The castle of Dublin.

CHAP. II.**

A short description of the castle of Dublin*

SECT. 1.**

The castle of Dublin is to be considered in a three-fold respect.

I. As a fortress or citadel erected for the defence of the city, and the security of the English interest in Ireland. This end it is well known to have answered in the rebellion of 1641, and before that event, it was signally useful in that of Thomas Fitzgerald in 1534.

II. As the royal seat of* *government, to which it has been converted in latter ages, though not erected for, nor applied to that purpose originally.

III. As the place where the courts of judicature were antiently held, and sometimes the high courts of parliament. **

I**. It is a generally-received opinion, that Henry Loundres, archbishop of Dublin, built this fortress about the year 1220. But it will appear from the following patent, that it was erected, or at least begun, in the government of Meiler Fitz-Henry, about the year 1205. “Rex dilecto, &c. — The King to his beloved, and faithful subject, Meiler Fitz-Henry, lord justice of Ireland, greeting. You have given us to understand, that you have not a convenient place, wherein our treasure may be safely deposited and for as-much, as well for that use, as for many others, a fortress would be necessary for us at Dublin, we command you to erect a castle there, in such competent place, as you shall judge most expedient, as well to curb the city, as to defend it, if occasion shall so require, and that you make it as strong as you can with good and durable walls. But you are first to finish one tower, unless afterwards a castle and palace, and other works, that may require greater leisure, may be more conveniently raised, and that we should command you so to do; for which you have our pleasure, according to your desire. At present, you may take to this use 300 marks from G. FitzRobert, in which he stands indebted to us. We command also our citizens of Dublin, that they strengthen their city, and that you compel them thereunto, if they should prove refractory. It is our pleasure also, that a fair be held at Dublin every year, to continue for eight days, and to begin on the day of the Invention of the Holy Cross, another at Drogheda on St. John Baptist’s day, to continue also for eight days, toll and custom thereunto belonging; another at Waterford on the festival of St. Peter ad Vincula for eight days, and another at Limerick on the festival of St. Martin, for eight days: and we command you that you give publick notice thereof by proclamation, Witness the lord bishop of Norwich at Geddington, 31st August, 1205.”

If it be not manifest from the fore-cited patent, yet it is highly probable, that the lord justice Fitz-Henry began the castle, in regard the grant was made at his solliciation, the necessity of the work set forth, a fund allotted for the execution of it, and that he continued upwards of three years afterwards in the government: though, as it was an expensive structure, perhaps archbishop Loundres might have had the honour of putting the last hand to it.

It would be impractical to give an exact description of this royal building, as in its antient form, on account of the many alterations it underwent at different times:

Yet we will adventure to give the reader such particulars upon the subject, as have occurred, and hope for indulgence where the description appears to be defective.

The entrance into the castle, from the city, was on the north side, by a draw-bridge, placed between two strong round towers from Castle-Street, which took its name from this fortress. The towers were called the Gate-towers, and the most west-ward of them till lately subsisted, the other having been some time before pulled down, to make a more commodious entrance into the court of the castle. The gate-way between* *these towers was furnished with a port-cullis, armed with iron, to raise or let down as occasion required, and to serve as a second defence, in case the draw-bridge had been surprised by an enemy. Since the invention of artillery, two pieces of great ordnance were planted on a plat-form opposite to the gate, to defend it, if the draw-bridge and port-cullis should happen to be forced.

From the western gate-tower, a strong and high courtin extended in a line parallel to Castle-Street, as far as another tower, which in the last century took the name of Cork-tower upon the following occasion. On the 1st of May 1624, about nine o’clock in the morning, this tower suddenly fell down, and being only in part re-built at the charge of the publick, Richard Boyle, the opulent and first earl of Cork, in the year I629, undertook to finish it at his own expense; and in thc accomplishment thereof disbursed 408l. His arms, and an inscription were fixed in the wall, at the place from whence he carried the work.* *This tower has been since demolished to make room for other buildings.

From Cork-tower, the wall of the castle was continued in one courtin of equal height with the former, until it joined Birmingham-tower, which was the stateliest, strongest, and highest tower of the whole. It is said to be erected by John Birmingham, earl of Louth, and baron of Atherdee, who was lord justice in the year 1321, or by Sir Walter Birmingham, who was lord justice in 1348.** **But we conceive, that it had an earlier existence than either of these periods, was coeval with the rest of the fortress, and called the high-tower, as it over-topped the rest; otherwise the citadel would be left imperfect, and the southern and eastern courtins without proper defence, for want of such a flanker. It seems therefore to have taken its present name from the long imprisonment in it of Sir William Birmingham, and Walter his son, who were committed to this prison in the year 1331, for evil practices against the government, and the year following the former was taken out from thence and executed, the other was pardoned as to life, because he was in holy orders.

Certain it is, that it was known by the name of Birmingham-tower as early as the 13th year of king Henry IV. *i. e. A. *D. 1411; and what is contained in the tower itself, exhibits undoubted evidence of this. For in it may be seen a grant of that year to John Conyngham “of a waste parcel of land, then of no value, lying under the castle of Dublin, called the castle-ditch; extending in breadth between the said castle eastward, to a certain parcel of land, (formerly called le Shepe’s land) which the said John and one Richard Bernard possess towards the east, and in length between the same castle to the south to the high street, called Castle-street to the north, and from the bridge of the said castle to the city wall, adjoining to a certain tower of the said castle, called Birmingham tower.”

This record proves not only what is before asserted, but also shews the growth and increase of the city without the walls since that time. For the two Sheep-streets take their names from a piece of pasture ground, called in the record le Shepe’s land, extending from the city ditch to the Carmelite monastery in White-friars-street, and not called Ship-Street, as being formerly a station for shipping, according to vulgar tradition; and in archbishop Alan’s registry it is called *vicus ovium, *from undoubted records. But this is beyond the bounds of the castle.

This tower was often used as a prison or state criminals, and is at present a repository for preserving the antient records of the kingdom, for which purpose the establishment was formerly made to he officer of ten, and encreased to 500 pounds a year. (The augmentation of appointment was made in favour of the celebrated Mr. Addison, who was secretary at that time to the earl of Wharfton, lord lieutenant of Ireland)

From Birmingham-tower the wall was continued by another high courtin as far as** the wardrobe-tower, which now affords an **entrance to the chapel, and was formerly, as it still remains, a repository for the royal robe, the cap of maintenance and other furniture of state, preserved here by a patent officer, who has a competent salary for that employment.

Between Birmingham-tower, and the wardrobe-tower the courtin was interrupted by two other nameless towers, of much less dimensions than either of the former; one of which, together with a part of the courtin, has been taken down, as well to make room for other necessary buildings, as to give an entrance into the castle garden, contiguous to it. The stump of the other of those towers yet remains, and on it is erected an elegant polygonal apartment, which serves for a cabinet to the government.

From the wardrobe-tower another courtin extended to the north, or store-house-tower, which stood near Dame’s-gate, and is now entirely demolished. This tower formerly served as a repository for the king’s** **ammunition and stores and from thence the courtin was continued to the eastern gate-way-tower, at the entrance to the castle.

(This seems to be the tower mentioned by Sir H. Sydney in his letter to the lords of the council of England, April 14, 1559. – And whear your lordships may thinke straunge the demaunde of of 4,000 of leade; it may pleas the thunderstonde, a great part thereof to be men for an towarde the covering of a certain tower within the Castle of Dublin; whose rowfe was taken down by my lord of Sussex, and a platfourme thereon made; and thereuppon a cannon planted, to the great force of that the queene’s majesties piece, and terror of the evil disposed sort: So, as if the same be not in tyme covered agayn, it will be the fynall decaye of that tower; beside the losse we have in the meane, of the nether rowmes there, for the bestowing of poweder, and other munycoins, whereof (begin as it is) we can lay there nothing. Collins Letters, vol. 1. P. 6)

The castle is of an oblong quadrangular form, and was originally encompassed with a broad and deep moat, part of which was dry, but that part which lay to the east was filled with water by the flowing of the tide, and a branch of the river Dodder, which runs in a channel under an arch by the edge of the castle garden, and supplies the tables and other out-offices of the palace.

This moat has from time to time been filled up, and at present is become private property, by grants from the crown, as may be seen before in the instance of John Conyngham, who was clerk of the king’s works, an officer in the nature of a surveyor-general. By a concordatum yet remaining in Birmingham-tower, dated the 23rd of October, 9 Hen. VI. (1430)Dublin, “twenty marks a year were allotted out of the revenue of the kingdom for the reparation of the castle-hall, buildings, and towers of the castle of Dublin, wherein the books and records of chancery, of both benches, and the exchequer were kept, and which were then in such a ruinous condition, that the said books and records were greatly damaged by rain and the violence of the weather and that the said 20 marks be paid into the hands of John Conyngham for the year ensuing to enable him to proceed on the said work. ”

There were formerly two sally-ports or postern-gates in the walls of this fortress; one near Birmingham-tower towards Sheep-street, and the other afforded a passage down to the back yard, and the out-offices. The former was closed up in the year 1663, by order of the duke of Ormond, then lord lieutenant, upon the discovery of the conspiracy of Jephson, Blood, Warren, and others, whose scheme was to surprise the castle by that port. The other remained within our own memory, until the courtin, extending from the** **wardrobe to the north-tower, together with the latter, were taken down to make room for a new range of buildings, where at present the council-chamber, and some of the offices of the secretaries stand.

On the outside of the castle, towards the east, stands a chapel for the service of the household, a lodging for the office of a groom-porter, or gaming table, lately put down, the provost-marshal’s prison, an armory, the work-houses of the armourers and smiths belonging to the train of artillery, the stables of the chief governor, and a range of fair buildings, Come years since erected, and employed in offices belonging to the public, such as the offices of ordnance, war, treasury, for the registring of the deeds and conveyances of the kingdom, and the like.

The antient officers, to whom the guard of the castle ordinarily belonged were a constable, gentleman-porter, and a body of warders, consisting of archers and pikemen, and (after the invention of guns and gunpowder) of harquebussiers, or musquetiers, and artillery men; a quantity of great ordnance being planted on platforms in the most convenient places for defence. The two towers at the gateway or entrance were set apart to the use of the constable for the custody of state prisoners, and they were indeed a strong security for such purposes: yet prisoners have found means to escape out of them, either by connivance or bribery.

One signal instance of this happened in the case of the lord Delvin, who in 1606 was committed in ward here for joining in a conspiracy with the earl of Tyrone and Tyrconnel, Maguire, O-Cahan, and most of the chieftains of the Irish septs of Ulster, to surprise the castle of Dublin, cut off the lord deputy and council, dissolve the state, and set up a government of their own.

The conspiracy was discovered on the 19th of May 1607, by a roman catholick intrusted with it, who dropped a letter in the council-chamber, directed to Sir William Usher, clerk of the council, and immediately carried to the lord deputy Chichester, then sitting in council, to the following import, “That he (the writer) was called into company among some popish gentlemen, who, after administring an oath of secrecy, declared their purpose was to murder or poison the deputy, to cut off Sir Oliver Lambert, to pick up one by one the rest of the officers of state, to oblige the small dispersed garrisons by hunger to submit, or to penn them up as sheep in shambles. That the castle of Dublin being neither manned nor victualled, they held as their own, that the towns were for them, the country with them, the grandees abroad and in the north prepared to answer the first alarm, that the powerful men in the west were assured by their agents to be ready as soon as the state was in disorder, that the catholick king had promised, and the jesuits from the pope warranted men and means to second the first stir, and royally to protect all their actions; that as soon as the state was dissolved, and the king’s sword in their hands, they would elect a governor, chancellor, and council, dispatch letters to the king, trusting to his unwillingness to imbark in such a war, and his facility to pardon, would grant them their own conditions of peace and government, with toleration of religion that if the king listned not to their motons, the many days spent in England in debates and preparations, would give them time enough to breathe, fortify and furnish the maritime coasts, and at leisure to call to their aid the Spanish forces from all parts.”

The discoverer further declares, “That he interposed some doubts to them, which they readily answered, and he pretended to consent to further their projects, and that he took this method to give notice of their designs though he refused to betray his friends, in the mean time, that he would use his best endeavours to hinder any further practices:” and he concludes, “That if they did not desist, though he reverenced the mass, and the catholick religion, equal to the devoutest of them, yet he would make the leaders of that dance know, that he preferred his country’s good, before their busy and ambitious humours.”

On this discovery, Tyrconnel, Tyrone, and Maguire fled beyond seas, most of the conspirators absconded, and Lord Delvin (as appears by an inquisition taken at the Vicar’s-hall near S. Patrick’s church on the 9th of June 1608) was arrested) 10th of Nov. 1607, and committed to the castle (‘For divers most wicked and atrocious acts of treason, committed against our lord the king, his crown and dignities, by him, Richard Nugent, lord Delvin’; says the inquisition) to be kept there in safe custody by Tristram Ecclesten, constable of the castle, till he should by due course of law be released: within eight days after which the deputy, having notice that he was meditating an escape, ordered the constable to remove him from the upper chamber next the battlements, into a lower apartment, that he might be kept the more secure, and there be guarded night and day by some of the warders: but Ecclesten, in contempt of the deputy, not only suffered the lord Delvin to abide in his upper apartment, without placing any guards over him, but also permitted his lordship’s servant John Evers to come to him, and bring to his gentleman, Alexander Aylmer, who attended him in his confinement, certain cords, by the help whereof, his lordship on the 22d of November), descended by the wall of the castle and escaped.

The day following a proclamation was issued, signed by the deputy and 18 of the privy council, for apprending and bringing him to justice; and sir Richard Wingfield, marshal of the army, was sent in pursuit of him with a detachment of horse. But his lordship found means to escape, and the next year voluntarily submitted himself to the king) and was pardoned.

To return, there was also in antient times a chaplain allowed for preaching to the garrison in the chapel of this fortress; which office seems to have had commencement in the year 1224, or not long before it. For that year king Henry III. issued a privy seal to William, earl Marshal the younger, then lord justice, “to allow 50 shillings yearly to William de Radclive, the king’s chaplain, for ministring in the chapel of the castle of Dublin.”

Officers of the mint had also their residence here in divers ages, and, upon account of security, it was appointed and set apart as a place for coinage by many acts of parliament, of which numbers yet remain in the Rolls-office. The importance of it also may be seen in the statute of 10 Hen. VII. Chap 14. By which none but a man born within the realm ot England was capable of being constable of it, as well as in the care taken from time to time in keeping it in repair.

On the 24th of January, 6 Hen. VI. (1427) money being scarce to answer the exigencies of the state, an order passed in council, “that as the hall in the castle of Dublin, and the windows of it were ruinous, and that there was in the treasury an antient silver seal cancelled, which was then of no use to the king, that it should be broken and sold, and the money arising from it be laid out on the repairs of the said hall and windows.”

An instance of the frugality of those times. By a statute of 2d Edw. IV. not printed, it was provided, “that 40s. be yearly taken out of the issues and profits of the hanaper, 40s. out of the issues and profits of the chief-pleas, 40s. out of the issues and profits of the common-pleas, 3l. out of the issues and profits of the exchequer, and 20l. out of the issues and profits of the mailers of the mint, and be yearly paid to the clerk of the works of the said castle, (for which he was made accountable before the barons of the exchequer) and that all the leads of the isle of the hall of the said castle be sold by the treasurer of Ireland, to make and repair the said hall.

But these sums not being paid on account of divers pre-assignments on the fund allotted, an. 15 Edw. IV. (1475)* *it was enacted, “that the sheriffs shall make due payments to the clerk of the works within three months after the sums come to their hands, not withstanding any assignments on the said issues to any other persons, under the penalty of 10 pounds, and that the clerk of the hanaper pay the 40s. allotted on his office within a month after the tally be offered him, and the mailer of the mint within seven days after the tally be offered him.” The former of these acts is among the printed statutes, and the other may be seen in the Rolls-office.

Many attempts have been made to surprize this fortress, of which see hereafter. It was twice besieged in the rebellion of Thomas Fitzgerald in 1534, and a part of it destroyed by fire in 1683. Friar James Keating, prior of Kilmainham, was constable of it in the 18th Edw. IV. (1478) and fortified it with men and broke down the draw-bridge, and held it out against* *the then lord deputy, Henry, lord Grey. But a parliament meeting on Friday after All Saints that year, it was then enacted, “That the said friar should, between that and christmas following, cause the said bridge to be repaired substantially and sufficiently, by the survey of Henry White of Dublin, clerk; and in case of failure, that his office of prior should be void, and that the lord deputy might make a guardian or custodee of the said priory, until the grand master of Rhodes, or prior of St. John of London should provide a guardian of prior of it.” **

SECT. II**

To consider this building as a royal seat of government, it is to be noted, that it was not converted to that use till the reign of queen Elizabeth. Before that period there does not appear to have been any fixed place for the reception of the chief governors, who sometimes held their courts at Thomas-court, (in which was a chamber of presence, called the king’s chamber, wherein the lords of the council assembled) sometimes at the palace of the archbishops of Dublin, at St. Sepulchre’s, but oftner in the castle of Kilmainham.

In 1488 the earl of Kildare, then lord deputy, received sir Richard Edgecomb in the king’s great chamber in Thomas-court, and there did homage, and took the oath of allegiance to king Henry VII. in the person of hr Richard Edgecomb. The earl of Kildare, being appointed lord deputy in 1524, took the oath of office in Christ-church, and from thence went in sate to the abbey of St. Thomas, Conn O’Neill carrying the sword before him, where he entertained the nobility and the king’s commissioners with a splendid feast. In 1556* *the lord lieutenant, Fitz-Walter, kept his court at Kilmainham, and there received the submission of Shane O-Neil. The lord deputy Sussex kept his court in the same place the year following. In 1559, the earl of Sussex, being again appointed lord lieutenant, lay the first night of his arrival at the house of Mr. Peter Forth; because the house of Kilmainham had been damaged by a tempest the year, before, and was not yet repaired. The next morning he rode to St. Patrick’s-church, and took the oath of office, and from thence to St. Sepulchre’s, where he kept his court.

Upon this occasion it was judged, that the castle of Dublin might be fitted up at less expence for the reception of the government, than the house of Kilmainham; and accordingly queen Elizabeth, in the third year of her reign (1560) sent a mandate to the lord lieutenant and council, “to repair and enlarge the castle of Dublin, for the reception of the chief governors. ” What was done in pursuance of this order does not particularly appear; but it is manifest, from an entry in the rolls of chancery, “That when sir Henry Sydney, lord deputy, landed in 1565~, he lay at Monck-town, and from thence removed to the house of Thomas Fitz-Williams at Merion, from whence as he approached the city, the sheriffs of Dublin met him with 60 horse and a trumpeter, and at Hoggin-green (New College-green) the mayor and aldermen received him in their formalities.

He marched not through the city, but rode through the ford of St. Mary’s abbey, and passed along Oxmantown-green to Kilmainham, to view the house which was then in decay ; and there the sheriffs at the outer gate took their leaves of him, and went home at two o’clock, and his lordship went to St. Sepulchre’s, and there lodged, and on the 20th of January he was sworn in Christ-church.”

Hooker adds, “that after he was sworn, the new appointed privy-council conducted him to the castle of Dublin, where he swore them according to the queen’s instructions.” From that time the castle became the residence of the chief governor, and has continued so from thence to this day.

Hooker affirms, “that it was sir Henry Sidney who repaired and beautified the castle about the year 1567 and that before his tune it was ruinous, foul, filthy, and greatly decayed.” But it is probable something was done to make it commodious, by virtue of the queen’s mandate in 1560; otherwise it could be no way fit for the reception of sir henry Sidney seven years after. What that good lord deputy did upon this occasion best appear from a concordatum for the establishment of the house-keeper of the castle, issued by his lordship and the privy council on the 15th of November 1570, which we will give intire, not only as it illustrates the subject, but as it may afford some entertainment to the reader, to compare the English language at that time with the modern way of writing

By the Lord Deputy and Council,

Henry Sidney,

Whereas ther haith been erected of late within his majestie’s castell of Dublyn, certen lodgings and other fair and necessarie roulmes, both for a convenient place for the lord deputie’s howse, and a fit seate for the placing and receiving of any gonvernour heraftir, as for the bettir and more commodious resorte and assermblv of the counsaill, and for the gretter ease of all sutors boeth riche and poore, whiche hertofore were accustomed to travaill to and from plaices boeth farder distant and lesse commodious for the dispatche of ther causes; whiche lodgings and buildings if they shoulde not from time to* time be well mayntained, loked into, ayred, clened, and dressed up in the absense of the gouvernour, they shoule in short tyme come to grette decay and ruyne. We have therfor thought fytt, that as well for the keaping of the said howse, and roulmes newely erected, as for the clensing of all the gutters within the said castell, sweping and keaping clene of the walkes upon the walls and platform, as for the tending and keaping of the clocke within the said castell, whiche requireth daily attendance to be tempred and kept in frame, to appoint sume honest, carefull, and diligent person to take that chardge in hand, who should from tyme to tyme undertake the doings of thos services, and in the gouvernour’s absence to loke to the preservation of thinges appertayning to the howse, to take the same by indentur, and in like mannir to re-deliver theme, so that hir magestie shall not, through negligent keaping of the said howse, be at any chardge. Forasmuche therfor as there is no certain fee or interteynment appointed for that purpose, we have condescended and agreed to allow unto our well biloved George Arglass of Dublin, gentilman, servant unto us the sayd lord deputy, or to his sufficciente deputy, 16 pence currant money of Ireland by the day; and with-all, sume convenient roulme for his lodging within the sayd caftell, at the assigmnent of the gouvernour for the tyme being; whiche allowance of 16 pence currant money of Ireland we have agreed shall begyn from the first dayc of October last past, and to be payeci quarterly out of th’ office of the hanaper in this realme, of souche sums* **of money as shall be thear recceyved to hir magestie’s use from tyme to tyme, and the sayd intertaynment shall so endure and continue during pleasur; willing and requiring the clearke of hir magestie’s sayd hanaper in this realme for the tyme being, and his deputies and substitutes by virtue of this our concordatum, to be enrolled in hir magestie’s exchequer in this realme, to make payment thereof unto hym from tyme to tyme as apperteyneth, any further special warrant or bill to be obteyned for the same and this accordingly shall not only be hys sufficient warrant and dischardge in that behalfe from tyme to tyme, but also unto the theforer, vice-theforer, chauncellour, and barrons, and outher officers of hir magestie’s said exchequer, auditors, and outher hir magestie’s officers and commissioners of accomptes, to make allowance thereof from tyme to tyme upon the accomptes of the clearke of hir magestie’s sayd hanaper for the tyme being. Given undyr hir magestie’s signett at the castell of Dublin the 15th of Nov. 1570, in the 12 yere of hir magestie’s reign.”

Rob. Weston, Tho. Cusack,

Adam Dublin, Lucas Dillon,

G. Kildare, Francis Agard,

T. Ardmachan. John Challoner,

H. Miden. N. White.

Rob. Dyllon, **

SECT. III.**

To consider the castle under its third relation, namely, as a place where the courts of law and equity for the dispatch of the justice of the nation, and where the high courts of parliament were held, it may be observed, that in the early ages of the English government, the courts of justice were ambulatory, and not fixed to any certain place. In the reign of Edward III. the common-pleas and exchequer were held at Carlow. In the 37th year of that reign (1363) the common-pleas was by writ removed from Carlow back to Dublin; and the reason for doing so is given in the record, namely, “because Carlow was surrounded by enemies, the walls about it much decayed, and the place reckoned unsafe for the residence of the king’s ministers.” This would have been as good a reason for removing the exchequer from thence at the same time; yet it continued there long after.

In the first year of Richard II. (1377) the minister of the exchequer petitioned the parliament for an augmentation of their sallaries, in regard, “that being obliged to sit at Carlow from their proper habitations, they could not have their own provisions for their sustenance, and by their fees of office, by which they used to be supported while the exchequer was at Dublin, they could not live on their antient fees.”

Upon the reasons alledged in this petition, their sallaries were augmented, and an order issued for continuing such additional sallaries while the exchequer sat at Carlow. After that time the common-pleas was removed back to Carlow, and that court was held there in 1389; from whence both that court and the exchequer were probably removed to Dublin in the reign of king Henry IV. for by patent dated the 27th of June 1401, the duke of Lancaster, then lord lieutenant, had power given him to remove them to such places as he should think proper.

Parliaments also were unfixed, and held at various places, as at Trim, Drogheda, Naas, Weys or Wexford, Conall, Clare, Limerick, Balldoil, Castledermot, Kilkenny, Watorford, Cashell, but more frequently at Dublin, and sometimes in the castle itself, as was done 11th Jac. 10th and 15th Car. 1. These assemblies were also sometimes held in Christ-church, where was* *a room called the common-house (perhaps the house of commons) as appears by a statute 29 Hen. VI. where a petition from the seneschal of the liberty of Wexford, and from the sovereign of Wexford was read in parliament, directed to the earl of Kildare, lord deputy, to the lords spiritual and temporal in parliament assembled, and to the commons of the said parliament in the common-house within the cathedral of the Holy Trinity, as Christ-church was antiently called; in which place a parliament was held in the government of Thomas, earl of Sussex in 1559, and at many other times. The stately halls of religious houses afforded also a commodious reception for those assemblies, and there is an instance of one being held in the hall of the Carmelites in White-frier’s-street in the year 1333.

In the latter end of the reign of queen Elizabeth, and the beginning of that of king James I. both terms and parliaments were held within the castle. In Michaelmas term 1605, and in the two following terms, the courts of justice sat* *in a house seated near the river Liffey, and not far from the college, which was built by sir George Cary for an hospital, though never applied to that use. In 1606 application was made by the lord deputy Chicester, and the privy-council of Ireland, to the lords of the council of England for a fund to build a place to hold terms and parliaments in.

A part of the letter sent ,upon that occasion, may be necessary to be transcribed, as it manifests what is alledged. “We are inforced to acquaint your lordships, how much we are troubled for a place to hold the terms in for that sir George Cary, the treasurer here, hath written to me the deputy, that he hath set his house here, which he built for an hospital, to sir Thomas Ridgeway, who (as he saith) shall succeed him in his said office of treasurership, in which place, since Michaelmas last, the terms have been kept, as this likewise must be by reason of the shortness of the time to adjourn it. We find that sir George Cary is not unwilling it should be retained for that use, so he might be compounded with for the charge he hath been at in building of it, which he values to be above 4,000l. and that charge we think very inconvenient his majesty should be at; for that we have found a place near the magazine, where the victuals were, which for 1,600l of sterling harps, we will undertake to make a great deal more convenient for keeping of the terms, and besides fit to hold the parliament in, when his majesty shall be pleased to appoint the same, for which purpose only his majesty must be at a great part of the aforesaid charge, tho’ the terms should be still kept in the hospital; by reason that the places here, wherein the parliaments have been used to be kept, were reduced by the blast of gunpowder, and still remain so. In consideration whereof, we are humbly bold to beseech your lordships to be a mean to his majesty to allow the aforesaid sum of 1,600l. to be employed in building that place, which will be both fit for terms and parliament. For to bring the courts of law again into this cattle, were to draw them just over the store of munitions, which not only by practice (as formerly hath been attempted) but by using of fire, by burning of some prisoners in the hand, may be fired, to* *the exceeding detriment of this state, and ruin of this cattle. In which respects, we doubt not but your lordships will think it exceeding inconvenient, and for our parts, we know it to be so dangerous (and at no time more than now) as we cannot without almost inevitable hazard adventure upon it; whereof her late majesty and your lordships had a like feeling, and accordingly directions were sent hither for removing the terms out of this castle, which, upon some occasion of altering the then deputy, was neglected: and, if we may by this bearer herein receive his majesty’s directions and money, we are in good hope that by Michaelmas term the place before mentioned may be built for the terms, which are now greater than usually they have been; and therefore neither the hospital nor castle great enough for that purpose, but only for necessity.” From Dublin, 29th April 1606 Your lordships, &c.

What is intended by the blast of gun-powder mentioned in this letter, refers to an accident by the blowing up of gunpowder on the Wood-quay in 1596, which did great damage to many parts of the city.

Notwithstanding the importunity of the said letter, yet the castle continued to be the ordinary place of meeting both for terms and parliament till the rebellion of 1641, and from thence to the restoration. (It is a stately pile, fronted with a grand arcade of Ionic columns, the whole built of Portland stone) For the building mentioned to be erected for an hospital by sir George Cary, afterwards became the property of the Chichester family, and was called Chichester-house, and was rented and inhabited by the lord justice Borlafe [Borlase? KF] in 1641. But in latter times, parliaments have been constantly held in it, and on the seite thereof a sumptuous parliament-house hath been not many years since erected, with all convenient chambers and offices for the dispatch of the business of those august assemblies.

A particular place was afterwards set apart in Christ-church-lane for the business of the law, and handsome courts and chambers erected for that purpose in the year 1695.

And now the castle is disengaged from both these incumbrances, which were a great inconvenience to the state, and such great alterations have been made in the building within side the walls, that it would be difficult to point out what the antient buildings were, or to what uses applied. The two gate-towers were antiently set apart for the constable’s lodgings, and the custody of state-prisoners; and so late as the year 1715, one of them, together with the adjoining old buildings, was applied to the latter of those uses. The antient fee of the constable was 20 l. sterl. per annum, which after-wards was augmented to 365 l. per annum, to make the whole 20s. a day; and a few years ago, the constable had an additional allowance made him of 70 l. per annual in lieu of his lodgings, to continue until the said lodgings were put in proper order for his habitation. Each warder, called vigil in the publick records, had a yearly fee antiently of 45s 61 d. as appears by a liberate now remaining in Birmingham tower, of the 32nd year of Edward III. (1358) whereby Thomas Langarton, vigil or warder of the castle of Dublin, had an order for receiving out of the exchequer 11s. 41 d. for a quarter’s salary, from the 17th of August to the 17th of November, in part payment of his annual fee of 45s 61 d. and another of the fame import for his quarter’s salary from November the same year to the February following.

The porter’s antient fee was 13 l. 13s. 9d. a year, and so continues. The fee of the keeper of the council-chamber is 18 l. 5s. a year. It has been seen before, that upon the first creation of a house-keeper, the fee was 16d. a day, or 24 l. 6s. 8d. a year: At present the fee of the house-keeper of the castle, and of the house of (a) (Lately converted to a barrack for the regiment of artillery) Chapel-izod) and overseer of the gardens, and keeper of the wardrobe, (which are blended in one office) amounts to 120

per annum. The antient fee of the keeper of the records of Birmingham tower was 10 l. but is now augmented to 500 1. per an. as has been already remarked

This description of the castle shall be closed by the relation of a matter now wholly foreign to the subject, namely, an account of a controversy determined by combat within the walls of it in the year 1583, as the same is related in the chronicle of John Hooker, alias Vowell, a contemporary writer.

Connor Mac-Cormack O-Connor appeared Teig Mc. Gilpatrick O-Connor before the lords justices (Adam Loftus, archbishop of Dublin, and sir Henry Wallop) and council, for killing his men under protection.

Teig, the defendant, pleaded that the appellant’s men had, since they had taken protection, confederated with the rebel Cahir O-Connor, and therefore were also rebels, and that he was ready to maintain his plea by combat.

The challenge being accepted by the appellant, all things were prepared to try the issue, and time and place appointed, according to precedents drawn from the laws of England in such cases. The weapons, being sword and target, were chosen by the defendant, and the next day appointed for the combat.

The lords justices, the judges and counsellors attended in places set apart for them, every man according to his rank, and most of the military officers for the greater solemnity of the trial were present. The combatants were seated on two stools, one at each end of the inner court of the castle. The court being called, the appellant was led forward from his stool within the lists, stripped to his shirt, and searched by the secretary of slate, having no arms but his sword and target; and taking a corporal oath, that his quarrel was just, he made his reverence to the lords justices and the court, and then was conducted back to his stool. The same ceremony was observed as to the defendant.

Then the pleadings were openly read, and the appellant was demanded, whether he would aver his appeal? Which he answering in the affirmative, the defendant was also asked, whether he would confess the action, or abide the trial of the same? He also answered, that he would aver his plea by the sword.

The signal being given by the sound of trumpet, they began the combat with great resolution. The appellant received two wounds in his leg, and one in his eve, and thereupon attempted to close the defendant, who, being too strong for him, he pummeled him, till he loosened his murrion, and then with his own sword cut off his head, and on the point thereof presented it to the lords justices, and so his acquittal was recorded.

Hooker gives the victory to the appellant, and yet acquits the defendant, which is a contradiction occasioned by his not attending to the legal terms; and he concludes with an ill-natured remark, “that the combat was managed with such valour and resolution on both sides, that the spectators wished, that it had rather fallen on the whole sept of the O-Connors, than on those two gentlemem.”

To Chapter III. Harris Contents.