« ForrigeFortsæt »
lowing him time to prepare for his trial—to have the charge in writing-to be heard by counsel--or to produce any witnesses to rebut
answer it, and yet neither confessing nor denying them, this council, after some time spent therein, required him to answer the said charge either negatively or affirmatively, yet would not confess or deny them. Whereupon the witnesses vouched for proof thereof were called.
* The charge laid against him standing then fully proved, the said Lord Mountnorris at last submitted himself to the judgment of this council, protesting that what interpretation soever his words might have put upon them, he intended no prejudice or hurt to the person of us the deputy and general, affirming, that by these words “but he hath a brother that would not take such a revenge,” his lord ship meant only, that he, the said brother, would die before he would give us the deputy and general occasion to give him such a rebuke.
« We fell in the next place to consider, as of the nature of the offence, so of the punishment due thereunto. And first for the nature of the offence, we conceive it to contain, first, a calumny against the person of us the deputy and general of the army, insinuating by these words, “ the public affront or the disgrace which my lord deputy had done him formerly," that indeed there had been such an affront or disgrace put upon him by us the lord deputy.. Whereas in truth it was nothing so; but that which was pretended by the lord Mountporris to have been the said disgrace or affront to his kinsman, was this; that his said kinsman, being one of the horse troop commanded by us the lord deputy, in the time of exercising the said troop was out of order on horseback, to the disturbance of the rest then in exercising; for which we the lord deputy in a mild manner reproving him, as soon as we turned aside from him, we observed him to laugh and jeer us for our just reproof of him, which we disliking, returned to him, and laying a small cane, which we then carried, on his shoulder, yet without any blow or stroke then given him therewith, told him, that if he did serve us so any more, we would lay him over the pate : the truth of which fact appeared unto us by the relation of his majesty's said deputy and general, avowed and confirmed by two of us the captains, namely, the lord Kirk udbright, and sir Frederick Hamilton, knt. who then saw the manner of it, and now sat as members of this council. Which said act was by this whole council adjudged to have been a far milder proceeding with the said Annesley, than such an insolence and disobedience to any commander, much more to his general, merited. And therefore it was a speech favouring doubtless of malice, to insinuate, that as an affront or disgrace, which was indeed a justly merited, but mild and modest reprehension and admonition.
Secondly. We conceive the offence to contain an incitement to a revenge, in these words, “but he has a brother that would not take such a revenge.” Which incitement might have given encouragement to that brother, being then and now in this kingdoin, and lieutenant of the said lord Mountnorris's foot company, to the said Annesley himself, being continually so near the person of us the deputy and general, or to some other, to have taken up resolutions of dangerous consequences.
the charge*-found guilty of disrespect to his superior officer and of exciting to mutiny--and sentenced to be cashiered-and shot te
>>.000 “For the punishment due to his offence, we judge it to be an apparent breach and contempt of the 41st article of the printed laws and orders of war, established for the good conduct of the service of Ireland, dated the 13th of March, 1633, and published in print by us the lord deputy, soon after our access to this government, in these words of the said article, “no man shall give any disgraceful words, or commit any act to the disgrace of any person in his army or garrison, or any part thereof; upon pain of imprisonment, public disarming, and banishment from the army, as men for ever disabled to
And which is more, in like breach and contempt of the 13th article of the said printed laws and orders of war, the words of which article are these: "No man shall offer any violence, or contemptuously disobey his commander, or do any act or speak any words which are like to breed any mutiny in the army or garrison, or impeach the obeying of the general or principal officer's directions, upon pain of death.”. Which articles are no other than the very same articles this army had always been governed by in the time of the late lord Faulkland, lord Wilmot, and other the generals before them. And therefore this council of war, in conformity to his majesty's gracious pleasure signified as aforesaid, and as well to vindicate the honour of us his majesty's deputy and general of his army from the wrong and contempt under which we now suffer, to the scandal of this government, and to the ill example of others; as also to deliver over to all which bear office, or are listed as members of the army under the rule and government of us his general, an example of justice, for them to take warning by, how they presume to offend against the authority intrusted with us by his majesty, do adjudge hereby, order and decree, that the said lord Mountnorris stands justly and deservedly liable to undergo the censures, pains and punishment by the said 4 istand 13th articles, provided against the breakers of all good discipline, and the transgressors against those orders, which are by the said 41 st article, imprisonment, public disarming, and banishment from the army, as a inan for ever disabled to carry arms; and by the *said 13th article, death. And therefore according to the said articles, this council do unanimously with one joint consent (not one of us being of other opinion) adjudge the said lord Mountnorris for his said high and great offences, to be imprisoned ; to stand from henceforth deprived of all the places with the entertainments due thereunto, which he holds now in the army; to be disarmed ; to be banished the army; and disabled forever bearing office therein hereafter ; and lastly to be shot to death, or to lose his head at the pleasure of the general. Given at his majesty's castle of Dublin the twelfth day of December, 1635.
Valentia, Thu. Cromwell, R. Ranelagh, R. Dillon, Law, Esmond, Kirkudbright, Jo. Borlasse, Cha. Coote, Tho. Weinman, Arth. Terringham, Art. Blundell, Faith. Fortescue, Robert Farrer, Tho. Ro
* “ My lord Mountnorris desired time to answer by counsel ; and
645 Strafford, I. 499.
death!! This Draconian sentence, actually signed by all the members, among whom were some of the highest nobility, shows how. overwhelming was the power of the deputy in the council. Strafford was a member, and said he would not choose to be deprived of the honour of voting for the sentence !*
Charles was determined to support the deputy in all his measures, however arbitrary or unjust. The sentence against lord Mountnorris was so transcendently wicked, that it excited a great sensation in England, where it was almost universally reprobated t—but the king's opinion in favour of it being announced, the clamour subsided. I
The capital part of the sentence was not, nor probably intended to be carried into execution-but Mountnorris was committed to prison on the 12th of December, 1635,9 and not finally released till March,
that he might have his charge in writing. That being not readily granted, he insisted on it, that he might have time to prepare his answer, but was told, it was contrary to the form of that proceeding."**
“I humbly told his lordship, and made solemn protestation, and offered to take my oath, that I did never speak the words, as I was able to prove by several witnesses; and desired that the lord chancellor, (at whose table they were spoken,) and judge martial of the kingdom, then in town, might be summoned to give his testimony for truth, and sir Adam Loftus his son, and near twenty others; and de. sired they might be examined in the causes and that I was well able to prove that the words charged to be spoken by me, were not spoken by me, but by others, as to that part that concerns the affront: but his lordship refused me to have any examined."527
*6 The earl of Cork deposed, that when the sentence was read in the state-chamber, my lord deputy said he would not lose his share in the honour of it ; Lord Dillon testified the same, and that my lord said it was a noble and just sentence."'528
+ They " wonder that a peer of the kingdom, a privy counsellor, a treasurer at war, though a captain, should be tried in a marshal's court for words spoken six months before, no enemy in the country, nor the lord deputy in any danger of his life by those words.9529
“ They conclude that it cannot be paralleled in any time, consideratis considerandis, that any man for the like words, no enemy in the country, so long time after, should be adjudged to die."530
| A letter from the secretary Coke states, “ To the sentence given against the lord Mountnorris by the council of war, no exception is taken; and his majesty avowing the direction of that way of proceeding, hath calmed and silenced all those spirits that began to make a
$ “ I was first committed the 12th of December; let go the 18th to my house ; committed again the 11th of April, put out the second of May: I was then
in great extremity, and admitted to my house again : where I lay in a long continuing sickness, and under the hands of "physicians. And the 30th of January afterwards, because I sued not
528 Rushworth, VIII. 194. 529 Strafford, 1. 508.
527 Idem, 190.
528 Nalson, II. 59.
1637-being, however, in the mean while, twice let out on bail in consequence of the deposition of his physician, that he was in danger of his life. Wentworth was determined not to release him without an acknowledginent of the justice of the sentence, which Mountnorris refused to make.* Whether he was obliged ultimately to submit, there are no means of ascertaining.
Lady Mountnorris on her knees presented a most affecting petition for his pardon and release to the deputy, but he was inexorable. She
0000000000 out the pardon, was imprisoned again, and there continued till March,
* " The manager said, the greatest tyranny was the earl of Strafford's keeping him in prison till he should confess the sentence just, which in his heart he abhorred and held unjust.'
+ The lady Mountnorris to the lord Strafford. “My lord, “I beseech your lordship, for the tender mercy of God, take off your heavy hand from my dear lord; and for her sake who is with God, be pleased not to make me and my poor infants miserable, as we must of necessity be, by the hurt you do to himn. God knows, my lord, that I am a poor distressed woman, and know not wltat to say, more than to beg upon my knees, with my homely prayers and tears, that it will please the Almighty to incline your lordship’s heart to mildness towards him; for if your lordship continue my lord in restraint, and lay disgraces upon him, I have too much cause to fear that your lordship will bring a speedy end to his life and troubles, and make me and all mine forever miserable. Good my lord, pardon these woful lines of a disconsolate creature, and be pleased, for Christ Jesus' sake, to take this my humble suit into your favourable consideration, and to have mercy upon me and mine; and God will, I hope, reward it into the bosom of you, and your sweet children by my kinswoman; and for the memory of her, I beseech your lordship to compassionate the distressed condition of me, Your lordship's most humble and disconsolate servant,
JANE MOUNTNORRIS. This 13th of February, 1635-6.
Endorsed, “ A copy of the lady Mountnorris's letter to the earl of Strafford, when her husband was in prison, under the sentence of death by martial law; and he was so hard-hearted as he gave her no relief."534
Extract from lady Mountnorris's petition to the king. “Her husband bath suffered in honour, health and imprisonment, for a word misinterpreted, and already unto twenty thousand pounds loss in estate, unparalleled precedents for a peer of that realm; and still pursued in the castle Chamber, in Ireland, where he can expect but sad events, if your majesty's impartial justice redeem him not. He hath been a careful and faithful servant in chief place to your majesty's blessed father, for forty years; and if he hath erred through human
532 Rushworth, VIL. 191.
33 Nalson, II. 62. 634 Clarendon's S. P. I. 449.
addressed a similar petition to the king, who, resolved not to impair the authority of his vicegerent, refused to interfere, and left his deliverance to depend on his making such submission as should satisfy Wentworth.
Strafford's malice and vengeance were not satisfied with the sufferings thus inflicted on the victim of his hatred. He had him afterwards cited into the star-chamber court in England," for what offence I know not, nor am I able to state the result. But the well-known despotism of that court, and the all-powerful influence of Strafford, renders it highly probable that he was enormously fined.
It is scarcely possible to add a shade to the atrocity of this affair. But it is aggravated by the circumstances, that Mountnorris was probably between 60 and 70 years of age--that he had faithfully served the king and his father for forty years—that he had twelve children -and was completely ruined by the persecution.
Lord Strafford avowed, after the trial was over, and lord Mountnorris was released, that his object had been to remove him from the country!!
Case of Adam Loftus, lord Ely. This nobleman was chancellor of Ireland, and a member of the privy council. He was earnestly recommended by lord Strafford him. self, in 1635, as one of the most suitable persons for the office of chancellor. & But a circumstance occurred which excited the vengeance of the deputy against him, who pursued him with the utmost virulence.
oooOOOO defects, he most humbly craveth pardon, and layeth himself at your majesty's feet, to do with him whatsoever your majesty shall command. Her humble suit, on her knees, is no more, but that your saered majesty will command his coming into England, being now useless here; his places taken from him ; his health impaired; and his estate ruïned ; and she and her twelve children shall, as in duty bound, pray for your majesty's long and happy reign over us."
*"1 hear that the lord Mountnorris kissed the king's hand at Greenwich; that he is much altered, and of a most dejected spirit; that he hath put in his answer to the bill in the star chamber, which your lordship hath put in against him and sir Piers Crosby; but I have not seen the man.535
7" At my lord Mountnorris his departure hence, he seemed wondrously humbled, as much as Chaucer's friar, that would not for him any thing should be dead; so I told him I never wished ill to his estate, nor person, further than to reinove him hence, where he was as well a trouble as an offence unto me.'
" It much concerns his service that a man able and well affected exercise that place; craving the boldness to recommend sir Adam Loftus to his majesty's remembrance, a person only known to ine, by his own virtue and chearfulness in his majesty's affairs. And to deliver my poor judgment, I see no man on this side that can weigh against him, having equal sufficiency with the ablest amongst them, and more generosity than they all.97587 “Only for his majesty's more full information I shall crave leave
535 Strafford, II. 86. 636 Idem, 145. 537 Idem, I. 306.