Life of Lord Chancellor Lord Loftus.

Chapter XXIII. **

Life Of Lord Chancellor Lord Loftus.

**

The term comprised in the life of Lord Chancellor Adam Lord Loftus of Ely may be considered of the utmost interest in the history of Ireland. During this period occurred the flight of the Earls of Tyrone and Tyrconnel, by which the Province of Ulster was at the disposal of the Crown, and enabled King James I. to plant his countryman on the confiscated lands of the exiled Irish chiefs. The province was formed into counties, tanestry and gavel-kind abolished, the Brehon laws set aside, and the country brought under the laws and constitutions of England Lord Loftus was Chancellor. under James I. and Charles I. While Falkland and Strafford were Viceroys, he had no enviable hold of the Seals. Adam Loftus was grandnephew and namesake of Archbishop Loftus, for many years his predecessor on the bench of the High Court of Chancery. He was second son of Robert Loftus, Serjeant-at-Law, and was early intended for the legal profession. He was educated in Trinity College, Dublin, of which his great uncle was Provost, and obtained the degree of LL.D. His reputation for ability in his profession soon obtained him practice, and, as was only natural, the patronage of his relative the Lord Chancellor procured him a place. He was appointed Judge of the Martial Court in 1597. [Morrin’s Calendar Pat. and Close Rolls, Chanc. Ir. vol. ii.]

[The Commission to execute Martial Law, issued by Queen Elizabeth to Adam Loftus, was as follows: a ‘Forasmuch as in martial governments as in civil, there must be discipline; and the same is to be accommodated to times, occasions, and countries, and accordingly, statutes, laws, and ordinances, are to be made and published, and being so, then to be executed, for otherwise they become fruitless, dead, and contemptible escripts. We have, therefore, by the advice of our Deputy General, set down and published divers ordinances and orders for the better government of all marshall men, and for the restraining of such insolences and extortions as have heretofore been exercised by some of them upon our good subjects, especially of the English Pale, which as our garden, on our account is to be preserved and freed from all noysome weedes, spoyls, and disorders, [This is very like the style of Edmund Spenser, the poet.] and that these ordinances and laws are to be orderlie and judiciallie examined and determined, and therefore executed accordingly; know ye, that we, of our special grace, with the consent of our Lord Deputy, and in respect of the good sufficiency and dexterity well known to us to be in our trusty and well-beloved Adam Loftus, Master of Arts, and Bachelor of the Civil Laws, for his good knowledge of the civil law, his other good parts and carriadge of himself, and for the better preventing and punishing of the said disorders and offences, do give and grant to him, the said Adam Loftus, the office and Judge of our Marshall Court, in and throughout the whole realm of Ireland, with full power and authority to hear, determine, examine and judge, all manner of offences, and the offenders of them, and every of them, against the statutes, laws, and ordinances made, or to be made or otherwise; in as ample’ a manner, and in like nature, jurisdiction, and course, as any Judge of our Marshal Court in England, or in any of our dominions might or ought to do, by virtue of any grant heretofore made to any judge o judges, concerning the punishment of such offenders, either by fine or imprisonment, loss of life, or other corporal punishment according to the nature and quality of the offence; to hold by his sufficient Deputy, during good behaviour; and in consideration of the pains, travail, and expense which the said Adam shall be at, in the exercise of his office, as well by his attendance upon our Deputy in camp, as in giving judgment and sentences against the offenders, upon complaint to be made by any of our subjects, in breach and violation of the laws and ordinances, we grant to the said Adam Loftus a pension, or daily pay or stipend of six shillings and, eight pence, with such other fees and emol aments as appertain to the office. - Dublin, Sept. 17th 39°.’]

On the accession of King James I. to the throne of Great Britain and Ireland, he wrote from Holyrood on March 29, 1603. To the Lord Chancellor and Council of Ireland:- ‘Albeyt we doubte not ye are sufficintye certifyed of our being proclaymed the onely lawful heire of the crowne of England, France, and Ireland, lykeas we have notifyed the Lord Deputye; yet we would not omitt to render you hartye thankes, if ye have given the lyke proofe of your affection to our service by proclaiming our authoritye.’ He then confirms them in their offices, with power to do and decree whatever they might have done by virtue of the jurisdiction granted to them. [Erck. Pat. Roll, Chanc. Ir. vol. i. p. 17.]

The valuable office of a Master in Chancery falling vacant the following year, was given to the young Judge of the Marshal Court, and, on the accession of James VI. of Scotland to the throne of England, which be occupied as King James I., Master Loftus received the honour of knighthood. Honours now began to follow in rapid succession. In 1603, Sir Adam Loftus was made Keeper of the Great Seal, when the failing health of his great uncle rendered him unable to fulfil the functions of Lord Chancellor.

The darling project of James I. was the Plantation of Ulster. He was greatly disappointed that those to whom he allotted large tracts of land made slow progress in colonisation, having, after a lapse of some years, either done nothing at all, or so little that the work seemed to perish under their hands than be advanced by them; some having begun to build and not planted, others planted and not built, and all of them in general retaining the Irish still in their hands, the avoiding of which was the fundamental reason of the plantation designed by the King. He wrote to the Viceroy, Lord Chichester, threatening to resume the lands, and either to dispose of them for the benefit of the Crown, or regrant them to more active undertakers, and as he wished all the original planters to have notice of his intention, commanded the Deputy to give such notice, in order that they should be aware, if they failed in their duties by August twelve months, he would carry out his threat. By way of showing the determination with which be was prepared to act, he wrote, with his own hand, on the letter this postscript:- ‘My Lord;- In this service I expect that zeal and uprightness from you, that you will spare no flesh, English or Scottish, for no man’s private worth is able to counterbalance the perpetual safety of a kingdom, which this plantation, being well accomplished, will procure.’ [Morrin’s Calendar Pat, and Close Rolls, Chanc. Ir. p. 628.]

This produced some effect, and James resolved to introduce changes into the legal procedure of the country.

The desire of the House of Stuart to establish tribunals for the administration of the law more under the influence of the Crown than the ordinary tribunals of the country led to the establishment of the Star Chamber [The Court of Star Chamber was established by James I. immediately after his accession. He considered it necessary for the peculiar state of Ireland to have this court. Its province was ‘finding and punishing unlawful maintenances, imbraceries, confederacies, alliances, false headings, and taking of money by the common jurors of that realm, and by untrue demeanings of sheriffs in making of panels, and other untrue returns, and by riots, rents, unlawful assemblies, forcible entries, and other like hateful disorders, by which the policy and good rule of that realm was well nigh subverted, and on enquiring little or nothing done for punishing these inconveniences, but there ensued great increase of murders, forgeries, and unsurities of the subjects, and loss of their lands and goods, to the great hindrance of the King and displeasure of God;’ for remedy whereon King James I., by Special Commission, and letters patent dated Hampton Court, the 10th of August, 1st of his reign, appointed a Court in Dublin Castle, called the Castle Chamber, or Star Chamber, where the causes were heard and determined as authorised by Statute of 3° Henry VII.] and Court of Wards.

The Lord Chancellor, or Lord Keeper, a Bishop, a temporal Lord, and the two Chief Justices constituted the Court; other Peers and Judges sometimes sat with them. The mode of procedure was by Bill of Complaint on parchment signed by Counsel, showing a case within the jurisdiction of the Court; thereupon the Clerk of the Court made out a warrant, under seal, summoning the offenders to answer the matter alleged. A record was taken of the defendant’s appearance, the defendant answered on oath, and if interrogatories were lodged within three days, defendant should answer; or, on plaintiff’s application, attachment issued. When issue was joined, the Court proceeded to order and judgment, and the party convicted was sentenced to be fined, or imprisoned, according to the offence. Costs followed the judgment. [Erck’s Repertory of Pat. Roll in Chan. Ireland, p. 38.]

The Court of Wards was instituted in Ireland by James I. He alleged as the reason for its establishment his care for the good and welfare of his subjects, and for preventing the great inconveniences which might happen in Ireland, if the children of noblemen and gentlemen, who should be in ward, should be deprived of good breeding and education, religion and learning, and that their possessions, during their minority, should be preserved in protection from all waste. He also had in view the augmentation of his royal revenue, and named members of his Privy Council Commissioners. There was a considerable number of officials in this Court. The Master, or principal judicial officer, with the keeping of the Seal, had a salary of 300l. per annum; also the First Attorney and second judicial officer; First Surveyor and third judicial officer to hold during pleasure. The appointment of these officers, was vested in the Crown, and the patronage, enabled the King to provide lucrative places for those who, in return, did their best to please him.

Sir Adam Loftus was named of Council to the Earl of Thomond, Lord President of Munster, and represented the King’s County in the’ House of Commons. He was shortly afterwards called into his Majesty’s Privy Council, and on May 1, 1619, became Lord High Chancellor of Ireland.

The Irish Courts had not the immediate superintendence of the pedantic King, like the English. We read in a very interesting work, [Foss, Judges of England, vol. vi. p. 1.] that King’ James I., on being told by Sir Edward Coke, ‘that it was not competent for the King to decide questions of law,’ replied, ‘he thought the law was founded upon reason, and he and others had reason as well as the judges.’ To this Coke answered, ‘That true it was, that God had endowed his Majesty with excellent science, but his Majesty. was not learned in the law of his realm; they are not to be decided by natural reason, but by artificial reason and judgment of law; that the law was the golden mete-wand and measure to try the causes of the subjects; and which protected his Majesty in safety and peace.’ The King, greatly offended, said, ‘that then he should be under the law, which was treason to affirm.’ Wherewith Coke replied, ‘Bracton saith, “Quod Rex non debet esse sub homine sed sub Deo et lege.”’ [12 Coke, Rep. 65.]

I find ample proof that the Chancellor’s conduct was at first most gratifying to King James I., who created him Lord Loftus of Ely. Lodge’s ‘Peerage of Ireland’ [Vol. vii. P. 247.] recites:

‘Among others of our best deserving subjects in that kingdom, we have, for many years together, taken especial notice of the faithful and industrious services performed, in many kinds, by our right trusty and well-beloved Sir A. Loftus, Knight, our Chancellor of that our realm; and in a gracious consideration of his merits, we are pleased out of our goodness and favourable respect of him, to look beyond himself, and to add to that eminent office of Chancellor, which we have bestowed upon him, such a title of honour as may descend upon his posterity for his sake; that thereby his virtues may be recorded to future ages, so long as there shall remain an heir male of his house.’ The Privy Seal is dated at Westminster, April 2, 1622, and the patent, May 10, same year. His lordship had married Sarah Barlow, widow of Richard Meredyth, Bishop of Leighlen, and had four sons and two daughters.

During the reign of James I., there prevailed considerable dissensions between the Courts of Common Law and Equity as to the jurisdiction of the Courts of Equity over the judgments of the Courts of Law. The violent conduct of the great Common Law lawyer and Chief Justice, Sir Edward Coke, brought about his dismissal, and the Court of Chancery had its functions established. [Foss, Judges of England, vol. vi. p. 4.] The number of decrees of the Court of Chancery in Ireland enrolled during the reign of King James I. is 312.

The income of the Chancellor was increased by the representation to the King that the profit of his place was so small he was in much need of. assistance, and the King directed Sir Thomas Blundell, Vice-Treasurer and Receiver-General, to allow the Chancellor the fee of 6s. 8d. a day, granted to him by letters patent for the execution of Judge Marshall’s place, together with a pension of 9s. a day, both subject to some abatement. [Morrin’s Calendar Pat, and Close Rolls, Chanc. Ir. vol. iii. p. 11.] Time allowance to the Lord Chancellor and Keeper of the Great Seal was for wages, duties, robes, and liveries of himself and the Masters of Chancery. He had a special allowance for his attendance at the Star Chamber, but in some instances I fear. the emoluments of the office were increased by means not quite regular, as we shall find elsewhere.

The Lord Chancellor has always taken a very important part in the State ceremonials, as appears from the following account of the inauguration of Lord Falkland given in the “Harleian Manuscripts:- ‘On Friday, September 6, 1622, Sir Henry Carye, Knight, Lord Viscount Falkland, late Comptroller of the Privie Counsell in England, and now Lord Deputie of Ireland, landed at loathe late in the evening, wherefor that nyghte he was entertayned by the Lord of Hoathe. And on Saturday, in the afternoone, Sir Adam Loftus, Knight, Lord Viscount Loftus of Elye, Lord Chancellor of Ireland, and Sir Richard Wingfield, Knight, Lord Viscount Powerscourt, and Marshall of Ireland, Lord Justices of this Kingdom of Ireland, being attended with divers of the nobilitie and Privie Counsell of this kingdome, mett said Lord Falkland within midway between Dublin and Hoathe, and so they came together to the Castle of Dublin. And upon Sunday morning, being September 8, the Lord Justices and Counsell met together in the Counsell Chambre in the Castle, and the Lord Chancellor, leaving the rest of the Counsell in the chambre, being attended by Francis Edgeworth, Clerke of the Crowne of the Chancerye, with the roll of the Lord Deputie’s oathe, went into the withdrawing chambre, to acquaint the Lord Falkland with the same. And (after a short conference between them) the Lord Chancellor returned into the Counsell Chambre again, from whence the Lord Justices, with all the Counsell, having the King’s sword borne before them by Sir Charles Coote, Knight and Baronett, one of his Maiestie’s Privie Counsell, repaired unto the cathedrall Church of the Holie Trinitie in Dublin, commonly called Christ Church, where, being seated in their seates, and his Maiestie’s sword being left before them; all the Counsell, together with the gentlemen pensioners, attendants, returned back to the Castle, from whence the Lord Falkland, being by them. attended, and accompanyed with the Lord Viscount Wilmott of Athlone riding by his side, they came all together to Christ Church, and being their seated in their usual seates, Doctor Usher, Lord Bishop of Meath, made a learned sermon, [He selected for his text ‘He beareth not the sword in vain;’ Romans xiii. His language was so violent, and excited such apprehension in the minds of the Roman Catholics of Ireland of religious persecution, that he was censured by the Primate.] and the sermon being ended, the Lord Justices came down from their seats, the sword being borne before them, and the Lord Falkland following them to the Communion-table, when the Lord Justices being sett in two chairs provided for them, the said Lord Falkland delivered unto the Lord Chancellor’s hands, his Maiestie’s two patentes under the Greate Seale of England for the authoritie and place of his Maiestie’s Deputie-Generall of this realme of Ireland, which the Lord Chancellor delivered to the hand of Francis Edgeworth, Clerke of the Crowne aforesaide (the Master of the Rolls being absent), to be publiquely read. After the reading whereof the Lord Chancellor ministered unto the said Lord Viscount Falkiand as well the oathe of his Maiestie’s supremacy as the oathe of the said place and room of Lord Deputie-Generall, both of which he received upon his knees. Which being done, the said Lord Viscount Falkland delivered unto the said Lord Justices a lettere from his Maiestie, sealed with his Maiestie’s privie signett, and the same being by them opened and publiquely read by Sir Dudley Norton, Knight, Principall Secretary of Estate, did impart his Maiestie’s pleasure unto the Lord Justices for the acceptance of his said Deputie, and delivering unto him his Highnesses sword. Whereupon they joyfully taking the sword, delivered it to the Lord Deputye, who presently, upon his receiving thereof, conferred the honor of knighthood upon Mr. Cary Lambert (second. son of the Lord Lambert deceased), and then delivered the sword unto the Lord Caulfield, Baron of Charlemont, to be by him carried that day. And so they departed from Christ’s Church in solemnitie of estate; the Lord Justices taking place for that day, next the Lord Deputie before anie other of the Lords, according to the ancient custome.’ [Harleian MSS.] Serjeants-at-Arms were appointed to attend the House. [‘The appointment of William and George Peisley to the office of Sergeant at Arms, to attend at all times when required, but more especially to attend the Speaker of the House of Commons in every Parliament to be held in the Kingdom, with a fee of 20l. a-year, to hold for life. The patent recites that in ancient times there was but one Serjeant to attend to the State, who did sometimes wait upon the Deputy, or Chief Governor, and sometimes upon the Lord Chancellor, so as there was no Sergeant-at-Arms to attend the Speaker of the Commons, and to perform other services in the House in any Parliament to be holdin in the Kingdom according to the manner of England. - Dublin, August 22, 1628. [Morrin’s Calendar Pat. And Close Rolls, Chanc, Ir. Temp. Charles I, 329.]]

Lord Chancellor Lord Loftus discharged his duties of Chancellor, without any complaint during the latter years of the reign of King James I., who was carried off by ague in the spring of 1625.

The year 1625 witnessed the death of James I., and immediately his son, the hapless Charles 1., was proclaimed King. He continued Lord Falkland Viceroy, and Lord Loftus Lord Chancellor of Ireland.

During the Viceroyalty of Lord Falkland, in 1626, the King ordered the Counsel for the Crown to inform against Sir Pierse Crosby in the Court of, Castle’s Chambers. for exhibiting a scandalous petition to the King in the name of Sir Edward Blaunchville, Knight, without the said Blaunchville’s authority or knowledge, reflecting upon the Lord Deputy. The petition complains ‘that the Lord Deputy granted away Blaunchville’s lands while he was under trial for his life. Blaunchville having declared himself innocent of any such charge, the King ordered Sir Pierse Crosby to be proceeded against “ore tenus,” or otherwise, as the cause shall require, and so that such due punishment be inflicted upon him, as his fault in justice shall deserve, that men may beware how they presume hereafter, to exhibit false matters against you, our principal Minister there, with purpose to wound your reputation, or break the good opinion we deservedly hold of you.’ [Morrin’s Calendar Pat, and Close Roll, Chanc. Ir. vol. iii. p. 148.]

The next person complained against was the Lord Chancellor, very shortly after the King’s accession to the throne.

It must have been most unpleasant for the Lord Chancellor to find his conduct as a Judge impeached, as appears by this letter from the King:- *

‘The King to Lord Viscount Loftus, Chancellor. *

‘Right trusty and well-beloved cousin and Counsellor, we greet you well - Whereas we have received an humble petition of Henry Wright and Richard Blacknall, showing that divers controversies are arisen between the Earl of Cork [The Earl of Cork was nearly related to the Chancellor.] and the petitioners, which controversies are depending before you in our Court of Chancery there; forasmuch as the petitioners do allege that the potency of the Earl is such as it is not for them to contest with him in law, fearing to be worn out with long and tedious suits; we, taking gracious consideration of the poor estate of the petitioners, and of their great disability to contend with so rich and powerful an adversary, have thought fit to recommend them and their cause to your good care, requiring you speedily to give them a hearing in our Court, touching the matters in difference between them and the Earl, and to put an end thereunto with all possible expedition, that the poor men may have no great source of complaint: Westminster, September 18, 1626.’ [Morrin’s Calendar Pat. and Close Rolls, Chanc. Ir. Charles I., p. 159. Vide also for another complaint the same vol. p. 213.]

The following year the King required the Chancellor to attend him in London, and directed Lord Falkland, Lord Deputy, to notify the same, and to command him to deliver into the Viceroy’s hands the Great Seal; then to entrust the Seals to Commissioners, any four of the Privy Council, two or more being resident in Dublin; then by Commission to empower Lord Aungier, Master of the Rolls, one of the second Justices of the King’s Bench, one of the second Justices of the Common Pleas, one of the second Barons of the Exchequer, and all the Masters in Chancery in Ordinary, and to any three or more of them whereof the Lord Aungier be always one to hear and determine causes in Chancery: Westminster, May 12, 1627.’ [Morrin’s Calendar Pat. and Close Rolls, Temp. Charles I., p. 199.]

The Commissioners of the Great Seal were the Lord Primate, Lord Dockwoa, Sir William Parsons, and Sir Adam Loftus. While those named to determine causes in Chancery, to punish all contempts and sign all judgments or decrees, were Lord Aungier, Sir Christopher Sibthorp, John Philpott, Sir Laurence Parsons, Henry Mainwaring, and Thomas Cary. [Ib. p. 200.]

Considerable dissension prevailed between Lord Loftus and the Deputy, Lord Falkland, who was very unwilling to allow the Chancellor to treat the suitors as he was in the habit of doing. All remonstrances of the Viceroy were disregarded, and an open rupture threatened to disturb the Government. Complaints against the Lord Chancellor had been sent to the King, backed with the sanction of Viscount Falkland. Lord Loftus was charged with undutiful behaviour towards the King in not raising money for the royal service, and especially in improperly acting as Lord Chancellor, and in not showing due respect to the Viceroy. These accusations were of too serious a nature to be lightly treated; therefore the Chancellor was compelled to repair to London, where, before the Privy Council, the King examined the truth of these charges, and weighed the varying allegations made on both sides. The decision of his Majesty was that the Chancellor showed his innocency and justified his proceedings.’ The King wrote to the Deputy, desiring that on the Chancellor’s arrival in Dublin the Great Seal should be returned to him, and his Lordship be fully restored “to the free execution of his office. The Chancellor was also commanded to carry himself more respectfully to the Viceroy, and that he in return would receive all due respect from that high personage, so that all former scandals may be avoided. [Morrin’s Calendar Pat. and Close Rolls, Chanc. Ir. Charles I. p. 384.]

By a subsequent letter from the King to Lord Falkland authorising a license to be made out for the Chancellor’s absence from Ireland, either on the King’s business or his own, leaving the Great Seal with the former Commissioners, his Majesty writes - ‘And whereas he (the Chancellor) complaineth that he hath suffered much by causeless clamours, and false charges laid against him, whereof as he hath cleared himself here to the satisfaction of us and our Council, so he desires his honour and justice may be vindicated there by a legal prosecution of those that have so wronged him; we, being tender of the reputation of our good officers and servants, and knowing it to be our part to give them protection and, punish false aspersions against them, do hold it very just and fit that all those who have preferred any scandalous and false information or charges against our Chancellor, for his carriage in the execution of his office, be proceeded against in our Court of Castle Chamber, and punished according to the demerits as by law is provided. [Id. P. 464.] - Southwick, August 16th, 1629.’

But these accusations were constantly cropping up. Another impeachment of ‘the Chancellor’s judicial integrity is shown in a letter addressed by the King to the Chancellor himself and the Earl of Cork, when Lords Justices. Referring to litigation subsisting between the Earl of Ormond and Sir Thomas Butler respecting the Manor of Cloghrenan, the proceedings were directed to be heard and determined by the two Chief Justices, Chief Baron, Master of the Rolls, Second Justice of the King’s Bench, and third Baron of the Exchequer, being the fittest persons to settle these controversies, by reason of their equal interest in both parties, leaving out the Chancellor in regard to some relations he had to the parties to the cause in question. [Morrin’s Calendar Pat. and Close Rolls, Chanc. Ir. Charles I. p. 652.] Westminster, April 18, 1632.

The corruption which in England notoriously pervaded almost every department of the State in the reign of James I. took some time before it crossed the Channel, but I fear it did at length extend to Ireland, climbed the bench of justice, and sullied the judicial robe. The proceedings against Lord Chancellor Bacon show that bribery was common, though dignified with the title of presents and New-year’s gifts. [Foss’s Judges of England, vol. vi. p. 3.]

No sooner was the rumour confirmed that Sir Thomas Wentworth was to be the King’s Viceroy in Ireland than the Lord Chancellor wrote him a congratulatory letter as follows:- ‘Right Honorable and my very good Lord, - It is now signified hither that his Majesty hath declared your Lordship for his Deputy of this Kingdom, which hath long waited for the Guidance of so noble a personage, the Fame of whose Virtues and able Parts is not limited within that Kingdom, but hath hither outrun your own Presence, and the Report of your coining into this Government, which, as well in Respect of the Good of this People and his Majesty’s Service, as for my own Particular, I have just cause heartily to desire may long continue in so worthy hands.

‘I acknowledge the unmerited Respects lately received from your Lordship, upon occasion of some Affairs there mentioned touching me, which the Lord Mountnorris acquainted me with; and I humbly beseech your Lordship to make Account that you shall find me always ready to apply my utmost Endeavours to deserve the Increase of your Lordship’s good opinion; and though the displeasure of the former here begat me many troubles and such Adversaries as yet cease not to pursue me without cause, yet I never gave him other occasion than the sincere discharge of my duties required, as your Lordship will hereafter better understand at your Arrival here, which I heartily wish may be as safe as it shall be welcome unto

‘Your Lordship’s faithful and humble Servant,

‘Ad. Loftus, Canc.

‘Jan. 27, 1631.’

This rather fulsome epistle was not likely to impress Lord Wentworth very highly with the self-respect and integrity of the writer. As, however, he was aware the Chancellor had many enemies, and was desirous of supporting so exalted an official, the Deputy did his best to uphold him against those who tried to injure him, as appears by the next letter.

‘The Lord Chancellor ‘of Ireland to the Lord Deputy. - Right Honourable and my very good Lord, - Having received two Letters from your Lordship, the one of the 18th, the other of the 28th February, I make humbly bold to represent these few Lines in answer of both. In the first, your Lordship hath been pleased to express your care that the complaints against me there, since your being of the Irish Committee, should be kept intire, without my Prejudice, till I might be heard. For which honourable and just Favour I shall ever dedicate myself to your Lordship’s service; I have, found by true and dear experience your Lordship’s opinion to be most certain and infallible, “that where His Majesty’s Ministers in eminent Places are not preserved in Honour and reverence, but undervalued, there his affairs must certainly suffer in them.” This hath been my case for many years past, occasioned through the dissonant affections of the Chief Governor and some others of the State, who never accorded more in any one thing, than in work that might tend to my Prejudice and Diminution. From hence have sprung private searches and scrutinies into all my Words and Actions, secret and underhand Detractions, and sometimes more open and plain Disrespects, daily endeavours to irritate and stir up clamours and complaints, some exhibited here, others to the Lords there. The Answers to all which have not taken up a little of the Time which I might have better employed in his Majesty’s service. The Root from whence all these injurious Branches take Life, and receive Abetment and encouragement remains there, and not altogether here, for if here only, I could either avoid them or in some measure procure my own Redress; but being there, I find no other sanctuary to fly unto, but the tribunal of his Majesty’s Royal and Free Justice, which hitherto hath acquitted and set me free from all Aspersions that Malice could cast upon one. And now that your Lordship hath been pleased to yield me this Protection, I shall rest in Peace without care of any evil Intentions… . Thus acknowledging myself to be infinitely bound unto your Lordship for your manifold Favours, I take leave and remain your Lordship’s Wholly to be Commanded,

‘Ad Loftus, Canc.

‘March 16, 1631.’

The unpleasant position of the Chancellor formed a good ground for additional pecuniary compensation, which Adam Lord Loftus was not likely to forego. I find that in 1636 the Lord Chancellor presented a petition to the King, praying some additional recompense for his services, which caused the following despatch to be addressed to the Lord Deputy:-

‘Charles Rex. -Right trusty and right well-beloved Cousin and Councillor,

• We greet you well. We have taken notice of that which came in a despatch of yours not long since to our Secretary, with reference to a report touching a Petition presented unto us on behalf of our right trusty, and right well beloved Cousin and Councillor, Adam Viscount Loftus of Ely, our Chancellor of Ireland, for some reward in respect of his long services to our Crown, and are therefore pleased in Testimony of our gracious acceptance of his good and faithful services, as well to our dear father of happy memory as to ourself, and for his future encouragement, to bestow upon him the sum of three thousand pounds. [The warrant then shows how it is to be raised.]

Given under our signet at Raiford Abbey, the 7th day of August, in the twelfth year of our reign 1636.’

‘By his Majesty’s Command,

‘John Coke’

It was very fortunate for the Lord Chancellor that the Royal bounty was so promptly extended, for the feelings of the powerful Viceroy towards him, shortly afterwards, were so changed that, I venture to say, if the money was not thus readily given, Lord Wentworth would have caused it to be withheld. The displeasure of the Viceroy I find followed on the nomination, by the Lord Chancellor, of a barrister named Alexander, in a Commission as Judge of Assize. [The arrangement of Judges of Assize is usually according to rank by the Judges themselves, who select their circuits. The Chiefs are entitled to the lightest, if they prefer them; and when a Judge is sick, or prevented from going his circuits, the selection of deputy is with the Lord Chancellor, who generally gives precedence to the Serjeants, if available. In this case the selection was not for the Serjeants, which placed the Chancellor under the censure of the Viceroy.]

In the Earl of Strafford’s letters, published by the Rev. Dr. Knowler, [The Earl of Strafford’s letters and despatches from the originals in the possession of his great grandson, Thomas Earl of Malton, by William Knowler. LL.D., Rector of Irthingborough, vol. ii. p. 67.] we find some sharp letters passed from the Lord Deputy to the Lord Chancellor in respect to this matter. The first is from the Chancellor, and states the cause of his Excellency’s rebuke. It is entitled ‘The Lord Chancellor to the Lord Deputy.’

‘May it please your Lordship,

‘Upon Monday last I received letters from Baron Lowther, signifying the death of Serjeant Catlin, and acquainting me that upon his first notice thereof he repaired to Trim, in his own person, and, understanding that the County of Meath was the last county of the Session, he, of purpose, adjourned the same, until the Monday fortnight next after; and, in the interim, returned the old Commission unto me, wherein he and the Serjeant were joined, and desired the renewing *of *that Commission to himself, and such other as should add unto him. Whereupon, after some pause, I could think of no other for that last despatch than Mr. Alexander, who dwelt in that country, and near the place where the Commission was to be executed; all other Judges and the King’s Counsel being otherwise imployed by your Lordship’s commandment. So I presently issued a new Commission unto these two, to perform that service. And if any error or mistake hath been in the nominating the last of these, it may time enough be altered, if your Lordship so command. This being all which your Lordship by your letters is pleased to require of me concerning this particular, I humbly take leave, and remain ready to do your Lordship’s service.

‘Ad Loftus, Canc.

‘April 1, 1637.’

This letter indicates that it was with some doubt of his wisdom in the selection the Chancellor inserted the name of Mr. Alexander, and was required by the Lord Deputy to state how he came to include this barrister’s name in the Commission, passing over the Serjeants. The reply of the Viceroy is short, and not very sweet, for the perusal of the Chancellor. **

** *

The Lord Deputy’s Answer. *

‘My Lord,

‘To appoint so young a man as Mr. Alexander to such a charge, as is the being Judge of Assize, and delivering so great a goal as is now at Trim, I did not judge it to stand either with honour or the good of a service so highly importing His Majesty and the public peace of the kingdom. And, therefore, I shall rather advise your Lordship to design Mr. Serjeant Eustace for that work, not being otherwise imployed in His Majesty’s service, but that he may well be spared so much time as the despatch of that service will borrow from him; and so I remain ready to do your Lordship’s service.

‘Wentworth.

‘Naas, April 14, 1637.’

It is no wonder the Lord Chancellor felt hurt at such a rebuke. The head of the law, and, supposed to be best acquainted with the members of the profession, to be accused of appointing a young man, not competent to discharge the important duty committed to him, was the most severe censure that could be passed upon his conduct; and that the Viceroy should himself designate the proper person to be appointed must have been most galling. He was, however, not willing to allow the Lord Deputy to dictate to him without some show of resistance, while not daring to disobey his mandate. **

** *

The Lord Chancellor’s Reply. *

‘May it please your Lordship,

‘I shall, as speedily as may be, direct a Warrant to the Clerk of the Hanaper to renew the Commission for the Assizes in the County of Meath, and present it to the Seal with a blank; and, when it comes, I will insert Mr. Serjeant Eustace therein, or some other fit person; for, Serjeant Eustace, I fear, is not provided with such necessaries as that journey will require. If there were no other difference between him and Mr. Alexander but matter of years, sure Mr. Alexander is the elder man; but in this and all other things, I shall comply with your Lordship’s commandment, and so remain,

‘Your Lordship’s,

‘in all due services to be commanded,

‘Ad Loftus, Canc.

‘April 14, 1637.’

This letter of the Chancellor’s touched the high spirit of Wentworth. The sly taunt at his Excellency’s objecting to Mr. Alexander’s youth, and nominating in his place a younger man, roused the haughty blood of one of the proudest men of his age, and called forth a crushing retort. It fell as follows:- *

The Lord Deputy’s Answer. *

‘My Lord,

‘Indeed I am not able to resolve your Lordship, whether Mr. Serjeant Eustace or Mr. Alexander be the elder man; only I know the one is the King’s Serjeant, and the other is not; which enables him, or at least qualifies him, to be trusted as a Judge of Assize before the other; and know I do, too, that to those who know them both, the Serjeant is held as able in his own profession. Besides (but that I am not apt unnecessarily to touch personally upon any), something I could have mentioned in Mr. Alexander’s particular which doth not render him altogether fit for such an employment. In fine, I hold places of that honour and trust, as are Judges of Assize, not decently communicable with every ordinary Counsellor-at- Law, and that I am very confident that Mr. Serjeant Eustace is well provided with all the necessaries requisite for that journey and employment; to wit, with learning and integrity; for, as concerning the rest, his journey to Trim is not so far, or his stay there like, to be so long, as that he shall need to overburden his horse [Judges of Assize travel differently now.] with the weight of his sumpter or other carriage. And so not doubting but that your Lordship will have that regard to the honour and good of His Majesty’s service that ever best becomes us all.

‘I remain,

‘Your Lordship’s very affectionate friend,

‘Wentworth.

‘Naas: April 15, 1637.’ **

**

As no further correspondence is published, it is fair to infer that the Lord Chancellor did not reply to this letter from his ‘very affectionate friend.’ The terms of this last rankled in his mind; and the next letter to which I direct my reader’s attention shows the relations of the Lord Chancellor and the Government were on a most unpleasant footing. In fact, the Chancellor’s conduct in his court had caused grave complaints to be made to the King. Mr. Secretary Coke wrote thus to the Lord Deputy:-

‘Right Honourable.

‘It displeaseth His Majesty very much, that the Lord Chancellor, so great and ancient a Judge, and who best understandeth how to make perfect answers, should now by ‘three imperfect answers to your Lordship [Evidently concerning some memorials which the Lord Deputy required to have answered by the Chancellor.] and the Council Board show disrespect to justice, and so much dishonour both to your Lordship and the State. For prevention, therefore, of further publick scandal to the Government by so eminent an example of contempt, His Majesty thinketh fit and requireth your Lordship (if he persist in disobeying the orders of your Lordship and the Lords) to take the Seals from him, and then to proceed with such compulsory means as law and justice do require. And yet His Majesty, calling to mind his Lordship’s former services, and considering his old age, is graciously pleased, if he conform himself by answering more perfectly, and by obeying and performing the decree that shall be made thereupon, then your Lordship may restore the Seals to him, which, if he continue in his contempt, will be otherwise disposed of.

‘Your Lordship’s

‘Most humble and obedient Servant,

‘John Coke

‘Whitehall: April 25, 1637.’ **

**

The manner in which the Lord Chancellor received these friendly admonitions was not calculated to make his further tenure of the Great Seal more protracted. On January 15, 1639, his successor was appointed in terms strongly condemnatory of the Chancellor’s conduct.

‘Whereas, upon a full and deliberate ‘hearing before us and our Council of several of the misdemeanours and irregularities charged against the Viscount Loftus of Ely, our Chancellor of Ireland, he hath been by Ourself and our said Council, declared unfit to hold that place any longer; and, forasmuch as it is most fitting that our justice, in a place of so great eminency, should be administered to our subjects in that kingdom by a person both of approved integrity and judgment, we have resolved to confer that place of Chancellor upon our right trusty and well-beloved Counseller, Sir Richard Bolton, Knight, now Chief Baron of our Court of Exchequer there, of whose integrity, abilities, and faithfulness, both in our service, and in the execution of the place which he now holds, you have given us so good testimony; we, therefore, direct you to pass patent to him accordingly, &c. And our will and pleasure is, that you cause Our Great Seal of that our kingdom, formerly sequestered by our directions in the hands of certain Commissioners, to be received from them and delivered to the said Sir Richard Bolton, with that ceremony in such cases usual.’ [15, 11a pars. R. 11, Pat. Dublin, January 15, 1639.]

After the summary proceeding which deprived Lord Loftus of his office, the noble Ex-Chancellor retired to his beautiful seat, now called Moore Abbey, at Monasterevan, where, in ancient times, a famous bell was kept, said to have belonged to St. Emhan [Hence Monaster Emhan or Evan,]; and, on solemn trials, it was sworn upon by the litigants. At the time of the suppression of monasteries in Ireland, Monasterevan was granted to George Lord Audley, from, whom the Chancellor, Lord Loftus, purchased it. Here he resided; and, on the marriage of his daughter Alice with Charles, Second Viscount Drogheda, Lord Loftus settled Monasterevan upon the young couple, which brought this property into the Moore family, when it acquired the name of Moore Abbey.

[To show how little reliance can be placed on tradition, I may cite an extract from the account of this fine mansion, in a work of generally correct information. ‘Adam Loftus, Viscount Ely, held the Court of Chancery during the rebellion of 1641 in the great hall of the monastery yet in being, lined with fine Irish oak.’ - Anthol, Hib. vol. ii. p. 114. Lord Ely was removed from the Chancellorship two years previously, so he never held any court in the house.

At this time the horizon of Irish politics, seldom bright, was lowering and overcast. Lord Wentworth had, in obedience to the King’s command, returned to England, where he received the Garter and Earldom of Strafford. There the Irish Parliament, hostile to the King and his favourite, appointed a Committee to lay their grievances before the King. They were gladly welcomed by the English malcontents, eager to put both King and Minister to death. Strafford was summoned to London, and forthwith committed a prisoner to the Tower. During his absence the King desired to make the Earl of Ormond Viceroy, but was compelled by the Committee to nominate two Puritans, Sir John Borlase and Sir William Parsons, Lords Justices. The Committee pressed on the impeachment of the Earl of Strafford, and the Irish House of Commons impeached Sir Richard Bolton, Chancellor, the Chief Baron, and other high personages.

At the breaking out of the Civil War in 1641, a proclamation was issued by Sir William Parsons and Sir John Borlase, the Lords Justices and Privy Council, reciting ‘That there is a discovery made by us, the Lords Justices and Council, of a most disloyal and detestable conspiracy, intended by some evil-affected Irish Papists, against the lives of us the Lords Justices and Council and many others of His Majesty’s faithful subjects universally throughout this kingdom, and requiring all to stand on their guard, and shew their faith and Loyalty.’ This was signed, amongst other of the Privy Council, by Adam Loftus. It called forth a speedy remonstrance from the Catholic Lords of the Pale; for, by the words ‘Irish Papists,’ there being no distinction, they might doubt themselves involved; to remedy which error the Lords Justices and Council, being tender [Vide Borlase, Irish Rebellion, p. 22.] lest these noblemen might take umbrage at this expression, published and proclaimed ‘That by the words Irish Papists they intended only such of the old meer Irish in the province of Ulster, as had plotted that treason, and none of the old English of the Pale.’

The struggle between the Confederate forces and those of the Protestant party soon involved the property of the Ex-Chancellor, as well as of others who shared his principles, in ruin and destruction, It is stated that before February 5, 1642, he lost to the value of 8,330l. and 2,106l. a-year.

Having left Ireland, fearing the consequences of his being taken prisoner, he resided at Middleham, in Yorkshire, where he died, and is buried in the church of Corkham. [Lodge’s Peerage of Ireland, vol. viii. p. 247. - The title now borne by the Loftus’ family is Marquis of Ely. Charles Tottenham, Esq., M.P, for the borough of New Ross, in the Irish Parliament, was grandfather of the first Marquis of Ely. He was popularly called ‘Tottenham in his boots;’ braving the agony of gout, and bad roads, while riding post haste from his seat in Wexford to Dublin, when the question, ‘whether the surplus money in the Irish treasury should be kept in Ireland or transmitted to England.’ As the Irish members attended Parliament in full dress, Tottenham, who was hardly in time to give the majority in favour of Ireland, had no time for dressing, and turning the scale for the country, earned the name of ‘Tottenham in his boots.’]

Among those who were advanced to places of dignity by Wentworth, while Viceroy of Ireland, was Sir Christopher Wandesford, whom, at Wentworth’s instigation, King Charles I. appointed Master of the Rolls in Ireland. He was distinguished for his knowledge of the laws of England, and was one of the eight managers of the impeachment of the Duke of Buckingham. In 1633, he was offered the post of Ambassador to the Court of Spain, but preferred accompanying his dear friend Wentworth into Ireland. He resolved to attach himself to the country, for he bought a fine mansion in Dublin, extending from Dame Street to the Liffey, with orchards and gardens, and a fine view of the port from Ringsend. He also built the Rolls Office at his own cost, a stately brick building, three stories high, containing a large muniment-room, the walls of which were panelled with presses of oak, containing compartments for the records of each King’s reign, and the year legibly marked, so as to be easy of reference. Offices for clerks, and rooms for the convenience of business were also provided. He set up a table of fees for public inspection; and a table of penalties consequent upon the transgressions of these orders was annexed.

He purchased an estate in the County Kildare, where he completed a book of instructions to his son, which bears date 5th Oct., 1636. This property was sold to ‘the Earl of Strafford.

Sir Christopher Wandesford also purchased the ancient inheritance of the O’Brenan’s in the County of Kilkenny, and here he encouraged Irish trade and manufactures, by erecting a cotton-mill and working a colliery. He received from King Charles I. the title of Baron Mowbray and Viscount Castlecomer. He died in 1640, it is said, of grief for the sad fate of his early and lifelong friend, the Earl of Strafford.

Before taking leave of this unfortunate Minister for the present, I subjoin an extract from the present Chief Justice Whiteside’s Lectures on the Irish Parliaments, which contain a brief notice of the strides made in Irish prosperity while he was Chief Governor: ‘Ireland, under the strong Government of Strafford, was tranquil and prosperous, as she was under Harry VIII. Her commerce increased vastly; her manufacture of linen, under the auspices of Strafford began, grew, and flourished; her revenue was large, she paid her debts, and yet her exchequer was full. We must admit that as a ruler he was suited to his time, and equal to his work, and that Ireland emerging from confusion and rebellion could not have been entrusted to firmer hands.’ [Life and Death of the Irish Parliament, pt. i. p. 62.]

Index Chapter 24. Home.