THE EARL OF GLAMORGAN’S SECOND VISIT TO IRELAND.

The Earl of Glamorgan, actuated by private claims and public business visited Ireland early in 1645, as already stated. Returning to England he again set out for Ireland in March of the same year, but being defeated in his intentions, he had to delay his departure until some months later, arriving at length in Dublin either in July or August.

The Marquis of Ormond had been fully apprized of his Lordship’s mission through Charles the First’s letter from Oxford, dated the 27th of December, 1644, as also by personal communications with his Lordship during his first visit. The powers granted by the Crown to the Earl of Glamorgan and the nature of his patent, dated 1st of April, 1644–5, are matters of history, so remarkable as to have been already made the subject of distinct treatises, and their peculiar features ably discussed by Dr. Birch and others.

The dates of his Lordship’s several commissions and powers are:—I. On the 6th of January, 1644–5, a commission, of which a Latin translation is given in the Nuncio’s Memoirs.[A] II. Another commission dated the 12th of January, 1644–5.[B] III. Another warrant dated the 12th of March, 1644–5. And IV. a patent granting him, as Earl of Glamorgan, most extensive and extraordinary powers, dated the 1st of April, 1644–5.

At this period the Marquis of Ormond addressed a letter to the Earl, as follows:—[C]

“My Lord,

“Mr. O’Neill hath with him, to be delivered to the Commissioners that treated here, two kinds of dispatches, the one an answer to their paper of the 11th of November, which contains likewise conditional answers to the several requests made upon the propositions that were, for the most part, debated on in your Grace’s presence. This is drawn and sent with the full approbation of the Council; the other contains some observations of mine, together with undertakings in some points wherein I held it unseasonable to press the Council to a concurrence, considering that, in the paper transmitted by their advice, there is a clear and full obligation, both upon them and me, to transmit as bills whatsoever his Majesty shall hereafter direct for the good of his subjects. In these two I have stretched my authority to the uttermost that, either with safety to the treaty or myself it will endure, which meeting with equal desires of accommodation there, I doubt not will produce the intended effects of seasonable succour to his Majesty; and therein of safety to his kingdom. Having told your Grace that I am at the highest I will venture on in this great affair, I should beseech your Grace for accomplishment of those noble ends that induced you through so great and apparent dangers to undertake this your journey, now to set all your strength upon bringing it to a good (that is a speedy) conclusion; but my experience of your judgment and indefatigable industry informs me that such a request is needless.

“We have here reports (made I believe without ground of truth) of the manner of the Italian Bishop’s reception at Kilkenny; but though I believe not all here said of his errand, yet I conceive your Grace may observe something, the knowledge whereof might direct me how to govern myself, in the account I take myself obliged to give his Majesty of the coming of so unbidden a guest into his kingdom.

“I have not yet had time to put your commands touching the parties mentioned in your last letter, received by Col. Fitzwilliams, into a way of execution; but I shall not fail to satisfy your Grace, either in doing the things or in giving such reasons why I could not, as shall still manifest my being

“Your Grace’s most faithful Kinsman,

“and humblest servant,

“Ormond.

“Dub. Cast. 22 of Novem. 1645.”

This communication contains the Marquis’s remarkable expression of confidence in the Earl of Glamorgan, when he says—“my experience of your judgment and indefatigable industry.” Only that courtiers are as little to be put faith in as princes, one might take this as sufficient evidence of the King’s false estimate of his Lordship’s “judgment,” as expressed in his letter to the Marquis.[D]

His Lordship’s negotiations with the Irish related to the raising of a body of 10,000 men to be transported to England in the royal cause; their first destination being for the relief of Chester, which measure was to be promoted through certain arrangements to conclude a peace with the rebellious party in Ireland: to be mainly effected through important concessions being made to the Irish Roman Catholic Clergy, to afford extended religious liberty to their cause in Ireland.

It had been arranged that the political articles of peace, to be made with the Lord Lieutenant, should be published at once; but other articles, affecting the Roman Catholic religion, concluded with the Earl of Glamorgan, were meanwhile to be kept secret, until ratified by his Majesty himself. The Lord Lieutenant was disposed to act liberally; but the Earl of Glamorgan, from his political and religious bias, combined with his warm, enthusiastic disposition, was fully disposed to approve and support demands in which he saw no extravagance, but, on the contrary, anticipated much real benefit to his own party.

All his Lordship’s negotiations, treaties, plans, promises, all his well laid schemes, and all the plottings of his party broke down through delays and repeated disasters, further promoted by the pertinacity with which the clergy held out to the last for the entire acceptance and complete settlement of their every demand; indeed the Nuncio went so far as to insist on the necessity of having a Roman Catholic Lord Lieutenant.

On the 24th of December, 1645, the Earl of Glamorgan went from Kilkenny to Dublin to confer with the Marquis of Ormond. On the 25th he was received by the Lord Lieutenant with the greatest possible civility, and every assurance of regard for his Lordship. But on the 27th, the whole course of events had changed, causing his Excellency to adopt a totally different line of conduct; an unexpected circumstance having meanwhile brought to light transactions of which he was not previously cognisant, which naturally aroused his worst suspicions, at so critical a period.

Dr. Birch has very lucidly narrated the particulars. The Popish Archbishop of Tuam, President of Connaught, and one of the Supreme Council at Kilkenny, going into Ulster to visit his diocese, and put into execution an order for arrears of his Bishopric, granted to him by that Council, met with a body of Irish troops marching to besiege Sligo, and joined with them. When they came near that town, the garrison made a sally on the 17th of October, charged the troops, utterly routed them, killing the Archbishop of Tuam in the encounter; among whose baggage was found an authentic copy, attested and signed by several bishops, of the treaty concluded with them by the Earl of Glamorgan; together with an order from the Supreme Council for the arrears of his Archbishopric; a bull of the Pope; and several letters between the Archbishop and his agents at Rome, Paris, and other places.[E]

The result of these disclosures was, that when the Council was assembled at Dublin on the 26th of December, 1645, the Lord Digby came to the board, and charging the Earl with suspicion of high treason, moved that his person might be secured. This done, he proceeded to substantiate the charge on most irrefragable evidence; wherefore the Lord Lieutenant and Council gave a warrant for the commitment of the Earl to the custody of the Constable of Dublin Castle, in condition of a close prisoner.[13]

We have uninterruptedly, thus far, followed Lord Herbert, seen him created Earl of Glamorgan, and eventually engaged by Charles the First in an extraordinary and extra-official capacity in Ireland; where he was delegated by the King to act in certain matters intended to promote the royal cause. So secret and so unheard of was this mysterious affair, that it is without a parallel in history. A Protestant monarch and a Roman Catholic nobleman are the sole actors in this strange drama; a monarch whose crown was tottering to its fall consequent on successive losses, opposed to surprising successes continually accruing to his enemies; for the battle fields of Marston Moor and of Naseby were alone sufficiently disheartening to have paralysed even a stouter heart; yet he finds in addition that, to the surrender of Bristol, he may soon have to add that of the strong city of Chester. His immediate necessities, added to the increasing expenses of the long continued war, were rapidly impoverishing not only his nobles but the country. While his own and the public distress thus gradually lessened every prospect of success, one last ray of hope seemed to present itself to the unhappy monarch. There was still a chance of succour from Ireland, the acceptance of which, however, was fraught with many difficulties. The loyalty of the Irish, it was quite evident, could only be ensured by nothing short of conciliatory measures of a more than ordinary nature, especially if desired to bring over to his service ten thousand of his Irish subjects.

The King had written from Liskeard, in August, 1644, to the enfeebled Marquis of Worcester, respecting himself and his son, of “the value I have of you both,” assuring him, “that if God bless me, I will not be behindhand with either of you.”

The most ordinary delays pressed heavily on his Majesty, whose nerves seem to have been completely unstrung by successive misfortunes and the pitiable state of his entire kingdom. In June, 1645, he expressed himself to the Earl of Glamorgan, “I am glad to hear that you are gone to Ireland;” so keenly alive was he to the importance of the mission on which he had engaged him, and in one short sentence expresses the sincere trust of his heart, when he says—“So that, by the grace of God, I hope shortly to recover my late loss with advantage, if such succours come to me from that kingdom, which I have reason to expect, but the circumstance of time is that of the greatest consequence, being that which is chiefliest and earnestliest recommended you.”

No one better knew than Charles the First himself, that he was incurring great risk, that he was adopting a bold, daring course, which success would scarcely palliate, which nothing but his own ideas of expediency could extenuate, and from the effects of which, at best, he could only hope to escape by artifice or by some strange amplification of his royal prerogative. Whatever might be the issue, the King well knew that the means he had taken would divide the opinions of all classes, and leave the final decision open to endless litigation. Such, indeed, has been the result even of its failure, but the success of the Earl’s negotiations would have brought far more important interests to bear on the questions involved in such strange transactions, than has ever yet occupied the pens of historians or biographers.

The plan for realizing this last hopeful event appeared well arranged. The agent employed was unexceptionable, he was eminently loyal, he had laid his fortune in his royal master’s lap, and zealously offered to do his bidding to the utmost of his power. The King was not wanting in condescension, affability and every gracious expression in the acknowledgment of the money and means raised by, and the energetic operations throughout, of the Earl of Glamorgan. He and his father were further each offered a dukedom; and a matrimonial alliance was to rivet their future connexion. But the King had his confidence in this singular mission strengthened materially by his intimate knowledge that both as being in accordance with his religious and political sympathies, the Earl was the most fitting instrument he could employ in so delicate an undertaking. In what respect the Earl of Glamorgan acted inconsistently or over-zealously in this perilous affair does not appear; while, on the contrary, his wonderful tact, patient submission, and judgment throughout make his remarkable discretion in every act conspicuous.

The Earl of Glamorgan, on the 5th of January, 1645–6, was formally examined before the Lord Lieutenant and the Council of Ireland, a copy of which proceeding the Committee forwarded to Secretary Nicholas, the nature of which will be understood from the following copy of interrogations put to him, with his replies annexed:—[F]

1. “Did your Lordship enter into Articles of Agreement with the Rt. Hon. Richard Lord Viscount Mountgarret, Donogh Lord Viscount Muskerry, Alexander McDonnell, and Nicholas Plunkett, Esq.; Sir Robert Talbott, Bart; Dermott O’Bryen, John Dillon, Patrick Darcy and Geffry Browne, Esqs., for and on the behalf of his Majesty’s Roman Catholic subjects, and the Catholic Clergy of Ireland, or with any of them, and with which of them in the month of August last, or at any time since your Lordship’s coming into Ireland, for or concerning any grants, or commissions, to be made on behalf of his Majesty, his heirs and successors, to his Roman Catholic subjects, or their clergy; or did your Lordship make any articles or agreement with any other person or persons, for or concerning any such grants or commissions?”

Earl of Glamorgan’s Answer. “That being at Kilkenny, he did before Michaelmas last (but knows not the exact time), enter into Articles of agreement with the Lord Viscount Mountgarret, and for and on the behalf, &c.; for and concerning certain grants or concessions made on the behalf of his Majesty, &c.; and he did not make any Articles or agreements with any other person or persons for or concerning any such grants or concessions other than those in this his examination mentioned, for the matter of which he refers himself to the Articles; and that an oath of secrecy was taken by himself and the others to keep the said Articles secret, and conceives he hath done nothing but what he hath warrant for; and done without intention of prejudice to his Majesty’s peace and service, or to the Protestant religion, all circumstances considered.”

2. “Was there any counterpart of the said Articles delivered by the persons above named, or any of them, or by any other, unto your Lordship? And if so what have you done therewith? Who were the witnesses at the signing, sealing and delivering thereof; and where or in whose custody or keeping are the said Articles or counterpart? And were not John Somerset, Geffry Brown and Robert Barry present at the signing, sealing, and delivering of the said Articles, and subscribed their names?”

Answer. “That there was a counterpart to deliver to him, and it remains among his things at Kilkenny or Bonretty; he remembers not all witnesses, but refers to the counterpart, only he remembers Geffry Brown (who was entrusted to write the Articles), signed as a witness, and so did Lord John Somerset, whom he called to sign, but he did not read the Articles.”

3. “What is the substance of the said Articles?”

Answer. “He refers to the Articles for the substance.”

4. “Did your Lordship grant, conclude, and agree on the behalf of his Majesty, his heirs, and successors, to and with the persons in the first interrogatory named, or any of them, or any others, that the Roman Catholic Clergy of the said kingdom should and might from thenceforth for ever hold and enjoy all, and every such lands, tenements, tithes, hereditaments whatsoever by them respectively enjoyed within this kingdom, or by them possessed at any time since the 23rd of October, 1641, and all other such lands, tenements, tithes, and hereditaments belonging to the Clergy within this kingdom, other than such as are now actually enjoyed by all his Majesty’s Protestant Clergy; or did your Lordship make any grant, conclusion, or agreement to the like effect.”

Answer. “He refers as before, but conceives the Articles are not obligatory to his Majesty (to which he afterwards desired might be added these words, and yet without any just blemish of my honour, my honesty, or my conscience.)”

5. “Did the said Richard Lord Viscount Mountgarret and the rest of the persons above named, or any of them, or any others agree with your Lordship on the behalf of the Confederate Roman Catholics of Ireland, that two parts in three parts to be divided of all the said lands, tithes, and hereditaments whatsoever mentioned in the precedent question, shall for three years next ensuing the feast of Easter, which shall be A. D. 1646, be disposed of and converted for and to the use of his Majesty’s forces, employed or to be employed in his service; and the other third part to the use of the said Clergy respectively; and so the like disposition to be renewed from three years to three years by the said Clergy during the wars? Or, did your Lordship make any agreement to that or the like effect?”

Answer. “Refers to the Counterpart.”

6. “Did your Lordship agree for and in the behalf of his Majesty, his heirs and successors, that the Lord Marquis of Ormond, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, or any other or others authorised by his Majesty, should not disturb the professors of the Roman Catholic religion in their present possession and continuance of the possession of their churches, lands, tenements, tithes, and hereditaments, jurisdiction, or any other of the matters aforesaid, until his Majesty’s pleasure were signified for confirming and publishing the said grants? Or, did your Lordship make any agreement to that or the like effect?”

Answer. “That (for aught he knows), he did not agree for, &c.; but saith that he promised to use his best endeavours therein with the Lord Lieutenant.”

(And so on to the 15th Interrogatory.)

16. “Did your Lordship take an oath in these following words, viz.: I, Edward Earl of Glamorgan, do protest and swear faithfully to acquaint the King’s most excellent Majesty, with the proceedings of this kingdom, &c.”[G]

Answer. “He remembers something to this effect, but refers to original or copy, which he will produce.”

The proceedings involved by this affair, the Earl’s examination before the Council, the documents in evidence against him, his own counter-statements, the correspondence between parties, and especially Charles the First, who entirely repudiated and ignored the acts of his duped agent; together with the proceedings in Parliament, and opinions expressed there, with others published in the political tracts of those agitated times, have been handled by every eminent historian, and still afford abundant matter for dispute. Those who take up the cause of the King, censure the Earl of Glamorgan in most unmeasured terms: Hume assails his intellect, Carte charges him with forgery. While those who see in the whole transaction but another instance of the King’s duplicity, of his contempt of every obligation (which a Christian feels bound to respect), so long as he fancies expediency offers him, in his high position, a sufficient excuse for the boldest tergiversation, exonerate the Earl from the charge of having acted on his own responsibility.

Indeed it requires a large amount of credulity to believe that any subject, much less a man of the mild and honourable tone characteristic of the Earl’s whole conduct, could have acted as he did, otherwise than with a full and perfect previous understanding with his misguided sovereign, and empowered with sufficient proofs, if even legally insufficient instruments under his hand and seal to warrant his proceedings. That he had such powers is well authenticated, and that he did not abuse them is his highest merit. He did not coin money, or appropriate property, or commit any other extravagance, such as a man deficient in “judgment” possibly would have done, under the grant of similar powers.

We cannot be mistaken as advocates of his acts in the Irish affairs, by merely showing that those acts were in strict conformity with the injunctions of the Royal will; for so long as troops were required, no means were to be spared that were found absolutely requisite to gain the desired end. We rejoice that the warm-hearted Earl did not succeed, that all his negotiations failed, and that the exorbitant demands made on him destroyed the measures they were intended to render unbounded and permanent; at the same time, as a Roman Catholic, the Earl of Glamorgan acted honestly, consistently, and by no means extravagantly. The folly and blame and entire shame of the whole affair weighs heavily on the King’s memory.

While the death of the Archbishop of Tuam in October, 1645, led to this exposure in Ireland, very different circumstances conveyed the intelligence to England.

Sir Thomas Fairfax, having some dragoons at Padstow in Cornwall, boarded a packet boat from Ireland, and seized Captain Allen, one of the passengers, who threw a parcel and some loose papers overboard; among those recovered were the Earl of Glamorgan’s articles of agreement with the Confederate Irish Roman Catholics, and letters from himself. These were published by order of Parliament, the 17th of March, 1645–6[43]: viz. “Articles of Agreement made and concluded between the Right Honourable Edward Earl of Glamorgan, in pursuance, and by virtue of his Majesty’s authority under his signet and royal signature, bearing date at Oxon, the 12th day of March, in the 20th year of his reign, signed, sealed and delivered by the Earl, 25th August, 1645, in the presence of John Somerset, Jeffrey Browne, and Robert Barry.”

To this document was appended his declaration as follows:—

“I, Edward Earl of Glamorgan, do protest and swear faithfully to acquaint the King’s most excellent Majesty with the proceedings of this kingdom, in order to his service and in the endearment of this nation, and punctual performance of what I have (as authorized by his Majesty) obliged myself to see performed, and in default not to permit the army intrusted to my charge to adventure itself, or any considerable part thereof, until conditions from his Majesty, and by his Majesty, be performed.

“Glamorgan.

“Sep. 3. 1645.”

From the same source we have a letter addressed to Lord Culpepper, in which the Earl says:—

“My Lord,

“Having overpassed many rubs and difficulties, the expected work is at last compassed, which by what means it was retarded, your Lordship, perhaps, before hath learned; and will be more faithfully and amply related by the bearer, Captain Bamber, whom I have employed to his Highness the Prince, to give an account of the state of affairs here, and in what a mist we are for want of intelligence, whereby we might be ascertained of the King’s and Prince’s condition, which one Allen, a merchant of Waterford, proposeth to undertake a course for. And —— his Highness desire, which moved for 300 men for the Prince’s Life Guard, which the Irish party is willing should be sent him, by the return of such shipping as I have humbly desired from his Highness, might be sent hither to Waterford for to waft over the men, whereof six thousand are in readiness for the relief of Chester, which yet we hear holds out, and the other four thousand by the first of May are to follow. Your Lordship would extremely further the service by your representing to his Highness the necessity of a course of intelligence, that we might not [be] as we are now, buried in ignorance of his Majesty’s and the Prince’s being and condition: of which I hope your Lordship will vouchsafe me some light, that our motion may be according thereunto; by which likewise to be ascertained of your Lordship’s welfare and happiness would be most welcome news to,

“My Lord,

“Your Lordship’s most affectionate

“and humble servant,

“Glamorgan.

“Waterford, the 27th of Febr. 1645.”

Also to Lord Hopton he wrote as follows:—

“My noble Lord,

“If the report of the many difficulties wherewith I have struggled in compassing the designs of his Majesty’s service, have not before this reached you, a faithful relation of the whole will be made to you by the bearer hereof, Captain Allen, whom I desire your Lordship to present unto the Prince his Highness as an honest man, and one that proposeth a course of intelligence to pass between this country and his Majesty’s quarters, whereof there is great need. Now (God be thanked) the business is brought to that upshot, that the 10,000 men are designed for his Majesty’s service, 6000 whereof are ready for transportation; the means for which are wanting, unless your Lordship will please to solicit his Highness the Prince for transmitting what shipping those parts are furnished with, that all possible expedition may be used. We hear, God be thanked, that as yet Chester holds out, to relieve which the 6000 men are ready are transportation. This bearer hath intimated the Prince’s desire for having 300 men hence for his Highness’ Life-Guard, which may be transported to his Highness by the return of such shipping as shall be sent hither, for the aforesaid service. By his return I desire to learn from your Lordship, the King’s present state and being, that we may shape our designs accordingly. Thereby I should be most glad to know the Prince’s and your Lordship’s good success and prosperity, for which none can be more solicitous than I who am,

“My Lord,

“Your Lordship’s most affectionate

“humble servant,

“Glamorgan.

“Waterford, 28 Feb. 1645.”

In the same publication appears Fairfax’s communication to the Parliament, that he had given Captain Moulton of the Lyon, cruising on the Irish Seas, intimation of the enemy’s intentions, which resulted in his capturing a barque from Dublin, taking her into Milford Haven, and seizing various letters intrusted to one of the passengers.

Among these are copies of a long undated letter from his Lordship to his Lady, the Countess of Glamorgan, then resident at Raglan Castle. He writes:—[43]

“My dear Heart,

“I hope these will prevent any news shall come unto you of me, since my commitment to the Castle of Dublin, to which I assure thee I went as cheerfully and as willingly as they could wish, whosoever they were by whose means it was procured; and should as unwillingly go forth, were the gates both of the Castle and Town open unto me, until I were cleared: as they are willing to make me unserviceable to the King, and lay me aside, who have procured for me this restraint; when I consider thee a Woman, as I think I know you are, I fear lest you should be apprehensive. But when I reflect that you are of the House of Thomond, and that you were once pleased to say these words unto me, That I should never, in tenderness of you, desist from doing, what in honour I was obliged to do, I grow confident, that in this you will now show your magnanimity, and by it the greatest testimony of affection, that you can possibly afford me; and am also confident, that you know me so well, that I need not tell you how clear I am, and void of fear, the only effect of a good conscience; and that I am guilty of nothing, that may testify one thought of disloyalty to his Majesty, or of what may stain the honour of the family I come of, or set a brand upon my future posterity. Courage (my heart), were I amongst the King’s enemies you might fear; but being only amongst his friends and faithful subjects, you need doubt nothing, but that this cloud will be soon dissipated, by the sunshine of the King my Master; and did you but know how well and merry I am, you would be as little troubled as myself, who have nothing that can afflict me; but lest your apprehension might hurt you, especially since all the while I could get no opportunity of sending, nor yet by any certain probable means, but by my Cousin Brereton’s, Master Mannering’s, our Cousin Constable of the Castle, and my Lord Lieutenant’s leave: and hope you and I shall live to acknowledge our obligations to them, there being nothing in this world that I desire more, than you should at least hear from me. And believe it (sweet heart), were I before the Parliament in London, I could justify both the King and myself in what I have done. And I pray acquaint my father, who I know so cautious, that he would hardly accept a letter from me, but yet I presume most humbly to ask his blessing, and as heartily as I send mine to pretty Mall; and I hope this day or to-morrow will set a period to my business, to the shame of those who have been occasioned of it. But I must needs say from my Lord Lieutenant, and the Privy Council here, I have received as much justice, nobleness, and favour, as I could possibly expect. The circumstances of these proceedings are too long to write unto you, but I am confident all will prove to my greater honour. And my Right Honourable accuser, my Lord George Digby, will be at last rectified and confirmed in the good which he is pleased to say he ever had of me hitherto, as the greatest affliction that he ever had, did do what his conscience enforced him unto; and indeed did wrap up the bitter pill of the impeachment of suspicion of high treason in so good words, as that I swallowed it, with the greatest ease in the world, and it hath hitherto had no other operation than that it hath purged melancholy: for I was not at the present any way dismayed, so have I not since been any way at all disheartened. So I pray let not any of my friends that’s there, believe anything, until ye have the perfect relation of it from myself. And this request I chiefly make unto you, to whom I remain a most faithful, and most passionately devoted husband and servant,

“Glamorgan.

“Remember my service to my brother, my cousin Browne, and the rest of my good friends.”

There is also a letter from her Ladyship’s relative in Dublin, Mr. Roger Brereton, probably very near the same date, being the 5th of January, 1645–6.[43]

“Madam,

“I presume that some rumours of my Lord of Glamorgan’s being confined in the Castle of Dublin for some matters laid to his charge by the Lord George Digby have before this time come to your Ladyship’s hearing; I thought fit therefore by these few lines to let you know that my Lord is in perfect health, hearty and very cheerful, not doubting to give a satisfactory answer to what may be laid to his charge, I have so much confidence in your Ladyship’s accustomed discretion, that I know there needs no dissuasive arguments to your Ladyship from either grieving or taking any reports you may receive to heart too much, not doubting but his Lordship will ere long see your Ladyship, when you may partake of all things more fully than may be by writing. My Lord your uncle is in health at Bunraly, and with him there the Earl of P. my Lord John and my Lady Honora. I wish your honour all health and happiness, and am,

“Your Ladyship’s still faithful servant

“and kinsman,

“Roger Brereton.”

Mr. Brereton likewise wrote, as follows, to Colonel Pigot:—

“Worthy Cousin,

“I have here enclosed sent two letters to the Countess of Glamorgan at Raglan, her Lord being lately confined here to the Castle of Dublin; and lest her Ladyship may take things too much to heart, these letters are sent to add some comfort. Both my Lord and I shall acknowledge our thankfulness unto you, if you be pleased to use the best and speediest course you may, for conveying them to my Lady.***

“Yours, &c.,

“Roger Brereton.

“Dublin, January 5, 1645–6.”

The King in his message of the 29th of January, 1645–6, to Parliament, as Sir Thomas Fairfax and others believed, and as Vittorio Siri declares,—“thundered against the Earl in his Declaration only in appearance, that he might be thought not to have been privy to the obnoxious concessions made by the Earl in his Majesty’s name to the Irish Roman Catholics.”[13]

The next day the King addressed a private letter to the Lord Lieutenant, affording sufficient evidence of the shifts to which he had recourse to uphold his miserable policy, which no experience of ensuing hazards and vexations could induce him to abandon.

“Ormond,[13][25]

“I cannot but add to my long letter, that, upon the word of a Christian, I never intended Glamorgan should treat anything without your approbation, much less without your knowledge. For besides the injury to you, I was always diffident of his judgment (though I could not think him so extremely weak) as now to my cost I have found, which you may easily perceive by the postscript in a letter of mine to you,[H] that he should have delivered you at his coming into Ireland, which if you have not had, the reason of it will be worth the knowing; for which I have commanded Digby’s service, desiring you to assist him. And albeit I have too just cause, for the clearing of my honour, to command (as I have done) to prosecute Glamorgan in a legal way; yet I will have you suspend the execution of any sentence against him, until you inform me fully of all the proceedings. For I believe it was his misguided zeal, more than any malice, which brought this great misfortune on him and on us all. For your part, you have in this, as in all other actions, given me such satisfaction, that I mean otherwise, more than by words, to express my estimation of you. So I rest

“Your most assured,

“constant, real friend,

“Charles R.

“Jan. 30, 1645–6.”

On the 31st of January, 1645, Secretary Nicholas wrote to the Lord Lieutenant and Council of Ireland, as follows:—[13a][25a]

“My Lords,

“His Majesty having, with the Lords of the Privy Council here, heard and duly weighed your Lordship’s [letter] to me of the 5th present, concerning your prudent and grave proceedings, in the business of the Lord Edward Herbert of Raglan, so highly importing his Majesty, hath commanded me to send your Lordships his royal thanks, as well for your affectionate expressions of your tenderness of his honour, as your just resentment, how scandalous and disadvantageous such the said Lord Herbert’s proceedings might have been to his Majesty’s affairs and service here, and on that side, if the wise course your Lordships have taken to vindicate his Majesty, had been deferred. Your Lordships will, by the King’s own letter herewith sent, receive the particulars of all, that his Majesty can call to mind or imagine he may have done or said to the Lord Herbert in that business. And since the Warrant, whereby his Lordship pretends to be authorised to treat with the Roman Catholics there, is not sealed with the signet, as it mentions, nor attested by either of his Majesty’s Secretaries, as it ought, nor written in the style that Warrants of that nature used to be; neither refers to any instructions at all; your Lordships cannot but judge it to be, at least, surreptitiously gotten, if not worse; for his Majesty saith, he remembers it not. And as the Warrant is a very strange one, so hath been also the execution of it. For it is manifest, the Lord Herbert did not acquaint the Lord Lieutenant with any part of it, before he concluded with the said Roman Catholics, nor ever advertised his Majesty, the Lord Lieutenant, or any of the Council here or there, what he had done in an affair of so great moment and consequence four months before, till it was discovered by accident. This doth not sound like good meaning; and I am sure is not fair dealing. But his Majesty having, by his letter to your Lordships, left the charge against the Lord Herbert, to be prosecuted by your Lordships, I shall say no more of that unhappy subject.”

To the Lord Lieutenant he wrote the same day another and separate letter, viz.—[25][13]

“We are all here much amazed at the news of the Lord Herbert’s imprudent action (to say no more of it) which hath most extremely prejudiced his Majesty and his affairs here. Your Excellency, and the Council there, will herewith receive a full and particular relation from his Majesty, of all that he can call to mind concerning that business, wherein as the Lord Herbert hath dealt very unworthily with his Majesty, so it is believed, that even the Roman Catholics themselves will condemn him for his imprudent proceeding therein. For if his pretended Warrant had been authentic, yet to do anything thereupon without your Excellency’s privity, was a madness, rather than a folly; and the concealing so long what he had done argues something worse. The King hath commanded me to advertise your Lordship, that the patent for making the said Lord Herbert of Raglan Earl of Glamorgan is not passed the Great Seal here, so as he is no Peer of this kingdom; notwithstanding he styles himself, and hath treated with the rebels in Ireland, by the name of Earl of Glamorgan, which is as vainly taken upon him, as his pretended Warrant (if any such be) was surreptitiously gotten. And I am sure, that honour cannot be conferred upon him under the signet (as firmly as under the Great Seal, to all intents and purposes) as his Lordship’s pretended warrant and power is alleged to be, though there be no signet to it.”

In a letter from the King dated Oxford, March 22nd, 1645–6, addressed to the Queen while in France, he says:—[16]

“Dear Heart,

* * * “I find that Sir Edw. Nicholas his gloss upon Lord Glamorgan’s business hath made thee apprehend that I had disavowed my hand, but I assure thee I am very free from that in the understandings of all men here, for it is taken for granted the Lord Glamorgan neither counterfeited my hand, nor that I have blamed him more than for not following his instructions, as Secretary Nicholas will more at large show thee.”

On the 3rd of February, 1645, the King addressed the Earl himself, by his title, which we have just seen disputed:—

“Glamorgan,

“I must clearly tell you, both you and I have been abused in this business; for you have been drawn to consent to conditions much beyond your instructions, and your treaty hath been divulged to all the world. If you had advised with my Lord Lieutenant (as you promised me), all this had been helped. But we must look forward. Wherefore, in a word, I have commanded as much favour to be shown to you as may possibly stand with my service or safety; and if you will yet trust my advice (which I have commanded Digby to give you freely), I will bring you so off, that you may be still useful to me; and I shall be able to recompense you for your affection. If not, I cannot tell what to say. But I will not doubt of your compliance in this; since it so highly concerns the good of all my Crowns, my own particular, and to make me have still means to show myself

“Your most assured friend,

Charles R.[I]

“Oxford, 3rd Feb. 1645.”

But this letter was no doubt written by the King under some restraint, as it might be read both by Ormond and Digby. Yet no further evidence need be required of Charles the First’s consummate duplicity, or how thoroughly he could make a convenience of his subjects to serve his own subtle and deceitful policy.

The tone of these last three letters sufficiently shows the weakness of the cause in which they were interested; if we credit the statements they contain we are required to believe that Lord Herbert presumptuously assumed the title of Earl of Glamorgan; and that his treaty with the Irish Catholic party was without the privity, much less instructions of his sovereign!

Lingard says, “I have in my possession the original warrant itself, with the King’s signature and private seal; bearing the arms of the three kingdoms, a crown above, and C. R. on the sides, and endorsed in the same handwriting with the body of the warrant,—‘The Earl of Glamorgan’s especial warrant for Ireland.’”[62]

The Earl’s imprisonment created great sensation, many insisting on his release by force of arms. The General Assembly of the Confederate Catholics pressed for his being liberated, as absolutely necessary for the relief of Chester, then besieged, and in distress; for which service 3000 men were reported as being ready to embark, waiting only for the ships contracted for by the Earl, for their transport; the expedition being thus delayed through his imprisonment, and likewise the treaty of peace frustrated.

The Earl of Glamorgan was set at liberty on the 21st of January, on giving up to the Lord Lieutenant the Instrument by which the Confederate Catholics obliged themselves to the articles of their treaty; but he would not resign the command of the Irish troops, for England, intended for the King’s service; bail being accepted in £20,000, on his own recognizance, and the Marquis of Clanricarde, and the Earl of Kildare, for £10,000 each, to appear on thirty days’ notice.

Returning to Kilkenny, he zealously endeavoured to obtain from the Confederate Catholics acceptance of the Lord Lieutenant’s offer of terms to conclude a peace; but they, persisting in their exorbitant demands, refused to accept the slightest modification of their own views, so that the Earl was at length compelled to abandon his own measures in despair, only to fall under the suspicion of his own party as well as of his opponents. On the 11th of March, he wrote the following letter to the Marquis of Ormond:—[J]

“May it please your Excellency,

“The perfect knowledge I have of your Excellency’s desire to perform what may be of most advantage to the King our master’s service, makes me confident to lay before you what I humbly conceive may most conduce thereto; my duty and affection obliging me not only to adventure my life and fortune therein, but also plainly to declare my sense thereof; which being made known to your Excellency, I shall ever most willingly and readily submit to your better judgment. I, therefore, take the boldness to acquaint you, that as I intend (God willing) to go into France, without which journey I cannot possibly bring things to that height of advantage to his Majesty’s service, either in the business of shipping, ammunition or money, as I have designed to myself, and can (God willing) infallibly perform; yet if, before my own return, and during my abode in any of those places, the Articles of Peace should be proclaimed here, and not appear so really advantageous, as is by them in other countries expected. It would not only prove a cooling card to many, whose zeal otherwise would transport them to supply me gallantly in order to his Majesty’s service, but also perhaps render me incapable thereof; for which reason of great importance, I should humbly beseech that the cessation should be continued until about the middle of June next; yet so as that the condition of having the residue of the ten thousand men by the first of May next may be enforced by your Excellency, against which time, though I return not myself, yet shipping shall be provided, and that service no way neglected. But with this motion of mine I have not acquainted the Commissioners that are gone to Dublin, nor the Supreme Council, lest in some I might have raised a spirit I could not lay down: who might have taken a rise at this my inclination for the furtherance of his Majesty’s service, to countenance their backwardness in preparing the supplies, or in their unwillingness to submit to a perfect peace; than which nothing is more heartily desired or aimed at by me, to the end that, under your Excellency’s most judicious and wise conduct, all things may unanimously proceed to the furtherance of the King my master’s service, and the happiness and contentment of this kingdom. And to receive your Excellency’s commands hereupon I have sent Sir Vivien Molineux, who goes with me into France. And give me leave to tell you that the continuance of the cessation upon the terms above mentioned (without which I cannot resolve to go myself into France), will be likewise advantageous to your Excellency and this kingdom; since during it, the Nuncio (whose mission is only to the Confederate Catholics) will plentifully contribute here to the maintenance of the war against the common enemy. And your Excellency, giving me a power to engage your word with mine, I will promise you at my return, to bring for the King’s service and the good of this kingdom, ten, if not twenty thousand pounds sterling; which, if managed by you, I conceive will be better than £60,000, as hitherto moneys have been disposed. And of this business, if you please, you may acquaint my Lord Digby, to whom I have intimated something thereof in my letter. But your Excellency, nor my Lord Digby, need not be told with what secrecy my intended journey ought to be kept, though I fear not the Parliament, since I have bought a gallant ship at Galway, with 16 pieces of ordnance, and victualled for two months, manned with 34 good seamen, an excellent captain, and good pilots, of 300 tons, English built, and a good sailer. And for my return, I intend (God willing) it shall be with a fleet, which how it is to be left under your Excellency’s command, I hope you are already well assured, as you may be of anything within my power, who am,

“Your Excellency’s, &c. &c.

Glamorgan.

“Kilkenny, 11th of March, 1645–6.”

Ormond wrote from Dublin Castle, 4th March, 1645, naming “the sad certainty of the loss of Chester,”—the men, long expected, he hopes will arrive “seasonably for some other service;” and says, “there are many reasons against the prolonging of the cessation till the midst of June,” but especially “the inevitable ruin that must in the meantime come upon all his Majesty’s true servants,” promising in his next to send the “authority to engage me for such money as you shall be able, upon so small an assurance as mine, to get.”

On the 29th of September, 1645–6, the Earl addressed a letter of explanations to the Lord Lieutenant.

“For to endear myself to some, the better to do his Majesty service, it is true I did declare a promise from the King of the assent that after your Excellency’s time he would make me Lord Lieutenant. But it is no meaning of mine but to keep your Excellency in during your life, and not really to pretend unto it, or anything in discrimination of your Excellency’s honour or profit; or derogating from the true amity and real service which I have professed, and will ever make good towards your Excellency. And my intention was ever to acquaint your honour herewith, and I once intended to do it before my going to Kilkenny, but never to conceal it totally from you, though for some reasons it being hitherto omitted, I think it not necessary for the present but as an obligation upon me thereunto. And in witness of my true intent and meaning, I leave this sealed in your Excellency’s hands this 29th of September, 1645, at Dublin.

Glamorgan.”

The Earl being thus bound to continue his residence in Ireland, notwithstanding the unpromising aspect of affairs, we shall proceed, in order of date, to consider the position of his father, at Raglan Castle.

Footnotes

[A] Fol. 713. Also Carte, vol. i. p. 557.

[B] Nuncio’s Mem. fol. 715; and Carte, vol. i. p. 554.

[C] From MSS. Badminton.

[D] See page 78.

[E] Husband’s Collection, p. 787, &c. edit. London, 1646, fol. and Rushworth, Part IV. Vol. I. p. 239.

[13] Birch, p. 94.

[F] Bod. Lib. “Carte Papers, 1634–57, Ireland, 63.” No. 150.

[G] See page 124.

[43] Glamorgan.

[43] Glamorgan.

[43] Glamorgan.

[13] Birch, p. 121, and p. 124–5.

[13] Birch, p. 121, and p. 124–5.

[25] Carte, vol. ii. Append. No. xxiii. p. 12.

[H] See page 78.

[13a] Birch, p. 121, and p. 124–5.

[25a] Carte, vol. iii. No. 426, p. 446.

[25] Carte, vol. iii. p. 447.

[13] Birch, p. 133.

[16] Bruce.

[I] Harl. libr. 163, c. 3, 147. Birch, p. 356.

[62] Lingard, 5th edition, Vol. vii. p. 627.

[J] Bod. Lib. “Carte Papers, 1634–1657, Ireland, 63.”