heirs; but his daughter’s son Gilbert took the name of de Lacy and became the fourth baron. Gilbert's son Hugh de Lacy (d. 1186) was one of the barons who accompanied Henry II. to Ireland in 1171; he obtained a grant of Meath, and governed Ireland as vicegerent for the king. By his wife Rose of Monmouth Hugh was father of Walter de Lacy (d. 1241), who succeeded his father as lord of Meath and took a leading part in the conflict of his family with John de Courci in Ireland, and also of Hugh de Lacy, 1st earl of Ulster. The latter was for a time a coadjutor of de Courci in Leinster and Munster, but after 1200 the rivalry between the two developed into war, and in 1203 de Lacy drove de Courci out of Down, and in the following year took him prisoner. He was rewarded by the king with grants of land in Ulster and Connaught, which were confirmed by the charter of the 29th of May 1205, when Hugh was created earl. He returned to Ireland with quasi-viceregal authority, and endeavoured without much success to reduce the O’Neill of Tyrone to submission. In 1207 war broke out between the earl of Ulster and FitzHenry, the justiciar. This brought King John in person to Ireland, where he expelled the earl’s brother, Walter de Lacy, from Meath, and compelled the earl himself to fly from Carrickfergus to Scotland. For several years Ulster took part in the wars in France, and he did not return to Ireland till 1221, when he allied himself with O’Neill against the English. In 1226 his lands in Ulster were handed over to his brother Walter, but were restored to him in the following year, after which date he appears to have loyally served the king, being more than once summoned to England to give advice about Irish affairs. He died at Carrickfergus in 1242 or 1243. He left no surviving legitimate children, and on his death the earldom of Ulster reverted to the Crown.
In 1254 the lordship of Ireland was granted by Henry III. to Prince Edward (afterwards Edward I.), who about 1255 transferred “the county of Ulster” to Walter de Burgh, lord of Connaught, in exchange for the rich domain of Kilsilan. De Burgh was henceforth, or at all events within a short time afterwards, styled earl of Ulster, to which title he may have advanced some hereditary claim of a loose order through his mother Egidia, daughter of Walter de Lacy, the first earl of Ulster’s brother. The earldom remained in the family of De Burgh until the death of William, 3rd earl of this line, in 1333, when it passed to his daughter Elizabeth, who married Lionel Plantagenet, son of Edward III. Lionel, having inherited in right of his wife the great estates of the family of de Clare as well as those of de Burgh, was created duke of Clarence in 1362. Leaving no male heirs, Lionel was succeeded in the earldom of Ulster by his daughter Philippa, who married Edmund Mortimer, earl of March. The third Mortimer, earl of Ulster, died unmarried in 1425, when his titles were inherited by his sister’s son, Richard Plantagenet, duke of York, whose son Edward ascended the throne as Edward IV. in 1461.
Since that date the earldom of Ulster, which then merged in the Crown, has only been held by members of the royal family. It was granted in 1659 to James, duke of York, second son of Charles I., on whose accession as James II. it again merged in the Crown. The next prince to bear the title (1716) was Ernest Augustus, duke of Brunswick-Lüneburg, son of the elector of Hanover, and youngest brother of George I. The title became extinct at his death without heirs in 1728. It was next conferred on Edward Augustus, brother of George III., in 1760, again becoming extinct at his death seven years later. In 1784 Prince Frederick, second son of George III., was created earl of Ulster, and died leaving no children in 1827. Each of these last four earls of Ulster, all being of separate creations, held the title in conjunction with the dukedoms of York and Albany. On the next occasion of its revival it was united with the dukedom of Edinburgh, Prince Alfred Ernest Albert, second son of Queen Victoria, being created duke of Edinburgh, earl of Kent and earl of Ulster in 1866. On the death of the duke of Edinburgh in 1900 the earldom became extinct.
See, for the de Lacy and de Burgh earls of Ulster, The Chronicle of Florence of Worcester, edited by T. Forester (London, 1854); Annals of Ireland by the Four Masters, edited by J. O’Donovan (7 vols., Dublin, 1851); The Annals of Loch Ce, edited by W. M. Hennessy, "Rolls Series" (2 vols., London, 1871); Calendar of Documents Relating to Ireland, edited by H. S. Sweetman (5 vols., London, 1875- ; W. W. Shirley, Royal and Historical Letters, of the Reign of Henry III., "Rolls Series" (2 vols., London, 1862-1866); Sir J. T. Gilbert, History of the Viceroys of Ireland (Dublin, 1865). For the later history of the earldom see G. E. C., Complete Peerage, vol. viii. (London, 1898). (R. J. M.)
ULSTER, a province of Ireland occupying the northern part
of the island. It includes the counties Donegal, Londonderry,
Antrim, Fermanagh, Tyrone, Cavan, Monaghan, Armagh and
Down. Ulster (Uladh) was one of the early provincial kingdoms
of Ireland, formed, according to the legendary chronicles, at the
Milesian conquest of the island ten centuries before Christ,
and given to the descendants of Ir, one of the sons of Mileadh.
Interprovincial wars frequently altered its boundaries, notably
in 332 when the three Collas, sons of Eochaidh Doimhleln,
conquered the land between the river Boyne and Lough Neagh,
which became a separate kingdom under the name of Uriel
(Oriel or Orgial). Its princes maintained themselves until
the close of the 16th century. In 1177 John de Courci, with the
countenance of Henry II., set out to the conquest of Ulster.
His operations were gradually successful, and he became lord
deputy of Ireland in 1186 (see above). The nominal reign of
the last king of Ulster closed in 1200. In 1585 Lord Deputy
Sir John Perrot undertook the shiring of Ulster (excluding the
counties Antrim and Down, which had already taken shape);
and his work, though of little immediate effect owing to the
rising of Hugh O’Neill, served as a basis for the division of the
territory at the plantation of Ulster in the reign of James I.
ULTIMATUM (from Lat. ultimus, last), a word used in diplomacy
to signify the final terms submitted by one of the parties
in negotiation for settlement of any subject of disagreement.
It is accompanied by an intimation as to how refusal will be
regarded. English diplomacy has devised the adroit reservation
that refusal will be regarded as an “unfriendly act,” a
phrase which serves as a warning that the consequences of the
rupture of negotiations will be considered from the point
of view of forcing a settlement. This opens up a variety of
possibilities, such as good offices, mediation, the appointment
of a commission of inquiry, arbitration, reprisals, pacific blockade
and war.[1]
As regards the alternative of war, the Hague convention relative to the Opening of Hostilities of the 18th of October 1907, provides as follows:—
“Considering that it is important, in order to ensure the maintenances of pacific relations, that hostilities should not commence without previous warning,” it is agreed by the Contracting Powers to “recognize that hostilities between them must not commence without a previous and explicit warning in the form of either a declaration of war, giving reasons, or an ultimatum with a conditional declaration of war.”
As reasons for a declaration of war are necessarily in the nature of an ultimatum, the ultimatum may now be regarded as an indispensable formality precedent to the outbreak of hostilities.
Another Hague convention of the same date respecting the limitation of the employment of force for the recovery of contract debts provides as follows:—
“Being desirous of preventing between nations armed conflicts originating in a pecuniary dispute respecting contract debts claimed from the government of one country by the government of another country as due to its subjects or citizens,” the Contracting Powers agree “not to have recourse to armed force for the recovery of contract debts claimed from the government of one country by the government of another country as being due to its subjects or citizens.”
This undertaking, however, is not applicable when the debtor
- ↑ To these may be added a new unofficial method devised by the Turks in connexion with the Austro-Turkish difficulty over the annexation of Bosnia-Herzegovina, viz. the boycotting of the goods and ships of the natives of the state against which the grievance exists. This is a method open to weaker as against more powerful states, which can have serious coercive and even complicated consequences under the influence of democratic institutions.
