From 1546 to 1549, Weston is a principal of Broadgates Hall (afterwards Pembroke College), and at the same time deputy reader in civil law at the university, under Dr. John Story. He is not a clergyman, and his later appointment to two lucrative deaneries greatly troubles his conscience.
On January 12, 1559, Weston is created Dean of the Arches and is a commissioner for administering the oaths required of ecclesiastics under the Act of Uniformity 1558. He is consulted in regard to the Queen’s Commission issued on December 6, 1559, for confirming Matthew Parker as Archbishop of Canterbury and is included in a commission issued on November 8, 1564, to inquire into complaints of piratical depredations committed at sea on the subjects of the King of Spain.
The Lord Deputy of Ireland, Sir Henry Sidney, requests that Weston be nominated for the post of Lord Chancellor of Ireland in succession to Hugh Curwen, Archbishop of Dublin, in April 1566. After a year, on June 10, 1567, Queen Elizabeth I tells Sidney that after good deliberation she has made the “choice for the supply of room of Chancellor by naming thereunnto our trusty well-beloved Doctor Weston, dean of the arches here, a man for his learning and approved integrity thoroughly qualified to receive and possess the same” and “that for some increase of his living whilst he remaineth in our service there she was pleased to give unto him the Deanery of St. Patrick’s, whereof the Bishop of Armagh, Adam Loftus, is now dean and yet to leave it at our order, as we know he will.”
Weston arrives in Dublin early in August and is sworn into office on August 8, 1567. He is conscientious in performing his duties, and greatly respected for his integrity, although ill-health (he is plagued by gout and gallstones) hampers his effectiveness. He is appalled by the laziness and inefficiency of many of the Irish judges and urges Elizabeth I to replace them with Englishmen wherever possible. He is equally shocked at the poverty and ignorance of many of the Protestant clergy in Ireland. His zeal for reform leads him, though a layman, to become an effective leader of the Church of Ireland for a few years. He cooperates with Adam Loftus, now Archbishop of Dublin, in purging the Archdiocese of Dublin of crypto-Catholics, but is opposed to the persecution of the Roman Catholic majority, or any efforts to forcibly convert them.
Weston dies on May 20, 1573, and is buried beneath the altar in St. Patrick’s Cathedral, Dublin, “leaving behind him an excellent character for uprightness, judgment, learning, courtesy, and piety.”
Weston marries Alice Jenyngs, daughter of Richard Jenyngs of Great Barr, Staffordshire. They have a son, John, and three daughters, of whom most of known of Alice, who marries firstly Hugh Brady, Bishop of Meath, by whom she has numerous children including Luke and Nicholas, and secondly Sir Geoffrey Fenton, by whom she is the mother of Catherine, who marries Richard Boyle, 1st Earl of Cork, and of Sir William Fenton.
Elvery is the second among seven children of William Elvery , merchant, and Theresa Elvery (née Moss), singer and music teacher, whose parents are English Quakers. Her father’s ancestors were silk merchants from Spain, called Alvarez. Her early childhood is spent in Carrickmines, County Dublin. In 1896 the family moves to Foxrock and she attends the Dublin Metropolitan School of Art. Her mother’s family is artistic – one aunt is the artist Phoebe Anna Traquair – and she and her sisters are talented artists and singers. Her younger sister, Dorothy Kay, becomes a noted portrait painter in South Africa. At the age of sixteen, she wins a three-week scholarship to study at the Royal College of Art in South Kensington, London. Back in Dublin, she models for William Orpen, then teaching in the school. They become friends, and she regrets never studying painting under him. She concentrates on sculpture under John Hughes and has great success, winning the Taylor scholarship three years in a row (1901–03). The first year she wins, the judges, seeking evidence that she had worked unaided, asks her to model a head from life in their presence.
Elvery’s first exhibit in the Royal Hibernian Academy (RHA) is a bronze statuette of a boy in 1902. Thereafter she is a lifelong exhibitor with the RHA, showing almost annually until her death. Friendship with the older Sarah Purser introduces her to Dublin’s artistic milieu and to the arts and crafts movement. In the movement’s 1904 exhibition she shows ten items, including terracotta statuettes, a holy water stoup, and a plaster cast of a lectern, which is cast in bronze in Paris that year and placed in her former parish church in Carrickmines. The movement’s historian, Paul Larmour, calls this lectern “a remarkable piece of organic Art Nouveau . . . There is nothing else like it in Ireland.”
In 1904, after a brief period studying in Paris with her sister and fellow students Estella Solomons and Frances “Cissie” Beckett, Elvery takes lessons in stained glass from Alfred E. Child, and is then persuaded by Purser to join her Tower of Glass (An Túr Gloine) studio. She remains six years, executing windows for St. Stephen’s Church, Mount Street, Dublin; St. Nicholas Church, Carrickfergus; and a war memorial at the Church of Ireland church, Carrickmines. Although her work is generally well received, she does not rate her skill in the medium highly – “I never got the right feeling for glass or the detached, austere quality necessary for ecclesiastical art” – and her window for a Gortconvent leads to a critical review of Purser’s studio by W. B. Yeats. She does not, however, confine herself to glass but also designs for silversmiths and illustrated books for children. For Iosagán agus Sgealta Eile (1907), by Patrick Pearse, she provides a black-and-white frontispiece and four colour illustrations. For the Cuala Press, run by Lily and Elizabeth Yeats, she designs calendars, Christmas cards, and fifteen hand-coloured prints, which continue to be issued until after World War II.
Elvery’s social life in Dublin is busy. An active member of the United Arts Club, she is called by Lady Gregory “the beautiful Miss Elvery,” and Orpen’s portrait, showing her long-necked, graceful, and vivacious, bears out this description. Tiring of glass, and wishing to become a painter, she leaves in 1910 for the Slade School of Fine Art in London. There Henry Tonks is less complimentary than her Dublin teachers. He finds her work facile: “The speed, the slickness, the skill. It is horrible!” Orpen also comes to this view: “her only fault was that the transmission of her thoughts from her brain to paper or canvas, clay or stained glass, became so easy to her that all was said in a few hours. Nothing on earth could make her go on and try to improve on her first translation of her thought.”
Back in Dublin, Elvery takes a studio in Kildare Street and teaches for a time in the Metropolitan School of Art, before her parents arrange a marriage with Charles Henry Gordon Campbell, eldest son of the future Lord Chancellor of Ireland, James Campbell. They marry on August 1, 1912, and move to London where he is called to the English bar. It is not initially a love match but they are well-suited – he likes artistic, Bohemian circles and they become friends with D. H. and Frieda Lawrence, the painter Mark Gertler, the publisher John Middleton Murry, and his wife, the writer Katherine Mansfield, who describes Campbell as “a queer mixture for she is loving and affectionate, and yet she is malicious.”
Campbell’s husband becomes secretary of the Department of Industry and Commerce in the Irish Free State and in 1922 the family moves to Clonard, Terenure, Dublin. His government position means that within six months the house is burned down by anti-Treatyites, who are, however, almost comically accommodating – local men, they express distress at the job and allow her to save the children’s Christmas presents. In 1931 she becomes Lady Glenavy after her husband succeeds to his father’s title, an important member of Dublin’s social and artistic scene. She helps establish the Dublin Drama League and assists Shelah Richards in the production of two plays in 1936. Her friendships are wide and varied and her conversation imaginative and engaged. Dressed in beige – what her son calls “variations on a theme of porridge” – she entertains constantly. Her house has what she terms a “caravanserai” character and is constantly full of people.
Appointed an associate of the RHA in 1932, Campbell becomes a full member in 1934 and takes her turn at teaching. She also joins the more radical Society of Dublin Painters and holds in February 1935 a one-person show at their premises, 7 Stephen’s Green, but she never shows with the Irish Exhibition of Living Art, though her work is more avant-garde than that of most academicians. At its best in still lifes and figure compositions, her work has “a sense of drama and an enigmatic or near-surrealist appearance.” Brian Kennedy notes that she is the first Irish painter to go surrealist (though she never thinks of herself in this way) and although she is serious about her work – taking lessons at an advanced age from Patrick Hennessy – she is also diffident. Her memoir does not trace her development as an artist and mentions only one work with approbation – The Intruder (exhibited at the RHA in 1932). Now in the National Gallery of Ireland, it depicts in bold, rich colours a female centaur beckoning a young man from a group of picnickers. It immediately attracts attention. Richard Orpen wants the academy to buy it, but they think it obscene.
About 1941 the Campbells move to a large Georgian house in Rathfarnham, and twenty years later they transfer to a smaller house in Sandycove. After her husband’s death in 1962, she publishes her memoirs, And Today We Will Only Gossip (1964). The title is well chosen as the book is not self-revelatory but full of characters she encountered. Monk Gibbon calls her a “unique mixture: of talent and diffidence; of gregariousness and contempt for the herd; of gentle consideration and a savage determination to wound. Only those who knew her well knew her at all; and even to them she remained something of a mystery” (The Irish Times, December 2, 1980).
Campbell dies in Dublin on May 21, 1970, and is survived by her two sons, the writer and humorist Patrick Campbell and the novelist Michael Campbell, and predeceased by her daughter, Bridget, an Irish international lacrosse player and talented scientist, who is killed by a bomb during the London blitz.
(From: “Campbell, Beatrice Moss” by Bridget Hourican and Pauric J. Dempsey, Dictionary of Irish Biography, http://www.dib.ie, October 2009 | Pictured: “Bridgit – a picture of Miss Elvery (Beatrice Elvery),” oil on canvas by William Orpen, 1909)
Fitzgibbon is an early and extremely militant opponent of Catholic emancipation. The Earl is possibly the first person to suggest to King George III that granting royal assent to any form of Catholic Emancipation will violate his coronation oath.
FitzGibbon is born in 1748 near Donnybrook, Dublin, the son of John FitzGibbon of Ballysheedy, County Limerick, and his wife Isabella Grove, daughter of John Grove, of Ballyhimmock, County Cork. His father is born a Catholic but converts to the state religion in order to become a lawyer, and amasses a large fortune. He has three sisters, Arabella, Elizabeth, and Eleanor.
When appointed Lord Chancellor for Ireland in 1789, FitzGibbon is granted his first peerage as Baron FitzGibbon, of Connello Lower in County Limerick, in the peerage of Ireland that year. This does not entitle him to a seat in the British House of Lords, only in the Irish House of Lords. His later promotions come mostly in the peerage of Ireland, being advanced to a Viscountcy (1793) and the Earldom of Clare in 1795. He finally achieves a seat in the British House of Lords in 1799 when created Baron FitzGibbon, of Sidbury in the County of Devon, in the Peerage of Great Britain.
FitzGibbon is a renowned champion of the Protestant Ascendancy and an opponent of Catholic emancipation. He despises the Parliament of Ireland‘s popular independent Constitution of 1782. He is also personally and politically opposed to the Irish politician Henry Grattan who urges a moderate course in the Irish Parliament, and is responsible for defeating Grattan’s efforts to reform the Irish land tithe system (1787–1789) under which Irish Catholic farmers (and all non-Anglican farmers) are forced to financially support the minority Anglican Church of Ireland. These are not fully repealed until 1869 when the Church of Ireland is finally disestablished, although Irish tithes are commuted after the Tithe War (1831–1836).
FitzGibbon opposes the Irish Roman Catholic Relief Act 1793, for which, in a “magnificently controlled vituperation in vigorous, colloquial heroic couplets,” The Gibbonade, he is pilloried by the satirist Henrietta Battier. But acceding to pressure exerted through the Irish executive by government of William Pitt in London, intent, in advance of war with the new French Republic, to placate Catholic opinion, he is persuaded to recommend its acceptance in the Irish House of Lords. Pitt, and King George III, who had been petitioned by delegates from the Catholic Committee in Dublin, expects Ireland to follow the British Roman Catholic Relief Act 1791 and admit Catholics to the parliamentary franchise (although not to Parliament itself), enter the professions and assume public office.
FitzGibbon’s role in the recall, soon after his arrival, of the popular pro-Emancipation Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, William Fitzwilliam, 4th Earl Fitzwilliam, is debatable. Although he is probably politically opposed to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Fitzwilliam is recalled, apparently due to his own independent actions. Fitzwilliam is known to be friendly to the Ponsonby family (he is married to one of their daughters), and is generally a Foxite liberal Whig. His close association with and patronage of Irish Whigs led by Grattan and Ponsonby during his short tenure, along with his alleged support of an immediate effort to secure Catholic emancipation in a manner not authorized by the British cabinet is probably what leads to his recall. Thus, if any is to blame in the short-lived “Fitzwilliam episode” it is the great Irish politician Henry Grattan and the Ponsonby brothers – presumably William Ponsonby, later Lord Imokilly, and his brother John Ponsonby—not to mention Lord Fitzwilliam himself. Irish Catholics at the time and later naturally see things very differently and blame hardline Protestants such as FitzGibbon.
Irish Catholics and FitzGibbon agree on one point apparently – Irish political and economic union with Great Britain, which eventually takes place in 1801. Pitt wants Union with Ireland concomitantly with Catholic emancipation, commutation of tithes, and the endowment of the Irish Catholic priesthood. Union is opposed by most hardline Irish Protestants, as well as liberals such as Grattan. FitzGibbon has been a strong supporter of the Union since 1793 but refuses to have Catholic emancipation with the Union.
In a speech to the Irish House of Lords on February 10, 1800, FitzGibbon elucidates his point of view on union: “I hope and feel as becomes a true Irishman, for the dignity and independence of my country, and therefore I would elevate her to her proper station, in the rank of civilised nations. I wish to advance her from the degraded post of mercenary province, to the proud station of an integral and governing member of the greatest empire in the world.”
In the end, FitzGibbon’s views win out, leading to the Union of Ireland with Great Britain to form the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland without any concessions for Ireland’s Catholic majority (or for that matter, Catholics in the rest of the new United Kingdom). He later claims that he had been duped by the way in which the Act was passed with the new Viceroy Charles Cornwallis, 1st Marquess Cornwallis, promising reforms to Irish Catholics, and is bitterly opposed to any concessions during the short remainder of his life.
The role of the Earl of Clare (as FitzGibbon becomes in 1795) as Lord Chancellor of Ireland during the period of the Irish Rebellion of 1798 is questionable. According to some, he supports a hardline policy which uses torture, murder and massacre to crush the rebellion, or that as Lord Chancellor, he has considerable influence on military affairs, and that martial law cannot be imposed without his consent. Others allege that as Lord Chancellor, he has no say in military affairs and the Encyclopædia Britannica states that he is “neither cruel nor immoderate and was inclined to mercy when dealing with individuals.” However, the same source also states that “(FitzGibbon)… was a powerful supporter of a repressive policy toward Irish Catholics”. His former side is displayed by sparing the lives of the captured United Irish leaders, “State prisoners,” in return for their confession of complicity and provision of information relating to the planning of the rebellion. However, this willingness of the prisoners to partake of the agreement is spurred by the execution of the brothers John and Henry Sheares on July 14, 1798.
In contrast to the leniency shown to the largely upper-class leadership, the full weight of military repression is inflicted upon the common people throughout the years 1797–98 with untold thousands suffering imprisonment, torture, transportation and death. FitzGibbon is inclined to show no mercy to unrepentant rebels and, in October 1798, he expresses his disgust upon the capture of Wolfe Tone that he has been granted a trial, and his belief that Tone should be hanged as soon as he set foot on land.
FitzGibbon is quick to recognise that sectarianism is a useful ally to divide the rebels and prevent the United Irishmen from achieving their goal of uniting Protestant, Catholic and Dissenter, writing in June 1798, “In the North nothing will keep the rebels quiet but the conviction that where treason has broken out the rebellion is merely popish.”
Another anecdote is to the effect of FitzGibbon’s callousness. Supposedly, upon being informed during a debate in the Irish Parliament that innocent as well as guilty are suffering atrocities during the repression, he replies, “Well suppose it were so…,” his callous reply purportedly shocking William Pitt.
FitzGibbon is noted by some as a good, improving landlord to both his Protestant and Catholic tenants. Some claim that the tenants of his Mountshannon estate call him “Black Jack” FitzGibbon. There is, however, no evidence to support this claim, although there is little to no evidence on his dealings as a landlord. Irish nationalists and others point out that while he might be interested in the welfare of his own tenants on his own estate, he treats other Irish Catholics very differently. Without further evidence, his role as a Protestant landowner in mainly Catholic Ireland is of little importance against his known dealings as Lord Chancellor.
FitzGibbon dies at home, 6 Ely Place near St. Stephen’s Green, Dublin, on January 28, 1802, and is buried in St. Peter’s Churchyard. A hero to Protestant hardliners, but despised by the majority Catholic population, his funeral cortege is the cause of a riot and, according to a widespread story, a number of dead cats are thrown at his coffin as it departs Ely Place.
He marries firstly Mary Halloran of Cloyne, County Cork, in 1845. She dies in 1901. In the year of his retirement, he remarries Florence Henrietta Gore, widow of Edward Croker. He has no children. James Joyce remarks in Ulysses that his second marriage at the age of 85 infuriates his nephew, who had been waiting patiently for years to inherit his money.
Despite his many years of service on the Bench, Chatterton does not seem to be highly regarded as a judge. On his retirement the Bar pays tribute to his good qualities but adds several qualifications: “there might have been on the Bench lawyers more profound, reasoners more acute…” In his first decade on the Bench, Chatterton has to endure the continual denigration of Jonathan Christian, the Lord Justice of Appeal in Chancery. Christian is notoriously bitter-tongued, and while he despises most of his colleagues, he seems to have a particular dislike of Chatterton. He regularly votes on appeal to overturn his judgments, and frequently adds personal insults. Nor does he confine his attacks to the courtroom: there is controversy in 1870 when remarks of Christian that Chatterton is “lazy, stupid, conceited and so incompetent that he ought to be pensioned off” find their way into The Irish Times. The hint about pensioning off Chatterton is not taken up, no doubt because he enjoys the confidence of the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, Thomas O’Hagan, 1st Baron O’Hagan, who is also on bad terms with Christian. In an appeal from Chatterton in 1873, the two appeal judges clash publicly, with O’Hagan reprimanding Christian for insulting a judge who is not there to defend himself.
Chatterton becomes involved in controversy in 1885, over the first attempt to rename Sackville Street to O’Connell Street. Dublin Corporation votes for the name change, but it arouses considerable objections from local residents, one of whom seeks an injunction. Chatterton grants the injunction on the ground that the corporation has exceeded its statutory powers. Rather unwisely, he also attacks the merits of the decision, accusing the Corporation of “sentimental notions.” The corporation is angered by both the decision and the criticisms: while it may have been a coincidence, the fact that Temple Street is briefly renamed Chatterton Street is interpreted by some as an insult to the judge, since the street is much frequented by prostitutes. The controversy is short-lived as the corporation is granted the necessary statutory powers in 1890, and the new name becomes official in 1924, by which time it has gained popular acceptance.
Bowes epitomizes the severity of the 18th century Penal Laws against Irish Catholics when he rules, in about 1759, that: “The law does not suppose any such person to exist as an Irish Roman Catholic, nor could such a person draw breath without the Crown’s permission”. Such views, given that Roman Catholics make up more than 90% of the Irish population at the time, inevitably make him bitterly unpopular, and in 1760 he is assaulted during a riot outside the House of Commons.
In spite of his religious bigotry, Bowes is considered one of the outstanding judges of his time. In particular, he is a reforming Lord Chancellor, who is praised for making the Court of Chancery “a terror for fraud, and a comfort and protection for honest men”. As Attorney-General he shows considerable courage in going on assize during the Irish Famine (1740–1741) despite the infectious fever which is raging at the time, and which claims the lives of three other judges who decide to brave the dangers.
Bowes is considered one of the finest speakers of his time. His speech for the prosecution at the trial of Henry Barry, 4th Baron Barry of Santry, who is charged with murder in 1739, is described by those who hear it as a masterpiece of eloquence and logic, and leads to the Irish House of Lords bringing in a unanimous verdict of guilty against Santry.
Bowes dies in Dublin on July 22, 1767, his mental faculties fully intact despite his bodily infirmities. He is buried in Christ Church Cathedral, Dublin, where his brother raises a memorial to him. He never marries, and his title becomes extinct on his death. He lives at Belvedere House, Drumcondra. His estates passes to his brother Rumsey Bowes of Binfield, Berkshire.
Barry seems to be an extreme example of an eighteenth-century rake, a man of quarrelsome and violent nature, and a heavy drinker. He is a member of the notorious Dublin Hellfire Club. The club’s reputation never fully recovers from the sensational publicity surrounding his trial for murder, although there is no reason to think that any of his fellow members knew of or condoned the crime. There are widespread rumours that he had committed at least one previous murder which was successfully hushed up, although there seems to be no firm evidence for this.
On August 9, 1738, Barry is drinking with some friends at a tavern in Palmerstown, then a small village near Dublin. Drinking more heavily than usual, he attacks a drinking companion but is unable to draw his sword. Enraged, he runs to the kitchen, where he chances to meet Laughlin Murphy, the tavern porter, and for no known reason runs him through with his sword. He then bribes the innkeeper to let him escape. Murphy is taken to Dublin where he lingers for several weeks, dying on September 25, 1738.
Although Barry is not immediately apprehended, there is no reason to believe that the Crown intends that he should escape justice. The authorities clearly aim not only to prosecute him but to secure a conviction. Even in an age when the aristocracy enjoys special privileges, the murder of Murphy, who by all accounts was an honest and hardworking man with a wife and young family to support, shocks public opinion, whereas Barry is regarded, even among members of his own class, as a public nuisance. In due course, he is arrested and indicted for murder. He demands, as the privilege of peerage, a trial by his peers. The trial, which takes place in the Irish Houses of Parliament on April 27, 1739, arouses immense public interest.
Bowes dominates the proceedings, and his speeches make his reputation as an orator. Thomas Rundle, Bishop of Derry, who as a spiritual peer is only an observer at the trial, says, “I never heard, never read, so perfect a piece of eloquence…the strength and light of his reason, the fairness and candour.” The Bishop is scathing about the quality of counsel for the defence, describing the performance of Barry’s counsel as “detestable.” The defence case is that Murphy had died not from his wound but from a long-standing illness (or alternatively a rat bite), but in view of the medical evidence produced by the prosecution this is a hopeless argument. According to Bishop Rundle, Barry’s counsel fails even to mention the possibility that Murphy, who lingered for six weeks after being stabbed, might have died through inadequate medical care. Given the overwhelming evidence of Barry’s guilt, however, any defence would probably have been useless, and despite what is described as their “looks of horror,” his peers have little difficulty in finding him guilty. Wyndham, who had conducted the trial with exemplary fairness, pronounces the death sentence. His retirement soon afterward is generally thought to be due to the strain of the trial.
King George II, like all British monarchs, has the prerogative of mercy, and a campaign is launched by Barry’s friends and relatives to persuade the King to grant a pardon. Their plea concentrates on the victim’s low social standing, the implication being that the life of a peer is worth more than that of a tavern worker, despite the victim’s blameless character and the savage and wanton nature of the murder. The King proves reluctant to grant a pardon, and for a time it seems that Barry will be executed, but in due course, a reprieve is issued. Popular legend has it that his uncle, Sir Compton Domvile, through whose estate at Templeogue the River Dodder flows, secured a royal pardon for his nephew by threatening to divert the course of the river, thus depriving the citizens of Dublin of what is then, and remains long after, their main supply of drinking water.
On June 17, 1740, Barry receives a full royal pardon and the restoration of his title and estates. Soon afterward he leaves Ireland for good and settles in England. He is said to have had a personal audience with the King and thanked him in person for his clemency.
Barry’s last years are wretched. Although he has a second marriage shortly before his death, he is abandoned by all his former friends, is in great pain from gout, and is prone to depression. He dies in Nottingham on March 22, 1751, and is buried at St. Nicholas Church, Nottingham. On his death the title becomes extinct. His estates pass to his cousin, Sir Compton Domvile, 2nd Baronet, who makes unsuccessful efforts to have the barony revived. His widow Elizabeth outlives him by many years, dying in December 1816.
Brewster is the son of William Bagenal Brewster, of Ballinulta, County Wicklow, by his wife Mary, daughter of Thomas Bates. He receives his earlier education at Kilkenny College, then proceeds to Trinity College Dublin (TCD) in 1812, taking his B.A. degree in 1817, and long after, in 1847, his M.A. degree.
Brewster is very active in almost all branches of his profession after his resignation, and his reputation as an advocate may be gathered from the pages of the Irish Law and Equity Reports, and in the later series of the Irish Common Law Reports, the Irish Chancery Reports, and the Irish Jurist, in all of which his name very frequently appears. Among the most important cases in which he takes part are the Mountgarrett case in 1854, involving a peerage and an estate of £10,000 a year, the Carden abduction case in July of the same year, the Yelverton case in 1861, the Egmont will case in 1863, the Marquess of Donegall‘s ejectment action and lastly, the great will cause of Fitzgerald v. Fitzgerald, in which Brewster’s statement for the plaintiff is said to be one of his most successful efforts.
On Edward Smith-Stanley becoming prime minister, Brewster succeeds Francis Blackburne as Lord Justice of Appeal in Ireland in July 1866, and Lord Chancellor of Ireland the following March. As Lord Chancellor, he sits in his court for the last time on December 17, 1868, when Benjamin Disraeli‘s government resigns. He then retires from public life.
There are only three or four judgments delivered by him in print, either in the Court of Appeal or the Court of Chancery (Ireland). His judicial manner is quiet, but with what is called “a touch of serviceable fierceness” which keeps order in Court. He is highly regarded by his colleagues. Even the bitter-tongued Jonathan Christian, who despises most of his fellow judges, defers to Brewster.
Brewster dies at his residence, 26 Merrion Square South, Dublin, on July 26, 1874, and is buried in the family vault at Tullow, County Carlow, on July 30. By his marriage in 1819 with Mary Ann, daughter of Robert Gray of Upton House, County Carlow, who dies in Dublin on November 24, 1862, he has issue one son, Colonel William Bagenal Brewster, and one daughter, Elizabeth Mary, wife of Mr. Henry French, both of whom die in the lifetime of their father. His estates are inherited by Elizabeth’s son, Robert French-Brewster, who adopts his grandfather’s surname. A nephew, Edward Brewster, studies under Abraham Brewster and becomes a lawyer and politician in New South Wales. Edward’s brother, John Grey Brewster, also emigrates to Australia, where he becomes a prosperous grazier and company director, retiring to England in later years where he dies in 1897.
(Pictured: Right Honourable Abraham Brewster photographed by Thomas Cranfield, 1861)
Inheritance in traditional Irish law uses gavelkind, whereby an estate is divided equally among a dead man’s sons. In contrast, English common law uses male primogeniture, with the eldest son receiving the entire estate. The 1704 act enforces gavelkind for Catholics and primogeniture for Protestants.
Two separate bills “to prevent the further Growth of Popery” are introduced in the parliamentary session of 1703–04. One originates with the Privy Council of Ireland and is referred on July 4, 1703, to the Attorney-General for Ireland. The other is introduced as heads of a bill in the Irish House of Commons on September 28, 1703, and is sent to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland on November 19. Under Poynings’ Law, both bills are transmitted to the Privy Council of England for approval. Formally, one bill is vetoed, and the other is returned to Dublin with amendments. A lack of surviving documentation makes it impossible to determine which of the two has which fate. The approved bill is engrossed on January 20, 1704, presented in the Commons on February 14, sent to the Irish House of Lords on February 25, and given royal assent on March 4.
Sir Theobald “Toby” Butler, the former Solicitor-General for Ireland, a Roman Catholic, makes a celebrated speech at the bar of the Commons denouncing the act as being “against the laws of God and man… against the rules of reason and justice.” Other eminent Catholic lawyers like Stephen Rice also denounce the measure but to no avail.
Charles Ivar McGrath says that while the Popery Act has “evident … negative effects,” specific research is lacking, and that it is intended more to prevent an increase in Catholic landholding than encourage further decrease. The Catholic share of land had already fallen from 60% before the Irish Rebellion of 1641 to 22% before the Williamite War in Ireland to 14% in 1704. The figure of 5% in 1776 given in Arthur Young‘s Tour in Ireland is probably an underestimate, although in 1778 only 1.5% of rent is paid to Catholics.
The act is “explained and amended” by a 1709 act, 8 Anne c. 3 (I), which specifies certain time limits left ambiguous by the original act, and closes some loopholes used by Catholics to remain beneficial owners of nominally Protestant property.
A 1719 act, 6 Geo. 1. c. 9 (I), indemnifies officials who have not hitherto subscribed to the oath required by the Popery Act. The time period for Dissenters subscribing to the oath is routinely extended, initially by an Indemnity Act at the start of each biennial parliamentary session. Similar acts are passed by the British parliament, and after the union the UK parliament continues the practice.
From the late 18th century Roman Catholic relief bills ease the Penal Laws, by explicit or implicit repeal and replacement. In 1772, Catholics are allowed to lease up to fifty Irish acres of bog-land for up to 61 years. The 1704 oath of allegiance for Catholics is replaced in 1774. Gardiner’s Act, the Leases for Lives Act 1777, implicitly repeals many other provisions of the 1704 act. Some are replaced with less onerous restrictions. The sacramental test is repealed for Dissenters in 1780. The Roman Catholic Relief Act 1782 repeals section 23 of the 1704 act. Another act of 1782 allows lay Catholics to be guardians of Protestants. Most restrictions on intermarriage are removed by the Roman Catholic Relief Act 1792. Many Penal Laws are repealed in general terms by the Roman Catholic Relief Act 1793. The sacramental test for Catholics is effectively replaced by the 1774 oath.
The Roman Catholic Relief Act 1829 abolishes the declaration against transubstantiation and specifies a new public oath for Catholics, explicitly permitting Catholics to hold Irish civil or military offices other than Lord Lieutenant and Lord Chancellor of Ireland, with the same oaths as required of non-Catholics (in addition to the new Catholic oath).
The Criminal Law Commission‘s 1845 report on oaths says sections 1, 3, and 6 of the 1704 act have fallen into disuse and should be repealed. The Religious Disabilities Act 1846, passed in consequence of the committee’s report, explicitly repeals provisions of sections 1, 3, and 4 of the 1704 act.
Brady is born in 1527, but his parentage is uncertain, as are most of the details of his early life. He is said to be a graduate of the University of Oxford and later a professor of divinity there, but there is no evidence of this in the college registers.
Brady’s first patron is Edmund Grindal, Bishop of London, under whose auspices he secures a prestigious appointment to the rectorship of St. Mary Aldermary, London, in early 1561. Over the next two years he becomes acquainted with a relative and chief advisor of Queen Elizabeth I, William Cecil. He is eager to return to Ireland and is appointed Bishop of Meath on October 21, 1563, while still in England. He is ideally qualified for this role, being a native of the diocese and a skilled preacher fluent in English and Irish. Arriving in Dublin on December 3, 1563, he is consecrated on December 19, being made a member of the Privy Council of Ireland soon thereafter.
On reaching his diocese, Brady is dismayed at its dilapidated state. His diocesan income scarcely exceeds £60 a year, many of the churches are in ruins, his clergy are uneducated and largely pro-Catholic, and the right to appoint clergy to many parish churches is in the hands of Catholic landowners. Further, the rival Catholic Bishop of Meath, William Walsh, is dedicated, capable, and popular. Although Walsh is belatedly arrested in 1565, his willingness to lead by example and suffer persecution for his beliefs stiffens Catholic resistance in Meath.
Brady is always diligent in attendance at Council meetings. He is vigorous in beating off raids on his diocese by Shane O’Neill, the effective ruler of Ulster. He enjoys the friendship of Sir Henry Sidney, the Lord Deputy of Ireland, who praises his sound judgment, hospitality and blameless private life. His good qualities lead Sidney and Adam Loftus, Archbishop of Armagh, to propose Brady as Archbishop of Dublin, after they have lobbied successfully for the recall of Archbishop Hugh Curwen. However, soon after, Brady and Loftus quarrel, and Loftus blocks Brady’s nomination in order to obtain the See of Dublin for himself.
Nonetheless, Brady retains Sidney’s confidence and finds a new ally in 1567 when Robert Weston becomes Lord Chancellor of Ireland. Weston sympathises with his educational and evangelical bent while gaining the respect of the querulous Loftus, thereby defusing the animosity between Ireland’s leading Protestant clergy.
In 1569, Brady’s diocese is amalgamated with the diocese of Clonmacnoise. He now heads a sprawling diocese that includes Gaelic areas where the crown has very little authority. In practice, he appears to have largely ignored Clonmacnoise. In Meath, a government inquiry in 1575 shows that he has made little headway in spreading the Protestant faith or in restoring the fabric and finances of the church. He has found clergy for nearly every church in the diocese, but most are of a poor standard. He contributes to the diocese’s worsening finances by alienating church land to family and associates. The free school he establishes is also forced to close due to a lack of suitable premises.
Following Sidney’s dismissal as Lord Deputy of Ireland in 1578, Protestant hard-liners begin to dominate the Irish government, causing Brady to lose influence. He complains in 1581 that his letters to London are being opened and read by his colleagues and sometimes being suppressed. His influence declines in Meath also as discontent with the government increases. In 1577, his men capture a number of friars at Navan but are attacked by locals and forced to free their captives. Thereafter, local officials and landowners routinely defy his authority. His conciliatory policies totally discredited, he stays away from Dublin and resides mainly at his episcopal palace at Ardbraccan.
From 1582 Brady suffers from ill health, forcing him to curtail his preaching. He dies on February 14, 1584, and is buried near the parish church at Dunboyne.
Brady marries twice, but little is known of his first wife. In 1568, following the death of his first wife, he marries Weston’s daughter Alice. They had at least four children, including Luke, their eldest son, and Nicholas, grandfather of his namesake the poet. After Brady’s death, his widow marries Sir Geoffrey Fenton and has further issue, including Catherine, Countess of Cork. The poet Nicholas Brady is the bishop’s great-grandson. Maziere Brady, Lord Chancellor of Ireland, is a nineteenth-century descendant of the bishop.
When appointed Lord Chancellor of Ireland in 1789, FitzGibbon is granted his first peerage as Baron FitzGibbon, of Lower Connello in the County of Limerick, in the Peerage of Ireland that year. This does not entitle him to a seat in the British House of Lords, only in the Irish House of Lords. His later promotions come mostly in the Peerage of Ireland, being advanced to a Viscountcy in 1793 and the Earldom of Clare in 1795. He finally achieves a seat in the British House of Lords in 1799 when created Baron FitzGibbon, of Sidbury in the County of Devon, in the Peerage of Great Britain.
As Lord Chancellor for Ireland, FitzGibbon is a renowned champion of the Protestant Ascendancy and an opponent of Catholic emancipation. He despises the Parliament of Ireland‘s popular independent Constitution of 1782. He is also personally and politically opposed to the Irish politician Henry Grattan who urges a moderate course in the Irish Parliament and is responsible for defeating Grattan’s efforts to reform the Irish land tithe system under which Irish Catholic farmers (and all non-Anglican farmers) are forced to financially support the minority Anglican Church of Ireland. These are not fully repealed until 1869 when the Church of Ireland is finally disestablished, although Irish tithes are commuted after the Tithe War (1831–1836).
FitzGibbon opposes the Irish Roman Catholic Relief Act 1793 personally but apparently recommends its acceptance in the House of Lords, being forced out of necessity when that Act had been recommended to the Irish Executive by the British Cabinet led by William Pitt the Younger. Pitt expects Ireland to follow the British Roman Catholic Relief Act 1791 and allow Catholics to vote again and hold public offices. At the same time, FitzGibbon apparently denounces the policy this Act embodies, so it is probably safe to say that FitzGibbon’s own beliefs and principles conflict with his obligations as a member of the Irish executive of the time.
FitzGibbon’s role in the recall, soon after his arrival, of the popular pro-Emancipation Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, William Fitzwilliam, 4th Earl of Fitzwilliam, is debatable. Although he is probably politically opposed to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Fitzwilliam is apparently recalled, because of his own independent actions. Fitzwilliam is known to be friendly to the Ponsonby family and is generally a Foxite liberal Whig. His close association with and patronage of Irish Whigs led by Grattan and Ponsonby during his short tenure, along with his alleged support of an immediate effort to secure Catholic emancipation in a manner not authorized by the British cabinet is likely what leads to his recall. Thus, if anyone is to blame in the short-lived “Fitzwilliam episode” it is Henry Grattan and the Ponsonby brothers – presumably William Ponsonby, later Lord Imokilly, and his brother George Ponsonby — not to mention Lord Fitzwilliam himself. Irish Catholics at the time and later naturally see things very differently and blame hardline Protestants such as FitzGibbon.
Irish Catholics and FitzGibbon apparently agree on one point – Irish political and economic union with Great Britain, which eventually takes place in 1801. Pitt wants Union with Ireland concomitantly with Catholic emancipation, commutation of tithes, and the endowment of the Irish Catholic priesthood. Union is opposed by most hardline Irish Protestants, as well as liberals such as Grattan. FitzGibbon is a strong supporter of the Union since 1793 but refuses to have Catholic emancipation with the Union.
In the end, FitzGibbon’s views wins out, leading to the Union of Ireland with Great Britain to form the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland without any concessions for Ireland’s Catholic majority, or for that matter, Catholics in the rest of the new United Kingdom. He later claims that he has been duped by the way in which the Act is passed and is bitterly opposed to any concessions during the short remainder of his life.
FitzGibbon’s role as Lord Chancellor of Ireland during the period of the 1798 rebellion is questionable. According to some, he supports a hardline policy which uses torture, murder and massacre to crush the rebellion, or that as Lord Chancellor, he has considerable influence on military affairs, and that martial law cannot be imposed without his consent. Others allege that as Lord Chancellor, he has no say in military affairs. His former side is displayed by sparing the lives of the captured United Irish leaders in return for their confession of complicity and provision of information relating to the planning of the rebellion. However, this willingness of the prisoners to partake of the agreement is spurred by the execution of the Sheares brothers on July 14, 1798.
In contrast to the leniency shown to the largely upper-class leadership, the full weight of military repression is inflicted upon the common people throughout the years 1797–98 with untold thousands suffering imprisonment, torture, transportation and death. Fitzgibbon ss inclined to show no mercy to unrepentant rebels and in October 1798 he expressed his disgust upon the capture of Wolfe Tone that he had been granted a trial and his belief that Tone should have been hanged as soon as he set foot on land.
FitzGibbon is quick to recognise that sectarianism is a useful ally to divide the rebels and prevent the United Irishmen from achieving their goal of uniting Protestant, Catholic and Dissenter, writing in June 1798, “In the North nothing will keep the rebels quiet but the conviction that where treason has broken out the rebellion is merely popish.”
FitzGibbon is noted by some as a good, improving landlord to both his Protestant and Catholic tenants. Some claim that the tenants of his Mountshannon estate call him “Black Jack” FitzGibbon. However, there is no evidence to support this claim, although there is little to no evidence on his dealings as a landlord. Irish nationalists and others point out that while he might have been interested in the welfare of his own tenants on his own estate, he treats other Irish Catholics very differently. Without further evidence, his role as a Protestant landowner in mainly Catholic Ireland is of little importance against his known dealings as Lord Chancellor.
FitzGibbon dies at his home, 6 Ely Place near St. Stephen’s Green, Dublin, on January 28, 1802, and is buried in the churchyard at St. Peter’s Church, Aungier Street, Dublin. A hero to Protestant hardliners, but despised by the majority Catholic population, his funeral cortege is the cause of a riot and there is a widespread story that a number of dead cats are thrown at his coffin as it departs Ely Place.
(Pictured: “Portrait of John FitzGibbon, 1st Earl of Clare,” painting by Gilbert Stuart, 1789)
seamus dubhghaill 