Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 13.djvu/284

 268 IRELAND [HISTORY. Among other arguments in favour of this atrocious law was that used by Ashley, who said that if the bill did not pass the duke of Ormonde would have a greater estate than the earl of Northumberland. &quot; Achitophel&quot; must have laughed in his sleeve. Buckingham said every opponent of the bill must have &quot; an Irish estate or an Irish under standing,&quot; which nearly cost him a duel with Ossory, and much damaged his reputation for courage. That such a man as Buckingham should have so taunted such a man as Ormonde is characteristic of the most shameless reign in our history. Dead meat, butter, and cheese were also excluded, yet peace brought a certain prosperity. The woollen manufacture grew and nourished, and Macaulay is probably warranted in saying that under Charles II. Ireland was a pleasanter place of residence than it has been before or since. But it was pleasant only for those who conformed to the state religion. Catholicism was tolerated, or rather connived at ; but its professors were subject to frequent alarms, and to great severities during the reign of Titus Oates. Bramhall became primate, and his hand was heavy against the Ulster Presbyterians. It is humiliating to record that Jeremy Taylor began a perse cution which stopped the influx of Scots into Ireland. Deprived of the means of teaching, the Independents and other sectaries soon disappeared. In a military colony women werescarce, and the &quot;Ironsides&quot; had married natives. To use their own language, they saw the daughters of Moab that they were fair. Women are more religious. than men, travelling missionaries more zealous than endowed clerks ; and Catholicism held its own. The i Quakers became numerous during this reign, and their j peaceful industry was most useful. They venerate as i their founder Thomas Edmundson, a Westmoreland man who had borne arms for the Parliament, and who settled in Antrim in 1652. James II. The duke of Ormonde was lord-lieutenant at the death i (1685- o f Charles II. At seventy-five his brain was as clear as ever, and James saw that he was no fit tool for his purpose. I &quot; See, gentlemen,&quot; said the old chief, lifting his glass at a . military dinner party, &quot; they say at court I am old and doting. But my hand is steady, nor doth my heart fail To the king s health.&quot; Calculating on his ; loyal subservience, James appointed his brother-in-law, j Lord Clarendon, to succeed Ormonde. Monmouth s enter prise made no stir, but gave an excuse for disarming the Protestant militia. The Tories at once emerged from their hiding-places, and Clarendon found Ireland in a ferment, i It was now the turn of the Protestants to feel what perse- cution means. Richard Talbot, one of the few survivors of Drogheda, governed the king s Irish policy, while the lord-lieutenant was kept in the dark. Finally Talbot, ! created earl of Tyrconnel, himself received the sword of j state. Protestants were weeded out of the army, Protestant ; officers in particular being superseded by idle Catholics of gentle blood, where they could be found, and in any case by Catholics. Bigotry rather than religion was Tyrconnel s ruling passion, and he filled up offices with Catholics inde pendently of character. Fitton, a man convicted of forgery, became chancellor, and but three Protestant judges were left on the bench. The outlawries growing out of the affairs of 1641 were reversed as quickly as possible. Pro testant corporations were dissolved by &quot; quo warrantos &quot; ; but James was still Englishman enough to refuse an Irish parliament, which might repeal Poyning s Act and the Act of Settlement. In 1687 the Church of England discovered that there were limits to passive obedience, and at the close of the following year James was a fugitive in France. By this time Londonderry and Enniskillen had closed their gates, and the final struggle had begun. In March 1689 James reached Ireland with some French troops, and summoned a parliament which repealed the Act of Settle ment. The estates of absentees were vested in the crown, and, as only two months law was given, this was nearly equivalent to confiscating the property of all Protestants. Between 2000 and 3000 Protestants were attainted by name, and moreover the Act was not published. The appalling list may be read in the /State of the Protestants by. Archbishop King, one of many divines converted by the logic of events to believe in the lawfulness of resistance. Interesting details may be gleaned in Thomas Edmundson s Diary. The dispossessed Protestants escaped by sea or flocked into Ulster, where a gallant stand was made. The glories of Londonderry and Enniskillen will live as long as the English language. The Irish cause produced one great achievement the defence of Limerick, and one great leader Patrick Sarsfield. The Catholic Celts aided by France were entirely beaten, the Protestant colonists aided by England were entirely victorious (battle of the Boyne, Wil 1st July 1690; battle of Aughrim, 12th July 1691). HI Even the siege of Limerick showed the irreconcilable divisions which had nullified the efforts of 1641. Hugh Baldearg O Donnell, last of Irish chiefs, sold his services to William for 500 a year. But it was their king that condemned the Irish to hopeless failure. He called them cowards, whereas the cowardice was really his own, and he deserted them in their utmost need. They repaid him with the opprobrious nickname of &quot; Sheemas-a-Cacagh,&quot; or Dirty James. Irish rhetoric commonly styles Limerick &quot; the city of the violated treaty.&quot; The articles of capitulation (3d October 1691) may be read in Leland or Plowden ; from the first their interpretation was disputed. Hopes of religious liberty were held out, but were not fulfilled. Lords Jus tices Porter and Coningsby promised to do their utmost to obtain a parliamentary ratification, but the Irish parlia ment would not be persuaded. There was a paragraph in the original draft which would have protected the property of the great majority of Catholics, but this was left out in the articles actually signed. William thought the omission accidental, but this is hardly possible. At all events he ratified the treaty in the sense most favourable to the Catholics, while the Irish parliament adhered to the letter of the document. Perhaps no breach of faith was intended, but the sorrowful fact remains that the modern settlement of Ireland has the appearance of resting on a broken pro mise. More than 1,000,000 Irish acres were forfeited, and, though some part returned to Catholic owners, the Catholic interest in the land was further diminished. William III. was the most liberally minded man in his dominions ; but the necessities of his position, such is the awful penalty of greatness, forced him into intolerance against his will, and he promised to discourage the Irish woollen trade. His manner of disposing of the Irish forfeitures was inexcusable. Grants to Bentinck, Ruvigny, and Ginckell may be defended, but not that to Elizabeth Villiers, countess of Orkney, the king s former mistress. The lands were resumed by the English parliament, less perhaps from a sense of justice than from a desire to humiliate the deliverer of England, and were resold to the highest bidder. Nevertheless it became the fashion to reward nameless English services at the expense of Ireland. Pensions and sinecures which would not bear the light in England were charged on the Irish establish ment, and even bishoprics were given away on the same principle. The tremendous uproar raised by Swift about Wood s halfpence was heightened by the fact that Wood shared his profits with the duchess of Kendal. From the first the victorious colonists determined to make another 1641 impossible, and the English Government failed to moderate their severity (principal Penal Act, 2 Anne, c. 3). In 1708 Swift declared that the Papists were politi-