With ghostly hands that reach from graves,
he exhibited in a
superlative degree the results of his tutelage in turpitude. Not
naturally depraved, he was nevertheless not rigidly righteous, and being
morally colour-blind he failed to recognize the lines of demarcation
between right and wrong, and all his life he cultivated alike with
careless indifference "the lilies and languors of virtue, and the roses
and rapture of vice".
With the terms of the
peace which he repudiated at Dunfermline the King was perfectly
familiar, he having written, when they were submitted to him, to the
effect that he was "extremely well satisfied" with them. Now, when
approached on the subject by an emissary from Ormonde, he endeavoured to
palliate his procedure by blaming the Covenanters. "The Scots", he said,
"have dealt very ill with me, very ill. ... I much fear that I have been
forced to do some things which may much prejudice [my Lord of Ormonde].
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."
When the signing of the
declaration at Dunfermline became known in Ireland, the clergy talked
openly of withdraw- ing their allegiance from the King and forming a
fresh confederation. Ormonde, who had, under circumstances into which we
need not enter, been excommunicated, and had therefore been repudiated
by the clerical party, at once addressed himself to the Commissioners of
Trust, and summoned a general assembly, which met at Loughrea on the 1
5th of November, while he himself remained about ten miles distant, at
Kilcolgan. To the Commissioners he explained in writing that the
Dunfermline declaration must have been "by some undue means obtained
from His Majesty", and stated that he was resolved, notwithstanding, "to
insist upon and assert the lawfulness of the conclusion of the peace by
virtue of the aforesaid authorities, and that the said peace is still
valid, of force, and binding to His Majesty and all his subjects. And
herein we are resolved, by the help of God, to persist, until that we
and such as shall in that behalf be entrusted and authorized by the
nation shall have free and safe access to His Majesty, and until upon
mature and unrestrained consideration of what may on all sides be said,
he have declared his royal pleasure upon the aforesaid affronts put upon
his authority."
In reply to his
communication the Commissioners expressed their readiness to concur with
Ormonde's wishes, their disapproval of the conduct of the clergy, and
their willingness to proceed to Galway to expostulate with them. They
accordingly sent their representatives to the bishops at Galway, who, on
the 5th of November, returned an answer exhibiting all the fierce spirit
which they had displayed when the Papal Nuncio was in the height of his
power. They declared their intention, as Charles had " thrown away the
nation from his protection as rebels", to pay no further obedience to
the King's authority, and to return to the Confederacy. They refused to
annul the excommunication of Ormonde, but agreed to accept Clanrickard
as his deputy.
The General Assembly met
at the time appointed, but it was evident that the clergy, who now led
the people, had finally broken with Ormonde, and he therefore determined
to leave Ireland; and having applied to the Duke of York, in Jersey, for
means to do so, was supplied with a vessel of twenty-four tons and four
guns. On December the 7th a declaration was sent to the royalist
Lord-Lieutenant in which "the archbishops and bishops" stated that "by
their excommunication . . . they had no other aim than the preservation
of the Catholic religion and people, and did not propose to make any
usurpation on His Majesty's authority", for they conceived "that there
is no better foundation and ground for our union, than the holding to
and obeying His Majesty's authority, to which we owe and ought to pay
all dutiful obedience". Finally they begged the Lord-Lieutenant "to
leave that authority with us in some person faithful to His Majesty and
acceptable to the nation", and Ormonde, as requested, appointed
Clanrickard his Lord Deputy, expressing at the same time a hope that
their professed allegiance to the Crown implied full obedience to the
Deputy. This done, Ormonde, accompanied by Inchiquin, Bellings, Daniel
O'Neill, Colonels Vaughan, Wogan, and Warren, and other officers, set
sail for France on the nth of December, 1650. Commissioners soon after
were deputed by Parliament to treat with the Assembly of Bishops for a
final submission of the nation, on favourable terms; but the extreme
Royalists would not agree to such an arrangement, although the Irish
decidedly sacrificed their interests in rejecting it.
Ulster now being entirely
under the iron hand of the Parliament, any activity exhibited by the
country was almost exclusively confined to the south. In the new year a
project was started to mortgage Galway, Limerick, Athenry, and Athlone
to the Duke of Lorraine, who in 1646 had proposed to send 10,000 men to
England to help Charles I, and whose assistance had been requested by
the Irish clergy in 1649, when Duncannon Fort had been offered as
security for a loan of ,24,000. The negotiations hung fire until
Duncannon fell into Ireton's hands, when they naturally came to an
abrupt termination. The Duke was next approached in November, 1650, by
Taafe, acting under instructions from Ormonde. Meanwhile, as an envoy
from the Duke, the Abbot of St. Catherine's arrived in Galway about the
end of February, 1651; but Clanrickard thought his demands exorbitant,
and Sir Nicholas Plunket and Geoffrey Browne were sent to Flanders to
treat with the Duke himself. The Bishop of Ferns, representing the
clerical element, went on the same errand, and prevailed on Plunket and
Browne to "go on cheerfully in the contract", with the result that,
disregarding the instructions they had received from Clanrickard, they
signed, in the name of " the kingdom and people of Ireland", an
agreement with the Duke of Lorraine, according to which he was to be
invested with royal powers under the title of Protector of Ireland, he
on his part undertaking to prosecute the King's enemies, and to restore
the kingdom and the Roman Catholic religion to their pristine power and
state. This agreement was signed without Clanrickard's consent or
cognizance, and no reference was made in the document to the Lord
Deputy, who on his part covenanted with the Duke's agent, the Abbot of
St. Catherine's, that the Duke should give ^25,000 on the security of
Limerick and Galway, and of the whole nation generally, but without
binding any person's separate estate. It was also provided that u in
case of pressing necessity for the public service of the kingdom, the
Lord Deputy may make use of his power as hitherto accustomed".
Notwithstanding all these agreements and arrangements little or nothing
was done save that the Duke of Lorraine did actually give £20,000 for
Ireland ; but, as in all such transactions, there was a great deal of
waste, and in the end "the sheer money came far short of the first
mouth- ful . The Abbot "returned in the same ship that brought him, and
gave the Duke such an account of his voyage and people that put an end
to that negociation, which had been entered into and prosecuted with
less wanness, circumspection, and good husbandry, than that prince was
accustomed to use". The affairs of Charles II were reduced to an almost
hopeless state after the battle of Worcester (3rd September, 1651). The
towns in Ireland offered as security soon fell under the power of the
Parliament, and the Duke of Lorraine, contenting himself by vigorous
abuse of Clanrickard, left Ireland to her fate. |
