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
Chichester’s “surrender” disclaimed the river and acknowledged the
receipt of compensation. Still, embedded in the Crown rental, by way
of a scrivener’s note of the trifling rent of 12s. 6d., lurked an
official declaration that the Bann and Lough Neagh belonged to him.
The humblest clerk in State employ knew that no rent for the Bann was
due by anybody. Yet a ledger in Government custody was burdened with
this falsehood in the year in which Balfour “exhibited articles unto
his Majesty against Sir James Hamilton.” No reason can be assigned
for the entry save one—an attempt to build up a defence to meet an
expected attack by the “discoverer.”
The “cooked” ledger consorts with the Lord Treasurer’s past, and with
what remains to be told of his future. The sequel unfolds the same
unending game of grab. Each development reveals a fresh crime, and
evokes renewed wonder at the miscreant’s resourcefulness. As fertile
in the closet as he was ruthless in the camp, Chichester may be
regarded as the embodiment of those vices which, amongst the people
he oppressed, made a byword of the rule he represented and the creed
he sought to spread.
CHAPTER XVI.
THE ESCHEATOR FOR ULSTER.
Once Buckingham’s protection had been purchased by the Lord High
Treasurer his confidence grew apace. Alive to the danger he had
escaped, Chichester strove to prevent further risks by providing
legal cover for his acquisitions. His attempt to shelter them behind
an Act of Parliament in 1615 had failed, but they would still, he
hoped, be safe if he could obtain a Patent for everything he held,
lawful or lawless, in his own name. The grants which Sir James
Balfour assailed rested on unenrolled assignments from Hamilton and
Bassett. Their origin could easily be traced by legal or official
prying; and Balfour’s foray, though thwarted, filled him with
concern. Since he had been appointed Deputy in 1605, Chichester had
not dared to take out any Patent in his own name unless with royal
authority, however freely he practised in the names of others. He
felt, nevertheless, that the stalking-horse system was out-worn; and
resolved to apply for an omnibus grant, directed to himself, which
should include the whole of his possessions—and as much of other
people’s as could be arranged for.
In 1619, assured of Buckingham’s help, he besought a King’s Letter
sanctioning a fresh Patent in his own name. In 1620 his Majesty’s
consent was signified; but it was limited to “a confirmation of all
his former grants by a re-grant.” The King, as a further precaution,
ordered a Commission “to ascertain the other persons in possession of
the territory, and to establish their rights.” His Majesty evidently
suspected his former Deputy’s pranks; but the royal attempt to
prevent their repetition was in vain. Chichester overleaped every
barrier; and, now armed with the King’s Letter, accomplished a feat
more daring than any he had previously ventured on.
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