The great fraud of UlsterHealy, T. M. (Timothy Michael)
History
The great fraud of Ulster
Healy, T. M. (Timothy Michael)
Ireland -- History -- 17th century; Ulster (Northern Ireland and Ireland) -- History
In June, 1661, Lord Donegall set sail for Ireland, furthered by
Treasury permits freeing him from Customs duties. On arrival in
Dublin, he sued for a Patent under the King’s Letter of the previous
February. No Lord Lieutenant was yet installed, as Monck (the
newly-made Earl of Albemarle) failed to come over. Three temporary
Lords Justices formed the Executive—viz., Lord Chancellor Eustace
and the now ennobled Coote and Boyle. £1,500 a year apiece rewarded
them for carrying out their functions, and they discharged them
exactly in the spirit of the Council of Henry Cromwell five years
before. The King’s Letter was addressed to this trio. Doubtless they
had been privily bespoken by Clotworthy in Lord Donegall’s interest,
for they responded to his requirements with such alacrity that a
new Patent was sealed ten days after he landed. Usually years were
occupied from the time the King’s Letter was lodged before a grant
could be got out. Many legal formalities had to be complied with;
and amongst these the law prescribed, as the most essential, a prior
public inquiry in order to guard against encroachment on the rights
of others. So vital to validity was this Inquisition that the Statute
governing Patents declared void any grant made without it.
The Lords Justices ignored the law, and issued to Lord Donegall a
Patent which snatched the Bann from the Londoners, and Lough Neagh
from the public, without inquiry or notice to anyone. A dispensation
called a “non obstante” was inserted in the Patent, which purported
to make it valid despite the non-holding of the inquiry. To include
in it a waiver of the Statute was but an added illegality. The
Lords Justices could not “dispense” with an Act of Parliament; and
the King’s Letter did not pretend to authorise the dispensation. Yet
the Patent of these ’prentice hands loftily announced itself good
“notwithstanding the Statute.”
By the agency of this paltry trio, Lord Donegall on the 3rd July,
1661, was allowed to consummate the iniquity which the “great Deputy”
begot in 1603-4. Their grant empowered him to assert anew a claim to
Lough Neagh and the Bann, which had been branded as untenable five
times in the previous half-century. Scotched by Strafford, assailed
by Sir Arthur Forbes and Sir William Power, denounced by Baron
Oglethorpe, exposed by Sir James Balfour, arraigned by Deputy St.
John, and blighted by a pedigree entailing every vice, it was revived
by a tricky exercise of power in an unsettled State, as a sequence to
Lord Massereene’s lease.
So rank was the repute of its illegality that Lord Donegall in the
following year applied for another King’s Letter to give it a lacquer
of legality. With this object he induced Charles II. to affix his
signet to a second Royal Letter containing the falsehoods already
exposed.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account