第303章

The royal proclamation produced little or no effect. The Jesuits and seminary priests remained and even increased in numbers by new arrivals from the Continental colleges and from England where the law was more strictly enforced. Nor could the leading citizens， the mayors and the aldermen of the principal cities， be forced to come to church， because they preferred to pay the fine of twelve pence prescribed in the Act of Uniformity for each offence. The government officials determined， therefore， to have recourse to more severe if less legal remedies. They selected a certain number of wealthy citizens of Dublin， addressed to each of them an individual mandate in the king's name ordering them to go to church on a certain specified Sunday， and treated disobedience to such an order as an offence punishable by common law. Six of the aldermen were condemned to pay a fine of ā100， and three citizens ā50， one half of the fine to be devoted to the "reparing of decayed churches or chapels， or other charitable use，"the other half to go to the royal treasury. In addition to this， they were condemned to imprisonment at the will of the Lord Deputy， and declared incapable of holding any office in the city of Dublin， or in any other part of the kingdom (22 Nov. 1605). A few days later other aldermen and citizens of Dublin were brought before the Irish Star Chamber， and having been interrogated "why they did not repair to their parish churches，" they replied "that their consciences led them to the contrary." They were punished in a similar manner. Thus， two methods were adopted for enforcing obedience to the Act of Uniformity， one the infliction on the poor of the fine of twelve pence prescribed for each offence by the law of 1560， the other， the promulgation of individual mandates， disobedience to which was to be punished by the Court of Star Chamber. The noblemen of the Pale， alarmed by such high-handed action， presented a petition against the measures taken for the suppression of their religion， praying that the toleration extended to them hitherto should be continued. In reply to their petition the Viscount Gormanston， Sir James Dillon， Sir Patrick Barnewall， and others were committed as prisoners to the Castle， and others of the petitioners were confined to their houses in the country， and bound to appear before the Star Chamber at the opening of the next term (Dec.

1605). Sir Patrick Barnewall， "the first gentleman's son of quality that was ever put out of Ireland to be brought up in learning beyond the seas" was the ablest of the Catholic Palesmen， and was sent into England at the request of the English authorities.

The appeal of these Catholic lords， backed[8] as it was by the danger of a new and more general rebellion， was not without its effects in England. In January 1607 the privy council in England wrote to Sir Arthur Chichester， Lord Deputy， that although "the reformation of the people of Ireland， extremely addicted to Popish superstition by the instigation of the seminary priests and Jesuits， is greatly to be wished and by all means endeavoured， still， a temperate course ought to be preserved." There should be no question of granting toleration， but at the same time there should be no "startling of the multitude by any general or rigorous compulsion." The principal men in the cities who show themselves to be the greatest offenders should be punished；the priests and friars should be banished， but no "curious or particular search" should be made for them； Viscount Gormanston and his companions should be released under recognisances， except Sir Patrick Barnewall who was to be sent into England； the Dublin aldermen should be treated in a similar manner but should be obliged to pay the fines， and the Protestant clergy should be exhorted to take special pains to plant the new religion "where the people have been least civil."[9]

But Chichester， Davies， Brouncker， and their companions had no intention of listening to the counsels of moderation. They continued to indict the poorer classes according to the clauses of the Act of Uniformity and to cite the wealthier citizens before the Star Chamber for disobedience to the royal mandates.[10] In Waterford Sir John Davies reported "we proceeded against the principal aldermen by way of censure at the council table of the province for their several contempts against the king's proclamations and the special commandments of the Lord President under the council seal of Munster.

Against the multitude we proceeded by way of indictment upon the Statute of 2 Elizabeth， which giveth only twelve pence for absence from church every Sunday and holiday. The fines imposed at the table were not heavy， being upon some ā50 apiece， upon others ā40， so that the total sum came but to ā400； but there were so many of the commoners indicted that the penalty given by the statute (twelve pence) came to ā240 or thereabouts."[11] Punishments of a similar kind were inflicted in New Ross， Wexford， Clonmel， Cashel， Youghal， Limerick， Cork， and in all the smaller towns throughout Munster. In Cork the mayor was fined ā100， and in Limerick more than two hundred of the burgesses were indicted， the fines paid by these being given for the repair of the cathedral.[12] Steps were also taken in Connaught to enforce attendance at the Protestant service. Five of the principal citizens of Galway were summoned before the court and fined in sums varying from ā40 to ā20， and punishments of a lesser kind were inflicted in other portions of the province. In Drogheda "the greatest number of the householders together with their wives， children， and servants，" were summoned and fined for non-attendance at church. In Meath， Westmeath， Longford， King's County， and Queen's County the government officials were particularly busy.