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
By such help James Hamilton won a lodgment in Ulster. He at once
hastened to Dublin, and presented two King’s Letters to the Deputy.
One of them, dated the 16th April, 1605, entitled him to the entire
of Sir Con’s property, while another of the 6th December, 1604, gave
him land (unspecified) to the value of £100 a year. These warrants
startled Chichester, who had expected to make his own of the whole of
O’Neill’s possessions. In his eyes they revealed a woeful situation,
for they conferred on an outsider “of his Majesty’s gift the
countries and territories of Upper Clandeboye and the Great Ardes.”
This manner of looting O’Neill fell out with his plans—a stranger had
struck sickle in the corn he had sown.
Hamilton’s second grant of £100 a year was framed on the elastic
“Wakeman” model, and surpassed it in the romance of its origin. In
his impoverished Elizabethan days the spy used when he came to London
put up at the “Half-Moon” Tavern in Bow Lane. It was a house of call
for Scotchmen; and the landlord, Thomas Irelande, hailed from “the
North Countrie.” At that date the Scotch were by Statute the “ancient
enemies” of the English; but Hamilton, while acting as a scout for
the Scots, was also in the pay of England. When James I. reached
the throne he cannot have suspected this, and his Letter of the 6th
December, 1604, with other gifts, attests his gratitude.
Suitors for King’s Letters who wished to baffle inquiry or avert
jealousy often put forward some “John Doe” or “Richard Roe” as a
feigned beneficiary (as the Earl of Devonshire did) to mask grants
intended for themselves. Hamilton preferred that the name of his
innkeeper should appear in the royal Letter instead of his own. He
had, on the 6th November, 1603, and 18th May, 1604, been given a
valuable monopoly for the export of linen yarn from Ireland, and may
have thought it would be easier or more speedy to obtain further
grants if he remained in disguise rather than appear as the original
beneficiary. Whatever his motive, he showed himself as skilful as
higher personages in employing the machinery for juggling with
Patents. The name of the Innkeeper, Thomas Irelande, chosen for
insertion as the nominal Patentee, corresponded with that of another
“Thomas Ireland,” an escheator of Queen Elizabeth’s reign, who might
be looked on as the grantee by those who did not burrow too deeply
below the surface.
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