celled, and the O'Ferralls to be restored.[1] At first his idea was that the surviving O'Ferralls and the chief inhabitants should repossess what they had before the war, and that the lands of those who had died in rebellion should go to Lord Delvin.[2] But the latter got into trouble with the government,[3] and in 1608 Chichester proposed to get rid of his claims altogether, and to settle the O'Ferralls so that ' ' all the inferiors of their septs may hold immediately of the King.'[4]
Neither then, nor for some years afterwards, was there any mention of a plantation, but a settlement was delayed owing to the controversy with Shaen and Malby.
Apparently during this period it was discovered that a large part of the county was vested in the King, by virtue of the Act of Absentees, as having once belonged, at least in name, to the Earls of Shrewsbury.[5]
In May, 1611, the Lords of the Council gave explicit directions to grant all the lands in the county, after satisfying the claims of Shaen and Malby, to the ancient proprietors. Apparently
- ↑ By a letter of Jan., 1605—6: referred to but not given in Cal. St. Paps., 1608, p. 522.
- ↑ King to Chichester. Cal. St. Paps., 1607, p. 220: also same to same, 1608, p. 522.
- ↑ Amongst other things he was accused of having threatened to murder Salisbury.
- ↑ Cal. St. Paps., March, 1608, p. 437, Chichester to Salisbury, and May, 1608, p. 522, the King to Chichester on behalf of the O'Ferralls.
- ↑ In Feb., 1610, or possibly 1611, Cal. St. Paps., p. 581. Ld. Delvin states that it was by his travail and great charges that the King's title to Longford was first brought to light. In Oct., 1611, p. 148, we find the K's title through the Stat. of Absentees to the manor of Loughsewdie and other lands, making up a large part of the county, which anciently belonged to the Earls of Shrewsbury, mentioned as an obstacle to a final settlement.
