at this time was meditating an edition of the Syriac version of the Old Testament, and sent a person into Holland for the purpose of purchasing types fit for the work: no account is given of the cause which induced him to give up so important an undertaking. In the year 1628 commenced the correspondence between the Archbishop and Laud, then Bishop of London, which was kept up without interruption for twelve years, and only terminated by the unfortunate calamities of the country. It is quite evident that Ussher had no suspicion of his illustrious correspondent entertaining any affection for the doctrines of Popery, and his exertions to make him Chancellor of the University of Dublin prove incontestably that he regarded him as the fittest person to support the Protestant University, and with it the cause of Protestantism in Ireland. On the other hand, the terms in which Archbishop Laud speaks of Ussher, afford sufficient evidence that he was not the Puritan which the enemies of our Church represent him to have been, and that if he did not enforce the discipline of the Church, it was not from want of affection for its ordinances, but from the gentleness of his nature, which rendered him unwilling to inflict punishment. The next year commences with an extraordinary demand upon the Archbishop to exert his authority in civil matters, and gives a curious specimen of the state of Ireland at that period. The declaration of the Bishops, of which an account has been given before, and the still more annoying remonstrance of the English House of Commons to the King," that the Popish religion was publicly professed in every part of Ireland: and that monasteries and nunneries were there newly erected and replenished with votaries of both sexes, which would be of evil consequence, unless seasonably repressed," were not sufficient to prevent the success of the Recusants in obtaining favours from the Crown. In despite of public clamour and suspicion, the Irish agents proceeded to London, and made an offer to the In the Diary of Provost Bedell it is recorded, that on the 28th of December in this year, the Primate dined in the College Hall. King of a voluntary contribution of one hundred and twenty thousand pounds, to be paid in three years. The graces which they solicited in return for this extraordinary exertion of loyalty, were in some instances favourable to Recusants, but in general were calculated for the redress of grievances which persons of all denominations experienced, and had an obvious tendency to promote the peace and prosperity of the country. The bounty was accepted, the graces were conferred, and were transmitted, by way of instructions, to the Lord Deputy and Council. The articles in these instructions were very numerous: perhaps the most important was that for the security of all proprietors; their several estates were to be confirmed to them and their heirs by the next Parliament to be holden in Ireland, and also an Act was to be passed for a free and general pardon, in order to remove the apprehensions of every one throughout the realm. In these instructions the sincerity of the King is at least doubtful, for he took no legal steps to summon a Parliament: however, the people relied on the royal promise, and the concessions were considered as fully granted, c In the instructions the King fixed the third day of the succeeding month of November, as the time when he intended the Parliament should be holden. Lord Falkland, without attending to any further circumstances of formality, issued writs of summons for an Irish Parliament to meet on the day named by the King. The impropriety of this proceeding was obvious by the law of Poynings, a certificate of causes and considerations, by the Lord Deputy and Council, was previously necessary, before the King's license could be transmitted for holding a Parliament in that kingdom. The Council Board of England soon discovered and censured an omission so essential. The matter was referred to the Judges, who pronounced the present writs of summons illegal and void. It seems extraordinary that the King and his Ministers could have been ignorant of the legal method of proceeding on this occasion: or if that careless inattention to the affairs of Ireland, which sometimes prevails in England in times the most composed, betrayed them into error in those days of agitation, it is still more extraordinary that the Deputy and Council of Ireland should have been equally ignorant and erroneous. But whether the irregularity were casual or premeditated, nothing could have been corrected more easily and readily, if Charles had been sincerely disposed to give effectual relief and satisfaction to his Irish subjects. Yet no new writs were issued, or any new time assigned for a legal and regular convention of the Irish Parliament.-Leland, vol. ii. pag. 487. because an Act of State, though not confirmed by Parliamentary sanction, had usually great authority in Ireland; but before any suspicion of sincerity was excited, these graces produced discontent and divisions. All submitted cheerfully to the contribution, which was the price of the favours conferred, but the Recusants assumed to themselves the whole merit, and disregarded the Protestants, who paid above a third part of the public charge; they professed the greatest loyalty, but secretly exulted in the persuasion, that the authority of the Crown in Ireland could not be supported without their assistance, and, urged on by their ecclesiastics, proceeded to the most imprudent excesses. They celebrated their religious worship with public solemnity, and with the full parade of their ostentatious ritual. They seized churches for their service, avowedly and severely executed their ecclesiastical jurisdiction, erected everywhere new monasteries, and even in the city of Dublin established a college for the education of their youth, under the superintendence of a distinguished ecclesiastic. The Protestants, galled by these intemperate proceedings, urged upon the Lord Deputy the necessity of interference. Lord Falkland, indisposed to severity from his natural disposition, and instructed by the English Government to display the greatest moderation in religious matters, was at length compelled to issue a proclamation, importing that "the late intermission of legal proceedings, against Popish pretended titular Archbishops, Bishops, Abbots, Deans, Vicars-general, Jesuits, Friars, and others, deriving their pretended authority from the see of Rome, in contempt of his Majesty's royal power and authority, had had such an extravagant insolence and presumption in them, that he was necessitated to charge and command them, in his Majesty's name, to forbear the exercise of their Popish rites and ceremonies." This proclamation was not treated even with the common respect due to an Act of State. At Drogheda it was received with peculiar marks of contempt, as appears from a letter of the Lord Deputy to Archbishop Ussher, in which he states: "I have received information both of the unreverend manner of publishing the late pro clamation at Drogheda, and the ill observance of the same since it was published. For the first, that it was done in scornful and contemptuous sort, a drunken soldier being first set up to read it, and then a drunken serjeant of the town; both being made by too much drink incapable of that task (and perhaps purposely put to it), made the same seem like a May game. And for the latter, that there is yet very little obedience shewed thereto by the Friers and Priests; only that they have shut up the foredoor of some of their mass houses; but have as ordinary recourse thither by their private passages, and do as frequently use their superstitious services there, as if there were no command to the contrary; those mass houses being continued in their former use (though perhaps a little more privately) without any demolishing of their altars, &c." The Lord Deputy then complains, in very strong terms, of the Archbishop not having given him information of the proceedings at Drogheda, and censures him for his neglect of duty as a Privy Counsellor. He concludes by calling upon him to take the assistance of Mr. Justice Philpot, and inquire into the circumstances of the case. Archbishop Ussher appears to have been justly offended with this letter, and the Lord Deputy sent him an apology, protesting he did not intend to give his Grace any cause of discontent, and blaming his Secretary. It seems strange, indeed that the Lord Deputy should not require his information from the commander of the garrison at Drogheda, rather than from the Archbishop; more particularly, as the Archbishop had just been visited by a severe domestic calamity, in the sudden death of his learned and excellent brother, Ambrose Ussherd. A few days after, a d Ambrose Ussher, the only brother of the Archbishop, was educated for a short time at Cambridge, and then became a Scholar and Fellow of Trinity College, Dublin. His literary attainments were very considerable, particularly in the Eastern languages. The very learned William Eyre mentions him with great respect, in a letter to the Archbishop. "Interea vero loci agnosco me valde obæratum esse et tibi et doctissimo fratri tuo Ambrosio, qui peritissima manu sua quædam in meum usum ex Alcorano Arabice exscripsit.”—Epist. 4. vol. xv. pag. 21. He died in March, 162. The cnly work he published was, A brief Catechism, very letter of thanks was sent to the Archbishop from the Lord Deputy and Council, for his exertions in investigating some irregular proceedings charged against the titular Bishop of Raphoe, and for ascertaining the proprietors of the conventual houses in that town. They inform His Grace that they had given directions to His Majesty's Attorney-General, "to put up informations in His Majesty's Court of Exchequer against the proprietors and possessors of the houses, that thereby may be made for such further cause of proceeding as the several cases shall require." On the 13th of September, 1629, Archbishop Ussher consecrated, at St. Peter's, Drogheda, the learned and ex well serving for the instruction of youth, published without date. There is a large collection of his works, in manuscript, preserved in the library of Trinity College. The most considerable work was a translation of the Bible into English, with a dedication to James I. It is supposed that this was not printed, in consequence of the translation undertaken by direction of the King. The other works are: Disputationes contra Bellarminum de Capitibus Fidei cum Synagoga Romana controversis. 4 tom. fol. An Arabic Dictionary and Grammar. Sermons on Luke, xvii. 16, Rom. x. 17; on perfect Reformation, preached before the State; on Psalm cxix. 60, against delaying Repentance. Sermons on Matt. xi. 28, 29, 30; Psalm lxxxii. 7; Luke, x. 20. Notæ in Evangelium S. Matthæi. Exposition of the four first Chapters of St. Matthew. Summaria Religionis Christianæ Methodus. The beginning of a work entitled, The greater Catechism. Theologia seu Corpus Theologiæ positivæ cum Catena S. Scripturæ. Miscellanea Theologica. The Reducing of Scripture Doctrine to the Use of the Conscience. An Exposition of St. Paul's Epistle to Philemon. The Examples of Holy Scripture unfolded. Loca in quibus Arabica Geneseos translatio ab Interpretatione LXX. recedit vel in quibus ab ea cum fonte Hebræa discrepat. Loca in quibus Arabica Evangelia differunt a Vulgata Lectione. A Discourse on Acts, xxiii. 1, 2, 3. Texts of Scripture to illustrate those two Articles of the Creed concerning the Holy Ghost and the Catholic Church. Various Forms of Prayer, and several Forms of Blessing, collected from the Liturgy and the Holy Scriptures. The Principles of Religion explained in English, Greek, Latin, and Hebrew. The Foundation of the Christian Religion gathered into six Principles. |