Ireland under the Tudors. Bagwell Richard
any Deputy could escape collison with the head of the Butler family, whose influence rested on lasting foundations and not on the favour of the Dublin Government. Moreover, permanent officials, who had powerful connections in the county, knew how to thwart their nominal superior; and, unless he happened to be a man of great tact, difficulties were sure to arise. Grey and Bellingham quarrelled with the Council. Sidney viewed the Ormonde of his day with unconcealed jealousy and suspicion. Strafford was at war with the Lord-Treasurer Cork and with the Vice-Treasurer Mountnorris; and his treatment of the latter contributed to his fall. Lord Fitzwilliam was beaten by a revenue commissioner, Lord Townsend by the boroughmongers; and the lawyers have often been able to make combinations enabling them to dictate their own terms. Australian governors can best appreciate the difficulties of Ireland’s rulers in past times.
Henry’s Irish policy; why it failed.
Henry VIII.’s plan for the government of Ireland was very different from that which his children pursued. Evidently he did not desire to plant colonists in the country, but rather to civilise the people as they were. By creating some of the great chiefs Earls, and by insisting on their going to Court for investiture, he hoped gradually to convert them into supporters. Such cases as that of Tirlogh O’Toole show that he knew how to be both gracious and just. On the other hand, the ferocity of his character was exemplified by his treatment of the five Geraldine brethren. He was a thoroughly selfish man, but in matters which did not concern him personally he had many of the qualifications of a statesman. Had England remained in communion with Rome, his tentative and patient policy might have succeeded in Ireland. The Reformation caused its failure, for there never was the slightest chance of native Ireland embracing the new doctrines. The monasteries had not weighed heavily on Ireland, and their destruction made many bitter enemies and few friends. By upsetting the whole ecclesiastical structure, Henry left the field clear for Jesuits and wandering friars; and his children reaped the fruits of a mistake which neutralised every effort to win Ireland.
FOOTNOTES:
247. Indenture in O’Carroll’s case, July 2, 1541, in Carew.
248. Submission of O’Donnell, Aug. 6, 1541; O’Donnell to the King, April 20, 1542: ‘Iterum Vestram Majestatem exortor, mittatis mihi instrumentum illud aureum, quo colla nobilium cinguntur, aut katenam, vestesque congruentes, quibus vestirer decenter, quoties accederem (data opportunitate) ad Parliamentum.’
249. Lord Deputy and Council to the King, Aug. 28, 1541; Four Masters, 1541: ‘he left them without corn for that year.’
250. St. Leger to the King, Dec. 17, 1541.
251. Articles binding Con Bacagh O’Neill, in S.P., vol. iii., No. 356: ‘Regem recognosco Supremum Caput Ecclesiæ Anglicanæ et Hibernicanæ immediate sub Christo; et imposterum, in quantum potero, compellam omnes degentes sub meo regimine, ut similiter faciant; et si contingat aliquem provisorem aut provisores aliquas facultates sive bullas obtinere de prædicta usurpata auctoritate, illos sursum reddere dictas bullas et facultates cogam, et semetipsos submittere ordinationi Regiæ Majestatis.’
252. Council of Ireland to the King, S.P., vol. iii., No. 357.
253. The King to the Lord Deputy and Council, S.P., vol. iii., No. 348.
254. The session was from Feb. 15 to March 7 or 10; see Lord Deputy in Council to the King, March 31, 1542; for the robbers, see same to same, Nov. 25, 1544.
255. See the submissions in Carew—MacBrien Coonagh, March 18, 1542; Rory O’More, May 13; MacQuillin, May 18; MacDonnell, May 18; Hugh O’Kelly, May 24; O’Byrnes, July 4; O’Rourke, Sept. 1; MacQuillin and O’Cahan, May 6, 1543. Lord Deputy and Council to the King, July 12, 1542, and Aug. 24.
256. Desmond’s visit to Court was between June 2 and July 5, 1542. Lord Deputy and Council to the King, June 2; J. Alen to the King, June 4; the King to the Lord Deputy and Council, July 5; St. Leger to the King, Aug. 27.
257. Indentura facta 26 die Septembris, 1542, in S.P. The signatories promised jointly and severally ‘usurpatam primatiam et auctoritatem Romani Episcopi annihilare, omnesque suos fautores, adjutores, et suffragatores, ad summum posse illorum precipitare et abolere ... omnes et singulos provisores ... apprehendere et producere ad Regis communem legem,’ &c.
258. Lord Deputy and Council to the Privy Council, Sept. 1, 1542; Four Masters, 1542.
259. Submission made at Greenwich, Sept. 24, 1542.
260. The creation was Oct. 1, 1542. The patent is in Rymer; the Herald’s account in Carew, Oct. 1. O’Neill was back in Ireland before Dec. 7, when the Irish Government wrote of him to the King. Tyrone’s style was—‘Du treshaut et puissant Seigneur Con, Conte de Tyrone, en le Royaulme d’Irlande.’
261. The heraldic account is printed in S.P., vol. iii. p. 473, from the Cotton MSS.; the O’Brien and Burke patents are in Rymer, Conatius being by mistake printed for Donatus; see the King to the Lord Deputy and Council, July 9, 1543; MacWilliam submitted much in the same terms as O’Neill.
262. Hill’s MacDonnells of Antrim, chaps. i. and ii.; Archdall’s Lodge’s Peerage, Earl of Antrim and Baron MacDonnell; Burton’s History of Scotland, vol. iii. p. 149. For the antiquarian controversy in 1617, see Carew, vol. vi., Nos. 183, 188, 189, 190. 191.
263. Hill, p. 37; John Travers’s Devices in S.P., vol. iii. p. 382.
264. Hill, p. 41; St. Leger to the King, June 4, 1543; Lord Deputy and Council to the King, June 5.
265. St. Leger to the King, July 18, 1543, and the notes; see also Carew, July 15 and 16.
266. Lord Deputy and Council to the King, May 15, 1543; same to same, Dec. 7, 1542, and the King’s answer.
267. St. Leger to the King, April 6, 1543; the King to the Lord Deputy and Council, Aug. 9; Lord Justice Brabazon and Council to St. Leger, March 24, 1544.
268. Lord Justice Brabazon and Council to the King, May 7, 1544; same to St. Leger, March 24, where the kerne are first mentioned in the S.P.; Privy Council to Lord Justice and Council, March 30; Ormonde to the King, May 7. In a letter to the King printed in S.P., vol. iii., No. 437, O’Reilly complains that his contingent cost him 600l., that eight