tions, he does not inform us; from whence we may probably conclude, that it was not of a very heinous nature; and that the doctor would insinuate, that the killing of a papist, though but upon a slight provocation, ought not to be punished, as a capital offence. But we find that lord Clarendon, in whose time it happened, thought very differently of this affair. For his lordship informs us, that at that gentleman's trial, «care was taken to have a good jury; but that they brought him in guilty; that great intercession was made with himself in his behalf; but that, in good earnest, the fact was so horrid, and so fully proved, and the captain had so little to say for himself, that he did not think him a fit object of the king's mercy." His lordship adds,3 "that the pannel was made up of the best men in the city; that is," says he, "men of the best reputation and credit, without regard to religion; and that there was as many of the one persuasion as of the other returned; that the captain excepted against as many of the jury as the law allowed him, who were all Roman catholics; but that the rest, who were very honest men, regarded nothing but the evidence and their oaths." Even chief justice Nugent, a papist, and one of the judges before whom this unhappy man, was tried, and to whom Dr. King has been pleased to give a most profligate character,+ "had been with his excellency, and desired he might intercede with his majesty, that he would be pleased to bestow the captain's estate upon his wife and children." Which, for any thing I have found to the contrary appears to have been done. CHAP. V. The affair of the quo-warrantos against the corporations not truly stated by doctor King. BUT these popish judges, not content with taking away the lives and properties of protestant individuals, conspired, it seems, with the popish lawyers, to destroy whole corporate bodies, by issuing quo-warrantos against their charters; al↑ Id. ib. p 204. 2 State Lett. p. 196. 3 1b. though (if we believe Dr. King) "there was not one of these corporations found to have forfeited, by a legal trial; so that all the corporations in the kingdom were dissolved without any reason, or pretence of abuse of privilege." * "Butz will any man believe, that lawyers (and some of them, this author acknowledges, understood their profession) would bring a quo-warranto against a charter, and not so much as pretend,any abuse, or forfeiture? Of Mr. Nangle, "Nangle, (attorney-general) arrivéd to a good perfection in the study of the law, and was employed by many protestants." King's State of the Protestants, &c. p. 55.-" Mr. Stephen Rice was (to give him his due) a man of the best sense among them (the popish lawyers), and well enough versed in the law." Ib. p. 54.-" It was before him (when chief baron of the exchequer) all the charters in the kingdom were damned." Id. ib.-Mr. Daly (afterwards judge) though a Roman catholie, yet understood the common law well, and behaved himself impartially.-Ib.p.55. + "The several corporations in Ireland having forfeited their charters by miscarriages, misdemeanors, and other offences during the rebellion in 1641, and since, Charles II. had empowered his chief governor of that kingdom to grant new charters to such of these corporations as he should think fit; and for such of them as should not make application for renew. ing their charter, to issue quo-warrantos against them for avoiding the same. And king James being informed that very few had made such application, directed his deputy Tyrconnel to cause these quo-warantos to be issued, by which their former charters were made void, and new ones given them with additional franchises. See Harris's Life of king William.—It appears from lord Clarendon, "that king James's intention in all this was nothing more than that religion should be no hindrance to the natives from enjoying the benefit of being freemen, and holding offices, as the rest of his subjects did."-State Lett. vol. ii. p. 8. But Dr. King was of a different opinion, and would have that benefit monopolized in the hands of protestants alone, excluding the papists from freedom, and votes in the corporations.”—State of the Protest. p. 66. "Upon much less provocation, Capel, earl of Essex, lord lieutenant of Ireland, that celebrated champion for liberty, and who was said to have fallen a martyr to it) thought the bringing of quo warrantos against the char ter of Dublin necessary. That chief-governor, in a letter to secretary Coventry, in 1674-5, on occasion of a trifling dispute between the aldermen and commons of that city, says, in my own thoughts, I am of opinion, and have been long so, that nothing will reduce this city to a due composure, unless it be the avoiding their charter by quo warranto, and granting them a new one; for the body of the commons are so numerous, and most of them being extreme poor men, are continually mutinous and factious: whereas, if they had a new charter, and the number reduced to fewer, and those named out of the most substantial chief trading men of the city, the then attorney-general, who was chiefly employed in that business, lord Clarendon makes very honorable mention in several of his letters, and in one of them mentions him,3 "as a man of great knowledge, very able in his profession, and of the best reputation for learning, as well as honesty, among that people."* But Dr. King's precipitate passion, or rather prejudice, against these popish judges and lawyers, seems to have so far transported him, that he has entirely mistaken, or misrepre sented, this transaction. "Lord Tyrconnel," he tells us, knowing that the protestants would not give up their charters, did endeavor to prevail with them, to admit papists to freedom and offices in their corporations, that, by their means, he might have their charters surrendered; but," adds he, "the resolution of the lord mayor of Dublin spoiled that design, and forced the king to bring quo-warrantos against them." Harris, in his life of king William, has retailed this story from King, and dates it in the year 1686, in the mayoralty of sir John Knox. But it is manifest, from lord Clarendon's authentic account of these matters, that the lord mayor and aldermen of Dublin, and many other corporations, had been prevailed upon before Tyrconnel's time, to admit papists to freedom and offices among themselves; « for his lordship had himself dispensed with no less than fifteen Roman catholic merchants of Limerick, according to the king's order, from taking the oath of supremacy, when admitted to the common-council of that sity and, in a letter to lord Sunderland, July 6th, in this very year, his excellency says, "that he had sent letters to all the corporations for giving their freedoms to all the Roman 3 Vol. i. p. 72. vol. ii. p. 373. 5 State Lett. vol. i. 4 State of the Protest. p. 67, & Ib. p. 304. whose interest it is to be quiet, I am confident, it would be the only way to bring them into order and peace."-Esser's Letters, p. 114. * And in another letter of May 30th, 1686, he says, " in the list of the persons added to the privy council, I find Mr. Richard Nangle; he is a very learned and an honest man."-State Lett. p. 226. + Dr. King, was so ridiculously prejudiced against such natives of Ireland, as were afterwards appointed to city offices under Tyrconnel's government, that not content to represent them as poor and unworthy, (the contrary of which can be proved) he tells us, "their very names spoke barbarities." State of the Protestants, p. 69.—So much it seems were the doctor's delicate cars offended with the harsh sound of Irish surnames. catholics as to his majesty's other subjects, without tendering them the oath of supremacy; and for presenting to him such as should be chosen into offices, that he might dispense with their taking the said oath according to the rules; that he had then received returns from about twenty of the corporations, all full of duty and obedience; and that, in some places, where they had two bailiffs, which are there the chief magistrates, they had, without any contest, chosen one of each religion." And although, in the year 1686, some seeming opposition, in that respect, was made by the lord mayor and aldermen of Dublin; or rather, as lord Clarendon expresses it," not so speedy a compliance given to the king's commands as he expected;" yet it is by no means true, that they were so very resolute, or uncomplying in that particular as King and Harris have represented them. On the contrary, it appears, that they afterwards not only complied with the king's orders, but also made a proper and reasonable apology for their not having done so sooner. For his excellency having sent for the lord mayor of Dublin to come to him, he, with the aldermen, expressed great readiness to obey the king in any thing he should command them; but said, that it being their constitution, that freemen should be elected only at certain terms, they could not prevail with the commons, without whose consent that rule could not be altered, though they tried twice, by his lordship's positive directions, to admit any freemen, till the usual time; and when that time came," adds his lordship, "all the Roman catholics, who made application, were admitted."* The following extracts from papers relating to the admitting of papists into corporations, and sent by secretary Coventry to lord Essex, in 1674, chief governor of Ireland, may throw some light on this affair. "In most of the corporations of Ireland, the freemen were generally papists in the year 1641, and so continued till about the year 1652; and although most of the persons who were then free, may now be presumed to be dead, yet there being a custom in most corporations, that all the sons of freemen are also free of the corporations whereof their fathers were free, there cannot but be now very many papists living, who are intitled to their freedoms in their several corporations. In the usurper's time, all the papists, that were freemen, were hindered from enjoying the benefit of their freedom. "Since the king's restoration, many disputes have happened concerning CHAP. VI. The behavior of the Irish priests, and new recruits, under king James, impartially considered. HAD Dr. King been as candid in his relation of facts, as he ought, and as he solemnly professed to be; at the same time that he reproached the papists of Ireland, with the forwardness of some of their clergy, and the insolence of the new recruits, at this period, in Dublin; he would have given us, at least, some intimation of the provocations, which both of the papists (in Ireland) who were formerly free, being admitted again into the corporations. "By a letter from the king, dated the 22d of May, 1661, his majesty declared his pleasure, that the respective former inhabitants, natives and freemen, and such as had a right to be freemen in any of the cities or towns in this kingdom (Ireland), should be forthwith restored to their accustomed privileges and immunities, and admitted to trade, in the said respective cities and towns, as freely as heretofore, without making any national distinction, or giving any interruptions, upon pretence of difference of judgment, or opinion, in matters of religion. Notwithstanding this letter, many of the antient freemen, that were papists, were kept out of several of the corporations, "His majesty afterwards, by his letters bearing date 26th February, 1671, in the time of lord Berkley's government, did again declare his pleasure that all the antient freemen of the respective corporations should enjoy their former freedoms and privileges. Yet in some of the corporations, in which the number of protestants is great, many of the papists are still kept out, and hindered from their freedoms. If they should be hindered from their freedoms, they will complain that there is no law to take that benefit from them ;that it is against the king's pleasure, expressly declared in his several letters, and since made public by proclamation that by the rules, papists, who are foreigners, may be admitted to be free in the corporations, and that it will be hard to bar papists, who are natives, from enjoying that freedom which has been already granted them.”— Lord Esser's Letters, p. 185-6-7, &c. In the heads of the bill to prevent the further growth of popery in 1703, we find these words," and whereas many persons, so professing the popish religion, have it in their power to raise divisions among protestants, by voting in elections for members of parliament, &c."—Com, Jour. vol. iii. f. 130. * These recruits were far from being such despicable creatures as Dr. King has represented them. They seemed to lord Cleadon to be very good men, well-sized, and as adroit (in their exercises) as could be expected of new men.”—State Lett. vol. ii. p. 54. These recruits were mostly Roman catholic natives; Of whom his ex |