Ireland under the Tudors, with a Succinct Account of the Earlier History. Vol. 2 (of 3). Bagwell Richard
Чтение книги онлайн.

Читать онлайн книгу Ireland under the Tudors, with a Succinct Account of the Earlier History. Vol. 2 (of 3) - Bagwell Richard страница 17

СКАЧАТЬ declined to be bound by the results of such a monstrous order. It was hardly worth while to brand the character of the Queen’s officers, and to destroy the discipline of her troops for the sake of 10l., saved in the payment of a company of fifty. Radclyffe asked for a passport, and even offered to be tried by his own soldiers. Both requests were refused, and the Commissioners, who seem to have surrendered themselves to Bermingham’s guidance, declared that if fraud appeared on the face of the incriminating document drawn up by him, they would force Radclyffe to give the details which he had already refused. He was made to appear about 6,000l. in debt, nearly half of which was on account of Irishmen enlisted above the number officially allowed. The accused officer was then committed to prison, and Arnold, having undertaken to see his men paid, refused to settle the tradesmen’s bills for necessaries, alleging that all should fall on the captains. There may have been great negligence, but the Lord Justice did not venture to accuse Radclyffe of any false statement; and it must be admitted that, whatever his faults, he had managed to keep Leix and Offaly quiet. As much could not be said for Arnold, whom the English Council gently rebuked for taking such an extreme course with an officer of high rank, a Privy Councillor, and a man of family. There could be no objection to detaining him in Ireland if necessary, but he might have been left at liberty. Cecil and Leicester, after privately examining the voluminous and contradictory reports, declared themselves puzzled in some things, and advised Arnold to take a good many of the Irish Council into his confidence. They reminded him that Dixe, with whom he appeared unable to agree, was chosen for a man of honesty and ability. What Leicester and Cecil could not fully understand at the time, we shall hardly be able to clear up now. That Radclyffe had committed irregularities was not denied, that they were much smaller both in amount and in kind than Arnold supposed may be gathered from the fact that he was afterwards allowed to give a bond for 600l. to repay all moneys overpaid to him, if the balance should be against him at a final closing. Sir George Stanley gave a similar bond for 300l. Nicholas Heron, another captain whom Arnold treated with great rigour, was afterwards knighted, and died in the enjoyment of the Queen’s favour.81

‘Sir Thomas Cusack’s peaces.’ Shane in his glory

      While Arnold was occupied in exposing, and perhaps exaggerating the defects of military administration, the optimist Cusack was trying to keep Shane O’Neill in good humour. ‘Sir Thomas Cusack’s peaces’ became a byword in official circles. The last was made on the basis of leaving Shane all the glories of the O’Neills until the Queen gave him his father’s title. He was not to be brought before the chief governor against his will, and the disputes between English and Irish in the North were to be referred to arbitration. The Queen had made up her mind to brook the fact of a great O’Neill; but she positively refused to confirm the articles exempting him from attending on the Viceroy, and referring all to arbitration. Shane then declared that he would have all or none; but he signed a temporary agreement for the pacification of the borders, and he appears to have kept it for a time. Cusack, who was never tired of singing Shane’s praises, wished to have the Great Seal affixed to the original treaty; but the Privy Council dared not mention it to Elizabeth, the alterations being deemed necessary for her honour. That saved, there was every desire to humour the tyrant of the North. Elizabeth said she thought she had yielded enough, but was willing to have Shane’s disputes with the Baron of Dungannon’s sons decided in the next Irish Parliament. Shane dared to claim Lady Frances Radclyffe as having been ‘appointed to him by the Queen’s Majesty,’ and the Privy Council were afraid to say more than that the question must be left till Sussex reached the Court. How Lady Frances would have fared as Shane’s wife may be inferred from the way in which he treated his mistress. The Countess of Argyle, the accomplished lady who had left her husband for his sake, was chained by day to a little boy, and only released when wanted to amuse her master’s drunken leisure.

Shane’s offers of service

      Lord Robert Dudley, mindful of their old sport together, advised the chieftain to do some notable service, and thus deserve the royal favour. He answered that the Scots were rebels and traitors, who usurped the Queen’s lands and revenues in the North, and that he would drive them all out of Ireland for no greater reward than the pay of forty men. In other words, he would gladly have had the Queen’s help in adding the MacDonnell lands to his own.82

Ill-treatment and torture of O’Donnell

      Cusack’s anxiety to please Shane was so great that he had no feeling left for O’Donnell, whose fate might well have moved the hardest heart. Seven years before, he told the Queen, O’Neill when hard pressed by the Government had been glad enough to take refuge in Tyrconnel, to marry his daughter, to profess loyalty to the Queen, and to swear eternal friendship to his hospitable host. O’Donnell had been glad to hear his son-in-law talk so, and said that he would befriend him only as long as he was loyal. Then Shane had taken to intriguing with his clansmen, and probably, if we may judge by the sequel, with his father-in-law’s wife. After his treacherous capture O’Donnell was bound hand and foot, an iron collar round his neck being tightly chained to the gyves on his ankles. Night or day he could neither lie down nor stand up. ‘When he perceived,’ said the victim, ‘that I could not be undone after this manner, he thought to torment me after another manner, to the intent that he might have all my jewels, and so he caused the irons to be strained upon my legs and upon my hands so sore that the very blood ran down on every side of mine irons, insomuch that I did wish after death one thousand times.’ No Christian or Turk, he thought, had ever been treated worse, and besides his personal wrongs not less than 500 people of some condition, and at least 14,000 of the poor, had lost their lives through O’Neill’s cruelty. His son Con, whose cousins delivered him to Shane, had been induced by torture to promise the surrender of Lifford. The tribesmen refused to give it up, and Shane threatened to strike off his prisoner’s leg. While Con daily expected death, his tormentor blockaded Lifford with earthworks, and his cattle ate down the green corn for miles round. The castle was taken, and all Tyrconnel was then at Shane’s mercy.83

Release of O’Donnell. He goes to Dublin, where he gets scant comfort, and thence to England, where

      O’Donnell himself was released after a captivity of two years and nine months, partly perhaps because he had been a troublesome prisoner. According to Cusack, or rather to Shane, who was his informant, he had given up Lifford, promised many kine and much plate and jewels, and released his ancient claim to the suzerainty of Innishowen. In the absence of documentary evidence no one is bound to believe this, and in any case, promises extracted by torture could hardly be thought binding. O’Donnell was indeed in no condition to pay such a ransom, for he had lost all control over his country. He had incurred unpopularity by paying a pension to Argyle as the price of his faithless wife. O’Neill had, however, seized Con in revenge for the alleged breach of contract. ‘Con,’ said Sir Thomas Wrothe, ‘is as wise and active an Irishman as any in Ireland:’ he was married to an O’Neill, and there was a suspicion that the lady favoured her father rather than her husband. Cusack advised Arnold to give O’Donnell nothing but fair words, and a letter to Shane bidding him use his prisoner well. On reaching Dublin O’Donnell was accordingly received with outward marks of respect, but Arnold refused to give him any help or to allow him to go to England. He was reminded that his grandfather, who was ‘the honestest O’Donnell that ever was,’ never came to the governor but to ask aid when banished by his son, and that son was in turn banished by his son the present suppliant. Calvagh was told that he came not now for service but for help, for which he would go to the Turk, and that no O’Donnell ever did come for service, nor was able to hurt the Pale, except when allied with O’Neill, Maguire, Magennis, O’Rourke, and O’Reilly. The family quarrels of the O’Donnells could not be denied, but they might at least be matched by those of the O’Neills, and there was something savouring strongly of meanness in the rest of the answer, when we reflect that Calvagh had been in alliance with the English Government at the time of his misfortune. The cause had been determined against him beforehand, but he came before the Lord Justice and Council to hear his statement read, and to add what might be required by word of mouth. ‘Hearing his bill read,’ says Wrothe, ‘he burst out into such a weeping as when he should speak he could not, but was fain by his interpreter to pray license to СКАЧАТЬ



<p>81</p>

For Radclyffe’s case, see his letter to Cecil, Jan. 31, 1565, and the memorial of his other letters, Feb. 4; Bermingham to Cecil, Feb. 24; Answer to the Commissioners by the Earl of Sussex; Auditor Dixe to Cecil, Jan. 17 and 26. Dixe says he was not disliked, because he kept himself ‘in a mean and quiet state.’ See the Queen’s letter to Lord Deputy Sidney, July 22, 1567.

<p>82</p>

Articles between Cusack and O’Neill, Nov. 18, 1563. The following is the article struck out by the Queen: – ‘Non est habendum pro violatione pacis si non accedat personaliter ad gubernatorem, antequam intelligat an is est illi amicus et favorabilis an non, et si aliqua contentio oriatur inter Angliam et Hiberniam a boreali parte, quod probi viri eligantur ab utraque parte ad dirimendum has controversias sine pacis violatione.’ Truce between Cusack and O’Neill, March 1, 1564; the Queen to Cusack, June 24, 1564; Privy Council to same, April 2; Cusack to Cecil, March 22; Randolph to same, Dec. 24 (S.P., Scotland); Cusack to Dudley, June 9; O’Neill to Lord Justice and Council, Aug. 18, 1564: – ‘Ipse autem et mei non intelleximus in hac boreali parte majores rebelles et proditores Celsitudini Reginæ quam Scotos qui absque Suæ Celsitudinis consensu usurpant.’

<p>83</p>

O’Donnell to the Queen, May 14 and Oct. 24, 1564; Wrothe to Lord R. Dudley, July 23. The deed for the surrender of Lifford is dated July 12. Old O’Donnell was released before April 17.