receperunt simili modo Henricum Regem Angliae in Dominum Regem Hiberniae sui devenerunt ei Heredibus suis Fidelitatem contra omnes Iuraverunt Matthew Paris likewise in his History speaking of King Hen. II. being in Ireland saith Archiepiscopi Episcopi ipsum in Regem Dominum receperunt ei Fidelitatem Homagium Iuraverunt Iohn Brampton Abbot of Iornaâ—… in his Historia Iornalensi pag. 1070. speaking of Hen. II. hath these words Recepit ab unoquoque Archiepiscopo Episcopo Hiberniae Literas cum Sigillis suis in modum Chartae pendentibus Regnum Hiberniae sibi Haeredibus suis Confirmantes Testimonium perhibentes ipsos in Hibernia eum Heredes suos sibi in Reges Dominos in perpetuum Constituisse All the Archbishops Bishops and Abbots of Ireland came to the King of England and Received him for King and Lord of Ireland swearing Fealty to him and his Heirs for ever The Kings also and Princes of Ireland did in like manner Receive Henry King of England for Lord of Ireland and became his Men and did him Homage and swore Fealty to him and his Heirs against all Men. And he received Letters from them with their Seals pendent in manner of Charters confirming the Kingdom of Ireland to him and his Heirs and Testifying that they in Ireland had Ordain'd him and his Heirs to be their King and Lord of Ireland for ever After which he return'd into England in April following vizt April 1173. I come now to Enquire into our Second Particular proposed Viz. Whether Ireland might be properly said to be Conquer'd by King Henry the Second or by any other Prince in any succeeding Rebellion And here we are to understand by Conquest an Acquisition of a Kingdom by Force of Arms to which Force likewise has been Opposed if we are to understand Conquest in any other sense I see not of what Use it can be made against Irelands being a Free Country I know Conquestus signifies a Peaceable Acquisition as well as an Hostile Subjugating of an Enemy Vid. Spelman's Glos. And in this sense William the First is call'd the Conquerour and many of our Kings have used the Epocha post Conquestum And so likewise Henry the Second stiled himself Conquestor Dominus Hiberniae but that His Conquest was no violent Subjugation of this Kingdom is manifest from what foregoes For here we have an Intire and Voluntary Submission of all the Ecclesiastical and Civil States of Ireland to King Henry II. without the least Hostile Stroke on any side We hear not in any of the Chronicles of any Violence on either Part all was Transacted with the greatest Quiet Tranquility and Freedom imaginable I doubt not but the Barbarous People of the Island at that time were struck with Fear and Terror of King Hen. Il's Powerful Force which he brought with him but still their Easie and Voluntary Submissions Exempts them from the Consequents of an Hostile Conquest whatever they are where there is no Opposition such a Conquest can take no place I have before taken Notice of Henry the Il's using the Stile of Conquestor Hiberniae I presume no Argument can be drawn from hence for Ireland's being a Conquer'd Country for we find that many of the Kings of England have used the Aera of post Conquestum Edward the Third was the first that used it in England and we frequently meet with Henricus post Conquestum Quartus c. as taking the Norman Invasion of William the First for a Conquest But I believe the People of England would take it very ill to be thought a Conquer'd Nation in the sense that some impose it on Ireland And yet we find the same Reason in one Case as in t'other if the Argument from the King's Stile of Conquestor prevail Nay England may be said much more properly to be Conquer'd by William the First than Ireland by Henry the Second For we all know with what Violence and Opposition from Harrold K. William obtain'd the Kingdom after a Bloody Battel nigh Hastings Whereas Henry the Second receiv'd not the least Opposition in Ireland all came in Peaceably and had large Concessions made them of the like Laws and Liberties with the People of England which they gladly Accepted as we shall see hereafter But I am fully satisfy'd that neither King William the First in his Acquisition of England or Henry II. in his Acquest of Ireland obtain'd the least Title to what some would give to Conquerours Tho' for my own part were they Conquerours in a sense never so strict I should enlarge their Prerogative very little or nothing thereby as shall appear more fully in the Sequel of this Discourse Another Argument for Henry the Second's Hostile Conquest of Ireland is taken from the Opposition which the Natives of Ireland gave to the first Adventurers Fitz-Stephens Fitzgerald and Earl Strongbow and the Battles they sought in assisting Mac-Morogb Prince of Leinster in the Recovery of his Principality 'T is certain there were some Conflicts between them and the Irish in which the Latter were constantly beaten but certainly the Conquests obtain'd by those Adventurers who came over only by the King's License and Permission and not at all by his particular Command as is manifest from the words of the Letters Patents of License recited by Giraldus Cambrensis Hib. Expug pag. 760. Edit Francof 1603. Angl. Norm Hiber Camd. can never be call'd the Conquest of Henry the Second especially considering that Henry the Second himself does not appear to have any Design of Coming into Ireland or Obtaining the Dominion thereof when he gave to his Subjects of England this License of Assisting Mac-Morrogh But I conceive rather the contrary appears by the Stipulations between Mac-Morrogh and the Adventurers and especially between him and Strongbow who was to succeed him in his Principality From what foregoes I presume it Appears that Ireland cannot properly be said so to be Conquer'd by Henry the Second as to give the Parliament of England any Jurisdiction over us it will much more easily Appear that the English Victories in any succeeding Rebellions in that Kingdom give no Pretence to a Conquest If every Suppression of a Rebellion may be call'd a Conquest I know not what Country will be excepted The Rebellions in England have been frequent in the Contests between the Houses of York and Lancaster one side or other must needs be Rebellious I am sure the Commotions in King Charles the First 's time are stiled so by most Historians This Pretence therefore of Conquest from Rebellions has so little Colour in it that I shall not insist longer on it I know Conquest is an hateful word to English Ears and we have lately seen a Book undergo a seuere Censure for offering to broach the Doctrine of Conquest in the Free Kingdom of England But to take off all Pretence from this Title by Conquest
Encouraging Shipping and Navigation by express name Mentions and Binds Ireland and by the last Clause in the Act Obliges all Ships belonging thereto importing any Goods from our Foreign Plantations to touch first at England Fourthly The Acts Prohibiting the Exportation of Wooll from Ireland to any Country except to England do likewise strongly Bind us and by the 12 Car. 2. c. 32. it was made highly penal on us and by the 14th of Car. 2. c. 18. 't is made Felony To these three last Acts I must confess I have nothing to urge to take off their Efficacy Name us they do most certainly and Bind us so as we do not transgress them But how Rightfully they do this is the matter in Question This I am sure of that before these Acts in King Charles the Second's Time the Eldest of which is not over Thirty-Seven years there is not one positive full Precedent to be met with in all the Statute-Book of an English Act Binding the Kingdom of Ireland And on this Account we may venture to assert That these are at least Innovations on us as not being warranted by any former Precedents And shall Proceedings only of Thirty-Seven Years standing be urg'd against a Nation to Deprive them of the Rights and Liberties which they Enjoy'd for Five Hundred Years before and which were Invaded without and against their Consent and from that day to this have been constantly complain'd of Let any English Heart that stands so Iustly in Vindication of his own Rights and Liberties answer this Question and I have done I am now arriv'd at our Present Days under the Happy Government of His Majesty King WILLIAM the Third and I am sorry to reflect That since the late Revolution in these Kingdoms when the Subjects of England have more strenuously than ever Asserted their own Rights and the Liberty of Parliaments it has pleased them to bear harder on their Poor Neighbours than has ever yet been done in many Ages foregoing I am sure what was then done by that Wise and Just Body of Senators was perfectly out of Good Will and Kindness to us under those Miseries which our Afflicted Country of Ireland then suffered But I fear some Men have since that made use of what was then done to other Purposes than at first intended Let us now see what that was and consider the Circumstances under which it was done In the year 1689. when most oâ—… the Protestant Nobility Gentry and Clergy of Ireland were driven out of that Kingdom by the Insolencies and Barbarities of the Irish Papists who were then it Arms throughout the Kingdom and in all Places of Authority under King Iames newly Return'd to them out of France the only Refuge we had to fly to was in England where Multitudes continued for many Months destitute of all manner of Relief but such as the Charity of England afforded which indeed was very Munificent and never to be forgotten The Protestant Clergy of Ireland being thus Banish'd from their Benefices many of them Accepted such small Ecclesiastical Promotions in England as the Benevolence of well dispos'd Persons presented them with But this being directly contrary to a Statute in this Kingdom in the 17 and 18 of Charles the Second Cap. 10. Intituled An Act for Disabling of Spiritual Persons from holding Benefices or other Ecclesiastical Dignities in England or Wales and in Ireland at the same time The Protestant Irish Clergy thought they could not be too secure in avoiding the Penalty of the last mention'd Act and therefore Apply'd themselves to the Parliament of England and obtain'd an Act in the first year of King William and Queen Mary c. 29. Intituled An Act for the Relief of the Protestant Irish Clergy And this was the first Attempt that was made for Binding Ireland by an Act in England since his Majesty's Happy Accession to the Throne of these Kingdoms Afterwards in the same year and same Session Chap. 34. there pass'd an Act in England Prohibiting all Trade and Commerce with France both from England and Ireland This also binds Ireland but was during the Heat of the War in that Kingdom when 't was impossible to have a regular Parliament therein all being in the hands of the Irish Papists Neither do we complain of it as hindring us from corresponding with the King's Enemies for 't is the Duty of all Good Subjects to abstain from that But as Scotland tho' the King's Subjects Claims an Exemption from all Laws but what they Assent to in Parliament so we think this our Right also When the Banish'd Laity of Ireland observ'd the Clergy thus careful to secure their Properties and provide for the worst as well as they could in that Juncture when no other means could be taken by a Regular Parliament in Ireland they thought it likewise adviseable for them to do something in relation to their Concerns And accordingly they obtain'd the Act for the better Security and Relief of their Majesties Protestant Subjects of Ireland 1 W. and M. Ses. 2. c. 9. Wherein King Iames's Irish Parliament at Dublin and all Acts and Attainders done by them are declared void 'T is likewise thereby Enacted that no Protestant shall suffer any Prejudice in his Estate or Office by reason of his absence out of Ireland since December 25. 1685. and that there should be a Remittal of the Kings Quit-Rent from 25 December 1688. to the end of the War Thus the Laity thought themselves secure And we cannot wonder that during the Heat of a Bloody War in this Kingdom when it was impossible to Secure our Estates and Properties by a Regular Parliament of our own we should have recourse to this Means as the only which then could be had We concluded with our selves that when we had obtained these Acts from the Parliament in England we had gon a great way in securing the like Acts to be passed in a regular Parliament in Ireland whenever it should please God to re-establish us in our own Country For we well knew our own Constitution under Poynings Law That no Act could Pass in the Parliament of Ireland till approved of by the King and Privy Council of England And we knew likewise That all the Lords and others of his Majesties Privy Council in England are Members of the Lords or Commons House of Parliament there And that by obtaining their Assent to Acts of Parliament in Favour of the Irish Protestants they had in a manner pre-engaged their Assent to the like Bills when they should hereafter come before them as Privy Councellors in order to be regularly Transmitted to the Parliament of Ireland there to be passed into Laws of that Kingdom But instead of all this to meet with another Construction of what was done herein and to have it pleaded against us as a Precedent of our Submission and absolute Acquiescence in the Jurisdiction of the Parliaments of England over this Kingdom is what we complain
any Power to Controul the Chancery in Ireland because as Lambard says p. 69 70. The Chancery did follow the King as the Kings Bench did and that as he tells us out of the Lord Chief Justice Scroope the Chancery and the Kings Bench were once but one Place But if this be the ground of the Jurisdiction of the Kings Bench in England over the Kings Bench in Ireland as I am fully perswaded it is the Parliament in England cannot from hence claim any Right of Jurisdiction in Ireland because they claim a Iurisdiction of their own and their Court is not the Kings Court in that proper and strict sence that the Kings Bench is But granting that the Subordination of the Kings Bench in Ireland to the Kings â—…ch in England be rightly concluded from a Writ of Error out of the latter â—…ying on a Judgment in the former I see no Reason from thence to conclude that therefore the Parliament of Ireland is Subordinate to the Parliament in England unless we make any one sort of Subordination or in any one part of Jurisdiction to be a Subordination in all Points and all parts of Jurisdiction The Subjects of Ireland may Appeal to the King in his Bench in England for the Expounding of the Old common and Statute-Law of Ireland will it therefore follow that the Parliament of England shall make New Laws to bind the Subjects in Ireland I see no manner of Consequence in it unless we take Expounding Old Laws or Laws already made in the-Kings Bench and making New Laws in Parliament to be one and the same thing I believe the best Logician in Europe will hardly make a Chain of Syllogisms that from such Premises will regularly induce such a Conclusion To close this Point We find that a Judgment of the Kings Bench in Ireland may be Removed by a Writ of Error to the Parliament in Ireland But the Judgment of the Parliament of Ireland was never question'd in the Parliament of England This Appears from the Prior of Lanthony's Case aforegoing I shall conclude this our Fifth Article with a memorable Passage out of our Irish Statutes which seems to strengthen what we have delivered on the Business of a Writ of Error as well as the chief Doctrine I drive at and that is 28 H. VIII Chap. 19. The Act of Faculties This Statute is a Recital at large of the English Act of the 25 Hen. VIII c. 21. In the Preamble of which English Act 't is Declared That this Your Graces Realm Recognizing no Superiour but Your Grace hath been and yet is free from any Subjection to any Mans Laws but only such as have been Devised within this Realm for the Wealth of the same or to such others as by Sufferance of Your Grace and Your Progenitors the People of the Realm have taken at their Free Liberties by their own Consent and have bound themselves by long Use and Custom to the Observance of c. This Declaration with the other Clauses of the said English Act is verbatim recited in the Irish Act of Faculties and in the said Irish Act it is Enacted That the said English Act and every thing and things therein contained shall be Established Affirmed Taken Obey'd and Accepted within this Land of Ireland as a good and perfect Law and shall be within the said Land of the same Force Effect Quality Condition Strength and Vertue to all Purposes and Intents as it is within the Realm of England if so then the said Clause declares our Right of being bound only by Laws to which we Consent as it does the Right of the People of England And that all Subjects within the said Land of Ireland shall enjoy the Profit and Commodity thereof in like manner as the Kings Subjects of the Realm of England I am now Arrived at our Sixth and Last Article Proposed viz. The Reasons and Arguments that may be be farther Offered on one side and t'other in this Debate I have before taken notice of the Title England pretends over us from Conquest I have likewise enquired into the Precedents on one side and t'other from Acts of Parliament from Records and from Reports of the Learned in the Laws There remains another Pretence or two for this Subordination to be Considered and one is founded on Purchase 'T is said That vast Quantity of Treasure that from time to time has been spent by England in Reducing the Rebellions and carrying on the Wars of Ireland has given them a just Title at least to the Lands and Inheritances of the Rebels and to the absolute Disposal thereof in their Parliament And as particular Examples of this we are told of the great Sums Advanced by England for suppressing the Rebellion of the Irish Papists in 41. and Opposing the late Rebellion since King WILLIAM's Accession to the Throne To this I Answer That in a War there is all Reason imaginable that the Estates of the Unjust Opposers should go to repair the the Damage that is done This I have briefly hinted before But if we consider the Wars of Ireland we shall perceive they do not resemble the common Case of Wars between two Foreign Enemies Ours are rather Rebellions or Intestine Commotions that is The Irish Papists rising against the King and Protestants of Ireland and then 't is plain that if these Latter by the Assistance of their Brethren of England and their Purse do prove Victorious the People of England ought to be fully Repaid But then the manner of their Payment and in what way it shall be Levied ought to be left to the People of Ireland in Parliament Assembled And so it was after the Rebellion of 41. The Adventurers then were at vast Charges and there were several Acts of Parliament in England made for their Re-imbursing by disposing to them the Rebels Lands But after all it was thought Reasonable that the Parliament of Ireland should do this in their own way and therefore the Acts of Settlement and Explanation made all the former English Acts of No Force or at least did very much Alter them in many Particulars as we have Noted before In like manner we allow that England ought to be repaid all their Expences in supressing this late Rebellion All we defire is That in Preservation of our own Rights and Liberties we may do it in our own Methods regularly in our own Parliament And if the Re-imbursement be all that England stands upon what availeth it whether it be done this way or that way so it be done We have an Example of this in Point between England and Holland in the Glorious Revolution under His Present Majesty Holland in Assisting England Expended 600000 Pounds and the English Parliament fairly repay'd them It would have look'd oddly for Holland to have insisted on Disposing of Lord Powis's and other Estates by their own Laws to re-imburse themselves 'T is an Ungenerous thing to villifie good Offices I am far from doing