78

Statute of Kilkenny.

1

protest against his ministers' unequal and unjust government in Ireland; and to intimate, that from henceforth they neither could nor would endure the realm of Ireland to be ruled by his ministers as it had wont to be; and particularly they complained of them in the following questions: Imprimis, How a land full of wars could be governed by him that was unskilful in war? Secondly, How a minister or officer of the king should in a short time grow to so much wealth? Thirdly, How it came to pass that the king was never the richer for Ireland?'"

To these interrogatories the king was not inattentive, and various regulations were adopted to provide for the redress of their grievances, not only immediately subsequent to the presentation of this protest, but during the whole of his reign. Yet while the Duke of Clarence was Lord Lieutenant of Ireland in 1361, the famous statute of Kilkenny was passed, of which the following is the substance:

"It was enacted, that inter-marriages with the natives, or any connection with them as fosterers, or in the way of gossipred, should be punished as high treason; that the use of their name, language, apparel or customs, should be punished with the forfeiture of lands and tenements; that to submit to be governed by the Brehon laws was treason; that the English should not make war upon the natives without the permission and authority of government; that the English should

Reflections upon that statute.

79

not permit the Irish to graze upon their lands; that they should not admit them to any benefice or religious privilege, or even entertain their bards; that to compel English subjects to pay or maintain soldiers was felony, (this respected the oppressive imposition of coigne and livery); that traitors and felons should not be protected by flying to sanctuaries, which, by affording an asylum to criminals, had been found very detrimental to the public tranquillity. It was likewise enacted, that wardens should be appointed to estimate the men and armour which each of the king's vassals was obliged to provide for military service.”

This celebrated act of legislation, if any thing so utterly subversive of the civil and natural rights of mankind can be so called, farnishes an additional proof of the despotic and ferocious tyranny which the English continued to exercise in that devoted country; and, as has been already observed, these and similar oppressions more than justified that spirit of turbulence and rebellion. which has constantly deformed the stormy and tempestuous, annals of the Irish nation. It is asserted, however, notwithstanding this very statute of Kilkenny, that Edward, to the very close of his reign, uniformily manifested his anxiety to do justice to his Irish subjects; but what that anxiety was, surely need not be described, when it is remembered that such ordinances as those which have been just recapitulated were suffered to be enacted. It is true indeed, that the final

80 Frequent change of viceroys; its impolicy.

subjugation, and perhaps the amelioration of the Irish people by legislation, were equally the object of Edward II. and of Edward III.; yet the latter, with all the power which he really possessed, and with all the disposition to conciliate which he was presumed to possess, advanced the English interest in Ireland very little beyond the state in which it had been left by his father. The measures, which he adopted were some of them wise and provident, but they seem to have had no fixed ob-. ject either in their origin or in their prosecution. Expediency and, momentary views of interest guided him in his general conduct towards Ire-, land, and which perhaps may be partly ascribed to the infancy in which the science of legislation. was in his time. Had he indeed conceived any. large and general views of policy, and had he been truly anxious that those views should be permanently carried into effect, he would necessarily have been more solicitous to provide governors for Ireland, whose qualities might have insured to them a continuance of their vicegerency; for he would have been aware, that nothing can be more fatal to any extended series of measures carried on by continual co-operation, than a frequent change of those who are delegated to con-duct them. This is a vital principle in every question of policy; for it is so impossible to expect that a succession of individuals should form precisely the same opinions upon the transactions. of any government, or that they should be all

Reign of Richard II.

81

cordially disposed to promote their progress, that it has always been one of the chief objects of modern political arrangements to secure the same men, in order successfully to carry the same measures; and we find in the present day the acknowledgment of this principle so deeply rooted, that it is the common language of parliamentary reproof to deny the possibility of any change of measures without a previous change of men. We find, however, that Edward, during his reign, which continued 50 years, appointed no less than 43 successive governors for conducting the affairs of Ireland; a circumstance of itself quite sufficient to defeat any general and connected purpose of reformation in that country, especially when we recollect how very imperfectly the system of diplomacy was understood in those days; and the consequence was, that with the best intentions on the part of Edward to conciliate his Irish subjects, we find them in a state of any thing but conciliation, and Edward himself leaving them at his death just as he found them at his accession, rebellious and dissatisfied.

The same mischievous policy was adopted by his successor, Richard II. during whose reign of 22 years no fewer than 25 governors of Ireland were appointed; a rapidity of succession, which, as Plowden observes, “making reasonable allowances for the uncertainty of weather, the slowness of travelling, and the general difficulties of communication in those days, the averaged interval of G

YOL. I.

82 Viceroyalty of the Duke of Lancaster.

each appointment and recall would scarcely cover the term of nine calendar months." The first instance that is recorded of any change in this injurious policy was at the commencement of the 15th century, when we find that Thomas, Duke of Lancaster, the eldest son of Henry IV. was appointed to the government of Ireland for 21 years; a change which probably involved as many evils on the other side as could possibly result from the brief and transitory appointments of his prcdecessors. The arrival of his royal highness in Ireland, however, gave a weight and stability to the English government, and Ulster was for a time freed from the Scotch marauders, who, from the commencement of his father's reign, had harassed that province in separate detachments. But the various troubles which agitated England and threatened to overthrow the usurped authority of Henry, frustrated the benefits which might have been derived from the permanent establishment of the Duke of Lancaster as Vicegerent of Ireland, for they compelled him to return to England; so that, according to Sir John Davies, "the seed of reformation took no root at all."

In the fifth year of this reign the statute of Kilkenny was confirmed in a parliament convened at Dublin by the Earl of Ormond, who was then chief justice; but it appears that the holding of parliaments was offensive to the native Irish, for it is especially observed, that during a parliament which was convened in the 14th year of the reign