Lives of the Lord Chancellors

Chapter I.

Of the Lord Chancellors of Ireland from the reign of Henry III. to the reign of Edward II.

The early Irish Records are very defective. Many were burned in the Castle of Trim and in St. Mary’s Abbey; others were carried out of the country, and are met with in the State Paper Office, the Rolls’ Chapel, Record Office, and British Museum, in London; others are at Oxford. Several cities on the Continent possess valuable Irish documents, while many are stored in private houses, which the recent Commission will no doubt render available. We must not, therefore, feel surprise at the difficulty I have had to encounter in tracing the first Chancellors. Future biographers will not be in my destitute position. The admirably arranged Public Record Office of Ireland, at the Four Courts, Dublin, with its courteous and highly efficient staff, affords ready access to all searchers for antiquarian, legal, and historic lore. [If only it was still the case! KF] I could only discover the name Stephen Ridell, Chancellor in 1186, and the date of the patent appointing John de Worchley, Chancellor of Ireland. [A.D. 1219, Pat. 3 Hen. III] Lord Campbell, in his ‘Lives of the Lord Chancellors of England, mentions that a pluralist dignitary of the Church, Ralph de Neville, Chancellor of England and Bishop of Chichester, in the time of Henry III., was so bent on engrossing the highest civil and ecclesiastical dignities, that he obtained from the King a grant of the Chancellorship of Ireland, to hold during the life of the Chancellor, with all the appurtenances, liberties, and free customs to the said Chancellorship of Ireland belonging. [Lord Campbell’s Lives of the Lord Chancellors of England, vol. i. p. 129. His Lordship adds: ‘I believe this is the only instance of the office of Chancellor of England and Chancellor of Ireland being held by the same individual.’] *

It does not appear that Chancellor De Neville ever set foot in Ireland, for he discharged his functions by deputy. The King sent a writ-patent, dated at Gloucester, May 21, in the eighteenth year of his reign, to Maurice Fitzgerald, his Justiciary of Ireland, reciting the said grant of the Chancellorship, and ordering that Geoffrey de Turville, Archdeacon of Dublin, be admitted Vice-Chancellor, the Chancellor having deputed him thereto. If the deputy discharged his duties in Ireland as well as the principal in England, the suitors had no reason to complain. Matthew Paris speaks of him as one who long irreproachably discharged his official functions, who was speedy and impartial in administering justice to all, especially to the poor. [Mat. Par. P. 312.]

When De Neville ceased to hold the seal of Ireland, Geoffrey de Turville was appointed Chancellor; and several other names appear upon the list in Mr. Smyth’s work: Alan de Sanctafide, [Pat. 1235, 19 Hen. III.] Robert Luttrel, [Pat. 1238, 21 Hen. III] then Geoffrey de Turville, [1237, 22 Hen. III] Ralph, Bishop of Norwich, [1237] William Welwood, [November 4, 1245, 36 Henry III] and Fromond le Brun, [1259, 49 Hen. III. The ancient family of Browne of Moyne is said to have descended from a common ancestry with the Chancellor.] who was Pope’s Chaplain, and an official of considerable influence during these unsettled days in Ireland.

While matters stood thus in Ireland the power and authority of the Chancellor rose high in England. Toward the close of the reign of King Henry III. the office of Chief Justiciary fell into disuse. The Aula Regia was divided into the Courts of King’s Bench, Common Pleas, and Exchequer. The Chancellor, as first magistrate under the Crown, became head of the law.

On the death of the Archbishop of Dublin, Fulk de Saundford, May, 1271, King Henry III. granted a license for the election of his successor, whereon the Prior and Convent of the Holy Trinity elected William de la Corner, Pope’s Chaplain, and King’s Counsellor, while, on the same day, July 29, 1271, the Dean and Chapter of St. Patrick’s, made choice of Fromund Le Brun; also Pope’s Chaplain, and then Lord Chancellor of Ireland. This caused a tedious controversy between the respective electors, which lasted until 1279, when the Pope annulled both appointments. [D’Alton’s Archbishops of Dublin, p. 103.] Fromund Le Brun held the office of Chancellor of Ireland until his death in 1283, when the Great Seal was intrusted to Walter de Fulburn, [1283, 2 Edw. I.] who retained it for five years. After him it went to William Le Buerlaco. [1288, 16 Edw. I.]

The next Chancellor was Thomas Cantock, Bishop of Emly, appointed Lord Chancellor of Ireland in 1292. The name of this prelate occurs in our list of Chancellors, but scant materials can be traced for a memoir of his life. Sir James Ware mentions him among the Bishops of Emly, [Ware’s Bishops, p. 496.] and states he was a native of England. Having been ordained, he obtained preferment in the Archdiocese of Cashel, as Canon of Emly, and Prebendary of Mollagymon, and, in consequence of his learning in the laws, he was appointed Chancellor of the Diocese. Being elected to the See of Emly, he obtained the Royal Assent, on September 4, 1306, and the Chancellorship of Ireland. He must have been popular, for we have it recorded, that, on his consecration in that year, in Christ Church, Dublin, great numbers of the Nobility, Clergy, and others attended. He showed a due sense of the compliment by feasting them with a magnificence unheard of in those times.

While the Bishop of Emly was Chancellor, a circumstance took place which showed the records were not then as carefully preserved as they are in our time; a fire broke out in St. Mary’s Abbey, which consumed a number. The throne of England was now occupied by King Edward I. who, from the attention paid to the law in his time, has been called the English Justinian. In 1275 was passed the Statute of Westminster the First, in fifty-one chapters, which was more a code then an Act of Parliament. [Lord Campbell’s Lives of the Chancellors of England, vol. i. p. 104.] Then, in succession, came the Statute of Gloucester, the Statute of Mortmain, that of Westminster the Second, that of Winchester, that of Circumspecte agatis, of Quo Warranto, and Quia Erruptores. Nor was Ireland omitted in these law reforms. The English Chancellor, Burnel, caused the Statute Ordinatio pro Statu Hiberniae [17 Edw. I. This statute contains eight chapters. This very important statute shows the Irish Court of Chancery was then established.] to be passed, introducing English laws into Ireland, for the protection of the natives from the rapacity of English officials, the spirit of which was speedily forgotten and the principle long denied to the Irish nation.

In the time of Lord Chancellor Cantock we find the first attempt to introduce the study of English law into Ireland. For this purpose an Irish Inn of Court was established called Collet’s Inn, outside the walls of the City, where Exchequer Street and South Great George Street now stand. [Duhigg’s History of the King’s Inn, p. 28.] It does not seem to have had any success. The narrow boundary of English rule, hemmed in by the jurisdiction of the Palatines and of Irish Chiefs, who owned no allegiance, and submitted to no English law, made the practice of the King’s Bench and Common Pleas very trifling. The Chancery was merely open for official business, and had then no equitable jurisdiction, while matters of revenue made the Exchequer a Court of great importance, and kept the Barons in full work.

The Chancellor died on February, 1308. The Great Seal was then in custody of Master John Cantock, at Dublin, and of Master Henry de Ruggeley, and remained so until the Saturday next after the Feast of the Purification of the Blessed Virgin. On this day the Custodees delivered the Seal to the Treasurer and Barons of the Exchequer, Dublin, by precept from the Treasurer and Privy Council. The Seal was then deposited in the Treasury, under the seals of the said Henry de Ruggeley, Master Walter de Islep, and Hugh Canon, to be kept there until the arrival of Piers Gaveston, Earl of Cornwall, Viceroy of Ireland. On his arrival he delivered the Seal to Walter de Thornbury, who continued Chancellor but a short time, and was succeeded by Adam de Wodington, Chancellor in 1294, and Richard de Beresford, Chancellor in 1307. On the death of Dr. Lech, Archbishop of Dublin, on August 10, 1313, Alexander de Bicknor, Prebendary of Maynooth, was proposed as his successor, in opposition to Walter de Thornbury, Chanter of St. Patrick’s, and Chancellor of Ireland. The Chancellor seems to have had most votes, but, on his voyage to France, where the Pope then held his Court, he was overtaken by a furious tempest, and sad to relate, the vessel in which he took passage was wrecked, and he, with one hundred and thirty-six fellow-creatures perished; whereon, adds the historian, ‘as if heaven had promulgated its judgment, De Bicknor’s election was no longer opposed.’ [D’Alton’s Archbishops of Dublin, p. 123.]

William Fitz-John, formerly a Canon of the Cathedral of Kilkenny, was the next Chancellor. He was held in such esteem by his fellow Canons that, on, the death of Michael of Exeter, Bishop of Ossory in 1302, they elected him as his successor, and he was consecrated, with the consent of King Edward II. Ware says, by some mischance, he missed seizin of the temporalities of his See, and was forced to another writ, dated May 9, 10. He administered the affairs of this diocese for about thirteen years, when a contest arose respecting the Archbishoprick of Cashel, which, I regret to find, was by no means an unusual circumstance in those times. The Dean and majority of the Canons assembled at Kilmallock elected John MacCorwell, Bishop of Cork, to the Archdiocese, others of the Canons collected in the Cathedral at Cashel and voted for Thomas, Archdeacon of that See. When the King was informed of this conflict, he thought to provide for a nominee of his own, a Franciscan friar named Geoffry de Ailham, but the Pope resolved to have nothing to say to any of these ecclesiastics, and appointed William Bishop of Ossory. The King could not, and did not hesitate to confirm this selection, for this prelate was well known to his majesty for a great number of good qualities. His appointment to the Archdiocese of Cashel was confirmed April 1, 1317. *

He took his share in the Government of Ireland; having been nominated deputy to the Viceroy Roger Mortimer, Earl of March, in 1318, and Lord Chancellor in that year. [1318, 12 Edw. II.] The state of society, the tone and temper of the governors and the governed, when one claimed every species of arbitrary power over the other, arising from assumed superiority of race and the might of conquest, may be gleaned from occasional reference to Acts of the Irish Parliaments. Thus we find, that, in the reign of Edward II., it was the custom of men of might, the haughty nobles of the Pale, to sally forth from their well-defended castles, and with hawk and hound, and guard of soldiers, proceed in any direction their sport led. They speedily took possession of any farmer’s house that promised good cheer, and made it their own for as long a period as they liked to stay. We may be sure the soldiers imitated the conduct of the knights and nobles. Soon empty hen-coops, bare haggards, and often ruined hearths, bore sad evidence of these predatory visitations. At length the Legislature was induced to interfere, and an Act of the rd Edward II. recites, ‘That inasmuch as merchants and the common people of this land are much impoverished and oppressed by the prizes [From prendre, to take.] of great lords of this land, which take what they will throughout the country without paying anything, or agreeing with the owners for the same. And forasmuch as they will also sojourn and lodge at their pleasure with the good people of the country against their wills, to destroy and impoverish them, it is agreed and assented that no such prizes be henceforth made without ready payment and agreement, and that none shall harbour and sojourn at the house of any other by such malice. And if any shall do the same, such prizes and such destructions shall be held for open robbery, and the King shall have the suit thereof, if others dare not sue.’

[The words I have put in italics show how dangerous it was to bring forward a legal claim against the men in power. Probably any hint to shorten a visit of this kind would elicit the same indignant reply, related of an Irish soldier, who, when billeted in a house situated in a proclaimed district, being expostulated with for the havoc he committed in the larder, made a bitter response, ‘You mean scoundrel, am I not here for your protection?]

Chancellor Fitz-John was reputed powerful, wealthy and venerable, both among the people and clergy, but his wealth seems apocryphal, for about six years before his death King Edward II. recommended him to the Pope as an object of compassion, and on January 20, 1320, wrote to his holiness very movingly in his behalf to procure release from instalments for the payment of some debts, due by his See to the Court of Rome. The letter stated as the cause of the Archbishop’s poverty the serious devastations committed on him by Edward Bruce and the Scots who invaded Ireland, which were so great that ‘from the time of his restitution of the temporalities until the date of the epistle he had not received the least profits out of his See, but was obliged to run in debt with his neighbours and friends even for necessaries, and to live only in hopes of a more plentiful income.’ He was appointed Custos for Ireland, and allotted as his fee at the rate of 500l. per annum, but this gleam of prosperity was transient, for he only held office some months. He died in 12.

Roger Utlagh, Prior of Kilmainham, a man of great learning and ability, was appointed Lord Chancellor of Ireland in 1321. As the Priors of Kilmainham sat as Barons in the Colonial Parliament, Utlagh quickly displayed his talents for statesmanship, and was rewarded with the custody of the Great Seal. He did not foresee the trials he would have to undergo as the penalty for his greatness. He combined the high offices of Lord Chancellor and Prior, and discharged the duties for several years. In 1327 he was elected Lord Deputy of Ireland, and sworn into office on April 6. While holding this high place the case of Dame Alice Kyteler threw the country into commotion

This remarkable case demands notice Dame Alice Kyteler had been four times married to men of wealth Her first husband was named Utlagh, and she bore him a son, William Utlagh, who followed the employment of a merchant, and had money dealings with several of the chief nobles of the colony. The Sheriff of Kilkenny, by direction of the Seneschal of that liberty, Fulke de la Freegne, broke into Utlagh’s house at night with an armed force, dug up and carried off with other moneys the sum of three thousand pounds, which was privately concealed by Utlagh and held in trust for his relative Adam le Blund, of Callan. Alice, his mother, appears to have been in partnership with her son, and not over nice in her modes of accumulating wealth. She is reported to have sought to increase her store by the refuse and sweeping of the ‘Fair Citie on the Nore’ where there is

‘Air without fog,

Fire without smoke,

Water without mud,

And the streets paved with marble.

She also reaped a harvest by dealing in witchcraft, for the ciop of credulity was then very prevalent in all countries. She told fortunes, compounded charms, and love potions. Sorcery was always denounced in strong terms by the Catholic Church, and in the Decretals of Pope John XXII. declared heresy, in the punishment of which the secular courts were enjoined to assist the ecclesiastical.

Unfortunately for Dame Alice, she did not cause her spells to bring happiness to her domestic hearth. She was accused by her own children and cited before the Bishop of Ossory, Dr. De Ledrede, on most revolting charges - to wit, that she caused the death of former husbands, having bewitched them to bequeath all their property to her favourite son William, leaving the rest of the family in poverty. Even the husband then living joined in the information, and stated ‘that she had by her spells reduced him to an attenuated condition, and caused his hair and nails. to drop off; that having snatched from her the key of a chest, he found therein a bag full of necromantic compounds, which he transmitted to the Bishop.’ A solemn inquisition was held, before the Bishop on these charges, and the decision was ‘that there existed in Kilkenny several heretical necromancers, including Dame Alice and six of her companions, who produced love, hatred, pain, disease, and death, by powders and charms; that, at evening prayer time between complin and curfew, Dame Alice swept the streets to the residence of her son, saying with conjurations, “May all the luck of Kilkenny come to this house,” and finally, that she committed the care of all her treasure to her familiar demon, Fitz-Art, who assumed at will the form of a cat, or of a large black hairy dog, appearing at other times as a triple negro, with two ferocious black companions, larger and taller than himself, each flourishing an iron rod.’

Dame Alice compounded for the offence imputed to her by paying a considerable sum of money, and pledged herself to renounce all sorcery and witchcraft. She was not long free from trouble. Again accused, Bishop Ledrede sought the aid of the secular power and applied to the Lord Chancellor, who, at the time was Roger Utlagh, Prior of the Hospitallers at Kilmainham. He required the Chancellor to arrest and imprison this Kilkenny sorceress and her accomplices, including her son William Utlagh, who it is stated was cousin to the Chancellor. [Gilbert’s Viceroy’s of Ireland, p. 156.] The Chancellor, not so credulous as others, or willing to befriend his relations, sought to dissuade the Bishop from this fresh prosecution, and was seconded by Arnold le Poer, Seneschal of Carlow and Kilkenny, and chief Judge of the district. The Bishop then cited her to appear before his Court, when she failed to appear, but, we are informed, was defended by counsel sent by the Chancellor. Being found guilty, sentence of excommunication was pronounced against her, and a summons then issued requiring her son, William Utlagh, to attend before the Bishop. Before the day fixed for the trial, the Bishop was himself arrested by Arnold Le Poer, who dispatched a sergeant and armed troop to capture him. The place and time of his capture showed utter disregard for religion in the person of the Bishop, for he was taken into custody at the door of the Church of Kells, when on a Lenten visitation to his clergy. By this act Le Poer incurred excommunication, and the outraged Prelate placed the diocese of Ossory under an interdict, closing the churches, and refusing the rites of the church, except in cases of urgent necessity. At the expiration of eighteen days’ imprisonment the Bishop was liberated; he then caused notices to be posted on all public places within his diocese, summoning Dame Alice and her son again to his Court. In the meantime two writs of summons were served on the Bishop, one from the Court of Chancery, requiring him under a penalty of a thousand pounds to appear in person before the Viceroy, who was no other than Utlagh the Lord Chancellor, for having laid an interdict upon the diocese of Ossory The other from the Metropolitan Court of the Archdiocese of Dublin, to attend before Archbishop De Bicknor, and answer the complaint of Arnold Le Poer. The Bishop sought to excuse himself from obeying these writs, on the ground ‘he could not make the journey to Dublin without passing through the district of which Le Poer was Seneschal, and he feared to go thither,’ but this was not deemed sufficient excuse, so the Archbishop annulled his interdict. After Easter in 1324, the Bishop applied for liberty to address the assemblage in the public Court House of Kilkenny, when the Seneschal sat as Judge, and the nobles, knights and burgesses were present. The application, as might have been expected, was peremptorily refused, notwithstanding which, the Bishop in his robes, attended by the chief ecclesiastical personage of his diocese, entered the court. An attempt was made to bar their progress, but they proceeded, and the Bishop, in a voice of authority, called on the Seneschal and the officials to attend to a matter concerning their faith. The Seneschal ordered him to leave the Court, and using strong language replied to the Bishop’s request to put the law in force against heretics - ‘Seek your remedy in the King’s Court, for our Court shall in no way support your jurisdiction in this matter.’

Dame Alice, meantime, appealed to the Archbishop of Dublin, but does not appear to have succeeded in establishing her innocence, for a writ issued, commanding her to appear, on a given day, at Kilkenny to answer for her relapse into heresy. Before Ledrede could cause her arrest, she prudently effected her escape into England, and never again returned to Ireland. A public bonfire was made in the ‘faire citie’ of the powders, ointments, philtres, and necromantic articles found in Dame Alice’s house. William Utlagh, her son, was imprisoned in Kilkenny Castle for two months, and one wretched woman, who confessed herself a necromancer, and to have dealt with demons, was consigned to the flames at Kilkenny in the presence of a great concourse of people.

[The belief in witchcraft crops up through the legal annals of England. In the reign of Queen Anne, when the literary productions of Dryden and Pope, Addison and Steele, Swift and Arbuthnot were enlightening the intellect of their contemporaries, a wealthy farmer, named Hicks, accused his wife and daughter, nine years old, of bewitching him. They were tried in July, 1716, found guilty, and executed.]

Bishop Ledrede wished to turn the tables upon the Chancellor whom he, Ledrede, accused for the part he had taken in these proceedings and favouring heresies, stated he would denounce them to the Pope, who he declared would bring down the Keys of St. Peter upon his head, with such effect, ‘that the noise should be heard, not only throughout England and Ireland, but resound from the Irish shore to the Grecian Sea.’ Utlagh, being not only Lord Chancellor but Viceroy, and Prior of Kilmainham, insisted on the fullest investigation into the part he took in the matter, and obtained leave from the Council to clear himself from the imputations of the Bishop of Ossory. Proclamations were made for three days, inviting any who had charges to prefer against the Viceroy to attend. Commissioners were appointed to examine the witnesses; these were William Rodyard, Dean of St. Patrick’s, Dublin, the Abbots of St. Thomas and St. Mary, the Prior of Christ Church, Mr. Elias Lawless, and Mr. Peter Milleby. [History of the Royal Hospital, by Rev. N. Burton, p. 87.]

During the investigation the witnesses were examined separately, and it does not appear any proof was given in support of the charge against the Chancellor, each witness made oath ‘he was orthodox, a zealous champion of the faith, and ready to defend it with his life.’ On the Report of the Commission, Utlagh was solemnly acquitted, and, as was usual on such occasions, he entertained the public .at a sumptuous banquet.

This malicious attempt to blast the Chancellor’s reputation as a judge and ecclesiastic, so signally failed, that it increased his reputation. It was, perhaps, a wholesome lesson to show, that those who stand high, have many blasts to shake them, and it is always well to have a clear conscience in the hour of trial.

[Utlagh’s liberality to Walter de Islep shows the method of living of the Chancellor while Prior of Kilmainham. This Walter was Lord Treasurer of Ireland, and was granted by the Chancellor entertainment for himself, two armigers, or upper servants, a chamberlain, and another servant, five boys and five horses. The said Walter to sit at the right hand of the Prior, at his own table, thereby to be more commodiously served, as well in eating as drinking. That he should eat as often as he pleased, together with his chaplain, esquires, and two other servants; have white loaves and the best ale, and beef, mutton, and pork, raw or drest at his option, with roast meat, and soup. - Archdall’s Mon. Hib. p. 2.]

Having ceased to hold the Great Seal, Utlagh continued to fulfil his duties as Prior, and improved the revenues of the Priory by his prudence and courage. Though the lands of the Priory were encompassed by the Irish tribes, the Knights Hospitallers, being men-at-arms, valiantly defended them. Headed by the sturdy Prior, the brethren defeated many incursions of O’Byrnes and O’Tooles from the Wicklow glens. Yet it was not always possible to protect the Marches of the Pale from these marauding bands. The O’Tooles made a raid upon the summer palace of the Archbishop of Dublin, at Tallaght, carried off 300 sheep, and slaughtered the Archbishop’s servants. At length Utlagh yielded to the inevitable destroyer, and, full of years and honours, died A.D. 1340. [Burtons’s Royal Hospital, p. 59.]

At the first Parliament held in Ireland, 9th Edward II., five Acts of Parliament show the fruits of the labours of the Colonial Legislators. The people were then much harassed by exactions, and three of the Acts relate to relieving them from oppression. Two to providing proper remedies in the King’s Courts of law, which then began to assume judicial functions.

Index. Chapter 2. Home.