During the next two years no meeting of parliament took place in Ireland. Certainly some of the bulls of the English parliament of that period were Irish enough, as I will now demonstrate. The majority of the House of Commons voted along with a few enthusiasts, that a standing army was dangerous to liberty. In order to deprive the king of an army, of which it was his pride to be the chief, the policy was to keep only a very few regiments in pay, and to rely mainly on the militia and the navy. Having reduced the army, they resolved, in the same rude spirit, that there should be no foreigners in it.
As all this is well known to readers of history, I shall give the facts (mingled with gossip and misinformation) from letters written by the French Ambassador, Count Tallard, to Louis XIV.[1] The count and his royal correspondent naturally felt special curiosity regarding the bearing of such events upon Lord Galway.
“London, 1st January 1699 [In the House of Commons]. — By a second resolution it was determined to admit none [into the English army] but natural born Englishmen; the Scotch, and even the Irish, are excluded. Monsieur de Schomberg, though a Duke and Peer of England, can no longer have the command of the army, he who had been accustomed to command the troops during the king’s absence. No French refugee, and no foreigner, can hold even a lieutenancy. In Ireland there can be no troops but Irish and Scotch. Lord Galway ceases therefore to command the army in that country, though he may remain regent.”
“London, January 2d. — The Duke commanded the troops in this kingdom during the king’s absence, as did Lord Galway in Ireland. Having so much confidence in them, he believed that he could safely leave the kingdom; but could he venture at this time to go to Holland, when no one remains in this country upon whom he can depend?” — “P.S. — Since writing my letter, I have learnt that the Bill for the reduction of the troops has been read a second time in the House of Commons, and that instead of the words ‘subjects born in England,’ the expression, ‘subjects of England,’ has been substituted, by which Irishmen are qualified to be among the troops.”
“London, January 14. — What has passed to-day gives no reason for believing that there will be any change in favour of foreigners in the Bill, which has already been read twice. It is even thought that Lord Galway will be personally attacked. He thought fit to speak in rather a high tone in the Irish parliament, and in return the latter takes the affirmative. The whole nation declares against him, and people begin to believe, not only that he will no longer command the army in Ireland, but even that he will not continue Lord-Justice.”
“London, January 15. — The Parliament made a considerable change yesterday in the Bill for the reduction of the army. Instead of ‘subjects of England,’ they agreed to insert ‘subjects of the king, or naturalized.’”
“London, January 22. — It will also be considered whether Lord Galway shall be attacked or not, for I hear they will not have him remain in Ireland. As they have reinstated those who are naturalized, and he is of that number, he is safe on that score. Your Majesty will be perhaps glad to know that there are not more than thirty Frenchmen who are so.”
“London, January 24. — The king is preparing to disband the troops, even before the Bill has passed. Like a skilful man, he desires to do himself honour by what he has not been able to prevent. He has gained the naturalized foreigners; and this is much, for it preserves the command of the troops for the Duke of Schomberg and the Earl of Galway.”
Amid this turmoil Lord Galway ventured to address a letter to the king, to which he received the following gracious reply:—
“Kensington, (Jan. 27) Feb. 6, 1699.
“I received some days ago a letter from you without date, by which I see you are uneasy at the proceedings of the Parliament here against the foreigners. I think you have too much cause to be so; though, as yet, nothing has passed about you, and I have good reason to hope you will be left undisturbed. At least you may be assured I shall do my utmost that nothing be done to your prejudice, for I am satisfied with your conduct, and you are useful to my service. You may be sure that I will not recall you, unless I am forced to it, which I hope will not be the case. It is not to be conceived how much people here are set against the foreigners. You will easily judge on whom this reflects.
“I design very shortly to send into Ireland five regiments of foot and two of horse, and soon after, three more of foot — eight in all. I will send you in a few days orders to disband Wolsey’s regiment of horse and nine regiments of foot, intending to keep only Hanmer’s and Hamilton’s. I design also, when the parliament rises, to send you your regiment of horse, and the three French regiments, and perhaps Miremont’s dragoons; but that must be very secret, though I much fear my design is already suspected here. I am in doubt whether I shall send likewise into Ireland Eppinger’s regiment. All this together would amount to eighteen battalions of foot, three regiments of horse, and five of dragoons, reckoning Eppinger’s as two. This would in a manner be agreeable to your project, and, according to my calculation, the expense no greater; but if it should be, something must be retrenched, on which- ↑ Grimblot’s Letters of William III., Lou’s XIV., and their Ministers.
