Introduction. By the time of the Restoration in 1660, the Scots, by now almost entirely confined to Ulster, had established themselves in sufficient numbers to become a dominant feature of the demographic landscape of the province. They, or at least those below the gentry level, had also established a distinct cultural identity, quite apart from their nationality, through their adherence to the Presbyterian form of protestantism. They constituted, therefore, a minority within a minority, though without a share in the political power enjoyed by their fellow protestants who belonged to the Church of Ireland. There are also several indications that their numbers grew after 1660 as a result of both a natural increase and further migration from Scotland. As has been shown in previous documents, the Scots in Ireland posed a conundrum for the government in Dublin in that their interests often differed from both those of the Irish and the government in England. This conundrum continued after 1660 and was complicated by the remnant of the covenanting movement causing unrest in Scotland. Twice, in 1666, and again in 1679, covenanting agitation had to be suppressed in Scotland by force, and there was concern in Dublin that the Scots in the north of Ireland might rebel in sympathy with their fellow countrymen or at least assist them.

This document, which is composed of excerpts from two documents, provides a contemporary analysis of the problem. Both documents were written by James Butler, first duke of Ormond, who was lord lieutenant of Ireland from 1662 to 1669 and again, from 1677 to 1685. Sir Henry Coventry was the king’s secretary of state in England and the earl of Arran was Richard Butler, Ormond’s son, who, on occasion acted as deputy governor in his father’s absence. Ormond reveals his prejudice against the Scots, but also a pragmatism in dealing with them, showing that they were, in a sense, protected from government pressure by the presence of the Catholic majority, but that the government, in turn, could operate in the knowledge that neither the Irish Catholics nor the protestant Scots could move against the government for fear of each other.

Source. Historical Manuscripts Commission, Ormonde Mss, new style, vol. 4 (London 1906), pp. 35-6 and 84-5.

 

Ormond to Sir Henry Coventry

4 September 1677, Dublin Castle.

Though I cannot yet pretend to be much better instructed in the state of the kingdom than I was before I arrived, yet I am already confirmed in the notions I had of that party, which, since the King’s restoration, I thought most dangerous to his Government, taken simply by themselves without the consideration of foreign incitement or assistance; and those are they who still call themselves Protestants, though they differ from the doctrine, and are not obedient to the discipline of the Church.

That these have, ever since His Majesty’s happy return, been numerous, can neither be denied or wondered at, because the Government had been for some time in their hands when it was restored to His Majesty; but it is certain that they are much increased, spread and emboldened beyond what they were about eight or nine years since, in so much that as I am informed by some of the northern bishops, and others, they have of late publicly met by thousands to administer and receive the Communion after their manner; that divers (and some of good quality in appearance) come frequently out of Scotland to join in that exercise with them, and that they have constituted among themselves some form of Ecclesiastical Government, though they own [admit] it not, but do yet (if at all) exercise it with much caution, and as secretly as they can.

These Bishops do further affirm that there is no good to be done by persuasion or example, they are so prepossessed and inflexible, and they attribute their increase in those parts in some measure to the number of them that come out of Scotland to inhabit here, as a Government more tolerable for them to live under; and their stubbornness they attribute much to the ministers who come over on the same account. That this is the case I do not doubt, but what to do or propose I do not find easy to determine.

To endeavour to reform so obstinate a multitude by putting the laws in execution against them on a sudden after so long a time of indulgence, and to let those laws sleep in reference to the Roman Catholics (against whom they seem to have been principally provided) would produce great and unreasonable clamour, and slack and ineffectual prosecution; and to execute them against both…would soon fill all, and more than all, the prisons in Ireland, and would drive so many from their homes and from their labour that much of the kingdom would be laid waste, and His Majesty’s revenue would unavoidably sink in all the branches of it….

Yet in this difficulty I shall presume to lay before His Majesty this my humble advice:

That for the present nothing be changed in relation to them, but that the liberty they have gained by some years of indulgence may be still connived at, so they enlarge it not by any attempt to renew the Covenant, or to set up and exercise a jurisdiction against the law, either of which is in my opinion to be endeavoured to be suppressed with all severity on the first probable instance of their going about it.

Instructions to the earl of Arran, 7 January 1678

….I suppose the people of this kingdom may be best distinguished by the truly loyal and conforming, the Irish Roman Catholics, and the Nonconformists who will be called Protestants. The two latter are so opposite in religion and civil interest that they are in some sort such a balance to each other that neither dare to rise against the Government, for fear it should make use of the other to suppress and chastise the first disturbers; and even among the Nonconformists some distinction may reasonably be made betwixt the Scotch and the English. The Scotch I take to be more heady, more united in opinion, more compact in habitation and neighbourhood, more ready to abandon their wretched residences, and for all these reasons more apt to be inflamed and put into action by their vagabond teachers. The English are more set upon trade and improvements, not so unanimously bent one way, more scattered in the country, and will not so easily be persuaded to quit their much more commodious homes. The Irish, though I think more in number than all the rest, I do not conceive are so much to be apprehended as the other party, but in case of an invasion or when any other party shall have begun; but then it must be expected that many of them will join the invaders, or in the other case will endeavour to form a third party, as they did when they found a breach in prospect betwixt the King and the rebellious Parliament.

 

Michael Perceval-Maxwell