Corpus of Electronic Texts Edition

A Jacobite narrative of the war in Ireland (Author: Unknown)

p.v

Editor's preface

Few documents have come down to us from the Irish, whose resistance to England from 1688 to 1691 attracted the attention of Europe. The paucity of contemporary Jacobite writings in connection with the affairs of Ireland is assignable to the results which followed the ill-success of the Irish movements for James II., and to the calamities in which favourers of the house of Stuart were involved through the operation of penal laws. The contemporary books and tracts in relation to Irish affairs from 1688 to 1691, printed at London, were issued under governmental supervision, and as publication was not permitted without official licence, the Jacobites were effectively excluded from the press in Great Britain and Ireland.

The Narrative printed in the present volume is contained in a manuscript of which only two copies are known to exist. These were apparently transcribed about the year 1711, and are in the ordinary style of English writing of that time.

One of the copies has been long in the possession of the Plunkets, earls of Fingall, in the peerage of Ireland. The second copy was, early in the last century, acquired by Thomas Carte, author of the Life of

p.vi

The work is anonymous, and little information has been obtained as to its authorship. According to a late earl of Fingall, family tradition ascribed the production to Nicholas Plunket. He is said to have been an eminent lawyer, member of a branch of the house of Fingall, but of his career no precise details are accessible.

The Plunkets or Plunketts were among the most eminent of the Anglo-Irish Roman-Catholic adherents of Charles I. and his family. The chief houses of the Plunkets were those of which the heads were the earl of Fingall, the barons of Dunsany and Louth. Peter'Plunket, fourth earl of Fingall, was only eight years of age at the accession of James II. in 1685. Christopher Plunket, lord Dunsany, served that king as a captain in the cavalry regiment of Henry Luttrell. Captains, lieutenants and ensigns of the name of Plunket were included in the infantry regiment levied for the same king by Oliver Plunket, lord Louth. In the Light to the Blind are incidentally mentioned sir Nicholas Plunket, member of the supreme council of the Irish Confederation, 1642, and Margaret Plunket, dowager countess of Fingall, one of the witnesses to the birth of prince James Francis Edward Stuart. The Narrative here printed contains references to Walter Plunket, a commissioner of the mint at Dublin for James II; Richard and Christopher Plunket, of the regiment of lord Louth; and brigadier Patrick Plunket, described as a very experienced officer of foreign education,’’

The author of the Narrative may have been connected with Plunket, who, under the pseudonyme of "John Rogers," acted in 1713-14 as a diligent secret agent in England and on the continent in the interest of James Francis Edward Stuart, with whose secretary, David Nairne, he maintained communications in relation to the projected return of that

p.vii

The Narrative is the production of an earnest advocate of the Stuart cause and of the rights of the Roman Catholics of Great Britain and Ireland. James II. is throughout styled the king of England, and William III. is designated the prince of Orange. The conduct of the adherents of William III. in Ireland is, in the Narrative, referred to as a revolt against the authority of the lawful monarch.

As elucidatory of the position of the Irish at the accession of James II., there is, in the present volume, prefixed to the Narrative, the author's account of the treatment of Irish royalists under the acts of settlement and explanation, 1661-65.

The Narrative supplies accurate information not elsewhere accessible on affairs of England and Ireland at the period of the Revolution of 1688, and in relation to persons engaged in the civil transactions and military operations of the time. The author was apparently acquainted with individuals who had taken prominent parts in the affairs which he chronicles. Statements and views expressed among the Jacobites on the various events and matters in which they were concerned, are detailed and discussed in the Narrative.

A strong belief in the capacity and integrity of the lord lieutenant, Richard Talbot, duke of Tyrconnell, is expressed by the author. The duke's death, he wrote, pulled down a mighty edifice—a considerable Catholic nation—for there was no other subject left able to support the national cause.’’

Our author was of opinion that if the duke of Tyrconnell had lived, he would not have accepted any offer for the surrender of Limerick, because he expected to retrieve the country by protracting the war. Tyrconnell, we are assured, grounded his

p.viii

Sarsfield is censured by our author for having joined the party of officers who dissented from the views of Tyrconnell, when he proposed to make terms with William III. before the siege of Limerick in 1690. Further on, however, he describes and praises the noble feat’’

The author of the Narrative explains that he regarded the Irish Catholics as the nation of Ireland,’’

In view of the remarkable loyalty of the Irish Catholics to the crown, the author argued that if the king secured them fully in their rights, he might never fear rebellion in England or Scotland, because the Irish would be insuperably powerful, as having the kingdom of Ireland entirely to themselves by an established possession.’’

Looking forward to the establishment of James III. on the throne of England, the author indicates, as follows, some of the measures to be adopted for the benefit of Ireland under an Irish government: the restoration of the Irish to their estates from which they had been excluded; to make the parliament of Ireland absolute in enacting laws without being obliged to send beforehand the prepared bills, which are destined to pass into acts by the consent of both houses of parliament

p.ix

Views of the Jacobites of Ireland in relation to the acceptation of William III. as king of Great Britain, appear at page 182 of the Narrative. In connection with this subject the author wrote:

But you'll say: that England, the principal kingdom of the monarchy, ought to be followed by heland in owning or disowning the kings of that monarchy. We answer thus: that the behaviour herein of the people of England is no rule to Ireland; a distinct realm, a different nation, as having a viceroy for governor sent by the king as king of Ireland; also as having discrepant laws; as having a Parliament of her own, so judges and magistrates. Ireland had never acknowledged her king to be chosen by the people, but to succeed by birth; nor her king to be deposable by the people upon any cause of quarrel. She knows more righteous things, and scorns to make heretical England her pattern in the point of righteousness. When the lawful king of England dies, Ireland acknowledges immediately the person next in blood, be Catholic or Protestant, to be the king of England and her's, whether the people of

p.x

The Narrative closes with brief notices of the departure to France of the Irish troops and Jacobite officials, and the proclamation in March, 1692, by which William III. declared the war in Ireland to be at an end. At the conclusion of the Narrative the author expresses his opinion that the king or France made a false step’’

In illustration of subjects mentioned in the Narrative, some documents have been appended, which may be noticed as follows:

1. I. The letter addressed by sir Richard Nagle, in 1686, from Coventry, to the earl of Tyrconnell, in relation to the injustice inflicted on the Irish by the act of settlement, and in advocacy of its appeal.
2. II. French official list of Jacobite army in Ireland, 1689. In this document are included the following particulars of most of the regiments: names of colonels, lieutenant-colonels, captains, lieutenants, ensigns, cornets, surgeons, almoners, quarter-masters, together with the numbers of sergeants and effective men in each company. This list, now for the first time printed, extends from page 201 to page 241. It was apparently compiled by a French official. The orthography of the names is in many cases peculiar, and they are here printed as they stand in the original manuscript. In the regiments were comprised French, English, Old Irish, and Anglo-Irish officers, chaplains and surgeons. The lists indicate the vitality of the Irish after the severities to which they had been subjected during the preceding forty years. The names afford evidence that identity of interests had led descendants of com'paratively recent settlers to combine with representatives of the older inhabitants. Of this an illustration is found in the family of the poet

   ---

   p.xi

   Edmund Spenser. That writer, by his advocacy of severe measures against the Irish, was regarded by them as an enemy to their race. We find, however, that his grandson, Hugolin Spenser, espoused the Irish cause, and became a lieutenant in the regiment raised in Munster by Dominic Sarsfield, lord Kilmallock, to serve against the army of William III. Hugolin Spenser thus eventually forfeited his right in the estates at Kilcolman, in the county of Cork, which queen Elizabeth had granted to his ancestor.
3. III. List of members of parliament at Dublin, 1689.
4. IV. Extracts from acts of parliament at Dublin, 1689. The first of these acts, asserting the independence of the parliament of Ireland, is in accordance with the principle enunciated many years previously by the supreme council of the Irish Confederates. It is noteworthy that neither Molyneux, in his ‘Case of Ireland being bound by acts of parliament in England,’ nor Grattan, in his motion on the declaration of right, 1782, made any reference to the circumstance that the independence of the parliament of Ireland had been specifically asserted by the Irish Confederates in 1642, and by the parliament at Dublin in 1689. In the preamble to the second act the given reasons for repealing the acts of 'Settlement and Explanation', in relation to which many details appear in the present volume. The preamble to the act of repeal set forth that it was ‘now, high time to put an end to the unspeakable sufferings of the Roman Catholic, natives of this realm of Ireland, who have eminently manifested their loyalty to his majesty James II against the usurper, the prince of Orange, and to remove the unparalleled grievances brought upon them under colour of the said two statutes of Settlement and Explanation, which cannot be otherwise redressed than by repealing the said acts and restoring the former proprietors to their ancient right, the compassing whereof is

   ---

   p.xii

   much facilitated by his majesty's royal condescension to apply towards the satisfaction and reprisals of honest purchasers under the said acts a great part of the lands and tenements forfeited to him by the late rebellion and treason committed by estated persons within this kingdom, who, contrary to their duty and allegiance, joined with the prince of Orange.’
5. V. Letter, signed by sir Richard Nagle, to the officers and soldiers, subjects of James II., in the army of Schomberg or Schönberg, as an appeal to them to return to the service of their king and country. The writer refers to William III. as a prince without nature towards his father, without honour towards his enemy; an oppressor of his own country, an usurper of yours; unfortunate in war, unfaithful in peace; postponing his oath in the business of Stadholder, to compass his ambition, and the laws of humanity in the death of De Witt, to gratify his revenge.’’
   At the close of the appeal, the author, in refeence to the composition of the forces brought against Ireland, wrote: Multitudes of strangers and foreigners of desperate fortunes and several nations ... are contriving your slavery, together with the old invaders of our country, the Danes, who held our ancestors in a war of three hundred years, and their insolence became intolerable to a proverb, till the very women fell upon them with the indignation of so many Judiths.’’
   In this and other Jacobite documents the writers ignore the dukedom conferred in England on Schomberg, and designate bim by his previous title of count. The Jacobites described Schomberg as an antiquated and almost effete but still rapacious mercenary in the pay of the prince of Orange. They charged him with having countenanced cruelties and the violation of articles into which he had entered with officers of the Irish army.
6. VI. Order for French convoy of artillery in Ireland, 1689, with directions for the march from Cork to Dublin. The concluding part of this document is not forthcoming.

---

p.xiii

7. VII. Order, in French, by general de Lausun, 1690. In this ordinance Lausun, in the name of Louis XIV., prohibits French officers and soldiers in Ireland from taking anything without payment, and expressly forbids them to enter or act offensively in Protestant churches or places of worship.
8. VIII. Letters from colonel William Wolseley to sir Robert Southwell, secretary of state to William III. In these communications, dated from the English camp at Mullingar, Wolseley describes his proceedings in pursuing and executing Irish Tories. I am,’’
   he writes, well assured that an Irishman is to be taught his duty only by the rod.’’
   These people, he says, declared they would die before they would submit to king William's government. I am of opinion,’’
   added Wolseley, that fair means will never oblige these people to a true submission to his majesty’’
   William III
9. IX. Contemporary French account of the siege of Limerick, 1690. This document supplies notices of daily occurrences during the siege in August and September. It furnishes many details in connection with the actions of the Irish in Limerick and their assailants. William III. in it, as in the Narrative, is styled the prince of Orange, and the Irish troops are designated the army of the king of England. The writer mentions that four hundred Ulstermen of the regiment of MacMahon, who were not furnished with arms, greatly incommoded the besiegers by casting stones. The total loss of the assailants is set down as five thousand men, among whom were many of their colonels and best officers. The Irish officers and soldiers, adds the account, signalized themselves throughout the entire siege by their bravery and by their extraordinary endurance. They were, we are here told, continuously under arms, and without either the necessaries of life or medical appliances for their sick and wounded.

---

p.xiv

10. X. Letter and statement by Hugh (Balldearg) O' Donnel, addressed to comte D'Avaux, minister of Louis XIV. The writer of these documents, Hugh O'Donnel, a colonel in the service of Spain, descended from chiefs of his name in Donegal. He was called in Irish, Balldearg or "of the red spot," and the author of the Narrative mentions that some of the family believed that the true earl of Tyrconnell, marked on his body with such a spot, would come from abroad into Ireland, and do there great matters for his country.’’
    In the memoir before us O'Donnel describes the three classes of the people in Ireland and their antecedents. The Catholics of the ancient race of Ulster were, he alleged, the most warlike of the Irish people; and he averred that they were the most oppressed on account of their fidelity to their religion and country. He states his objections to the courses adopted by the administrators of James II. in Ireland, and especially censures them from excluding from posts of honour the representatives of the Irish of the ancient race. O'Donnel, as a direct descendant of the first earl of Tyrconnell, protests against the recent grant which had been made of that title to the viceroy, Richard Talbot. He requests D' Avaux to place at his disposal a suitable proportion of the supplies expected from France,’’
    and with them he considered he could oppose effectively the hostile forces in Ireland.
11. XI. Prisoners at Ballymore. In this list are given the names of the Irish Jacobite officers made prisoners on the surrender to Ginkel of the garrison at Ballymore, Meath, on the 8th of June, 1691, together with the names of the regiments to which they belonged.
12. XII. The battle of Aughrim, July, 1691. The arrangement of the army under the command of Ginkel at this battle is here given as it was published, by authority of that general, at Amsterdam in 1693. This table exhibits the accuracy of the statement in the Narrative, that the better moiety’’
    of the army of England brought on this occasion against the Irish was constituted of foreigners. The general was Ginkel,

    ---

    p.xv

    and chief in command under him was the duke of Würtemberg. The former bore testimony to the great bravery evinced by the Irish at Aughrim. The battle, according to Ginkel, was obstinate and close, and on both sides there was horrible carnage’’
    Major-general Hugh Mackay, who took an important part in the battle of Aughrim, referred to the fact that the Williamite troops were composed of four or five different nations. A Huguenot officer, who served in the army of William III. against the Irish, mentioned the difficulties which he experienced in managing the military under his command, arising from the circumstance that they were composed of nearly all the nations of Europe. My lieutenant, he wrote, spoke French, and the cornet Flemish and German.’’

13. XIII. This description of the battle of Aughrim is from a contemporary Latin poem by a Jacobite on affairs in Ireland, 1688-91. The production, hitherto unpublished, is specially valuable for the information which it supplies in connection with English and Irish Jacobites. In his description of the battle of Aughrim the author notices the acts of Cuconacht Maguire Guevarrus, Charles Moore, Ulick Bourke, the youthful lord Galway, brigadier William Barker, an English Jacobite, and others who either fell in the engagement or were taken prisoners. Dean Alexius Stafford, of Wexford, is also mentioned in the poem. He fell,’’
    we are told, in the front of the royal regiment as he was encouraging them upon the first charge.’’
    The poet's description of the death of general St. Ruth, at the point of victory, and the subsequent action of Sarsfield, corresponds with the statements on these subjects in the Narrative. The allusions in the poem to a mercenary traitor were probably directed against colonel Henry Luttrell. It may be here mentioned that the passages of the Narrative, at pages 149-50 of the present work, in relation to Luttrell, are in the Bodleian manuscript, but they do not appear in the Fingall volume.
14. XIV. Letter from sir Richard Nagle. This communication was

    ---

    p.xvi

    addressed to Fitzwilliam, lord Merrion, by the Jacobite attorney general, from Limerick, when the army of England was approaching to lay siege to that town in August, 1691. Nagle deplores the death of the viceroy, Tyrconnell, which had just occurred, and mentions the arrangements which had been made for carrying on the government in Ireland for king James.
15. XV. This contemporary diary of the siege of Limerick, 1691, was written by colonel Richards, an officer of repute, highly esteemed by William III. It extends from the 25th of August to the 25th of September, at which date the preliminary negotiations for the treaty were in progress. The manuscript of this diary was formerly in the possedsion of the duke of Buckingham, at Stowe, subsequently passed into the Ashburnham collection, and is now in the library of the Royal Irish Academy, Dublin.
16. XVI. The treaty of Limerick. The civil and military articles are here given in full, as signed in October, 1691.
17. XVII. Letters from Patrick Sarsfield, earl of Lucan. The first of these letters is an application for passports for officers of the Irish army. The second letter is addressed to baron de Ginkel in relation to arrangements for the embarkation of Irish troops for France.
18. XVIII. Letter from John Wauchope to George Clarke, secretary at-war. Wauchope, a Scotch Catholic, was major-general in the Jacobite army in Ireland. He possessed the confidence of Tyrconnell and Sarsfield, and took part in the preliminary negotiations at Limerick. To Wauchope's letter is appended a statement of the reasons which induced the French commander at Limerick to consider a capitulation desirable.
19. XIX. James II., in this letter, declares himself to be extremely satisfied’’
    with the conduct of the Irish officers and soldiers, and expresses his gratification at their decision as to serving him in France.
20. XX. Under this document the earl of Lucan certifies that the

    ---

    p.xvii

    arrangements had been carried out for the conveyance of the Irish forces to France.
21. XXI. Ratification of the treaty of Limerick, 1691-2. In this instrument are included some words which had been omitted in the manuscript of the treaty. The circumstances of this omission and the mode of rectification are stated in the documents printed at pages 313-16 of the present volume. Sir Theobald Butler, referred to in these papers, was an eminent lawyer. He acted as a commissioner for the Irish in connection with the treaty. Butler, on behalf of the Catholics of Ireland, pleaded, in 1703, at the bar of the parliament at Dublin against the infringement of the treaty of Limerick, the observance of which had been guaranteed to them in a most solemn manner, on the public faith of the nation. At the end of the volume will be found an official list of the personages who accompanied James II. from France to Ireland in 1688-9, together with the names of the ships on which they embarked. In addition to the reproduction of the engraved portrait of Sarsfield, earl of Lucan, a facsimile of one of his letters has been included in the present volume. Facsimiles are also given from an order by general Lausun, and from letters of sir Richard Nagle and colonel William Wolseley.

p.1