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 Stuart days no system of comparing or checking the King’s Letters
with the Patents existed, unless the Crown lawyers chose to direct
that precaution. If they were corrupt, the Crown was robbed. In
that era, official corruption was almost universal. No register of
Patents was kept, and grantees constantly strove to extend the limits
of their Letters, so as to secure more than the King intended. With
influential backing, any fraud was possible. If the grantee did not
enrol his grant the Crown was left without even a copy, and could not
always tell which of its possessions had been given away. Looseness
was fostered by lack of system as well as by lack of honesty.
The Attorney-General and Solicitor-General were supposed to oversee
the Patents. They were often needy adventurers, imported from
some London Inn of Court on the nomination of accomplices in the
Executive. The Lord Lieutenant was their master, and they did not
pretend to independence, but obeyed their superiors without question.
Honesty injured their prospects, and they seldom affected to practise
that unusual virtue. It was a time when much ecclesiastical property
was forfeit, especially in Ulster, where the downfall of the Gael
enabled the Statutes of Henry VIII. against the monasteries to be
at last enforced. St. Mary’s Abbey, Dublin, at its dissolution by
Henry VIII. reputed to be the richest in Ireland, held valuable
possessions in every province, and several fraudulent Patents made
raids on them. Many of these were given over to the Lord Lieutenant
and his confederates on flimsy pretences. Public advantage from the
confiscations was nil.
The King’s entourage was not fettered by vows of poverty. Courtiers
who boasted no virtue themselves did not look for shining examples
from Irish officials. They knew these men had left England for
their advancement, to make what they could out of a conquered
country. The Castle in Dublin was a coarse replica of the Court in
London. The spendthrift habits of James I. bred extravagance in his
underlings. To deceive that slobbering pedant seemed a small demerit
to the Anglo-Irish harpies who regulated their profligacy by London
standards.
The clearing-house of corruption in the metropolis for the sale
of offices and favours was kept by Michael Hicks of Ruckholt, son
of a Cheapside shopkeeper, who had been Burleigh’s secretary in
Elizabeth’s reign. Hicks was Cecil’s playfellow in youth; and at his
mart much was to be learnt of the schemes and foibles of great men.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account