Preface

PREFACE.

The present Volume of the Calendar to the State Papers Domestic for the reign of William and Mary, covers the period from the 1st May, 1690, to the end of October, 1691.

In the previous volume we left the Duke of Schomberg anxiously awaiting King William's arrival in Ireland; his anxiety increased during the month of May, 1690. He lacked both money and stores, and could not lay siege to Charlemont, as he had but four pieces of artillery fit for the purpose. He had, however, massed troops around the place, and, as he learned that the garrison was in considerable straits, hoped to tire them out, ere the King set forward from London (p. 5). A few days later (May 11th) Schomberg again pressed for monetary help; the petty jealousies existing between the officers added to his trouble: "My zeal for your service," he writes to the King, "makes me wish for money as the means of carrying out my projects, and also makes me desire to see you here as soon as possible." The following day he was able to announce that the garrison at Charlemont had made overtures for capitulation (pp. 8–9), and on the 19th the actual surrender (p. 13) as well as the capture of the Castle of Ballingarry. This is Schomberg's last letter to the King, preserved amongst the State Papers here calendared. On the 4th of June William left England for Ireland. On the 26th May a warrant had issued to the Master of the Great Wardrobe to deliver to the Keeper of the King's Chapel Closet, for his Majesty's use in Ireland, three dozen of large, and two dozen of small Common Prayer Books, four surplices of fine Holland, each to contain 12 ells, two Turkey carpets, three crimson damask cushions, two footstools, four brass candlesticks, plated, two strong sumpters, and two boxes to put the books in (p. 18).

King William, as we know, landed at Carrickfergus on the 14th June, posted himself before Drogheda on the 30th, and on the 1st of July gained the memorable victory at the Boyne.

News of the victory had reached London on the 7th, and on that day Lord Carmarthen commences his letter, which announced to the King the naval disaster at Beachy Head, with congratulations on the success at the Boyne, which he evidently regarded as decisive of the campaign in Ireland, and which, therefore, would admit of King William's speedy return to England (pp. 53–54). The Queen expressed her joy at the event on the same day (p. 54), and Lord Nottingham writes thus to the Lord Mayor:—

"The Queen has this morning received an account, by an officer come express, that his Majesty had on the first of this month given an entire defeat to the Irish army near Drogheda, and taken the greatest part of their cannon, ammunition, baggage, &c., and that his Majesty was marching with the whole army. Her Majesty commands me to acquaint you with this happy news."

On the Continent, when the exaggerated accounts of the King's wounds, and his reported death, grew to be discredited, news of the victory gave a natural satisfaction to the Allies, and an equally natural uneasiness to the French, and William received many congratulations from the Allied generals. Schomberg's death is referred to by the Prince of Waldeck in a letter written on July 22nd.

Whether or not the letters that first brought news of the victory, mentioned that one serious item in its cost, the death of Schomberg, we do not know; but Lord Nottingham refers to him as "the late" on the 9th of July. It is noteworthy that the day previous to the receipt of tidings of the victory at the Boyne, Lord Nottingham had named Schomberg as the most fit officer to command either "towards" Scotland or in the southern parts of England, there being, said the writer, "nobody " here fit for that command" (p. 52).

News of the result of the fight with the French fleet had been eagerly expected in London for some time prior to its arrival. On the 23rd of June Lord Carmarthen tells the King that at eleven on the previous night tidings reached town of the appearance of the French fleet off Falmouth (p. 38) and on the morning of writing, off Portland (ibid.). The Queen at once called a Cabinet Council and gave her orders. The disadvantages under which the English fleet was placed are thus described by Carmarthen:—"Besides the misfortune of our fleet not being together, we have also intelligence that the Toulon squadron has passed by Killigrew and therefore we may be sure that upon joining their fleet at Brest they have made this haste to fight before Killigrew could arrive. Notwithstanding all these disadvantages, Mr. Russell and Captain Priestman are of opinion that your fleet now with Lord Torrington will be strong enough to help us. Last night about 12 o'clock the wind changed from west to north-east, which we have reason to believe saved your fleet at St. Helen's from being surprised at anchor, as well as giving it the wind in case of engagement, and whatever the intentions of the French are this is certainly one of the boldest attempts they ever yet made by sea or land. It is not impossible that they might design a diversion to our fleet in the channel, while they with some small convoy might send men into Scotland by the west of Ireland in transport ships" (p. 38).

The Queen's anger at Torrington's delay in bringing on an engagement is a matter of history, and her letters on the subject here calendared, have all been printed by Dalrymple; they do not therefore need comment.

Three days after his last letter (viz., on 26th June), Lord Carmarthen writes that it was generally supposed that the fleets had been engaged on the previous day, but by news from Portsmouth, sent off at three in the afternoon, it was found that the fighting had been only between scout ships, and the wind being then north, "both the fleets were upon a stretch southwardly, endeavouring to gain the wind, and it is supposed that which soonest could get the wind would begin the attack. We hope also that most of the Dutch ships will join your fleet, and that every hour will bring us news of a general engagement" (p. 40).

On the 28th Lord Carmarthen writes again to the King, and referring to the still further postponement of the naval battle, says that Lord Torrington "is condemned by everybody here" (p. 43). At one in the afternoon of the 1st of July from "off Beachy," Torrington wrote an account of his defeat to Carmarthen, which is printed by Dalrymple, and which contains the passage, What the consequence of this unfortunate battle may be God Almighty only knows" (p. 44). On July 2nd Carmarthen wrote the King:—"This morning has brought an ill account from the fleet. We can say nothing more than what you will read in Lord Torrington's letter, which, in my opinion, does not speak much in his justification. . . . A letter from Captain Elmore speaks as if the French stood after our fleet to pick up some lame ships." Of a successor to the defeated Torrington, Carmarthen writes:—"My opinion is that Haddock would be the best Admiral, and besides other reasons, because I find the world hereabouts generally thinks so, which is of no small importance."

Sir Richard Haddock would not, however, as we learn from Lord Carmarthen a few days later, undertake the command of the fleet alone (p. 53). Edward Russell, so Carmarthen believed, would also decline the charge on account of expense (ibid.). He, however, subsequently accepted it. After his appointment he sent, through Lord Nottingham, a significant message to Van Tromp:— "I beg you, if Tromp commands [the Dutch] fleet, as we hear, to make my compliments to him, and give him this assurance from me, that he shall not be left in the day of battle" (p. 253). Later on, however, Russell speaks of the Dutch in no very complimentary terms; writing to Lord Nottingham in the spring of 1691 he says:—"It is very strange, after all the care that was taken to divert a winter squadron, the Dutch should not afford once, all this winter one poor ship; in your letter you take notice of three; God knows where they have been or where they are, and yet we have carried on the service this winter with some good success. I am sorry to hear the Dutch ships are in no greater forwardness for the sea, after the assurance they have given. The English fleet is nearly ready, and it may prove of fatal consequence if they do not, with some ships, join us early, for I fancy the chief desire of the French is to be out before we join" (p. 301). Indications of ill-feeling between the Dutch seamen and commanders and the English seamen and commanders are not wanting both before and after the engagement off Beachy Head. A letter as to this was addressed by Lord Nottingham to the Admiralty in November, 1690:—"I have received," he writes, "complaints that Captain Cole does not observe with officers of the Dutch men-of-war, that good correspondence which is necessary, and may at this time especially, be very justly expected from our commanders towards the Dutch; the particulars are not insisted on, as it is rather desired that the like may, for the future, be prevented than that any reflection should be made on what is past. If you therefore think fit to send any order to the said captain and other commanders of his Majesty's ships, to live in the most friendly manner with the Dutch, even as they do with one another, and to concert with them all such matters as may be for the security of the merchant ships, the safety of the men-of-war, the interest of the common cause, and the advantage of both nations" (p. 162). Russell certainly had his enemies at Court, and to this fact he refers in a letter written on board the Britannia off Kinsale, in July 1691 (p. 440); a curious complaint to the King, of the way in which his services were regarded, had been made by him during the previous May (pp. 366–368).

The movements of the French fleet, after the engagement, find frequent mention in the Calendar. The Earl of Nottingham refers to the French having landed 1,000 men at Teignmouth on July the 26th, and special precautions for the safeguard of Exeter and Plymouth were thereupon taken. The sick and wounded seem to have been taken to Hastings and other towns along the coast (p. 56). The Dutch Ambassador complained that the wounded Dutch were not well cared for, and the Queen directed the Commissioners of Sick and Wounded to remedy the grievance complained of (p. 87). On the 9th of July Carmarthen writes to the King that the French had withdrawn to Havre, and that Lord Torrington was expected to reach London from the fleet that night (p. 57). A commission of enquiry as to the conduct of the "Admirals, Vice-Admirals, and Rear"Admirals of the Fleet and captains of any of the ships" on the occasion of the engagement, was issued on July the 12th, and addressed to the Earls of Pembroke and Montgomery, and Macclesfield, Sir Robert Howard, Sir Henry Goodrick, and Sir Thomas Lee (p. 62). The Dutch Admiral would not actually blame the English, but he thought that had our ships fought like the Dutch, a different result would have been obtained (p. 66), though some nine months later it was reported that he himself was laid aside " being looked upon to be a Torrington" (p. 300). On the 7th of August the Queen refers to Torrington's trial having been ordered "yesterday"; the various difficulties raised as to the trial and its final issue may be traced in the Calendar. The warrant for revoking his commission as Vice-Admiral of England is dated at Kensington as December the 12th (p. 186); the command of his marine regiment was bestowed upon Danby (p. 199). At the end of August a warrant was issued to allow persons appointed by the States of Holland to "fish up" the cannon, anchors, cables, &c., of the three Dutch ships burnt near Hastings, and of a fourth sunk near Pevensey after the battle at Beachy Head (p. 110), and a man of Hastings who had proved previously useful in the recovery of the sunken valuables was, on the Dutch Ambassador's solicitation, exempted from being "pressed" (p. 304).

The progress of the campaign in Ireland after the Boyne, and the movements of King William, receive full and interesting illustration by numerous documents in the present Calendar. The King's arrival in England is announced on the 7th of September, and after that frequent reports from Ireland reached him; the most important are those despatched from Count de Solms when he was left in command. Like Schomberg he was much harassed by disagreements and jealousies existing between the officers. Much good was expected from the Earl of Marlborough's expedition against Cork, and the terms of the capitulation of that place, dated 28 September 1690, will be found on page 131. A thanksgiving for the successful campaign was ordered for Sunday the 19th of October.

It was evidently considered that, during the cessation of active hostilities between the English and Irish armies, consequent upon the inclement weather of winter, steps should be taken to influence the Irish people in favour of King William, and the following passage in a letter addressed by Lord Nottingham to the Lords-Justices on October 11 is worthy of quotation:—

"Considering that the Irish are mightily influenced by their priests, the King thinks that some connivance at the secular priests would induce them to persuade the common people to a quiet subjection to the Government; and besides, that this distinction between the secular and regular priests would occasion such jealousies among them, as, by dividing them, would facilitate the reduction of Ireland, and preserve the future peace of it.

"There is one thing more which the King thinks of great importance to his service, and that is the bestowing of the ecclesiastical preferments. The King delays giving the bishoprics, and would have you defer filling the lesser dignities, for there are many livings in Ireland so poor and inconsiderable that few clergymen care to accept of a single parsonage (and his Majesty would have pluralities, as much as may be, avoided), and therefore it may be proper to oblige the person who shall be preferred to a prebend or deanery to undertake the cure of a parish too" (pp. 142, 143).

In furtherance of this policy Lord Nottingham, on the 18th of November, announced the King's intention to appoint "some of the most eminent clergymen here" to consider and report to him on the best means for establishing the protestant religion in Ireland on a firm basis (p. 155). Five days later the King appointed the Bishops of London, St. Asaph, Salisbury, Chichester, Worcester, and Oxford, the Deans of Canterbury and St. Paul's, and Dr. Thomas Tenison, to make this enquiry. A clause in the Commission runs:—

"We recommend it particularly to you to consider of the ecclesiastical preferments in our said kingdom, now void, and of the persons best qualified to fill them, in respect of their learning, exemplary life, and fidelity in the discharge of their duty, by a due residence upon the place" (pp. 158, 159).

A little later, the Bishops of Kilmore, Killaloe, Cloyne, Down, and Limerick, were enjoined to see that the Irish clergy took up immediate residence within their benefices (p. 165).

Towards autumn grievous complaints reached England from Ireland of the behaviour of the troops in King William's army. On the 1st of November the LordsJustices were directed to make enquiry into the complaints as to the seizure of cattle, belonging alike to Roman Catholics and Protestants. On this point the famous Major-General Percy Kirke writes to Lord Nottingham:—

"Certain it is, that there have been great abuses committed of that nature. I cannot pretend to particularize any, having only heard the reports of the people of the country and not having power to examine them, so can only justify myself in this case, that I have not, this year, commanded in chief any part of the army; that I have not taken to the value of 5l. from either protestant or papist; that I have never given order or pass, either for taking of cattle, or carrying any from the army, nor have I sold any, nor has anybody sold any for me, nor have I any at this time but 100 black cattle and 300 or 400 sheep, that my Lord Lisburne, being sent out of a party to Col. More's house, a garrison of the enemy within a mile of Banagher Bridge, took from the garrison" (p. 161).

Before the close of the year, the Lords-Justices were invited to report on a proposal made to the King for establishing monthly commissions of oyer and terminer in each Irish county (p. 175), and they were also instructed to make a very thorough enquiry as to the civil and religious condition of the country (pp. 176– 180).

Various suggestions for developing the internal resources of Ireland will be found in this Calendar; that for the establishment of the linen manufactory being made by Nicholas Dupin and Henry Million, "on behalf of themselves and others," on the 9th of December 1690 (pp. 183, 187, &c.). A curious document which has been placed with the papers for 1690, is one in which are contained "Remarks shewing that it is not to the interest of England that Ireland should be a separate kingdom" (p. 201).

Papers connected with Scotland for the seven months of 1690, with which the Calendar deals, are not particularly numerous or important. The unsettled state of the Highlands of course finds frequent incidental mention, and a somewhat interesting account of a meeting of clansmen, written by Colonel Sir John Hill, from "Fort William alias Inverloughie," and dated July 4, appears on p. 48. Lochiel was deputed to act for the rest. Colonel Hill says: "I know many are against any gentle way of dealing"; but the writer held to his own opinion. "The great thing," he continues, "most of them are concerned at is the superiority of their lands, which they would hold of the King, and they say if the King will buy off these superiorities from Lord Argyll and the Duke of Gordon, they will follow the King's commands against all mortals." Col. Hill advocates the bestowal of "a little largess upon Lochiel (who rules all the rest), Glengarry and McLean, who are low in the world, and the rest must do as they do, and the value of five or six thousand pounds would do the work and make them the King's true servants." Viscount Tarbet's letters on the condition of the Highlands will also be read with interest.

A copy of the Earl of Annandale's declaration (in the handwriting of Lord Carmarthen) is calendared on p. 92, and a printed copy of the confession, given in full by Dalrymple, is calendared on page 97. The Queen's letter to the King on the Earl's confession and pardon, also printed in full by Dalrymple, is calendared on the following page. Lord Preston's references to him and to Sir James Montgomery are mentioned on p. 243.

The Presbyterian Ministers express their gratitude to the King for the bestowal of a year's revenues of the Scottish bishoprics upon the survivors of those deprived "for mere ecclesiastical conformity." His Majesty's favour towards the "reformed church of Scotland" was, they considered, thereby most abundantly demonstrated, and the Moderator's address goes on to commemorate the fact that even before his accession, William had commiserated the condition of the many hundreds ejected from their livings (p. 208).

As was the case in the previous volume of this Calendar, there are in the present a large number of documents relating wholly to continental affairs. These, for reasons stated in the preface to the last volume, have been dealt with very shortly; the proper place for them to appear at length will be the Calendar to State Papers, Foreign, for the period. Their value is unquestionable, and references to a few of the more important incidents—such as the condition of the French forces after Fleurs, the action of the Duke of Savoy with regard to the alliance, the battle of Stafarda, and some others—have been made.

It was the King's intention, on his return from Ireland, to have crossed to Flanders and taken the lead in operations against France; Sir William Dutton Colt writes from Zell on the 28th of November that, on the Continent, news of the King's journey was daily expected (p. 173). But the winter was too far advanced for William to cross to Holland, and he remained in England until the early days of January 1691 when, accompanied by Lord Nottingham, he left London for the seat of war in Flanders. His voyage, as we know, was exceedingly perilous, and nearly cost him his life, but he seems to have landed none the worse for the exposure which he suffered. The Queen, who certainly was deeply affected on learning of the danger in which her husband had been placed, on the 7th of February, ordered a special clause to be added to the general thanksgiving ordered to be said at Divine Service during the war. The clause ran:—

"We also praise thy Holy Name, for that wonderful preservation which thou hast lately given him, at sea, in saving him from so many deaths, as were ready at once to have taken him from us, who is the breath of our nostrils, and to have quenched the light of our Israel." This thanksgiving was to be used in their Majesties' Royal Chapel until further orders (p. 250).

Other forms of thanksgiving and of prayer for the King's prosperity and safe return are also referred to (pp. 324 and 334).

Lords Sydney and Carmarthen kept the King well informed of passing events at home, and a valuable record of domestic news is contained in their letters now calendared. Before referring to these, it will, however, be convenient to mention a few of the papers relating to the progress of events abroad till the King's return to England in April.

The Congress at the Hague, held shortly after the King's arrival, does not find any important mention, though a curious allusion to it is made in a direction from Lord Sydney to the Lord Chamberlain (p. 469) to supply a suitable present to the Envoy who attended the Congress from the Elector of Saxony. Somehow or other a gift to him had been omitted. There are at the period now under consideration references to the affairs of the new ally, the Duke of Savoy, and also to Prince Louis of Baden's campaign in Hungary.

The first references to the investiture of Mons occur in letters dated at Brussels on the 5/15th of March, and addressed to William by the Marquis de Castanaga, commander of the Spanish forces. The news was communicated to him by the Prince of Berghes (p. 293). Progress of the siege is referred to in several letters, and its fall is mentioned in a letter from the Elector of Bavaria, in which he states that had it held out a little longer help would have arrived (p. 345).

After the fall of Mons, William hastened back to England and landed on the evening of the 13th of April. His arrival had been expected for several days (p. 335). He desired a full escort of English men-of-war across the sea, and the Admiralty was so situated in regard to available vessels that the department felt some difficulty in complying with the demands, suggesting that the service might be performed by Dutch ships (p. 302).

The chief events at home during the King's absence had been the trials of Lord Preston, Capt. Elliot, and Mr. Assheton; the warrant for their arrest is dated on the 18th January (p. 219), and the order to Lord Lucas to receive them as prisoners in the Tower on the following day (ibid.). Various orders follow with regard to the admission of friends and counsel to the prisoners. Sir Creswell Levinge, Sir Francis Winnington, Sir Bartholomew Shower, Mr. Wallop, and Mr. Hawles, are named as retained for the defence (p. 224).

The result of the trial was communicated to the King by Lord Sydney on January 20th, portions of his letter are worthy of quotation. After mentioning his own illness Sydney proceeds by stating that, "Lord Preston, Mr. Assheton, and Captain Elliot desired to be tried separately. Lord Preston was tried on Saturday; he did not insist upon his peerage, though he did the day before when he was arraigned. The woman that was owner of the vessel and the master proved that they were hired by Mr. Assheton and Elliot to carry them and two others for 100l. over to France, and that Lord Preston was one of the four that came on board; some other seamen bore similar testimony. Captain Billop gave an account of taking them, hidden upon the ballast, and of his taking the papers from Assheton. Lord Nottingham, myself, and Mr. Bridgman, proved the delivery of these papers. They were produced and read, and some were believed to be in Lord Preston's writing. Lord Chief Justice Holt summed up the evidence very well and with a great deal of mildness; but Lord Chief Justice Pollexfen was somewhat rougher. The charge, they told the jury, was high treason. The jury agreed, in a quarter of an hour, and brought in a verdict of guilty. Lord Preston is very unwilling to lose his life, and will endeavour to deserve it." Others implicated in the alleged plot were Lord Clarendon, the Bishop of Ely, and the famous quaker, William Penn.

Lord Sydney advocated the suspension of Lord Preston's execution: "I think he will do you more service than his head is worth . . . He will, if he obtain his pardon, be a good evidence, and what he can say against Lord Clarendon, the Bishop of Ely, and Mr. Penn (which he will be ready to do) is of great importance. We cannot find the Bishop nor Mr. Penn, and it being 'all over the town' that Lord Preston has confessed, or intends confession, will make them use all endeavours to hide. Mr. Penn is as much in this business as anybody, and two of the letters are certainly of his writing, and if we can catch him it will so appear." After mentioning Mr. Assheton's trial, Lord Sydney continues: "Sir George Fletcher, Lord Preston's father-in-law, has been with me to tell me that his Lordship has not finished the paper wherein he will declare what he knows of this matter. I am not sorry for it, because his Lordship is somewhat discomposed, and his memory wants some refreshment, which he shall have from me to-morrow morning, though I shall not be able to go to him myself" (pp. 228, 229).

The proceedings in regard to Lord Preston, his confessions, and his eventual pardon, may be followed in the various papers now calendared, many are of considerable interest. Lord Carmarthen was quite as much opposed to his execution as was Lord Sydney. "He is the only witness," says Carmarthen, "against Lord Clarendon, the Bishop of Ely and Penn . . . . by his execution you disappoint all these ends, and in my opinion it will not be to your disadvantage if you should think fit to show your clemency rather than draw any more blood on this occasion" (p. 244).

The proclamation for apprehending the Bishop of Ely, Penn, and James Grahame, is dated on the 5th of February (p. 246), and on the 27th, Lord Sydney communicated to the King an interesting account both of the Quaker himself and of an interview that took place between him and the writer:—

"About ten days ago, Mr. Penn sent his brother-inlaw, Mr. Lowther, to me to let me know that he would be very glad to see me if I would give him leave, and promise to let him return without being molested. I sent him word I would, if the Queen would permit it. He then desired me not to mention it to anybody but the Queen, and I said I would not. On Monday he sent to know the time I should appoint, so I named Wednesday evening, and accordingly I went to the place at the time, and found him just as he used to be, not at all disguised, but in the same clothes and same humour I have formerly seen him in. It would be too long for you to read a full account of our discourse, but in short it was this: that he was a true and faithful servant to King William and Queen Mary, and if he knew anything that was prejudicial to them or their government, he would readily discover it. He protested, in the presence of God, that he knew of no plot, nor did he believe there was any in Europe, but what King Louis had said, and he was of opinion that King James knew the bottom of this plot as little as other people. He said he knew that you have a great many enemies, and some who came over with you; and some who joined you soon after your arrival, he was sure were more convertible against you, and more dangerous than the Jacobites. 'For,' he said, 'there is not one man amongst them that hath common understanding to the letters that were found with my Lord Preston, and the paper of the conference.' He would not give any positive answer, but said if he could have the honour to see the King, and if the King would be pleased to believe the sincerity of what he said, and pardon the ingenuity of what he confessed, he would freely tell everything he knew of himself, and other things; which would be important for his Majesty's service and interest to know. But if he cannot obtain this favour he will be obliged to quit the kingdom, which he is very unwilling to do. He also said he might have gone away twenty times if he had pleased; but he is so confident of giving you satisfaction if you would hear him, that he was resolved to wait your return before he took any sort of measures. What he intends to do is all he can do for your service, for he cannot be a witness, if he would, it being, as he says, 'against his conscience and his principles to take an oath.' This is the sum of our conference, and I am sure you will judge it as you ought to do" (pp. 282–283).

The opening months of 1691 did not find Irish affairs in a very good state, despite King William's successful campaign of the previous year; much illfeeling and jealousy continued to exist amongst the officers, and after the King's departure in the previous autumn, various enterprises had been carried out with but negative results. "I have long seen by private letters," writes Lord Carmarthen, "that the affairs of Ireland have been thought to be in a deplorable condition"; but a letter from the Lords-Justices, of the 16th January, caused him to regard the state of the country with graver apprehension than he had ever before done. The Protestants were in a deplorable condition, and in some places forced to take shelter amongst the Rapparees. The army was practically penniless, and the writer fully expected that during the coming summer the King's affairs would "recoil instead of "advancing" (p. 229). An order received in January from the King for disbanding several regiments of horse and foot met with the strongest opposition from the Lords-Justices (pp. 230–232), and was subsequently modified (pp. 251 and 256). In a letter dated January the 24th, Lord Sydney comments upon the failure of a costly expedition against the rebels in Connaught (p. 232). On the same day the Lords-Justices make certain suggestions for the coming campaign; they also refer to the embezzlement of horses and the lack of arms and ammunition, and the landing of Tyrconnel "with provisions and arms, but no men." Had a squadron of our ships "attended" the coast, that landing could have been prevented (pp. 233, 234). Ginckle reports Tyrconnel's arrival at Limerick, with Secretary Nagle and Baron Ruys (p. 234); his declaration, as "Lord Lieutenant and General Governor of Ireland," is dated from that place (p. 235). His policy towards the Irish is mentioned (p. 237), as is the disappointment felt by the Irish at the smallness of his help (p. 265).

Affairs in Ireland grew rather worse than better as the year advanced, and the progress of events may be minutely followed by the documents now calendared. William's presence was held needful, but the Lords-Justices despaired of seeing of him whilst he was so engrossed with the war in Flanders (p. 264). Carmarthen placed no dependence on the power of the Lords-Justices to set things right, and on the 24th of February, writes:— "I presume to give you my opinion of the necessity of sending somebody thither [to Ireland] as Lord Lieutenant, with the accustomed powers of that place; whose quality as well as authority may give a countenance to his actions, and make him more willingly obeyed than these Lords-Justices are or will be" (p. 270). He goes on to suggest some persons suitable for the office. Lord Sydney was equally emphatic as to the need of the King's return from the continent. Writing to him on the 6th of March, he says:—"I am sorry to find your coming here at all is deferred, for we want you every minute, and the affairs of Ireland more than can be expressed" (p. 295). Mackay was, in this writers opinion, the only man fit to command in Ireland, and he urges the King to reconsider his determination to employ him in Flanders; for "the reducing of Ireland is of the greatest importance in the world to you." The officers then in Ireland would, he felt sure, "never do it" (ibid.).

With such opinions before him, it is not surprising that William hastened to England so soon as he found that Mons could not be saved for the Allies. He reached England early in April, and before his return to the continent, a month later, had the opportunity of giving personal instructions with regard to settling Ireland and bringing the war to a conclusion at the earliest moment that policy allowed.

A plan of operations for the year, which commenced with the siege of Athlone, had been approved by the Queen before the King's return, and she had made a promise of speedily relieving the necessity of the army in Ireland with regard to money (p. 308). Immediately on the King's return he approved the scheme for a proper establishment of military hospitals there, and the papers about these will be found of interest (pp. 341, 356, 357). The general conduct of the army also received consideration. Ginckle remained in command, but Douglass, Kirke, and Lanier were ordered home, the two former being required for service in Flanders (p. 352), and a Board of Ordnance was constituted (p. 363). The impoverished inhabitants who had supplied provisions for the army during the winter, for which they had received no payment, were directed to submit their accounts to the Irish Treasury (372).

Still the army was in great want. The Lords-Justices and Ginckle wrote from Dublin on the 18th of May, that "it had long since taken the field" had it possessed "arms, clothes, recruits, and horses," and, they continue, "unless the wind brings them in, we do not know when we shall be able to lie down before Athlone" (p. 378).

The state of the enemy's forces was not, however, much better, though their camp was conveniently situated to hinder King William's army from crossing the Shannon either above or below Athlone, and there certainly existed internal dissension in the Irish camp, as well as in the English. A letter to the Earl of Nottingham, written from Dublin Castle on the 27th of May, states that "Since the coming over of Marshal St. Ruth there have been great divisions amongst them; for he commands here for the King of France and Sarsfield and Clifford, upon pretence of sickness, as it is thought, keep at Portumna, and have not as yet been with the army" (p. 390). "News from Ireland," dated on the same day, announced that French help had reached Limerick, but that St. Ruth was turning out the Irish officers and filling their places with others—presumably French: an action which was resented by Tyrconnel (ibid.).

On full consideration of the condition of Ireland, William had given orders for concluding the war on almost any terms (p. 393). The Lords-Justices therefore forwarded to England, on the 29th of May, the draft of a proclamation, offering very liberal conditions to all who would consent to cease their disloyalty, Sir Charles Porter stating, in a covering letter, that it would be "absolutely necessary, upon any terms, to end the war in this kingdom this summer." He felt sure the proclamation would be censured by two classes of people: "The English here will be offended that the Irish are not quite beggared," and the House of Commons would be indignant and astonished when they saw "those lands gone which they designed to be applied for the payment of the army" (p. 393). "Yet," he continues, "it is most certain that if parting with the Irish estates will reduce the country this summer, it is much better husbandry for England than to keep them and continue the war" (ibid.).

It was felt that the proclamation should be issued by the Lords-Justices, not in their own name, but in the Queen's. It was not suggested to issue it till the English forces had gained some distinct advantage over the Irish, as its acceptance by the defeated party would then be the more certain. The General (Ginckle) was leaving Dublin the next day to take the field (p. 394), and as the Queen approved of the proclamation being "presently" published (p. 411), Ginckle carried it with him ready to issue on the first success (p. 429).

Meanwhile the campaign was carried on with vigour. On the 29th of June Sir Charles Porter writes that the army was upon the point of attempting to pass the Shannon at Athlone, and of storming the town in the face of a superior force of the enemy. "By their bravery," he writes, "they will deserve whatever care is taken of them." He goes on to relate the means by which the possibility of the passage of the river had been tested:—

"On Saturday, at ten in the morning, three Danes, whereof one was a quartermaster, the others common troopers, who had been disgraced formerly as not behaving themselves as they ought on a party sent out by the Duke of Wurtemburg, begged leave to attempt the pass, near the bridge at Athlone, which they performed, and found it not above knee deep in most places, and that 20 might march abreast. They came off well, though thousands of small shot were fired at them by the enemy; only two of them are slightly wounded, the other, who was the quartermaster, was not hurt, though he attempted to pull down the palisado on the other side." It was at that ford, writes Porter, that "the attempt was made yesterday, or will be this morning" (p. 429).

The successful issue of the siege is communicated to the King by Ginckle himself in a letter dated at Athlone on the 11th of June, which gives many interesting particulars (pp. 441, 442), and King William learnt of the victory at Aughrim in a similar manner, Ginckle's second letter being dated on 13th of July (p. 444). The death of St. Ruth was then only rumoured. On the 18th, Carmarthen wishes the King "joy" on the happy news which had evidently just reached London (p. 450). The reduction of Ireland was, by him, evidently now regarded as certain, and the employment of William's troops elsewhere was engaging attention. That these conclusions were somewhat hasty is of course shown by subsequent events, which may be traced in the pages of the Calendar. But though the defence of Limerick was obstinate, its defenders can have had very little real hope of the ultimate success of their party. The anticipated fall of Limerick is mentioned in a letter to Sir Joseph Williamson, dated on 22nd September (p. 528), and the fact that the garrison had desired to capitulate is referred to on October the 6th, in a letter from Nottingham to Ginckle, the chief portion of which letter is not preserved (p. 539).

Amongst the documents, in the volume relating to Ireland, attention should be called to the directions given in April 1691, to the Lords-Justices, and to Ginckle, to find employment in the army in Ireland, for the two sons of Dr. Walker, the gallant defender Londonderry. The King considered that he "ought to take some care of these gentlemen for the sake of their father, who had served him so very well, and lost his life in his service" (p. 354). The inhabitants of Londonderry also received marks of royal appreciation; prior to May 1691, they had shewn by their petition "that by their manifold disbursements, losses, and debts, contracted for the preservation of the place," they were "brought to a very low and ruinous condition, which makes them not able of discharging the engagements they lie under, or scarce subsist, unless, by his Majesty's grace and favour, they are enabled thereunto." They had lately adventured to take some lands in the barony of Glenarme and liberties of Colraine, being part of the Earl of Antrim's estate, for which lands they had contracted to pay 1,356l. rent for the first year of their lease, and for arrears, 1,079l.; but this was more, considerably, than the premises would yield for the present, and they therefore prayed, "as a mark of his Majesty's favour to the said city," that he would "graciously remit and allow them the aforesaid year's rent and arrears, and further to appoint commissioners to examine and state their losses and disbursements, and that towards the satisfaction of what they have expended or undergone, the forfeited estate of the Earl of Antrim may be settled upon them" (p. 361). The petition was referred to the Treasury, and a warrant issued on the 21st of August, which remitted to the citizens the sum of 1,500l.

The extent of damage suffered by the city during its memorable siege is referred to in this warrant as follows:— "The Queen—taking into her consideration the eminent services performed by the inhabitants of the said city in their defence of the same, when it was besieged in 1689, and being informed that during the siege their great church, the town hall, school house, main guard house, gates and other public buildings were ruined, or very much shattered, and require rebuilding and repairing—is pleased for that end, to grant to the said Mayor and Commonalty the sum of 1,500l." (p. 497).

During the ten months of the year 1691, with which this volume deals, no very important developments took place in Scottish affairs, yet the documents calendared throw an interesting light on William's policy towards that Kingdom. This is pronounced first in a letter to the Privy Council of Scotland, dated from the Hague on the 13th of February. It was the King's intention to adopt an equal and moderate government; those who continued rebellious were to be secured; the army—to avoid the harass of the people—was to be properly subsisted, and the fortification of Inverlochy—Fort William, as it came to be called—was commended as a safeguard for Inverness, the highland capital (p. 257). Moderation towards the episcopal clergy is, on the same day, recommended to the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland:—

"Our pleasure is that you make no distinction of men, otherwise well qualified for the ministry," who acknowledge the government in church and state, "though they formerly conformed to the law introducing episcopacy, and they are not to be troubled on that account." Past severity is to be reviewed and redressed. This done, continues the King, "We will protect you and maintain the government in the church by presbytery, suffering no invasion to be made upon it, and we expect you to avoid all causes of division, and cordially unite with those who agree with you in the doctrine of the protestant religion, and own that confession of faith which the law has established as the standard of the communion of that church. And during our absence out of Britain, and till further directions, you are to proceed to no more processes, but apply yourselves to reconcile differences and redress grievances" (p. 258).

Lord Carmarthen refers to the arrival of a deputation from the episcopal clergy on this point, which reached England after the King's departure. Meeting their wishes would, he considers, be exceedingly beneficial to the peace of Scotland. "Truly, I believe," he writes "that the speedy doing of this may be of no less consequence than preventing a rebellion, and at a time when nothing but the folly of clergymen would have put it to a venture" (p. 282).

By the time this letter was written the King's pacific message from the Hague had probably been received by the episcopal clergy. The acknowledgment of this message was conveyed to the King in Flanders, and, apparently, a somewhat fuller explanation of policy was requested by the Assembly; for, writing from Opprebaix in June, the King says: "We do not however restrain you as to these matters relative to the church or yourselves, nor did we even intend to protect any of the ministry who were truly scandalous, erroneous, or supinely negligent; we therefore propose their subscribing the Confession of Faith, as the standard of the church communion which takes off the suspicion of error. We do not oblige you to receive such as are really scandalous, insufficient, and supinely negligent, though they were willing to acknowledge our authority" (pp. 414—415).

Despite the policy of pacification an outbreak of a serious nature was evidently not unexpected in Scotland. Argyll, Melville, and others of the Council had referred, as far back as March, to a need for frigates to prevent rebels from the Western Islands joining the disaffected on the mainland; to the importance of keeping an efficient garrison at Inverlochy, by which course Cromwell brought the Highlanders under obedience; and for a more liberal supply of money to Mackay (p. 286). Carmarthen, in July, writes that he is not apprehensive of "commotions," unless caused "by the insolence of the clergy and the folly or knavery of some of your Council there" (p. 446); and the King, in a letter written at the same time as that last quoted to the Assembly of the Church of Scotland, had directed the militia to be in readiness, though not to act without giving the Highlanders time to reflect (p. 413).

The Earl of Breadalbane was empowered to treat with the disaffected Highlanders, and various instructions to him, and a ratification of his actions, are contained in the present volume, the outcome being found in a letter from the King to the Privy Council of Scotland, and in "Concessions in favour of the Highlanders," sent from St. Gerard on the 17th of August (old style); both documents are interesting. A general pardon of all who were in arms against the King before the 1st of the previous June, and who would take the oath of allegiance before the 1st of the following January, and the promise to purchase "superiorities," whereby the Highlanders would have "an immediate independence on the Crown", were the two principal points in the "Concessions." It will be remembered that the purchase of superiorities by the Crown had been recommended by Colonel Hill, as a sure means of pacification of the Highlanders, so far back as July 1690. The particulars as to the different clans found in the "Concessions" are curious (pp. 489–492).

Events on the Continent continue to receive much illustration in documents mentioned in the present volume, after King William's return to Flanders in May 1691. He was, on this occasion, accompanied by Lord Sydney, who in a letter from the Hague, dated May 5/15th, he announces to the Lords-Justices of Ireland that on the previous Friday the King had started from London, sailed from Harwich about 9 the next morning, and reached Maasslius between 6 and 7 on Sunday morning, "after a quiet and very pleasant voyage, during which he was not in the least indisposed." When he left England everything there was "in great quiet," and, continues Lord Sydney, "since my coming here I find the preparations for the ensuing campaign are very forward; insomuch that the King will be able to take the field in Flanders very soon" (p. 361).

The despatches from the Prince of Waldeck, and other commanders of the allied forces in different parts of Europe, addressed to the King, contain many interesting details of the movements of their forces, of the advance of Boufleurs, and of the motions of the French army generally. The successes of the French armies in Catalonia and in Italy are also the subject of frequent communications.

The Elector of Bavaria writing from Carmagnole under the date 1/10th of October, congratulates the King on the fall of that place after four days' siege (p. 534). The reasons of the Court of Spain against appointing the Elector as Governor of the Low Countries are given in a document dated in Madrid the same day (ibid.)

Carmarthen, writing from London on September the 11th, sympathizes with King William on his inability to draw the French to an actual engagement (p. 516), but he consoles himself, remembering that the fact will the sooner bring the King back to England. William's arrival in London on the 19th of October is referred to page 547, where the circumstances of his journey are related in somewhat amusing detail:—

"Last night King William came to town from Margate, having had a mighty favourable wind to bring him from Holland thither in 24 hours, and so home that day. He took shipping upon Sunday in the morning about 7 o'clock. All his guards and retinue who went to bring him home were disappointed, thinking he would have come by Harwich; but coming the other way he was forced to send to the country gentlemen, and the people to conduct and guard him home on his journey. A gentleman's coachman turned over the coach wherein was himself, Lord Churchill, Lord Portland, and Mons. Overkirk, or the Duke of Ormond, I am not certain which, but I do not hear that any great damage was done, only Churchill complained of his neck being broken; the King told him there was little danger [of that] by his speaking. We had the greatest rejoicing with guns, bonfires, and illuminations with candles in windows that I ever saw."

During nearly the whole of the period with which the present volume deals, King William was absent from England. Queen Mary's zealous discharge of the duties of state are evidenced by many entries; her letters to the King are calendared but very slightly, as they are all printed in extenso by Dalrymple. To allude in detail to the various passing events of political importance which called for a display and tact and resolution would be to prolong this preface unnecessarily. The light which these letters throw upon the Queen's disposition, and her deep affection for the King, is a fact well known.

The financial condition of the country, which was certainly such as to increase to an enormous extent the difficulties of the Queen and the ministers in the discharge of their duties, is brought prominently forward by the frequent letters written to King William by Lord Godolphin.

As before, several of the documents now calendared threw light upon the personal history of important characters; of some of these we have already spoken. Marlborough's indignant denial of a charge of misappropriating money is contained in a letter to the King dated on the 17th June 1690, but as that is printed by Dalrymple it needs no comment here. His military enterprises, his opinion of different persons intimately connected with the King, and their opinion of him, also receive illustration, and it is interesting to note, that the Princess Anne of Denmark and her husband, each by holograph letter, dated at Tunbridge on the 2nd of August 1691, recommend the famous general for a vacant garter (p. 468). "I flatter myself," writes Prince George, "that your Majesty will be so kind to bestow it [the order] upon Lord Marlborough for my sake, it being the only thing I have ever pressed you for" whilst the Princess's words run as follows: "You cannot sertinly bestowe it upon any one that has bin more servisable to you in the late revolution, nor that has ventured theire lives for you, as he has don ever since your coming to the Crown; but if people won't think these merits enough, I can't beleeve any body will be so unreasonable to be dissatisfyed, when 'tis known you are pleased to give it him on the Prince's account and mine. I am sure I shall ever look upon it as a marke of your fayvour to us. I will not trouble you with any ceremony becaus I know you don't care for it."

Only a few weeks later the Queen thus writes of Marlborough's wife: After speaking of the general's departure that morning for Ireland she says: "Though I have little reason to care for his wife, yet I must pity her condition, having lain in but eight days," and she adds, with touching allusion to her own unhappiness at the King's absence, and her alarm for his safety, "I have great compassion for wives when their husbands go to fight." (p. 107).

Amongst the documents in the present volume that have relation to King James and the Jacobite party may be mentioned the letter sent by the Duke of Berwick on September the 16th 1690 to Count de Solms, "commanding the enemies forces in Ireland," in which he states that he is informed of an intention to send the Jacobite prisoners to "foreign plantations"; he warns the Count that if any such action should be taken, the prisoners captured by King James's forces would certainly be sent to the French gallies (p. 122). The sentiments with which Louis XIV. came to regard King James after his reverses in Ireland, and the feelings of the Papal Court towards the fugitive monarch are summed up in a despatch from the Spanish ambassador at Rome:—

"King James already begins to be looked upon with disfavour in France, and knowing that he causes embarrassment, and that they would expel him from that kingdom, it has been insinuated to the Pope on his behalf that he wishes to come to Rome. His proposal is badly received, because these ecclesiastics think it very hard to have to maintain him; and they anticipate that his residence here will embarrass the government and hinder the free exercise of justice, as they experienced in the case of the Queen of Sweden, although they received from her considerable sums of money which came from abroad for the expenses of her household. King James's Envoy has left Rome for France with three cardinals of that nation." (p. 511).

Documents relating to the condition of the army and navy are exceedingly numerous, as are the passes granted to intending travellers. In the frequent applications to patent inventions—some exceedingly foolish and others, based upon scientific principle, which have proved of the highest public utility—may be traced the growing spirit of commercial enterprise that (despite the warlike struggles abroad in which the King was entangling the nation) was already manifesting itself amongst Englishmen. The internal condition of the English Church, a desire to redress evils existing therein, and to promote the general reformation of manners, finds notice on more than one occasion, whilst the reform or creation of charitable institutions, hospitals, and the like, is equally apparent. In January 1691, an important commission issued to inquire into the "divers great abuses and irregularities" committed in all, or most, "of the hospitals or houses of charity within this kingdom, whereby great wrong is done to the poor, and the charitable and pious intentions of the founders and benefactors to the said hospitals are greatly perverted." Those commissioned were therefore to visit, amongst others, the several hospitals of St. John the Baptist in or near Chester, of St. Mary Magdalen in the suburbs of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, of the Blessed Virgin Mary in Newcastle-upon-Tyne, of St. Sepulchre near Haw . . . (fn. 1) within the deanery of Holderness, of the hospital at Ilford in Essex, of St. Mary Magdalen in the deanery of Colchester, of St. Katherine near the Tower of London, of the Blessed Virgin Mary at Nottingham, the hospital of Blythe in the deanery of Bedford, of St. Cross near Winchester, of St. Mary Magdalen in the deanery of Winton, and of St. John at Lichfield, and were to "inquire, examine, and inform themselves of the estate and rule of the said hospitals, and of the masters, heads, poor people and others there abiding, and of the disposition and employment of the revenues given or purchased for the maintenance of the same hospitals, &c.; and of all crimes, defects, excesses, abuses, corruptions, offences, and enormities, in concealing, abridging, altering, and diverting or misemploying the said hospitals or houses." When this inquiry had been held, the Commissioners were to "correct, amend, and reform all defects" (p. 240).

The completion of Chelsea Hospital is referred to by the Queen in August 1691, in a letter to the Bishop of London, in which he desires him to consecrate the chapel and burial ground (p. 484).

This growth of the spirit of charity was, no doubt, fostered both by the actions and well-known sentiments of the benevolent Queen, who did so much to make tolerable the presence of a foreign sovereign on the English throne.

W. J. Hardy.

15th November, 1897.