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
“When I took leave of your lordship at the Court at Greenwich, you
were pleased that my fourth part of the fishing of the Bann, being
in controversy between Mr. Hamilton and myself, should remain, as it
was the former year, in sequestration; and that neither of us should
reap any benefit of the rent of the same, until the controversy was
decided by law.”
He went on to complain that the sequestrator, Captain Phillips, “pays
the yearly rent of the fishing privately unto whom Mr. James Hamilton
will appoint there; and thereby thinks to deprive me of my rights to
the fishing, to my great loss.” He, therefore, besought Cecil to let
him have the fishery again, and that meanwhile the Bishop of Derry
should be appointed sequestrator.
This protest led to an Order of the Privy Council on the 31st
October, 1608, setting Phillips aside. It runs:—“As Mr. Hamilton
has prayed that Sir Thomas Ridgeway be appointed sequestrator, and
Sir Randal MacDonnell has demanded that the Bishop of Derry be
appointed, the Lords of the Council suggest that they be appointed
joint-sequestrators; and, if they are not content with this
arrangement, the Deputy shall appoint some indifferent person as
sequestrator.” Chichester’s reply is not preserved. The State Papers
are at times mournfully vacant as to his correspondence. Cecil, whose
“Cabinet,” as the Earl of Northampton complained, “had been made the
treasury of the State’s whole evidences and intelligence,” lacked at
his death many precious papers. The “saint” and the sinner understood
one another.
Whatever answer Chichester sent, or rejoinder Sir Randal made, it
dawned on the Privy Council by the end of 1608 that the Bann had
been alienated by the Deputy. The King took the news bitterly. After
the Flight of the Earls he contemplated a grant of the river to the
London Corporation; and his anger was kindled against the devastators
of Ulster’s spoil. In January, 1609, Cecil was ordered to demand
explanations. He had commanded Sir Arthur in June, 1608, “not to
dispose of an acre” without authority from England. James I. assumed
that the grants fathered on Hamilton had been made in disobedience to
this injunction; but Chichester stoutly replied that they were gifts
for the benefit of the Earl of Devonshire under the Wakeman Letter. A
discreet silence was preserved as to the fact that he had transferred
to himself the non-tidal Bann and Lough Neagh along with MacDonnell’s
“fourth” under bogus patents.
Little as the Lords of the Council guessed the extent of his
profligacy, they grew suspicious. In April, 1609, Sir Randal obtained
an order that the Deputy should “direct trial of the controversy
with all convenient speed,” and “that his Majesty may be no further
importuned in the matter.” This command Chichester pigeonholed, and
his victim was left remoter than ever from justice.
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